| Author |
Destroyer layout feedback |
Wild Cat
Fleet Admiral
Joined: August 28, 2004
Posts: 109
From: The Netherlands
|  Posted: 2010-07-20 13:39
At first I wasn't aware that the destroy layout was updated.
But when my gunboat started spewing torpedo's I got some what confused, if I didn't accidentally picked an assault destroy instead, but it was lacking beams.
Now that I know and had a better look and feel of them, I can only say I really like the new UGTO destroyer layout.
Weapons are now much more installed/placed in a forward arc, really aggressive and offensive.
Best way I can put in words and describe how the new destroyers feel, its like they have the fire power of a cruiser but remain their speed and agility as a destroyer.
Cruisers and Dreadnought really need to watch them selfs now, they aren't the only ones who can cause some serious damage.
If the actually pack more fire power then a cruiser, that I don't know, but they can now fire quite a lot of weapons at the same time then before.
The more weapons that can fire at the same time goes hand in hand with a might big energy drain.
Going flat out and full guns blazing will drain an Assault destroyer his power reserves with in less than a minute, even at 2/3 speed it will still get drained.
The Gunboat is some what more forgiving in energy drain and much better manageable, but after several minutes of continues shooting his energy reserves will also be drain as well.
The new Picket destroyer is an absolute beauty. Packed with 8 particle cannons and 10 chemical lasers. Its no longer limited to defense role of taking down missiles with limited offensive power.
Now it can dish out some serious damage at close range as well as dealing with large foes from a distance with the particle cannons.
At full speed, it can shoot for about a full minute before depleting the energy reserves.
Energy management has become a lot more important for UGTO destroyers, some thing I had much less to worry about with the older versions.
I would not be supervised if things get toned down a bit. As they now might have a bit to much of a sting. But destroyer can still be hurt as before.
[ This Message was edited by: Wild Cat on 2010-07-20 16:51 ]
_________________
Wild Cat
Dutch Time
|
joshjones1997
Vice Admiral
Joined: July 13, 2009
Posts: 3
| Posted: 2010-07-20 16:08
i like having more torps and lasers on my assault dessie but now i have no cannons on it which i dont like:[
_________________
|
Starcommander
Marshal
Joined: December 14, 2005
Posts: 579
From: In your base, stealing your cookies
| Posted: 2010-07-20 16:53
strange.....ICC didn't get there layout changed.....yet another example of dev bias toward UGTO. lol
I mean if your going to redo the balance of the game, at least do it all at once.
_________________
WH 40k armies, Grey Knights, Dark Angles, Imperial Guard (Vostroyan First Born) and Orks.
There is a thin line between knowing when to give up and when to try harder.
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2010-07-20 16:56
ICC Combat Destroyer is about the same as UGTO Gunboat with just cannons/torpedoes and no missiles.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
Wild Cat
Fleet Admiral
Joined: August 28, 2004
Posts: 109
From: The Netherlands
| Posted: 2010-07-20 17:00
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-20 16:53, Starcommand of ICC *XO* wrote:
strange.....ICC didn't get there layout changed.....yet another example of dev bias toward UGTO. lol
I mean if your going to redo the balance of the game, at least do it all at once.
|
|
You sure? I chatted a bit to the enemy team during battle (ICC in my case) and some people replied they liked the new changes to the destroyers. So I was under the impression that ICC also had them. But I don't know if they where referring to their own destroyers or those of UGTO.
_________________
Wild Cat
Dutch Time
|
Shigernafy
Admiral
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 5726
From: The Land of Taxation without Representation
| Posted: 2010-07-20 17:07
Wrong. All factions had their destroyer layouts updated.
_________________
* [S.W]AdmBito @55321 Sent \"I dunno; the French had a few missteps. But they're on the right track, one headbutt at a time.\"
|
Starcommander
Marshal
Joined: December 14, 2005
Posts: 579
From: In your base, stealing your cookies
| Posted: 2010-07-20 17:14
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-20 17:07, Shigernafy wrote:
Wrong. All factions had their destroyer layouts updated.
|
|
Really? Hmm I flew my combat dessy yesterday and it had the same layout its had before.....
_________________
WH 40k armies, Grey Knights, Dark Angles, Imperial Guard (Vostroyan First Born) and Orks.
There is a thin line between knowing when to give up and when to try harder.
|
Sopwith Camel
Grand Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 07, 2002
Posts: 651
From: Toronto
| Posted: 2010-07-20 17:35
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-20 17:14, Starcommand of ICC *XO* wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-20 17:07, Shigernafy wrote:
Wrong. All factions had their destroyer layouts updated.
|
|
Really? Hmm I flew my combat dessy yesterday and it had the same layout its had before.....
|
|
I assume that only newly spawned ("built") ships would have the new layout, and that saved ("garage") ships maintain their legacy layout?
_________________
Fleet Commander, Galactic Navy
|
Shigernafy
Admiral
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 5726
From: The Land of Taxation without Representation
| Posted: 2010-07-20 17:38
The changes were just applied at something like 3pm Eastern today (Tuesday).
And I think the layouts are updated automatically for garaged ships, but I'm not 100% on that one.
_________________
* [S.W]AdmBito @55321 Sent \"I dunno; the French had a few missteps. But they're on the right track, one headbutt at a time.\"
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2010-07-20 17:38
Wrong, if you pull a ship out that doesn't fit the game layout, it will default it for you (saves us having to wipe garages on ship changes).
Also, the new ship layouts only came today - hence why you won't have seen them yesterday.
_________________
|
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
| Posted: 2010-07-20 18:23
Yes, all factions got new Destroyer layouts simultaneously, and they all only came out today.
Anyone tried out the K'luth destroyers yet? Interested in opinions on them.
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
*Obsidian Shadow*
Grand Admiral
Joined: January 03, 2010
Posts: 316
| Posted: 2010-07-20 19:24
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-20 16:53, Starcommand of ICC *XO* wrote:
strange.....ICC didn't get there layout changed.....yet another example of dev bias toward UGTO. lol
I mean if your going to redo the balance of the game, at least do it all at once.
|
|
look before ya leap 
_________________
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Raven Warriors
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2010-07-20 23:09
ICC Combat Destroyer : Really good so far, but I would really think about making all the torps fore/left/right and all the railguns fire when broadside. Also, I'd say its a little too energy problematic. Its really hard to even run at 1/2 with guns going and this really bites into its survivability.
ICC Missile Destroyer : Perfect, though I wish it came with at least 1 EW slot. Though I think the energy cost of the phoenix missiles are a little too high. I can sit still and fire them and still lose energy.
ICC Minelayer Destroyer : Given the real lack of usefulness of mines it really bites into the potential of this ship, but the railguns are a great addition.
Still testing others.
-Ent
[ This Message was edited by: Saint Valentine on 2010-07-21 08:06 ]
_________________
|
Leonide
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: October 01, 2005
Posts: 1553
From: Newport News, Virginia
| Posted: 2010-07-21 02:24
tested the Claw today in Scenario. energy isn't that bad, considering it's supposed to be a beamship with torps. energy was very managable, and very survivable if you played like a real Kluth (IE, not staying uncloaked).
in wolfpacks, this thing would be nasty.
_________________
captain of the ICC Assault Cruiser C.S.S. Sledgehammer
|
Antra
Admiral
Agents
Joined: February 16, 2002
Posts: 657
From: Grand Rapids, Michigan
| Posted: 2010-07-22 06:32
First off, I admit to not being as familiar with K'luth and UGTO destroyer designs as ICC.
EW: ICC destroyers have had most of their EW replaced with more boom. I'm in favor of more boom, but I liked the utilitarian feel of the Escort and Minelayer destroyers with their EW slots. ED is now for shooting things down and can't perform a secondary EW role. Minelayer can no longer scan for mines. ICC are now pretty vulnerable to the K'luth for the same amount of combat power. That is, it takes an even smaller ship to ping now. The destroyers that can ping can do so less often.
Minelayer: Same number of mines as the frigate, probably more hull points, better shields. Do mines scale? I hope they do, big time, or else there's no point to the minelayer destroyer. I fly this ship very, very frequently and I used to prefer it to the frigate due to greater utility. The minelayer frigate however, has 3 EW slots and is a heck of a lot faster. Against larger, distracted targets the frigate is excellent. The destroyer was always going to take more knocks because it's slower and less maneuverable, so the added survivability was a break even with the frigate's utility. The minelayer has more guns now, but it can't do anything else.
I don't know what to suggest. The ships are balanced according to a formula, and from what I've seen that formula has worked well. Are mines priced too high, perhaps? Was the means by which mines are used -- ie, dancing around an enemy or setting a trap -- taken into account when priced? Was ICC's penchant for additional EW slots consciously removed?
I'm sure those things were considered. I know the ships I fly very well, and ICC minelayers have given me most of my ship deaths.  I'm just not sure I like the removal of well-roundedness for more boom.
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
