Posted by: GreyStar
« on: April 18, 2017, 07:15:44 AM »I'm not sure I can believe that about the MC90, so this requires further inspection and testing.
Posted by: briG
« on: April 18, 2017, 05:33:57 AM »Have some comments on other stuff, but just quickly gonna clear up a misconception first:
This is because "burst count" is purely for graphical effects, it has absolutely nothing to do with damage. you could change everything to burst counts of 200 and still would get the same damage out of it. So, pulse counts being 2 on the ISD don't actually mean it's weaker than if you have the same damage stats on another ship with a pulse count of four. It just means you're seeing more graphical effects.
It's basically a performance thing. This way, there's almost no CPU work involved in damage calcs. It's given the distance, the damage of the total package, the number of targets it needs to get divided between (which is almost always single-target), and the speed of the "packet", and it backloads the damage to when the projectiles should roughly be hitting, but this way it doesn't have to parcel out the damage to each particle and check if that particle actually hit.
Thank you for clearing that up. I was going to mention that I could be wrong if this specifically was the case but it slipped my mind.
Posted by: Corey
« on: April 18, 2017, 04:49:38 AM »Have some comments on other stuff, but just quickly gonna clear up a misconception first:
This is because "burst count" is purely for graphical effects, it has absolutely nothing to do with damage. you could change everything to burst counts of 200 and still would get the same damage out of it. So, pulse counts being 2 on the ISD don't actually mean it's weaker than if you have the same damage stats on another ship with a pulse count of four. It just means you're seeing more graphical effects.
It's basically a performance thing. This way, there's almost no CPU work involved in damage calcs. It's given the distance, the damage of the total package, the number of targets it needs to get divided between (which is almost always single-target), and the speed of the "packet", and it backloads the damage to when the projectiles should roughly be hitting, but this way it doesn't have to parcel out the damage to each particle and check if that particle actually hit.
Quote
However, what is wildly inconsistent across ships is that the pulse count is not taken into account whatsoever. Meaning, despite a shown weapon on a ship might show decent damage, it could actually only have 1 pulse(most have 4) and is doing 1/4 of the shown DPS.
This is because "burst count" is purely for graphical effects, it has absolutely nothing to do with damage. you could change everything to burst counts of 200 and still would get the same damage out of it. So, pulse counts being 2 on the ISD don't actually mean it's weaker than if you have the same damage stats on another ship with a pulse count of four. It just means you're seeing more graphical effects.
It's basically a performance thing. This way, there's almost no CPU work involved in damage calcs. It's given the distance, the damage of the total package, the number of targets it needs to get divided between (which is almost always single-target), and the speed of the "packet", and it backloads the damage to when the projectiles should roughly be hitting, but this way it doesn't have to parcel out the damage to each particle and check if that particle actually hit.
Posted by: briG
« on: April 18, 2017, 03:14:07 AM »As for the MC80b I didn't realize it's ion bolt could interrupt damaging abilities(I'm looking at you Sovereign dreadnaught). I'll definitely keep a few handy for those now.
The MC90's armament layout is strange. It has front, right, left turbo laser batteries. Front being the most damaging set, naturally. Which is only a tad more damaging than the MC80's and significantly less than the MC80b's. Additionally, the ion cannons it possesses do not fire from the front. It only has left and right banks of ion cannons. Now in this case it is of little consequence to to the MC90 due to their tankiness and close-quarters ability which usually lands then in the thick of things.
The MC30c is quite the slugger in terms of damage output. Easily rivals the BAC in that department. Exceeds it when destroying space stations and other installations.
Edit: removed dumbness
The MC90's armament layout is strange. It has front, right, left turbo laser batteries. Front being the most damaging set, naturally. Which is only a tad more damaging than the MC80's and significantly less than the MC80b's. Additionally, the ion cannons it possesses do not fire from the front. It only has left and right banks of ion cannons. Now in this case it is of little consequence to to the MC90 due to their tankiness and close-quarters ability which usually lands then in the thick of things.
The MC30c is quite the slugger in terms of damage output. Easily rivals the BAC in that department. Exceeds it when destroying space stations and other installations.
Edit: removed dumbness
Posted by: GreyStar
« on: April 17, 2017, 09:09:09 PM »While you're right on all of those, I don't see a purpose for the MC80B in the late game due to being so utterly outclassed by the Nebula. The MC80 sticks around soley due to boarding parties however. The MC80 has less DPS, less tanking abilities, and less abilities in general compared to the 90.
Uncle Palpy shares my sentiment however.
Uncle Palpy shares my sentiment however.
Posted by: HobbesHurlbut
« on: April 17, 2017, 06:20:14 PM »MC80B wasn't much bigger than the MC80 (Liberty), it served as an intermediary because it's more optimized for combat AND improved habitability for non-calamari personnel except for command. Its weapons are optimized as well, all of them being able to concentrate fire forward whereas the typical mon cal cruiser has her firepower evenly distributed across all arcs. Early 80Bs carried 4 squadrons, later ones carried up to 8 squadrons.
Posted by: Papa Palps
« on: April 17, 2017, 05:41:37 PM »MC90s all the way! 
Posted by: GreyStar
« on: April 17, 2017, 04:26:42 PM »Everyone's favorite non-Dauntless non-New Class non-CR90 fish tank ships. A focus on high defenses and shield regen over the armor and armament of the Star Destroyer family, with relatively modest guns up until the MC90 part of the family, they serve as a standard of New Republic fleets until the Dauntless, BACs, and Nebulas come out.
MC40a - It serves as a shield stripper with light carrier capacity, and at the very least be able to tank Strike Cruiser and below-ish level of fire. A defensive version of the Strike Cruiser if you will, less turbolasers better shield and fighters.I know it has power to shields. However, at best it would only be a faster, lighter Dauntless cruiser. Perhaps a MC40a / Assualt Frigate fleet can trade raw firepower for better survivability and speed, along with a lot more fighters. Due to having acess to all three basic NR fighters.
MC30c - A ship I feel I could use more often as a part of early game fleets, it works best when targeting masses of fleets and possibly having the shields to tank that. Perhaps it would be best to put this on defensive duty when the enemies come knocking.
MC80 Liberty - Default capital ship, it has a variety of useful abilities at the cost of poor stats. Colonization allows faster early game start up, Boarding Party once researched is one of the most useful abilities in the game, Power to Shields deprives it of what litte firepower it has but does allow it to tank damage, and Rebellion allows quicker destruction of planets though cannot take a planet down solo. Staple of early game, heavily outdone in terms of stats and only slightly outdone in terms of abilities in middle and late game capital ships.
MC80B - This is a ship that puzzles me. It has the same stats as the Liberty, better armor I believe however and better manuverability, speed, and weapon placement, but less starfighter options. In addition it has really solid abilities. Power to Shields, the standard, even more useful on this tank, Ion Bolt, which can interupt damaging enemy abilities, shut down an Immoblizer, etc, Force Pull which allows the ship to bring targets closer for better firepower, and Reflective Shielding, a passive that causes all damage to be reflected onto the enemy. What puzzles me about this ship however, is Reflective Shielding. It has good hull, good shields, and two great abilities intended for tanking, but yet it's sister ship, the MC90, has nearly double the health, nearly double the shield (not sure about dodge / armor off the top of my health), the same (or maybe even better) Power to Shields, and Shield Agis which allows the ship to reduce nearby damage of itself and all ships, which is better for tanking then Reflective Shielding. Though the MC90 costs a lot more in terms of everything, it also has full starfighter options with the exception of the K-Wing. As such as I can see the 80B being used as an intermediarey between the Liberty and the 90, but not as a tank once the MC90 is up and running.
MC90 - I love this ship so much, having almost the firepower of an ISD1, but with plenty of useful abilities. Power To Shields, always good, Shield Agis, improved durability of all ships around it makes one a staple "Flagship" of sorts, Close Quaters, a micro jump to attack enemies with, useful, and Force Pull, the opposite of Close Quaters and more suited to Shield Agis use, still has it's purpose. I believe it's able to take on an ISD even disregarding fighter superoritity. Not a TIE Defender focused ISD2 however.
Viscount - Nothing much to say on this titan, lots of guns and only one ability (retificed in 1.2) In addition Sacrifice however has usefulness for protecting a fleet of Nebulas, who with their firepower can take out a fleet trying to kill the Viscount.
MC40a - It serves as a shield stripper with light carrier capacity, and at the very least be able to tank Strike Cruiser and below-ish level of fire. A defensive version of the Strike Cruiser if you will, less turbolasers better shield and fighters.I know it has power to shields. However, at best it would only be a faster, lighter Dauntless cruiser. Perhaps a MC40a / Assualt Frigate fleet can trade raw firepower for better survivability and speed, along with a lot more fighters. Due to having acess to all three basic NR fighters.
MC30c - A ship I feel I could use more often as a part of early game fleets, it works best when targeting masses of fleets and possibly having the shields to tank that. Perhaps it would be best to put this on defensive duty when the enemies come knocking.
MC80 Liberty - Default capital ship, it has a variety of useful abilities at the cost of poor stats. Colonization allows faster early game start up, Boarding Party once researched is one of the most useful abilities in the game, Power to Shields deprives it of what litte firepower it has but does allow it to tank damage, and Rebellion allows quicker destruction of planets though cannot take a planet down solo. Staple of early game, heavily outdone in terms of stats and only slightly outdone in terms of abilities in middle and late game capital ships.
MC80B - This is a ship that puzzles me. It has the same stats as the Liberty, better armor I believe however and better manuverability, speed, and weapon placement, but less starfighter options. In addition it has really solid abilities. Power to Shields, the standard, even more useful on this tank, Ion Bolt, which can interupt damaging enemy abilities, shut down an Immoblizer, etc, Force Pull which allows the ship to bring targets closer for better firepower, and Reflective Shielding, a passive that causes all damage to be reflected onto the enemy. What puzzles me about this ship however, is Reflective Shielding. It has good hull, good shields, and two great abilities intended for tanking, but yet it's sister ship, the MC90, has nearly double the health, nearly double the shield (not sure about dodge / armor off the top of my health), the same (or maybe even better) Power to Shields, and Shield Agis which allows the ship to reduce nearby damage of itself and all ships, which is better for tanking then Reflective Shielding. Though the MC90 costs a lot more in terms of everything, it also has full starfighter options with the exception of the K-Wing. As such as I can see the 80B being used as an intermediarey between the Liberty and the 90, but not as a tank once the MC90 is up and running.
MC90 - I love this ship so much, having almost the firepower of an ISD1, but with plenty of useful abilities. Power To Shields, always good, Shield Agis, improved durability of all ships around it makes one a staple "Flagship" of sorts, Close Quaters, a micro jump to attack enemies with, useful, and Force Pull, the opposite of Close Quaters and more suited to Shield Agis use, still has it's purpose. I believe it's able to take on an ISD even disregarding fighter superoritity. Not a TIE Defender focused ISD2 however.
Viscount - Nothing much to say on this titan, lots of guns and only one ability (retificed in 1.2) In addition Sacrifice however has usefulness for protecting a fleet of Nebulas, who with their firepower can take out a fleet trying to kill the Viscount.