Would for the disciple.  That thing is already vicious on the rush, since it offers the best performance of any light frigate.  Combined with the strongest scout (a wonderful LRF counter) this makes a very powerful rushing team.  I wouldn't buff the disciple personally.  Skirmisher yes, Cobalt maybe, not Disciple.

Turrets are absolute crap currently, definitely in need a cost decrease.  They're only useful for cleaning up militia then scuttling them afterwards.  Hangers on the other hand are somewhat decent.  While a cost decrease would be nice, they're passable as a static defense since their strike craft can at least reach across the entire gravity well.

A disciple rush plays into an assailant or LRM defence though, its the strongest early counter and also means less resources available for illuminators later..  Early rushes also involve a setup option- there have been online games played on large fleet size, by players who then state that they dislike the rush!  The brake on the Disciple is supposed to be eco, you'd have to keep them in line with the other light frigates...?

Hangars are much the better option, but they are too expensive early, and require a planet upgrade if you want repair as well.  When carrier strikecraft were reduced in terms of cap cost hangar strikecraft were not reduced in either logistic or resource cost- they were nerfed like light frigates were by v1.1, without a nerf being justified.   

It's a disciple/scout rush.  It's trivial for the rusher (since no research is required) to keep an eye on you and keep his proportions in line with what you're making.  If you're spamming nothing but LRM, expect to see almost entirely scouts.  The disciples complement this extremely well by countering flak, scouts, and carriers early on, leaving you in a predicament without any clear-cut counters.  Once you have some critical mass of LRF that's another story, but early on the discple/scout rusher has no labs or technologies to research so he's likely to outnumber you, not the other way around.

To add to the skirmisher debate...

1. Buff the skirmisher to something like 12 or 12.5 dps.  Problem solved. 14 dps would be ridiculous considering the ship gets reintegration.

2. Fix reintegration so it kicks in when 50-60% of its health is left. Maybe even at 75%. Point being the ability goes to waste if the ship dies before the effects wear off.

3. Buff the Vasari scout so that it can fend off an early game LRF (specifically Illum) rush. Don't overdo it, but something along the order of +50 health, +100 shield, and +.5 dps would do it.

4. Also, am I the only person annoyed by the fact that TEC and Advent scouts that take up 2 ship slots are both tougher than a Vasari scout that takes us three ship slots? Helloooooooo

Except that just improving the skirmisher dps doesn't seem to solve the problem without an acconpanying scout buff!  I agree with the reintegration fix, it would work throughout the game. 

A player who has better eco and excellent intelligence has a huge advantage.  Jikaras are for better eco, not fighting.  Even when weaker than opposition scouts they can still perform their tasks and jump away, and later they can hide.  What hampers balance is not having enough neutrals- space should be full of mining opportunities.  Darvin suggested 2 neutrals per player, but I find this just enough so that the neutrals can be effectively defended by other factions and the Jikaras get no advantage.  Better maps might solve this.

Reduced turret costs might help against a mixed disciple/scout rush, and the counter of pure light frigates would be helped by the supply reduction to all light frigates- which doesn't buff scouts, rather the opposite.

However... in team games even a successful light frigate/scout rusher is stuck with a fleet that is open to counter by other fleets, in 1v1 games the home planets tend to be too far apart?  Should the factions be balanced for a close range no neutrals map- is it even possible?  

Note that reintegration should not just bring skirmishers "up to par" with the other light frigs, it should make them superior.  Why?  Because it makes no sense to have a light frigate with the "advantage" (cough) that, later on with research and money spent, it can be equal to the other light frigs.  Why the hell is that a selling point?

Consider this statement:  "Hey, I can play the vasari!  Sure, I'll get crappy light frigs to start out with, but after upgrades, time, and money spent, I can make them basically equal!"

Anything sound wrong with that?

So the way it should work is, you can potentially have a better light frigate late game, but you have to "pay" for this potential by being saddled with a poor light frig at the start.  It doesn't make sense that reintgration would only get you parity.

All this is assuming "unit to unit" balancing.  All bets are off with what I just said if we are balancing light frigs "by faction."

This is the very problem with Vasari. They are the only race reliant on neutrals. TEC and Advent have kickass colonize abilities. Vasari doesn't. Maps flooded with neutrals HEAVILY favor Vasari. The current problem is that about half the time the neutral balance is about right, but then 1/4 of the time the number of neutrals is ridiculous and other times there are practically none.

I've made my case about Vasari many times before. I'm ust one person with one opinion. Thankfully, the current balance of the game is not that the Vasari are pathetically weak. You can win with any race in this game, and understanding how to use them well is key.

The current balance is ok. It can still be improved upon. Of course, my opinion is that te game will never be completely balanced.

  Back on topic, the skirmishers needed to be more expensive (I mean Command Points) to counter the research-focussed from having an all-too-powerful force of twenty or so ships that can stagger regenerating their hulls-"Reintegration", and walk all over a force of even twice their size, with heavy casualties, but a win nonetheless every time. This ability can be researched with just your capitol planet if you build just military labs, though it is admitadly expensive to do.

The research requires three other researches as prerequisites.  Combined with the 2-lab cost, it's hardly the kind of thing that you can use for a quick rush.  For the same price an Advent player could easily field illuminators. 

Fact of the matter is that no one skirmisher rushes.  In fact, very few people use skirmishers willingly because the unit is so weak.

Yup, you are right.  Coming from a formerly exlusive vasari player, I can say I never fielded skirmishers before except in vain attempts to counter carrier spams.  I wouldn't even build them in the open to colonize my first planets or roid.  I just jumped straight to assailants.

Has no one noticed the Vasari's choice of tactics and strategy? They arent the big bad wolf they were 10,000 years ago. They dont have the massive empire their ancestors once controlled. They have a limited number of ships, and personell. They have to rely on guerilla warfare to accomplish their goals.  When it comes to warfare, guerillas arent the best at all out shoot'em up type battles like the Advent and TEC are so capable of.  They have to use their ability to slide past barriers and straight up firefights to actually win.

The goal was to balance the race as a whole not the individual units. The idea behind the Vasari was they overestimated their abilities and assumed they were as capable of conquering as their ancestors were. They were foolish and now they are forced to fight it out with hit and run tactics to actually accomplish anything. I stand by my opinion that fixing Vasari units isnt going to change anything for the better, only cause the devs to go back in at a later time and re-re-balance the game as a whole.

SKirms are now up and the PSCF

lets hear your official vote on the issue.

The concept of bunkering up on your home planet and producing a conquering fleet of skirmishers is worryingly similar to the beliefs of some first-time online players, and I wonder where it comes from?  Perhaps from playing one or two teamed AI, with pirates active, as practice? 

If the ship fixes are minor enough there's no reason not to have them...?  Even though the suggested scout fix seems somewhat beside the point as to the Jikara disadvantage on most set maps, there's no reason not to have most of it, though I'd stop short of reducing the cap cost.

However, I'm convinced that cheaper turrets is the best means to stop an early scout/light frigate rush- and if you expect a rush the game should allow you to stop it, whatever faction you are.  Also, hangars might cover the entire gravwell but three carriers can shut down eight hangars equally divided among four planets.  At least properly placed turrets keep shooting at a stronger fleet.

The random maps seem to be more favourable to Jikaras than the set maps.  Here is the number of neutrals present on some of the set maps played online:

Convergence has only three neutrals for four players, though at least they are central.

Razor's Edge has no neutrals at all, while Maelstrom both has no neutrals and also allows Advent to rush via a desert planet. Fulcrum, best for 4-6 players, has a single gas giant.  Foreign Invasion has four neutrals for 4-6 players.  Entanglement has a random number (3-5?) for 6 players.  Gateway has one plus a couple (random?) in the other system. 

Implosion has one for each of 8 players plus up to 4 centrally.

None of these popular set maps seem as favourable to Jikaras as the random maps- randoms might average two per player..?  Perhaps this is another reason why the random maps are popular online, despite their odd starts.

However I consider 2 neutrals per player to be a minimum level that still often fails to favour Jikaras.  3-4 neutrals per player might be necessary to allow Jikaras their advantage.  If you only have two neutrals per player, one might be empty and the other on a main fleet route.  Three-four allows for one to be empty and one easy to cover, leaving one or two battles in 'deep' space.  A couple of Jikaras can then gain the economic advantage that the faction needs for balance, by forcing the deployment of a colony with an escort- and still being able to raid the enemy gravwell.

trying to balance individual ships is a bit meaningless when there are racial abilities. Besides, it'd be a bit boring if all the units were the same. The vasari have enough going their way to balance out the skirmishers, the fact that most of the exp. players are saying this makes me even more willing to accept this.

I think this is more a factor of there being few worthy standard 4v4 and 5v5 maps.  The 4 and 6 player random maps are popular, but people will also play some of the standard maps, too.

Agreed.

Vasari as a race is not balanced though. Skirms are so much weaker then the other LFs that Vasari can't counter carriers. If Vasari can't counter carriers then how are they balanced? LFs are Vasari's major early game weakness. Do Vasari have a major early game advantage to off set this? No. Are Vasari stronger late game to offset their early game weakness? No. Are Vasari better at "fighting dirty" then other races? No. Vasari do have some very cool advantages, but these are not enough. Vasari are not balanced early game. Period.

The game sins is not designed to simulate geurilla warfare so such a race is completely unsuitable game-play wise. If this game has stealth units and reduced visibility in plasma storms or something then guerilla Vasari would make sense.

Saying that pros can play Vasari is no argument. Noobs can and do play Advent and win. Many people avoid Vasari. Some pros don't want to play as them. I don't see how anyone can say that they are balanced.

^^ I agree. Vasari have a major movement bonus with pahse gate tech, cannon jumps and that one capital ship that no one ever uses. But if they were going to be a "guerilla war" race then they would have things like extremely high dps, but very low hull or sheild. And that isn't the case. Or they would move faster in gw, and that isn't the case... or they would fire faster... and that isn't the case. Skirms are about as good at guerilla warfare as socks in a hamper.

heres a quote from a ship description for the Vasari

Antorak Marauder

Despite a technological advantage, the Vasari Exodus Fleet strongly favors guerilla warfare tactics

Hows the socks in that hamper now?

Okay, try #2 since the forum doesn't like me.

On the box descriptions are a bit flawed. And no one uses the Antorak unless its a big map, they are dominating, or they know how to micro the ever living piss out of it so it doesnt get blown up by a stray piece of dust.

And yes, Vasari, after a long expensive series of techs, can jump all over the place. But thats mobility, and only helpful if when you get there, you can beat the fleet waiting.

guerilla warfare would include:

-Faster pahse jumping (this is an artifact, but would certainly fit Vas)

-Less AM lost per jump(this is a tech, so good)

-Either fast cooldown times with medium/weak damage, or slow cooldown with huge damage. (no, except nano-ish, or planet drain. Phase missle storm isnt bad)

-The same, but for regular weapons (nope, im not seeing high DPS or for any Vas ship, compared to its TEC or Advent counterpart)

-Traps (nope, mines are worthless to anyone with any intel at all. This irritates me, mines say "in phase space" but are visible without effort, just not destructible. This is ridiculous, if they are cloaked, make them invisible or undetectable until scouts actually use "see mines", I know its possible)

-Cloaking or camo (only Illums have something remotely close. Vas scouts can shit into phase space... which does absolutely nothing)

-Disabling (there are a good number of these techs in the Vas tree and fleet... however I might note that everyone has at least a few. Also that Orky has none... which is weird actually.)

Geurillas are typically fast, cheap, and sneaky. ONE of those covers VAS.

EDIT: So Vas is really, more guerilla-ish, but not totally. I think making a good cheap/weak/powrful unit (skrim) would be much more helpful.

The research requires three other researches as prerequisites.  Combined with the 2-lab cost, it's hardly the kind of thing that you can use for a quick rush.  For the same price an Advent player could easily field illuminators. 

    I'm not saying Vasari are the best choice, personally, i prefer TEC, but a decent player should be able to use any race and not have to rely on them all being basically the same.  And as far as the Vasari not haveing a beginning advantage, that's only partially true, you just need to e specific in the forces you use- Basically, i mean a Skirantra as your 1st Capitol, along with the upgraded skirmishers for your first strike.  initially, you wait for your opponent to come to you, throwing themselves against your fleet and a couple of planetary defenses, then throw everything you have left (Assuming you have enough left) back at them where they'll have only a couple ships and platforms waiting.

Im using the description as my arguement, i could careless about if people use the ship itself. the point is the Vasari Fleet isnt made for guerilla warfare its made for mass assaults, BUT the devs made sure the actual units reflected the reasoning in the lore. IE using typical FLEET UNITS to perform Guerilla Style Warfare. (pay attention next time) The Vasari isnt the uber weak race, this is the same people who cried foul with the Advent, now moving to the Vasari. I enjoy TEC but you dont see me in here complaining for the TEC to get buff this and buff that. Plain and simple each RACE HAS A WEAKNESS IN DIFFERENT AREAS THEN THE OTHERS. Its up to the individual player who invests time in a particular race to figure out how to take advantage of the strengths and minimize the weakness.

Everyone whos crying for the Skirmishers to be buffed are taking in no consideration the true effects itll have on game play. Im willing to bet, when the Devs decided to do the rebalance. They took a good hard look at all the units in the game. And there is a reason they left the Skirmishers (funny they would name it that, hmm what is a skirmish?............i know, do you?) the way they are, and guerilla warfare doesnt constitute a major advantage of a particular unit over another. All that would do is instigate more spamming. Which makes no sense considering a LF is nothing more then a early game fleet filler. If the Devs intended this to be a guerilla warfare unit and did what you purpose is a "true guerilla warfare unit" youd see people spamming the hell out of LFs. Spamming is not a tactic, its a lazy mans attempt get a game over with without using any thought.

Allegiance, I feel another one of our "definititions of military tactics and units" arguements coming on

I know what a skirmisher is. And yeah, I agree that spamming is no good. But even then, a skirmisher would cost a ton less, be faster, be weak as hell, use less fleet capacity and do exactly what i was talking about.

Blammo tons of them, they wipe out some weaker units or really damage something... kinda get wiped out running away (but getting away). then comes in the rest of the fleet. Making the present skirm cost a lot, slow and useless even in the begining is essentially a worthless unit. Especially because assailant isnt a ton better at openings, and vas scout is a pos in a fight.

lol Im not saying that the ships for Vasari are balanced for guerilla warfare, Im saying the Vasari are using what they got to accomplish a strategy they had to adopt. 

The problem is, that Skirmishers can't even be used for any hit-and-run attacks effectively. It can't even perform well in clearing out militia. Currently, Skirmishers are just too expensive for what they provide; 7 fleet for 10 DPS is horrible.

  I disagree.  I just played a game where i used 5 Skirmishers and a Skirantra to clear my first five planets (Yes, it's a capitol, but doesn't even equal 3 Skirmishers in firepower and was only targeted in one grav well) And i didn't lose a single Skirmisher to that endeavor.  You just have to know how to use the ship.  They are weak, so use ships that can heal them, and research Reintegration.  (Both Skirantra and Overseer heal other ships, why have a Capitol and a Cruiser for this unless it was a part of the designers plan?  Advent have only the "Subjugator", While TEC rely on the Hokos, both of which heal damage over time, which is what the Skirantra does-20, 25, 30 per second per upgrade, while the overseer enhances armor and immediately heals 250HP, and is able to do so 7 times, without recovering Antimatter, making it a good ship to rely on.)

  You must keep in mind that the Vasari are RUNNING AWAY!  Everything they are relies on their ships, so it stands to reason that their fleet would need to be diverse.  Yes, alone the Skirmisher is a poor choice, esspecially without research, but really, so are any of the others when compared to more diverse fleets.  The game is designed so no 1 ship is better than another, so the people whining about not being able to Skirmiser-Rush need to take a look at what their saying, exactly.  Perhaps that is why it only takes two weapons labs to build LRFs and Flak?

  The Light Frigates are fodder- They are intended to harrass your enemy enough that they are forced to deal with them, while other, more specialized ships do their thing.