Fixing the Broadsword

[Elukka]

As many of you may know, PDB doesn't fire on the Broadsword DD's Nike torpedoes.
I think this is a gamebreaking bug.

Since it doesn't look like there'll be another patch, i was wondering if it can be fixed by modding?
Even something less fancy, like just replacing it with the Terellian fusion torpedo would work for me.

[Toshiro]

[:)]  Hey there
 
The Broadsword uses the Nike torpedo and its a drone weapon. Same as the fusion torp and Athenas.  I use it in my BSG mod as the main type of torp. (Although I renamed it)  I basicaly used the same def file info.  It gets shot down no problem.  Perhaps the problem lies in the PDB on opponent ships.  Now most (or all) of them will target drones,fighters and other capships. I would think it most likely be tracking/ range and  firing arc problem of said PDB.
Does the frigate have a problem shooting them down.  Mk7 interceptors are deffed to take on those too.
Have all the capships been tried against a Broadswords Nike torps??  Basicaly I think the capships have limited pdb function.  Don't think they cover all that well.  For example if there are fighters and incoming torps and a capships  in range the PDB,... it now has 3 target types  it can shoot at. But it will only target one of them.
If you only have one PDB on that side your pretty much screwed.  But thats how it was balanced.  Probably why you don't have capships launching a large salvo of torps at you ( Honor Harrington ring a bell? )
 
Toshiro

[Elukka]

I'm pretty sure that at least the Asher and Specter DD's don't shoot at them at all. I know of the firing arcs and can get them firing on other torpedoes. Also, there were no other targets for the PDB weapons to shoot at.

[Toshiro]

[:)] Lets go over a few ships.  Asher only has 3 pdbs  port/starboard/and rear.  no foward facing pdb! Only Phalanx cannons  which are short range 35km
Berents has 3 pdbs, 2 fwd and 1 aft and MK7s.   Spectre has 2 fwd and 2 aft pdbs.   Phalanx only!
Cruisers have 1 fwd ,1 aft, 2 port and 2 starboard pdbs. Fwd an Aft are Vanguard cannons which are 45km range.   Devastator has 1 fwd, 1 aft, 1 port and 1 starboard . All Vanguard cannons on this one.
Th Orion has an interesting mix, it has 6 vanguard gun emplacements in 60, 90 and 180 degrees on each side, and 2 fwd and 2 aft Phalanx pdbs.
 
Personaly I think with only 35km range the phalanx, unless it packs a punch will not stop a torp in time.
 
The asher has the most problems because of no FWD facing PDBs.  The game is hardcoded for ships to "face off" against each other. Nose to nose where most of its heavy lasers,xrays are.  It has been a problem for those who desire broadside exchanges like in Honor Harrington. Unless you alter your angle of attack and present your PDBs arc to the enemy they will not fire.
 
If for some reason you are saying that in the best positions The PDBs do not fire at a Nike at all??
The Courageous cruisers have nikes as well.  Do the enemy PDBs fire at them??
One possible fix ,if its the nike def that is, is to copy the fusion torp from the Wep def in the shatter dat.
change its name and attributes to a nike and repaste "it" into the wep def. and removing the old one.
Then reinsert it back into the shatter dat.  OR  maybe redeffing the capships to have fusion torps or athenas.
 
I will play around and see what your talking about as I haven't noticed nikes not being shot at.
 
Toshiro
 
 

[wdboyd]

Toshiro,

You have provided a lot of information for players that only informed modders would be aware of and or most likely appreciate.

Players want fixes for their lack of game success.

Most of the time there is nothing wrong with the simulation. But, it's easier to blame the game.

There are some players that can't or won't complete a game without game cheats.

Unfortunatley, there are no shortcuts or game cheats available for Starshatter.

Commanders, life is tough in the Starshatter galaxy. [:D]

A better question is, "Have others been able to complete the games dynamic campaign?"

If so... how in the world did they do it with all the supposed problems that need to be fixed?

We modders know that the simulations weapons perform as designed. They don't have a choice.

Commanders (players).... examine your tactics. If a frontal assualt is suicide... uh er, don't do it. What does that leave you. Make your attacks from a different angle or elevation. From above and or below. Think in 3 dimensions. Learn your ships strengths and weaknesses.

In conclusion, don't blame lack of mission or campaign success on supposed game bugs. Rest assured, others have completed the simulations dynamic campaign. You can too. It should be challenging.

For those of you that want a super fleet that can't be beat... get into modding the game and your wish can become a reality. But, be warned, modding takes time, effort and learning how things work in the simulation.

[Toshiro]

[:)]  Yes  I agree.   I have used the nike def as parameters for my modded torps.  They do get shot down.
So...my point is that this is really about PDB arcs/range and tactics.   In fact I don't think I recall anybody ever raise this issue before.   Of course I could be wrong.[&:]    Perhaps this happens on few pc systems?
Basically the Nike is a drone class weapon, and all PDBs are assigned to target all space units.
So they should be able to be shot down.
  I believe the game's ships stats were created to be this way and
I think Milo has created a balance for the sake of the campaign story.  Different space navies, with their different abilities and so on.  I think the goal is to explore the differences and discover the advantages and weak spots.
 
Or course there will always be some who to make their changes to the game.  Once you start on that road getting a balance will be some work.[:D]
 
So right now I can't say this is a bug.  So far I have had no problems here.
 
Toshiro
 

[Elukka]

I'll do some additional labbing to check this thing again. I'm not the most skilled capital ship captain but i've had little trouble neutralising other torpedoes.

wdboyd - I'm sure the campaign can be completed, however i just think there is something wrong when a certain type of destroyer is able to take on any other ship. The Broadsword isn't described as some sort of supership. A frontal assault could and probably should be suicide on, say, a cruiser. But if it's just a lone destroyer, a frontal assault with 2 destroyers, a cruiser and a couple of frigates really ought not to be suicide.

It really doesn't make sense how all other torpedoes can be shot down except the Nikes.

[JT]

You modders may believe it's functioning as designed, but game developers (such as myself) know there's such a thing called "game balance" that has to be upheld.

[Avimimus]

Pah. The Original Starshatter didn't have what I would call game balance (appologies to the Dev).

Here are the basic issues I have:
1. The player ships are more powerful than the AI ships
2. The AI ships have large gaps in their defenses that an astute player can easily make use of
3. The AI isn't aggressive enough (this was probably done to prevent ramming) and therefore it is possible to get into a blind spot and stay there
4. The formations are too loose in the campaign allowing each ship to be taken on without the support of its squadron

All of these things make it virtually impossible to be killed in a one-on-one (unless it is intentional).

The Mod I have almost finished would, while not necessarily making the game balanced, make it much more challenging and fix many of these problems. Mind you the more dangerous enemies mean that your hull tends to take wear in the campaign (and can't be repaired in time).

If I ever solve the airbase bug that has caused me to take an "indefinate break" I will probably reballance the sim to have much more durable hulls and at the same time more vulnerable shield and reactor systems.

Btw. I dealt with the issue raised in this thread by increasing dispersion for PDBs so that a higher degree of randomisation is introduced.

[JT]

ORIGINAL: Avimimus

Pah. The Original Starshatter didn't have what I would call game balance (appologies to the Dev).

If you got the idea that I'm a Starshatter developer, sorry about that. I wish I could work on Starshatter! (You could also be talking about the actual developer, though -- it's a bit ambiguous.)

What I meant is that I develop games on the side, as a hobby. I have yet to release any of them, mostly because I work on so many different games. =)

I'm a major proponent of the Zero-Point Rule, where any fighting force, when taken as a combined whole, should be exactly equal to any other fighting force as a combined whole... this ensures that the battle is both challenging and entertaining and that the victor is the better strategist. In this case, it's okay if a Broadsword can walk circles around its Alliance equivalent, but wading through a whole fleet of Terellian ships should be tacitly impossible.

To address the other points:

Player ships shouldn't be more powerful, I agree -- but if you're playing in Arcade mode, I could see concessions being made for player ships in that regard.

The other aspects of the AI are definitely problematic; the problem with fixing those is that quantifying "strategy" can be very difficult programmatically. Strategy and tactics are arts, not sciences, and computers tend to have considerable problems being artistic.

Getting the AI to understand formation tactics a little better would be great. Heck, a month or two ago I was asking for a revision so that any given mission would commit sufficient resources -- e.g., if asked to destroy a cruiser, committing just four fighter/bombers to the deed is a bit... conservative.

The AI should also commit all of its available force (keeping only a small reserve) to action at any given time. For instance, even during the pitched conflict at the end of Highland when the Archon Battle Group moves to aggress the enemy, the Archon still keeps nearly 90% of its fighter assets on board at all times, even when/if it is about to be destroyed.

[yngvef]

I too was frustrated with the Broadsword in the beginning. I had just gotten command of my first destroyer squadron and was ready to kill some badguys when a couple of Broadswords came and killed my entire squadron. Later, I realized that the reason my Asher didn't fire PDBs at the Nikes was that I was flying directly towards the torpedoes (and the Asher has NO pdbs pointing forwards)... Also, I realized that I had forgotten to set the shields to maximum before engaging and I spread my squadron out too thinly and thought my frigates were capable of handling anti-ship duties (even though they are stated as being anti-fighter platforms). There were many lessons learned in "The Battle of Jalah", as I like to call it.

Later, in another campaign, I was commanding a Spectre class destroyer and was careful not to rush the Broadswords. Also, I kept the shield at maximum, my wingman close, the top of my ship facing the incoming torpedoes, the frigates on the flanks and the speed down (to avoid getting too close). My PDBs took out all but one Nike that destroyed one of my torpedo launchers, but I was still able to keep fighting. I went low to force the enemy to either face me or my squadron. Lucky for me they faced the squadron and my torpedoes ripped the Broadswords apart. One of my frigates was lost and the other Spectre destroyer was heavily damaged, but I removed the Broadsword threat from that battle for good... It was a good day [8D]


Regarding this:

ORIGINAL: Elukka

The Broadsword isn't described as some sort of supership. A frontal assault could and probably should be suicide on, say, a cruiser. But if it's just a lone destroyer, a frontal assault with 2 destroyers, a cruiser and a couple of frigates really ought not to be suicide.

The information about the Broadsword in Tactical Reference goes like this: "The DD-3C21 BROADSWORD class of destroyers represents the pinnacle of Hegemony warship technology; big, fast, and ready to deliver punishing amounts of damage to all who stand in their way."

When a ship is defined as "the pinnacle of warship technology", they should be dangerous. We have been warned [;)]

The Nike can be shot down as long as you keep the PDBs pointed at them. However, the PDB isn't perfect and some will still hit and cause heavy damage. The Nike is a much better weapon than the "Fusion torpedo" because it travels about 70 percent faster and causes 25 percent more damage when it hits. The main tip is to avoid staying within Nike range for too long. If you end up in a slow shootout between a single Spectre and a single Broadsword, you will most probably lose because they have better weaponry than you. The trick is to overwhelm them by attacking with as powerful force as you can muster, and having everyone getting within range at the same time. The Broadswords PDB is good... but not THAT good [;)]

Also, people argue that a destroyer should not be THAT powerful, but what "should be" and what "actually is" isn't always the same. Just think about this, in the beginning of WW1, navies on both sides of the conflict put a lot of faith in the new "Battlecruiser" design. It was fast enough to keep up with smaller ships and had guns powerful enough to deal with the bigger ones. It all turned out to be a flawed concept, and an alarming amount of battlecruisers exploded in the "Battle of Jutland". The reason being that ship gunnery happened at longer and longer distances and this caused the impact angle to be quite steep. This combined with the battlecruisers weak top armor caused several disastrous ship explosions. What looked good on paper was not very good in real life. This can happen the other way too, where a ship turns out to be much more capable than initially believed.

We all know now, mostly from bitter experience, that the Broadsword is a very lethal enemy. Our job is to find a solution to that [;)]

Also, from a game balance point of view, the Hegemony cruisers are quite poor machines compared to the alliance's. The enemy frigates are basically fireworks, and they don't have any really maneuverable fighters like the F-32 Falcon. This has to be balanced out by the Broadsword... and it is [:D]

"Don't try to fix me, I'm not broken"

[Zanthras]

Bravo...yngvef, bravo indeed! [8D]

[wdboyd]

Right on target guys. [:D]

Quotes from my a previous post of mine.
 
"Players want fixes for their lack of game success."

"Most of the time there is nothing wrong with the simulation. But, it's easier to blame the game."

"There are some players that can't or won't complete a game without game cheats."

"There are no shortcuts or game cheats available for Starshatter. "

The bottom line... don't blame the simulation for your command incompetence.

Oh, and for your whiney commanders out there... you can address some of your claimed play balance problems, by turning the AI down to the easy level in the game options. Other than that, learn to be a better commander. Life is tough in the Starshatter galaxy. [:D] Handle the incoming fire or get out of the command chair. [;)]

I'm being sarcastic of course. Players, imbrace the difficulties presented in the simulation. If you want something easy to play... find a checker board somewhere. [:'(]

Keep em flying.

[Elukka]

I know the Asher has no forward facing PDB. I know the PDB needs to face the torpedoes to be able to fire on them. I know some torpedoes should get through. I also think the PDB should at least try to hit the Nikes. It doesn't. That's my problem.

I'm pretty sure the problem isn't in my inability to position my ship correctly, as i've never seen a ship, AI or mine, fire on the Nikes. I've never had big trouble shooting down other torpedoes. I think i also read somewhere on the forums that someone had the Archon group destroyed by a single Broadsword.. I'm not sure about that, though.

From what i gather, not everyone has this problem. (If Yngvef has destroyed Nike torpedoes, after all) Anyways, i recently acquired a new computer and thus reinstalled Starshatter. I'll report back after trying it out again.

Edit: I can confirm that it works fine now. Maybe i can now finally properly play the game. There might've been something wrong with the installation last time.
[:)]

Still, i think this is a bug as i'm not the only one who has been experiencing this.