[Beta] Fighter Bugs and Initial Feedback

Discussion in 'Bug Reports / Tech Support' started by aReclusiveMind, Jul 14, 2019.

  1. aReclusiveMind

    aReclusiveMind Developer Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    3,040
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2016
    1. The combat log is no longer accurate for fighters.

    Shown here is a battle (Savename: Fighter Log) in which my fighters are clearly doing far more damage to the ship then shown in the log. The log should ideally display accurate info so I can determine if the damage being done is correct and judge the balance.

    Just load the save, click end turn, and you can fight the battle.

    Weapons used are phasors.
    Rak-kak has Expert Squadron Commander (+75% damage to fighter damage)

    isg_beta_fightercombatlog.jpg

    2. Hidden Window behind fighter window
    What is this window behind the one shown? Is that where info about the weapons the fighters/bombers are using is displayed?​

    isg_beta_fighterpanel.jpg


    3. Balance issue found while testing - Possible to find tech that is very powerful from space monsters
    This isn't directly fighter related, but occurred while I was performing tests with the attached battle.
    In the combat attached, I was able to capture gauss-coil gun technology for free from defeating the space amoeba. That is three levels above my current weapons tech level. That is too powerful a find and too big of a luck swing.


    Saving the best/longest comments for last...


    4. Phasors are way too powerful on fighters.

    At tech level V, Phasors can be unlocked.
    • Normally they can't have armor piercing until you've reached tech level VI
    • Normally they can't have shield piercing until you've reached tech level VII.
    Fighters get phasors, with armor piercing, shield piercing, AND the stun chance at tech level V.


    EXPERIMENTS/EVIDENCE:

    TEST #1 PHASORS
    • Load save (Savename: Fighter Starbase). No Squadron Commander buffs.
    • Press End Turn
    • Attack SOL I
    • Send in one set of fighters and press end turn a few times
    • The fighters can kill the star base in 2 salvos by bypassing shields AND armor.
    TEST #2 WURTZITE CANNONS
    • Load save (Savename: Fighter Starbase). No Squadron Commander buffs.
    • Use Collective Transcendence to immediately finish Wurtzite Cannon research.
    • Press End Turn
    • Attack SOL I
    • Send in one set of fighters and press end turn a few times.
    • The fighters MIGHT destroy the starbase in 4 volleys before returning, but sometimes fail to do so and have to return to refuel/rearm.
    TEST #3 WURTZITE CANNONS + RAK-KAX
    • Load save (Savename: Fighter Starbase Rak-kax). Expert Squadron Commander buffs.
    • Use Collective Transcendence to immediately finish Wurtzite Cannon research.
    • Press End Turn
    • Attack SOL I
    • Send in one set fighters and press end turn a few times.
    • The fighters will destroy the starbase in 3 to 4 volleys. The extra damage is hard to calculate. Is it because the cannons are doing more, or just because their attack value is higher a leader is present?

    OVERALL COMMENTS ON THIS ISSUE:

    Researching Wurtzite Cannon, a level VI tech, is a significant downgrade for fighters from the level V tech Phasors. The armor piercing is nice, but not nearly as nice as shield piercing + armor piercing + stun + high accuracy phasors.

    I would recommend Phasors revert back and lose their PD modification so they can't be used by fighters. Phasors are too good, at least when you don't have to worry about space or cost to add all the good modifiers on-top of the stun. They are probably the most versatile weapons in the game.

    Wurtzite Cannons feel better with the armor piercing boost. More testing is required, but they seem usable. I can't tell of expert squadron commander damage buff is working or not. They may have just been more accurate with a leader around.

    Also, the starbase has Chaos Chain. I know this has been brought up already. It has no PD to defend itself, so it is very easy pickings. Now, it is a weak tech level 2 base, and perhaps fighters with much higher tech, level VI Wurtzite cannons, should handle it easily, but the fact that it can't shoot back at them or the carrier might be an issue.

    Gauss-Coil Guns are much higher tech and still don't have the overpowered shield piercing + armor piercing + stun combo of Phasors. I like that they are a PD option now, and think they will be a nice upgrade for fighters at tech level VIII. Wurtzite Cannons as the top level weapon for fighters limited their growth potential as part of the arsenal. Gauss-Coil Guns swap the armor piercing of Wurtzite for shield piercing and gain more damage and accuracy.

    I have only used Gauss-Coil fighters briefly, but they seem to be more in-line balance wise than the Phasors are relative to their tech level. Shield piercing also means they are guaranteed to make some sort of impact, even against high level targets with heavy shielding.

    Size or building cost of fighter bays may need to go up. More testing is required. If they feel slightly too powerful, I'd rather see their cost go up than to nerf them down to negligible status again. Ample PD defense and flak guns should make quick work of them unless maybe an expert squad commander is in charge.​
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Jul 14, 2019
    • Helpful Helpful x 2
  2. Konstantine

    Konstantine Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    With all due respect, both for aReclusiveMind and all the work he has done on this, I still feel that this approach is possibly flawed. This is basically an attempt to make a squadron of 4 fighters have enough punch…but not be overpowered.

    Today’s real fighters are powerful weapons platforms, and four of them are able to destroy a ship easily. But historically this was not so. In sci-fi movies this is also usually not so. And in MoO2 it was not so.

    4 fighters were deemed to put out negligible damage, and the experiment now revolves around altering that damage output, while ignoring the issue that it is just 4 fighters.

    I’ve written on this before and still find it hard to accept that a capital ship is limited to a single bay of four fighters. Remove that restriction, and fighters can become a viable option without having to alter their original damage output to such degrees.

    This would not need dedicated carrier ships to accomplish. Fighters could still be a ship special as they are now, activated in battle exactly as they are now, but with the difference being how many fighters are present. If I could put 2 bays on a ship (space permitted), then I would be launching 8 fighters at a target instead of the current four. This means double the damage output for the fighters, and double resilience for them as well.

    By focusing on trying to get the perfect numbers for a squadron of 4 fighters, we may be restricting ourselves down the road. Dedicated carriers or even normal ships with more than a single bay would throw the equation out of whack again as they would be OP.

    Once again, the deepest respect for all the effort put into this, but I feel it is a restrictive approach to pursue a solution optimized around a squadron of 4 fighters.
     
  3. aReclusiveMind

    aReclusiveMind Developer Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    3,040
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2016
    I am trying to fix issues with as few changes as possible pre-release. In this case, I am providing info on some bugs and also feedback on the fighter changes already in the game. The changes overall are good, but phasors are broken (on fighters).

    I too would to like to have more fighters on a carrier some day, but they also need to gain higher level tech so they aren't using woefully out of date weaponry compared to the rest of your fleet. This step is where we are at right now. The damage output is increased because of the tech change and some bugs being fixed in the last release. Also, you aren't stuck shooting recharging shields endlessly now.

    The game can be rebalanced if/when more carrier options are introduced in the future. For instance, by giving fighters a specialized version of the weapon tech that does -70% damage instead of using PD modifier at -50%. Now you can have 4 fighters doing less damage, 6 fighters doing similar damage to today, and 8 doing more than they do today. In this regard these changes aren't taking away the opportunity to make these changes in the future.
     
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  4. Adam Solo

    Adam Solo Developer Administrator Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    4,846
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    Thanks for the report and discussion. We will fix the phasors "all modifications from the get go" issue. Phasors are indeed versatile. However, that versatility comes with a price, as its shield piercer and armor piercing weapon modifications aren't cheap. So, we will allow fighters to equip phasors with piercing capabilities only if the modifications are available as they normally would for the other ships.

    As for allowing multiple fighter / bomber bays to be installed, that will have to be addressed as a possible enhancement for post-release.

    Would this be a good compromise in your view for the time being?
     
    • ThumbsUp ThumbsUp x 1
  5. aReclusiveMind

    aReclusiveMind Developer Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    3,040
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2016
    Yes, it would help lower the initial impact of Phasors for sure, but...

    I do wonder if it would then be best as a player to move up the tree without getting Wurtzite Cannons in that case. I think Phasors still outstrip Wurtzite Cannons in damage once they get shield and armor piercing. You also still have the stun chance being applied multiplied by each fighter attacking.

    I suppose it could be considered a choice you make. Wurtzite Cannons may be better against high hull strength ships later in the game. Early on though, all the ships have low hull strength and can be quickly killed with modded phasors. Not sure if the AI uses the optional buffs to hull strength on their later designs.

    Phasors may even beat out Gauss Coil-Gun (with shield piercing) in raw damage/killing capacity against low hull/system strength targets. Bypassing two very potent forms of defense (as Phasors do) at once is very powerful as shown in my saves.
     
    • ThumbsUp ThumbsUp x 1
  6. Konstantine

    Konstantine Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    I both understand and appreciate what you are trying to do, it is no small effort and you are to be credited with the attention to detail and thought you are putting into this.

    That said, it's four fighters, it's an issue, and I doubt it will be restricted to me alone.

    So close to release though, I understand why it can't be addressed, I really do... it's unfortunate.

    None of that detracts from the tremendous effort you are making

    It gets my vote as an adequate compromise... but how will this work?

    If I research Wurzite cannon for example, will my fighters switch over to using that weapon (it's a higher tech than the Phasor), and thereby not benefit from SP and Auto?

    A player could skip certain weapons to ensure that fighters are outfitted in approximately the way he/she wants, but then there is always the risk of finding a weapon tech during an invasion and the fighters get altered against the players wish.

    This would be interesting, similar to SEV where fighter weapons were researched separately from main weapons, but in our case it could be automatic (a fighter version with every weapon tech)
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Adam Solo

    Adam Solo Developer Administrator Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    4,846
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    We could restrict phasor modifications to shield piercer or armor piercer on fighters, but not both. SP only perhaps? It makes sense thematically, at least to me. And maybe AP must be foregone for fighters because their small PD mount lacks punch or something.
     
  8. aReclusiveMind

    aReclusiveMind Developer Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    3,040
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2016
    So in that scenario, phasors would have shield piercing only, wurtzite would have armor piercing, and gauss-coil would have shield piercing. That seems reasonable.

    The only issue is how will players know their phasors only get the shield piercing mod from regular phasors? The player gets limited info about their fighter load out in game, which goes back to a couple of items in my OP about the log and info panel for them.
     
  9. Adam Solo

    Adam Solo Developer Administrator Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    4,846
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    We could expand the fighters description, phasor description, or we could put that info in the manual. Just a few ideas.
     
    • ThumbsUp ThumbsUp x 1
  10. Konstantine

    Konstantine Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    Have you considered, as a temporary measure, giving fighters a unique weapon, whose damage output increases relevant to the weapons tech level researched. In other words, rather than having a fighter that uses wursite, phasor etc, You would have a Fighter gun, whose attributes would be consistent throughout, but damage output would increase with higher weapons tech researched. Perhaps this fighter gun could even be given shield piercing properties at some point. It may be easier this way to hit the sweet spot on numbers, just a thought.

    Un-related (but not entirely)

    Would love the option to turn down, discovered/ stolen/ gained tech, instead of automatically being forced to accept it
     
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  11. Adam Solo

    Adam Solo Developer Administrator Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    4,846
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    Maybe it's not so bad as it seems. Phasors are indeed versatile, but they lack punch. If fighters are equipped with weapons modifications only when they should, this means you need to research tech level VII weapons to get both AP and SP for fighters with Phasors. Wurzite comes in level VI tech. At level VII tech it's Phasors with AP and SP against Wurzite Cannons with AP.

    Level VII Weapons Tech (Fighters)

    Fighters with phasors with AP and SP inflict 10 damage (half of 20 because it's a PD version) each when they strike (for a total max of 40 damage per round) directly to structure and systems because shields and armor are bypassed.

    Fighters with wurzite cannons with AP inflict 12 damage (half rounded of 25 because it's PD) each when they strike (for a total max of 48 damage per round) directly to structure and systems when shields are not available, or to shields when they're avaialble.

    I wonder if this means Wurzite Cannons could be lower powered. Perhaps 30 base damage would be preferable, not only because of fighters, but maybe in the general case, and the fighters just show what may be unbalanced in general.

    So, if Wurzite Cannons do 30 damage, this means a fighter would inflict 15, for a total of 60 damage (vs 40 of phasors). True, the 60 would first be discounted on the shields for Wurzite, while the 40 would take out structure and systems directly.

    Or, maybe Phasors should be nerfed all around. 20 damage directly to structure and systems is quite strong, especially with stun ability. We could at least make them more expensive in cost as they are now.

    Conclusion

    1. Phasors cost could go up (doesn't affect fighters though).
    2. Wurzite Cannon damage could go up from 25 to 30 (it has double accuracy penalties already).
    3. Phasors are the only weapon with both SP and AP modifications. We could nerf damage or take out one of the modifications. Personally, I think it's good to have 1 weapon that is special because it allows both piercing modifications, but perhaps it's too good at the moment.

    Or, we only disallow AP from phasors for fighters, specifically, due to "technical constraints" :)

    I'll think about this more. Feel free to provide your own thoughts.
     
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  12. Adam Solo

    Adam Solo Developer Administrator Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    4,846
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    We are too late to consider these two for the release, but we could consider them for post-release.
     
  13. aReclusiveMind

    aReclusiveMind Developer Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    3,040
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2016
    Wurtzite Cannons may indeed be underpowered all around. The double accuracy penalty hurts them badly, and I don't know what benefit they have to warrant that.

    Contrast their penalties to the penalities Phasors have. How are they worse than Wurtzite Cannons, a higher level kinetic tech? How are they better?

    Max damage is important, but so is average damage. Phasors may still have higher average damage because they aren't likely to miss. Plus no shields to worry about, and the stun chance.
     
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2019
  14. aReclusiveMind

    aReclusiveMind Developer Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    3,040
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2016
    @Adam Solo - I am unclear on which weapon fighters get if both Disruptor Beam and Gauss-Coil gun are researched as both are the same tier of weapon. Is it just the most recently researched one? I researched Disruptor after having Gauss-Coil and it switched me to Disruptor Beam.

    1. Here is my breakdown/view on the weapons, mostly from a fighter perspective, but overall as well.
    2. I am also including some proposed number tweaks, but no new mechanics to implement.
    3. Worth noting that Squadron Commander can impact damage by up to +75% on fighters and bombers.
    4. Fighter Bay sizes may need base cost/size increased slightly to account for stronger fighters.
    5. If additional fighters are added down the road, say 6 or 8 to a wing, one possibility is to add a "Fighter Sized" (working title) modifier that provides -70% base weapon damage instead of -50% damage. We change fighters to require "Fighter Sized" versions of weapons (Wurtzite, Phasors, etc.) instead of PD weapons. The additional damage reduction balances as 4 fighters (less damage), 6 (similar damage), 8 (more damage).

    Wurtzite Cannon -
    Is a specialized close-range weapon that isn't very special, potent, or scary.
    Is not a straight upgrade from the Railgun one level below it which serves a different role.
    Currently can do less damage than the lower tech Railgun or Phasors due to accuracy and mod availability.

    Conclusion
    When used by ships or fighters, using these should require you to stack ship attack buffs and find a way to get in close (before being destroyed) to make them worthwhile. Defending commanders should fear such ships closing in with them and equip approprite measures to counter ships and fighters using these short range weapons.

    1. Increase damage from 25 to 35 (40%). You can try 30, but I think that's still too weak.
    2. Increase space/cost to reflect this conventional "hardest metal available", which could be heavy/rare.
    3. Delay armor piercing ability until weapon would normally have it.

    Fighter specific info:
    Max damage for fighters increases from 48 to 68. Average damage is certain to be less due to accuracy unless ship is well designed for it.


    Phasors -
    Is the most versatile weapon in the game mod-wise.
    Only weapon capable of bypassing shields and armor at the same time.
    Has a stun ability.

    Conclusion
    Hopefully these may become less "must have" once the Wurtzite Cannon has a role. I like that they are versatile and want to avoid changing that. Currently armor + shield piercing is too strong against low hull/structure found on lower tier armors.

    1. Delay armor and shield piercing abilities until weapon would normally have it.
    2. Ensure AI uses hull reinforcement more often in their designs to counter modded dual pierce phasors strategies.

    Fighter specific info:
    Max damage for fighters is 40. This will often be the average damage as well. Chance to stun and dual pierce.


    Disruptor Beam -
    Similar to Wurtzite Cannon, but more accurate because they are beams.
    High raw damage potential.
    No piercing modifiers.

    Conclusion
    60 damage is quite a bit higher than 35 (proposed) of Wurtzite, but they lack any piercing. A good well rounded weapon.

    1. No changes recommended at this time.

    Fighter specific info:
    Max damage is 120. Average damage may be somewhat less due to accuracy. No piercing, but 120 per volley is decent.


    Gauss-Coil Gun -
    Exceptional accuracy at range for a kinetic.
    Solid damage
    Can provide shield piercing.

    Conclusion
    Exceptional accuracy make these a well rounded weapon. Gauss-Coil Gun changes things up with shield piercing instead of armor piercing.

    1. Delay shield piercing modifier until weapon would normally have it (rank 9).

    Fighter specific info:
    Max damage is 100. Average damage is likely to be 100 due to accuracy bonuses. Shield piercing helps make that damage count.
     
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2019
    • Helpful Helpful x 2
  15. Konstantine

    Konstantine Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    As a ship borne weapon, I would hate to see any changes or having them nerfed. While it is true that it is the only weapon that can provide SP and AP modifications, think of the implications. Those two mods alone increase the size requirements substantially, add more mods and it's dramatic.

    If you are restricting changes to Fighters only, then disallowing AP for technical reasons sounds right. After all, it is possible from a theoretical standpoint, that a fighter borne phasor with both SP and AP requires more space than the fighter can provide.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  16. Adam Solo

    Adam Solo Developer Administrator Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    4,846
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    If both are researched, it will equip Disruptor since it has a bigger max damage.

    35 max damage with double accuracy penalties seems acceptable. Still far from 50 from Gauss Coil, and Gauss has SP, which arguably can be seen as better. We can also increase space/cost. Weapons only allow modifications when the right miniaturization level is reached. This is not the case for fighters at the moment, but it should be the case for fighters as well.

    Phasors only allow modifications when the right miniaturization level is reached, as for all other weapons. The only exception is fighters at the moment, but that should change.

    Ensuring AI uses hull-re-inforcement more is also a good suggestion.

    I think we could increase the space or cost for phasors a little bit.

    Disruptors don't get their damage reduced by range, which is huge. However, they have double accuracy penalties. They are more accurate than kinetics, but that is canceled by this "double accuracy penalty".

    Accuracy is not reduced with distance for Gauss. So, it has exceptional accuracy. Gauss only allows modifications when the right miniaturization level is reached, as for all other weapons.

    I'm going to make these changes as time allows. Thanks.
     
    • ThumbsUp ThumbsUp x 1
  17. Adam Solo

    Adam Solo Developer Administrator Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    4,846
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    Good point.

    Yes, we'll go with disallowing AP for phasors for technical reasons (one of which may be not having enough space in fighters for both modificaitons). I'll add a note on the phasors description. Thanks.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  18. Konstantine

    Konstantine Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    Space, and power requirements (a fighter must provide for a power plant that will operate the engines and weaponry, real ships have a problem with this today as the older power plants are in-adequate to provide energy for all the newer electronic components. With the advent of directed energy weapons being installed on navy ships, we now require a power plant that could give electricity to a small city)

    It is not far-fetched to place restrictions on fighter borne weapons, especially directed energy.
     
    • ThumbsUp ThumbsUp x 2
  19. aReclusiveMind

    aReclusiveMind Developer Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    3,040
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2016
    Thanks for all the comments. I think we are going to be in a good place with the changes. If our concern becomes fighters being too strong afterward, we can always adjust. Ideally the AI and players will learn to counter fighters once they start taking heavy damage from them to mitigate their effectiveness.

    With this change, I believe Wurtzite Cannon will now also be the only mid-high level armor piercing weapon for fighters? They should be a more appealing option for them now between the damage increase and unique armor piercing heavy metal shells.
     
    • ThumbsUp ThumbsUp x 2
  20. Adam Solo

    Adam Solo Developer Administrator Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    4,846
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    Ok, I think all the changes were done regarding this topic.

    Changes made:
    - Phasors space requirements changed rom 30 to 35
    - Phasors cost increased from 80 to 100
    - Wurtzite Cannon max damage changed from 25 to 35
    - Fighters only equip armor piercing or shield piercer modifications with the right level of miniaturization
    - Fighters can't equip phasors armor piercing due to space and power limitations (phasor weapon description updated to state this constraint)

    Am I missing anything else?
     

Share This Page