[FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

[Shepp]

Not a big fan of the change for the carrier. I'm fine with the destroyers capacity being lowered, and also think it wouldn't hurt to reduce fighter capacity on all of the destroyer class ships. Its just that carriers are well; supposed to be carriers. Even if they made the capacity around 30S/ 10M to offset the speed boost that would get that. As it sits right now Egosoft has gone to all of the work to create better looking ships and then actively worked to keep people from wanting to use them.

[-=SiR KiLLaLoT=-]

By carefully observing the real proportions of L and XL ships, I was able to create a list of S and M ships that could actually be positioned within the hypothetical space intended for them and the result was this.

Asgard: 6 M 12 S
Syn: 9 S
Osaka: 8 S
Tokyo: 2 M 36 S

Raptor: 4 M 126 S
Rattlesnake: 12 S

Colossus: 12 M 96 S
Behemoth: 20 S

Zeus: 16 M 80 S
Odysseus: 2 M 6 S

Condor: 3 M 12 S
Phoenix: 8 S

I think these numbers somehow make sense

I think Devs have to define ship numbers by the real size of things. Then then create an overall balance of speed/shields/turrets/hulls/firepower to test everything on.
If we continue in this way, much more complex new work will have to be done as future ships and races are introduced.
So having a real yardstick like that of size would make more sense in my opinion.

[j.harshaw]

I think Devs have to define ship numbers by the real size of things. Then then create an overall balance of speed/shields/turrets/hulls/firepower to test everything on.
If we continue in this way, much more complex new work will have to be done as future ships and races are introduced.
So having a real yardstick like that of size would make more sense in my opinion.

It is. Size and geometry are bases from which initial numbers are derived before factoring in modifiers. Necessary so that objects of a certain size move in very roughly the same manner and you don't see things like Xenon Is turning like fighters. This is why, for example, paranid ships tend to be fast, but a very large paranid ship won't be much faster, or at all faster, than say a very small teladi ship which uses the same engines. Size is not well communicated in the game, however.

[-=SiR KiLLaLoT=-]

I can imagine that you have made such a calculation, but I wonder where 30 M ships can be hidden inside a Raptor

The list above refers to a count of "rectangles" visually verified by entering the ship textures via the exterior view, and there are some combinations like that of the Raptor or Tokyo that don't make sense, at least for M ships.
Even if they had been disassembled, 30 Cobras (a random M-ship) would not be able to fit inside a Raptor ...

It's that kind of proportion that I can't understand.

[Mr_Cossack]

It's seem so odd that the Destroyer can take over 40 ships but this dedicated carrier can only carry 16? from a gameplay point of view i feel like it will just make it obsolete and no one except a.i will use it? unless i am missing something here?

[A5PECT]

Well that explains why carriers don't have enough cargo space to refit all of their fighters; most of them weren't supposed to dock 40 fighters to begin with

I'm all for diversifying carriers through docking counts. I'm open to lowering docking counts across the board, but I'd like to see those changes introduced all at once. Putting out the changes to Paranid ships only isn't useful for testing and feedback. It just serves to confuse users and give them wrong impressions ("oh noes, they're nerfing paranid!!!11!11!!")

[dougeye]

To be honest the only way to describe all the new paranoid capital ships is "style over substance"

[grimgore]

I also have to say something about it. I have tried to understand it, but it just doesn't make sense. Just imagine! 50km distance between an enemy L destroyer or L freighter. The Zeus E releases its fighters 16+8 max. The freighter/destroyer e.g. Behemoth max 44. There is a fight, what will happen? Simply impossible to accept. A carrier the size of a Zeus E must not be so weak. No speed buff justifies such a capacity nerf. Unless Zeus E is equipped with a lot of additional firepower. You have to consider how strong S ships can be in this game. What a difference 10 more or less can make . Either you adjust everything or the game loses a lot of credibility. I can't get this out of my head in the game it kind of bothers me. No matter if it's a single player. It has to fit.

[A5PECT]

The Zeus E releases its fighters 16+8 max. The freighter/destroyer e.g. Behemoth max 44.

This is what I was talking about. Players are going to keep making these comparisons until you show us the rest of your plans for L and XL ship storage counts.

Of course 16 vs 40 doesn't make sense, the two ships are following different design rules. If the Behemoth followed the rule set forth by the Zeus E - i.e. 1 landing pad = 2 units of ship storage- it would only have 8 S ship slots. This would not only make for a much better comparison of the Behemoth the Zeus E, but also between other large ships:

Behemoth to Odysseus
2 L turrets vs. 3 L turrets, but 8 S ships vs. 4 S ships

[SirBerrial]

2 L turrets vs. 3 L turrets, but 8 S ships vs. 4 S ships

Yeah, but S ships on non-carriers are annoying.
If the other cap ship types get vastly cut capacities, but gain carrier logic and ability to perform repairs on docked subordinate ships (no resupply/no refits), carriers with their capacities and resupply/refit abilities would still hhave their niche to fill, and s/m ships would becme far more user-friendly for the destroyers and will become a factor in choosing a ship.

[A5PECT]

Yes, reworking docking capacities would open up a lot of options to differentiate and balance ships against each other. If carriers actually carry more fighters than destroyers, then you can give destroyers basic carrier behaviors without making carriers redundant.

(Personally I'd be fine with giving destroyers just the "launch fighters during combat, dock fighters outside of combat"; I'd prefer if carriers held all of their logistical functions over destroyers)

[SirBerrial]

Logistics should be carriers domain, yes, but basic maintenance of subordinate ships (repairs only, no refit and no resupply) and carrier logic would turn the subordinates from headaches to assets.
Manual repairs of assigned subordinates is annoying.

[Manawydn]

But even destroyers have 40 S capacity! 16+8 carrier - not a carrier.

Just because Destroyers currently DO have 40 S capacity, doesn't mean they *should*. A Destroyer should have less than 15 S capacity at max IMO. It's a Destroyer, not a carrier.

The blanket 40-S-Capacity on every L-sized ship is a problem, not a benefit.

[Raptor34]

But even destroyers have 40 S capacity! 16+8 carrier - not a carrier.

Just because Destroyers currently DO have 40 S capacity, doesn't mean they *should*. A Destroyer should have less than 15 S capacity at max IMO. It's a Destroyer, not a carrier.

The blanket 40-S-Capacity on every L-sized ship is a problem, not a benefit.

Perhaps. But I don't see it as a problem.
It has 40 S capacity, but in practise it's entirely pointless. Or at least for combat uses, it's nice as a personal mobile garage. Still wish we get a L class light carrier though.
Well, the Phoenix might be able to make more use of it perhaps, since they have 2 bays.

[Pesanur]

Behemoth to Odysseus
2 L turrets vs. 3 L turrets, but 8 S ships vs. 4 S ships

2 L turrets vs. 4 L turrets

[Pesanur]

By carefully observing the real proportions of L and XL ships, I was able to create a list of S and M ships that could actually be positioned within the hypothetical space intended for them and the result was this.

Asgard: 6 M 12 S
Syn: 9 S
Osaka: 8 S
Tokyo: 2 M 36 S

Raptor: 4 M 126 S
Rattlesnake: 12 S

Colossus: 12 M 96 S
Behemoth: 20 S

Zeus: 16 M 80 S
Odysseus: 2 M 6 S

Condor: 3 M 12 S
Phoenix: 8 S

I think that for the Raptor make more sense 2 M instead of 4. The M docking bay is just over the engine area and after the entrance to the S docking bays.

[mr.WHO]

Yeah, both Raptor and Tokyo have quite strange placement on M-dock in the back that doesn't give you a much space.

If anything, it makes you wonders - if there is a hangar then were is the space for engine room?

[-=SiR KiLLaLoT=-]

Yeah, both Raptor and Tokyo have quite strange placement on M-dock in the back that doesn't give you a much space.

If anything, it makes you wonders - if there is a hangar then were is the space for engine room?

I can confirm that the Raptor can carry 4M ships internally.
I looked at the initial position of the Dragon ship and went inside with the camera.
Thus it is possible to verify the real size of the internal cube dedicated to the space of the ship.
Here, however, it is possible to notice how the presence of a second internal cube is not a problem.
The point of the matter is that by going inside the cube you can clearly see that it is intended for 2 ships.
So 2x2=4
How do they move ships internally? It does not matter!

[GCU Grey Area]

16 fighters does seem a bit too low to me for a carrier. I'm fine incidentally with the low fighter storage on the other new Paranid capitals & think a similar adjustment should be made to existing ships (assuming that won't break saves). However those ships all have other functions, whereas a carrier's primary function is simply to transport & deploy fighters. Consequently think a greater proportion of it's internal volume would be used for fighter storage (i.e. the ratio of docks to fighter storage should be substantially different for carriers).

Not tried a Zeus E yet (current game is still in quite an early phase), however suspect it won't be nearly as thrilling as when this happens with one of the old carriers when you give the attack order: https://www.dropbox.com/s/tfchws4mpgvxb ... 1.jpg?dl=0 & the sky's suddenly filled with fighters in a matter of seconds. With a Zeus E almost half of it's launch tubes are only going to be launching a single fighter...

[abisha1980]

to be really honest the other ships are wrong and have to much unrealistic space

Raptor should only hold like 25 S ships max