Forums » Suggestions
The energy usage of Capital Swarms should be reduced/removed
The energy use for capital swarms has been added a while ago, and I dont seen many players using them, mainly because of their energy use.
500 per volley is very excessive, not just because it makes no sense on a missile launcher, as every missile has its own propulsion, guidance, and fuel, but also other missiles dont use energy at all.
Its a very obscure weapon now, both for attacks and defense (as even a slight pcb attack would make you a sitting duck), and the fact every other capital weapon is just better.
Capswarms are already limited because of their ammo, huge grid usage, and very slow reload, what is completely fine, but it became pretty much unusable due to its obscene energy usage.
No matter what, energy usage as a whole makes no sense on a missile launcher, not even in VO, no matter of its balancing.
Also, would give players an another defensive weapon, other than the capital cannons, as honestly... I dont enjoy flying a ship what becomes a completely defenseless pinata even against one pilot, not mentioning unrats.
As honesly, no one is willing to lose all their weeks of progress, just because they cannot defend themselves, even against a single pcb greyhound, as whatever anyone says, PCBs are still more than very effective.
So, I suggest to lower the energy use of Capital Swarms to a low level, or get rid of it as a whole.
500 per volley is very excessive, not just because it makes no sense on a missile launcher, as every missile has its own propulsion, guidance, and fuel, but also other missiles dont use energy at all.
Its a very obscure weapon now, both for attacks and defense (as even a slight pcb attack would make you a sitting duck), and the fact every other capital weapon is just better.
Capswarms are already limited because of their ammo, huge grid usage, and very slow reload, what is completely fine, but it became pretty much unusable due to its obscene energy usage.
No matter what, energy usage as a whole makes no sense on a missile launcher, not even in VO, no matter of its balancing.
Also, would give players an another defensive weapon, other than the capital cannons, as honestly... I dont enjoy flying a ship what becomes a completely defenseless pinata even against one pilot, not mentioning unrats.
As honesly, no one is willing to lose all their weeks of progress, just because they cannot defend themselves, even against a single pcb greyhound, as whatever anyone says, PCBs are still more than very effective.
So, I suggest to lower the energy use of Capital Swarms to a low level, or get rid of it as a whole.
Cap swarms are still powerful in situations. They can hit bots at a distance cap cannons can't, they are distracting as hell to players. They still do a lot of damage. These were nerfed for a reason. I think mainly due to people using lua to spam them faster than they should be able to shoot, but even after the nerf hey aren't useless. They are more balanced then they were pre nerf. They also made taking stations super easy, tho they are still good for that.
since the nerf it is too much power i just dont use em a quad capcannon dent is better in every way compared to capswarms now
Capswarms not needed a nerf. Swarmspam was fixed, the turret fire delay works, i tested it after the change came.
But giving a weapon absurd energy usage, just so its nerfed, isnt helpful for anyone, as literally no one uses them
As honestly, every other weapon is better now. And just because something is annoying, it does not mean that it has to be nerfed to unusable levels
When 3 turrets eat u your cap in just two volleys
They can hit bots at a distance cap cannons can't, they are distracting as hell to players.
And what? It was fine like that for years and no one complained. They are a capital weapon after all, what are meant to be powerful. Guided missiles are meant to be a long ranged and effective offensive/defensive weapon, and not some close-ranged "maybe it hits" type of thing with just absurd energy usage.
If you want to see defenseless pinatas flying around, don't expect people flying/building them for hauling.
As I said, no one is going to risk weeks of work just because their ship has no defenses when capacitor is dry.
As the change was only advantageous for who want to annoy capship pilots who do griefing/piracy, and no one else.
What isnt helpful in the long term.
But giving a weapon absurd energy usage, just so its nerfed, isnt helpful for anyone, as literally no one uses them
As honestly, every other weapon is better now. And just because something is annoying, it does not mean that it has to be nerfed to unusable levels
When 3 turrets eat u your cap in just two volleys
They can hit bots at a distance cap cannons can't, they are distracting as hell to players.
And what? It was fine like that for years and no one complained. They are a capital weapon after all, what are meant to be powerful. Guided missiles are meant to be a long ranged and effective offensive/defensive weapon, and not some close-ranged "maybe it hits" type of thing with just absurd energy usage.
If you want to see defenseless pinatas flying around, don't expect people flying/building them for hauling.
As I said, no one is going to risk weeks of work just because their ship has no defenses when capacitor is dry.
As the change was only advantageous for who want to annoy capship pilots who do griefing/piracy, and no one else.
What isnt helpful in the long term.
As a newer Goli owner with my experiences to date I would agree with Hun. I have no desire to use capswarms in any situation because of the energy/grid useage. Missles are too easy to evade, the grid requirement makes you rely solely on one cap turret and weak standard turrets if youre flying a Goli, and 10 seconds cycle time seems like forever. Granted I know things were tweaked to balance, but I cant see why I would ever use them.
"They also made taking stations super easy, tho they are still good for that." -Not to pick a fight but this statement seems odd because don't capcannons have a longer range against a stationary target? Turrets dont move in conqueable sectors. Can one not just fly circuits around them evading thier fire and bombarding them with multiple cancannon volleys easier? If so then capcannons seem a better weapon in a station taking scenario.
I would mention the same about HQMB also the grid is set so stupidly high you cant use a single capturret to protect yourself when mining in a dangerous bot sector. Standard turrets just spray which only causes the bots to scatter cause of thier AI but they will still eat you alive. But I digress as that wouod be another suggestion.
+1 for OP
"They also made taking stations super easy, tho they are still good for that." -Not to pick a fight but this statement seems odd because don't capcannons have a longer range against a stationary target? Turrets dont move in conqueable sectors. Can one not just fly circuits around them evading thier fire and bombarding them with multiple cancannon volleys easier? If so then capcannons seem a better weapon in a station taking scenario.
I would mention the same about HQMB also the grid is set so stupidly high you cant use a single capturret to protect yourself when mining in a dangerous bot sector. Standard turrets just spray which only causes the bots to scatter cause of thier AI but they will still eat you alive. But I digress as that wouod be another suggestion.
+1 for OP
as literally no one uses them
I think this is going to be one of those cases where inc is going to look at the game data and then inform us that your assumption is wrong. If he says you are right, then I'll reply more in depth.
I think this is going to be one of those cases where inc is going to look at the game data and then inform us that your assumption is wrong. If he says you are right, then I'll reply more in depth.
+1
+1
I dont enjoy flying a ship what becomes a completely defenseless pinata even against one pilot, not mentioning unrats.
As honesly, no one is willing to lose all their weeks of progress, just because they cannot defend themselves, even against a single pcb greyhound, as whatever anyone says, PCBs are still more than very effective.
The last time this was raised, the issue was one of "expectation": namely that the OP wanted to be able to fly with impunity in a capship loaded only with Behemoths (no fighters or defensive craft), not practice any advance-scouting tactics, and be able to defend his capship against an attacker using solely turrets.
The responses included comments, such as those from DeathSpores who wrote last year about his own tactics:
1-scout while leaving your cappy in a safe empty sector
2-change your capship ships loadout when hostiles are detected. to be able to deal with the situation
So, let me start by clarifying this design point:
- A skillful single attacker, with the right loadout and preparations, should be able to threaten any current Player capital ship.
This is actually not new, although the reality within the game has ebbed and flowed at different points, with varied changes.
Now "threaten" also doesn't mean "trivially destroy". But neither should capship owners expect to "fly with impunity". Space is supposed to come with risks and dangers.
There are a lot of thoughtful options and tactics available, like the ones DeathSpores mentioned above, and we've only been expanding on the possibility in that regard (changing fighter loadouts within your ship).
As I've written before, your Tridents and Goliaths are freighters. They are not military battlewagons. The analogy I've made before was to a WWII Liberty Ship. Yeah, it has some guns and defenses and things, but it's mostly a freighter or transport and you wouldn't want to use one to try directly attacking a serious military navy.
Understand, this isn't actually me saying "No" to the OP suggested change, this is actually me saying that for the arguments to be more relevant, it will be useful to have similar expectations.
As honesly, no one is willing to lose all their weeks of progress, just because they cannot defend themselves, even against a single pcb greyhound, as whatever anyone says, PCBs are still more than very effective.
The last time this was raised, the issue was one of "expectation": namely that the OP wanted to be able to fly with impunity in a capship loaded only with Behemoths (no fighters or defensive craft), not practice any advance-scouting tactics, and be able to defend his capship against an attacker using solely turrets.
The responses included comments, such as those from DeathSpores who wrote last year about his own tactics:
1-scout while leaving your cappy in a safe empty sector
2-change your capship ships loadout when hostiles are detected. to be able to deal with the situation
So, let me start by clarifying this design point:
- A skillful single attacker, with the right loadout and preparations, should be able to threaten any current Player capital ship.
This is actually not new, although the reality within the game has ebbed and flowed at different points, with varied changes.
Now "threaten" also doesn't mean "trivially destroy". But neither should capship owners expect to "fly with impunity". Space is supposed to come with risks and dangers.
There are a lot of thoughtful options and tactics available, like the ones DeathSpores mentioned above, and we've only been expanding on the possibility in that regard (changing fighter loadouts within your ship).
As I've written before, your Tridents and Goliaths are freighters. They are not military battlewagons. The analogy I've made before was to a WWII Liberty Ship. Yeah, it has some guns and defenses and things, but it's mostly a freighter or transport and you wouldn't want to use one to try directly attacking a serious military navy.
Understand, this isn't actually me saying "No" to the OP suggested change, this is actually me saying that for the arguments to be more relevant, it will be useful to have similar expectations.
I am not against the fact that capships are just freighters, as myself i dont want an overpowered battleship, as I like how capships are like now.
I just say that such absurd energy usage is illogical on a weapon what is essentially a missile launcher.
I tend to ask for threats after I log on, thats a practice I did for years now.
I am not against threathening capships, but I am against leaving them defenseless even against a single pilot.
What you cannot do anything against, as if your capacitor is empty, unable to defend yourself, fire back at the attacker, being essentially pinned down and waiting when help comes for the attacker to be whacked like a helpless pinata full of possibly weeks of work.
What isnt good, like at all.
So again, I am not against risks, as I take them into account..
But I just say what I think is illogical, as I have been flying capships long enough to have experience on what should be different.
I just say that such absurd energy usage is illogical on a weapon what is essentially a missile launcher.
I tend to ask for threats after I log on, thats a practice I did for years now.
I am not against threathening capships, but I am against leaving them defenseless even against a single pilot.
What you cannot do anything against, as if your capacitor is empty, unable to defend yourself, fire back at the attacker, being essentially pinned down and waiting when help comes for the attacker to be whacked like a helpless pinata full of possibly weeks of work.
What isnt good, like at all.
So again, I am not against risks, as I take them into account..
But I just say what I think is illogical, as I have been flying capships long enough to have experience on what should be different.
I am confused at what you are saying. You say that, "I like how capships are like now.", but you then argue different.
"I just say that such absurd energy usage is illogical on a weapon what is essentially a missile launcher"
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/37455
" I am not against threathening capships, but I am against leaving them defenseless even against a single pilot."
If you honestly think a capship is vulnerable against a single pilot, then you are doing something wrong. First off, a cap ship can carry multipe ships. Second off a cap ship has shield, an insane hull, and multiple defensive turrets, and did I mention it can carry multiple ships?
"What you cannot do anything against, as if your capacitor is empty, unable to defend yourself, fire back at the attacker, being essentially pinned down and waiting when help comes for the attacker to be whacked like a helpless pinata full of possibly weeks of work."
But you can do something. You can shoot first. You can launch from your ship and attack. You can have the person\s escorting you attack. You could even, this may blow your mind, scout ahead.
"I just say that such absurd energy usage is illogical on a weapon what is essentially a missile launcher"
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/37455
" I am not against threathening capships, but I am against leaving them defenseless even against a single pilot."
If you honestly think a capship is vulnerable against a single pilot, then you are doing something wrong. First off, a cap ship can carry multipe ships. Second off a cap ship has shield, an insane hull, and multiple defensive turrets, and did I mention it can carry multiple ships?
"What you cannot do anything against, as if your capacitor is empty, unable to defend yourself, fire back at the attacker, being essentially pinned down and waiting when help comes for the attacker to be whacked like a helpless pinata full of possibly weeks of work."
But you can do something. You can shoot first. You can launch from your ship and attack. You can have the person\s escorting you attack. You could even, this may blow your mind, scout ahead.
I did some minor editing in this thread in accordance with the rules.
If i remember correctly capital canons are not affected by PCB and are very efficient at killing unrats or a single PCB hound.
Capital swarms are very unefective at killing unrats mostly because they cannot target ships that are not seen from the turret angle, removing the energy cost will not change that.
I haven't lost any goliath to unrats using activate turrets with capitol canons. Worst case i ended with a hull under 40%.
If you feel unsecure wait until a npc capship jumps before you.
Capital swarms are very unefective at killing unrats mostly because they cannot target ships that are not seen from the turret angle, removing the energy cost will not change that.
I haven't lost any goliath to unrats using activate turrets with capitol canons. Worst case i ended with a hull under 40%.
If you feel unsecure wait until a npc capship jumps before you.
the style is a bit stale, capswarms have way too many cons to use, capcannons good all round and rails good but need energy. the other turrets are just useless cuz they dont hit anything and u have to be in pcb distance to use them. kinda defeats the purpose of turrets.
If the debate is about, "Why capships are defenseless without capswarms." then the above responses would be for that debate, and I agree with them. Capswarms are not a necessity, and nerfing them is not making capships defenseless.
If the debate is that, "Capswarms have been nerfed into the ground and are now in the same category as the Gat HV or Atlas Type B." then maybe responses should be more around how capswarms can be changed to bring back their use without making them OP.
I have no skin in the fight. I'm just saying there might a situation where the OP and the respondents are fighting two different debates.
If the debate is that, "Capswarms have been nerfed into the ground and are now in the same category as the Gat HV or Atlas Type B." then maybe responses should be more around how capswarms can be changed to bring back their use without making them OP.
I have no skin in the fight. I'm just saying there might a situation where the OP and the respondents are fighting two different debates.
Capswarms were great at long range defense, for what capcannons arent. Rails are decent for it but they use energy (what is fine for me).
For short range, everything works, above that... up to 2400 meters, usually we had capswarms.
And if the attacker gets close, only capcannons left, and rails if the attacker not uses pcb, what is rare. And only until you run out of energy.
Not mentioning unrats, but thats not on the table now.
For short range, everything works, above that... up to 2400 meters, usually we had capswarms.
And if the attacker gets close, only capcannons left, and rails if the attacker not uses pcb, what is rare. And only until you run out of energy.
Not mentioning unrats, but thats not on the table now.
Capswarms were great at long range defense: energy nerf did not really change this, the fact you can't anymore blindly shoot them at a target not seen from the turret did . You'll have likely only one turret firing at a given target anyway.