Platforms: Paradigm Shift

[Dominus_Noctis]

posted on October 29th, 2012, 4:10 am

Last edited by Dominus_Noctis on October 29th, 2012, 5:10 am, edited 6 times in total.

Today we’ll cover an often neglected, but still very important subject: stationary defenses!

Click here to read this article!

posted on October 29th, 2012, 5:48 am

sweet stuff indeed. i must say though, that the Newton being able to drop platforms, was my idea first though, i think, idk though, just cool to see it in regular gameplay + void.

posted on October 29th, 2012, 8:19 am

I'm a bit ambivalent about this as the immediate takeaway is that the Fed's static defences are being significantly downgraded, but in return are being made more spammable.

A few questions:

1) Are the time and material costs of deploying base platforms from the Nebula-Rigel and the Newton going to be the same as having it built from a Mediterranean? If not, then I urge you to reconsider that decision as the opportunity costs of using a combat unit or a repair ship for platform deployment are greater than that of using a constructor.
2) Will platforms still have a heightened vulnerability to damage during the upgrade process (something to consider reviewing, if you haven't, considering the longer time upgrading will take)?
3) I'm getting an impression that the Fed's early game is going to have less offensive potential than in 3.2.6, so harder for them to raid, and harder for them to discourage raiding--combat ships can have all the defence in the world, but without the offence to be able to force a raider away before the loss of too many miners, it'll be hard to keep up in the economic game. A reasonable conclusion?

posted on October 29th, 2012, 12:11 pm

I'm glad turrets will get a new more defined role. I always like using them, but they are usually too OP, or completely useless.

posted on October 29th, 2012, 12:47 pm

I'm not really sure if I like this... but I will have to see it in action to make my final judgement...

posted on October 29th, 2012, 12:59 pm

i never build fed pulse turrets as they seemed useless to me, will this chance make them more useful?
still will be interesting to see how i plays ingame

Klingon turrets are to expensive (seem to be too short range) and taken out relativity easily imo (tho perhaps its different in online play)

romulan turrets are only good if you build a cloak generator (but that has the cloak lagging effect if you build more than a few or have some cloaked ships near)

dominion are good unless the romulans pound them with the artillery they wipe out if clumped together (which is needed to be effective unless you want them picked off 1 by 1)

borg dont seem to do enough damage to be worth it and have a much larger footprint (i cant remember off hand the cost if its worth it) i would like to see them improved somehow (upgradable perhaps?)

anywho thanks for the article

posted on October 29th, 2012, 1:36 pm

Sounds like campers heaven. Also a nice addition for those who play against the AI.

posted on October 29th, 2012, 1:51 pm

I like these changes a lot.

I'm very interested to see how the idea of placing offensive turrets will work. total annihilation had that strat, you could have a few con vehicles follow your force and lay down cheap quick missile forests to inch forward your line. it worked there, so I'm willing to give it a try in fo.

posted on October 29th, 2012, 2:23 pm

It seems that the developers definition of "cheap" and my definition are two completely separate things. Federation platforms are far from cheap in 3.x and are next to useless when you accumulate the resources necessary to build them. The supply cost is disgusting for something that doesn't require crew and requires only very low maintenance. You pay the price of a Sovereign for something the size of a Saber just to try and deter a base-killing fleet that won't even flinch at the sight of a dozen turrets. I sure hope that these 4.x turrets are all that this article claims them to be. I'd scoff at any article claiming that 3.x turrets are cheap or useful!

posted on October 29th, 2012, 2:58 pm

This is one of those things that you have to try to form an opinion, and now I'm curious about the other races, because Feds always have been cool with turrets but the other races not so much, Romulans and Borg are not worth the effort.I can't wait to try the next patch.

posted on October 29th, 2012, 5:13 pm

What is the bottom left fed ship in the first pic? I first thought it was a Canaveral, but it doesn't look like it...

posted on October 29th, 2012, 5:24 pm

The platforms are cheap in 3.2.6, the turrets are not.

The point of deploying static defences is to put a clock on a raiding force so that they have to leave the area or risk destruction. If a raiding force of five destroyers takes negligible damage from two turrets (and the cost of deploying that many will slow down ship production) as they destroy all six miners at an expansion, then the turrets may as well not have been there.

What is the bottom left fed ship in the first pic? I first thought it was a Canaveral, but it doesn't look like it...

I think that's the new ship going into the Cassiopaea (sp?) yard. Not sure if it has had a name or blog released about it, but I think there's a little information floating around about it.

Edit: just checked -- it's the Calypso (blog here).

posted on October 29th, 2012, 6:49 pm

I'm a bit ambivalent about this as the immediate takeaway is that the Fed's static defences are being significantly downgraded, but in return are being made more spammable.

A few questions:

1) Are the time and material costs of deploying base platforms from the Nebula-Rigel and the Newton going to be the same as having it built from a Mediterranean? If not, then I urge you to reconsider that decision as the opportunity costs of using a combat unit or a repair ship for platform deployment are greater than that of using a constructor.
2) Will platforms still have a heightened vulnerability to damage during the upgrade process (something to consider reviewing, if you haven't, considering the longer time upgrading will take)?
3) I'm getting an impression that the Fed's early game is going to have less offensive potential than in 3.2.6, so harder for them to raid, and harder for them to discourage raiding--combat ships can have all the defence in the world, but without the offence to be able to force a raider away before the loss of too many miners, it'll be hard to keep up in the economic game. A reasonable conclusion?

1. The costs are the same, the build time is instantaneous, with a long delay before the next Platform can be dropped.
2. No, refits no longer take additional damage.
3. I wouldn't consider that a reasonable conclusion: 326 has far fewer options to get to offensive-style units, and those options occur much more slowly than in version 4 . Platforms are designed to synergize with your ships and new Federation tactics, not to be standalone with static functionality .

posted on October 29th, 2012, 7:15 pm

I don't think newton should "drop" platforms but I don't mod if it builds them. That should be reserved for Rigel type Nebula only (should be instant with no disable for the ship and should only drop the base platform (no upgrades) to really make it worth its cost.)

posted on October 29th, 2012, 8:06 pm

1. The costs are the same, the build time is instantaneous, with a long delay before the next Platform can be dropped.
2. No, refits no longer take additional damage.
3. I wouldn't consider that a reasonable conclusion: 326 has far fewer options to get to offensive-style units, and those options occur much more slowly than in version 4 . Platforms are designed to synergize with your ships and new Federation tactics, not to be standalone with static functionality .

Thank you for answering my questions. My counter-responses are:

1) I'm glad the costs are the same. I expect you've had a fair amount of feedback on the Rigel explaining that 60 supply was way too much for a pulse platform, and the balance of instant build + long recharge vs 20 second build and no recharge seems reasonable.

2) This is a good change, which more than anything will enable the posited offensive use of platforms. Thank you.

3) My assertion is based on the information that the Federation's "snipe" abilities (proximity torpedo and tricobalt torpedo) are going away. These abilities currently give Feds enough early-game "bite" to be able to raid effectively or to exact a punishment on raiders. Without that bite it looks to me like the pre-Eraudi Fed game will be more defensive, especially against cloakers.

One more question: are the Newton's upgrades being made cheaper in terms of Supply cost? 'Cos if it's still going to cost 54 supply to get the ship and the second (Industrial Replicators) upgrade, Fed players are going to continue to baulk at it.