Cruiser Command

Cruiser command is a cooperative map between two teams. Simply put, each team controls one battlecruiser and the goal is to kill the opponent's battlecruiser.


It is currently Tue Jan 22, 2019 12:57 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


 Post subject: Re: Destroyer revamp
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 12:34 am 
User avatar
CCA
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 10:13 am
Posts: 363
Wiki edits: 0
Offline
WhyteDragon wrote:
Completely against this. It's a destroyer. Bulky. Slow. Unwieldy. Turbo warp sounds like the last thing it should have.


but due to this, it's basically "hug the BC" - if there was some way for it to be slightly more mobile, giving it usefulness even when not hugging it's allied BC, then I think it would be better as far as actually playing it

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject: Re: Destroyer revamp
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 11:15 am 
User avatar
Yarrr
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:33 am
Posts: 494
Wiki edits: 126
Offline
Rather than, I think it's more important to first look at "why is the destroyer hugging the BC" rather than immediately just giving it more mobility as compensation.

Honestly speaking, it was my thought that the destroyer simply lacked the capability to deal with other small ships efficiently. As such, that made it an anti-BC unit. And as such, that meant it retained best use in BC combat. Naturally, like nearly every ship in BC combat, it will stay within the BC's protection.

Hugging the battlecruiser in battlecruiser combat is an inherit issue in all small ships. You cannot attribute it entirely to just the destroyer. In my opinion, the reason the destroyer hugs the battlecruiser more than other ships is because nobody uses it for anything other than fighting battlecruisers.

... this is my train of thoughts on the matter. The issue to me seems to lie more in its usage in small ship combat.

I honestly still wouldn't agree to a turbo jump for the destroyer. Give it sustainability. Give it shields. Give it health. But... not a turbo jump. I do think it would be nice to let the destroyer survive a bit more easily, but I honestly don't think that the way you're suggesting is the right way to go about it at all.

I think something along these lines might be more appropriate if we wanted to add a defensive aspect;

Defensive Aspect - Shield Core
The Destroyer wields a more powerful shield generator than normal ships. It innately possess 200 shields which regenerate by 5 per second, in addition to whatever equipment or upgrades it may wield.

or

Defensive Aspect - Iron Screen
The destroyer lessens incoming damage to hull by 80% for the next 5 seconds.

or

Defensive Aspect - Vanguard Frame
The destroyer reduces incoming damage to hull that strikes its front half by 60%.

I feel like any of these would be more appropriate that adding in a warp drive.


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject: Re: Destroyer revamp
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 4:39 pm 
User avatar
CCA
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 10:13 am
Posts: 363
Wiki edits: 0
Offline
WhyteDragon wrote:
Naturally, like nearly every ship in BC combat, it will stay within the BC's protection.


The problem is more along the lines of there never being another opportunity to use the ship.. all the other ships (OK, maybe chomper..) get to travel away from the BC to some extent, not so much the destroyer

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject: Re: Destroyer revamp
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 5:19 pm 
User avatar
Yarrr
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:33 am
Posts: 494
Wiki edits: 126
Offline
slapshot wrote:
WhyteDragon wrote:
Naturally, like nearly every ship in BC combat, it will stay within the BC's protection.


The problem is more along the lines of there never being another opportunity to use the ship.. all the other ships (OK, maybe chomper..) get to travel away from the BC to some extent, not so much the destroyer

Then how would adding this booster 'add opportunities'? You're not changing how the game is played, the objectives, the goals... you're just adding abilities. Adding a booster would allow it to 'more safely capitalize upon existing opportunities,' but it most certainly would not create new ones.

I don't think giving the destroyer a little defensive amplification is wrong, so that it doesn't get instantly destroyed by a battlecruiser if caught alone, but... I still agree with giving it a turbo boost.


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject: Re: Destroyer revamp
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 6:14 pm 
User avatar
CCI
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:56 am
Posts: 271
Wiki edits: 22
Offline
Ill take whyte-dragons Shield Core...and Iron screen is a rip-off of Iron Curtain and directional defensive abilities annoy me :|

Ok, so what about abilities that augment the quantum bombardment...
For example the destroyer starts with: Particle Accelerater - applies a buff to the destroyer, the buff stays until the destroyer fires a quantum bombardment. Removes the buff but gives the quantum bombardment 25% speed. 15 second cooldown. The buff will not stack (for now... ^^)
So essentially...I use the Particle Accelerator ability, and my next quantum bombardment will be 25% faster, however its up to me when i fire that quantum bombardment. I can hold on to that buff for 10 minutes if i dont fire off a quantum bombardment. Also, if i fire the quantum bombardment after 15 seconds of activating the buff, that means i can activate it again Immediately for the next quantum bombardment (though keep in mind quantum bombardments have 5 second cooldowns, so i can only use the particle accelerator with 1 out of every 3 quantum bombardments, and if i wanted to use it twice in a row i would have to skip 2 rotations of bombardments).
So thats the ability that people start off with, but we can add MOAR with upgrades.

Enhanced Trackers - requires T2 20 :y: 100 :b: 5 :g: 15s cooldown - increases homing range (distance when it starts moving to an enemy) and tracking abilities (how fast the projectiles can turn) by 50%
Saturated Explosives - requires T3 50 :y: 125 :r: 10 :g: 25s cooldown - increases damage by 25%

These abilities will not replace other abilities, therefore you can have all 3 active buffs at once, which is far more interesting, as each ability on its own sounds dull and generic, but you can combine them to create your own unique buff, (since there are already 10 variations with just 3 buffs)

Also fun other ideas ~~ You can target which direction you want your next quantum bombardment to go *like a wraith's EMP*
Your next projectiles are cloaked :lol: The qauntum bombardement fires all at once *instead of 5 projectiles fired in rapid succession, it will fire them all at once*. When fired, the next quantum bombardment will have a CD of 2 seconds down from 5 seconds....lots of fun stuff you can do xD instead of having boring damage upgrades, we can can increase a destroyers effectivness overall by the amount of buffs it can do...we can even rip off Leech and chroniton and apply them in a similar fashion ;)

_________________
You merely adopted Cruiser Command. I was born in it, molded by it.

One day a wise man introduced me to this game. "It shall protect your virginity, my lad" he said.

Dont touch me you filthy casual.


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject: Re: Destroyer revamp
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 6:17 pm 
User avatar
CCI
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 6:27 am
Posts: 36
Location: Republic of Korea
Offline
Light tractor beam
Smilar to BC's tractor beam, but longer, faster and weaker than BC's. and it can be used to ally and enemy small ships.


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject: Re: Destroyer revamp
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 6:22 pm 
User avatar
Creator
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:00 pm
Posts: 1027
Location: In the SC2 Editor
Wiki edits: 115
Offline
Sharp wrote:
Light tractor beam
Smilar to BC's tractor beam, but longer, faster and weaker than BC's. and it can be used to ally and enemy small ships.


What about the opposite? It pulls itself towards the target. Maybe that doesn't really fit the role though...

What about a simpler version where you just target a unit (including asteroids) and it pulls you toward it. It will give the destroyer its own mobility ability that is unique and could work pretty well to escape or get closer.

_________________
Never ignore coincidence. Unless, of course, you’re busy. In which case, always ignore coincidence.


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject: Re: Destroyer revamp
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 7:58 pm 
User avatar
CCA
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 10:13 am
Posts: 363
Wiki edits: 0
Offline
WhyteDragon wrote:
Then how would adding this booster 'add opportunities'? You're not changing how the game is played, the objectives, the goals... you're just adding abilities. Adding a booster would allow it to 'more safely capitalize upon existing opportunities,' but it most certainly would not create new ones.

I don't think giving the destroyer a little defensive amplification is wrong, so that it doesn't get instantly destroyed by a battlecruiser if caught alone, but... I still agree with giving it a turbo boost.


new opportunity created: go and harass the enemy BC - if they send small ships or engine boost at you, you can have a chance at escaping

the current destroyer doesn't instantly get destroyed by a BC if caught alone.. (well as long as it's not caught in a tractor beam), as it takes a few shots due to it's high health, however it's so slow that the difference between 3 shots and 10 shots isn't really all that much.. and increasing the health would make it way harder for any small ships to kill it (extra shields are basically the same as more health) - the vanguard also doesn't really help.. since even with reduced damage, you won't want to fight the BC, you will need to turn and run once it starts shooting at you..

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject: Re: Destroyer revamp
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 9:04 pm 
User avatar
CCI
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:56 am
Posts: 271
Wiki edits: 22
Offline
slapshot wrote:
WhyteDragon wrote:
Then how would adding this booster 'add opportunities'? You're not changing how the game is played, the objectives, the goals... you're just adding abilities. Adding a booster would allow it to 'more safely capitalize upon existing opportunities,' but it most certainly would not create new ones.

I don't think giving the destroyer a little defensive amplification is wrong, so that it doesn't get instantly destroyed by a battlecruiser if caught alone, but... I still agree with giving it a turbo boost.


new opportunity created: go and harass the enemy BC - if they send small ships or engine boost at you, you can have a chance at escaping

the current destroyer doesn't instantly get destroyed by a BC if caught alone.. (well as long as it's not caught in a tractor beam), as it takes a few shots due to it's high health, however it's so slow that the difference between 3 shots and 10 shots isn't really all that much.. and increasing the health would make it way harder for any small ships to kill it (extra shields are basically the same as more health) - the vanguard also doesn't really help.. since even with reduced damage, you won't want to fight the BC, you will need to turn and run once it starts shooting at you..


We could always nerf the starting hull a lot, then have a +100 for each hull like the chomper. So earlier it starts off pretty wimpy but becomes a force to be reckoned with late game

_________________
You merely adopted Cruiser Command. I was born in it, molded by it.

One day a wise man introduced me to this game. "It shall protect your virginity, my lad" he said.

Dont touch me you filthy casual.


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject: Re: Destroyer revamp
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 9:48 pm 
User avatar
Yarrr
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:33 am
Posts: 494
Wiki edits: 126
Offline
slapshot wrote:
new opportunity created: go and harass the enemy BC - if they send small ships or engine boost at you, you can have a chance at escaping

That's not a created opportunity. That's an existing opportunity that you just make easier by adding boost -- something of which makes the job of any small ship easier. People already did this even without the boost -- it was just a matter of doing it correctly. You're mistakenly treating an inferior opportunity as negligible, a point of which is a matter of opinion, unless being relatively assured.

What you're saying is roughly equivalent to proposing that miners be given chain saws because they don't have enough killing power to defend themselves. Yeah, it sounds cool and looks neat but you're missing the entire point.


Top
 Profile  
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group