Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Nerf the bloody lift sources already
2018-02-22, 11:24 AM
Post: #151
RE: Nerf the bloody lift sources already
Please describe the exact situation, preferably step by step, where the unnerfed bloody lift sources are meaning a problem for you.

From the Depths english playlist starts here, before that it's hungarian:
https://youtu.be/Ltdx0yVI9cA?list=PLImar...ZokVtdBa73

[Image: 6yFiDvF.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2018-02-22, 05:18 PM
Post: #152
RE: Nerf the bloody lift sources already
(2018-02-22 01:10 AM)Lincrono Wrote:  
(2018-02-21 04:22 PM)gorice Wrote:  Again: a dediblade airship with a given mass of weapons etc. will be smaller and cheaper to build than an equivalent boat, and if that boat uses conventional props, the airship will be cheaper to run. It will also be much faster than the ship without even trying. A thrustercraft version of same thing will be faster and smaller still, but may or may not be cheaper to build and run than the boat, depending on how spamtastic its thruster/stabiliser setup is.

There may be edge cases (very low-density craft, hydrofoils) where some of these things are not the case, but I stand by my point.

These are simply facts. You're welcome to run your own experiments if you don't believe me. I took the time to do so myself because I was curious, and frustrated that everyone was presenting opinions without data.

As far as airships losing balance goes: I haven't noticed that they do it more than ships. Any craft that is heavily damaged risks capsizing/losing control. Certainly, it isn't enough to make up for all the other imbalance.

These are not actually 'facts' They're highly dependent on build style, what you claim are 'edge cases' are not edge cases at all. it's very easy to build a lighter, cheaper, cheaper to run boat that has the same all-around armor protection and the same weaponry as a similar-cost/mass airship. If the airship is built with 3D defense/offense in mind it will look closer to a star-destroyer or a zeppelin: IE it is closer to a box or cylinder. A sailing ship is always going to be closer to a half-box, or half-cylinder with some superstructure on top. Likewise, the lightest and cheapest airships look every much like sailing ships that have jets stuck to them, and maybe bottom-mounted guns: in this case you break even. The critical advantage of aircraft is they can easily control distance to target, don't have to worry about collision with land, and can evade in three dimensions, as opposed to ships which can really only evade in one.

I think I've been pretty clear that by 'ships' I mean displacement hulls. Anything that relies on active measures for lift will of course be different. If you can find a way for a displacement hull can carry a given payload more cheaply than a dediblade airship, I'd like to see it. And, FWIW, I think that any rework of air lift should also have a go at hydrofoils etc. (I wouldn't be surprised if WF- or LH-style surface thrustercraft are quantitatively the most efficient craft you can build).

The advantages of 'cylinders' versus 'half cylinders' are hard to gauge, but I would make a few points. (1) Ships still need to defend against torpedoes, supercavitating rounds, and other nasties, so it is wise to build them with at least some (though less) protection on the underside; (2) exactly what a flier needs to protect depends a great deal on its altitude, attitude and expected opposition (a surface skimmer does not protect its underside much; a high-alt craft does not protect its top much; a forward broadsider, well...); (3) the volume savings of using a more efficient form of lift (flight) mean that there is more armour to go around, which probably negates a large part, if not all, of the displacement hull's armour advantage; and (4) most importantly, the aerial craft's mobility advantage is incomparable. Having twice the area to protect doesn't matter if you get hit a fraction as often.

And with that, I'm out. This discussion feels like flogging a dead horse. I don't think the game is unfun or unplayable. I've had my money's worth, and I understand that a small dev team can't keep making big changes indefinitely. However, any serious balance discussion of a game called 'From the Depths' has to take the enormous, completely lopsided advantages enjoyed by air units into account. Anything less is farcical. I have no idea why so many people find it so difficult to accept that balance is broken, especially when the counter-arguments amount to 'nah-ah!'.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2018-02-23, 09:01 AM (This post was last modified: 2018-02-23 09:08 AM by Normal69.)
Post: #153
RE: Nerf the bloody lift sources already
Well it was an interesting conversation, and there were a lot of ideas how "the bloody lift sources" could be nerfed without taking away building vertisality.

Everybody has agreed upon that flying has better terrain avoidance than swimming - altough I have to try using 60m required depth + sonar on a ship, as it was reported to work.

I still have to build a ship-ship I consider effective andtest the result against airships - my biggest enemy here would be the 80% and sinking which I honestly don't like. Maybe I will use Gladyon's mod against that.
I do have a board plan for that unit, pardon my mouse.


Attached File(s) Thumbnail(s)
   

From the Depths english playlist starts here, before that it's hungarian:
https://youtu.be/Ltdx0yVI9cA?list=PLImar...ZokVtdBa73

[Image: 6yFiDvF.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2018-02-23, 04:19 PM
Post: #154
RE: Nerf the bloody lift sources already
I like the look of Bubbleship. Maybe you could have two propeller tunnels so there's more room for the central turret?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2018-02-23, 05:32 PM
Post: #155
RE: Nerf the bloody lift sources already
Ships relying SOLELY on buoyancy cannot have enough armor as airships. HOWEVER, ships can also use active lift, such as lots of propellors, which are MORE PROTECTED than airship's lift, which is also on the bottom, but that is where they are vulnerable (this is for props vs jets or custom jets, ignoring dediblades for this specific bit). Hydrofoils can also help some.

Water protec from cannon rounds and lasers, which aircraft don't have, but aircraft have a HUGE advantage in evasion and speed.

(2017-04-20 06:54 PM)Hikari Wrote:  I made something that has an impact of a type 1a supernova. The projectile already breaks laws of physics by going way past the speed of light.

2000mm HE Dakka Enthusiast
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2018-02-23, 09:54 PM
Post: #156
RE: Nerf the bloody lift sources already
It's a sad, sad world where you have to cover the bottom of your ship with upward facing props in order to compete with the lifting capacity of aircraft. And let's not forget how inefficient props are.

H͢elp!̵ I'͝ve bee͡n t̛rapped͜ ͏i͝n̢ ́my͝ co̕mpu͜t̴er! ҉A ҉bo̵t͢ ͏c̶o̷n̨ţrol͢s ҉m̸y͘ body͏!
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2018-02-23, 09:57 PM
Post: #157
RE: Nerf the bloody lift sources already
(2018-02-23 05:32 PM)MizarLuke Wrote:  Water protec from cannon rounds and lasers, which aircraft don't have, but aircraft have a HUGE advantage in evasion and speed.

that's wrong for two reasons: turrets are above water (water blocks both ways) so are vulnerable

ship have the 80% and sinking rule, which means that even if water blocks 80% damage, they will die at the same speed of an equivalent airship.

gets high on math
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Yesterday, 04:50 AM (This post was last modified: Yesterday 04:51 AM by Pathos The Kosmonaut.)
Post: #158
RE: Nerf the bloody lift sources already
I think the best compromise here would be to have specific physics sliders for each method of propulsion/lift. That way people dissatisfied with airship dominance can use alternate physics settings of their choice.

I made a suggestion post about this: http://www.fromthedepthsgame.com/forum/s...?tid=33929

[Image: Br2rXov.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Today, 06:53 AM
Post: #159
RE: Nerf the bloody lift sources already
(2018-02-23 09:54 PM)Unhinged mechanic Wrote:  It's a sad, sad world where you have to cover the bottom of your ship with upward facing props in order to compete with the lifting capacity of aircraft. And let's not forget how inefficient props are.

Props produce more force per power than jets, since both ships and airships can use dedi-blades that one breaks even. That's not a 'sad sad world' that's the reality of a *fantasy game* builders are going to (and should) use every available tool to create what they wish.

Airships possess an advantage because they can evade in three dimensions AND all their natural counters are either weak right now (missiles are the most countered weapon, lasers die to shields, railguns are terrible, and lose to shields) or themselves struggle to get hits. airships can then leverage their evasive ability to avoid all the other slow guns and weapons being used against them by a targeting system that can't handle three dimensional movement well. Making them slower, WILL NOT FIX THE PROBLEM, ensuring counter weapons are effective by improving their ability against evasive craft will, and it will do so without significantly changing overall DPS against other targets.

-Do not bring forth an argument as fact that can be disproven with a 10 minute Google search.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Today, 08:24 PM
Post: #160
RE: Nerf the bloody lift sources already
(Today 06:53 AM)Lincrono Wrote:  
(2018-02-23 09:54 PM)Unhinged mechanic Wrote:  It's a sad, sad world where you have to cover the bottom of your ship with upward facing props in order to compete with the lifting capacity of aircraft. And let's not forget how inefficient props are.

Props produce more force per power than jets, since both ships and airships can use dedi-blades that one breaks even. That's not a 'sad sad world' that's the reality of a *fantasy game* builders are going to (and should) use every available tool to create what they wish.

Airships possess an advantage because they can evade in three dimensions AND all their natural counters are either weak right now (missiles are the most countered weapon, lasers die to shields, railguns are terrible, and lose to shields) or themselves struggle to get hits. airships can then leverage their evasive ability to avoid all the other slow guns and weapons being used against them by a targeting system that can't handle three dimensional movement well. Making them slower, WILL NOT FIX THE PROBLEM, ensuring counter weapons are effective by improving their ability against evasive craft will, and it will do so without significantly changing overall DPS against other targets.

I am going to say this for the third and final time, as you've clearly not been listening to me the last two times and I'm tired of repeating myself.

If you make a weapon that is accurate enough to easily hit airships but does less damage than the more inaccurate weapons, then airships are still better than ships, because the only weapons able to hit them easily do less damage than the various other weapons that are only able to hit ships. Ships still have to worry about weapons airships don't have to, and nothing has changed.

If instead you add a weapon that is more accurate than current ones and does equal damage, then ships and airships are more equal, but now that weapon is incredibly overpowered, being the best of both worlds.

And finally, if you buff AI targeting, then you just make airships effectively more like ships, and in fact remove the viability of any actual plane-like design entirely, effectively restricting aircraft to floating slabs. In fact, ALL of the possible means of nerfing evasion would make giant, slow battleships the only viable vehicle type, in the air, sea, and on land.

H͢elp!̵ I'͝ve bee͡n t̛rapped͜ ͏i͝n̢ ́my͝ co̕mpu͜t̴er! ҉A ҉bo̵t͢ ͏c̶o̷n̨ţrol͢s ҉m̸y͘ body͏!
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: Unhinged mechanic, 1 Guest(s)