Conclusive undeniable proof that HRP are not over powered. Return of the Torpedo Boat pt3

[Troy_McClure]

I agree for dumbfire. However how exactly is a small ship supposed to counter an FDL with 1 huge beam and 8 torpedos? You lose shields fast, and if they get close for even a few seconds, or youre forced out of SR, bam, 2,000odd damage of unavoidable lockon weaponry

Torpedo's only counter small non-sr ships. The meta is in favour of large SR ships. I don't see how buffing toprs and wrecking small ships even harder makes any sense. They should be dumbfore IMO

My first thought was that increased damage inflicted by torps/missiles will surely be very bad for small ships with relatively weak shields in PvP..I really hope FD realise what the full effects are before they give a blanket buff!
.
My concerns are purely out of self interest ofc , as I mostly use DBS in PvP now! I would prefer to use the FAS as it is the ship I have used pretty much exclusively since it was introduced, but I don't have the necessary rank anymore as I clear saved a few months ago!
.
It will be fascinating to see how this shakes up the whole meta of PvP coz FD, just like General Haig, tend to stick with a plan once decided, whether it works or not!

 

[GluttonyFang]

If a small ship specialises in taking down larger ships, it should also succeed in doing so then

Only if the large ship is unsuspecting. A small ship can also specialize in anti-missile, but it costs the small ship more in terms of versatility for the simple fact that it's a small ship.

Combat small ships are on the whole slower and less manoeuvrable than the FDL or FAS.

I'm talking about large ships, not medium ones. And I don't see an issue with the dedicated medium ships being able to have an upper-hand against a small ship. If every ship was equal, they wouldn't have disparity in pricing, at least in their respective categories. But Elite PvP outside of Arena isn't supposed to be a strictly balanced place for combat to occur, and it should remain so.

We have both seen what the little league can do for us who enjoy small ships and small ship PvP fun, I don't think making that universal across all ship sizes is a humble idea.

A fast recharge means nothing if you die the moment your shields go down

Except if you see your opponent carrying missiles/torpedo, you'd be careful and draw distance when your shield gets low to allow time to react, which I think is reasonable.

 

[Zeta Legion]

My first thought was that increased damage inflicted by torps/missiles will surely be very bad for small ships with relatively weak shields in PvP..I really hope FD realise what the full effects are before they give a blanket buff!
.
My concerns are purely out of self interest ofc , as I mostly use DBS in PvP now! I would prefer to use the FAS as it is the ship I have used pretty much exclusively since it was introduced, but I don't have the necessary rank anymore as I clear saved a few months ago!
.
It will be fascinating to see how this shakes up the whole meta of PvP coz FD, just like General Haig, tend to stick with a plan once decided, whether it works or not!

Missile damage would be okay if it weren't for the ridiculous HRP meta, the crippling ammo limitations, shields, and AMS providing 100% effective defense, the slow rate of fire...

 

[Alexander the Grape]

The only small ship remotely specializing in 'whaling' is the Vulture, a task it does well in PvE, but it isn't as effective in PvP for a lot of reasons mostly to do with the awful meta.

The FDL and FAS are essentially the 'big money' fighters. It makes sense for them to outclass ships that cost less than a tenth of their base price.

Torpedoes are slow enough to dodge in a small ship, missiles aren't going to seriously hurt you. Hitscan lasers or rails on the other hand...

An FDL cost's 1/10th as much as a combat cutter, but no one complains tha they're roughly equal in PvP ability.

With ship-launched fighters coming, you'd think people would be more aware of the necessity of making the meta more than about just 2 ships that can actually "dogfight" with everything else being a massive tank or trash

 

[geoffrey.hdt]

Current HRPs:
-------------
Class 1 = 110
Class 2 = 190 (+72% compared to C1)
Class 3 = 260 (+37%)
Class 4 = 330 (+27%)
Class 5 = 390 (+18%)

DBS max hull = 1064
FAS max hull = 2800


Before buff, HRPs:
------------------
Class 1 = 20
Class 2 = 40 (+100% compared to C1)
Class 3 = 80 (+100%)
Class 4 = 160 (+100%)
Class 5 = 320 (+100%)

DBS max hull = 505
FAS max hull = 2010

Before buff, people complained that small ships were not viable against bigger ships. This seems to be FD's answer to the problem where on 1:1, at equal skills, small ships can now cause troubles to bigger ones but not win the fight.

But the truth is that in a wing, small ships were already viable with proper use of silent running. Now, they are overpowered in a wing...and they are getting faster engines in 2.1...oh boy...

 

[Majinvash]

What? How is that relevant? I'm not talking about killing power, obviously small ships should not be good at killing a target that wants to flee


"Fun challenge" is a nice way of putting making something bad and reducing diversity



Dedicated fighter small ships are the Eagle, I.Eagle, I.Courier, DBS, Viper III, Viper IV, Vulture. Dedicated fighter non-small ships are the FAS, FDL, and Corvette.

Combat smalls ships outnumber combat large ships by factor of 7:3



Since money is so easy to come by, and PvP doesn't earn you any money, balancing based on rebuy makes no sense.

Money should buy you earning power and more PvP roles, not dominance at everything in PvP. This is a game about flying spaceships, not space freighters. Or would a 100% Cutter meta appeal?

I agree, small ships should be fragile. They should also fly insanely well compared to larger ships. Currently neither is true

The first bit is entirely relevant, unless your whole point is just talking 1v1.

Why would you want to run a smaller weaker ship, if it had no chance of taking out a larger ship. When others stronger fighters, FDL and the Vulture. Except for challenge and the lols of a tiny rebuy.

Even taking HRP totally out of this discussion. Even when SCB was king, in wing combat you didn't see anything smaller than a Vulture and at a push the Courier. If you did, it died quickly.

Of the list of dedicated fighters, admittedly I forgot the courier. The rest are starter ships, the Vulture is the next step up with a rebuy over 1 million.

Balancing on terms of rebuy doesn't but then neither does the fact I can buy a Federal warship because I ran a few cargo missions. I accept parts of this game that are just because they are in a game.
Without this game being entirely redesigned the small ships will never be viable because of access to better ships, in this stepping stone of progression.

The Cutter is a terrible ship and IF it wasn't for its ability to just jump away from everything, would be less popular. I would like to see all the top level ships thrown into the same masslock range.

Alex I support almost everything you say, which is why I was suprised you feel that for game reasons torpedo should be nerfed against small ships because its unfair on the small ships. ( HRP Totally aside )

Majinvash
The Voice of Open

 

[Alexander the Grape]

Before buff, people were complaining that small ships were not viable against bigger ships. This seems to be FD's answer to the problem where on 1:1, at equal skills, small ships can now cause troubles to bigger ones but not win the fight.

But the truth is that in a wing, small ships were already viable with proper use of silent running. Now, they are overpowered in a wing...and they are getting faster engines in 2.1...oh boy...

Small ships are overpowered in a wing? Explain why AA won the PvP league with all FDLs then

 

[Zeta Legion]

An FDL cost's 1/10th as much as a combat cutter, but no one complains tha they're roughly equal in PvP ability.

With ship-launched fighters coming, you'd think people would be more aware of the necessity of making the meta more than about just 2 ships that can actually "dogfight" with everything else being a massive tank or trash

Cutter is a trading vessel. End of.

I don't think anyone would question that the meta such as it is needs to change. The thing with small ships is they are limited by their size, cost, and mass with how effective they can be. The FDL and FAS are largely extensions of this principle in action; to be able to equip the number of weapons and modules as well as the larger engines, reactors, etc. they need to be in a medium hull. They are still 'fighters' so to speak, just larger, more effective ones.

What ship-launched fighters have to do with any of this I don't know, and won't be able to say until we have a chance to test them. My money is on them being useless but that's just speculation.

 

[Alexander the Grape]

The first bit is entirely relevant, unless your whole point is just talking 1v1.

No it's not. I'm talking about winning power, not killing power. Masslock is irrelevant

Why would you want to run a smaller weaker ship, if it had no chance of taking out a larger ship. When others stronger fighters, FDL and the Vulture. Except for challenge and the lols of a tiny rebuy.

Because there are other roles than killing! Support, harrassment, chasing down, anti-fighter, anti-modules...

Even taking HRP totally out of this discussion. Even when SCB was king, in wing combat you didn't see anything smaller than a Vulture and at a push the Courier. If you did, it died quickly.

Yes, we agree on something, small ships are useless and may as well not exist in PvP. I'm saying this shouldn't be the case.

Of the list of dedicated fighters, admittedly I forgot the courier. The rest are starter ships, the Vulture is the next step up with a rebuy over 1 million.

Nobody gives a damn about rebuy. Also what's the use of having 50% of all combat ships in the game being "starter ships" with no use beyond the first 30 mins of play? What's the harm in diversity?

Balancing on terms of rebuy doesn't but then neither does the fact I can buy a Federal warship because I ran a few cargo missions. I accept parts of this game that are just because they are in a game.
Without this game being entirely redesigned the small ships will never be viable because of access to better ships, in this stepping stone of progression.

I agree small ships should be worse at PvE, because earning power is inexorablely linked to rebuy.

However that's no excuse for them to not have a PvP role

The Cutter is a terrible ship and IF it wasn't for its ability to just jump away from everything, would be less popular. I would like to see all the top level ships thrown into the same masslock range.

No, it's a fantastic ship. Ever faced one in a 1v1 in anything smaller than a corvette?

Alex I support almost everything you say, which is why I was suprised you feel that for game reasons torpedo should be nerfed against small ships because its unfair on the small ships. ( HRP Totally aside )

I don't think they should be nerfed, they're fine as is. As long as the buff doesn't overly affect small ships, I'm happy

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Cutter is a trading vessel. End of.

I don't think anyone would question that the meta such as it is needs to change. The thing with small ships is they are limited by their size, cost, and mass with how effective they can be. The FDL and FAS are largely extensions of this principle in action; to be able to equip the number of weapons and modules as well as the larger engines, reactors, etc. they need to be in a medium hull. They are still 'fighters' so to speak, just larger, more effective ones.

What ship-launched fighters have to do with any of this I don't know, and won't be able to say until we have a chance to test them. My money is on them being useless but that's just speculation.

Corvette then.

Again: why should this be the case?

Would it not be a less "stale" PvP meta if ships other than the FDL and FAS were useful fighters?

Also, why are you so willing to accept an entire expansion being focused on a useless addition over decent PvP diversity?

 

[Majinvash]

I am missing something

As a summary, ( HRP not being considered beyond a slight buff if you have them ).

How would you make a Viper vs using an FDL viable in wing combat.

All I can think of is faster and more manoeuvrable. Both I would like to see but I would still choose the FDL.
Stronger shields and weaponry would just move it up a class, so really cannot be considered.
A stronger Viper, is a Vulture.

And I have sent Cutters packing in a shielded FDL and dual PA Vulture ( god i love that ship )
I made a Corvette highwake with my viper 2 pulse 2 mc. Double chaff

Sorry for terrible grammar on last few posts, sorting out a contract and only half concentrating on both

Majinvash
The Voice of Open

 

[geoffrey.hdt]

Small ships are overpowered in a wing? Explain why AA won the PvP league with all FDLs then

What I mean is that if you fly an armored FAS / FdL, how do you do against a wing of silent Vipers equipped with railguns? Do you feel confident taking all of them down and live to tell about it? (if you do, I'd say that the Vipers did not fly / use silent running properly...)

Before HRP buff, it was possible though the Vipers would still have had a chance to take you down, at minimal cost considering the low insurance claim. Now it is actually wiser to run away from them.

And of course, I am not telling that a wing of Vipers is stronger than a wing of FASs / FdLs. Sorry if my comment was confusing.

 

[Sole Hunter]

I am a little lost what you mean...

They aren't balanced... My video just showed that.... A small ship running HRP is able to survive quite happily a volley of torps that in the previous version would just about wreck a Battleconda.

That was a 90k 1 trick pony shot.... 6 Torps should wreak just about anything without a shield in the game! ( If you manage to hit them )

I know you love your Viper, truly.. I love mine too... While I can outfly and survive fighting Cutters and Corvettes in mine, I am under no illusion that I will ever get the shields down on a decent build even with a bad pilot.

But if I was fighting someone and I saw he had torps, I know how I would then start controlling the fight and what I would be doing if my shields started to fail.

*edit. Alex, I am not asking for a buff on Torpedos, I am asking for a balance of how HRP work. HRP are the issue here, I do not think there has been any nerf to torp strength of late. If there has, I missed it in the patch notes. That is one thing I always look for.

Majinvash
The Voice of Open

I would imagine 2.1 will bring significant changes to torpedos & missiles - if I remember correctly... they talked about it out in a recent newsletter. It's not clear if they intend to change them but I would imagine that's part of their plan if they give missiles some love. I think what they shoud just do is penalize a ship for stacking too many HRP's and reduce the efficiency of damage reduction on smaller ships from missiles and torps. That should open up ships to more options and different modules and not just the whole SCB + HRP's stacking. It just doesn't make any sense from a ship role perspective to be able to tank 20-30 missiles or 12 torpedos.

 

[Majinvash]

I would imagine 2.1 will bring significant changes to torpedos & missiles if I remember correctly it's been said in a newsletter. It's not clear if they intend to change them but I would imagine that's part of their plan if missile get some love?

Not seen that but I hope they are not just buffed to counter already OP HRP. The divide between meta and normal career builds is going to be impossibly huge.

God if they do that, the game is going to be more of a joke than putting in a weapon that can 1 shot drop a Cutters shields. I mean that would be dumb.....

Majinvash
The Voice of Open

 

[MarcusKross]

God if they do that, the game is going to be more of a joke than putting in a weapon that can 1 shot drop a Cutters shields. I mean that would be dumb.....

*cough* Feedback cascade rails *cough*

 

[Sole Hunter]

Not seen that but I hope they are not just buffed to counter already OP HRP. The divide between meta and normal career builds is going to be impossibly huge.

God if they do that, the game is going to be more of a joke than putting in a weapon that can 1 shot drop a Cutters shields. I mean that would be dumb.....

Majinvash
The Voice of Open

The biggest problem with the current meta from a balance perspective is the whole stacking of modules. There is so many modules that could open new variables and different ways of playing. What they should just do is penalize the whole "stacking" meta and add stacking penalties to an effectiveness reduction that is incurred when using two, three or more modules of the same on a ship (Note; that it is the stat bonus that is affected, not the module itself), armor still apply for the stat bonus but would decrease it's overall efficiency). You could also give a velocity and accuracy bonus for a stacking penalty - to increase the overall effectiveness of missiles and torps.

Just add a module affected by stacking penalty multiplier for HRP's. That would resolve a lot of problems for all ships and fix some of the annoying issues with silent running ships and the whole i-win power button "silent running".

- Penalize HRP's stacking when using two, three or more modules (module affected by stacking penalty multiplier for HRP's)
- Multiplier penality that it is the stat bonus that is affected, not the module itself (overall efficiency).
- Velocity and accuracy bonus for a stacking penalty - to increase the overall effectiveness of missiles and torps.

Overall effectiveness could be (random numbers):

- 1st mod: 100.0% effectiveness - 50% Velocity and accuracy bonus
- 2nd mod: 85% effectiveness - 65% Velocity and accuracy bonus
- 3rd mod: 55% effectiveness - 70% Velocity and accuracy bonus
- 4th mod: 25% effectiveness - 85% Velocity and accuracy bonus
- 5th mod: 10% effectiveness - 90% Velocity and accuracy bonus

The first thing to note is that absolute effects are never stacking-penalized, only percentage effects for the amount of HRP's - the goal is to decrease the overall effectiveness and penalize ships who are stacking (% effect to an attribute suffers no penalties to a single module) extra multiplier for velocity and accuracy bonus to missiles and torpedos are added when stacking one, two or three of the same modules. Note; both velocity & accuracy modifers are 100% effective but based on the ship total armor.

 

[Alexander the Grape]

What I mean is that if you fly an armored FAS / FdL, how do you do against a wing of silent Vipers equipped with railguns? Do you feel confident taking all of them down and live to tell about it? (if you do, I'd say that the Vipers did not fly / use silent running properly...)

Before HRP buff, it was possible though the Vipers would still have had a chance to take you down, at minimal cost considering the low insurance claim. Now it is actually wiser to run away from them.

And of course, I am not telling that a wing of Vipers is stronger than a wing of FASs / FdLs. Sorry if my comment was confusing.

Are there any mechanics that give small ships a numerical advantage? Do they allow larger wings? No. You are more likely to face a wing of large ships than small.

*Any* ship will win if it has a massive numerical advantage. That does not make it not bad.

Again, no one cares about money when PvPing. Pvping is all about winning.

Any ship can hi wake out out with minimal chance of death, and the extra time required to farm for rebuys is tiny compared to the time required to PvP in general.

When PP open changes happen, then merits will matter, not rebuy, and again, rebuy is irrelevant

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

*cough* Feedback cascade rails *cough*

"Oh no, now I only have double the eHP of my enemy rather than 20x!"

Joking aside, if regen beams work well enough, then this will make large ships best where they should be - in wings supported by smaller vessels

 

[Zeta Legion]

Corvette then.

Again: why should this be the case?

Would it not be a less "stale" PvP meta if ships other than the FDL and FAS were useful fighters?

Also, why are you so willing to accept an entire expansion being focused on a useless addition over decent PvP diversity?

The Corvette fully kitted out for general combat is around 600mil. The FDL is around 100mil. Much smaller gap than say the Courier to the Corvette. Or the DBS to the Asp for example. It's less about 'small' ships VS. 'big' ships than it is about 'cheap' ships VS. 'expensive' ships. Since most of the ship cost is made up by the modules, and the modules require a theoretical volume of space for their mass, there is simply a practical limit on the power you can squeeze into a smaller hull vs. a larger one.

As for other roles besides killing power, the hard cap on wing size kills that idea. I mean, you could bring an Anaconda and three Couriers, but when the other side shows up in 4x FAS, it doesn't really matter because they will simply crush you before you can dance your way to fame and fortune. This isn't a tabletop game or RTS where every 'unit' has an individual points cost/population limit cost that limits deployment in battle. Should there be more useful fighters than the FDL and FAS? Sure, but they should be ships in a similar weight class.

I don't see how this last comment is relevant. What exactly do you mean by accepting a useless addition over PvP diversity?

 

[MarcusKross]

"Oh no, now I only have double the eHP of my enemy rather than 20x!"

Joking aside, if regen beams work well enough, then this will make large ships best where they should be - in wings supported by smaller vessels

I agree. Also it has been confirmed that the feedback cascade collapses the shields only if you manage to register the hit while the enemy is deploying the bank not after the shield regeneration sequence starts this only gives a 4 second window to fire. I am just repeating this whenever it comes up to let everybody know.

 

[Zeta Legion]

I agree. Also it has been confirmed that the feedback cascade collapses the shields only if you manage to register the hit while the enemy is deploying the bank not after the shield regeneration sequence starts this only gives a 4 second window to fire. I am just repeating this whenever it comes up to let everybody know.

It's still remarkably unbalanced. Wings already spam rails. Probability dictates that they are gonna get lucky more times than not without even trying.

 

[geoffrey.hdt]

Are there any mechanics that give small ships a numerical advantage? Do they allow larger wings? No. You are more likely to face a wing of large ships than small.

*Any* ship will win if it has a massive numerical advantage. That does not make it not bad.

But don't you think that a big ship should at least get a chance to win against a wing of smaller ships?

If you answer "no", let's agree to disagree


Before buff, an armored FAS could have approx 5 times the hull points of an armored Viper.

I would find more balanced to have this:

HRPs (what i would suggest*):
--------------------------------
Class 1 = 40
Class 2 = 80
Class 3 = 160
Class 4 = 320
Class 5 = 640
=> Viper mk3 max hull = 685
=> FAS max hull = 2970


...instead of the current HRPs:

Current HRPs:
-------------
Class 1 = 110
Class 2 = 190
Class 3 = 260
Class 4 = 330
Class 5 = 390
=> Viper mk3 max hull = 1065
=> FAS max hull = 2800


...while we initially had this, before buff:

Before buff, HRPs:
------------------
Class 1 = 20
Class 2 = 40
Class 3 = 80
Class 4 = 160
Class 5 = 320
=> Viper mk3 max hull = 465
=> FAS max hull = 2010


edit: * I did not spend enough time on these numbers to ensure they would balance all ships of course. It is just a quick example of HRPs favoring ships with large internal slots.