Posted by: Waffles
« on: March 03, 2011, 12:16:44 PM »Ehh, I dont really know how to do anything at this point so a little extra "help" wont hurt 
Posted by: Deutschbag
« on: March 03, 2011, 12:15:04 PM »It's a weird bug. For some reason, when you make your first game on a new install, it gives you a bunch of high-tech stuff like that. Make a new game and it'll be gone.
Posted by: Waffles
« on: March 03, 2011, 12:06:48 PM »Kinda off topic but why did I have four different sizes of Plasma Torps from the start of the game as racial techs? Something doesnt seem right. I dont have the plasma torp warhead tech, but I still had the plasma torps themselves. biggest one was size 32.
Posted by: Starkiller
« on: March 03, 2011, 11:01:49 AM »My Battlefleets are the big boys, designed for full scale fleet battles.
I have two, each includes two fleet carriers with 50 fighters each,
20 fighters with mesons for attacking enemy shipping, 20 fighters
with 4 size 10 missiles for long range antishipping strikes, and
10 intercepters with heavy lasers in the antifighter role, then
four battlecruisers with both ASM and AMM, 4 Escort destroyers
and are pure AMM platforms, 2 pure beam destroyers and 2
pure antiship destroyers, and lastly an EWACS cruiser with no
weapons, but very long range sensors.
The four Strike Fleets have much fewer ships, and no carriers
or EWACS cruisers, but their composition is similiar. These are
my fast attack guys.
Whenever I get some spare money and/or resources, I build a
warship and stick it in the reserve.
Eric
I have two, each includes two fleet carriers with 50 fighters each,
20 fighters with mesons for attacking enemy shipping, 20 fighters
with 4 size 10 missiles for long range antishipping strikes, and
10 intercepters with heavy lasers in the antifighter role, then
four battlecruisers with both ASM and AMM, 4 Escort destroyers
and are pure AMM platforms, 2 pure beam destroyers and 2
pure antiship destroyers, and lastly an EWACS cruiser with no
weapons, but very long range sensors.
The four Strike Fleets have much fewer ships, and no carriers
or EWACS cruisers, but their composition is similiar. These are
my fast attack guys.
Whenever I get some spare money and/or resources, I build a
warship and stick it in the reserve.
Eric
Posted by: Arwyn
« on: March 03, 2011, 03:17:32 AM »My battle line units are usually a mix of destroyers and cruisers, with a mix of heavier units. My missile destroyers and cruisers mount the same missile types, usually size 3 or 4, and in decent numbers 6 to 8 for destroyers, and 10 to 14 for the cruisers. The heavy hitters are usually battle cruisers mounting size 6 or 8 missiles, and usually sporting a flag bridge.
I tend to build designs that can be built on the same shipyard, especially for beam armed ships and escorts. I also tend to build ships for similar speeds, with a tendency towards faster, lighter armored units.
I tend to build designs that can be built on the same shipyard, especially for beam armed ships and escorts. I also tend to build ships for similar speeds, with a tendency towards faster, lighter armored units.
Posted by: Deutschbag
« on: March 02, 2011, 11:35:00 PM »I like to make destroyers as my escort ships, and cruisers as my main ship of the lines. I'll usually specialize pretty heavily. My main battle-line craft are almost always missile-heavy. I tend to have a heavy command cruiser, a handful of light cruisers, and a flotilla of mixed-type destroyers. One fleet of mine that was pretty typical was a single command cruiser, four light cruisers armed with size-six long range anti-ship missiles and two CIWS, and six destroyers with AMMs and point-defense cannons set to area defense. It worked pretty well.
I'm also experimenting with carriers. But I don't have much experience with that yet.
I'm also experimenting with carriers. But I don't have much experience with that yet.
Posted by: Erik L
« on: March 02, 2011, 01:29:36 PM »I tend to break ship classes up based on role. I usually have a small AMM escort, than a larger AMM escort cruiser. Beam ships are escort sized for PD roles, Frigate/Destroyers are dual mode ships, and beam armed cruisers are pretty much offensive combatants only.
Initially, I'll field a DDE with AMMs, a DDE with beam, and a DDG. When my engine tech is high enough (for my tastes), I'll field a missile CA and beam CA, along with an AMM CA. Each size class usually has at least the AMM escort version. Once I start fielding battleships (around 30k tons), I'll move the DDs to system picket roles and to bolster colony PDCs. The main offensive fleet(s) are usually based in the homesystem. Though I also tend to put an offensive fleet in each sector capital.
Posted by: Waffles
« on: March 02, 2011, 01:07:42 PM »Wow, seems like its gonna be a field day to design ships properly But thats all the fun about gamess like these. Making and mixing design until you finally create that one ship that just blows everyting out of the water. And then the Hidden Space Clowns come over and have a talk with you 
But thats all the fun about gamess like these. Making and mixing design until you finally create that one ship that just blows everyting out of the water. And then the Hidden Space Clowns come over and have a talk with you Posted by: Arwyn
« on: March 01, 2011, 08:47:15 PM »I usually field three types of ships of each size class, an escort (AMM or Beam, or both), a missile ship, and a beam ship.
The offensive beam ships can double as PD (at reduced effectiveness) as well as protecting the missile ships/carriers/jump ships from hostile ships.
I tend to break ship classes up based on role. I usually have a small AMM escort, than a larger AMM escort cruiser. Beam ships are escort sized for PD roles, Frigate/Destroyers are dual mode ships, and beam armed cruisers are pretty much offensive combatants only.
Posted by: Erik L
« on: March 01, 2011, 06:25:09 PM »I usually field three types of ships of each size class, an escort (AMM or Beam, or both), a missile ship, and a beam ship.
The offensive beam ships can double as PD (at reduced effectiveness) as well as protecting the missile ships/carriers/jump ships from hostile ships.
The offensive beam ships can double as PD (at reduced effectiveness) as well as protecting the missile ships/carriers/jump ships from hostile ships.
Posted by: Brian Neumann
« on: March 01, 2011, 05:54:44 PM »Arwyn, Nice summation of the different uses. When I get to pick my energy weapon mix, I often go with a point defense of mesons, and particle beams for long range work. Mesons are very effective against missiles in close as they ignore any armour, and can be turreted. They also work very well as weapons for FAC/Fighters for the same reason. Anything that closes to get into non particle beam weapon range also gets sliced to ribbons with the fast firing mesons. 15cm with capaciter 6 are particularily deadly for this. If they don't close and you pick a longer range then the particle beams will tear them appart as they have the damage at long range when all of the other beam weapons are drastically reduced due to the same range.
Another interesting option is a pure meson armed fleet. You can get 30cm mesons that max out your shipboard fire control range, and they are going to be relitivly fast firing for heavy weapons. If you don't reasearch much above the 30cm range then all the extra reasearch points can be spent on the range multiplier and capaciter techs. It makes for a very effective weapon as it will cut up ships even at long range. The down side to mesons is they do not work against 1 particlair system well at all. The invader plasma torpedo gets armor based on its warhead size, and mesons do NOT ignore this armor, so they have a very poor chance to stop plasma torps.
Brian
Another interesting option is a pure meson armed fleet. You can get 30cm mesons that max out your shipboard fire control range, and they are going to be relitivly fast firing for heavy weapons. If you don't reasearch much above the 30cm range then all the extra reasearch points can be spent on the range multiplier and capaciter techs. It makes for a very effective weapon as it will cut up ships even at long range. The down side to mesons is they do not work against 1 particlair system well at all. The invader plasma torpedo gets armor based on its warhead size, and mesons do NOT ignore this armor, so they have a very poor chance to stop plasma torps.
Brian
Posted by: Arwyn
« on: March 01, 2011, 05:32:23 PM »All the beams have a use. They are more tactically limited than missiles, but they can be brutally effective if they are used correctly.
Nothing is better at jump point defense than beam armed vessels. A beam armed ship is going to fire several times before a missile armed can cycle through a flight of missiles. That damage can be telling. If your beam weapons are firing every 5 to 10 seconds, and the bad guys are only firing every 30 to 40 seconds, you can get in 3 to 8 shots unopposed. That can be telling in combat.
I have played through several games and have lost games to the "out of ammo" issue with missiles. Beam weapons give an excellent trade off, as long as you have the ship, they can fire, and generally fire fast. I try and find the best use for the guns depending on how the tech research at start goes. If I wind up with heavy tech investment in lasers, then the guns of the fleet are lasers. If I have heavy rail gun tech, then the guns of the fleet are rails.
Rail guns- Good basic PD weapon early on, as long as they are on a fast ship. Later (bigger) rail guns shoot fast and have decent hitting power, at higher tech levels, they can reach fairly far out there. Rail guns really work best on faster ships, so they can take advantage of the ship speed to target contacts. Railguns are also fairly cheap to research, making them a good option when funds and RP are tight.
Gauss- great PD weapon, and a VERY nasty fighter weapon for warp point defense pickets. Gauss fire incredibly fast, but have little hitting power and poor range. They make up for it in sheer volume of firepower and moderate weight. A squadron of 10 low tech fighters armed with Gauss can SHRED ships that have just transited into a system. Gauss can (should generally) be turreted, but fighters and smaller craft can make very good use of them. Research is cheap early on, but picks up quickly, making them most effective early to mid game.
Lasers- best range, reasonable fire rate, good hitting power and accuracy. Lasers are the defacto standard for beam weapons in the game due to being effective for both offensive and defensive uses. Lasers are the solid steady baseline for everything else. Later versions with size reduction can be mounted on fighters effectively. Only downside is the cost. Between focal sizes, capacitor, and frequency, lasers arent cheap in research points.
Plasma Carronade- slow firing, short ranged, and horrifyingly brutal pretty much sums up Plasmas. They are probably the most tactically limited of all the beam weapons, and really only shine in warp point defense. Strictly offensive, they are fairly cheap to research, since you only have to worry about bore size and capacitor, and they deliver very high damage. The down side is they are moderaly heavy, have slow refire until capacitor tech is pretty advanced.You can use them effectively in open fleet engagements, but it takes a VERY fast ship, and one with good anti-missile defense, or a pack of ships with dedicated AMM vessels.
Particle Beam- A pretty neglected weapon. Takes a lot of research, but can be remarkably nasty. Long range, and good hitting power at the higher levels. Couple to a fast ship with good fire control, this can be a pretty effective weapon, especially when you get strength 9.
Mesons- Very effective, but poor range. Good PD weapon vs armored missiles. Good fast attack weapon due to the skipping armor feature. Moderately expensive to research, they are a good all around beam weapon, especially since they can be used on PDC's, making them a nice standard beam that can be deployed on PDCs anywhere. Also can be mounted on fighters later on, making for a very dangerous combination.
Microwaves- very situational, similar to Plasma Carronades. Against targets with no EMP shielding, they are brutal. If the target HAS good shielding, they are horribly weak. If they work, you have a bunch of targets that cant defend themselves. If they dont work, you usually wind up with a bunch of dead fighters. Since they are so situational, they dont tend to get used very often by most folks. Since they dont do any physical damage, the ships that use them tend to be even more single functions specialized than most Aurora vessels.
I have run several games through a couple of versions of Aurora. My current game got me Plasma Carronades early on, and I used them very effectively on jump point defense ships, coupled with lasers. Once my capacitor technology came up, the carronades where very effective verses aliens jumping into my system with less than friendly intentions.
In my previous game, I got particle beam strength 9 from a ruin, and used it for beam armed capital ships. I also ran fast patrol squadrons of smaller frigate and destroyer armed vessels with dedicated AMM escorts, and the rest of the flotilla armed with gauss/laser combos, and several Particle Beam armed corvettes. They proved VERY effective vs smaller alien squadrons. The AMM/laser/gauss combo swatted the missiles till they ran out, while the particle beams savaged the alien ships. Since my smaller ships were faster, the NPR couldnt close with me to use their beams, and the missiles werent getting through the anti-missile screen effectively. In fact, my patrol squadrons were racking up more tonnage than my battle fleet and I could run almost eight patrol squadrons for the cost of one battle fleet.
Beams take more work, but they are worth it. I would never run a game with missile only boats again.
Nothing is better at jump point defense than beam armed vessels. A beam armed ship is going to fire several times before a missile armed can cycle through a flight of missiles. That damage can be telling. If your beam weapons are firing every 5 to 10 seconds, and the bad guys are only firing every 30 to 40 seconds, you can get in 3 to 8 shots unopposed. That can be telling in combat.
I have played through several games and have lost games to the "out of ammo" issue with missiles. Beam weapons give an excellent trade off, as long as you have the ship, they can fire, and generally fire fast. I try and find the best use for the guns depending on how the tech research at start goes. If I wind up with heavy tech investment in lasers, then the guns of the fleet are lasers. If I have heavy rail gun tech, then the guns of the fleet are rails.
Rail guns- Good basic PD weapon early on, as long as they are on a fast ship. Later (bigger) rail guns shoot fast and have decent hitting power, at higher tech levels, they can reach fairly far out there. Rail guns really work best on faster ships, so they can take advantage of the ship speed to target contacts. Railguns are also fairly cheap to research, making them a good option when funds and RP are tight.
Gauss- great PD weapon, and a VERY nasty fighter weapon for warp point defense pickets. Gauss fire incredibly fast, but have little hitting power and poor range. They make up for it in sheer volume of firepower and moderate weight. A squadron of 10 low tech fighters armed with Gauss can SHRED ships that have just transited into a system. Gauss can (should generally) be turreted, but fighters and smaller craft can make very good use of them. Research is cheap early on, but picks up quickly, making them most effective early to mid game.
Lasers- best range, reasonable fire rate, good hitting power and accuracy. Lasers are the defacto standard for beam weapons in the game due to being effective for both offensive and defensive uses. Lasers are the solid steady baseline for everything else. Later versions with size reduction can be mounted on fighters effectively. Only downside is the cost. Between focal sizes, capacitor, and frequency, lasers arent cheap in research points.
Plasma Carronade- slow firing, short ranged, and horrifyingly brutal pretty much sums up Plasmas. They are probably the most tactically limited of all the beam weapons, and really only shine in warp point defense. Strictly offensive, they are fairly cheap to research, since you only have to worry about bore size and capacitor, and they deliver very high damage. The down side is they are moderaly heavy, have slow refire until capacitor tech is pretty advanced.You can use them effectively in open fleet engagements, but it takes a VERY fast ship, and one with good anti-missile defense, or a pack of ships with dedicated AMM vessels.
Particle Beam- A pretty neglected weapon. Takes a lot of research, but can be remarkably nasty. Long range, and good hitting power at the higher levels. Couple to a fast ship with good fire control, this can be a pretty effective weapon, especially when you get strength 9.
Mesons- Very effective, but poor range. Good PD weapon vs armored missiles. Good fast attack weapon due to the skipping armor feature. Moderately expensive to research, they are a good all around beam weapon, especially since they can be used on PDC's, making them a nice standard beam that can be deployed on PDCs anywhere. Also can be mounted on fighters later on, making for a very dangerous combination.
Microwaves- very situational, similar to Plasma Carronades. Against targets with no EMP shielding, they are brutal. If the target HAS good shielding, they are horribly weak. If they work, you have a bunch of targets that cant defend themselves. If they dont work, you usually wind up with a bunch of dead fighters. Since they are so situational, they dont tend to get used very often by most folks. Since they dont do any physical damage, the ships that use them tend to be even more single functions specialized than most Aurora vessels.
I have run several games through a couple of versions of Aurora. My current game got me Plasma Carronades early on, and I used them very effectively on jump point defense ships, coupled with lasers. Once my capacitor technology came up, the carronades where very effective verses aliens jumping into my system with less than friendly intentions.
In my previous game, I got particle beam strength 9 from a ruin, and used it for beam armed capital ships. I also ran fast patrol squadrons of smaller frigate and destroyer armed vessels with dedicated AMM escorts, and the rest of the flotilla armed with gauss/laser combos, and several Particle Beam armed corvettes. They proved VERY effective vs smaller alien squadrons. The AMM/laser/gauss combo swatted the missiles till they ran out, while the particle beams savaged the alien ships. Since my smaller ships were faster, the NPR couldnt close with me to use their beams, and the missiles werent getting through the anti-missile screen effectively. In fact, my patrol squadrons were racking up more tonnage than my battle fleet and I could run almost eight patrol squadrons for the cost of one battle fleet.
Beams take more work, but they are worth it. I would never run a game with missile only boats again.
Posted by: Brian Neumann
« on: March 01, 2011, 07:50:27 AM »Another point is that, in a general sense, I find missiles do greater damage,Beam weapons have different damage templates. Lasers do the most penetration and on average go about half as deep as the total damage hitting the armor. For example a 10 point laser hit will get down to the 5th layer of armor. Missiles on the other hand have a straight cone penetration with the depth of the penetration equal to the square root of the damage rounded down. Most of the rest of the beam weapons fall inbetween these two. I think about 1/3 the depth of the damage. Mesons of course being the exeption as they ignore the armor and shields of the target completely. As far as which is more effective, it depends on how thick the targets armor is. A 50 cm laser however is not something to discount. Max damage of 64 with a mid range damage in the 30-40 range will punch right through 15 levels of armor. Only a heavily armored ship is not taking internals from this sort of fire. And it is going to be doing between 8-12 points of damage at your maximum beam fire control range in all likelyhood. At point blank range it is going through almost 30 points of armor while the largest railgun does 20 points and is only cratering about 6-7 deep. In this sort of equation a lot depends on the design of the race you are fighting. A race with light armor and speedy ships, then the laser is far more dangerous as it does not need to wear away at the armor. A race with really heavy shields and armor and then the cratering of the other weapons becomes more important as there is more overlapp in the damage patterns.
overall, than Beam Weapons do.
Eric
Brian
Posted by: Waffles
« on: March 01, 2011, 06:34:51 AM »Thanks man. Though I'm sure I can pump out some cheap missile tech within a few years since my best MK researcher is currently my best scientist in both specialization bonus and amount of labs allocatable.
Posted by: Brian Neumann
« on: March 01, 2011, 05:40:50 AM »Thanks guys, though I'm really wondering about rail guns right now since thats what I'm driving towards in regards to my main guns. Though I'm kinda realizing that RGs are more of a short ranged "Rape activated" button. I wanna re that my longest range as of right now is roughly 90k.Actually larger railguns will get the full range of your fire control. The smaller ones however do not do anywhere as well for range as their equivilent sized lasers or mesons. The up side however is that railgun reasearch is cheaper over time than most of the energy weapons, and while not the best point defense the 10cm railgun is a decent pd weapon. While it lacks in tracking speed it makes up for in volume of fire. This is especially true if it is on a small fast ship where the ship speed is better than your tracking speed. For example if your base tracking speed is 4,000km/s and you get a ship moving at 6,000km/s then the adjusted chance to hit for a turret is based on a speed of 16,000km/s and you get one shot. The railgun however will be based on 6,000km/s with 4 shots. Against comparable tech it works out about equall. Against someone with significantly faster missiles it is not as good overall, but does still work somewhat.
Hope that helps
Brian
