Kol does have aoe while it uses finest hour it's attacks hit aoe no?

I came to the same conclusions (except the "25 is too low" part).  It's still a brick, and that's not necessarily a bad thing so long as we can find it purpose.  However, I disagree about the 25 antimatter thing.  Until Finest Hour comes online, this ability will deplete your reserves, and on low-level Kols it barely leaves a scratch anyways.  The problem, I think, is Finest Hour.  This is creating a double-standard that we have to balance around; any ability balanced for a mature Finest Hour Kol simply won't work on a level 1.



I was mulling on suggesting those numbers, as well as an increase to its debuffs.  However, we're getting very close to the point at which there is insufficient difference between level 1 and level 3.  The big problem is that Finest Hour makes these abilities so much more spammable.  Where the level 2 and 3 Kol has to conserve antimatter like a hawk even with a piddly 25 antimatter price tag, the level 6 Kol can spam away and still have antimatter left over for flak burst!  How do we get these abilities useful at level 1 without overperforming for a level 6+ Kol?

Now, on the flipside, the Kol was still sidelined when it came to a fleet battle of 60 or so LRM's on each side.  It was tough enough to actually get into the fray and fight (good) but I had to be very careful with it and it was never really overpowering.  That may mean we do have more leeway to create a true beast, because I still couldn't use this thing with impunity.  And those guardians with Repulse basically screwed it.

Now, I liked Waxwork's idea of buffing the speed of all battleship capital ships.  This would make it much easier to withdraw and reposition, meaning I could use the Kol more aggressively knowing I have a better chance of escape.  That'd also be a huge boon to the Radiance and Kortul.



I like where this discussion is going.

 

Yes, but not GRG, only its basic attack.  It's not a major AoE, definitely overshadowed by the cluster rocket upgrade for my LRM's.

I think I said this in the other thread, but with finest hour being too much of a milestone for antimatter, what about increasing the Kol's antimatter reserves while decreasing the bonus it gets per level?

GRG needs to be fine tuned, but right now I think it is too difficult to do that when high level Kols are so much better when it comes to using abilities...

I wouldn't alter the antimatter levels, just hone the abilities more.  Maybe a slight AM cost increase on the GRG- but a speed increase on battleships will also help them greatly, whether fleeing, against kites or clearing militia, don't underestimate it.  About time too, why should carrier capitals kite battleships when carrier cruisers can't kite LRF?

I was worried about buffing the Jarrasul but it seems okay, and it's fun to have the extra constuctor frigates.  Perhaps still a slight concern that it gives Vasari a more powerful rush, but then without Scramble perhaps they need it.

Magnetize I would go for a 40-50% increase in strikecraft numbers, not infinite.  That matches the increase in carrier capital squadrons.    

I know you rushed the last ships to get the mod ready, but here's two or three major elements you might want to take another look at.

Revelation:  This is meant to be a siege capital, yet it gets no siege improvements until its ultimate and then its lousy.  Compare it to Drain Planet..  I'd like to improve it by adding an allegiance swing along the lines of the Advent superweapon, if we can get that to function.  Then it would siege using allegiance, which would be good for variety, and would match the Provoke Hysteria animation.  An alternative is simply to extend the duration 50%.

Marauder: Subversion could use far more of a buff than just dropping the cost.  You send your Marauder into a back area, there's a undefended planet with three trade ports, nothing being built- what can the Marauder do?  Again an allegiance penalty sounds fun... and would work with the new Envoy ships and their abilities.

Radiance:  I doubt that a rework of Animosity will make the Radiance as good as the new Kol.  I've suggested a shield points benefit to Animosity before, that might help.  Or, instead of buffing the armour beyond 1/2/3 which has faction tendency issues, you could allow hull regen points- which might make the Radiance rather more beastly, and more effective against phase missiles.  And I like beastly battleships, they've been underdogs for too long.    

This is what I'm concerned with. The Kol is still far too weak early-game, but Finest Hour then brings it to become extremely powerful. Regardless, there still seems to be little reason to choose a Kol for a cap- the Sova and Marza already start strong and stay strong (Especially with the Sova's buff), the Dunov looks like a very good support cap, and Akkan is obvious. Why bother investing in a weak ship for it only to becom strong at level 6? GRG has to be buffed somehow to compete early-game, and possibly weakening Finest Hour as a result would make the Kol a better choice. Even removing GRG's debuffs and making the ability omni-directional would help considerably in giving the Kol high damage output.

I dont think we need to buff the missile batteries.

GRG should have unlimited range

 

This is an intersting idea. While Unlimited seems a bit over the top, You could give GRG a crazy range. This would allow a Kol to 'soften' up its target before they get into range.

 

Also this would allow a Kol to use GRG as what Ive always assumed it to be...a anti-sturcture ability. Since most structure dont have shield or migitiation, this allowed a Kol to hit key structures hard. Like Repair bays or Hanger platforms.

 

At any rate this would give this ability a neat position as a 'sniper' like ability. I may have to see if how I like it in the next DS MP update.

 

 

 

 

Also, IMHO. Not sure if your going to cover it but, reducing LRF and Bombers damage vs Cap will make great improvments to all the caps. I also suggest you increase LF damage slightly to Caps. This would clarify the RockvsPaper triangles we have in SINS.

Ive tweaked the damage modifiers and it makes the game better for it. IMHO.

Then lets continue it. Besides the greater usability magnetize gets from being able to target allied ships (which are likely to have the most enemy strike craft around them), either a defensive buff or a boost to abilities seems appropriate. The thing is the TEC already has a lot of both, and the later could complicate things with the Kol even more. Among the defensive buffs, increasing armor and shield regeneration rates are the only things I can think of that aren't already used by the TEC, and the latter seems the best sounding option to me (I don't think it should be very big because this will make magnetize one of the most flexible abilities, so 40%/80%/120%?). The only other thing might be ability cooldown rates (which can make a difference with the TEC), but I think that might be going over the top when used on a Kol with Flux Field already in effect.

Agreed; I'm thinking the way to approach this is to increase the debuff effect, but I'm just not sure.


I slept on this last night, and I realize that one of the huge issues in this game is what is capable of pursuing what.  Right now, LRF are just fast enough to pursue fleeing capital ships.  This is alright for the kite-happy carriers, but a death sentence to the capital ships that have to get into the fray to fight effectively.  Even with the click-spam exploit I had to be really careful when maneuvering my Kol to keep it alive.

What I'm thinking is that we change around the speeds of capital ships.  Battleships and Support capital ships are very fast, Colony and Siege capital ships have medium speed, and Carriers have slow speed.  We define slow as the current capital ship standard speed, and buff everything else accordingly.

This means that carriers vs lrf have the same kiting effect as we see now.  Colony and Siege capital ships can still be pursued, but not very effectively.  They must still fear heavies.  Battleships and support capital ships would be able to get the heck outta there if things turn sour.



As I said before, colonize and scramble are mutually exclusive abilities.  If you pick a Jarrasul, you don't get a Skirantra.  If you get both, that still means you have colonize/scramble as opposed to scramble/scramble.  No matter how you slice it, you must sacrifice scramble for colonize, so I see absolutely no rush issue here no matter how hard we buff it (within reason).



Agreed.  This ability needs a useful secondary effect, but I'm not sure what it should be.

 

 

First off...

I very much am interested in how this affects things...since you were on the DS team, did you change these numbers for the mod or did you just buff caps in general?

I think I'll try this...for one, I think having an infinite target count might break the ability (as in it won't actually work) though I personally wanted to see how OP it would be....

I agree, it needs more siege potential...I remember reading your thread earlier that made this suggestion about allegiance...its a good idea, but I don't know how feasible it is...I'm going to look into it, and if it is possible I'd like to try it out...

One possibility is adding a secondary advantage to guidance that increase siege potential...I had some ideas on this earlier, but honestly I think it's only worth it if the ability becomes passive, which may not be a popular move...

Subversion is an absolute mess, I agree...my thinking (long before we even got to the Marauder) was on making this ability passive...whatever disadvantages it brings, the marauder (simply by existing) could be a huge problem...this would make it a very high priority target (and therefore phase out hull a great defensive advantage)...

Lets just say that subversion is a passive ability...there are two ways to approach this:

One, give it one or two penalties that get worse per level...or two, give it a new penalty for each level...

For example, lets say subversion 1/2/3 increases ship and structure build time by 100%/200%/300%...if the ability was passive (or long duration and/or low antimatter cost), that could be crippling to defenses...why bother wasting time on wiping out constructors and factories if they basically can't build anything during the battle?  I think this could have a lot of potential....

Another possibility is to have 3 different penalties...halt all planet upgrade construction, halt all structure construction, and halt all ship construction...lvl 1/2/3 would give the enemy 1/2/3 of these penalties....this would be very hard to balance, but hey, its an idea...

An advantage of being passive is that lots of phase jumps won't prevent the ship from using this ability...an advantage of being active is that the ship can enter a gravity well, use subversion (which say, lasts 5 minutes), and then immediately leave (and distort gravity prevents PJIs from affecting it)...part of me wants it passive and part of me wants it to be active, but either way this ability does have a lot of potential at the conceptual level...

I've also been thinking about carrier speeds, but I think I may see things a bit differently.  Earlier you mentioned that you were disappointed with the new Kol's performance because it couldn't even beat a Sova.. 

Maybe I misunderstood, but either way I have to point out that carriers with bombers *should* be the counter to a heavy ship (like HCs and of course, Bships).  That's a paradigm that fits into many games, probably stemming from the swing of carrier naval power in WW2.  And that's a pattern that Ironclad clearly tried to embrace by making bombers a hard counter vs the biggest/toughest ships in Sins.

....

That said, I agree with Darvin (and others?) regarding the need to nerf LRF speed and/or buff cap ship speed as a way to blunt the power of LRFs vs Caps..  But I think it would be a mistake to nerf Cap Carrier speed (relative to Bships), because I think it's totally appropriate for carriers to have that kind of advantage over Bships and siege dreadnoughts.  In my view, the role of a Bship would be one of high endurance, well rounded firepower, and strong range.  This makes them a backbone of a fleet, suited to soaking up and dishing out large amounts of damage vs a lot of different threats.

They shouldn't be high speed units charging around the battlefield, engaging and disengaging through complex maneuvers.  That, in my view, is the role for the lighter frigates (and heavy cruisers, I guess..)  So if we're going to change the core stats of Bships, I'd much prefer to see a change in their armor, hull, weapon range, and/or raw DPS.  I'm not saying that more complex changes to relative cap ship speeds wouldn't work, I'm just saying that those would be very big changes and they'd make this feel more like a gameplay/conversion mod than a balance mod, imho.

Subversion was only useful in frontline attack. Because the duration is so long that it stacks. You could end up with a very slow buildtime in 1 grav well, which is useful when you are fighting at someone's factories. But it's not that useful.

I was just fiddling with some numbers for hull regen with Animosity, and I realized that the new (working) version of this ability might be highly exploitable because:

1) It can currently prevent an infinite number of ships from retreating for 20 seconds (with only a 35 second cooldown, it could probably even be used to repeatedly taunt and lure fleets back into the center of a grav well, though I haven't tested this yet..)

2) Since it re-issues the attack command constantly, won't this work as an interrupt vs channeling abilities?  Might it even prevent non-channeling abilities from being cast?

If you guys have tested any of this, please share.  I'd love to see Animosity working as intended, but if it's exploitable as an ultimate fleet disruptor then it might have to be reworked..  (Reinstating the max # of targets might be a good place to start, but that will scale poorly vs strike craft).

Yeah, battleships should be tough, but I fail to see where the idea they should be slow comes from. Going back to your WWII allusion, several battleships back then are in fact faster than the nuclear powered super carriers of modern day. Further, the fact that both the Kol and Kortul have antistrikecraft abilities seems to suggest Iron Clad wanted battleships counter carriers. If them being faster helps them do that, I see no problem with that.

If animosity working right does actually prove to be able to prevent fleets from retreating, I suppose we have no choice but to go to an all buff approach. Though it is also quite possible that in practice it doesn't really work this way as the Radiance has a real risk of destroying itself with that ability.

When you start to compare the game with history some awkward aspects of the mechanics become evident.  First World War dreadnoughts were built to outrange anything afloat, though they were slower than cruisers and a variant, the battlecruiser, was devised to deal with the problem of the cruiser-raider.  Smaller craft, torpedo boats, had powerful underwater weapons with inferior range to big guns and extremely limited ammunition.  Though by the middle of the Second World War the battleship was no longer supreme, with multiple directors able to track many targets the modern ones became very successful at destroying attacking aircraft, especially with the development of the proximity fuse. 

So- battleships were never devised to be in the thick of the action, the enemy was meant to be destroyed at range.  Battlecruisers were specifically designed to be high speed units charging around with the ability to dictate the terms of engagement.  Small light slow long range units and small heavy flak units are somewhat unusual creations in historical terms and the base firepower on capitals is extremely low.

At the moment the Halcyon is the supreme kite ship, able to outrun LRF unlike carrier cruisers, and also only needing AM for its anti-strikecraft ability.  My opinion is still that the ship is too strong, and could use the slight adjustment of reversion to extra strikecraft rather than extra squadrons, which would also make the Skirantra nerf easier to handle.  I never understood why the extra strikecraft were 'backloaded' as Darvin put it- weren't they only 'backloaded' to the same extent that the Sova's heavy fighters were and are 'backloaded'?  Otherwise after the revisions the Skirantra we will simply be back to the era of 'Halcyon man'... The Skirantra users suffered through that era, the hardcore believe that Scramble is divine retribution.

No to faster Motherships.  If we were to alter speeds beyond slightly faster battleships, then the Rapture, Dunov and Marauder have a better claim to increased speed.  The rush issue for the Egg is that you are giving the Vasari the ability to build 2 or 3 factories simultaneously in the early game on conquest.  That is a genuine rush issue.  There will be no choice between colonise and Scramble as Scramble will not exist as a rush issue once it has been 'equilibriumed'... The Revelation ultimate just needs to be improved in its primary effect, it isn't very good.  No rework of Animosity should make it do damage, thats what the Rapture is for, don't sideline an underused ship.

A huge no to better LF damage against capitals... Seriously, try playing online.  People cry when their caps are destroyed by LF.  Real tears.  Even if they win, they still sulk afterwards.

Subversion already is semi-effective during battles, my objection is that it does nothing on proper raiding missions.  I'm not that keen on the AM cost being halved to 50 though its seems okayish, I'd just like wider utility for the ability.  It shouldn't be passive.  The problem for the Marauder is that if it runs around on errands during a battle it is an easy target for the strike craft concentrations that exist where fleets are, it is far better using its speed to avoid enemy fleets.  Also it might have problems with making multiple jumps out of starbased gravwells.  If Subversion could be used on less defended rear area planets then the Marauder would work better as a ship.

I agree with the concerns about Animosity, it needs solid multiplayer testing, and even as a starting point I'd like a longer cooldown built into the next version of the mod.  It shouldn't be capable of entirely preventing a fleet retreating. 

For the Rapture, I would consider a shorter cooldown to Domination, rather than lowering the AM cost.  The main problem with the Rapture is durability not AM reserves.    

Also at some point we need to expand into other areas, I'd be interested by what you had to say about my pirate mod. If that were to be considered usable enough to be included, having reasonable levels of pirates helps capitals... and there is a cost involved even for more experienced players, at least the capital ships have to stay at home to take advantage of the attack.   My pirate mod includes a vastly increased rebuild time for trade ships, which are tricky to protect with starbases.

More than anything else we need more people to say that they are prepared to devote some time to multiplayer testing of the mod.  Fewer players seem to have downloaded the latest version of the mod than have contributed to the thread...  Saturday night was great, but it was only one night.  If there was enough of us to have a testing session regularly every Saturday night, or on another designated night of the week, then we would get somewhere.  More volunteers!  Again! 

Okay...I have read these posts and there have been a lot of good ideas...so, I want to summarize what I have picked up on feedback...

Higher levels of flak burst need to have more appeal...two suggestions are reducing cooldown time (say 12/10/8 instead of 10s) or increasing range at higher levels (2400/3000/3600 instead of 3600)...

Animosity needs a much longer cooldown time to prevent ridiculous fleet interrupts...no second buff until it is tested in MP...

GRG needs to have more kick at low levels, but not be as spammable with high level kols...this means high levels of this ability have slightly higher antimatter costs, and low levels of this ability do relatively more damage...a +x% in damage and concurrent +x% in antimatter cost may be in order...

Domination needs a cooldown reduction (maybe antimatter cost reduction too)...

Provoke Hysteria needs a buff...allegiance penalty would be nice but would change the ability, increasing duration is probably best, though doubling rate of damage and halving duration might help too...

Magnetize is broken and needs to not have infinite target count (put count somewhere in the 50-100 range)...

Incendiary shells needs to be fixed so the ability "sticks" and actually does damage over time...secondary buff may be necessary (I was thinking a very slight armor reduction) and ability probably will need to stack...

Other things like Subversion, EMP, Shield Restore, Guidance...I'm not seeing quite enough yet to make any propositions...

I'd like to focus on abilities...the speed and damage of each cap is important, but affects all factions equally if the cap abilities are balanced...

 

TEC has some starbase survivability issues, as other races have very nice goodies to keep their starbases alive, especially from the pesky Bombers. When you compare TEC arsenal to the lights of Overseer spam, phasic trap, vengence, and telekenetic push, they really do come up short. Not to mention shield restore and guardian shield bubble.

I'm hoping the dunnov change will make it a viable solution.  Thou one problem I see with a shield ability is that the damage shields take is not modified by armor, unless I'm wrong. And TEC is all about armor.  Maybe an armor boosting ability is in order?

Also please keep the carriers with extra squads rather than extra craft. It really does make huge difference.  A carrier cap should have a lot of squads. Otherwise it's not viable. 

One solution to scramble bobmer thou could be to change it to scramble strikecraft. And have it spawn a random assortment of Bomber/Fighter squads. That would fix the biggest issue with scramble bombers without nerfing the cap too much.  You could still get 3 squads, they just would not always be bombers, so you can't just blow up opposing caps at will.

Agree with the first one, the second one is not possible with a mod. There is no way to spawn a random number or variety of strikecraft, or much of anything for that matter.

Another option on GRG might be to increase cooldown time on each level but increase the damage enough so that their is still a significant increase in DPS per level. In other words, it would scale a bit like ion bolt.

We don't really have many culture related buffs to work with on provoke hysteria, just whatever the deliverance engine does and that's about it. I think increase its effectiveness is the only real option here, weather with damage or cooldown time.

Yeah magnetize should have a target cap, but I think we should allow it to target allied ships as well, with a possible buff as discussed earlier.

I thought incendiary shells already stacked, but if not they diffidently should. I think just increasing (perhaps doubling) the damage done will be sufficient, as their damage is not effected by shield mitigation or armor.

Subversion seems to need to be made passive (though reduced in effectiveness) or will stick around for a long time even if the marauder leaves the gravity well.

People already do this, even if the units don't move that quickly.  Good players are always maneuvering, engaging, and disengaging.  What this proposal would do is make it easier to do so with the faster capital ships, letting them get in and get out so they can more easily be effective.

This isn't as necessary with carriers that don't really need to "get in" in the first place to be effective.  The whole reason why battleships need a buff is because the carriers are simply outperforming them in every single metric.  The carriers are more durable because they can better avoid damage in the first place, and deal more damage with their strike craft, and effectively have unlimited mobility.  Something has to give here.

I do not believe that increasing battleship combat power is the answer, though it could be part of the answer.




And with two Radiances, that's effectively infinite duration as well.  That's a serious problem; even preventing 10 frigates from retreating in an early-game battle could be enough to end the match.  I don't see how this ability can be balanced at all, and I'm now convinced we need to completely rework it.




I'm not so much worried about this so long as it doesn't interrupt capital ships. Your other concern is far more significant.




Yes, and if you have any suggestions on how to fix the backloading issue on "heavy strike craft" I'd be happy to hear it.




Right now, these capital ships are the slowest for some reason.  This means that the Akkan is never seen in significant engagements until it's level 6 (and it rides on its armistice ability to survive), and the Jarrasul is always used apart from the main fleet.  The Progenitor is only seen with massive support, and even then the hope that the enemy will drop dead before the battleball runs out of shields.  I believe their speed needs to at least be taken up to the level that the other capital ships have currently.  At one time when these guys reigned supreme it made sense that they had this weakness, but not anymore.




As I said earlier, the battleships and the support capital ships (Rapture, Dunov, and Antorak) should have the fastest speed, with the siege and colony capital ships in the middle, and carriers as the slowest.  Carriers use the same speed they currently have, everything else is scaled up.




The Jarrasul is no longer a rushing titan.  Frankly, I think it's fine that its colonization gives it a military edge (though I'd prefer an economic one) because there are better military choices now anyways.  The Jarrasul loses in a straight fight to many types of capital ships, so it's fine in my books that it does get its own advantages.




We apparently have different ideas on the target strength for scramble.  I want to see it an equivalent of Adept Drone Anima, which is a potent rushing option.  The current change to scramble certainly isn't weak, it just doesn't build up the massive swarms.



The original change I wrote was "increase antimatter and antimatter regeneration rates by ~50%", but then I realized that I could just reduce all antimatter costs by ~33% to get the same effect, and it would be easier to mod, plus it wouldn't leave capital ships with antimatter draining abilities gimped.

You might decrease the cooldown of domination, but I find the ability is fine.  It's particularly awesome in the Advent mirror match because you can grab an enemy guardian that's in the middle of their fleet and make it use repulse, breaking up the enemy's battleball.




I think most people agree that phasic traps are a problem, much moreso than TK push.  However, this is just indicative of a larger issue with TEC; they simply lack powerful and versatile abilities that the other factions casually field.  Their units give superior bang for your buck, but beyond that they're at the mercy of the superior abilities of the other factions.

I'd agree that buffing the Dunov is our best bet.  The TEC starbase does benefit quite nicely from the Akkan as it is, but the Akkan has always been the TEC faction's sole ace.

Let's be clear. I never said Bships should be slow, I just don't think they should be fast either.  There are already plenty of other smaller, faster, and more agile craft to fill that role.

I'm also not saying that Bships should be entirely weak vs carriers.   I said they should be well-rounded and sturdy, and I think Ironclad's original design for the Kol reflects this philosophy.  Flak Burst is effective, but because of its limited range, cooldown, and high AM cost, it's not a complete counter vs carriers.. It's just a stop-gap solution to boost the anti-SC power of a fleet.  This loosely matches the performance of WW2 Bships as well, which were especially well armed with AA guns (and in at least some texts I've read, prized for that power), but ultimately, Bships were still very vulnerable torp/dive bombers (especially if they were isolated).

Anyway, we clearly can't and shouldn't try to model this after WW2 navies, I just drew that analogy because WW2 fleets (and really, most navies throughout history) included smaller escort ships like destroyers, cruisers, and PT-boats that were more appropriate for the role of moving around to hunt soft targets.. But those littler ships had to be careful because they were very vulnerable to the firepower of the big ships.  That's the way I envision Sins Bships.  Big, hard to kill, but also deadly enough that they're hard to ignore.  This encourages enemies to avoid them, to kite and draw their enemies out so they can pick apart the enemy fleet.  That's what makes Bships the backbone of a fleet.  If Bships were bumped up to being faster ships, and they're also kept very powerful, then that heavily diminishes the role for smaller/faster (but lighter) frigates.

I tested some of my suggestions from the other thread last nght (modified from your v0.11), and I was pretty happy with the results.  It was just a long game vs AI though.

-Kol

--Finest hour*
---AM regen from 5/s to 3/s (300 total to 180 total)
---Hull regen from 10/s to 15/s (600 total to 900 total)

 This kept AM scarce, but since the ability is AM positive (+180AM over 60 seconds, cost=150AM), it still encourages the player to spam it continuously, which is the way it should be for FH imo.  The Hull regen helps too of course (+900 HP over 60s)

--Gauss Rail Gun
---Damage changed from 325/650/975 to 600/850/1100
---Target's max speed changed from -100% to -50%
---Target now has an increased weapon cooldown of 15/20/25%
---Antimatter cost changed from 75 to 40/45/50
---Cooldown changed from 6s to 12/8/6

I opened my game with the Kol, and it perormed very well imo.  If used judicously, the 600 dmg GRG can really help shorten the battles vs militia.  This is a bigger buff than the v0.11 change.  It definitely felt powerful throughout the game, but I don't think it's too much since it eats through a lot of AM and the Kol really needs multiple uses of Flak Burst to fend off SC spam, even with Gardas in support.

--Flak Burst
---Damage changed from 30/45/60 to 40/50/65*
---Range changed from 2400/3000/3600 to 3000/3600/3600m
---Cooldown changed from 12/10/8 to 10/9/8s

As I said in the other thread, by averaging out some of the earlier suggestions this setup ensures that each level provides a meaningful boost.  It's still not a one shot (or even two) knock-out vs the toughest/biggest SC swarms, but I think it would be too hard to balance if we made that our goal.  In this form, it's interesting and it provides a much needed boost to both the Kol and its adjoining fleet. (obviously, it might be necessary to tweak it more, and we could average out the dmg/range scaling if you guys don't like the jumps).

 

-Radiance

--Animosity
---Added regen of 5/7.5/10
---Changed targets to: maxTargetCount
  Level:0 24.000000
  Level:1 48.000000
  Level:2 96.000000

I wasn't sure about the regen, but any higher and its low cost/cooldown would make it competitive with proper regen abilities.  I adjusted the max targets to limit the abusability, as discussed above.. However, I had another idea:

What if we use the pulsing created by Seleuceia to give Animosity sort of an on-off cycle every few seconds?  This would re-open the door for players to override the attack order, somewhat, but not immediately or completely as it was before.  The idea would be to reset bufftaunself every X seconds (currently 4), then set the Bufftaunt to function from that moment for every 0.2s, for a duration of X-Y seconds. (e.g., Every 4 seconds the ships are spammed with attack orders that can't be overridden for 2 seconds.  Then they get a two second window to cast abilities, switch targets, and try to move away.  Then the next Bufftauntself cycle begins and forces ships in the radius to focus on the Radiance again).

The effect of all that, I think, is that most players would just let their ships target the Radiance because if they try to force another target they'll end up wasting time as their ships turn back and forth trying to acquire targets (ideally, the Radiance could do something clever like move to the opposite side of its fleet, forcing enemy ships to turn towards it and away from its allies).  However, with some testing it could hopefully be balanced to limit the exploitability mentioned above.  Ships at the edge of the radius could still try to flee, ships could take time to use their heal abilities or whatever else, etc.

 

PS:

I tried to exploit the infinite targets on Magnetize, but I couldn't tell if it was working.  Has anyone confirmed that this works and that it really pulls in all targets in the radius?

I also noticed that, although you changed the max targets, you left the finish condition at 8/12/16, which may be why I didn't notice it pulling in an excess of SC.

finishCondition
 finishConditionType "FightersKilled"
 fightersKilled
  Level:0 8.000000
  Level:1 12.000000
  Level:2 16.000000

First off, HerrPinguin I'm glad you joined these discussions....

Now...

Everyone has pretty much left the carriers and colonizers alone for quite awhile so I'm going to assume those changes made to the Sova, Jarrasul, and Skirantra are alright...

I'd like to clear up the battleships as much as possible so we can focus on the other two ship types as much as possible....after reading everything these are the conclusions I've come to...

Kol:

Let's address FH first since it's antimatter regen affects other ability's antimatter costs...I like the suggestion of lowering the antimatter regen while buffing the hull regen...this prevents the massive lvl 6 milestone that significantly affects the Kol's antimatter reserves...

Finest Hour:  Antimatter regeneration decreased from 5/s to 3/s; hull regeneration increased from 10/s to 15/s...

GRG needs to have more shock value i.e. more powerful/less frequent...higher levels of GRG also need to have increasing antimatter costs so this ability is not wantonly spammed with high level Kols...since HerrPinguin has already tested his version of GRG, I think lvl 1 damage of 600 and antimatter cost of 40 are good numbers to go with...

Now, previous damage values were tested with FH regenerating 5 antimatter per second, so GRG lvl 2 and lvl 3 damage values were kept in check since this ability could be spammed...since this antimatter regen on FH will likely change, I think higher levels of GRG should have a little more kick to them...

Gauss Rail Gun:  Lvl 1/2/3 does 600/900/1200 damage and costs 40/45/50 antimatter

Higher levels of Flak Burst right now are not as appealing since they don't increase the ability that much more...due to the differences in SC HP across the factions, I'm reluctant to have the damage anything but 40/50/60...however, I do think having an increasing range and decreasing cooldown will help make lvl 2 and lvl 3 more appealing...

Flak Burst: Lvl 1/2/3 has range 3000/3300/3600 and cooldown 10/9/8

Radiance:

I agree CB needs a buff...right now it does 250 DPS to any ship in the column, and the column lasts 8s...this is essentially 2000 Damage to the target and any ship that stays in the column for the duration of the ability...

What is wrong with this ability?  First, the total damage is not as much as missile barrage.  Second, it is a pain to aim.  Third, it affects a narrow range of targets that may move out of the column during the ability.  Missile barrage is better because it does more damage, has infinite targets, and is a fire-and-forget ability.

What advantages does this ability have?  It can be used every 2 minutes while missile barrage can only be used every 4...

So, CB can do 4000 damage in 2 minutes (two uses) while MB only does 3000...but the smaller target count and difficulty in aiming hardly are worth that extra 1000 damage...

In my opinion, CB's main problem is its lack of guarantee...by the time the ship is aiming the direction you want it, the layout of enemy ships can change, and while the beam is firing they can move out of the way...here is my proposition

Cleansing Brilliance: Increase DPS from 250 to 500; reduce duration from 8s to 6s.

This does 3000 damage instead of only 2000...it also prevents ships from getting out of the way as easily...this ship already fires twice as fast as missile barrage, and energy absorption regenerates antimatter so I don't think reducing cooldown and/or antimatter cost is the way to go

I agree that Animosity could become a huge problem since multiple radiances could, well, keep a fleet from moving indefinitely...

Currently the stats are cooldown 35s, duration 20s, antimatter cost 65...in my mod, the only change with level is range (3000/4000/5000)...

There are several ways to go about improving/tweaking/fixing this ability...

One, significantly increase cooldown (35 -> 60)...this would make it very difficult to actually keep a fleet indefinitely from moving...first, it would require more than 2 radiances (guidance may allow 2 to do it), and second, the odds of all of them surviving aren't that great...

Two, decrease range (say 2000/3000/4000 instead of 3000/4000/5000)...this would make it harder to affect a whole fleet, and also add a lot more incentive to invest in higher levels...

Three, create a max # of targets...this would prevent a whole fleet from being frozen, but it also might just make this ability a mess...low numbers make it hard to scale in the late game, large numbers basically won't be much of a limit...

Four, limit this ability to only affect SC...this would still be very very powerful (could prevent FFing on that precious whatever whatever), but would require a lot of tweaking with the numbers...

Five, prevent this ability from affecting capital ships...that way, it couldn't be used like ion bolt to prevent a cap ship from escaping...

Before making a proposition, I'm going to put these ideas out there and get some feedback...This ability has potential, I'd like to find a way to make it work before looking for a secondary buff...

HerrPinguin, when I get a chance I'm going to look into Magnetize...good catch with seeing the finish conditions, I wasn't aware of those...since that is an option, right now I'm inclined to leave the max # of targets at infinite, and then tweak those finish conditions to limit the # of SC damaged...

One thing....

I've seen a lot of comments regarding the DPS/Speed/Hull/etc of the capital ships as well as suggestions for the Support/Siege cap ships...I promise I'm not ignoring you, but my mind can only focus on so much at a time...

Thanks to everyone for your suggestions and willingness to test/balance

I wouldn't be to ready to alter Animosity completely just when it seems to have started working as we want it, and the object is to improve the battleships.  I wouldn't be so quick to declare the Radiance too much improved, especially while Halcyon Man still has the dominant Advent strategy...

Firstly as I understand it the ability has an existing target cap of 8/16/32?  If this is too much then drop it to 8/16/24.  The developers made the change away from infinite targets in 1.1 so its safe to asume they considered infinite targets to be too strong.  Wasn't the object to have it working as intended?

I agree that the ability needs more power as it levels, though a peculiarity of the Radiance is that it gains AM when fired on, so you might justify an AM increase as the number of targets goes up.  Cooldown should be 60 minimum. 

Yes to making capitals immune, they have elite crews.

What I'd also like is to have Animosity useful when the ship is under fire.  The Radiance needs some independent regen ability from somewhere to tank like the Kortul or Kol.  Advent could also use at least one ship that is an option against a heavy phase missile user.  So I'd add a hull regen per damage taken following the example of the passive armour AM per damage, to allow a positive defensive benefit for being under fire.  An offensive benefit would merely sideline the Rapture as I've posted elsewhere, but the Radiance hasn't been given any tanking ability yet, to make it somewhat resistant to bombers.  The hull regen could then increase with level- like the Kortul shield regen increase by level for Power Surge.

No to a nerf to phasic trap.  It's on a hangar, they can be destroyed easily.  At least test more before any alteration?  If you set up a phasic trap in a game the disadvantages will become obvious.  Hangars need their AM buffed as well.  I'm fairly sure that this is a matter of not being aware of the possibilities for the offence rather than the inherent strength of phasic trap.  At the very least another target than capital ships must be welcome?  TK push is far more effective.

Also still a huge no to faster colony capitals.  No faster travelling battleballs, thank you very much.  Just no.

HerrP are you going to be online?  When is the group going to meet again?  We only need 9-10 fairly skilled players with the latest mod version to be able to hold regular testing sessions.   

I removed the max target count and also extended the ability to affect SC...of course, I did this because a working version of animosity had never really been tested, so I figured the ability needed a buff...

So, max target count can be reinstated. and if there is a max target count, then I won't let SC be affected; however, if the cooldown is significantly longer, I don't see a reason to have a max target limit or have the ability not affect SC...currently I am leaning towards a longer cooldown (like 60s)...

I personally like the idea of animosity not affecting capital ships regardless of there being a max target count...

Of all the possible buffs with animosity, I like DesConnor's suggestion the most...an HP regen that is related to damage is the best...unfortunately, I don't know how to implement this...

There is an instant action ConvertDamageToAntimatter, but no such thing that is related to shields or hull...I'm going to try and see if the trigger type OnDamageTaken can be used with other instant actions (like a hull regeneration) but it may or may not work...will report back on this...