Posted by: Corey
« on: January 23, 2019, 02:24:17 PM »It's designed that way so factions only get the one Battlecruiser, but even aside from intended roles being damage vs tank, the Praetor is over twice as long as the Allegiance
Posted by: thatsashirt
« on: January 18, 2019, 10:12:08 PM »Fair enough. Since no faction gets both the Praetor and the Allegiance AFAIK, I kind of conflate them.
Posted by: tlmiller
« on: January 17, 2019, 10:04:21 PM »The only annoying thing about the Allegiance is it's pathfinding imo. I tend to not bring many just because of how slow they are and how much more versatile ISD IIs are, but that's kind of a preference thing. As a poor man's Praetor I think they fill their role pretty well.I wouldn't really relate the Allegiance to the Praetor. The Praetor is a tank. It's got slightly above average damage but it can take a beating. The Allegiance is the polar opposite. It's shields won't last long in a sustained firefight, but there's not many ships that aren't significantly larger that can take getting into a slugfest with it. It just has too much offensive power and will blast through the shields of opponents. Only in the face of sustained combat where they can't regen shields do they wither and die, and even then, they take quite some time due to how beefy their hull is even AFTER the shields are down. The key is to keep pesky bombers away from them to keep their shields up as long as possible.
Posted by: thatsashirt
« on: January 17, 2019, 07:14:08 PM »So does anyone else find the Allegiance class a bit weak. It costs iirc 4000 more credits than the tector, has many more gonna but only like 1000 more shields iirc. That and Its larger size (thus bigger target, plus lower speed) makes a big, expensive glass cannon. It's not bad, just doesn't seem cost effective given its size and population cost. It has Lower shield stats than several of the NR capitals with much less pop cost.The only annoying thing about the Allegiance is it's pathfinding imo. I tend to not bring many just because of how slow they are and how much more versatile ISD IIs are, but that's kind of a preference thing. As a poor man's Praetor I think they fill their role pretty well.
Also about the MTC, since it was modular can we be given the option to build multiple types? Like a carrier focused type vs a frigate type with better armament etc.They come with 9 squadrons as it is, seems like plenty to me. Their frailty and lack of killing power is the only keeping them from being an easy must-buy. They're also being shifted to the CSA in 2.3 so I imagine their fighter loadout may change.
Lastly on the ISD 2, I highly doubt that many of the capitals in the game can fire with both thier starboard and port guns simulataneously when the target is positioned specifically to one side, yet many do break this "law". Why are the ISDs an exception to this. Also the ISD is in a lower z level than all frigate type ships and similar. Just like how SSDs can bring all of their find to best of most targets due to their lower placement, both physically and in game, shouldnt all capitals be allowed this for atleast firing at frigates?
Have you noticed ISD's firing both port and starboard side weapons at one target? That seems like it would have come up before, because it would it would them totally broken. For the z level thing, I assume they chill at the same z level as other capital ships, which makes sense to me.
Posted by: MrDrProf
« on: December 26, 2018, 02:32:48 AM »"many more guns" ***
"Firepower to bear" ***
"Firepower to bear" ***
Posted by: MrDrProf
« on: December 26, 2018, 02:30:41 AM »So does anyone else find the Allegiance class a bit weak. It costs iirc 4000 more credits than the tector, has many more gonna but only like 1000 more shields iirc. That and Its larger size (thus bigger target, plus lower speed) makes a big, expensive glass cannon. It's not bad, just doesn't seem cost effective given its size and population cost. It has Lower shield stats than several of the NR capitals with much less pop cost.
Also about the MTC, since it was modular can we be given the option to build multiple types? Like a carrier focused type vs a frigate type with better armament etc.
Lastly on the ISD 2, I highly doubt that many of the capitals in the game can fire with both thier starboard and port guns simulataneously when the target is positioned specifically to one side, yet many do break this "law". Why are the ISDs an exception to this. Also the ISD is in a lower z level than all frigate type ships and similar. Just like how SSDs can bring all of their find to best of most targets due to their lower placement, both physically and in game, shouldnt all capitals be allowed this for atleast firing at frigates?
Also about the MTC, since it was modular can we be given the option to build multiple types? Like a carrier focused type vs a frigate type with better armament etc.
Lastly on the ISD 2, I highly doubt that many of the capitals in the game can fire with both thier starboard and port guns simulataneously when the target is positioned specifically to one side, yet many do break this "law". Why are the ISDs an exception to this. Also the ISD is in a lower z level than all frigate type ships and similar. Just like how SSDs can bring all of their find to best of most targets due to their lower placement, both physically and in game, shouldnt all capitals be allowed this for atleast firing at frigates?
Posted by: Jorritkarwehr
« on: August 30, 2018, 08:50:49 PM »Quote
Also, why did the Juggernaut lose it's transport ability outside of that one Zsinj hero?
The B5 (Which the Empire still gets) didn't. It's the better armed A6 variant that can't transport.
Posted by: thatsashirt
« on: August 30, 2018, 07:08:25 PM »Megamaser Tanks are pretty ridiculous, but I think Corey knows about that one.
Nebulon B-2s don't seem to have much purpose, especially for Zsinj since he also has Gladiators and Quasars.
Lucrehulks could maybe have a small price bump?
AT-TEs seem a bit weak as well. Also, why did the Juggernaut lose it's transport ability outside of that one Zsinj hero?
Nebulon B-2s don't seem to have much purpose, especially for Zsinj since he also has Gladiators and Quasars.
Lucrehulks could maybe have a small price bump?
AT-TEs seem a bit weak as well. Also, why did the Juggernaut lose it's transport ability outside of that one Zsinj hero?
Posted by: ianofdoom2
« on: August 30, 2018, 06:26:59 PM »I believe that the MTC needs some buffing. I know that in the lore, they were lightly armed and protected, but I think they're too weak, and give no benefit to the faction that controls them. I personally believe that there should be different models based on the models from the lore. Perhaps these units, like the ARC Hammer in Vanilla FoC, could allow the player to construct unique units over the planet the ships are currently over?
Example: An Inquisition module-MTC could allow players to recruit Inquisitors over planets that are either deeply tied to the Force (Russan, Korriban, Yinchorr, Byss, etc) or are important to the Empire (Coruscant, for instance). Maybe they could also allow the recruitment of Shadow Stormtroopers, as those, like the Inquisition, were apart of the greater Imperial Intelligence.
Again, this would only work for some worlds, otherwise, the MTC would be overpowered. There are a number of other MTC modules, too; perhaps those could be incorporated into the mod? Just a thought.
Example: An Inquisition module-MTC could allow players to recruit Inquisitors over planets that are either deeply tied to the Force (Russan, Korriban, Yinchorr, Byss, etc) or are important to the Empire (Coruscant, for instance). Maybe they could also allow the recruitment of Shadow Stormtroopers, as those, like the Inquisition, were apart of the greater Imperial Intelligence.
Again, this would only work for some worlds, otherwise, the MTC would be overpowered. There are a number of other MTC modules, too; perhaps those could be incorporated into the mod? Just a thought.
Posted by: Zardnaar
« on: August 21, 2018, 09:01:27 AM »ISD IIs are more of a battlecruiser/carrier and I think people want battleships. That is the Tector.
Posted by: baharr
« on: August 20, 2018, 07:27:40 PM »Nonetheless, ISD1s lag dramatically far behind ISD2s (while costing almost the same) and even ISD2s are of extremely questionable value compared to the Tector, imo - ideally each of these ships ought to have a role in the Imperial line-up and right now it's more of a ISD1 < ISD2 < Tector sort of hierarchy of quality. Which doesn't feel right to me.
As an aside, another unit that ought to be looked at is
Megamaser Tank
These things are indestructible and deadly. So far the only way I could find to bring them down was to swarm them (and I mean swarm) them with PLEX soldiers and hit fast-forward. Bombing runs and orbital bombardments work too, but that seems... a bit overkill.
One MMT will happily annihilate 3-4 AT-ATs or entire armoured companies because
a.) its main gun fires quickly, is perfectly accurate, and is a guaranteed one-hit-kill against most targets
b.) it can take beastly amounts of punishment.
I love the concept of the unit, but I feel its main gun either needs a longer recharge time or it needs to be more fragile. Conceptually the MMT seems to be more of a sniper when currently it's a frontline brick.
As an aside, another unit that ought to be looked at is
Megamaser Tank
These things are indestructible and deadly. So far the only way I could find to bring them down was to swarm them (and I mean swarm) them with PLEX soldiers and hit fast-forward. Bombing runs and orbital bombardments work too, but that seems... a bit overkill.
One MMT will happily annihilate 3-4 AT-ATs or entire armoured companies because
a.) its main gun fires quickly, is perfectly accurate, and is a guaranteed one-hit-kill against most targets
b.) it can take beastly amounts of punishment.
I love the concept of the unit, but I feel its main gun either needs a longer recharge time or it needs to be more fragile. Conceptually the MMT seems to be more of a sniper when currently it's a frontline brick.
Posted by: Douk Nouk Kem
« on: August 20, 2018, 06:28:35 PM »The Star Destroyers are not bugged, people just expect the ISD to have a primarily forward firing arc, which they don't canonically, and don't in the mod, the shape of the ship specifically prohibits that from being possible.Well damn, guess I got myself bamboozled like a complete fool, still this design feature is rather unfortunate.
Posted by: Corey
« on: August 20, 2018, 04:59:43 PM »The Star Destroyers are not bugged, people just expect the ISD to have a primarily forward firing arc, which they don't canonically, and don't in the mod, the shape of the ship specifically prohibits that from being possible. When they wanted to fire forward like that, the ship has to tilt significantly forward, however we may just change that for some, but not all hardpoints (many of them would have to fire directly through the ship for that to function)
Posted by: baharr
« on: August 19, 2018, 04:17:52 PM »Interesting about the various ISD bugs. Does the team know/has Corey acknowledged on the streams that they're aware of them?
Posted by: Zardnaar
« on: August 18, 2018, 09:32:36 AM »The biggest problems that ISD line is facing right now is the fact that:
1) They don't feature any kind of ability that boosts their performance ( when compared to NR capital ship line which gets standard issue Power to Shields )
2) They are unable to perform their intended role - frontal assault due to one specific bug
To get into details about the latter issue, both ISD I and II have one single hardpoint on board and second one on starboard doing nothing, and they are actually bugged in different ways, because ISD II's hardpoints outright refuse to attack anything that you command them to, while two ion cannons on ISD I will attack intended targets but only if the target faces either board or starboard which is rather useless, and while ISD II only loses two turbolasers, which is not that much given that the whole point of buying this thing is for its octuple batteries, but for ISD I it means losing 1/3 of its ion cannon firepower, which immensely brings down its usefulness given that if it could function properly it would fill an important role that ISD II cannot when it comes to fighting other capital ships.
And about their abilities, it would be nice if something similar to vanilla game "Assault" ability could be given to both ships, to provide short term boost to their offensive capabilities without actually penalizing them like power to weapons does, to make it different ISD I could get boost to its bow guns, while ISD II would juice up its octuple batteries, this would furthermore give these ships different function while providing them with much needed buffs and securing their intended role as frontal assault capital ships.
Personally I don't see reason to change Tector, it's an extremely solid ship, limited to only two factions to give them a good midrange heavy capital, and its performance based on stats already puts him reatively in the middle between cheaper 8 point Secutor and more turbolaser based 11 point Allegiance.
Tector is tough as guts though but its expensive. rebel ships eat the ISDs for lucnch though they are so squishy. Its OP but so are strike cruisers, CC VSD's, Bellators, Allegiances etc.