Don't you think Point Defence slot was unnecessary?

[Nyanko-sensei]

I've got a feeling that adding special slot type for PD was uncalled for, and they were better as S-slot things for three reasons:

1. Being generally inferior to flaks, only corvettes could make decent use of those and yet they can't.
2. You are forced to have those if you want implement carrier design on cruiser or battleship, yet flak does better.
3. Even if you need PD, you are forced to go with quite specific hull design, which limits you again. Want PD on cruiser? - Go with hangar, despite the fact that you don't need hangar at all.

What do you think?

 

[The Founder]

PD slot as sepperate slot? Absolutely nessesary.
Having them fit into any smal slot made balancing them and missiles more of a Nightmare then it already was.* The whole model of PD/Missiles is flawed from the ground up. This might at least be a step into the right direction:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/why-missile-and-pd-never-work-out.980433/

*And that was before you consider that the Admiral AI and Ship Designer AI were just running in paralell without ever talking about PD needs.


1. But Flaks become avalible much later and require much bigger Slots. So those two are hardly comparable in the first place.
Missiles were intended to be a Corvette Counter, as thier 70% Tracking as of 1.3 clearly shows.
So giving Corvettes PD ability was actually a mistake all along. PD for Corvettes is with 90% propabiltiy not comming back. And in the Destroyer age Medium slots are not exactly abundant and the enemy might have mor small missiles, so the PD might still be worth it.

2. When you do get Cruisers and Battleships, having Flak and affording a Medium Slot for it is no that hard anymore. I build some 1 Heavy, rest Medium Cruisers. Kinetik Artillery, Autocannons, 1 Flak on the Swarming behavior of cruisers.*
If you do want to go for PD power, the extra ability from the Fighters is nothing to scoff at.

*My battleships are all Large/Lances, no PD. 1-3 Large/Flak Destroyers will provide PD cover.

3. You just explained why you would not go PD on Cruiser/BB. If anything the PD slots are a drag if you want to go Carrier with those ships.

 

[Agamemnic]

Never really thought about it but that's cos I go straight to flak so you raise a very valid point. Especially the point on PD being tied to specific hulls (the inferior carrier hulls for that matter)

 

[Nyanko-sensei]

1. But Flaks become avalible much later and require much bigger Slots. So those two are hardly comparable in the first place.
Missiles were intended to be a Corvette Counter, as thier 70% Tracking as of 1.3 clearly shows.
So giving Corvettes PD ability was actually a mistake all along. PD for Corvettes is with 90% propabiltiy not comming back. And in the Destroyer age Medium slots are not exactly abundant and the enemy might have mor small missiles, so the PD might still be worth it.

Well, missiles don't work as they where intended because Corvette era is about first 20 years. When destroyers becomes common a certain tendency about corvettes becomes noticeable - they keep dying like fruit-flies, while destroyers survives. And during that era I keep killing corvettes with my own corvettes with whatever my starting weapon is. In fact, never heard about someone who goes specifically after missiles in early game when they start with something else.

So I still think that PD in S slot would be a right thing to do. It would simply make PD more universal and thus more common among ship designs. Because right now most popular advice about PD I keep hearing - "don't bother about it".

 

[The Founder]

Well, missiles don't work as they where intended because Corvette era is about first 20 years. When destroyers becomes common a certain tendency about corvettes becomes noticeable - they keep dying like fruit-flies, while destroyers survives. And during that era I keep killing corvettes with my own corvettes with whatever my starting weapon is. In fact, never heard about someone who goes specifically after missiles in early game when they start with something else.

I never said they were properly working as Corvette counter. I said it was thier clear design intention to do so.

Originally all missile like weapons had the "can not be evaded" Flag. Wich resulted in Torpedoes being better at killing Corvettes then Larger ships.
1.3 Replaced "Can not be evaded" entirely with Tracking. Wich now also varries based on slot size, giving smaler ships and slots finally a say in the meta.
Yet despite them loosing "Can not be evaded", missiles got a 70% tracking value on all slot sizes. The highest non-absolute value in the game. While Corvettes got 60-90% Evasion.

Missiles overall are not working as intended. There is too much Overkill, and the whole kerfluffle of overlapping PD fields. That alone makes missiles unuseable and thus means the Point Defense mechanic is not showing all it can do.
PD and Missiles are directly tied into one another. Limiting the number of PD slots (unrelated to small slots) was a good idea.

 

[Mackus]

Hmm.
- Increase missiles hit-points (especially the larger ones), so they'll sometimes survive direct hit from PD.
- Make missiles pick new target if their current one was destroyed, so they won't get wasted.

 

[GloatingSwine]

So I still think that PD in S slot would be a right thing to do. It would simply make PD more universal and thus more common among ship designs. Because right now most popular advice about PD I keep hearing - "don't bother about it".

The advice not to bother with PD isn't that PD slots are uncommon, but that most of the things PD is intended to stop aren't worth worrying about.

If missiles had a job and did it well, then point defence would be valuable.

 

[Scourgeclaw]

 

[Nyanko-sensei]

Hmm.
- Increase missiles hit-points (especially the larger ones), so they'll sometimes survive direct hit from PD.
- Make missiles pick new target if their current one was destroyed, so they won't get wasted.

That's the point. Make missiles decent weapon instead of making countermeasures crapy. Fire and forget capability with ability to pick new targets for each Salvo can turn them into a viable choice on par with other weapons.

Also I am under the impression that devs are going difficult way of trying to balance things out by limiting player's options instead of doing more logical thing - giving control over fleet behavior in battle, like prioritizing targets for different groups, using formations, charge/keep distance/ fallback and such.

 

[The Founder]

Hmm.
- Increase missiles hit-points (especially the larger ones), so they'll sometimes survive direct hit from PD.
- Make missiles pick new target if their current one was destroyed, so they won't get wasted.

That's the point. Make missiles decent weapon instead of making countermeasures crapy. Fire and forget capability with ability to pick new targets for each Salvo can turn them into a viable choice on par with other weapons.

Also I am under the impression that devs are going difficult way of trying to balance things out by limiting player's options instead of doing more logical thing - giving control over fleet behavior in battle, like prioritizing targets for different groups, using formations, charge/keep distance/ fallback and such.

While retargetting is propably the best fix, it is also the most expensive. Asume a combat simulation rework on par with the Ethos/Faction rework for 1.5 is required for that.

 

[alxgvr]

I suspect rockets in stalleris similar to any other "instant" weapon: damage calculated in the same time shot was made. "Moving" of the rocket is just an animation. Am I right or wrong?

 

[Elothan]

I recall Reading something like that.

 

[The Founder]

I suspect rockets in stalleris similar to any other "instant" weapon: damage calculated in the same time shot was made. "Moving" of the rocket is just an animation. Am I right or wrong?

Absolutely wrong, unfortunately.
Damage is only dealt if the projectile atually connects. With fast travelling instant weapons that is not a big problem.
But even with the game not drawing more then 50 missiles (the rest just travel invisible), there is too much time between firing and hitting. That alone accounts for the overkill.

The other part is a general issues with Balancing PD and Missiles. Those transcend any game that uses this PD/Missel model.

 

[Seomis]

Point defense slots may just seem unnecessary right now due to missiles being terrible. Wait for the next rebalance.

 

[Seomis]

I suspect rockets in stalleris similar to any other "instant" weapon: damage calculated in the same time shot was made. "Moving" of the rocket is just an animation. Am I right or wrong?

There was some interesting testing done on this not long ago: The Missiles are a Lie (analysis)

 

[GloatingSwine]

There was some interesting testing done on this not long ago: The Missiles are a Lie (analysis)

Yeah, but the conclusions of the OP were basically all wrong because they ignored the fact that most missiles aren't rendered.

 

[Seomis]

Yeah, but the conclusions of the OP were basically all wrong because they ignored the fact that most missiles aren't rendered.

... The fact that most missiles aren't rendered is point of half the post.

 

[GloatingSwine]

... The fact that most missiles aren't rendered is point of half the post.

No, the post assumes that missiles are doing something funky because damage happens when there isn't a visible missile, and that point defence is nonsense because its effect goes strange at high missile speeds.

The subsequent pages reveal the reasons for those and the reason for the first is "most of the missiles are invisible but the same deterministic maths is actually happening because the game is still calculating their real effect"