Regarding Artillery:

I totally understand where you're coming from on this one, but at the same time it's an awkward situation that would be a bit of an undertaking to find a new niche for the Akula Artillery. While Jupiter Artillery plays a lot like back-line 'siege weapons', the Akula Artillery have the potential agility and firepower to intercept and punish priority threats(closer to how you would attach RPGs/TOW Missiles to your forward battlegroups to 'punch' priority targets). The extra durability of the Akula Artillery plays towards that role, unlike the fragility of Oberon Artillery(which forces them into more of an ambush/flanking playstyle).

Thematically and visually, I get it - Akula Artillery are flying cannons with a few engines strapped to it, meanwhile Jupiter Artillery look more like heavily armored fixed-weapon space-tanks. Gameplay/mechanics wise, however, they behave the opposite.. and I don't really see how that could change without overhauling their primary weapons, agility, and power distribution ratios.

IF the Artillery Cruisers were to be overhauled, I'd probably want to see something somewhat similar to the current corvette trilogy(with Jupiter and Akula swapped): Akula Artillery would be the fragile, nimble Light Artillery that can punch like a truck; Oberon Artillery would be the Medium Artillery that would serve a similar function as Jupiter Destroyers(Long Range Zone-Control/Escort) - perhaps give them an INVERSE damage falloff to make them distinct(more damage at longer range, less damage at close range); Jupiter Artillery would be the slow, heavily armored 'turret emplacement' that can provide a constant stream of medium-ranged suppressive firepower in its limited, slow-turning firing arc.

Regarding Medium Corvettes:

Personally speaking, I'm perfectly fine with them being slower than the other two variants. Oberon Corvettes are excellent anti-corvette/'strike ship' interdictors, and the slower speed kind of re-inforces that they should defensively screen/ambush and assist allies instead of chasing off after targets like the Jupiter 'interceptors' and Akula 'bombers'.

Regarding Ram:

Oh boy, I'm reluctant to touch on this one due to fear of backlash, but I would like to see either one of two things done(potentially along with the removal of the shield-ignore component):

The damage caused by rams is determined by the maximum health of the ship doing the ram(Heavy Destroyers would ram for more damage than Light Destroyers using the same type of ram module - say.. 80% of health for Plasma, 60% for Blast, 40% for Purge). While the Rams in the game are technically energy weapons, the force/mass of the vessel doing the ram would presumeably matter/transfer into the actual impact of said energy weapon.

Alternatively: Ramming a ship would 'reflect' a portion of damage back upon the ship performing the ram based on the maximum health of the ship being rammed. (A Brutus ramming a Monarch would suffer substantial, perhaps even lethal, structural/frame warping because of the force of collision.)

Basing it on speed sounds like an engineering (software and network) nightmare and I cannot imagine it would go very smoothly. With some of the potential speed combinations in the game, I could also see the numbers getting absurdly out of hand very quickly.

Yup, just going to echo that it seems to (currently) be a quirk of the ship.

It's not really unique; Oberon Tactical Cruisers, for example, are typically highly dependent on good energy management due to their large boosts when routing to power to weapons or engines. Conversely, the Akula Tactical Cruisers recieve 'relatively' little benefit from power to weapons, but they have a very high base healing at close range(meaning they're usually better off conserving power for shields). This translates into Oberon Tacticals being more of a mid-range 'spot'/burst healer while the Akula Tacs are the reliable and consistent close-range powerhouses.

Akula Artillery Cruisers typically have the most armor, highest damage per individual shot, and recieve a huge boost to movement with power to engines like Oberon Artillery. (This is a bit of a pet peeve of mine, but everyone calling Artillery Cruisers "snipers" is a disservice to the potential of the class. Akula Artillery, especially, really shine when you play them more like a 'hunter/trapper' just behind the first and secondary lines. Hiding way out in the 'bushes' of nowhere and 'sniping' with them only makes you an isolated target that's ripe for the picking.)

Hmm.. I don't think I relate on this one.

The VO strikes me more as.. 'plucky space-pirates' or 'crew of insert generic spaceship TV series here' than a strict military structure. I doubt we'll see anything like VoiceOver Packs anytime soon, so it's probably something you'll have to bite the bullet on for the time being(or mute it).

I DO agree on the post-match animations though; I don't feel those represent the desired reactions of my personal avatar. If anything, I find them to be of the opposite effect - directly antagonistic of player agency(forced behavior of the player character without player intent or consent).

As for 'Immersion versus Realism'.. well.. that's a losing battle I'd rather not even get started on. Short version: Dreadnought is clearly aiming to be a video game over a simulation.

Sounds like they want a 'validation response'. We've heard things about healing changes, the new game mode, and various other tidbits, but there's been a silence regarding the state of the different queues/matchmaking brackets. "We're aware of/working on the issue" would probably help stem the paranoia of neglect.

I can certainly understand, as I would personally love to hear whether the devs think the current veteran queue is satisfactory or in (absolutely critical) need of improvement(by removing T4 from it, thus resolving legendary queue frequency and new player retention at the same time). That is a slightly different topic though, so I digress.

Transhuman Necromancers are at it again!

On the subject of Autoguns, they can actually put out some pretty nice damage. The main problems are that they're such short-ranged weapons on such a slow-moving ship and that they have to compete with some pretty serious defensive options(meaning: their subjective 'worth' is below the point of being competitive).

Personally speaking, I'd love to see their range doubled to the 2.5k-3k range - even if that means their damage has to be reduced to compensate. It would give Dreadnoughts an option of being a threat to anything that carelessly wanders too closely(as opposed to being directly on top of it). Conversely, it would give Dreadnoughts a potential surrounding suppression zone that could be used to 'push' entrenched hostiles off a point.

Well, this isn't a fighter sim. Even the smallest class of ships is presumably operated by a crew of atleast a (few) dozen people. Suggesting that a Jutland/Monarch should be operated with a joystick is kind of... vexing.

That said, I'm all for supporting whatever control schemes players may prefer.

I don't know if the dominance of Armor Amp and Armorbooster will change that much unless something is done to natively harden dreadnoughts(like an armor rating/type system). Percentage based damage reduction is effectively a survival multiplier. Modules like Endurance Mode simply do not compare to something that straight up muliplies your capacity to soak damage in a game with such a relatively short time to kill.

Heavily neutering these modules to the point of other options being considerable might very well cripple the class to the role of being a glorified purge nuke platform in the current meta - especially with the healing changes on the horizon.

Sounds like you guys are putting a lot of thought into the situation; that's reassuring.

I would like to ask that you involve the players(' feedback) before everything is 'set in stone'. Give us time to play with and adjust to things while they're in motion so the changes don't feel like we're getting slammed by a truck. This should also hopefully help in finding the 'sweet-spot' without overcompensating.

(Instead of something drastic like "All tactical cruisers now use an ammo system", add the system to one or two ships first and see how the players react, then the entire ship line, then all tac cruisers.. if the results 'prove' to be desireable.)

machinech#5333 posted (#post-215889) said:

LYB-FooJub#4039 posted (#post-209761) said:

And part of my point was limiting group size won't do jack to stop that.

Actually it will...but I take the comment you've made with the fact I've watch LYB group stomping in vet regularly. So it's not exactly unexpected. I've yet to see LYB vs LYB due to solo queing to make a game fair. Matter of fact I still have the footage lay'n about of a 3 man LYB crew max level players in maxed t4's absolutely curb stomp a random vet game. Sure your good, but then against a mixed bag of players in t3's with only 2 t4's and not'd have to try not to be. Then again I did appreciate learning some things from LYB, like how you can simultaneously fire your primary and secondaries to double up your dps...

This is a necrotic horse that has been beaten to death multiple times at this point, but do try to put yourself in the shoes of someone who has played enough to unlock all those ships and modules. Think about how much game experience you have accrued, how many tactics and compositions you have seen, faced off against, and learned to overcome. Now, try to imagine that there are other players you've been playing both against and with over all that time; you chat with them in discord(and now chat) and you get to know them, so you start playing together with them to try to learn and further better yourself.

Now, let's say there are newer, less experienced players that are coming in and get thrown into the same matches that you're in. Not because you chose to, but because that's who the game put you up against. These newer players are frustrated and upset that they are not a match for you. So, trying to be considerate, you try playing below your skill level, you start trying silly thing that intentionally give you a handicap, on and on you try to accomodate so that one day you'll have more players who are on equal footing. However, the complaints never end, no matter what you try... so.. what do you do? How long do you 'put up with it' until you just decide to play and have fun with other players who are of your peerage?

To be clear, I am not justifying malicious behavior of people going around to intentionally stomp newer players. Most of the more seasoned players stay out of recruit matchmaking altogether, because it simply is not a contest(regardless of self-imposed handicaps). With the current structure of the game, there is a very large experience and time-gap between Veteran and Legendary Queues; thus, you can have very new players and very seasoned players thrown into the same Veteran Queue.

It might be hard to believe, but most of the 'pub-stomps' are not Voluntary; they're a byproduct of the current structure of the game. That is what needs to be improved.