New Miner Starbases

E EternusOP

OP 14/02/2007 · 01:21 AM #1

Name M.Lakko
Class Starbase
Weapon 4000
Energy Damage 1500
Kinetic Damage 1500
Missile Damage 1000
Chemical Damage 0
Hull 15,000
Range 10
Scanner rating 1,500
Power rating 9,337

Cost per unit 68,335
Upkeep 2,352

1 turn produces 5

Mineral Required
Mineral Required
Terran Metal 12
Red Crystal 13
White Crystal 8
Rutile 65
Composite 22
Strafez Organism 0

Ship Attributes
Defense Modifier
Energy Shield + 30 %
Absorption Shield +15 %
ECM - 30 %
Ionized Hull + 40 %

-------------------------

Name M.Hokko
Class Starbase
Weapon 4000
Energy Damage 1000
Kinetic Damage 1000
Missile Damage 2000
Chemical Damage 0
Hull 10,000
Range 12
Scanner rating 1,500
Power rating 9,337

Cost per unit 68,335
Upkeep 2,352

1 turn produces 5

Mineral Required
Mineral Required
Terran Metal 12
Red Crystal 12
White Crystal 10
Rutile 55
Composite 22
Strafez Organism 0

Ship Attributes
Defense Modifier
Energy Shield -30 %
Absorption Shield +40 %
ECM + 30 %
Ionized Hull + 15 %

We`ve run every possible test I`m assured and both comes out a heavy hitter but beatable. So here`s your oppurtunity to complain away

D DarckKnight

16/02/2007 · 08:05 AM #69

lakko needs 8 or less hokko doesn't matters

A Archaeoptyrex

16/02/2007 · 07:55 AM #68

range 9 hokko (since less hull)
range 8 lakko, would be fair ?

Rockin` build rates for such high range ships. But looks good.

R Rafale

16/02/2007 · 07:44 AM #67

kewl ^_^ still looking mean ^_^ then

E EternusOP

16/02/2007 · 07:42 AM #66

Still trying to decide whats best for the hoko probably will have a range nerf to 9 or 10 same as Lakko at least

R Rafale

16/02/2007 · 07:23 AM #65

>_< i dont think aminers should have range 10 chlorites or no retail epidote >_<

if you stick with aminers being a defensive race then there is no need to improve the destroyer class >_< (mostly use for attacking) *wishes to use the two new starbases though ^_^

S species382

16/02/2007 · 06:17 AM #64

i think mostly the motivation for a range 10 Cholrite was to have at least a single miner ship, which can attack/withstand borrellies

B BadSicilian

16/02/2007 · 05:34 AM #63

chlorite having higher range would help it against rubys, since a ruby spam still murders anything a miner can do that i`ve sen, so chlorite might be able to do a lil more damage :\

G Gilead

16/02/2007 · 05:01 AM #62

Hiig: maybe the Miners think that borrelies should have range 9 (my poor castrated destroyers :P), so a Chlorite with range 10 could kill it....

or they want it to kill pikes, apollos, swords, broadswords, tigers.... but maybe not :)

O Omega231

16/02/2007 · 04:18 AM #61

how do i get these?

E enigmatism

16/02/2007 · 04:13 AM #60

whens the new A.Hoko gonna be available to use?

H Hiigarans

15/02/2007 · 10:59 PM #59

also, the new Lictor is abit unbalance. prehaps, it still need some minor adjust on shield n pr.

H Hiigarans

15/02/2007 · 10:58 PM #58

also, i hear most ppl agree Cholrite should have range 10. what`s the point for it if Borelly range had been reduce to 8?

the current Cholrite with range 9 can beat it now on both offensiev n defenisve. so, what those Miner looking for? a better hull + slightly better shield + not bad upkeep but only with slightly less dmg version of P.Zeus?

S species382

15/02/2007 · 08:40 PM #57

After reconsidering (->Rafale), i think, such a high range can be ok, as long as the (effective) hull to pr ratio is approximatively equal 1. Then, one can try to dammage the starbases entirely by retailiation types of attack, and inflict comparable damage irrespective range (that requires however, than nobody funny gives them the ability no-retail). Therefore the Hoko is basically ok with me, however, the Lakko not, lakko is curently 50% stronger then the already good Hoko.

Therfore i would suggest,
- keep range of Hoko
- maybe give it ONE (not 2,3, or 4) realy bad shield
- reduce range of Lakko to 7
- maybe give it ONE (not 2,3, or 4) realy good shield

Then lakko would demotivate defensive spamming, and people have to start stacking against each a miner...... how uncool.

A archaeoptyrex

15/02/2007 · 07:58 PM #56

Shattered ... the whole point of this thread is that such high range ship with good hull makes stacking much less attractive.

these SBs force people to spam, which some people like to do, and everyone must do at some point, but it makes the game less worthwhile if everyone does it all the time.

R Rafale

15/02/2007 · 06:31 PM #55

but if the range of the starbase decrease does it means it will get killed by careful and aggressive ? >_<

S species382

15/02/2007 · 06:20 PM #54

See it from the rpactical side, the range 10+ starbases motivate enemy attacks (pyth and herc spams) on carefull, and make an attack on aggressive by long range ships impossible. Does this realy improves the fun of the game?

R Rafale

15/02/2007 · 09:49 AM #53

yeah i think the range should drop to either 8 or 9 since every other starbase is at 7.

but i like the range now because people have to spam careful against starbases, and they also need to attack aggressive against the lictor ^_^ nice combo lol

Z Zenith

15/02/2007 · 09:19 AM #52

What terran hits careful with thor or zeus?

R Razgriz

15/02/2007 · 09:04 AM #51

i like em, the miners were meant to be a defensive race and this helps with that

E Evane

15/02/2007 · 08:55 AM #50

Every terran ship beats lakko when attacking on careful from 130% PR except kalieum, empereur, and apollo.

About half the terran ships beat it on careful from 100% PR including the 3 capital ships (herc, nirv, tyr).

Reply