stein220 stein220

What does the Kol need so it isn't the object of scorn.

What does the Kol need so it isn't the object of scorn.

The Kol gets a lot of flak  :rofl:  but seriously, what does it need to reasonably keep up with the other capitals now that Rebellion is out?  

More AM to keep it's abilities going?  Higher scaling GRG?  Fuzzy dice?

269,304 views 162 replies
Reply #101 Top

Quoting CoronalFire, reply 98
I meant that if you do not want your ship to crash into a planet, it needs to exceed the escape speed. Any ship AT THE MINIMUM needs to be ABLE to obtain this speed.

From wiki on "Escape Velocity":

 "A rocket moving out of a gravity well does not actually need to attain escape velocity to do so, but could achieve the same result at walking speed with a suitable mode of propulsion and sufficient fuel. Escape velocity only applies to ballistic trajectories."

Specifically under the section titled "Misconception":

"Escape velocity is sometimes misunderstood to be the speed a powered vehicle, such as a rocket, must reach to leave orbit and travel through outer space. The quoted escape velocity is commonly the escape velocity at a planet's surface, but it actually decreases with altitude. It is the speed above which an object will depart on a ballistic trajectory, i.e. in free-fall, and never fall back to the surface nor assume a closed orbit. Such an object is said to "escape" the gravity of the planet.

A vehicle with a propulsion system can continue to gain energy and travel away from the planet, in any direction, at a speed lower than escape velocity so long as it is under propulsion. If the vehicle's speed is below its current escape velocity and the propulsion is removed, the vehicle will assume a closed orbit or fall back to the surface. If its speed is at or above the escape velocity and the propulsion is removed, it has enough kinetic energy to "escape" and will neither orbit nor fall back to the surface."

Do not insult my intelligence and call me uneducated, especially when you yourself are wrong...

Quoting CoronalFire, reply 98
You want an effect for the Kol that makes it useful. First let's try to find the effect we want for balance, then come up with some dreamy science so everyone can relate to it. You want an effect that takes -3 off armor (I know you didn't agree with this, but bear with me) let's call it "meson bolt" because everyone knows Mesons are cool and go through armor and stuff. Never mind the exact realism of such a thing (such as now every ship firing at the target takes advantage of the debuff).

I'm not arguing that you could call your -3 armor "incendiary," I just believe that most people would understand it better as the devs did it. It makes the most sense to the majority of people, even though it's totally unrealistic (how many dreams have you had that feel like this). I was suggesting you call your effect "armor piercing" since everyone "knows" armor piercing goes through armor (you saw the flaw with this, but it should still remain, because the name is for the effect, not the effect for the name). Another option could be some sort of "acid matrix" that "degrades the armor" amounts.

Wow, you go on a tirade about how incendiaries as I envision them is completely wrong and unrealistic and shouldn't be implemented...then, you come back and say I should do whatever I think is cool because realism is irrelevant...lovely save of face...

I shall reiterate my legitimate contribution to this thread as well as TEC ideas I've shared elsewhere:

  • GRG - There are two debuffs I favor:
    • Penalty to shield mitigation - I am leaning away from this debuff because of how it affects advent far more than Vasari
    •  Disable passive regen - I am liking this more and more...it is logical that an armor piercing round would be able to reach critical systems (something that armor prevents "normal" weapons from doing)...this debuff is in line with the lore that explains why GRG slows down the ship....I just feel passive regen is more useful than a speed debuff
  • Incendiary Shells
    • This ability definitely needs a debuff, not just damage over time...I favor a stacking debuff to armor...I've already explained by reasoning for it... 
    • I believe the damage over time should be hull damage, not just normal damage...
  • Radiation Bomb
    •  I believe this needs a secondary effect...perhaps an AoE debuff to passive hull repair, haven't decided yet
  • Flak Burst
    • I'd like a secondary debuff to this ability...personally, I'd rather it be severe damage over time with a much larger radius, and a secondary debuff that affects the SC's accuracy
  • Meson Bolt
    • Not a huge fan of the armor debuff...am looking for a different debuff (maybe shield mitigation) but haven't decided on one yet...
Reply #102 Top

Quoting Seleuceia, reply 101


Disable passive regen - I am liking this more and more...it is logical that an armor piercing round would be able to reach critical systems (something that armor prevents "normal" weapons from doing)...this debuff is in line with the lore that explains why GRG slows down the ship....I just feel passive regen is more useful than a speed debuff



Being "logical" from a lore standpoint is not good rationale for a mechanic.  Passive regen disable is not a sufficiently strong debuff to make the Kol a serious threat.  Both other battleships can effectively cripple antimatter reserves of other ships, and thus demand that you pay attention to them (which plays into their durability, especially in the case of the Radiance which gains antimatter from being hit).  Passive regen disable on the GRG would not be sufficient to do this.  The Kol is a brick, the problem is that a brick doesn't do you any good if the enemy can safely ignore it in favor of other targets.

Reply #103 Top

Except you can't ignore that.  The regen disable gives the Kol the opportunity to force enemies to play by its terms.  In long fights, it will eventually shine, particularly against titans and starbases.

Reply #104 Top

Sel, is there a way to PM? You still insist on misunderstanding, on every point possible. But no one else wants to hear the bickering. If you are interesting in continuing, let me know I am up for it, but this is no longer the place.

 

I agree passive regen disablement isn't enough for the Kol. However it does sound better then the speed penalty, as TEC like to win battles by attrition and this would help cause the enemy lose an attrition war. But I much prefer "armor piercing." Battleships to my mind should be great at focus fire, specific ship killers in the game (a sort of a VIP killer more then a fleet support). Debuffing some enemy armor seems good. Though we can wait and see what other ideas may be presented.

I wish Radiation Bomb had a greater AoE effect. Flak burst could use either more range or less AM cost, no major change just some different numbers. Meson Bolt I like the way it is.

 

Edit 1: Didn't think of titans. Someone make a mod and try passive regen disable out?

Reply #105 Top

With regard to the Kol anti-strikecraft weapon suggestion, it's problematic only because it would be a weapon system other battleships/other capital ships do not.

I feel that all capital ships, or at least all battleships, should have point defense weapon banks.

Here's how I think you should buff the Kol:

  • In addition to its current effects, Flak Burst now also reduces strike craft accuracy by 4/8/12/24% (thereby mitigating alpha strike damage)
  • Adaptive Forcefield is now passive; reduces damage by 10%/17%/22%/27% and increases Phase Missile block by 17%/30%/40%/52% (amounts derived by averaging the ratio of uptime to downtime of existing Adaptive Forcefield values)
  • In addition to slowing targets, Gauss Rail Gun now has one of the following perks:
    • Ignores shield mitigation (it does so little damage anyway -- what does it matter?)
    • Passive regeneration disabled

If you want to give the Kol point defense weapons, I suggest you give them to either all battleships, or to all capital ships (namely: 4 point defense weapon banks for carriers and dreadnoughts, 6 point defense weapon banks for battlecruisers, and 8 point defense weapon banks for battleships).

 

Reply #106 Top

Quoting Frostflare, reply 106
With regard to the Kol anti-strikecraft weapon suggestion, it's problematic only because it would be a weapon system other battleships/other capital ships do not.

I feel that all capital ships, or at least all battleships, should have point defense weapon banks.

Here's how I think you should buff the Kol:


In addition to its current effects, Flak Burst now also reduces strike craft accuracy by 4/8/12/24% (thereby mitigating alpha strike damage)
Adaptive Forcefield is now passive; reduces damage by 10%/17%/22%/27% and increases Phase Missile block by 17%/30%/40%/52% (amounts derived by averaging the ratio of uptime to downtime of existing Adaptive Forcefield values)
In addition to slowing targets, Gauss Rail Gun now has one of the following perks:

Ignores shield mitigation (it does so little damage anyway -- what does it matter?)
Passive regeneration disabled


If you want to give the Kol point defense weapons, I suggest you give them to either all battleships, or to all capital ships (namely: 4 point defense weapon banks for carriers and dreadnoughts, 6 point defense weapon banks for battlecruisers, and 8 point defense weapon banks for battleships).

 

I believe Volt did similar to this in his mod, gave battleships of all three races some non-ability flak.

Reply #107 Top

Quoting Exterminator451, reply 102
Passive regen disable is not a sufficiently strong debuff to make the Kol a serious threat.

I beg to differ...especially if it can affect SB's and Titans which have ridiculous shield, hull, and AM regeneration levels...it is an immensely powerful debuff, I've played with it in mods and whatever ability has it instantly becomes the go to ability on that ship...one key to making it useful is to have a decent duration (longer than the 10s GRG currently has)...

Quoting CoronalFire, reply 105
Sel, is there a way to PM? You still insist on misunderstanding, on every point possible. But no one else wants to hear the bickering. If you are interesting in continuing, let me know I am up for it, but this is no longer the place.

Two ways:

  1. Click on person's name on the left of one of their replies (above the avatar), select "Private Message"...
  2. Click "Private Messages" near top center...have to precisely know how to spell the person's name though, so option 1 is almost always better...

 

Reply #108 Top

Oh, thank God.  You two can take it to PM's so people can finally get back to discussing how to make the Kol not suck.

Reply #109 Top

Quoting Frostflare, reply 106
With regard to the Kol anti-strikecraft weapon suggestion, it's problematic only because it would be a weapon system other battleships/other capital ships do not.

I feel that all capital ships, or at least all battleships, should have point defense weapon banks.

Here's how I think you should buff the Kol:


In addition to its current effects, Flak Burst now also reduces strike craft accuracy by 4/8/12/24% (thereby mitigating alpha strike damage)
Adaptive Forcefield is now passive; reduces damage by 10%/17%/22%/27% and increases Phase Missile block by 17%/30%/40%/52% (amounts derived by averaging the ratio of uptime to downtime of existing Adaptive Forcefield values)
In addition to slowing targets, Gauss Rail Gun now has one of the following perks:

Ignores shield mitigation (it does so little damage anyway -- what does it matter?)
Passive regeneration disabled


If you want to give the Kol point defense weapons, I suggest you give them to either all battleships, or to all capital ships (namely: 4 point defense weapon banks for carriers and dreadnoughts, 6 point defense weapon banks for battlecruisers, and 8 point defense weapon banks for battleships).

 

In RR, I did actually put flak guns on the Radiance and Kortul as well.  This thread was about the Kol so I didn't bring it up though.

Reply #110 Top

+1 for GRG disabling passive regeneration.

It plays into the TEC strategy very well, is a powerful debuff that could finally give the Kol an anti-matter removal ability in line with the Radiance or Kortul (ableit with a longer period of time needed to take effect, again playing into the Kol's strengths) and would make a Kol a good choice for dealing with titans/capital ships similar to the Advent/Vasari battleships.

As for Adaptive Forcefield, making it passive seems the best option, as it would reduce the anti-matter issues that the Kol currently has and make it less of an inferior choice compared to Flak Burst or GRG, which have utility that doesn't rely on the enemy attacking the Kol first.

Reply #111 Top

I love passive Adaptive Forcefield idea.  Especially with extra res against phase missiles. Let's make another Corsev.

Then make Vasari invulnerable to red button as a race perk.

90% of posts in this thread are sheer idiocy.

Reply #112 Top

90% of the posts in this thread are two guys quibbling with each other and both claiming to be more logical and knowledgeable.

Reply #113 Top

Quoting OddskiBoddski, reply 113
90% of the posts in this thread are two guys quibbling with each other and both claiming to be more logical and knowledgeable.

Didn't read those. Was referring to balance ones.

Video game military/physics experts make me puke.

Reply #114 Top

Quoting Mecha-Lenin, reply 114


Video game military/physics experts make me puke.

 

 With great power comes great madness. Might have been the other way around, though... 

 

+1 Loading…
Reply #115 Top

Quoting vyolin, reply 115

Quoting Mecha-Lenin, reply 114

Video game military/physics experts make me puke.

 

 With great power comes great madness. Might have been the other way around, though... 

 

 

:rofl: k1

Reply #116 Top

Quoting vyolin, reply 115

Quoting Mecha-Lenin, reply 114

Video game military/physics experts make me puke.

 

 With great power comes great madness. Might have been the other way around, though... 

 

 

Multiply that by a few hundred and you have Congress. Maybe we should just add an ability to the Kol that spawns a Congressman on the target ship.

Reply #117 Top

Quoting OddskiBoddski, reply 117


Multiply that by a few hundred and you have Congress. Maybe we should just add an ability to the Kol that spawns a Congressman on the target ship.

 

Perhaps two congressmen? That way they could argue.

Reply #118 Top

And then the ship would promptly explode into clouds of lies, damn lies, and pseudo-logic. Plus accusations of marital infidelity.

Reply #119 Top

Quoting OddskiBoddski, reply 117
Maybe we should just add an ability to the Kol that spawns a Congressman on the target ship.

I thought that's what Armistice was..

Reply #120 Top

Quoting Volt_Cruelerz, reply 120

I thought that's what Armistice was..

 

Nah armistice is the out of shape people trying to catch their breath. The congressmen don't catch their breath they exhale it in torrents of hot air, which superheats the metal and overwhelms the sensors on the target ship.

Reply #121 Top

Quoting Mecha-Lenin, reply 112
I love passive Adaptive Forcefield idea.  Especially with extra res against phase missiles. Let's make another Corsev.

Then make Vasari invulnerable to red button as a race perk.

90% of posts in this thread are sheer idiocy.

In my defense, I nerfed AFF when I made the change in RR.  Also note that in RR, I nerfed the Corsev.

Reply #122 Top

"Kol" is synonymous with "trolling" in the language of Ket. :troll:

Reply #123 Top

Mecha, Sanchezz, Greg, or any other MP player, what would you like the change to be?  (And mecha, please don't troll.)

Reply #124 Top

Yes, if you need troll, create a separate thread called "What does the troll need to dish out more scorn?"

Reply #125 Top

Quoting stein220, reply 125
"What does the troll need to dish out more scorn?"

Smurfing...