Poliolegs@Poliolegs
With the S5 torpedo nerf, the Perseus now absolutely must get additional PDS coverage (Expired with end of rebalan- experiment/test)
With the S5 torpedo nerf, the Perseus now absolutely must get additional PDS coverage (Expired with end of rebalan- experiment/test)
May 31st 2024 at 3:15 am
PerseusThe brochure (I know. Something something marketing.) states that the size 5 torps are part of its defense against fighter swarms. Until now that was viable. I've deleted many many fighters in a Gladiator.
It might be almost acceptable, if S5 we're still effective against heavy fighters. PDS for torps and S5 torps for fighters was reasonable. These new torps won't even harass fighters.
I used to favor reducing gun size and number per turret, but adding turrets. Now it needs one or two turrets of the same size.
It might be almost acceptable, if S5 we're still effective against heavy fighters. PDS for torps and S5 torps for fighters was reasonable. These new torps won't even harass fighters.
I used to favor reducing gun size and number per turret, but adding turrets. Now it needs one or two turrets of the same size.
19replies
May 31st 2024 at 5:50 am
You're not supposed to be well defended alone against Fighters. You're supposed to hug a Hammerhead at all time in a Perseus. You want a Polaris. Especially since now it will be a better gunship as well than the Perseus.
May 31st 2024 at 6:47 pm
That's not the only thing. The Perseus is stated as having extremely heavy armor for a ship of its size... which I take to mean armor possibly greater than things like the Nautilus and Polaris (nautilus is a minelayer which does not need much armor by design, and Polaris while a full cap ship is stated as having light armor for its size).
So my assumption is that the Perseus will be able to virtually ignore any non-torpedo-equipped fighters (except maybe the Ares series) as a non-threat due to that armor once it gets modeled in the game.
So my assumption is that the Perseus will be able to virtually ignore any non-torpedo-equipped fighters (except maybe the Ares series) as a non-threat due to that armor once it gets modeled in the game.
May 31st 2024 at 7:26 pm
Polaris has a light CAPITAL armor, which is another class alltogether than normal armor.
So a light capital armor can be thrice as resistant as a "normal" heavy armor for all we know.
So a light capital armor can be thrice as resistant as a "normal" heavy armor for all we know.
May 31st 2024 at 8:37 pm
The Perseus's armor isnt just stated to be heavy, but actually look bulky too. Especially in some placed like the upper main hull, in the front half, based on looks alone I expect that part in particular to be better armored than most places on the Polaris.
June 1st 2024 at 6:40 pm
CIG already commented on what to expect in terms of armor in the Perseus Q&A. As Capital ship, the Polaris is supposed to have better armor.
How heavily is it armored?
It’s heavily armored for its size and designed to take a beating from other ships, but it isn’t as strong as a capital ship.
May 31st 2024 at 9:27 pm
That's only aesthetics. I expect the Polaris armor to outclass the Perseus everywhere. Not because Perseus is bad, but both ships are in two very different class (large vs capital) and I suspect.it will be reflected in their armor as well. Perseus is only meant to go after sub capital ships and large ships. It's range of effective targets is very small.
But we'll see when both ships will be out. But we'll see when both ships will be out.
But we'll see when both ships will be out. But we'll see when both ships will be out.
June 8th 2024 at 9:30 am
which I take to mean armor possibly greater than things like the Nautilus and Polaris
Lol, what IS this obsession with people being all threatened by the Polaris?
The Perseus is like 1/3rd the size and not even the same type of ship. They have nothing in common at all.
No, the Perseus will not have stronger armor than a freaking capital ship (the Polaris has lightER armor by comparison to slower, larger, cumbersome ships like the Idris and Jav--not "light" armor).
It's meant to use its four size 7 canons to harass larger ships than itself. That's its main purpose. They're likely going to only excel in wings. Solo, they will get roasted by larger ships, as is basically the case with everything in SC.
May 31st 2024 at 6:47 am
Yep, gameplay-wise there has to be checks and balances. Making an overgunned, heavy armored ship that can kill large stuff and fighters runs a big risk of unbalancing all combat ships. And buffing the defenses against the only stuff that can dodge its guns gets real risky.
May 31st 2024 at 2:39 pm
I defy you both to explain:
- How one or two additional PDS turrets would turn the Perseus into a solo kill-all ship that's impervious to attack. Making S5 torps unusable against all fighters makes the Perseus comically defenseless. You wouldn't even need a swarm.
- Where anyone, other than theory craft, has said anything to support "it's supposed to hug a Hammerhead"
- How exhaust port chain reaction single snub fighter one shot small moon sized space station destruction makes any sense, or more importantly, makes for a fun and balanced game.
The point may be moot, as they have stated they are adjusting velocities up some.
May 31st 2024 at 4:47 pm
Ease up there, pal.
1. Its not a binary always win/always lose argument, framing it that way is a bit of a strawman. And turrets arent the problem. Being too good at too many things is the problem. Not having checks and balances that counteract strengths leads to problems. The balancing gets ruined once a ship becomes the meta/best choice in too many situations. When that kicks in, other ships just flat out wont be used by meta-chasers, gameplay is gonna stagnate and the whole game will suffer. What counters the perseus? Is it a swarm of fighters? Is it bombers? Is it only larger ships with bigger guns/torps? The last one is unbalanced as all hell, the second one is less unbalanced and the first two give way more gameplay options/variety. If adding a couple extra turrets makes one or two of the biggest counters to this ship not a problem anymore, or less enough of a problem that its always/almost always worth the risk, why choose any other ship in that size (or below)? Why hamstring yourself like that? Roleplay?
2. Didn't say that, but if the ship has a weakness, bringing a ship that complements it and covers for it is good sense. Otherwise, why have any anti-fighter defenses? Why not just bring two perseuses? Lets flip the script, though. Why would a hammerhead bring a perseus? A hammerhead specializes against small fry, but is supposed to have a hard time against heavier stuff. Bringing a perseus adds large, armor piercing guns to the fleet, leaving each ship space to focus on what they do best without having to worry as much about covering their ass. In dnd/MMO terms, why have a balanced party when you could have all dps? Or all tanking?
3. Dunno where you got that from, but a single fighter one-shotting a perseus was about as far from my balance argument as you could get...? Hell, star wars even used space magic and an entire movie retcon to hand wave that one away.
1. Its not a binary always win/always lose argument, framing it that way is a bit of a strawman. And turrets arent the problem. Being too good at too many things is the problem. Not having checks and balances that counteract strengths leads to problems. The balancing gets ruined once a ship becomes the meta/best choice in too many situations. When that kicks in, other ships just flat out wont be used by meta-chasers, gameplay is gonna stagnate and the whole game will suffer. What counters the perseus? Is it a swarm of fighters? Is it bombers? Is it only larger ships with bigger guns/torps? The last one is unbalanced as all hell, the second one is less unbalanced and the first two give way more gameplay options/variety. If adding a couple extra turrets makes one or two of the biggest counters to this ship not a problem anymore, or less enough of a problem that its always/almost always worth the risk, why choose any other ship in that size (or below)? Why hamstring yourself like that? Roleplay?
2. Didn't say that, but if the ship has a weakness, bringing a ship that complements it and covers for it is good sense. Otherwise, why have any anti-fighter defenses? Why not just bring two perseuses? Lets flip the script, though. Why would a hammerhead bring a perseus? A hammerhead specializes against small fry, but is supposed to have a hard time against heavier stuff. Bringing a perseus adds large, armor piercing guns to the fleet, leaving each ship space to focus on what they do best without having to worry as much about covering their ass. In dnd/MMO terms, why have a balanced party when you could have all dps? Or all tanking?
3. Dunno where you got that from, but a single fighter one-shotting a perseus was about as far from my balance argument as you could get...? Hell, star wars even used space magic and an entire movie retcon to hand wave that one away.
June 1st 2024 at 7:20 am
I apologize for startling you. My language and turns of phrase are simply habit. You have nothing to fear from me. I do devolve to hyperbole too often.
1. Its not a binary always win/always lose argument, framing it that way is a bit of a strawman. And turrets arent the problem. Being too good at too many things is the problem. Not having checks and balances that counteract strengths leads to problems. The balancing gets ruined once a ship becomes the meta/best choice in too many situations. When that kicks in, other ships just flat out wont be used by meta-chasers, gameplay is gonna stagnate and the whole game will suffer.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I spend most of my time in this sub-forum arguing against to Pimp my Perseus requests. If S5 torps were a guaranteed one shot one kill weapon on fighters, I would simply say nerf them down to marginal effectiveness. Like, limit their effectiveness against fighter to simply a harassing tool.
The (now reverted) state at the time of OP was 0% effective at deterring fighters. That means we are relegated to two turrets very limited in firing arc and firepower, and thus, minimally effective at deterring fighter attacks. Whereas the original pitch was that it was not an effective anti-fighter platform but also not defenseless against them.
The (now reverted) state at the time of OP was 0% effective at deterring fighters. That means we are relegated to two turrets very limited in firing arc and firepower, and thus, minimally effective at deterring fighter attacks. Whereas the original pitch was that it was not an effective anti-fighter platform but also not defenseless against them.
What counters the perseus? Is it a swarm of fighters? Is it bombers? Is it only larger ships with bigger guns/torps?
I would say none and all. Like you started your #1, I believe that it should not be a binary always win/always lose. Some swarms of fighters should be able to take down a Perseus sometimes. Some bombers should be able to take down a Perseus sometimes. Mixed groups of fighters and bombers should be able to take down a Perseus most of the time. Larger ships with bigger guns/torps should be able to take down a Perseus most of the time. Taking away torps as a usable weapon means you can easily kill a Perseus with a heavy fighter and a tackle. I'm basing this on experiences with fully crewed Corsair (a more nimble ship) vs fighters.
If adding a couple extra turrets makes one or two of the biggest counters to this ship not a problem anymore
I wholeheartedly believe it wouldn't. Otherwise I wouldn't suggest it. And I specifically said "ONE or two" to give room for adjustment to the proper balance.
2. Didn't say that, but if the ship has a weakness, bringing a ship that complements it and covers for it is good sense. Otherwise, why have any anti-fighter defenses? Why not just bring two perseuses? Lets flip the script, though. Why would a hammerhead bring a perseus? A hammerhead specializes against small fry, but is supposed to have a hard time against heavier stuff. Bringing a perseus adds large, armor piercing guns to the fleet, leaving each ship space to focus on what they do best without having to worry as much about covering their ass. In dnd/MMO terms, why have a balanced party when you could have all dps? Or all tanking?
I was addressing the previous comment there. But you bring up a good question. A Perseus is not a member of a party. It IS a whole party of 5 players. A Hammerhead is a nine person ship. A five or nine person ship should be just "the tank" or just "the healer". Now, I agree that a Perseus that constantly runs around without additional support/escort against fighters should absolutely pay for that foolishness. But a 5 or 9 person ship should not be so weak as to always lose to 2 or 3 other players or NPCs in fighters or small bombers.
3. It was the extrapolation based on the experiences in the Corsair and later against Corsairs.
3. It was the extrapolation based on the experiences in the Corsair and later against Corsairs.
June 4th 2024 at 6:08 am
EDIT: This was supposed to be a reply to another comment, leaving it in for posteroty.
No worries, man. Sounds like i misunderstood somewhat, apologies if i came across stronger than i should have...
That said, it sounds like we're mostly agreeing at each other...? I agree that a perseus shouldnt automatically lose against whatever it's hard counter is, same as it shouldnt automatically win against stuff its designed to counter. I think that a ship's counter should be an advantage more than anything, but it does get weird with ships of different sizes. Especially when we start thinking 4 vanguard harbingers vs a perseus, two half-crewed redeemers v. Perseus or like 8 talons against one? Especially when a lot of players are depending on a single ship for gameplay, that ship should at least be tough enough to last a bit.
Im also not really dead set against adding a turret or two, but i think its early. Let the ship get built, see how it does. If anything, ever so slightly underpowering it on release helps make sure its not overpowered, while giving you space to buff it if it's underperforming. I really just want balance, and its easier to add a turret than remove one (not to mention how happy folks are at buffs/how mad folks get at nerfs). Hell, we might even have armor in by then (one can hope?), which gives another avenue for balance.
No worries, man. Sounds like i misunderstood somewhat, apologies if i came across stronger than i should have...
That said, it sounds like we're mostly agreeing at each other...? I agree that a perseus shouldnt automatically lose against whatever it's hard counter is, same as it shouldnt automatically win against stuff its designed to counter. I think that a ship's counter should be an advantage more than anything, but it does get weird with ships of different sizes. Especially when we start thinking 4 vanguard harbingers vs a perseus, two half-crewed redeemers v. Perseus or like 8 talons against one? Especially when a lot of players are depending on a single ship for gameplay, that ship should at least be tough enough to last a bit.
Im also not really dead set against adding a turret or two, but i think its early. Let the ship get built, see how it does. If anything, ever so slightly underpowering it on release helps make sure its not overpowered, while giving you space to buff it if it's underperforming. I really just want balance, and its easier to add a turret than remove one (not to mention how happy folks are at buffs/how mad folks get at nerfs). Hell, we might even have armor in by then (one can hope?), which gives another avenue for balance.
May 31st 2024 at 3:43 am
This could be a good change for the Gladiator if the smaller missile racks got a buff so they could one-shot fighters with an S4 missile for example, saving the torps for larger ships. The Gladiator should also get a buff to S4 missile racks IMO but that's another story.
Especially if torps hit 100% of the time and cannot be flared off.
Especially if torps hit 100% of the time and cannot be flared off.
June 7th 2024 at 12:58 am
we just need s5 cruise missiles not torps
June 1st 2024 at 8:22 am
S5 Torpedoes solely for heavy fighters and medium to small large ships, they were never meant for medium fighters of lower, unless their pilot us an idiot and doesn't know how to evade.