Destroyer Overhaul

PROPOSAL TO BALANCE DESTROYERS

- Destroyers will have their old module back like it was: 40% (60% for Federation) speed increase, 12% (20% for Empire) damage increase, 250 (400 for Jericho) shield points/second recharge. Their speed modules to be limited to propel them up to a maximum speed of 250m/s. When warping, speed limit will be 500m/s. Their mobility or agility LIMITED to 40 degrees per second. 

- Destroyers will deal 50% less main weapon damage to any ship that gets close to 750m, because their role is not meant to be close quarters. 

*they already have an issue attacking ships up close: not all guns can shoot the target, so it will make it more difficult to counter interceptors or other ships up close, leaving the responsibility to their teammates, like if should be*

  • Add another module to the Destroyer: Destroyer Bridge (control room). When destroyed, radar systems will be offline. 80 seconds to repair.  

*Destroyers would now have: Engines, Capacitor, Bridge; 4 turret modules*

  • Destruction of Destroyer modules will result in a % of hull damage instead of hull points, based on total hull points:

     1. For Federation and Jericho Destroyers:

Engine: 10%

Capacitor: 15%

Bridge: 10%

Module 1: 10%

Module 2: 10%

Module 3: 10%

Module 4: 10%

*Destruction of all modules in a Federation or Jericho Destroyer, would deal 75% hull damage.*

     2. For Empire Destroyers:

Engine: 5%

Capacitor: 15%

Bridge: 10%

Module 1: 5%

Module 2: 5%

Module 3: 5%

Module 4: 5%

*Destruction of all modules on Empire Destroyers, would deal 50% hull damage.*

- Destroyers will not be punished by the x2 explosive damage. Instead, if the destroyer loses its shield, the destroyer will suffer x3 damage TO THE MODULES from all ships around 2000m for 10 seconds. (CONCEPT: Think of it being a system overload for the shields being gone).

- Destroyers that have their shields popped to 0 points (with 120 second intervals), their shield explodes with a EMP that affects the destroyer itself and any other ships in 500m radius, for 1 second, and deals 1000 EM damage to anything on that radius,  including the ** Destroyer itself . Additionally, the destroyer will suffer a 10 second shield reboot:  the  **Destroyer will not be able to recharge shields in any way for 10 seconds

- Destroyers will be able to ram ships, dealing quite a damage proportional to the ship size (small ships get hit hard, eyes on that)

- Destroyer that gets destroyed, is no longer available to the player. In short: Destroyers will not respawn on PvP.

  • A Destroyer that gets rammed by a ship flying at +2000 m/s will be destroyed.

  • Slotting Destroyers only will not be allowed. The player will be prompted to slot a regular ship to one of the 3 or 4 slots available

  • Reactor Meltdown: Phase 1: When a Destroyer is at 10% or less hull points, it sets off radioactive debris (cloud) around him, damaging the Destroyer and any ships in a 300m radius for 500pts/s until hull integrity > 10%. Phase 2: If destroyed, it sets a 1000m nuclear explosion. (Similar to Covert Ops’ Reactor Overload module.)

ART CONCEPTS: Add a 5 second core overload animation + Reactor Meltdown Phase 2 explosion, as ship destruction animation.

(Instead of just exploding when destroyed, Destroyers will go on a 5 second “critical state”, with small explosions on its hull, emergency alarms, and then explodes violently, like a nuke. Nothing can be done during those 5 seconds, just admiring its chaotic demise.)

ANYTHING IN BLUE  = these values can be tweaked.

PURPLE  = It refers to the Destroyer ships.

*<text>* = notes

but why?

[@Scarecrow_1](< base_url >/index.php?/profile/258964-scarecrow_1/)

You can’t use red color in posts.

Quote

2.4. Making posts and those

 

The official language of this forum is English. The use of foreign languages, transliteration, and the deliberate distortion of the English language is not welcome.

The text of the message should be clearly readable, which means you should avoid using pseudo-graphics, coloured text markup, capital letters, bold text, and font size change abuse.

Thread subject must be informative and briefly display the content of the thread. It is forbidden to write the message text in capital letters (except for acronyms).

Moderators have the right to remove a thread or a message, regardless of relevance, user interest and other factors.

Users are not permitted to use red colour when creating and designing posts and signatures. The use of red font is reserved for moderators and administrators

 

1 minute ago, xKostyan said:

but why?

1500 players online in a weekend!!

Destroyers are not what they were before.

People will not handle money to something they know blows up quick :V

Not even worth building one. 

Good ol’ vets leaving, sadly.

Why not nerf their functionality and add some other stuff to them along the way, instead of giving them a fake survivability that can be cut into a 5th o such value? 

Plus, this is a proposal, an idea. I would like to see what people think about it, even tho is not a bad idea, but who knows what people can come up with, instead of saying “no” or “just add 20pts of resistance to them, fixed” … why not think it up? Work out the game instead of soft patching it? ![;)](<fileStore.core_Emoticons>/emoticons/002.png “;)”)

I have Brave and Sirius and I do fine with them, I see others doing fine with Tyrant, I have yet to see a reason to redo them

10 minutes ago, ntboble said:

[@Scarecrow_1](< base_url >/index.php?/profile/258964-scarecrow_1/)

You can’t use red color in posts.

 

yes he can because it’s op and everyone knows it’s not an administrative post. It is prohibited in most cases but if you just want to outline your content it’s alright. Just don’t do stuff like moderating even though you are not.

11 minutes ago, ntboble said:

[@Scarecrow_1](< base_url >/index.php?/profile/258964-scarecrow_1/)

You can’t use red color in posts.

 

:V edited it, now its blooooo XD thanks m8

4 minutes ago, xKostyan said:

I have Brave and Sirius and I do fine with them, I see others doing fine with Tyrant, I have yet to see a reason to redo them

… dude you are xKoystan… *Im watching you meme* XD

I once posted this pic… will do it again…

589bb8da40cd9_SCdessienerflogic.png.73d58e967d8b01d9569bcafbc37e93d4.jpg

I like all of this, but the Tyrant should be an exception to the close-quarters nerfs. It is a close range brawler rather than a general suppressor destroyer. Instead, the Tyrant should gain power as enemies get in a close range.

 

And all destroyers need to have a massive theatrical explosion upon death. I don’t understand why this doesn’t already happen.

The debris from destroyed destroyers should also remain on the battlefield forever and be radioactive in a 250m radius or something similar.

Or just make that module destruction isn’t x2.5, and that’s it.

1 hour ago, Scarecrow_1 said:

… dude you are xKoystan… *Im watching you meme* XD

I once posted this pic… will do it again…

589bb8da40cd9_SCdessienerflogic.png.73d58e967d8b01d9569bcafbc37e93d4.jpg

There are people that can play and there are people that try to push for changes to accommodate their incompetences.

Destroyers should only be overpowered and glorious in their deaths if they become a vehicle that requires several players at once to operate (Imagine each turret having its own independent aiming and set of active modules)

Otherwise, they’re a single player and should carry as much weight as a single ship of another class.

Intuitively I know it makes no sense for a tiny ship to destroy something so big in mere seconds, which is partly why I thought destroyers should be a multiplayer vehicle from the start.

6 minutes ago, Weylin29651 said:

Destroyers should only be overpowered and glorious in their deaths if they become a vehicle that requires several players at once to operate (Imagine each turret having its own independent aiming and set of active modules)

Otherwise, they’re a single player and should carry as much weight as a single ship of another class.

Intuitively I know it makes no sense for a tiny ship to destroy something so big in mere seconds, which is partly why I thought destroyers should be a multiplayer vehicle from the start.

I would sell all of my destroyers if I could if they made them multi crew ships. This game isn’t meant to have them and hopefully never will.

 

And they are literally called Destroyers. Why the hell shouldn’t they dominate the battlefield???

Everything in the game should dominate at their intended role.

If destroyers are going to be well above the rest, then they need to be limited per game, such as 1 per team, or being disabled after one death in any mode.

Just get them to the pre-nerf state and then cut their overall HP by 40% and let the players’ builds decide what role they want to play.

Tweaking the current nerf is probably all that’s going to happen, no major changes anymore.

8 minutes ago, Weylin29651 said:

Everything in the game should dominate at their intended role.

Suppressors… AKA the kind of ship that shoots everything up so they run away, and if they don’t, they die… which is not happening right now, its the opposite :V

In Star Conflict, destroyers take the same role as a juggernaut with a LMG: support allies with firepower, spray fire so they hide and run and take quite a lot of shots… only that in this moment the juggernaut armor becomes C4 plates at 750m that only harm the juggernaut, and even tho he has an LMG, people run to him, slap his face, and go on laughing saying “its ok”. 

18 minutes ago, Weylin29651 said:

then they need to be limited per game

they don’t get to respawn on my proposal, limited enough?

21 minutes ago, FilthHound said:

Just get them to the pre-nerf state and then cut their overall HP by 40% and let the players’ builds decide what role they want to play.

They actually nerfed their HP pools 50% when using explosive, and 66% at 750m… and 80% if you do both… :V 

 

That said, don’t think I haven’t killed a few dessies and enjoyed the nerf on the non-dessie side… XD (still doesnt feels right… nor intense… I miss that)

4 minutes ago, ORCA1911 said:

Tweaking the current nerf is probably all that’s going to happen, no major changes anymore.

IK man, like devs basically don’t put enough effort to being logically creative with such a nice game… instead of “put a booster and nerf it like this… ta daaa ezpz” I just surf the waves until I crash myself with a reef… or a cliff… XD

 

We can only propose tweaks to current nerf pretty much, destroyers are now last season stuff and it will take a while before they re-do something on them.

19 minutes ago, Scarecrow_1 said:

They actually nerfed their HP pools 50% when using explosive

They always took 200% damage from explosives AFAIK. Which is something I dislike since it just boosted weapons that already get a high use - bubbles and coil mortars. So many uses for explosives in all gamemodes while other weapons gather dust in the storage rooms. That’s why I want an overall decrease in HP and not a weapon specific vulnerability. And I don’t think a giant, well armored ship should be vulnerable to explosives. On the contrary, only heavy hits to vital parts should be dangerous to it.

So, if you wanted to let them take double damage, make it double critical damage from critical hits. Recons and especially Covert-Ops ships have a high critical chance with all weapons and these ships are the ones meant to get close to a destroyer and mess up its day from a blind spot. Plus Gauss Cannons punching huge holes through the armor instead of a blue ball of death that can pass through everything and somehow hit things in a 20 metre radius around it.

If you lower the hull/shield from destroyers and also take out the 200% damage from explosive weapons you probably will make destroyers harder to kill. Because if they survive it will be easier to regain its full hull/shield. Also you will make them less appealing to (new?) players who only look for big numbers in survavility.