New Strategy: Drones with Subverters !

[spoon]

Originally posted by Ragnarok:
Ok first we will consider the Talisman. If you are religious and you have this component without the AS. All the defender has to do is use a max range stratagy and they can easily defeat you if done right.

It's not like the AS is the only weapon on the ship, and the Talisman wins hands down in a max-range/max-range battle.

Use missles, if PD is too heavy then go to the longest firing beam weapon you have with lots of combat modifiers.

Missiles rarely work, and the Talisman player can have just as many combat modifiers

The AS has a max range of what 5? 6? You can easily over come that with the WMG or like weapon. Once again making it not impossible to defeat the AS.

I'd put my money on the AS ships

If you are not religious with the AS then it will be harder to use the AS to win a game. Because it has a 100% to convert only at 1 range. After that it falls off alot. I think 50% by range 5 or 6 which ever it is. Which isn't that much.

You can put them on mounts, which raises it up pretty high.

So while the Talisman may be a bit unbalanced I do not feel that it is a uber trait to have.

The main balancing factor is the tendency to gang up on Talisman weilders, and to do it early. This is a good sign that it is unbalanced. However, the threat of such an alliance kind of makes for a cool game mechanic in games with experienced players.

-spoon

[Wardad]

Originally posted by Cirvol:
...
1 = that talismans are STILL unbalanced
2 = that subverters going thru phased-shields makes them unbalanced... (making master computers stop them isn't enough imho)

does anyone disagree with those 2 points?

1. Yes, talismans are unbalanced. Lower it from a guarenteed hit to a regular size combat sensor with a bonus (+150), and add another level of combat sensor for the normal races (+85).

2. No, to your solution unless the subverters fire rate is increased.

[Cirvol]

Ok, so we're all mostly in agreement that talismans are pretty out of balance...

(my personal solution is to just change it to +99% chance to hit as this is what i think makes the most sense, and is a good balance with all the 'normal' races having +65% with combat sensor 3's (but the more i think of a 'normal' +85% cs4, the more i like it... hard to decide tho, since it really affects everything a lot)

having master computers is the 'current' solution to the subverter 'balance' problem...

(someone mentioned that even after a mc is destroyed that the ship will be unable to be subverted in the upcoming patch ... anyone have an eta on the next gold-patch??? )

the only issue with this is the cost... i will of course be using mc's against any psychic races, but still, it forces an expensive cost into a light cruiser design which would normally need only 1500 mineral for the cq, bridge, and ls... vs what, 4k mineral, 1k of org and 1k rad for a computer?

if you have a self-destruct device, will it blow up the offending subverter ship as well?... does it even work vs subverters? (in terms of blowing up?)

[Wardad]

Hey, When I got home I tried DRONES with SUBVERTERS in Gold Patch 2 simulator.

Seems the drones need a POINT BLANK or RAM movement order. Short, Optimal, or Max movement orders result in the drones running away.

note: A Capture Ship movement order is ignored and the secondary movement order (point blank) is used. That's why it works.

Three drones do good against a Battle Cruiser.
Six drones get killed before closing to point blank range against my Baseship. They bunch up into Groups of 3.

Comments anyone?

[Wardad]

Cirvol,
Master Computers have another issue, the Computer Virus. It has a fire rate of 3.
Use it with large mounts and a fire priority of fastest ship and it is devastating.

I would not use MC without a backup crew. I would not use Subverter without the Computer Virus. The double threat would cause opponents to spend space, minerals and build time. Where as good portion of my ships will be cheaply equiped with normal weapons.

[ January 04, 2003, 04:09: Message edited by: Wardad ]

[Fyron]

Capture Ship strategy only applies to Boarding Parties. Subverters are considered a normal weapon for the purpose of that strategy.

[Baron Munchausen]

Subverters on drones would be much too evil with the way subverters currently work. It's too easy to over-whelm defenses with huge numbers of drones. Now, if you changed the way subverters work so it's not so 'all or nothing' then it might be reasonable. This would involve changing the way ship capture works, too.

I suggested a long time ago that ship capture should take more than one round. It should be more like planet capture is, with multiple rounds of combat and each side taking casualties before the issue is decided. (And, both side should be able to fire on a ship that is 'in dispute' so you could destroy your own ship rather than see it captured!)

If this were implemented, then the Subverter could convert a percentage of the crew instead of just having a percentage chance to totally succeed or fail. The loyal crew and the subverted crew could then fight it out as if the ship had been boarded. Boarding parties could be subverted, too, of course! Could boarding parties capture their own ship? Why not? Yes, under some circumstances a ship could still be totally subverted in one round -- especially by multiple hits -- but with careful balancing of the power of the subverter this could be less common than it currently is while still preserving the effectiveness of the Subverter. In particular, the subverter on a drone or satellite should be much less powerful than the subverter on a ship. Then the many attacks possible with units could be properly balanced.

And there needs to be some sort of 'psychic damper' technology to reduce the effectiveness of the Subverter. Even if it's an artifact tech that is only occasionally available that's better than no defence at all.

[ January 04, 2003, 04:33: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]