[Poll] Should station weapons reach further than capitals'?

[KextV8]

Or get rid of main guns, and replace them with L turrets, like in X3TC. Less targeting issues, just pew pew.

I dunno. The L destroyers here feel like X3TC M7 Frigates. The XL Asgard is the only one that feels like an actual Destroyer from X3. And it works fine with a frontal battery, doesn't detract from its feel at all.

I'd rather see more XL warships and just let the destroyers keep their m7 feel. M7 was my favorite kind of player ship. And is in this game the destroyers. I usually spend my personal time in a tricked out Syn.

[Ragnos28]

The attack order only goes to the leader, his subordinates then act like their assignment tells them to. But it works both ways

Just finished my test, with the new conditions: https://youtu.be/Tl5iyMTMwRE

It works

Few questions tho:
- is normal behavior that the main batteries are not being used except for the leader? I find it strange that the subordonates favor the usage of L plasma with 8.6 km range over the main battery with 10 km..not complaining tho
Can't wait to test this with a wing of Rattlesnakes with full L plasma.
- is normal behavior that the orders of the subordonates is just escort ship and no atack orders?
- is the forward X-shape the default formation for ships under bombard role?

@S!rAssassin look, look, no main batteries are being used its...wonderfull

[chew-ie]

The attack order only goes to the leader, his subordinates then act like their assignment tells them to. But it works both ways

Just finished my test, with the new conditions: https://youtu.be/Tl5iyMTMwRE

It works

Few questions tho:
- is normal behavior that the main batteries are not being used except for the leader? I find it strange that the subordonates favor the usage of L plasma with 8.6 km range over the main battery with 10 km..not complaining tho
Can't wait to test this with a wing of Rattlesnakes with full L plasma.
- is normal behavior that the orders of the subordonates is just escort ship and no atack orders?
- is the forward X-shape the default formation for ships under bombard role?

@S!rAssassin look, look, no main batteries are being used its...wonderfull

Especially liked ZSW-670 backing off ^^ ("You guys stopped? Why the h...? Oh... coming!")

RE formations - I'd use formations which keep the distance like the leader (cross, X...). Using claw or other formations of that sort could go wrong - or help. I also keep the groups small (4-5 ships at most). Picking the proper formation is vital IMHO.

The main batteries should be used - but under some conditions (we as players don't have access to unfortunately) they won't fire. Sometimes the main batterie fire also stops although working beforehand (filed a bug report @beta board RE this one)

All in example:


---

RE ships without main guns - I'm using the Barbarossa as turret plattform / "destroyer gunship". Works as well

[Raptor34]

Let's not forget that after having station weapons have longer range than warships, we'll immediately have a new poll "Should ship weapons reach further than stations?"

[Ragnos28]

RE formations - I'd use formations which keep the distance like the leader (cross, X...). Using claw or other formations of that sort could go wrong - or help. I also keep the groups small (4-5 ships at most). Picking the proper formation is vital IMHO.

Well, in that case...I will make the forward X-shape default. If it isn't broken, don't fix it.

[Falcrack]

Voted yes. It is illogical to me that a mobile firing platform should outrage stationary defenses. I always thought the whining of players complaining that their destroyers were not able to stay out of range of stations in order to fire on them with impunity and no fear of losses was stupid.

That being said, it would probably require a rebalance of defense modules on stations, perhaps reducing the amount of L turrets per defense module, or increasing the cost of such modules. A single disc defense module has far more power in terms of turrets than most destroyers in the game, for a tiny fraction of the cost.

[jlehtone]

Voted yes. It is illogical to me that a mobile firing platform should outrage stationary defenses. I always thought the whining of players complaining that their destroyers were not able to stay out of range of stations in order to fire on them with impunity and no fear of losses was stupid.

That being said, it would probably require a rebalance of defense modules on stations, perhaps reducing the amount of L turrets per defense module, or increasing the cost of such modules.

I did assume that OP feels the current implementation boring, because player can (particularly with 6.0) demolish stations "hands down".
The implication is that enemy stations should be able to kill you more. For fun.
The player stations, obviously, should be constructed from rice paper, and tremble in the presence of every and any NPC ship ...

The attack order only goes to the leader, his subordinates then act like their assignment tells them to. But it works both ways

I can't fathom what is going on there.

* If your role is "Bombard", then you should get an "Attack order", when Capital target enters leader's radar
* If your role is "Intercept", then you should get an "Attack order", when non-capital target enters leader's radar
* If your role is "Attack", then you should get an "Attack order", when your leader gets an "Attack order"
* If your role is whatever, then you do get an "Attack order", when player says so
* Coordinated attack and reaction to attack are basically one of the above

In every case you do get the same order to attack a target. Only two things can vary:
(A) the target, and (B) your relative position to the target when your order activates.
(For example, interceptors might get a target that is 40km away, while fighter being hit by station turret turns to return fire from point blank range.)

In all the orders to attack a station only the distance to target does differ.
That distance is the only reason to fly differently, not the role.

The 6.0 is supposed to have new physics. That affects flying and collision avoidance.
In other words, if the new physics is better at keeping distance, then it indeed "works both ways".

[chew-ie]

In other words, if the new physics is better at keeping distance, then it indeed "works both ways".

Not to diminish your wise words in any way - but on the macrosripted level there is some difference. Or at least the end result is a better one:

A simple attack order will get the occasional destroyer in trouble - as he is allowed to attack anything. ("oh, a butterfly" ) The bombard assignment keeps this urges in check and saves the day / destroyer [from doing a 5.1-style-dive beneath the Xenon station where it can focus fire all 8 graviton turrets].

[jlehtone]

A simple attack order will get the occasional destroyer in trouble - as he is allowed to attack anything.

The order in itself should have a target. Sure, if the order is given with wrong target, then result is as one can expect.

The "Coordinated Attack" is odd. It defaults to "weak first". What weak? I told to attack the Station, not the drones around it!
Clearly, there targets in that are a lottery beyond our control. Likewise, the "Attack multiple" does get a list from us, but priorities after the first are a black box. (Or a coffin.)

While scouting unmapped sectors, I just discovered this ANT Behemoth soloing a Xenon defense station:
...
This is how it ended:

A textbook siege, wasn't it? Both sides did their part, regardless of the specs of the station.

[Ragnos28]

The attack order only goes to the leader, his subordinates then act like their assignment tells them to. But it works both ways

Just finished my test, with the new conditions: https://youtu.be/Tl5iyMTMwRE

It works

Few questions tho:
- is normal behavior that the main batteries are not being used except for the leader? I find it strange that the subordonates favor the usage of L plasma with 8.6 km range over the main battery with 10 km..not complaining tho
Can't wait to test this with a wing of Rattlesnakes with full L plasma.
- is normal behavior that the orders of the subordonates is just escort ship and no atack orders?
- is the forward X-shape the default formation for ships under bombard role?

@S!rAssassin look, look, no main batteries are being used its...wonderfull

Especially liked ZSW-670 backing off ^^ ("You guys stopped? Why the h...? Oh... coming!")

RE formations - I'd use formations which keep the distance like the leader (cross, X...). Using claw or other formations of that sort could go wrong - or help. I also keep the groups small (4-5 ships at most). Picking the proper formation is vital IMHO.

The main batteries should be used - but under some conditions (we as players don't have access to unfortunately) they won't fire. Sometimes the main batterie fire also stops although working beforehand (filed a bug report @beta board RE this one)

A viewer has come with another explanation for what happen in my clip, and I tend to agree with him.
He says that this is just the improved AI at work and that the behavior of my ships in the video was just them moving in formation and the turrets happening to be in firing range.
That would explain why the main batteries would not fire, subordinates not recieving atack orders. So, bombard is only suposed to act like intercept against L/LX targest, having nothing to do with keeping distance.

[chew-ie]

Just finished my test, with the new conditions: https://youtu.be/Tl5iyMTMwRE

It works

Few questions tho:
- is normal behavior that the main batteries are not being used except for the leader? I find it strange that the subordonates favor the usage of L plasma with 8.6 km range over the main battery with 10 km..not complaining tho
Can't wait to test this with a wing of Rattlesnakes with full L plasma.
- is normal behavior that the orders of the subordonates is just escort ship and no atack orders?
- is the forward X-shape the default formation for ships under bombard role?

@S!rAssassin look, look, no main batteries are being used its...wonderfull

Especially liked ZSW-670 backing off ^^ ("You guys stopped? Why the h...? Oh... coming!")

RE formations - I'd use formations which keep the distance like the leader (cross, X...). Using claw or other formations of that sort could go wrong - or help. I also keep the groups small (4-5 ships at most). Picking the proper formation is vital IMHO.

The main batteries should be used - but under some conditions (we as players don't have access to unfortunately) they won't fire. Sometimes the main batterie fire also stops although working beforehand (filed a bug report @beta board RE this one)

A viewer has come with another explanation for what happen in my clip, and I tend to agree with him.
He says that this is just the improved AI at work and that the behavior of my ships in the video was just them moving in formation and the turrets happening to be in firing range.
That would explain why the main batteries would not fire, subordinates not recieving atack orders. So, bombard is only suposed to act like intercept against L/LX targest, having nothing to do with keeping distance.

As explained in the discussion with jlehtone - bombard helps to set boundaries for the AI. I lost too many destroyers doing useless things (chasing drones through graviton barrages). Setting them to e.g. "attack" will lead to their certain death - as would "intercept". They are no fighters and should stay put.

[Ragnos28]

As explained in the discussion with jlehtone - bombard helps to set boundaries for the AI. I lost too many destroyers doing useless things (chasing drones through graviton barrages). Setting them to e.g. "attack" will lead to their certain death - as would "intercept". They are no fighters and should stay put.

Yes, I also think that bombard is required even if it is just for the fact that ships under bombard will ignore all targets that are not L or LX, so drones and S/M ships will not make the subordinate destroyers change position. I will also test destroyers under defend and maybe atack with commander to see if I get comparable results, same with just the fleet leader recieving atack orders.

Anyway, my Rattlesnakes are almost at position, near the same defence station, so I'm ready for the next tests.

[Ragnos28]

Just finished the new tests with Rattlesnakes:
- with bombard role: https://youtu.be/W1_80qU79zc
- with defend role: https://youtu.be/DSs_rV25iD0

It does not work with Rattlesnakes, too short range.

[chew-ie]

It does not work with Rattlesnakes, too short range.

Try the Battlesnake upgrade (endurance mods on main weapons: +20% range => ~+1.3km => ~8km range)
(theorycrafting, have yet to test my elite squad myself)

[Ragnos28]

Try the Battlesnake upgrade (endurance mods on main weapons: +20% range => ~+1.3km => ~8km range)
(theorycrafting, have yet to test my elite squad myself)

Thank you for the mode suggestion, but I must keep it vanilla, in order to be able to report bugs and to keep the validity of the tests I perform.

[chew-ie]

Try the Battlesnake upgrade (endurance mods on main weapons: +20% range => ~+1.3km => ~8km range)
(theorycrafting, have yet to test my elite squad myself)

Thank you for the mode suggestion, but I must keep it vanilla, in order to be able to report bugs and to keep the validity of the tests I perform.

Attaching modifications to weapons/hulls/shields/engines/turrets is a vanilla feature.

[Ragnos28]

Attaching modifications to weapons/hulls/shields/engines/turrets is a vanilla feature.

My bad, thought you meant a game mod named "Rattlesnake upgrade", not a weapon mod.

[chew-ie]

Attaching modifications to weapons/hulls/shields/engines/turrets is a vanilla feature.

My bad, thought you meant a game mod named "Rattlesnake upgrade", not a weapon mod.

Sorry for the confusion - I like to call them Battlesnakes Did my test - and .. well - mixed result. The extra range will help, but it's not a no brainer depending on the approach vector. The elite factor helped them survive (better shielding, more hull)

[Ragnos28]

The extra range will help, but it's not a no brainer depending on the approach vector. The elite factor helped them survive (better shielding, more hull)

On another note, I've become quite fan on the forward x-shape formation (that apparently is the default one for ships under bombard). I use it now for my destroyers asign to my lead carrier, and now they no longer pile on top of it when I aproach gates.
I will repeat the test again with a wing of Odysseus E, to see if I still have a viable station demolition tactic, even w/o the use of the main batteries.

[abc0000]

Anti-ship L Turrets (plasma) should be slightly longer-range than the main gun of destroyers, but weaker in firepower by 2-2.5 times. when firing at a gun platform, the destroyer must take damage from it

heavy classter missiles and torpedoes are great for destroying L turrets at stations.

torpedo fighters can safely destroy L turrets without flying into the coverage area of M turrets of the station