Poll: Are Phased Polaron Beams too powerful?

[Arkcon]

Originally posted by Tezzezar:
Again, if you look at it in terms of research invested, APB XII's do slightly higher average damage but take longer to research and are countered by low level shields that PPB's ignore.

The thought about lowering the cost of phased sheilds is a good one and would be another way of dealing with the issue. Maybe have planetary and system sheilds be X+ levels.

Almost every game I've been in players go straight for these weapons. The ones who don't do so as soon as their fleets get destroyed. That's usually an indicator that there is a balancing issue.

Tesco, do you want to let us in on your reasoning or are you just representing the my favorite weapon vote?

I've stopped using them and the null space cannon against the A.I., it's just too easy. Well maybe against TDM modpak races if they have me on the ropes.

Thing is, if I can hold out long enough. Battleships, some armor, some shields, ECM III etc, fast engines, Anti Proton Beams, maybe one WMG -- I usually come out ahead of the Polaron or null space or WMG only Dreadnoughts. They lose more than I do. Hmm... is good planning and tactics an exploit

[ September 12, 2002, 22:02: Message edited by: Arkcon ]

[spoon]

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
"I tend to look at weapons in terms of the damage per turn per KT of the component. PPB's are WAY ahead of the other weapons."

No, they aren't. Several weapons, including the APB, beat them out. Most effective for the relatively low research cost though (and even that can be a bit deceving).

If you factor in their shield-skipping ability as extra damage, then, yes, they do. (and if your opponent isn't using shields, then he sets himself up for misery in many other ways (ship capture, engine destroyers)).
PPBs dominate the game from fairly early on until pretty late in the game. Are they necessary to win? Nope. But it's a lot easier to win with 'em than without 'em

-Spoon

[ September 12, 2002, 22:19: Message edited by: spoon ]

[Phoenix-D]

"Again, if you look at it in terms of research invested, APB XII's do slightly higher average damage but take longer to research and are countered by low level shields that PPB's ignore."

"I tend to look at weapons in terms of the damage per turn per KT of the component. PPB's are WAY ahead of the other weapons."

One or the other Tezzezar. Don't use one when I'm responding to an argument based on the other!

APBs also have longer range. WMGs have a 30% to-hit bonus, and can run away between shots. Meson BLasters take about as much research as PPBs but don't drop off, so they do better damage/kt at max range. Ripper beams do much more damage at close range. Null-space cannons don't care what defenses you have, but are expensive to use (not to research, they cost less than APB).

PPBs are a bit imbalanced, but only because phased shields cost so much to research.

Phoenix-D

[Fyron]

Shield Depleter and APB XII armed ships can slaughter PPB armed ships quite easily.

[cshank2]

PPB beams are almost useless against Phased Shields...

[Phoenix-D]

"PPB beams are almost useless against Phased Shields..."

I wouldn't say that. They only loose 5 points of damage at close range to APBs, and cost a lot less to research.

Phoenix-D

[Fyron]

But they cost like 4 or 5 times as much to build and maintain.