On Disruption overcharge upgrade, available for SM, AM, all eldar - the description states:
At a glance, this seems to not apply at all.
Additional testing had revealed that it does affect Aeldari fields, but does so irreliably.
Sometimes, i do notice the holofield taking 3 damage and not regenerating for 10 seconds.
Is this functionality intended, but the chance is not reflected in the tooltip - or is the functionality itself currently faulty?
@leonatos Most likely because whatever system they used to display those values before broke down because of an unrelated change.
This kind of failure usually indicates poor coding (and possibly old code and or turdcode)
The reason they didnt fix it is most likely because they chose to rewrite said system instead of beating a dead horse.
For me, it works this way -
A successful assault action from any ship transfers a battleplan from the target ship to the source of the assault action.
Example - you lightning strike the enemy ship.
5 seconds later, the assault action is resolved and battleplan is transferred to your vessel.
I've been messing around with trying to mod things, and i happened to stumble upon the tonnage crit reduction values
I believe in update 1 the numbers were increased (instead of 0.1 per step, 0.2 per step)
Are those variables now obsolete, or had that change accidentally been reverted?
@m-andris90 I suggest you first try:
- installing Python 2.6 for windows. Use the pre-compiled x86 version
- installing pyCrypto for windows.
- Try running the .py now.
If that fails, please provide exact full error messages that you are getting and what did you do to get them.
I suspect the battleships need a well-defined role.
Currently, Light cruisers are good because they can dominate escorts, have enough firepower to take down most cruisers, and what they cant take down - they will outrun.
I suspect we need to have two things looked at -
making cruisers and battlecruisers more reliable at destroying light cruisers when facing them directly. This could be done by giving cruisers a boost in turn rate (since they are mostly fine already).
giving Grand Cruisers and Battleship a purpose -
I suspect the real problem here is lack of utility. Damage wise most of them are fine, except for those that arent (im looking at you, battleship retribution). That needs an individual look at from devs but thats not what we discuss over here.
main problem with BS is that once you're in and engaged, you will just get circled to death, and you might not even get to bring your broadsides to bear.
Well, everyone's posting DOW2 mods, so i will do that too then
Forgotten Emerald is a DOW2: Retribution mod that gives Last Stand a facelift.
- Heroes are being overhauled.
- New Wargear.
- New Abilities.
- Existing Wargear and Abilities are being balanced with new ones and between each oher.
- Redundant or Useless Wargear and Abilities are being ether Re-rolled, Balanced or Removed.
- Enemy waves are changed in order to bring more fun to existing gameplay.
You can find the mod on its official steam group page, here:
Multiple times i have encountered the following scenario:
I use a fleet that is based mostly around strike craft spam.
Factions that i personally used with this tactic:
- Imperial Navy
- Dark Eldar
(they are different than the rest, and thus not included in the following analysis)
It would appear that in its Beta1 state, the strike craft spam is overperforming.
As far as my experience goes, i have the impression that it is a tactic that has just two softcounters, one of which is itself (strike craft spam)
I have played over 20 games using this tactic alone on orks, and probably total of 20 games with the non-ork factions from the list above (combined)
These are the doctrines which have proven to stand up to the strike craft spam:
- Mass strike craft
(requires 'just right' management of fighters to work)
- Using stealth
(requires careful play, otherwise losses inevitable)
The problem with this is that not only the tactic counters itself, which is fertile ground for a meta to develop.
The problem is that losing a fleet to this tactic feels infuriating; it does not feel like you even had a chance, as the enemy fleet never came into any reasonable proximity.
While playing the strike craft fleets, i (not exagerrating) knew i will win depending on which faction i faced.
Thus, the current state of the strike craft mechanics leads me to believe that if left as it was in beta1, it will encourage a quick (within 1-3 months, faster if shared in the community) development of a strike craft meta, in which the fleets will consist mostly of launch bay vessels, and every vessel without those launch bays would be considered a liability / an easy kill.
I suspect that would result in decreased game longevity in ranked gameplay.
I would like to recommend carefully revisiting the following aspects of the strike craft gameplay:
- Ability of ships to send launch craft off to unidentified detected ships
- Prices of ships with few hangar bays
- Prices of ships with many hangar bays
- Ship turret effectiveness boost in "Brace for impact" stance
From my current perspective,
the ideal change would be:
- Disable the ability to send strike craft off to unidentified detected ships ("red blips")
- Decrease the relative price of ships with few hangar bays (relative to similiar vessels without hangar bays)
- Increase the relative price of ships with many hangar bays (relative to similiar vessels without hangar bays)
- If post beta2 the changes would not be enough, increase the effectiveness of the "Brace for impact" stance further (specifically against fighter craft), to allow any one ship in the abovementioned stance to repel one full set of fighters procurable with one ship of the same class with its turrets alone, without strike craft support (adjusted for faction differences)