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

N NiHiLiM

28/08/2010 · 08:42 PM #275

the filter is blocking out the x in brainfcuk
hate when chatfilters start to interfere with normal language usage :s

like in; i love maths. like algebra and behindytics.
but most chatfilters`ll block out `behind` from behindytics.. sigh.

N NiHiLiM

28/08/2010 · 08:38 PM #274

l2read :p

>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.

my mind is too fubar atm. i`ve just wrote a Brainx compiler ..;; HAHHAAH !
oh boy... need to get some sleep. will vote when i made up my mind.

can`t we give preference order ? like: 1) V1>redesign>V2

S SamTheMan

28/08/2010 · 08:19 PM #273

___MY VOTE___
1) Lakko Redesigned Concept.
2) Undecided
3) Yes
4) Yes
5) Yes

BadWolfOP

28/08/2010 · 12:25 PM #272

Voting will end on 9/1/2010 12:01 am server time

Edited by ShatterdDreams on 2010-08-28

S SamTheMan

28/08/2010 · 09:16 AM #271

I`ll trade for a better starbase even if the upkeep is horribly expensive. Starbases are mainly uses to power build cheaply. Personally i rarely find starbases useful in a defensive stack anymore.

Im not fond of V2 at all. Looks like the origional with the same A.miner weakness. At least the origional 10 range starbase out flanks destoryers.

M MajorDinero

28/08/2010 · 08:52 AM #270

emmdee: maybe that`s why lakko/hoko got improved to be where they are now :P

I really with there was some sort of test GC server where we can see these changes in motion. I wonder if it would be possible to re-open death match into a public test server ^^

E emmdeeUT

28/08/2010 · 08:34 AM #269

Apoapsis, despite what is said about the Miners being a defensive race, originally Miners had terrible SBs, the original Lakko and Hoko. hey had the defense of Swiss cheese.

E Edge

28/08/2010 · 06:19 AM #268

piff what are meant and whats fair and balanced are 2 different things

A Apoapsis

28/08/2010 · 06:13 AM #267

I hope that everyone can keep in mind that miners as a race are supposed to have great starbases.

E Edge

28/08/2010 · 06:10 AM #266

plus BR should still be lower than 5 its still disgrace miners get so high BR in starbases

E Edge

28/08/2010 · 06:08 AM #265

range is to high on version 2 needs dropped no higher than 6

BadWolfOP

28/08/2010 · 04:26 AM #264

Another option for Lakko posted up which i believed to be fair for balancing out the lakko in general and allows you to keep it`s BR

D DrunkenMasters

28/08/2010 · 03:30 AM #263

Shattered, I don`t see Chiron as being even REMOTELY useless... And Diamond, as it is, with almost 140k per turn build rate is quite faster than lakko and hokko. And fairly difficult to kill(at equal pr sure, it is easy, but turn-to-turn, not so easy).

E emmdeeUT

28/08/2010 · 03:29 AM #262

Make the easiest tweaks first. Change BR to 4, increase upkeep, no carryover on UWs. Then see what happens, reassess in 1-2 months.

Changing Lakko fighting characteristics should not be done lightly/without very careful thought. The problem has been the spamming Lakkos. Let`s fix that problem and maybe a couple upkeep tweaks.. If we want to change a ship because it is considered "overpowered" or "unfair" or something, there will be no end to the haggling as we will need to redesign the whole game.

B buckaroo

28/08/2010 · 02:54 AM #261

I think you should just MAKE the changes you think are necessary. Making it this huge ordeal that takes weeks of proposing and discussing is just annoying! Change the dang ships and make it tough luck for us that we don`t own this game, help design this game, or any of that crab, we just play it. Does this make sense~!? BW we trust you, shatteredDreams if BW trusts you we all trust you so fine make it happen!!

A Archaeoptyrex

28/08/2010 · 02:21 AM #260

I retract ... this is a pretty good ship 1:1 firepower in any form is nice for a miner. + excellent hull as long as they don`t get any chemical spray.

I do have a suggestion though that might pique people. Drop range of current lakko down to 8 (or 7). This pretty much solves the ECM superiority UW issue (e.g. emmys can hit great now).

Give this new designed ship as a replacement for the G-Diamond. It seems to fit with guardian ships pretty well. Guards also won`t be as scared about the -95% chemical.

I Infernal

27/08/2010 · 10:36 PM #259

that is true MD. im so glad im no longer terran on slow heh

S SamTheMan

27/08/2010 · 10:32 PM #258

Thief the new Lakko design beats Pyth badly. Take a look at the battle Data ShatterdDreams did for us. The new Lakko Design actually balances out nice. It has its ups and downs, but the current Lakko going to be nerfed in upkeep and build rate anyways so look at the downside of the origional. Also consider how the New Lakko beats other ships A.miner normally have trouble with and loses to the others. I like the idea of 1 of our 3 starbases actually doing damage rather then another useless fodder.

M MajorDinero

27/08/2010 · 10:26 PM #257

@infernal:

lakko UWs might be impossible due to these changes now, but UWs are still very possible even as a miner ^^, the sad thing is that terrans will forever be gimped when it comes to UWs, lol

M MajorDinero

27/08/2010 · 10:24 PM #256

I think that these changes will make the lakko a desirable ship to stack/climb with on RT

but I don`t think that it will be used on TB very much. The upkeep is also very expensive relative to how good the ship is imo

people keep saying that the hull/PR ratio and no retal is too much, but this is offset by the extremely low range this ship has and the very high upkeep for a SB.

I do think that the new lakko is definately on the right track in terms of concept, it needs to be different enough from the hoko with complimenting weaknesses and strengths...but I don`t think that discouraging spamming of a ship is ever gonna work well on TB - it`s just gonna result in miners spamming another ship :P

Reply