The Official Phalanx Thread
You feel like a battlecruiser is too weak or a race too strong? Go ahead and discuss it here :)
posted on April 29th, 2009, 11:39 pm
After comparing some stats, i realized that everyone is railing against the phalanx for no reason. First, let's take a look at some stats:
Sovvie stats: 36 off. 46 def. 23 sys.
Phalanx stats: 44 off. 46 def. 25 sys.
so the phalanx has 10 more offensive value and 2 more system value.
Now lets loook at the costs:
sovereign:777 dil. 231 tri. 24 sup. 106 sec. buildtime (on normal game speed)
phalanx: 935 dil. 251 tri. 28 sup. 140 sec. buildtime (on normal game speed)
So the phalanx costs 158 more dilithium, 20 more tritanium, and 4 more supply. Now if we look at a sabres cost:
233 dil. 68 tri. 7 sup. 62 sec. buildtime (on normal game speed)
So that means if you were to build a sovereign and a sabre you would be spending:
75 dil. 48 tri. 3 sup. -34 sec. buildtime because they can be built at once (on normal game speed)
more than a phalanx. Now the stats for the two combined are:
47 off. 58 def. 28 sys.
So you get 1 more offensive, 12 more defensive, and 3 more system value for your money. Even if that is better (which i doubt it is because more weapons are geared towards destroying small vessels), it is only slightly so and thus the phalanx is a good vessel. Thoughts?
Sovvie stats: 36 off. 46 def. 23 sys.
Phalanx stats: 44 off. 46 def. 25 sys.
so the phalanx has 10 more offensive value and 2 more system value.
Now lets loook at the costs:
sovereign:777 dil. 231 tri. 24 sup. 106 sec. buildtime (on normal game speed)
phalanx: 935 dil. 251 tri. 28 sup. 140 sec. buildtime (on normal game speed)
So the phalanx costs 158 more dilithium, 20 more tritanium, and 4 more supply. Now if we look at a sabres cost:
233 dil. 68 tri. 7 sup. 62 sec. buildtime (on normal game speed)
So that means if you were to build a sovereign and a sabre you would be spending:
75 dil. 48 tri. 3 sup. -34 sec. buildtime because they can be built at once (on normal game speed)
more than a phalanx. Now the stats for the two combined are:
47 off. 58 def. 28 sys.
So you get 1 more offensive, 12 more defensive, and 3 more system value for your money. Even if that is better (which i doubt it is because more weapons are geared towards destroying small vessels), it is only slightly so and thus the phalanx is a good vessel. Thoughts?
posted on April 30th, 2009, 12:16 am
You forget that you can only build a maximum of 8 Phalanxs... The units you get from Mayson are not restricted (Torpedo turrets and Norways). They have good offense but given that it is all in phasers it wouldn't suprise me if they lack the crunch power against larger targets.
For a unique unit, with a maximum of 8 of them they are not powerful. When you consider the power of other limited units like Descent class. There is also the matter of the Sovereigns Officer ability being superior to the Phalanx's which is quite sub standard as it only affects one of its weapons systems.
Then there is the other question of the Sovereigns superior special as disabling engines is supremely useful in a variety of situations.
Finally i believe the Sovereign is faster no?
For a unique unit, with a maximum of 8 of them they are not powerful. When you consider the power of other limited units like Descent class. There is also the matter of the Sovereigns Officer ability being superior to the Phalanx's which is quite sub standard as it only affects one of its weapons systems.
Then there is the other question of the Sovereigns superior special as disabling engines is supremely useful in a variety of situations.
Finally i believe the Sovereign is faster no?
posted on April 30th, 2009, 12:22 am
Both of you have forgotten that magellan array deals area damage
posted on April 30th, 2009, 12:24 am
What does the Phalanx's special actually do btw? I've never quite understood the full mechanics of it.. Before critising it i should probs get a better understanding of it.
posted on April 30th, 2009, 12:32 am
i mainly put this out there to point out that the phalanx does indeed have a use as it is much more offensive value than a sovereign. Its special also lets it fire several blasts from its magnan phaser array and said phaser array does deal area damage and might be more effective against destroyers. The only real downside of the phalanx is that it has a cap of 8 and you cannot spam it as well as some other ships., Otherwise its a great ship! now i think i will take on proving that risner is good: you get reduced chassis research costs (letting you tech up faster), your buildings are built at a slower pace (that way you dont suck down as much resources as fast) and you get boosted offensive values for akira and intrepid class vessels (helps improve their use since you can build excelsior IIs after only researching one chassis, if at all). Thus when playing as risner you get several bonuses for playing offensively. I'll also take on proving the use of the avalon: for only slightly more cost than an excelsior II, you get a stronger vessel (which people seem to forget since they figure its a fightercarrier it must be weak) AND the ability to release what amounts to a monsoon with a little more bite in the field.
posted on April 30th, 2009, 3:21 am
You don't have to research any chassis to build excelsior mk2s, also wither or not the avalon is weak it ranks up fairly quickly so it can use is officer ability to spam more fighters quickly.
posted on April 30th, 2009, 3:29 am
Ooh 
im definitely sticking with risner now! 
im definitely sticking with risner now! 
posted on April 30th, 2009, 3:43 am
you do that your dead...... risner has way to many issues, and mayson is actually stonger at offense
for one both avatars dont need chassises to build excelsior mk2 and maysons excelsior gets a +4 boost and acs torpedo, not to mention torpedo turrets, and norway, and 25 percent faster build time
risner gets slower build, howeber better akira and intrepid, and an increase in system value for all euradi yard vessals, however risners so called strong point with avalon, sucks since they cost alot and suck, and you can only build 5, and you can only build 10 expensive phalanxes,
so go with mayson, excelsiors will pay off more then phalanx
for one both avatars dont need chassises to build excelsior mk2 and maysons excelsior gets a +4 boost and acs torpedo, not to mention torpedo turrets, and norway, and 25 percent faster build time
risner gets slower build, howeber better akira and intrepid, and an increase in system value for all euradi yard vessals, however risners so called strong point with avalon, sucks since they cost alot and suck, and you can only build 5, and you can only build 10 expensive phalanxes,
so go with mayson, excelsiors will pay off more then phalanx
posted on April 30th, 2009, 5:22 pm
Ray he won't be dead. It's not a clear cut issue, it really does depend on such a wide variety of issues that cannot just be sweepingly stated.
Risner has a slower build geared towards the end combat with big guns. Unfortunately because you cannot spam Phalanx's and only 5 Avalon's is not enough (i don't think anyone would like spammed fighter carriers) Risner does indeed lack the big guns at the end.
It seems to me that Mayson is defensive and Risner is offensive with big guns. As such the 25% of Starship Chasis works well.
However her other advantage doesn't sit right.
2 basic ships get a 3 point increase in offense, however Mayson grants a defensive increase to ALL basic ship
yard ships... 2 points if i'm not mistaken... Rinser needs to either grant a smaller offensive bonus across the board or do something else to the Akira and Intrepid. Another smaller phaser array on the Intrepid and a Torpedo on akira might work? donno
The +5 Systems value to all advanced shipyard ships doesn't seem like a massive bonus however if the Phalanx and Avalon were fixed it well could be.
The lack of spamming the Phalanx and Avalon are the problem. Personally i would keep them as limited ships but decrease the cost of the Avalon slightly and upstat the Phalanx to represent this. Most other races battleships have 4-5 Weapon systems. Just throw in another phaser as powerful as the current one. Or a torpedo launcher and you have a ship thats worth only building 8 of them...
Maybe make the Phalanx capable of multi targetting? Afterall it has pulse phasers that are best against destroyers, a phaser for everything else and its Magnan array to lay on the hurt to big ships.. Seems that a limited numbers ship would be able to multi-target when push came to shove to take advantage of its weapons systems???
These are all ideas, not quite sure how to handle Risners situation but just because someone plays with them doesn't mean they will lose Ray.
Remember that person is not you, they do not fight like you or think like you. They do not have your exact same skill level and as such they might be a better or worse player. In either case they may hate Mayson and prefer to go with Risner and play better with an Avatar that can bring out big gun ships, no matter how flawed.
Risner has a slower build geared towards the end combat with big guns. Unfortunately because you cannot spam Phalanx's and only 5 Avalon's is not enough (i don't think anyone would like spammed fighter carriers) Risner does indeed lack the big guns at the end.
It seems to me that Mayson is defensive and Risner is offensive with big guns. As such the 25% of Starship Chasis works well.
However her other advantage doesn't sit right.
2 basic ships get a 3 point increase in offense, however Mayson grants a defensive increase to ALL basic ship
yard ships... 2 points if i'm not mistaken... Rinser needs to either grant a smaller offensive bonus across the board or do something else to the Akira and Intrepid. Another smaller phaser array on the Intrepid and a Torpedo on akira might work? donno
The +5 Systems value to all advanced shipyard ships doesn't seem like a massive bonus however if the Phalanx and Avalon were fixed it well could be.
The lack of spamming the Phalanx and Avalon are the problem. Personally i would keep them as limited ships but decrease the cost of the Avalon slightly and upstat the Phalanx to represent this. Most other races battleships have 4-5 Weapon systems. Just throw in another phaser as powerful as the current one. Or a torpedo launcher and you have a ship thats worth only building 8 of them...
Maybe make the Phalanx capable of multi targetting? Afterall it has pulse phasers that are best against destroyers, a phaser for everything else and its Magnan array to lay on the hurt to big ships.. Seems that a limited numbers ship would be able to multi-target when push came to shove to take advantage of its weapons systems???
These are all ideas, not quite sure how to handle Risners situation but just because someone plays with them doesn't mean they will lose Ray.
Remember that person is not you, they do not fight like you or think like you. They do not have your exact same skill level and as such they might be a better or worse player. In either case they may hate Mayson and prefer to go with Risner and play better with an Avatar that can bring out big gun ships, no matter how flawed.
posted on April 30th, 2009, 6:22 pm
I think another problem is that the saber costs too much too, so you cant really compare, Also the phalnax itself needs more firepower because they said the sovie is going to get a boost in 3.6. In all fairness, it is worth the extra dilithium, cus right now the soverign isn't.
posted on April 30th, 2009, 7:18 pm
You think one of the most powerful destroyers in the game costs too much??
The sabre is fast, well defended, has a 360 degree fire arc AND long range. It builds quickly as well.
It is a very capable ship IMHO.
The sabre is fast, well defended, has a 360 degree fire arc AND long range. It builds quickly as well.
It is a very capable ship IMHO.
posted on May 1st, 2009, 6:26 am
The only race that has a battleship with 5 weapons that i can think of is the romulans (tavara). Also, the trick with risner is to leverage the cheaper chassis costs to get to late game tech before your opponent and start pummeling him with sovvies and defiants.
posted on May 1st, 2009, 11:51 am
But not Phalanx and Avalon which are her special ships?
Makes no sense to give an avatar special ships that are restricted and not used??
Makes no sense to give an avatar special ships that are restricted and not used??
Actium
posted on May 1st, 2009, 1:08 pm
Last edited by Actium on May 1st, 2009, 3:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
actually i noted the the avalon is nothing for bigger battles cuz it takes to long to do some serios damage with the bombers and thats the reason why i dont use it
posted on May 1st, 2009, 1:53 pm
You did? I missed the post so sorry for that. But yeah Risner's ships aren't anywhere near powerful enough.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests