Patch Balance Thread at Petro

[TearsOfIsha]

I agree with you Rust_Lord about the MC-30, such a fragile frigate should not be near the price range of a Mon Calamari Cruiser.

 

I know it must sound like I'm disagreeing with Rust_Lord on EVERYTHING but I'm not sure it needs a price reduction. It's one of the few units in the Rebel arsenal that is lethal against both Fighters and Cruisers. I don't mind the increase in time between volleys - it's shooting 8 torpedoes at once - and the cluster bomb is still there (which was one of the few effective weapons against the Star Vipers). I think a heavy price should be required.

[Daft Adidas]

This is a cool smily. :rifle:

[TearsOfIsha]

This is a cool smily. :rifle:

 

Uh...... yes.....:nut

[Daft Adidas]

sorry the smily was meant come up. Lol!

[Daft Adidas]

this was what i was talking about, by the way how do you put quotes in ur text where it sez orinialy posted by whoever?

[TearsOfIsha]

this was what i was talking about, by the way how do you put quotes in ur text where it sez orinialy posted by whoever?

 

You press the quote button, below the post

[Shadow_015]

this was what i was talking about, by the way how do you put quotes in ur text where it sez orinialy posted by whoever?

 

Basically, you put a [, then you type QUOTE in capital letters. That is followed by an = sign and then you type the person's name correctly and put another ] facing the other way.

 

After that you paste in what they said.

 

Then behind the text you put another [, then a / and then you type QUOTE again and put a ]. That should do it....

 

Remember, this is for quoting multiple pieces of text. If you want to quote just one piece of text, then just press quote

[Daft Adidas]

Thanks guys, is this on quick reply or advanced coz on quick it won't let me click the box. Why?

[Daft Adidas]

You press the quote button, below the post

Thanks, i get it now.

[Shadow_015]

I realize this is kind of random but this is a patch thread and the Mon Calamari Cruiser debate seems to have hit a stalemate.

 

Technically it has, and it hasn't. We aren't really off-topic since we are talking about MCs and ISDs, but in terms of changes FOR the patch, so I think it's okay. Sure, this is a patch thread but let's face it - this thread would have died long ago were it not for our debate. This is also evident in the fact that there has been no real topic since you instigated this comment...so I say we continue this debate, but constructively.

 

Since we've now sort of hit a stalemate. Let's think of ways we can compromise and come up with some possible changes which we could possibly pitch towards one of the designers for a future patch.

 

Shadow, I have to admit, I don't really like the idea of the Laser Cannon or the Hangar. The problem is the Laser Cannons on Cruisers are a bit pants unless their mounted in banks like Corvettes. I'm not really sure if they'd have much of an effect - and their not really canon either.

 

Okay, I accept that the laser canon idea isn't a popular one so i'll drop that entirely. But I still maintain that the Hangar idea is good (and canon), and it doesn't necessarily distort game balance the way Rusty and I have discussed it. A random squadron each time would spice things up a bit. I have to admit, I kind of forgot what the armament of an MC was and i'm too lazy to look it up (i've had a long day - trust me) but I swear they had some laser cannons on em?

 

The Hangar Bay is canon but.... it begs the question why don't the rest of the rebel ships have fighters? It just doesn't seem to fit with the rebels, what with bringing fighters in via hyperspace and whatnot.

 

The Hangar bay is canon yes. If you included 1 or 2 random fighter squadrons (out of Rebels) it would be balanced and fair, and also canon since each MC had different complements of squadrons.

 

The rest of the Rebel ships don't have fighters because they weren't outfitted with fighters in canon. The Assault Frigate Mk II was meant as a space weapons platform and the Nebulon-B did carry fighters...but on extra racks which were outfitted to the undercarriage of the Frigate. It's state in EAW now is its original state - but i'm sure you already know that You already know about MC Frigates anyway and they are not canon so I won't speak about them.

 

Tears, I know you also think MCs should be buffed but how? I haven't really seen you mention anything significant in terms of the way they should be buffed. I've mentioned 3 methods sofar - laser cannons, hangar and speed. What are you specifically thinking of? I'm out of ideas so i'm definitely willing to listen to your suggestions

 

Taking X-Wing boosts as a given, I think the best thing that could be done with the MC is to keep it's higher maneverability but make sure that actually equates to a boost. Perhaps allowing the MC to fly under and over Imperial ships so they can simply move to whatever position they need to get a good a shot.

 

Please elaborate on this. It's similar to what I said. My suggestion is to either change its cruising speed by 40-50% in-between its original speed and the MC30c's (what I said before), or to include something like the Corvettes have which is the boost engines ability - although it would be active for a much shorter duration with the same recharge time as the Corvette. And yes this is also agreeing with the point you made earlier Rusty.

 

Allowing the MC to fly over and under the ISD is an interesting idea, but I find it difficult to envision how that could be set by the designers and how you would pull that off in skirmish. For me, when I turn on the cinematic camera 7-8 times out of 10 there will be a few ships which are on a different 'altitude' level (technically not the right word but you know what I mean) than the others.

 

As for the MC-30 I think they could come down in price a tad...4000 in skirmish is a wad of cash for a fragile frigate. 3500 is still a hefty price becasue you only have to take your eyes off it for an instant, lose two hardpoints and they are useless, chewing up 3 pop cap to boot.

 

Totally read my mind there. I was thinking of the exact same price and I definitely agree. Along with your points about it I would also like to respond to Tears' comment about the Cluster Bomb. They may still be there, but the bombs only work in the range of the outer-most circle when the bombs have fully expanded - so the damage effect works only there and not inside or outside the arc of where the bombs explode. 3500 seems like a good price to me. They are a little more effective than Assault Frigates, but also weaker in armour, so the 500 extra is warranted. 4000 is too much.

 

Choosing your fights (as much as you can) is at the heart of how the Alliance fought in SW and in this game. Thats why, I believe, they are faster. Death by a thousand cuts...hence why fighters were (should be) so important.]

 

I agree. To be honest however, when you are in a cramped skirmish battle map, picking your fights becomes harder since there's nowhere to really go and you are fighting over both land and mining facilities. It may work for GC, but definitely not for skirmish in my opinion.

 

As for buying Awings over Xwings...i know it doesnt solve anything but its the only solution available at present. It would be better for star base garrison fighters to upgrade to Awings when you reach the right tech level to counter the other fighters. As for the Xwing, they are supposed to be generally on par with the interceptor so increase their price to 550 in skirmish and give them a shield boost.

 

Agreed. I just hope that a designer is weighing in on this discussion. Otherwise i'll have to seek one out and inform him of the points

 

I myself have beefed up the X-Wing to make it worth something...gave it better shields about 25% and a higher refresh rate. I think it could use a pair of concusion missles to boot.

 

I see the Empire new fighters just run over the Rebels, and it is *not really fun* to play.

 

A boost to Rebel fighters would go a long way to help the Mon Cal problem verse the Empire ISD now stronger fighters to maintain some kind of balance.

 

Agreed there. Rebels definitely aren't fun to play in this way. I don't even play against the Consortium in skirmish anymore, or at all (I only play skirmish atm). I only play either as Imps vs. Rebs or as Rebs vs. Imps.

 

Though for the X-wings would recommend Proton Torpedoes instead of Concussion Missles however, as Protons were canon - the X-Wing had them and A-Wings were the ones with Concussion Missles.

 

On another note, I think I was the guy who made that comment about the 'more TIE fighters in comparison to Rebel fighters' comment. It was not fully argued, or poorly argued - so please disregard that comment, I apologize .

 

Finally, here are my suggestions to end this argument and prevent another one flaring up to do justice for both sides:

 

1. Increase the speed of the MC (in one of the ways I mentioned before) or:

2. Give the MC a Hangar with 1 or 2 random fighter complements. Home One

would get B-Wings automatically and 1 other random fighter complement.

3. Keep the ISD stats - that's happenning anyway and i'm fine with that.

4. BOOST THE X-WING. A shield boost is definitely welcomed - by 25% at

least would be great.

5. NERF THE CONSORTIUM - that's happenning anyway, but I definitely

want to see a decline in mass-driver and special weapon effectiveness.

6. Change the MC Frigate's cost from 4000 to 3500.

 

 

If there is anything else please do not hesitate to add and voice your own opinions. Who knows, the constructiveness may actually lead to something...

[ImpElite]

"NERF THE CONSORTIUM - that's happenning anyway"

 

What do you mean that's happeneing anyway? I hope nerf only means weaken not obliterate, I wouldn't like seeing my new fav faction go down the toilet, even if they were slightly weaker than the other two factions.

[Valter]

Technically it has, and it hasn't. We aren't really off-topic since we are talking about MCs and ISDs, but in terms of changes FOR the patch, so I think it's okay. Sure, this is a patch thread but let's face it - this thread would have died long ago were it not for our debate. This is also evident in the fact that there has been no real topic since you instigated this comment...so I say we continue this debate, but constructively.

 

Since we've now sort of hit a stalemate. Let's think of ways we can compromise and come up with some possible changes which we could possibly pitch towards one of the designers for a future patch.

 

I apologize, I just figured the debate had hit a standstill but if you still want to discuss the issue then I have no objections, I have nothing better to do right now anyway...

 

 

Okay, I accept that the laser canon idea isn't a popular one so i'll drop that entirely. But I still maintain that the Hangar idea is good (and canon), and it doesn't necessarily distort game balance the way Rusty and I have discussed it. A random squadron each time would spice things up a bit. I have to admit, I kind of forgot what the armament of an MC was and i'm too lazy to look it up (i've had a long day - trust me) but I swear they had some laser cannons on em?

 

Well, I just checked Wookieepedia and the MC-80 (the design in EAW) has no laser cannons but does have a hangar bay. There many other ways to fix the balance issues in this game. One solution is strengthening the rebel starfighters, which would defeat the purpose of a hangar bay.

Actually, the boost in power to the B-wings and A-wings coupled with the nerfs to the StarVipers and TIE Defenders should be enough to put the Rebels back in front when it come to starfighter performance.

 

 

The Hangar bay is canon yes. If you included 1 or 2 random fighter squadrons (out of Rebels) it would be balanced and fair, and also canon since each MC had different complements of squadrons.

 

Canon? Yes. Necessary? No.

 

As I stated before the rebel fighters are getting some boosts while the Imperial and Consortium fighters are getting nerfed, thereby putting the Rebels ahead of the game in the starfighter department.

 

I maintain my standpoint on nerfing the Consortium cruisers. Instead of beefing up the Mon Cals why not nerf the Keldabes and Aggressors? I think this solution is far more practical in the long run because it would rebalance both the Consortium and the rebels at one time. Kill two birds with one stone...

 

 

 

Finally, here are my suggestions to end this argument and prevent another one flaring up to do justice for both sides:

 

1. Increase the speed of the MC (in one of the ways I mentioned before) or:

2. Give the MC a Hangar with a random fighter complement.

3. Keep the ISD stats - that's happenning anyway and i'm fine with that.

4. BOOST THE X-WING. A shield boost is definitely welcomed - by 25% at

least would be great.

5. NERF THE CONSORTIUM - that's happenning anyway, but I definitely

want to see a decline in mass-driver and special weapon effectiveness.

6. Change the MC Frigate's cost from 4000 to 3500.

 

 

If there is anything else please do not hesitate to add and voice your own opinions. Who knows, the constructiveness may actually lead to something...

 

Excellent suggestions but I don't think number 2 is necessary if the others are implemented.

 

To give the Mon Cals a hangar bay after increasing their speed, strengthening the X-wings and nerfing the Consortium would be a redundancy. I just think giving the Mon Cals a hangar bay would cause more problems than it would solve. Most likely it would force the game designers to give the Keldabe a hangar bay to balance out the Capital ships. The pop cap would have to be drastically increased for the Mon Cal which would defeat the purpose of giving it a hangar bay, if the Mon Cal's pop cap is not increased then the rebel player can hyperspace in multiple Mon Cals and mass spam fighters thereby destroying the game balance further. The fighters that the Mon Cal releases would have to be given a pop cap thereby defeating the purpose of a hangar bay again, and if the fighters don't take up pop cap in battle then buying fighters seperately would become unnecessary.

 

Don't you see? There are many other ways to solve the given balance problems without giving the Mon Cals a hangar bay.

 

I welcome any opinions or objections about my given suggestions...

[Shadow_015]

I apologize, I just figured the debate had hit a standstill but if you still want to discuss the issue then I have no objections, I have nothing better to do right now anyway...

 

Yeah...we've got nothing to do anyway until the patch comes out lol!

 

Excellent suggestions but I don't think number 2 is necessary if the others are implemented.

 

To give the Mon Cals a hangar bay after increasing their speed, strengthening the X-wings and nerfing the Consortium would be a redundancy. I just think giving the Mon Cals a hangar bay would cause more problems than it would solve. Most likely it would force the game designers to give the Keldabe a hangar bay to balance out the Capital ships. The pop cap would have to be drastically increased for the Mon Cal which would defeat the purpose of giving it a hangar bay, if the Mon Cal's pop cap is not increased then the rebel player can hyperspace in multiple Mon Cals and mass spam fighters thereby destroying the game balance further. The fighters that the Mon Cal releases would have to be given a pop cap thereby defeating the purpose of a hangar bay again, and if the fighters don't take up pop cap in battle then buying fighters seperately would become unnecessary.

 

Don't you see? There are many other ways to solve the given balance problems without giving the Mon Cals a hangar bay.

 

I welcome any opinions or objections about my given suggestions...

 

1. I said OR at the back of my first point. So i'm happy with either. If a speed boost is given in one of those ways then i'll be happy enough.

 

2. Remember my post about the pop. cap comparison of ISDs and MCs and the point which ended up being Rebels were outnumbered in fighters 3-1? Well, increasing the MCs with a Hangar and giving Rebels 1 squadron each would mean:

 

Out of a Pop. Cap of 20 for Imps: they would get 5 ISDs along with 10 TIE Interceptor squadrons and 5 TIE Bomber Squadrons (at 2 Fighter and 1 Bomber squadrons per ISD).

 

Out of a Pop. Cap of 25 for Rebs: they would get 5 MonCals along with 5 Fighter squadrons taking up population cap, and 5 fighter/bomber squadrons randomly mixed from hangars which do not take up pop cap.

 

Final result = Imps 5 ISDs, 10 Fighters, 5 Bombers...Rebs 5 MonCals, 10 Mixed fighter/bomber squadrons.

 

This would be coupled with the ISD being superior with more firepower and armour like its upgrade in this patch, and the MC being a bit faster and having shields.

 

And let's remember this is hypothetical in comparison and usually fleets are mixed, so it always ends up differently, but if squadrons were compared rawly like that, thats how it would turn out. Plus other Frigates don't have squadrons for Rebels, only MonCal - so Imps are still favoured anyway.

 

I'd still say that's a more or less even balance which favours the ISD more-so. But if the MonCal only got a speed boost (though a bit more significantly, i'd be happy too).

 

Well, I just checked Wookieepedia and the MC-80 (the design in EAW) has no laser cannons but does have a hangar bay. There many other ways to fix the balance issues in this game. One solution is strengthening the rebel starfighters, which would defeat the purpose of a hangar bay.

Actually, the boost in power to the B-wings and A-wings coupled with the nerfs to the StarVipers and TIE Defenders should be enough to put the Rebels back in front when it come to starfighter performance.

 

We already said Rebel fighter boosts, and i'm happy with that and certainly hope its gonna happen for the X-Wings. However, a tiny speed boost for the MC is still warranted...

 

"NERF THE CONSORTIUM - that's happenning anyway"

 

What do you mean that's happeneing anyway? I hope nerf only means weaken not obliterate, I wouldn't like seeing my new fav faction go down the toilet, even if they were slightly weaker than the other two factions.

 

Of course they're not getting obliterated, but nerfing the Aggressors and Kedalbes like Valter suggested is fine by me . The ZC are already being downgraded somewhat in the patch as you will have already read...

 

 

Finally, I was playing skirmish yesterday and I was moving my MonCals towards the Repair satellite I set up after a battle. For 2 MonCals it was at 80% Hull Strength, full shields and 80% hard points for each hard point. However, the Repair Satellite was trying to heal it and it didn't do anything?

 

I had the Alliance and Ardent out, along with Home One (1 of its Ion Hardpoints was also damaged but the Satellite couldn't do anything). Is this some kind of glitch or is it supposed to happen? It says the Satellite fixes hardpoints but while it happened at the beginning, after the second battle nothing happened to my MonCals? Anybody know....?

[Daft Adidas]

I don't know if u have already been talking about this but in space they shuld add a feature where the X Wings or Ties fight together in a squadron, no go off and do their own thing it wuld ne fun if u culd off with ur team and attack the Imperial Star Destroyer!

[ImpElite]

erm, no idea what you just said...

[Daft Adidas]

sorry made some big spelling and puncuation mistakes their, Fight in squads out in space

[Valter]

1. I said OR at the back of my first point. So i'm happy with either. If a speed boost is given in one of those ways then i'll be happy enough.

 

A speed boost would be much easier to implement than a hangar bay.

 

2. Remember my post about the pop. cap comparison of ISDs and MCs and the point which ended up being Rebels were outnumbered in fighters 3-1? Well, increasing the MCs with a Hangar and giving Rebels 1 squadron each would mean:

 

Out of a Pop. Cap of 20 for Imps: they would get 5 ISDs along with 10 TIE Interceptor squadrons and 5 TIE Bomber Squadrons (at 2 Fighter and 1 Bomber squadrons per ISD).

 

Point taken but if the rebel fighters got a boost in firepower then it wouldn't matter if they were outnumbered by Imperial fighters. Quality over quantity was the Rebel philosophy anyway...

 

Out of a Pop. Cap of 25 for Rebs: they would get 5 MonCals along with 5 Fighter squadrons taking up population cap, and 5 fighter/bomber squadrons randomly mixed from hangars which do not take up pop cap.

 

Again, There are many other solutions to the given balance problems; The balance problem with starfighters could be easily remedied just by strengthening the Rebel starfighters, and the balance problem with the Capital ships could be solved with a simple speed boost to the MC's and a nerf to the Consortium Cruisers.

 

Final result = Imps 5 ISDs, 10 Fighters, 5 Bombers...Rebs 5 MonCals, 10 Mixed fighter/bomber squadrons.

 

Ok, then if the fighters that the Mon Cals release from their hangar bays are random then what if the Mon Cals released nothing but X-wings? The rebels would be screwed.

 

This would be coupled with the ISD being superior with more firepower and armour like its upgrade in this patch, and the MC being a bit faster and having shields.

 

If the MC was faster and had better shields then there would be no reason to add a hangar bay.

 

 

We already said Rebel fighter boosts, and i'm happy with that and certainly hope its gonna happen for the X-Wings. However, a tiny speed boost for the MC is still warranted...

 

Finally, we agree on something.

 

 

Of course they're not getting obliterated, but nerfing the Aggressors and Kedalbes like Valter suggested is fine by me . The ZC are already being downgraded somewhat in the patch as you will have already read...

 

Yes, the Consortium is being downgraded slightly but the Aggressors are not included in the patch (Correct me If I'm wrong) therefore the Aggressors are still the almighty gods of space combat.

 

Nerf Consortium Capital ships, speed up Mon Cals and Strengthen Rebel fighters and all balance issues should be corrected.

 

Finally, I was playing skirmish yesterday and I was moving my MonCals towards the Repair satellite I set up after a battle. For 2 MonCals it was at 80% Hull Strength, full shields and 80% hard points for each hard point. However, the Repair Satellite was trying to heal it and it didn't do anything?

 

I had the Alliance and Ardent out, along with Home One (1 of its Ion Hardpoints was also damaged but the Satellite couldn't do anything). Is this some kind of glitch or is it supposed to happen? It says the Satellite fixes hardpoints but while it happened at the beginning, after the second battle nothing happened to my MonCals? Anybody know....?

 

I've had this happen to me as well while attempting to repair damaged Star Destroyers or MC's with repair platforms, it's definately a glitch. I hope this problem will be addressed in the patch.

[wedge2211]

Again, There are many other solutions to the given balance problems; The balance problem with starfighters could be easily remedied just by strengthening the Rebel starfighters, and the balance problem with the Capital ships could be solved with a simple speed boost to the MC's and a nerf to the Consortium Cruisers.

Giving the Rebel fighters a bump might be the solution to both problems, and would be more in keeping with canon and other games like the X-Wing series, where squadrons of Rebel fighter-bombers would be sent to take out Imperial capital ships.

[Shadow_015]

I've had this happen to me as well while attempting to repair damaged Star Destroyers or MC's with repair platforms, it's definately a glitch. I hope this problem will be addressed in the patch.

 

I am very much for giving X-Wings shield boosts. However, I did have another thought which also brings back my argument about X-Wings needing Torpedo launchers.

 

When I look at it, the Imperials have another advantage over the Rebels in terms of starfighters which I think should be addressed. If you look at it, the Imperials have the TIE Fighter, Interceptor, Bomber, Defender and Phantom.

 

Examining them closer reveals that the TIE Bomber, Defender AND Phantom can all shoot Proton Torpedoes. In comparison, the Rebels have 4 fighters: the X-Wing, the Y-Wing, the A-Wing and the B-Wing; and only two of these fighters can shoot Proton Torpedoes.

 

Now I agree with Tears, and I hope you all agree also that the Rebels were superior in space in terms of fighters and space pilot skill (not really factoring the addition of the TIE Defender, Elite Imp Pilots or experimental TIEs).

 

I therefore suggest that to counter this balance is to give the X-Wing Proton Torpedoes vs. Capital Ships and space installations. Also possibly giving the A-Wing Concussion Missles (but that's only conditional). This would match the Rebels with Imperials in terms of Proton Torpedo ability and also boost the X-Wing more. It wouldn't unbalance it with TIE Fighters because it had protons in canon + they are against capital ships + X-wings whooped TIE Fighters anyway.

 

 

Also, for Mon Calamari Cruisers. I think it is probably for the best to increase the speed. Though i'm not really sure whether it should be as an ability like the Corvettes, or as a n/a speed boost? What do you guys think?

 

The reason i'm confused is because when I match MCs to ISDs I come up with this (including patch upgrade).

 

ISD has stronger weapons/armour = MC has stronger and redundant shields.

ISD has 4 Turbos and 2 Ions = MC has 4 Turbos and 2 Ions

ISD has Tractor Beam ability = MC has Boost Shields ability

ISD has Hangar = MC has ?????

 

I don't believe the MC's current slight speed increase vs. ISD counts because it is not significant enough to be considered as either an ability or advantage.

 

That is the reason I was asking for a Hangar (but now speed boost) and why i'm kind of wondering whether or not it should be a Boost Engines ability instead of base-speed upgrade.

 

What do you guys think?

[FunSolo]

lol, "agressor, the almighty god of space combat"... i was laughin so hard bout that sentence.. man.. get 1-2 bomber squads in there to take out the specialweapon and they are useless n doomed.

only thing overpowered at the consortium: the fighters in a 1on1. for real.. play against someone good, take your "almighty god" to try somthing and get screwed by isd's and bombers. ^^

 

PS: i second that idea with the hangar bay on mc's. canon and that way it can defend itself against bombingruns

[Valter]

When I look at it, the Imperials have another advantage over the Rebels in terms of starfighters which I think should be addressed. If you look at it, the Imperials have the TIE Fighter, Interceptor, Bomber, Defender and Phantom.

 

Technically the TIE fighter and Interceptor are the same thing, the only difference between the two is that the Interceptor is slightly faster and can take a little more punishment than the standard TIE's.

 

Examining them closer reveals that the TIE Bomber, Defender AND Phantom can all shoot Proton Torpedoes. In comparison, the Rebels have 4 fighters: the X-Wing, the Y-Wing, the A-Wing and the B-Wing; and only two of these fighters can shoot Proton Torpedoes.

 

Actually, you are mistaken. The TIE Phantom lacks proton torpedoes, therefore the Rebels and Imperials are balanced in the fighter/bomber ratio. Besides, the rebel fighters outperform their Imperial counterparts anyway:

X-wings (S foils) > TIE Fighters

Y-wings (ion cannons) > TIE Bombers

A-wings ("lure" ability) > TIE Interceptors

B-wings (As a bomber) > TIE Defenders / TIE Defenders (As a fighter) > B-wings

 

I know some of you would disagree with me about B-wings being better bombers than TIE Defenders but let me explain. B-wings have s-foils which makes then harder targets to hit and damage. The s-foils also increase the frequency of the bombing runs the B-wings can make when attacking enemy cruisers. The only advantage that the Defender has over the B-wing is the "boost weapons" ability which severely diminishes the Defender's speed making it an easy target for corvettes.

 

Now I agree with Tears, and I hope you all agree also that the Rebels were superior in space in terms of fighters and space pilot skill (not really factoring the addition of the TIE Defender, Elite Imp Pilots or experimental TIEs).

 

I therefore suggest that to counter this balance is to give the X-Wing Proton Torpedoes vs. Capital Ships and space installations. Also possibly giving the A-Wing Concussion Missles (but that's only conditional). This would match the Rebels with Imperials in terms of Proton Torpedo ability and also boost the X-Wing more. It wouldn't unbalance it with TIE Fighters because it had protons in canon + they are against capital ships + X-wings whooped TIE Fighters anyway.

 

Giving proton torpedoes to X-wings would render Y-wings and B-wings completely useless. In this game the primary function of the X-wing is to counter enemy fighters not destroy capital ships. X-wings would have no weaknesses if given proton torpedoes since they could destroy Tartans without any difficulty and enemy fighters would be incapable of destroying them because of the S-foils ability.

 

Correct me If I'm wrong but aren't there 7 X-wings in a single squadron? Imagine 7 X-wings, each shooting one proton torpedo at a target; in one bombing run a single X-wing squadron could wipe out a HP on an enemy Capital ship. Now imagine 6 or 7 squadrons, with s-foils engaged, making a bombing run on different HP's; in one bombing run 7 squadrons (each heading for a different HP) of X-wings could cripple a Star Destroyer, and if the s-foils are engaged the TIE's would be incapable of even landing a single shot on the speedy X-wings. That's not balanced or fair.

 

PS: The rebel pilots were anything but elite. They were a bunch of simple folk just supporting a cause they believed in and were poorly trained compared to the elite Imperial pilots, who were trained at academies as opposed to being self-taught. By the way the TIE's were the ones doing the "whooping," take for example the Battle of Yavin where the best of the Rebel pilots had difficulty taking on a few TIE's (I believe the number of TIE's and X-wings were even in that particular battle as well).

 

 

Also, for Mon Calamari Cruisers. I think it is probably for the best to increase the speed. Though i'm not really sure whether it should be as an ability like the Corvettes, or as a n/a speed boost? What do you guys think?

 

I don't think they should be speed demons, a very slight increase in speed is all that is needed.

 

The reason i'm confused is because when I match MCs to ISDs I come up with this (including patch upgrade).

 

ISD has stronger weapons/armour = MC has stronger and redundant shields.

ISD has 4 Turbos and 2 Ions = MC has 4 Turbos and 2 Ions

ISD has Tractor Beam ability = MC has Boost Shields ability

ISD has Hangar = MC has ?????

 

You are underestimating the abilities of the Mon Calamari Cruiser, I'll go through a brief list of key advantages the MC has over the Imperial Star Destroyer:

 

The Imperial Star Destroyer has a shield hardpoint - MC doesn't

 

The fact that the MC lacks a shield generator HP really gives the MC a huge advantage over the Imperial Star Destroyer. If a few bombers can successfully take out the Imperial Star Destroyer's Shield HP then the MC could easily emerge victorious. The Imperials on the other hand can't utilize this strategy for obvious reasons.

 

The MC fires more turbolaser shots per round and in more frequent procession. The Mon Cal can outshoot the Star Destroyer which means it has yet another advantage over the Star Destroyer.

 

The MC is slightly faster. Not a great advantage but an advantage all the same.

 

The MC has it's weapons branched out, rendering any flanking maneuvers useless. As Rust_Lord so eloquently stated, if the Mon Cal moves into the Star Destroyer's blind spot then the Star Destroyer is doomed.

 

The MC also has stronger shields and a slightly faster shield refresh rate than the Star Destroyer allowing the MC to recover faster from previous attacks than the Imperial Star Destroyer.

 

The MC can turn quicker than a Star Destroyer, all the better to flank a Star Destroyer.

 

At this point (even with the stat increases for the Imperial Star Destroyer) the Mon Calamari Cruiser has a number of advantages over the Star Destroyer, some of the advantages are trivial but some are very significant and could mean the difference between victory or defeat.

 

I don't believe the MC's current slight speed increase vs. ISD counts because it is not significant enough to be considered as either an ability or advantage.

 

That is the reason I was asking for a Hangar (but now speed boost) and why i'm kind of wondering whether or not it should be a Boost Engines ability instead of base-speed upgrade.

 

At this point the MC and Star Destroyer are quite balanced against each other, Actually the MC has more balance issues against the Consortium Cruisers than against the Imperial Cruisers. In fact, the Mon Calamari Cruiser is defenseless against Keldabes and Aggressors; No amount of shield power can defend against Mass Driver cannons and the mega-cannons of the Aggressor.

 

Nerfing the Keldabes and Aggressors is the best course of action. Not only would nerfing the Keldabes and Aggressors balance out the Rebel Cruisers vs. Consortium Cruisers but it would also balance the Empire Cruisers vs. Consortium Cruisers. This is a solution that would require less time and energy for the designers at Petroglygh and therefore would take less time to be implemented into a future patch.

 

lol, "agressor, the almighty god of space combat"... i was laughin so hard bout that sentence.. man.. get 1-2 bomber squads in there to take out the specialweapon and they are useless n doomed.

only thing overpowered at the consortium: the fighters in a 1on1. for real.. play against someone good, take your "almighty god" to try somthing and get screwed by isd's and bombers. ^^

 

PS: i second that idea with the hangar bay on mc's. canon and that way it can defend itself against bombingruns

 

You obviously have no idea what you're talking about, the Aggressor IS a god in space combat, look at the facts, Aggressors...

- Have extremely strong shields.

- Have the highest HP health of any cruiser.

- Can use the "self-destruct" ability thereby taking everything down with it.

- Are practically unaffected by proton torpedoes. One proton torpedo does less than 5% HP damage to it's HP's. 6-7 bombing runs are required to destroy just one of it's HP's.

- Can wipe out a corvette with one blast from it's main cannon.

- Can move through asteroid fields without any difficulty.

 

By the way your strategy is rendered useless if crusaders are covering the Aggressor. Bombers are slow and can be picked off without any difficulty by corvettes and fighters before they even have a chance of attacking the Aggressor. Even if the main cannons are destroyed the Aggressor can still use it's "self-destruct" ability which has the potential of destroying half of your fleet.

[ImpElite]

*small voice* Maybe this thread should be renamed to really long posts thread lol

[TearsOfIsha]

Technically the TIE fighter and Interceptor are the same thing, the only difference between the two is that the Interceptor is slightly faster and can take a little more punishment than the standard TIE's.

 

Actually, you are mistaken. The TIE Phantom lacks proton torpedoes, therefore the Rebels and Imperials are balanced in the fighter/bomber ratio. Besides, the rebel fighters outperform their Imperial counterparts anyway:

X-wings (S foils) > TIE Fighters

Y-wings (ion cannons) > TIE Bombers

A-wings ("lure" ability) > TIE Interceptors

B-wings (As a bomber) > TIE Defenders / TIE Defenders (As a fighter) > B-wings

 

This is a very odd way of comparing fighters. I totally agree with you that XWings are better than TIE/lns and Y-Wings are better than TIE Bombers, but you've compared completely different fighters later on.

 

Firstly, you yourself stated that Interceptors and lns were basically the same thing, so why are you also saying one's a lot better? Also, it's wrong to compare A-Wings to Interceptors - the A-Wing is the best fighter the rebels have, and should be compared to the TIE Defender.

 

I'm not against the idea of the TIE Defender so long as it has a heavy cost, as it's basically the best multi-role fighter in the game.

 

The B-Wing is the best bomber though, as it should be. They kick out a lot of firepower - in fact, they are the only effective weapons that I have against Keldabes.

 

I know some of you would disagree with me about B-wings being better bombers than TIE Defenders but let me explain. B-wings have s-foils which makes then harder targets to hit and damage. The s-foils also increase the frequency of the bombing runs the B-wings can make when attacking enemy cruisers. The only advantage that the Defender has over the B-wing is the "boost weapons" ability which severely diminishes the Defender's speed making it an easy target for corvettes.

 

uh, I'm not really sure what you're saying here. Defenders are easy targets for corvettes anyway. A single Corellian Gunship can crush Defender sqauds in seconds - but that is true for any Corvette vs Fighter engagements.

 

Giving proton torpedoes to X-wings would render Y-wings and B-wings completely useless. In this game the primary function of the X-wing is to counter enemy fighters not destroy capital ships. X-wings would have no weaknesses if given proton torpedoes since they could destroy Tartans without any difficulty and enemy fighters would be incapable of destroying them because of the S-foils ability.

 

Correct me If I'm wrong but aren't there 7 X-wings in a single squadron? Imagine 7 X-wings, each shooting one proton torpedo at a target; in one bombing run a single X-wing squadron could wipe out a HP on an enemy Capital ship. Now imagine 6 or 7 squadrons, with s-foils engaged, making a bombing run on different HP's; in one bombing run 7 squadrons (each heading for a different HP) of X-wings could cripple a Star Destroyer, and if the s-foils are engaged the TIE's would be incapable of even landing a single shot on the speedy X-wings. That's not balanced or fair.

 

This is precisely why torpedoes are a bad idea for XWings. They would become StarVipers. Personally, I think a simple boost to their HP is all that's needed.

 

PS: The rebel pilots were anything but elite. They were a bunch of simple folk just supporting a cause they believed in and were poorly trained compared to the elite Imperial pilots, who were trained at academies as opposed to being self-taught. By the way the TIE's were the ones doing the "whooping," take for example the Battle of Yavin where the best of the Rebel pilots had difficulty taking on a few TIE's (I believe the number of TIE's and X-wings were even in that particular battle as well).

 

That may have been true at the start of the Civil War (i.e the time that EaW represents) but by the time we get to the period that FoC represents, Rebel Command's obsession with keeping it's pilots and troops alive had meant that a disproportinate amount of the rebel forces (compared to the Imperials) were *very* experienced, as they had survived loads of previous engagements, and the Empire's total brutatlity had meant a lot of their best TIE pilots had defected to the Rebels.

At the battle of Endor the Imperial pilots were totally dependant on superior numbers and the Emperor's Battle Meditation to keep up with the rebel pilots.

The Rebel pilots, at that stage, *were* elite.

 

You are underestimating the abilities of the Mon Calamari Cruiser, I'll go through a brief list of key advantages the MC has over the Imperial Star Destroyer:

 

<snip>

 

At this point (even with the stat increases for the Imperial Star Destroyer) the Mon Calamari Cruiser has a number of advantages over the Star Destroyer, some of the advantages are trivial but some are very significant and could mean the difference between victory or defeat.

 

You make some good points, but a few things to add -

 

The Mon Cals are supposed to have excellent shielding, that is one of their defining characteristics;

 

Can we stop trumpeting on about speed. If you can't pin down precisely why a characteristic equates to an advantage then don't mention it, becaue it's meaningless. All this talk about maneverability, speed and blind spots is not only extremely nebulous but is too dependant on outside factors as well - it's all very well saying that the Mon Cal can get into the ISDs blind spot really quickly but if there's no room to do it then that 'advantage' evaporates. That's a tactic, not a unit advantage.

 

At this point the MC and Star Destroyer are quite balanced against each other, Actually the MC has more balance issues against the Consortium Cruisers than against the Imperial Cruisers. In fact, the Mon Calamari Cruiser is defenseless against Keldabes and Aggressors; No amount of shield power can defend against Mass Driver cannons and the mega-cannons of the Aggressor.

 

I've yet to play against the upgraded ISD, but I agree about the ZC stuff. That shield leech weapon on the Keldabe appears to have been custom designed to pwn Mon Cals. It's pathetic.

 

Nerfing the Keldabes and Aggressors is the best course of action. Not only would nerfing the Keldabes and Aggressors balance out the Rebel Cruisers vs. Consortium Cruisers but it would also balance the Empire Cruisers vs. Consortium Cruisers. This is a solution that would require less time and energy for the designers at Petroglygh and therefore would take less time to be implemented into a future patch.

 

No, I don't agree with this. Nerfing ZC cruisers is a good course of action bu they are issues with other units that won't be fixed simply by nerfing the consortium.

 

You obviously have no idea what you're talking about, the Aggressor IS a god in space combat, look at the facts, Aggressors...

- Have extremely strong shields.

- Have the highest HP health of any cruiser.

- Can use the "self-destruct" ability thereby taking everything down with it.

- Are practically unaffected by proton torpedoes. One proton torpedo does less than 5% HP damage to it's HP's. 6-7 bombing runs are required to destroy just one of it's HP's.

- Can wipe out a corvette with one blast from it's main cannon.

- Can move through asteroid fields without any difficulty.

 

By the way your strategy is rendered useless if crusaders are covering the Aggressor. Bombers are slow and can be picked off without any difficulty by corvettes and fighters before they even have a chance of attacking the Aggressor. Even if the main cannons are destroyed the Aggressor can still use it's "self-destruct" ability which has the potential of destroying half of your fleet.

 

You're preaching to the converted here. I don't despise the Agressor as much as the Keldabe but I do think it was still overdone. Both ZC capital ships are needlessly better - they can be built anywhere, they can easily move through asteroids (I don't think Petro actually bothered to explain that boost) and their special abilities are off the scale. The Self - Destruct idea was *way* overdone. It basically means that whatever bombers you send to destroy the cruiser are forfeit.

 

Personally I think there should be massive disadvantages to the ZC self-destruct. Such as not being able to bring in any more cruisers to replace it, or their being a *huge* cost to replace it (c10000 or more). That'll make it a true weapon of desperation rather than the cheat it is at the moment.

[YertyL]

OK, why why why do you folks all (or at least some of you) want

MC = ISD = Keldable ??? (in terms of balance)

Why does an MC need to be equal to an ISD 1on1 when these two are totally different ships?? An MC is a cap ship, an ISD is a cap ship/carrier.

Yes true, if an IMP brings in 5 ISDs these will defeat 5 Mon Cals and support, however a Rebel player can simply instead bring in 20.000+ credits worth of fighters/bombers which will tear the ISDs to shreds - something an imp player couldn't.

The Empire, the Rebellion and the ZC are different in play style, economy and pop cap - it's IMO foolish to make 1on1 comparisons between similar ships.

Would you say that the Rebs are underpowered because they can't build a Super-Mon-Calamari-Cruiser and the Empire can?

The only real balance issues IMO appear when a player can execute a strategy that is hardly or not at all counterable even at the same economical situation (e.g. if 1200 credits worth of X-Wings would own a Tartan) or if the same strat with one faction is simply "better" than with another faction (e.g. Starviper spam > X-Wing spam, although they cost exactly the same amount of credits and pop cap (at least in GC)).

The only real way to find out balance issues IMO is to really play a game (against a human opponent at best) instead of discussing artificially constructed examples or calculations.

[ImpElite]

Erm, for those who can't seem to figure out how to beat an Aggressor without it delf destructing right next to you, send in bombers to blow up it's ENGINES, then the TurboLasers, and then the bottom Main cannon (the bottom fires the red ball of plasma or whatever it is), cuz on frigates (Alliance Assault Frigate MK II and Victory Star Destroyer) it's red ball will destroy one hardpoint at a time, if your shields are down it's Turbolasers will destroyer it faster than it's red ball can, if it's facing an Imperial Star Destroyer or a Mon Calamari Cruiser, it takes TWO shots from it's bottom cannon to destroy a hardpoint if I'm not mistaken (except for maybe Tractor Beam and Hangar), and once your shields are down it will, just like the frigates, destroy you faster than the bottom main cannon will.

 

Hope that helps all of you having trouble with Aggressors.

 

(<GASP> I made a long post! I'm becoming one of them!!!! lol)