Reply To: Scout MkII (Combat Refit)


more discord discussion

XavierToday at 5:21 AM
Originally, all the ships were variations of the Artemis class. Over time, they have been tweaked based on feedback. The Sabre’s beams for example, were reduced because someone said they were too powerful (not sure who, but I do recall it being mentioned).
Matthew VajToday at 6:14 AM
Personally, I don’t see an issue with scouts being significantly less combat effective relative to light cruisers. I do think that they should have better efficiency in general, but the real challenge is how it’s used along with the other ships. I don’t see a scout being tasked with handling a whole fleet on its own, while the currently active ships in the division usually can (to a point). It might be capable of directly combating a few kraliens, but it will take longer and be more difficult. I’m not convinced that’s a bad thing.
Its real strengths would lie in taking tango and the ability to redeploy and quickly respond to new threats, usually in defensive action.
I think it’s also important to remember that the gm takes individual ships’ capabilities into account. We’ve been seeing a lot of larger fleets lately, since our current ship roster can handle them. If we had a scout or other lighter ship used more often, we’d see more variation in enemy fleets, giving the scout opportunities to contribute.
RakaydosToday at 7:08 AM
If the idea is to make it feel like the existing scout, why is everything combat related getting a Nerf except for Pshock count? Reduced shields, reduced beam output, reduced mine count, reduced hull node count…
Matthew VajToday at 7:42 AM
Relative to thur existing scout?
RakaydosToday at 8:34 AM
XavierToday at 9:14 AM
Was the beam made weaker?
Some of the changes were to make it more fragile, but quicker to manoeuvre
RakaydosToday at 9:44 AM
The original scout beam was .5 DPS. (3 damage every 6 seconds) Each of horizons tickle beams are .33 DPS. The quicker to maneuver aspects were already part of the scout concept- the TSN leapfrogging it doesn’t mean the scout needs to trade away capability to leap back into proper position.
XavierToday at 11:34 AM
The main beam could be increased to 0.33 or even 0.4. the shorter beam is only for drone defense, so 0.14 should (I think) be sufficient to destroy a drone
If we increased the cycle rate of the drone defense, or overlapped two, then it would make them better at drone defense, but too weak to deal any significant damage to an enemy ship
RakaydosToday at 1:46 PM
You mean decreased to .33 or .4? The base scouts beam is stronger.
RakaydosToday at 1:53 PM
Cataphract is already using paired rapid fire beam arrays for fighter interdiction. One of the same arrays could work fine for drone defense on the scout.
For comparison, each of Vipers beams is .75 DPS, for 1.5 DPS total. Lancer has 4 beams averaging .5 DPS each, for 2.0 DPS.
Lt. Jr. Thomas AvirsonToday at 2:02 PM

Those numbers for Lancer’s DPS don’t quite line up.
NhaimaToday at 2:05 PM
Lancer’s beams have an average damage of .44 damage per second per beam. 2×1.5 and 2×2.5, all cycling at 4.5 seconds base. 0.5 DPS does make for a nice round number though, so I could see him using it for that purpose.
Lt. Jr. Thomas AvirsonToday at 2:08 PM
I can see the appeal of “cleaner” numbers, but imo we’re dealing with small enough amounts that rounding can distort the apparent comparative results.
EG Viper doesn’t have 75% of Lancer’s DPS, it’s closer to 84%.
NhaimaToday at 2:13 PM
That’s true, but I don’t know if the correct ratio between Viper and Lancer’s beam output makes much of a difference when discussing a ship that fits much more in Sabre’s and Horizon’s output bracket.

That said, you won’t get any disagreement from me that precise and correct numbers are better. In that respect, I completely agree with you Avirson. :thumbsup:
RakaydosToday at 2:40 PM
I misremembered Lancers cycle time, and remembered an earlier calculation that must have been off, thank you for the correction.
So it’s 1.5 for viper, 1.76 for Lancer, 1.31 plus point defense for Cataphract (barring further changes), for the beam heavy ships of the fleet or in development. Horizon’s old .66 DPS, that was deemed too weak to be a secondary armamant on a missile cruiser, should be about right for a combat-refit scout.