Friday, January 5, 2018

Taking a poke at a Hydra build

What have we gleaned?


By: George Argyropoulos
a/k/a Dragon_Bane   



I'll be frank- I did not like these targets. For several reasons. That said, I had some good success with this build until I kept running into turrets because of the funky hit boxes. I was not amused, but I figure players would like to see a build, so here goes...

UPDATE: The targets seemed to be a bit better in this latest test server. The hit boxes were still funky and Kix is looking into it. There was a LOT of lag for me unlike last time, but Price seemed to have very smooth sailing and so did TSM so maybe it was a server or connection issue, but it seemed to be happening to several players. I also had some serious memory leakage and a very odd occurrence of high CPU useage. We'll see what shakes out when we get on a raid server I guess.

Full build Huggy link

UPDATED BUILD<<<<<<<<<<<
The CICs I used were the Siege Cap for the first three and the Aegis one for the CM ship

BUILD AS OF 2/1/17

I did try this without the HLNC and it still worked, but you had to drive better. Have I mentioned I'm lazy and hate fabricated and unnecessary pressure and excessively punitive damages in a target? This is supposed to be fun, not torturous. That said, yes, you don't necessarily need the HLNC, it just performed better with it. You likely won't need it when we have access to the CICs or Flagship as well, but that is pure speculation on my part.

UPDATE: The CICs changed everything. I was afraid of that. They did help immensely and made the pressure and necessity of constant precision driving a little less. There was no need for the HLNC. I really think that if i didn't have the lag I could have likely pulled a perfect run, so there is hope at least.

Did I mention that these targets weren't finalized yet?

Much like the Bucky build seen here, the fleet is a mixed build fleet. I'm finding that the further down the path of niche designed targets we go, the more niche designed fleet builds are needed to maximize efficiency in the targets. Given the nature of CICs as we have had them perfunctorily explained to us, this seems intended by the designers.




UPDATE: The specials remain the same, the only change to the DPS build was that all weapon slots now have the launcher!! This pic is updated!!!!!
I found that the addition of the HVR made driving a lot les of a headache because of the responsiveness added to the launchers while driving.

The first three hulls are the same but for the additional Sprint CM on the third. The fourth hull sports FLCM for the Phalanx.

Did I mention that these targets weren't finalized yet?

The reason for the additional Sprint CM was that, upon review, the lobbed rockets were launched in bunches of 8. The reload of the turret was greater than 4 seconds. With 4 Sprint CMs we can cover the entirety of one launch and if the targets change in the future, we have a reload of under a second so that with the 4 we could handle a stacked set of these turrets. I have moved these to a dedicated CM ship now!!!

Of note however, when testing I had tested with ONE Sprint. It shot down 2-3 rockets, the third being shot down much closer to the fleet. This means that the projectile speed of the rockets was slow enough to allow the one single Sprint to fire both salvos, reload and fire off another one (maybe 2). Given that, we may be able to get away with only using 2-3, but the paranoid pirate in me is going to shy away from that for now. In testing yesterday, the 4 Sprints worked very well to mitigate most of the projectiles, HOWEVER, there were instances of the Sprints not firing or missing large swaths of the projectiles. Driving and timing DOES matter in these targets.

The choice of HVR was apparent to me after the first foray into the target. There were little to no shockwaves, so the overriding concern was to get as much damage as possible to the target as fast as possible in order to get the TTK (time to kill) as low as possible. This also explains the Multiplex Charge Doubler and Auto-Loader 4. Using the HVR made driving a lot less stressful. I'm absolutely sticking to this from what I've seen thus far.

Did I mention that these targets weren't finalized yet?



UPDATE: THIS BUILD HAS CHANGED!! Please see the UPDATED BUILD link above. This is the link for JUST the CM ship. I updated this picture!!

I used the Aegis CIC for this ship. Given that it was not likely to fire at the targets much I pulled all the offensive specials I didn't need and replaced them to maximize the hull's counter measure abilities.

I swapped to Garrison Battery so I could use the CME3 for the Phalanx. We found that the CMs were specific in nature to the projectiles so combining them on the same ship was not detrimental in performance. The Sub Aquatic was added to help the reload on the Sprints as well as boost the projectile speed a little. The HVR are there purely for the projectile speed.

Driving is still very important in these targets but is NOT as critical as the last test server with the addition of the CICs. They really do change the builds entirely in their use and ability. Hope this helps and GOOD LUCK!!

As for the FLCM choice and the Phalanx, in order to get the Phalanx range out beyond that of the Sprints we put the Phalanx on another hull and equip the FLCM special, allowing them to fire first and give us a better chance of shooting the missile(s) down. With the slow projectile speed of the rockets in conjunction with the HVR on the builds, we really don't need (at this time) any extra range on the Sprints.

This benefits us because we can then have a single hull with FLCM equipped so that the Phalanx has a range buff as well as an accuracy buff allowing us to maximize our countering ability against the radioactive missile in the target and maximize the damage output on the other three hulls. Only time and testing will tell if this is worth losing the extra building damage on the fourth hull. It may be that the loss ultimately hurts us if the buildings don't die quickly enough to justify the change in special. If that turns out to be the case, this hull will then be changed to a copy of the first two since the Sprint would fire first regardless.

So, something to think about. In testing I was keeping well below 1/4 damage until I messed up driving or lagged from explosions, etc. or the fleet jumping forward. Vengeful_One had a very similar build and pulled off a 5 minute damage run WITHOUT the HLNC. Driving is VERY IMPORTANT in these targets. Again, I am not a fan of these targets and I'm not a horrendous driver either. I think I'm going to gamble with the Bucky for now and see what comes in the raid. Given two flags, a new generalist and the likely introduction of Charged R armor, I don't anticipate a fun raid weekend, sorry. Good luck everyone!


This is one of the runs on the S target using the CICs and the build above. Even with the lag as bad as it was and guessing where I needed to turn and stop, I was consistently getting under 3 minutes of damage and could instant repair on the map. Even when I screwed up I was still in the 15-20 min range for the whole fleet. THIS WARN YOU: I believe that, much like last raid set, the first month the S target is going to be 'soft'. I do NOT expect this level of performance in the raid next month. I dislike the constant escalation, but I do want to prepare everyone for that possibility.



For your viewing pleasure, this is an early run of the Hydra S target from the first test server that Robyn ran. Enjoy!!







16 comments:

  1. Yeah this one makes me nervous. Thanks for the info

    ReplyDelete
  2. Replies
    1. sorry my bad its early in the morning

      Delete
    2. Blame it on the lack of coffee!! ;)

      Delete
  3. Excellent updated article George.The explanations are very in depth.

    You weren't the only one suffering with the major lag either.It was rough.

    ReplyDelete
  4. would the aura from the aegis and mercy CIC trigger the res capacitator? If so, that would add +35% radio damage combined with turret defence and speed...

    ReplyDelete
  5. I found a very nice web browser that uses cloud streaming for web browsing, meaning; playing battle pirates or any flash game actually doesn't use adobe flash player installed on your machine but rather loads as a streamed video. it has almost no load on your cpu or memory I actually wonder how they are doing it. problem is, it's still in beta and still have some bugs but the game performance is only tied to your device and internet ability to run a video.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Really? Send me the info or post it please. That sounds like playing on Puffin, but if I can get the same controls that'd be cool!

      Delete
    2. LOL, you nailed it, they made a beta version for windows. I was very excited to find out. It works great on my mobile but the PC version has some bugs still. My internet connection is not all great so this could be the reason, would you test it and tell us?

      Delete
    3. So you actually knew about Puffin? or were you referring to the mobile version?

      Delete
    4. I was referring to the mobile version. Is there a puffin for the PC now?

      Delete
    5. Yup, just google puffin

      Delete
  6. I'm curious about the effect of the ant-radiation armors. According to Huggy's you can leave the 2 D5-R's off and still have 99% turret defense. I used one slab of D2-R on one of my Buccs during the raid, and I didn't see the slightest difference. It looks like adding R-armor only adds to the repair time. Or am I overlooking something?

    ReplyDelete
  7. What is best alternative option for those not having auto loader 4?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Are the use of SiegeCapacitor CIC on Flagship best solution or should it be changed to Mercy to boost the other ships and move repaire to flagship?

    ReplyDelete

  9. Thank you for sharing valuable information nice post,I enjoyed reading this post.

    หนังสารคดี

    ReplyDelete