64 replies to this topic

[Phoenix Rising]

Since implementing the new build cost/time scheme for v1.1, I've been dismayed at how much starfighter complements are affecting the accessibility of their parent carriers. Current mechanic dictates that the cost/time for any complement squadron be added to that of the carrier. However, in certain cases, such as the Venator's, the total price of complements is more than that of the carrier itself. Complement pricing has become too expensive to justify the limited upgrade level you get from them.

I see three possible solutions to this problem, all of which carry different implications for gameplay and balance. One of them will show up in the next version. I want to know what the players think. Here are the options:

Maintain costs; scale complement upgrades - this will keep carriers expensive, but make complements more deadly, and will remedy the problem of advanced carriers having outdated complements. Build times and costs will remain the same, but complement upgrade levels will be scaled to that of the carrier. This means, regardless of the carrier's class, fully-upgraded carriers will receive fully-upgraded complements. Everything else in between will be matched based on how relatively complete they are with their upgrade branch, opposed to what number upgrade they're on. Examples:

Bayonet - TIE Starfighter (currently TIE Starfighter) - 0%
Bayonet 2 - TIE Fighter (currently TIE Fighter) - 14%
Bayonet 3 - TIE Fighter x3 (currently TIE Fighter x2) - 29%
Bayonet 4 - TIE Fighter x4 (currently TIE Fighter x3) - 43%
Bayonet 5 - TIE Fighter x5 (currently TIE Fighter x4) - 57%
Bayonet 6 - TIE Fighter x6 (currently TIE Fighter x5) - 71%
Bayonet 7 - TIE Fighter x8 (currently TIE Fighter x6) - 86%
Bayonet 8 - TIE Fighter x9 (currently TIE Fighter x7) - 100%

Imperial I - TIE Starfighter (currently TIE Starfighter) - 0%
Imperial II - TIE Fighter x3 (currently TIE Fighter) - 33%
Imperial III - TIE Fighter x6 (currently TIE Fighter x2) - 67%
Imperial IV - TIE Fighter x9 (currently TIE Fighter x3) - 100%

Halve costs; offset complement upgrades - this will reduce the financial burden of complements, making carriers more affordable, and will address the issue of new carriers having old complements. Build times and costs will be cut in half for complements and their starting upgrade level will be offset by the difference in levels on the tech tree between carrier and complement. Examples:

Bayonet - TIE Fighter (currently TIE Starfighter) - 1
Bayonet 2 - TIE Fighter x2 (currently TIE Fighter) - 2
Bayonet 3 - TIE Fighter x3 (currently TIE Fighter x2) - 3
Bayonet 4 - TIE Fighter x4 (currently TIE Fighter x3) - 4
Bayonet 5 - TIE Fighter x5 (currently TIE Fighter x4) - 5
Bayonet 6 - TIE Fighter x6 (currently TIE Fighter x5) - 6
Bayonet 7 - TIE Fighter x7 (currently TIE Fighter x6) - 7
Bayonet 8 - TIE Fighter x8 (currently TIE Fighter x7) - 8

Imperial I - TIE Fighter (currently TIE Starfighter) - 1
Imperial II - TIE Fighter x2 (currently TIE Fighter) - 2
Imperial III - TIE Fighter x3 (currently TIE Fighter x2) - 3
Imperial IV - TIE Fighter x4 (currently TIE Fighter x3) - 4

Halve costs; cap, scale, and offset complement upgrades - this will reduce the financial burden of complements, attempt to strike a balance between the previous two choices, and normalize complement upgrade potential across carrier classes. Maximum upgrade level for complements would be capped at 50% of the way up their branch (rounded down); however, they would have the potential to go higher if their carrier is higher on the tech tree (up to Level 5, which could reach fully-upgraded complement). Before offset, they would be scaled at a 1:2 ratio in a similar manner as the first choice so that upgraded corvettes didn't always get better complements than upgraded capitals. Examples:

Bayonet - TIE Fighter (currently TIE Starfighter) - 1 + 0%
Bayonet 2 - TIE Fighter (currently TIE Fighter) - 1 + 7%
Bayonet 3 - TIE Fighter x2 (currently TIE Fighter x2) - 1 + 14%
Bayonet 4 - TIE Fighter x2 (currently TIE Fighter x3) - 1 + 21%
Bayonet 5 - TIE Fighter x3 (currently TIE Fighter x4) - 1 + 29%
Bayonet 6 - TIE Fighter x3 (currently TIE Fighter x5) - 1 + 36%
Bayonet 7 - TIE Fighter x4 (currently TIE Fighter x6) - 1 + 43%
Bayonet 8 - TIE Fighter x5 (currently TIE Fighter x7) - 1 + 50%

Imperial I - TIE Fighter (currently TIE Starfighter) - 1 + 0%
Imperial II - TIE Fighter x2 (currently TIE Fighter) - 1 + 16%
Imperial III - TIE Fighter x4 (currently TIE Fighter x2) - 1 + 33%
Imperial IV - TIE Fighter x5 (currently TIE Fighter x3) - 1 + 50%

As long as I'm doing a poll on complements, I'd also like to know what everyone thinks about adding transports to complement rosters. Historically, I've universally disallowed anything in the transport class from being part of a complement, but that means certain carriers, like the ISD (which is supposed to get 8 Lambdas, 15 DXs, and 4 or so Skiprays in addition to the TIE wing), have not been allowed to reach their full potential. This would probably make the most sense with choice 2 or 3 in the first poll, but it has no bearing on that outcome. This is just to gauge opinion.

Edited by Phoenix Rising, 09 January 2009 - 06:50 AM.

[Kitkun]

I vote third and yes. Yay transports.

However, I think fully halving the price might be a bit drastic. two-thirds or three-quarters would be good, I think.

Also, I'd propose that 'Carrier ships' follow an offset, or otherwise be a bit over the cap in order to increase their viability.

[coinich]

Part of the fury I suppose of an ISD was its ability to use shuttles to board enemy ships. I know this wasn't implemented, but certainly the DXs would often be launched in combat.

[wuffles]

Personally I would go for 3 and yes definately allow transports if the ship was supposed to launch them. If this makes an ISD more expensive then so be it. Also would it be possible to look at the launch rate for the ships and possibly improve it especially for ships that were specially designed or refitted to be a carrier as you would expect them to be able to launch faster. I dont know if its possible but if the venator has 2 hangar bays as it looks like one on each side then could it launch 2 at a time?

As it stands I find carriers to not really be worth it as especially once upgraded they are just launching stuff which lacks the power to stay around and do anything useful. Making them launch higher tech variants should help with that at least though.

If you are going to do this though will you look at either the cost or build time of fighters when built at a starbase as you risk making it not worth building them. Already I find it not worth building most unless you have done a lot of research, at least with carriers the fighters are disposable.

I like the idea that the higher tech ships also get higher tech complements as it really wouldnt make sense for them to be launching obsolete tie starfighters.

As an aside what would the complement of the dreads be, I think I played the SMG EaW mod and they had a dread launching bayonets, is that canon or was it just a gameplay choice they made?

[Phoenix Rising]

Personally I would go for 3 and yes definately allow transports if the ship was supposed to launch them. If this makes an ISD more expensive then so be it.

In my opinion, with halved costs, it would make the ISD more useful, rather than more expensive.

Also would it be possible to look at the launch rate for the ships and possibly improve it especially for ships that were specially designed or refitted to be a carrier as you would expect them to be able to launch faster. I dont know if its possible but if the venator has 2 hangar bays as it looks like one on each side then could it launch 2 at a time?

EaW doesn't allow you to launch squadrons simultaneously, only faster. The rate is currently based on the hangar count.

If you are going to do this though will you look at either the cost or build time of fighters when built at a starbase as you risk making it not worth building them. Already I find it not worth building most unless you have done a lot of research, at least with carriers the fighters are disposable.

With choice three, that should already be taken care of. It would be nearly impossible to get fully-upgraded starfighters as complement (you could only do it with Level 0 complement on a Level 5 carrier, which we don't even have right now). For any choice, you almost never get advanced starfighters as complement, so you'd still need to build those. I think the biggest potential choice for making independent fighters obsolete would be number one.

As an aside what would the complement of the dreads be, I think I played the SMG EaW mod and they had a dread launching bayonets, is that canon or was it just a gameplay choice they made?

Hah, I suppose they could in theory (the bays on the Executor should be big enough), but I've never heard of it.

[wuffles]

I dont think ISD needs to be more useful as such, at level IV its already a well rounded monster. Those heavy lasers it gets really help it out vs the small ships and it has plenty of firepower already for bigger ones. I think you did a great job in making both the Imperial and Tector strong but different. One of the things I love most about this mod is the fact that a ISD really is something for most smaller ships to fear as opposed to the stock game where its got a pathetic amount of turbo lasers.

The other thing I wish could be done but pretty sure cant is specifying the order which fighters come out of a ship. Its annoying when you have say 3 ships and 2 spawn fighters and the third spawns bombers, would be nice if they all spawned in same order to make creating groups quicker and easier.

[Phoenix Rising]

I dont think ISD needs to be more useful as such, at level IV its already a well rounded monster.

Well, a better carrier at least. I tend to prefer the Tec now, at least at lower levels, but it'd be a tough call with all those half-priced transports on the Imp.

The other thing I wish could be done but pretty sure cant is specifying the order which fighters come out of a ship.

Nope... although the game usually seems to pull either the most expensive ones out first, or whatever you have the least of, or the best counter for the battle. Not sure which, but there is something going on behind the scenes with the order, since Venators usually always spawn all of their bombers in the first 60 seconds for me.

[Tropical Bob]

I vote numero uno! No point in upgrading a carrier if you're only gonna get starting level fighters that get owned at the first sight of an enemy. That's my current beef with the Venator-class in v1.1...Sure, I get 35 squadrons of fighters from each ship, but they're each rather low tier. If the AI managed to upgrade anything, the carriers would become half useless. The full cost of fighters being added on nicely balances having lots of high-level fighters. Perhaps carrier upgrade research could be increased somewhat to represent the research of the fighter levels being included?

If it's canon to throw transports on the ISD's and such, go ahead! Canon seems to work out rather good already in my book.

Edited by Tropical Bob, 10 January 2009 - 09:36 AM.

[Phoenix Rising]

If it's canon to throw transports on the ISD's and such, go ahead! Canon seems to work out rather good already in my book.

Yup, it is. Although, I'm kind of surprised no one has brought up the argument yet that Lambdas shouldn't be used in combat. Maybe it's implied since they're now light freighters?

Edited by Phoenix Rising, 10 January 2009 - 09:44 AM.

[Kitkun]

They have guns, they shoot the enemy. They're better than nothing.

I seem to remember seeing the question before, but I can't remember the answer.
Can you have certain complements spawn only if certain conditions are met? E.g. shields are down?

Edited by Kitkun, 10 January 2009 - 12:56 PM.

[skie9173]

Itd be nicer if fighter spawn order could be controlled but if it can't ohh well. as for transports i feel that they should be used. AFAIK there weren't many cases of the imps using transports in battle but this if PR, its pretty much an entire "what if" setup. as for the rebels they'd use whatever they could get their hands on in battle, transports definately included. as to Lambdas, if i remember correctly i think that both sides were known to use them to recover downed pilots and such during and after battles. if they can take potshots at the enemy while doing it all the better right. this idea could be used to help explain how ships always seem to have full fighter compliments from battle to battle.

[Phoenix Rising]

I seem to remember seeing the question before, but I can't remember the answer.

They're all over XW and TF, although the scale is off.

Can you have certain complements spawn only if certain conditions are met? E.g. shields are down?

Possibly with a script.

as to Lambdas, if i remember correctly i think that both sides were known to use them to recover downed pilots and such during and after battles.

Freighter types were supposed to get a small, stackable Bounty ability to simulate salvage operations, but I never got it to work on units. So they're kind of useless in combat right now, other than for roleplaying reasons like you mentioned.

[Kaleb Graff]

If I understand the question correctly, I'm voting for number 2. My main reason is that carrier fighters will be behind regular fighters at any given level, meaning they should be cheaper. It also make the fully-upgraded fighters special, separating them from carrier fighters. As for transports, I don't see why not.

[Fox83]

Well I hate when complements become outdated (but sometimes in complemets are fighters that aren't even researched yet ). Is it possibe to link fighter research and complemets?

BTW this is bit off topic but something I would like to present.
Well I may not be true SW fan (in the end I´m militarist) but the way I see Upgrades (but refit is perhabs better word) is that they should reflect situation on war front. So you begin with "prototype" models (MKI), they get deployed to batte. Than construcion team sit down over battle performance report an find out what would be needed to upgrade. Also you have R&D guys reserching some stuff (Better power generators, weapons, ....). Combining previous gives birth to refit (MKII > MKIII > .....). But it would be great if you could for 1/3 time + 1/4 price refit older model to newly researched one (same way as hero upgrade).

Practical example>
You have just finish research of aclamator II. So on selected planet (with lvl 3 shipyard) where is in orbit 5 aclamators I will appear new buildable option refit MKI to MKII (I wonder if it could be possible to make engine to count how many ships will be refited.)
Now lets say price of aclamator is 8000 credit and build time is 300s. So refit from I>II (II>III, III>IV, ....) would cost 2000 credits per unit and take 100s per unit. (So if it can do math 10000C and taking 500s for all.)
= For less time and money than building 2 new aclamator II (while having 5 obsolete MKI) you would have 5 MKII

Beacose I find it quite irritaing that it have almost no sense (at least to me) to build ships that would be too soon obsolete and I'cant get them up to standard of new ships.

[anakinskysolo]

I think that's a good idea, but only if you can make the choice of upgrading the older ships. I wouldn't like them to upgrade automatically.

[Phoenix Rising]

Is it possibe to link fighter research and complemets?

Heh, no. That's why I had to go down this path a long time ago.

But it would be great if you could for 1/3 time + 1/4 price refit older model to newly researched one (same way as hero upgrade).

In short, it could be done, but it would be time consuming and would probably push most of your build options off the screen if you had anything but state-of-the-art ships above a planet.

[Fox83]

Is it possibe to link fighter research and complemets?

Heh, no. That's why I had to go down this path a long time ago.

But it would be great if you could for 1/3 time + 1/4 price refit older model to newly researched one (same way as hero upgrade).

In short, it could be done, but it would be time consuming and would probably push most of your build options off the screen if you had anything but state-of-the-art ships above a planet.

Well but it would be exellent at the start of campaign when you have only starting fleet, which may be greatly boosted by such refiting (and also can help with decision what to research). And there is always possibility to sell what you don´t want refit. BTW the refit should be only available for frigates and better ships. (The squadron ships (fighters, bombers, ....) are in upgrade striped to bone and redressed.)

[Tropical Bob]

Could make a buildable refit station, to help with build bar clutter?

[Kaleb Graff]

I know this sounds really strange, but could we make complements cheaper as the upgrade level of the carriers go up, because of the difference between carrier level and equivilent fighter level. Thus, it would be full-cost at level one (0 upgrades), but only at 44% for a Venator IV, because it's carrier is at 100%, but the complement is only at 44% of full. This prevents overpowered complements early compared to regular fighters, but keeps them equal. I can probably explain better later.