Joined
Last Online
Recent Posts

@plushanubka

https://www.twitch.tv/plushanubkabfg/clip/EnergeticRockyMelonAMPEnergy?filter=clips&range=7d&sort=time

You see the half of the Ork fleet is somewhere else on the clip and DE brings full force.

Anyway ork sucks.

@nemesor-xanxas
If that is a case, higher armor value means Higher HP reduction since it is multiplied with damage. And that doesn't make sense.

@charles
Thanks for the information

1/ Armor
Armor is a Mitigation.
Life = Life - Damage * Armor / 100

But what is life variable here?
Does it mean the paper damage?

So it works like this?
24(paper) - 24(paper) * armor value / 100

*I wrote this on other thread(which I have deleted)
It's about armour, crits and stance.

Accuracy, target range, number of attacks, damage, reload time seems self-explanatory. It seems crit rate increases directly proportional to the damage(0.25 increase per 1 damage)

But I can't crunch numbers right while I don't know how armour and critical works.
I suspect armour would mitigate some portion of the damage and critical deals full paper damage(Plus module damage? for what probability?).
But guessing is not enough and I'm pretty sure someone knows the answer already

Plus, Stance tooltip says
Lock On has +20 Accuracy and Reload! has +40 firing rate.
I'm pretty confused by this explanation.

for example, Poor accuracy has absolute zero hit probability at 18000 range.
If I take Lock on, does it mean I would hit the target with a 20% probability or zero chance of hitting[0 + (0*0.2) = 0]?

Does it gives flat 40% bonus fire rate [10 -> 10+(10x0.4) firing per minute]

Tyranids have the strongest fighter force in the game and (at least I know)orks are the second.
Kinda surprising because I thought it would be Tau(They were on BFG1 due to their numbers and fighter shield upgrade) or Eldar
[or Necrons perhaps. provided they have fighters. I heared they didn't even had fighters on TT.]

Turns out dogfight is purely number based in game. six squadrons of tau fighter lose to seven squadrons of harpy by a large margin. And Necron(the most technologically advanced) fighters are totally joke.

I thought this is lore breaking, but on second thought, this was very normal in terms of a game balancing.
Those Ork and Tyranid carriers have poor guns while Eldars have excellent guns on all ships.
If Eldar wants fighter superiority, they should have a ship class of having large launch bay capacity with poor firepower. If not, the ship will cost exorbitant price( ...Voidstalker?)

Mont'ka seems working fantastic.
Screw kau'yon.

I haven't figured out how to play Protector fleet.
Their gun damage is dismal and inaccurate, bombers are not working properly, ships are costly and quite slow even with an experimental manifold upgrade.

Overpriced cruiser build didn't work. So few ships, only two launch bay per ships.
Gun line Light cruiser focused build didn't work either. Even with kauyon tactics, their actual DPS is too low to be feasible.
Custodian build is better than the last two, but remotely good.

One thing I haven't tried is an escort fleet. It seems protector fleet is good at escort fight due to their seeker missiles.

Nid pure carrier fleet is anti battleship build.
They are probably the only faction that can overwhelming all-braced defensive turrets and seven squadrons of boarding craft will decimate crews even the heaviest enemy ship.

• Don't forget to bring tentacle escort to de-crew regained enemy ship.

I'll leave some humble suggestions here

1. Ability to recall bombers and fighters
If you don't have targets for fighters, Every time out there is a waste.
If they were spendable like BFG1, I won't care about it. Now there are 3 limited squadrons. If I send out bombers and it seems they are definitely going to die, I should bring them to safety. The penalty will be the cooldown itself.
Disappeared(stealth) ships shouldn't send bombers back instantly. Bombers will follow the last known location and can wait for detection of a targeted ship for some time(hence taking risks) or like mentioned above, be called back to the hanger. It is much more 'realistic', will give another tactical depth and players will have good reason to send fighters to voids(not target the ship itself).

What it means is, cooldown timer for squadron varies.
For example, Cooldown is increased 1 to 3 seconds per lost bomber/fighter(repair cost).
Plus you could put rearming cost(put a distinction between used ammunition)

For example, If the ship has 4 launch bays, give an option to send out 2 fighters and 2 bombers.
Like I said above, Fleets having a huge concentrated launch bay is a disadvantage itself.
I don't exactly know how turrets work. If turrets shoot twice more bullets if there are two 'chunk' of squadrons from two different ships in range(sounds a bit odd) then having concentrated launch bay is actually beneficial. But if not, having a concentrated launch bay is a downright disadvantage.
I know this suggestion is contradicting the current system, but ALL or NONE system sounds silly to me.

4. Like @Ashardalon said, Bombers should not dogfight with fighters, they have damn turrets for that. Making them slower while being intercepted is a pretty good suggestion.

5. Increased speed of Naval fighter and bomber across the board.
Don't you think at least they should be faster than battleships? Real physics say nay for they 'swim' in the same medium, but I see this game follows the logic of earth naval battles.

6. Reduce or removal turret hit bonus
It is well explained in OP so it will be a waste to explain again.

Looks like your connection to Focus Home Interactive - Official Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.