A.Miner Starbase Discussion

OP 22/08/2010 · 05:52 AM #1

Ok people it`s time to vote on these idea`s if you would pls submit all your votes to the empire PollMeister on RT. this will decide which or all of these shall go through. just copy paste the format below with your choices

1) Lakko Version one, with BR of either 4 or 3.
Lakko version two
or Lakko the Redesigned Concept.

2) kyro upkeep reduction (y/n)

3) Livid upkeep reduction (y/n)

4) lyth upkeep reduction (y/n)

5 Chlor build rate reduction and Epidote build rate increase (y/n)

in a format similar to this pls
1) lakko version two
2)Yes
3)No
4)No
5)No

*note the changes to hoko will go through, and Chlor and epidote is a package deal, you can`t get either or.

also only one vote per person, not account, if we find you voted with multiple accounts all your votes will be discounted for wasting our time. Also for those of you that have taken the Lakko as part of a UW Reward, you will have the option to choose another ship.
------------------

These are the current changes proposed by the staff, please discuss them in a constructive manner, feel free to also pm feed back directly to us.

Lakko version one

upkeep is increased from 2,352 to 7,195

Build rate, dropped from 5 to 4 or 3
which means instead of 55,350 pr a turn it`s now 44,280 or 33,210 pr a turn

or

M.Lakko redesign concept
Energy Damage 11,500
Missile Damage 24,000
Hull 55,000
Range 3
Scanner rating 623
Power rating 36,666
1 turn produces 1
Ship upkeep 32,999

Ship Specials
No retaliation
Ships attacked by this ship cannot return fire.

Energy Shield +40%
Absorption Shield -60%
ECM +40%
Ionized Hull -95%

Or..

M.Lakko Ver. 2
4,000 Total Damage
1,500 Energy Damage
1,500 Kinetic Damage
1,000 Missile Damage
Hull 15,000
Scanner 900
Range 8
Power Rating 11,061
1 turn produces 5
Ship upkeep 6,032

Ship Specials
No defense
This ship can`t return fire if attacked.

Energy Shield +30%
Absorption Shield +30% Was +15%
ECM -40% Was -30%
Ionized Hull +40%

Hoko

upkeep increased from 1,450 to 4,475

build rate dropped from 6 to 5
which means instead of 59,670 pr a turn it`s now 49,725 pr a turn

Kyro

upkeep reduced from 45,000 to 32,328

Lyth

upkeep reduced from 52,052 to 41,154

Livid (r)

upkeep reduced from 20,000 to 15,641

Chlor

build rate dropped from 10 to 8

Epidote

build rate increased from 10 to 12

Edited by ShatterdDreams on 2010-08-28

Edited by BadWolf on 2010-08-29

Edited by BadWolf on 2010-08-29

Edited by BadWolf on 2010-08-29

Edited by ShatterdDreams on 2010-08-29

S SamTheMan

25/08/2010 · 08:29 PM #215

If we going to redesign M.Lakko we should call it Beta-Kyro. 3 range u got to be kidding me, give me a terran base instead. If you changed Abosorption Shild to -30% and Ionized Hull to -40% with a range of 6 or 7 i can see the base doing ok, if not give us MANOFWAR instead.

Also if u going to edit the starbases instead the Hull of the Hoko 1k and i`ll love you guys.

S ShatterdDreams

25/08/2010 · 08:26 PM #214

the new lakko concept must have such extreme ratios or else it be flop, it`s easily billable the way it is, and as stated the only it`s really going to do much damage to any fleet is if let them survive.

and yes there`s a reason the range is at 3

so i would really like people to look over the design and test it, don`t be bias about lakko needing to be high range or any of that. then i would like you to choose either the rebalanced version of the current lakko or this new lakko

N NiHiLiM

25/08/2010 · 07:34 PM #213

i would only adjust Lakko`s upkeep and BR.

changing all it specs... that ain`t Lakko any-more.
Lakko is fine as it is now. it`s only the br and up that needs to be adjusted, in order to solve the "issues" that there are with minder.SB now.

and *if* there would be a serious adjustment of the specs:
then ffs, don`t call it Lakko anymore. cause it won`t be Lakko.
delete Lakko and introduce a new ship instead.
(but i`d prefer to keep Lakko as it is ^^ )

S Sibiriangun

25/08/2010 · 07:29 PM #212

I agree with KoN that the ratios of the new lakko are a bit extreme, even considering the low range. That being said, it is completely useless as a spam since it will lose to most fleets on aggressive, and guards will have no problem taking out a spam.

But it is a very nice ship for a lower stack flanker! Good job staff!

T Thief

25/08/2010 · 07:23 PM #211

oooh now we are talking! a no retal base would be very nice addition to the miner race

N notorion

25/08/2010 · 06:37 PM #210

as a newbie-leet i`d say it doesn`t really matter for (most of the player) about these cahangeez cause eventually it`ll be a nature (those ships) and like it or not ppl are gonna stick to it.

Just a perspective from a drunken gurls.

D Deathroe

25/08/2010 · 12:36 PM #209

First off, this thread may be one of the finest discussions on GC, ever !!

I usually don`t comment on ship design, I am too much of a newbie:P That said, I think the balancing of the M Lakko is a great idea - for all the reasons previously stipulated. I personally think that ship balancing should be a function of a race`s income (and story line). I have always felt that the Range of A miner star bases is too high. Range is extremely important and most star bases, considering that they are built for shields and heavy firepower would have a range of 6, 7 and maybe 8. One of the current ideas is to drop the range of the M Lakko to 3, I think this is too low.

The increase in upkeep seems appropriate - and is fair considering the income of most miners.

Some of the negative defensive shields seems drastic!! Having the M Lakko have two major weakness is too much. For this discussion let us assume that a major weakness is a modifier great than ( -25 or more). The A Miners are supposed to have great defensive ships; so, keeping with the story line, I doubt very much that A Miners would ever desgin let alone build such a star base !!

Thanks to all the Staff for working so hard on this - as a paid player - my many thanks !!

A aacra

25/08/2010 · 12:28 PM #208

@darkmaruadian- There must a be a hundred reasons a person doesn`t like to post cg`s every 5 min. Good material for a different thread, though that dead horse has already been beaten a few times.

K KnightofNi

25/08/2010 · 10:35 AM #207

Hmmm the new lakko design looks intriguing... actually looks a lot like the corsair with some pretty extreme shields (the corsair and just about all other coll ships LOLRAPE the new lakko lmao) :P... I do think that the weap/hull/pr ratio needs to be dropped a bit though...with 36k a turn a ship shouldn`t have 1/1.5/1 ratios, that seems ridiculously overpowered, even with a 3 range. Maybe drop the hull to 45k or the missile damage down to 18-19k to balance it out a bit. I do realize that the ship can`t be used on attack (and that is the caveat to the ship) but still, the w/h/pr(/br) ratios seem just ridiculous.

It is a far cry from the original 15 range lakko though... dropping it from range 15 to range 3 in two swift blows :P

M Mazuku

25/08/2010 · 10:34 AM #206

i like it. it seems to work well for me in my mind great wep, good hull and it still builds pretty fast. the chem shields seem a bit harsh though.

N nedflanders

25/08/2010 · 09:21 AM #205

hmm this is a really interesting change..I`ve only done like a few simulations, but I get the feeling that this ship is a great counterpart to the hoko. If some miner is basing and you dont know what he is building...if you attack aggro on the lakko chances are you will win but if you attack aggro on hoko chances are you will lose (note that herc still beats both SBs on the same stance, not sure if my interpreted role of the ship is the same as the staff`s)

Just one thing...the combination of range 3 and -kin shds almost seems purposely planned. If it wasn`t `purposely planned`, I`d suggest the range to be boosted slightly to 4 or 5.

A combination of factors also makes this ship something you probably don`t want to use for UWs, so mission accomplished there as well.

K keltikelti

25/08/2010 · 08:55 AM #204

just increase upkeep no ship changes

S ShatterdDreams

25/08/2010 · 08:30 AM #203

This new base concept is an interesting one that we think will help miners, first off it`s a beast on careful, most capitals lose to it on careful. aggressive how ever is another story most ships beat it on aggressive. so it will be useful in a miner stack also because of the no retal it will be good for STACKING. in a UW situation or if it`s spammed not to worry, it`s perfectly killable from under by quiet a few ships. go test it out people and see for yourselves.

Edited by ShatterdDreams on 2010-08-25

K keltikelti

25/08/2010 · 07:06 AM #202

/me approves of the changes

S SamTheMan

25/08/2010 · 06:55 AM #201

So when the changes going to take affect?

S ShatterdDreams

25/08/2010 · 02:26 AM #200

i`m feel sorry for anyone who plays miner just because of their bases. miners have loads of good ships an tones of other reasons to play the race. sure the bases are ok, but even if all miners had were kyro, like they once did, it`s still be a completely worth while race to play.

A AmericanMinistry

24/08/2010 · 09:25 PM #199

i play fast as a cg miner. its fun and i like it and its not just because of the bases that it is fun.. and i dont plan on restarting if they do make the proposed changes. but first off 60bil is nothing for a miner thats 3 days worth of lyth that u saved 3 months for so no thats not much money... and 2 your right it does take that long to get that much and so it sucks researching and using minimun fighting turns each day to save up so that maybe one day every few months i can build uo and fight with the big boys..... your idea of .6 upkeep on that lakko is good cause it is the bases that make our race worth playing, don`t need to go to high.

D DarkMaraudian

24/08/2010 · 09:18 PM #198

lolz at aacra`s post , meaning they cant bot as easily yeh :P ?

K KnightofNi

24/08/2010 · 09:05 PM #197

I was a cg miner on fast for a good 3-4 months and amassed 60b creds over that time... keeping in mind that I`d never played miner before in my life when I started that server and had no idea how to go about anything :P. So anyone saying that cg miner doesn`t make any money is totally full of dung and needs to stfu lol... it may make LESS money than mineral miner or tax miner, but after a point it doesn`t even matter lmao... I quit cuz I hated the ships LOL

Oh and when BW busts out the hive you will all be soooo screwed >:)... god forbid you have to think about collective as a fighting race (which it is, as I`ve proved over the last year lmao)

T Thief

24/08/2010 · 08:42 PM #196

but the issue is maybe these changes scare off cg miners? and since theres multi race taxxers to eat food and multi race food producers, it seems like u dont want to do anything that will alienate one side of the market? maybe im wrong maybe the epi boost and the kryo reduction will be enough to keep them around but thenagain ur taking the chlor away from high pr battles ....

Reply