Descent (into chaos optional)

You feel like a battlecruiser is too weak or a race too strong? Go ahead and discuss it here :)
1, 2
posted on September 13th, 2009, 9:53 pm
The Descent's special weapon, while very powerful, is in my opinion a little overpriced.

If it were the case that fleets attacked each other evenly and selected targets at random, then this would make the "shield recharger" extremely effective - you could wait until it was really needed, then suddely all your ships would be fresh (shielded) and ready again to take on the enemy.

However, we all know that that isn't the best way to take down a fleet. So all AI and human fleets tend to be drawn to one particular target (usually the one with the highest offensive value in the odf (or something... I know what I mean XD I've played around with the values myself!)). Once the sheilds go down it starts to take hull damage, then it is destroyed.

The "shield recharger" is an area effect weapon, labelled as having "dogfight" range (I think...). So surely, either it needs to be changed to a single target weapon with a much smaller special energy cost, or something needs to be done to make it more effective over an area.

Ideas?

(The perfect solution IMO would be to leave the weapon as it is and force fleets to attack each other homogenously - ship -> ship as opposed to fleet -> ship. But that's another discussion altogether and unlikely to happen anyway.... :P)
posted on September 13th, 2009, 9:55 pm
Last edited by Tyler on September 13th, 2009, 9:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The perfect solution is to use it for base defence rather than fleet defence. Starbase with a 3 lives instead of 2?

What about fleets hit by multi-target or area effect weapons?
posted on September 13th, 2009, 10:01 pm
What Tyler said. Likewise, as a first warp in, although it doesn't do much damage, it will take down a yard given enough time, as most destroyers do crud damage to the thing. Likewise, think area of effect damage :)
posted on September 13th, 2009, 10:30 pm
Last edited by Exodus on September 13th, 2009, 10:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Tyler wrote:The perfect solution is to use it for base defence rather than fleet defence. Starbase with a 3 lives instead of 2?

What about fleets hit by multi-target or area effect weapons?


True, and true. And I totally missed DNA's thread, but it turned out to be on a different note so that's not so much a problem.

Still, it is Fleet Operations and not Station Operations right? :P

EDIT: It occurred to me while reading the other thread - using it as a base defence still doesn't justify the area effect. It still might as well be single target! And then the energy cost is a still just little too high, although that could be explained by the "experimental" status and then improved via veterancy.
posted on September 13th, 2009, 10:48 pm
As I said, using it to recharge vessels hit by area of effect damage works wonders... I wish I had one of those babies yesterday when 7 Excel II's were hit by Engine Overload :)
posted on September 13th, 2009, 11:03 pm
I guess I just don't see many area effect weapons put to use against me. And I know the cure for that - play online more/at all! Nevertheless, I still think there's an error.
posted on September 13th, 2009, 11:47 pm
we thought about reducing the cooldown of shield recharge a bit.. but it rendered to be to powerful. We shouldn't miss the fact that the Descent is already a free and quite capable unit for the time it may be acquired. If we start buffing the shield recharge, it gets to powerful

We designed shield recharge to be an area weapon, in order to make it easier to use in cases of an emergency (you dont have to search for your damaged vessels) and to counter area damage weapons. I will think about increasing the radius of shield recharge a bit ^-^ put that on todo for evaluation
posted on September 13th, 2009, 11:50 pm
What would be cool is that instead of recharging shields.

extend the range from dogfight to short and make it enhance defences like the Ambassadors special.
posted on September 13th, 2009, 11:51 pm
I will think about increasing the radius of shield recharge a bit Azn put that on todo for evaluation


I think this is a good idea, but only by a small amount. The special already does wonders for ships damaged in area of effect encounters.
posted on September 16th, 2009, 10:59 pm
Snapshot_9 wrote:What would be cool is that instead of recharging shields.

extend the range from dogfight to short and make it enhance defences like the Ambassadors special.


Y'see? Now I reckon that works better. I'm not saying it's "unbalanced" or wanting it to be more powerful, I just don't see the sense in it as it is now.... I suppose some would say I was being perfectionist, but can you blame me? :P
posted on September 17th, 2009, 5:38 am
The main time the AoE part of it is valuable for more than keeping you from failing at it altogether due to trying to micro in a massive battle is this...

Serkas.  That's right.  When 6-10 Serkas are bombarding your battlegroup, that AoE is a wonderful, wonderful thing.  They don't have to be accurate when the first mega-salvo comes from their special, so they unload from cloak.  But the AoE shield recharge will give you a chance to fight back when the romulan fleet decloaks and opens fire on your freshly bombed fleet.
posted on September 17th, 2009, 4:08 pm
Snapshot_9 wrote:What would be cool is that instead of recharging shields.

extend the range from dogfight to short and make it enhance defences like the Ambassadors special.

Yes, lets give it a Rip-off of the Ambassador's weapon...
posted on September 17th, 2009, 5:12 pm
:lol: I don't know why people think it should be expanded. Besides, it splits the effect... :whistling:
posted on September 17th, 2009, 7:00 pm
Damn those FedRats and their OP ships. And they still want moar...

:lol:
posted on October 30th, 2009, 2:57 pm
DarthThanatos wrote:they still want moar...


Well no, I said I didn't want it too be more powerful. I just don't see the sense in it as it is.
1, 2
Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests