Hyperion and Sapporo should get some speed buff

[flywlyx]

As L- class ships, they should have higher speed than typical destroyers with three shields and 100K hull.

Especially since both are designed for long-range, agile operations—Hyperion as an expeditionary vessel and Sapporo as a high-speed exploration ship. However, in their current state, both are slower than the "robust capital ship" Phoenix E, which makes little sense from both a lore and balance perspective.

Ideally, these ships should function as reconnaissance-in-force units, where mobility is a key factor.
Hyperion should receive a 40–50% speed boost to keep up with M-class ships like the P and Nemesis, given its lack of shields and hull durability.
Meanwhile, Sapporo should get a 20% speed increase to at least surpass Phoenix E, along with a 40–50% boost in steering to align with its description as a highly maneuverable vessel.

[Raptor34]

I like the way you completely ignore that EVERY other destroyer is slower than the Phoenix E instead.
Even the Rattlesnake somehow.

Edit: For the purpose of this "test". I'm using the in game ship comparison tool and TER all-around engines. I assume of course that there aren't oddities like certain engines performing better on different ships.

[flywlyx]

I like the way you completely ignore that EVERY other destroyer is slower than the Phoenix E instead.
Even the Rattlesnake somehow.

Even when compared to the Odysseus E, it’s only 11% faster, which is hardly significant—especially considering that the Odysseus E has twice the front firepower, twice the shields, and twice the hull.

Edit: The lack of real game balance in the vanilla game has been a long-standing issue, but this flight mechanism update, which impacts the flight performance of all ships, presents a great opportunity to start addressing it.

[Raptor34]

I like the way you completely ignore that EVERY other destroyer is slower than the Phoenix E instead.
Even the Rattlesnake somehow.

Even when compared to the Odysseus E, it’s only 11% faster, which is hardly significant—especially considering that the Odysseus E has twice the front firepower, twice the shields, and twice the hull.

Edit: The lack of real game balance in the vanilla game has been a long-standing issue, but this flight mechanism update, which impacts the flight performance of all ships, presents a great opportunity to start addressing it.

The Oddy is also way bigger and shots the Hyperion can dodge would more or less guarantee to hit it.
Like I won't say no to a buff, I just don't see the reasoning behind it beyond good ship get better.

That and I wonder why is the Phoenix E that fast. It's like the Kestrel of the new age lmao. Remember how despite being Teladi the Kestrel was one of the fastest ship in it's class? Now that's the Phoenix E.

[flywlyx]

The Oddy is also way bigger and shots the Hyperion can dodge would more or less guarantee to hit it.
Like I won't say no to a buff, I just don't see the reasoning behind it beyond good ship get better.

That and I wonder why is the Phoenix E that fast. It's like the Kestrel of the new age lmao. Remember how despite being Teladi the Kestrel was one of the fastest ship in it's class? Now that's the Phoenix E.

I'm mainly referring to AI fleet composition since player-controlled ships are a completely different matter. For me, the Hyperion is a convenient early-game flagship that can handle all plot missions with ease, but that's about it. The Odysseus E, on the other hand, can carry an M-class ship and is vastly superior in every aspect. Once I get my hands on a solid M-class ship like the Katana, Odachi, or Dragon, there's little reason to keep using the Hyperion. Maybe the free repairs are a perk, but having to constantly babysit it due to its lack of shields just isn't worth the trouble. The fact that two Nemesis and four assorted fighters can take it down makes me question whether it's actually good at anything.

If it's genuinely intended only for the early game and not for mid-to-late game use, then the current design is fine—but it still feels like a waste, as only minor adjustments could give it a unique role in the AI fleet.

I believe the reason behind the speed of the Phoenix E is that all other destroyers have distinct advantages over it—Behemoth has more docks, and Odysseus E has more firepower—so it needed a unique buff to stand out.

[Raptor34]

Honestly seems like a good missile boat to me. But I'm mired in reorganizing my logistics network atm and haven't actually had the time to test my theories. That and apparently bombard doesn't work.

Though the issue I'm seeing is how it will handle missile resupply. I'm intending to use EQ docks with position defense so they'll in theory fly back to resupply. And going by my experience in that Boron highway mission, it's capacity even solo is good enough for 2-3 fights, probably more if I didn't mod it's reload speed.
Basically if it can auto reload after every fight or so then it should work out okay. If it needs to deplete it first... then there is an issue there.

Also even if you give it better speed I'm not seeing how it'll help in AI fleets anyway.

[GCU Grey Area]

Honestly seems like a good missile boat to me.

That's how I'm planning to use them. In previous games got good results from L.Smart interceptor frigates. Casualty rates among my S fighters went down noticeably after I started including them in my fleets. The missiles add an extra source of damage & do a fine job of forcing enemy fighters to evade (& while they're evading the one thing they're not doing is shooting at my fighters). Reckon Hyperion could do well in that role - it's tougher than a frigate & can carry considerably more missiles. As an added bonus when the enemy fleet's defeated they can contribute the firepower from their main guns for station demolition work. Suspect Hyperion's agility may make them pleasant ships to work with in this regard, while their firepower looks to be more than good enough for the role. Odysseus may have the edge in burst damage, however Hyperion's slightly ahead on sustained (cooling rate of it's guns is simply phenomenal).

[flywlyx]

That's how I'm planning to use them. In previous games got good results from L.Smart interceptor frigates. Casualty rates among my S fighters went down noticeably after I started including them in my fleets. The missiles add an extra source of damage & do a fine job of forcing enemy fighters to evade (& while they're evading the one thing they're not doing is shooting at my fighters). Reckon Hyperion could do well in that role - it's tougher than a frigate & can carry considerably more missiles. As an added bonus when the enemy fleet's defeated they can contribute the firepower from their main guns for station demolition work. Suspect Hyperion's agility may make them pleasant ships to work with in this regard, while their firepower looks to be more than good enough for the role. Odysseus may have the edge in burst damage, however Hyperion's slightly ahead on sustained (cooling rate of it's guns is simply phenomenal).

Isn't the Odysseus E significantly stronger than the Hyperion when equipped with missile turrets? It has more turrets, double the shields, double the hull, and double the missile storage(if you want to, an M class missile attachment could provide even more bonus), all while being only 10% slower.
Unless they actually equip it with six missile launchers as its main weapons, I don’t see how it fits the role of a missile destroyer better than the Odysseus E. It’s more like it’s underwhelming, so we should use missiles to make it seem less so.

[Raptor34]

That's how I'm planning to use them. In previous games got good results from L.Smart interceptor frigates. Casualty rates among my S fighters went down noticeably after I started including them in my fleets. The missiles add an extra source of damage & do a fine job of forcing enemy fighters to evade (& while they're evading the one thing they're not doing is shooting at my fighters). Reckon Hyperion could do well in that role - it's tougher than a frigate & can carry considerably more missiles. As an added bonus when the enemy fleet's defeated they can contribute the firepower from their main guns for station demolition work. Suspect Hyperion's agility may make them pleasant ships to work with in this regard, while their firepower looks to be more than good enough for the role. Odysseus may have the edge in burst damage, however Hyperion's slightly ahead on sustained (cooling rate of it's guns is simply phenomenal).

Isn't the Odysseus E significantly stronger than the Hyperion when equipped with missile turrets? It has more turrets, double the shields, double the hull, and double the missile storage(if you want to, an M class missile attachment could provide even more bonus), all while being only 10% slower.
Unless they actually equip it with six missile launchers as its main weapons, I don’t see how it fits the role of a missile destroyer better than the Odysseus E. It’s more like it’s underwhelming, so we should use missiles to make it seem less so.

Only if you run L missile turrets I think. And I was assuming that the Oddy has the same base missile capacity as the Syn of 140 or so. The Hyp has 240. And good luck trying to get the Oddy to pull back to rearm. The Hyp is fast and agile and that includes the simple thing of well, turning away.

[flywlyx]

Only if you run L missile turrets I think. And I was assuming that the Oddy has the same base missile capacity as the Syn of 140 or so. The Hyp has 240. And good luck trying to get the Oddy to pull back to rearm. The Hyp is fast and agile and that includes the simple thing of well, turning away.

If we're talking about missile destroyers, I don't see the point in assuming the Ody E is using anything other than L missile turrets. It's hard to imagine a scenario in the vanilla game where a destroyer with 22 missile turrets would need to retreat. And even if such a situation existed, having 100% more hull and shields seems far more reliable than just a 10% boost in speed and 10 degrees of extra turning speed.

[LameFox]

Never understood why the Phoenix is that fast now. Seems weird to me, especially that it eats into the Split's already kind of sad speciality.

I'm pretty okay with the speed on the others though. Now that I can actually boost in capital ships I've not really had issues flying my Sapporo around, even in hostile space, like the two Xenon systems I have to cover to extract it in the early game.

[blackphoenixx]

If anything the Sapporo needs a firepower buff. The missile array may look cool but its dps is pitiful and the lack of anti-capital option for the M turrets really hurts the ship as anything but a radar drone.

Only if you run L missile turrets I think. And I was assuming that the Oddy has the same base missile capacity as the Syn of 140 or so. The Hyp has 240. And good luck trying to get the Oddy to pull back to rearm. The Hyp is fast and agile and that includes the simple thing of well, turning away.

If we're talking about missile destroyers, I don't see the point in assuming the Ody E is using anything other than L missile turrets. It's hard to imagine a scenario in the vanilla game where a destroyer with 22 missile turrets would need to retreat. And even if such a situation existed, having 100% more hull and shields seems far more reliable than just a 10% boost in speed and 10 degrees of extra turning speed.

I've done some testing on that. An unmodded Oddy E with all tracking turrets kills a K in melee with ~150-180 heavy heatseekers and ~50-60% shield left (Ter Mk3) without even firing its main guns. And that's with the K jumping right on top of it.
They can carry 600+ missiles so you easily have enough for 3 engagements before needing to resupply. So yeah, there isn't a lot you need to run away from, especially if you use them in groups of two or more.

And it's not exactly slow or clumsy either, it's the second-fastest "real" destroyer after the Phoenix E iirc and while its yaw is a little on the low side it's not completely terrible.

Resupplying that many missiles in one go is a massive strain on your logistics even with closed loop though so you better bring multiple supply ships and a solid trading network if you want them to actually have ammo.

[LameFox]

Missiles *were* the Sapporo's firepower buff though. It's canonically a (very old) lightly armed exploration ship converted into a command role, not a frontline combat ship meant to take on capitals. Bringing it ever closer to being a normal destroyer would make no sense. It already works in the role it's designed for—having one as a fleet or patrol lead will significantly expand their response range.

[flywlyx]

Bringing it ever closer to being a normal destroyer would make no sense.

Very true. That’s why I’m not suggesting adding more weapons but instead increasing its speed to differentiate it. Right now, all destroyers have almost identical parameters, with firepower being the only major distinction.

If possible, I’d rather see Sapporo lose 50% of its hull in exchange for a 50% speed boost. That would make it truly unique and align better with its role as a non-combatant exploration vessel.
It just doesn’t make sense for a non-combatant ship to have the same durability as a typical destroyer.

It already works in the role it's designed for—having one as a fleet or patrol lead will significantly expand their response range.

It only works right now because of its larger radar range—aside from that, it’s just another typical destroyer, far from its described high speed and maneuverability.

If it had thinner armor while becoming faster and more agile, it would better suit a patrol role since patrol forces need to cover as much area as possible within a given time. On the other hand, if it had thicker armor and slower speed, it would be a better fit for a fleet command role, especially considering that most TER capital ships are much slower than it.

I actually think the Sapporo should have both a Vanguard and a Sentinel variant, with significant differences in hull and agility to better fulfill these distinct roles.

[Targ Collective]

The Hyperion is an Expeditionary Ship. That basically means it is a Light Destroyer with six weapons around 500 MJ, giving it around the firepower of one Terran Main Battery on a ship which is much faster and more nimble than an Osaka which can fit two Main Batteries. The Hyperion also takes four groups of M turrets, and can fit missiles, meaning it outclasses the Jian (it has turrets top and bottom, and can fit missile turrets). It is more mobile than standard destroyers, to get the battery power of one Syn you would need three Hyperions, but has less range.

The Hyperion is fast with Travel Drive. Generally you'll want to go Terran for activation time or Paranid for max speed. Boost capacity depends on the species make. But remember the firepower needs to be balanced with other ships, and remember it's a Light Destroyer. For a Destroyer it is already moderately well armed and can take long range missiles. The AI also needs the Hyperion to be expensive enough, and not too good in combat, for it to balance with other species tech (otherwise the Hyperion would make the bearing faction too powerful).

The Hyperion is already fast enough to give the AI a significant advantage. Making it too fast, giving it too much range, giving it L turrets, these things will have been considered and rejected for the sake of game balance.

The Munchkin is strong within you. But game developers will place balance first, and seen through that lens, I don't believe the Hyperion is too fast, unless you are a speed hungry Munchkin.

[flywlyx]

The Hyperion is an Expeditionary Ship. That basically means it is a Light Destroyer with six weapons around 500 MJ, giving it around the firepower of one Terran Main Battery on a ship which is much faster and more nimble than an Osaka which can fit two Main Batteries. The Hyperion also takes four groups of M turrets, and can fit missiles, meaning it outclasses the Jian (it has turrets top and bottom, and can fit missile turrets). It is more mobile than standard destroyers, to get the battery power of one Syn you would need three Hyperions, but has less range.

The Hyperion is fast with Travel Drive. Generally you'll want to go Terran for activation time or Paranid for max speed. Boost capacity depends on the species make. But remember the firepower needs to be balanced with other ships, and remember it's a Light Destroyer. For a Destroyer it is already moderately well armed and can take long range missiles. The AI also needs the Hyperion to be expensive enough, and not too good in combat, for it to balance with other species tech (otherwise the Hyperion would make the bearing faction too powerful).

The Hyperion is already fast enough to give the AI a significant advantage. Making it too fast, giving it too much range, giving it L turrets, these things will have been considered and rejected for the sake of game balance.

The Munchkin is strong within you. But game developers will place balance first, and seen through that lens, I don't believe the Hyperion is too fast, unless you are a speed hungry Munchkin.

Since you brought up the Syn for comparison, let's compare all the COP E destroyers together and see how they stack up against it. Since AI performance is a factor, let's equip them all with faction-specific gear.
Behemoth E: +86m/s speed, -0.5° steering, -7k shield, -4K weapon dmg, -6 L turrets and +4 M turrets
Odysseus E: +121m/s speed, -1.1° steering, -63k shield, -4.3K weapon dmg, -4 L turrets, and +2 M turrets
Phoenix E: +123m/s speed, +1.2° steering, +7k shield, -3.5K weapon dmg, -6 L turrets, and +2 M turrets
Hyperion: +140m/s speed, +9.7° steering, -104K shield, -4K weapon dmg, -8 L turrets, and +4 M turrets

The numbers speak for themselves. With only a minor increase in speed (20m/s) and steering (9°), it sacrifices all L turrets (2–4) and loses 40K–100K in shield capacity. The trade-off heavily reduces both damage output and survivability without offering a significant mobility boost in return. As a destroyer, it's far from well-armed, and I highly doubt it could win a one-on-one fight against any standard destroyer in AI hands. To be honest, I've never noticed faster speed giving AI any real advantage—capital ship AI is simply too poor to make use of it. All they do is stop and open fire(and they miss a lot), whereas making use of speed advantages requires well-executed tactical maneuvers, which they simply don't perform.

[Targ Collective]

The steering and short range is a crucial factor for the gameplay of the ship. In short, it is supposed to be reasonably well balanced for the AI, but lets be honest, the Hyperion is intended first and foremost to be *fun for the player to fly*. The short range requires the player to engage, and the decent steering makes that something the player can do without fighting the ship. We also need to take a look at boost speed and duration.

I remain convinced that the Hyperion is balanced not just around the AI but also the player. Not only AI competent but also as a main player ship. The relatively extravagant interior means this is not just for the AI but to say thanks for the DLC support, and that means it needs to play well not only in the hands of the AI but also the player. What the AI needs is quite necessary but fitting the ship around how humans play will affect balance.

If it is too fast then the AI would keep up but humans would find it more difficult. I'm convinced this is a human-first design, and that will affect balance.

[flywlyx]

The steering and short range is a crucial factor for the gameplay of the ship. In short, it is supposed to be reasonably well balanced for the AI, but lets be honest, the Hyperion is intended first and foremost to be *fun for the player to fly*. The short range requires the player to engage, and the decent steering makes that something the player can do without fighting the ship. We also need to take a look at boost speed and duration.

I remain convinced that the Hyperion is balanced not just around the AI but also the player. Not only AI competent but also as a main player ship. The relatively extravagant interior means this is not just for the AI but to say thanks for the DLC support, and that means it needs to play well not only in the hands of the AI but also the player. What the AI needs is quite necessary but fitting the ship around how humans play will affect balance.

If it is too fast then the AI would keep up but humans would find it more difficult. I'm convinced this is a human-first design, and that will affect balance.

The numbers speak for themselves—given the typical AI behavior of standing and shooting, Hyperion has no chance against other E destroyers.

I also don’t see any reason why making it faster would take away from the fun of piloting it. As I mentioned, the main issue is that it doesn’t fit into any meaningful role within a player’s fleet. It serves as a decent starting ship, but once players acquire other destroyers, there’s little reason to use it anymore.

Ship designs should be diverse enough to give each vessel a distinct role, rather than relying on a one-size-fits-all approach with standardized stats.

[Targ Collective]

Build cost is a factor, size is a factor. Some things only pay off if you scale them up. The Hyperion's Encyclopaedia indicates that the specialist role it is intended for is attacking M vessels and hardpoints. If the scenario is taking out a Xenon Defence Platform, then it is speed and the accuracy that derives from it which is the factor.

Balance isn't just about ceremonial one-on-one ship-on-ship duels. You need to think firepower, mobility, survivabilty. Generally two Kalis against a Gladius will win, because it is not just the weapon hardpoints, it is mobility and shielding.

Hyperions are expensive for the firepower, but as an L ship it can fit missile turrets, which can massively increase ranged firepower. It can also fit any M turret, including Terran designs. The place in the game balance the Hyperion is intended for is M ships and hardpoints, with decent missile and point defence capabilities.

Destroyers aren't supposed to one-on-one Hyperions. They'll have more powerful main weapons and turrets, but they are not intended to be replaced by Hyperions. In a fleet taking a sector Hyperions are intended to be used in number and targeting weapon and shield emplacements, with fighter backup, and enough of them can certainly take the hull too.

i recognise that this is on the verge of becoming an argument, and I'd like to ask for this to stay civil. But the Hyperion is not a ship without a role. It's cheaper than Destroyers and is not intended to replace them. I feel the batteries are on the expensive side, because optimal loadout is expensive, but I genuinely think the Hyperion ticks all the boxes for a player ship but had to be brought into balance so that the Paranid conflict won't be too badly destabilised by the advantage it gives. It has to be awesome, but not *too* awesome. In the X3 days the Xenon had a ship called a Q and it was able to take Destroyer grade weapons. The AI having too powerful an ace is not fun, and the AI gets these. What if people want to unlock it and then fight the Paranid?

The Expeditionary Class is supposed to be between M and L hull classes and is balanced for that. It's more durable and powerful than a Corvette or Frigate, can automate missiles with turrets, has six baby main batteries. If it were classed as a Destroyer I certainly would agree with your concerns, but it's an Expeditionary Ship, not a Destroyer. It's like saying a Kalis is a worse ship in direct firepower to a Katana or Osaka - true, but not accounting for specialisation. It has worse shields so the player doesn't feel too invincible, can be used in groups, is excellent at breaking subcomponents so the big damage can be sniped out.

They can each dock three fighters. That might seem a little harsh, but ten Hyperions will get you thirty, twenty sixty, and if you need to use bulk fighters you can buy or build a carrier.

I'm getting a little passionate here, because I enjoy debating maybe a little too much. Please take this as honest open debate okay? I don't agree with your argument, but I'm not attacking your right to argue and would love to hear out your perspective further.

[flywlyx]

Build cost is a factor, size is a factor. Some things only pay off if you scale them up. The Hyperion's Encyclopaedia indicates that the specialist role it is intended for is attacking M vessels and hardpoints. If the scenario is taking out a Xenon Defence Platform, then it is speed and the accuracy that derives from it which is the factor.
...

Capital ship AI simply lacks the capability to target hardpoints as players do.

Two Kalis will for sure win; they have eight shields and four weapons, while a Gladius only has two shields and four weapons. This is purely a victory of having more shields. Meanwhile, Hyperion has only one shield, fewer than any E destroyer.

A fully equipped Hyperion costs 24M, whereas an Ody E costs only 20M. It is more expensive than any E destroyer.

In AI control, Hyperion generally performs worse in almost any mission it can complete. That’s why I suggest increasing its speed—patrol and scouting seem to be the only roles it's suited for, but in its current state, it’s still not distinct enough to be the best choice for those tasks.