LF and LRF damage % chart changes.

I dunno about the module change. they aren't designed for anti-structure roles and if you use them against defenses you must either be a bit desparate or stupid or it doesn't matter anyway since you have so many.

the change from very light ... well. lrfs do get a pretty tough bonus, so it probably wouldn't hurt that much, as they'd still cream them pretty easily.

instead of upping dmg against very heavy, how about lowering lrf dmg also to 50%? I mean the hc can already be countered by bombers and by a host of special abilities, mostly by the 2nd caster unit, so it is only reasonable to have them be pretty effective against both lf and lrf. they're fairly high tech anyway.

What is the file name and where is it?

It's in Gameinfo and the file is Gameplay.CONSTANTS

These are the stats for the heavy cruiser weapons. Againt heir the only Ship to use this weapon And as you will see their already counter just about everything.

        DamagePercentBonus:COMPOSITE:CapitalShip 0.75
        DamagePercentBonus:COMPOSITE:VeryLight 1.0
        DamagePercentBonus:COMPOSITE:Light 1.5
        DamagePercentBonus:COMPOSITE:Medium 1.25
        DamagePercentBonus:COMPOSITE:Heavy 1.0
        DamagePercentBonus:COMPOSITE:VeryHeavy 1.0
        DamagePercentBonus:COMPOSITE:Module 0.75

The damage increase in fields were LRFs and LFs aren't in direct competiton it to make them equal as a toll for the job how ever the LRFs still remain slightly superior due to their higer DPS and longer attake range.

Ah! Thanks so much. +1 for you.

Bump

I would agree with this except instead of rasing damage to lrf decrease damage lrf does to lf.Dont make lf kill lrf better but make them survive longer to kill some stuff.

When I first came here I was like

Then I realised it wasn't official, then I was like .

Anyway, the entire point of LRF's is to own LF's early game.  I would agree with EadTaes in that any LF's that do survive and get within range of LRF's should at least get a fighting chance, don't you?

Koda0 (^) 

Indeed if you lowered the dmg LRFs do to LFs you would achive a similer result. How ever LRFs would remain a better choise to counter them selves since they would do 100% damage to other LRFs while LFs will do only 75%. This will only help favor more LRFs as a solution to LRFs. However boostign the LFs dmg vs light armor opens a new possible improvized counter to to LRFs that aren't more LRFs. It's not the best since youll be takign mroe damage but it narrows the gap a bit so that with support cruisers and the rigth backup you can do it.

what if LRF's had a minimum range and cant fire within that range, giving LF's a chance if they make it that close... its like, artillery or a tank is devastating at long to medium ranges but at short ranges (more for artillery than tanks) is very weak or even defenseless

Hmmm.... I dunno... I always compared LRF's to snipers or Abrams (the tank) more than Artillery...

Koda0 (^)

That's a very interesting idea. How ever i wouldn't make I make unable to target/fire but would rather give it a 50% damage penalty. Thats quite interesting.

Karma for great Idea.

we could say due to the short range, 50% of missiles dont reach the range at where the safeties disengage so they just ram into the shields harmlessly (like 'Hunt for the Red October', where Sean Connery rams the torpedo with his sub before it reaches arming range and the torpedo just gets knocked by the hull)

thanks for karma

I like the ideas listed. I especially like LF being 1.0 damage against LRF. LRF already has a BIG 1.5 buff against LF so why make LF 0.75 against LRF? I think changing that one value would move LF into a much better strategic option again.

I'm not sure about some of those changes. LRFs should still hit LFs badly in my opinion.
However, LRFs should have their effectiveness highly reduced against other types of ships.

The problem with LRFs rite now is that they work good against everything, as long as they're protected from fighters. Structures, LFs, Caps, support Cruisers, carriers; you name it - they blow it. Only HCs take a moment to destroy, but it is still way easier to amass LRFs in an amount to wipe a HC fleet than the other way around.

1. LRF should be made a specific counter to structures and LFs, not a massive damage dealer against everything as they are now.
2. LFs should receive some boost to their usefulness (reduced supply cost a bit, slightly buffed damage against capitals and HCs) so they really are really needed in late game and so that they would need a counter.

So basically... yeah. 
I only oppose that LFs should get a buff against LRFs and that LFs should deal as much as LRFs do against heavy units now. LRFs should get nerfed instead, otherwise all caps and HC will get blown away as soon as they appear in the gravwell.

ψ

The damage table has LRF at 75% against most of the big units like HCs and capitals so would you have them lower their overall DPS instead of adjusting the damage tables?

That is also somehting I concidered. But I personaly prefered the buff. But a nerf to LRFs in the same order/maner i buffed the LFs would also indeed work. I would have ever maintain the LFs superioraty againt structures then have it equal to LRFs. Since LRF can wipe defencive structure from outside their firering range while LFs have to expose them selves to the fire from the defences.

Basicaly it would look like this.

        DamagePercentBonus:ANTIMEDIUM:CapitalShip 0.5
        DamagePercentBonus:ANTIMEDIUM:VeryLight 1.0
        DamagePercentBonus:ANTIMEDIUM:Light 1.0
        DamagePercentBonus:ANTIMEDIUM:Medium 1.25
        DamagePercentBonus:ANTIMEDIUM:Heavy 0.75
        DamagePercentBonus:ANTIMEDIUM:VeryHeavy 0.5
        DamagePercentBonus:ANTIMEDIUM:Module 0.50       
        DamagePercentBonus:ANTIHEAVY:CapitalShip 0.5
        DamagePercentBonus:ANTIHEAVY:VeryLight 1.0
        DamagePercentBonus:ANTIHEAVY:Light 0.75
        DamagePercentBonus:ANTIHEAVY:Medium 1.0
        DamagePercentBonus:ANTIHEAVY:Heavy 1.5
        DamagePercentBonus:ANTIHEAVY:VeryHeavy 0.5
        DamagePercentBonus:ANTIHEAVY:Module 1.0

Indeed. Adjustignt he damage tables is a better way to go at it since it only affects the performance vs certain types instead of againts all types.

But lums will most certainly need a base damage modification.

i dont see why (im just using generic names i dont mean these actual ships) LFs cant be effective vs LRFs and LRFs be effective vs LFs

why does paper HAVE to cover rock but rock cant rip paper?

The problem I see with making lf effective counter to lrf is that lrf are suppose to counter lf so it doesnt make sense to me to make them able to kill lrf better but to let them survive better against them to kill their counters.lf are ver cheap and shouldnt be effective at killing its counter or why build lrf.

LF are short range fighters, whereas LRF are long range

LF should have good short range attack, while LRF should have better long range attack, but be weak at short ranges.

to be honest, i feel the LRF takes more of a destroyer role, but in a funny form. i see a destroyer being strong against all ships and structures with multiple weapons types and banks being able to fire in a 360 degree arc (like the Kol). (im describing it this detailed cause id really really like it to be implemented )

however, the LRF is very much long range 'fire support' as it were, but somehow manages to take on a short range combat role as well. i think this needs to be addressed. perhaps drop its armor by heaps... or make it suceptible to LFs at short range...

on the other hand, make it viable for LRF's to attack LRF's with some effeciency, considering how easy it is to spam LRF and how difficult and costly it is to spam Carriers...

WOWHOHO hold it. Not talking about making LFs counter LRFs here. Just talking about narrowing the gap a bit so LFs dont get creamed as hard as they do currently by LRFs. LRFs will still be bale to cream and should always cream LFs only maybe not as much as they do currently. Their is a big difference in that.

Yeah destroyers with 360 weapons and HP somewere bettween a LF and HC would rock.

i can live with that. i mean, a sufficiently large number of LFs should still drill LRFs without losing half their number...

damn straight

I see I would prefer them to last longer instead of kill lrf better.I think you can do more things if they last longer then just kill faster.IMO lf die way to fast and its annoying.