Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: TheDeadlyShoe
« on: February 09, 2012, 06:57:44 AM »

I find:

Railguns are the best weapon for low-tonnage ships.  They pack high firepower, good point defense capability, and most importantly do not require large fire controls to function in the point defense role.  However, their generally shorter range means they can suffer in beam duels versus lasers and particle beams, particularly if outmatched on speed.

Lasers are the baseline weapon, and have superior armor penetration and good range.  Even 10cm lasers can have good range.  While reasonably effective at point defense (when turreted), Lasers usually require bulky or redundant fire controls.  On the plus side, any laser-armed starship is an effective beam combatant. 

Particle beams have long range, but are bulky and slow to charge.   Their low damage-per-tick can be severely handicapping in close range duels or against well-shielded opponents.  However, their consistent damage across the entireity of their range means they can potentially pick apart slower enemies and effectively retaliate against higher-technology foes.  Unfortunately, they are complete balls at point defense.

Plasma carronades are generally inferior weapons, with high theoretical damage but drastic damage dropoff and poor charge speeds.  They're nigh-useless at point defense. They are however easy to research and can deliver massive upfront blows.

Gauss cannons are very specialized point defence weapons.  After you get to Rate of Fire 3 or so, they are probably the best Final Defensive Fire point defence weapon.  But their range is strictly limited - which means they are not very useful as antiship weapons. On the other hand, they have a few other niche uses - CIWS systems use gauss technology and small gauss cannons can fit on a fighter.  Also, theyre the only beam weapon that doesnt require capacitor research, as they do not use power.  Personally, I don't like them.

Mesons and microwaves are outside my experience so far.  Not sure how well mesons scale in terms of range, in particular.
Posted by: Arwyn
« on: February 08, 2012, 08:37:06 PM »

I'm just starting to build up a navy, how do mesons, carronades, lasers, and microwaves compare as weapons?

Mesons, carronades, lasers, and microwaves are all beam weapons. So are railguns, and gauss. That means they are all short ranged (compared to missiles) so they operate from 20,000 km to 250,000 km. Missiles are VERY long ranged in Aurora, and are running millions of km.

The advantages to beam weapons is speed, and no ammo requirements. Up close, beams are killer, at a distance they are ineffective vs a missile armed combatant.

Beam weapons have two main research components, size (expressed in bore or focus size in centimeters or strength points) and range (or wavelength or distance, its the same thing). There is a third component, thats actually shared between all beam weapons, and thats capacitor recharge rates, and that sets how fast they can fire, in increments of 5 seconds.

That being said, the various beam platforms advantages are;

1) Mesons: Ignore armor AND shields. They also can be fired in atmospheres, unlike the other beam weapons. Mesons only do 1pt of damage, but it cant be stopped. They are popular with lots of players for those reasons. They can be turreted and are popular as good offensive/defensive weapons since they can be used to shoot down incoming missiles or against ships. Mesons are very cheap to research initially, but get more expensive as the technology improves.

2) Carronades: Slow firing and very short ranged, but the throw out MASSIVE damage. Carronades are situational, and work best when used in very close ranged engagement like jump point defense. They are also very cheap to research, since there is no distance research for carronades.

3) Lasers: Lasers are the standard beam weapon. The do better damage the closer you get, but they can have fairly long ranges (for beams). They are good for offensive and defensive purposes (like anti-missile duty). Generally lasers are the primary beam platform for a lot of players and NPR races, as they are a good all around weapon, and can be turreted.  Lasers are moderately expensive to research, very cheap at first but progressively more expensive.

4) Microwaves: Microwaves kill shields and electronics (sensors) but do nothing else. They can blind enemy ships and knock down shields quickly, but are otherwise limited. They are very short ranged, which makes them harder to deploy. Due to their limited damage profile and short range, they are not a very common weapon system.

5) Railguns: Railguns are the other common beam weapon system. They have good range, excellent hitting power, and are fairly cheap to research. The downside is that railguns are hull only weapons and cant be turreted.

6) Gauss: Similar to railguns, the are kinetic weapons that have VERY high rates of fire, low damage, and short range. They are a very good anti-missile weapon though, and popular in point defense turrets. They are excellent anti-missile weapons, but are moderately to very expensive to develop as the game goes on.

7) Particle Beams: Basically a big, slow, but hard hitting cannon or torpedo system. Particle beams are slow firing, but pack a big punch. They have fantastic range and hitting power, but are slow to fire. Particle beams can be expensive to develop. 
Posted by: MehMuffin
« on: February 08, 2012, 05:52:06 PM »

I'm just starting to build up a navy, how do mesons, carronades, lasers, and microwaves compare as weapons?
Posted by: Elim
« on: January 26, 2012, 07:05:21 PM »

Last week my glorious space empire declared war on a lesser alien race, they were no threat to me and.  .  .   and why should i let them continue their insignificant existence.   My People are far more important to the universe.   I need resources. 
i kicked them out of my system, not even breaking a sweat. 
Then i waited a couple of months to bolster my fleet, i wanted to crush them and test some new weapons on their home world. 

My 3 fleets, each with around 10 cruisers, escorts and sensor ships moved near the jump point, then i attacked, they landed around 300.  000 km near the enemy jump point, i drank my mineral water with a smug expression on my face. 
That was until i realized the enemy waited for me. 
And around 50 ships with mesons are really not funny, my ships moved instantly in different directions.   Not fast enough.   Their firepower and armor no match for the traitorous and disgusting tactics the enemy used. 

After that.  .  .  incident.  .  .  my glorious space empire was merely a.  .  .  space empire without a fleet. 
And that was the point, where my peace loving, superior race met their end. 

What i want to say is this, do not underestimate the enemy, do it that way!
Quote from: waresky
u must overwhelming all'em.
Kill'em at all. . :D
More Tubes Mmmmore Tuuubes Officer!
Posted by: waresky
« on: January 23, 2012, 11:49:13 AM »

Size 4, Size 8, Size 42. More tubes = more bad guys blowing up. Less tubes = you blowing up.

u must overwhelming all'em.

Kill'em at all..:D

More Tubes Mmmmore Tuuubes Officer!

Posted by: scoopdjm
« on: January 21, 2012, 11:30:54 PM »

what are you talking about? those are the BEST kind of ships.
Posted by: Erik L
« on: January 21, 2012, 08:20:32 PM »

Just remember. The only wrong answer to building ships in Aurora are the ones that blow up ;)
Posted by: Jiman
« on: January 21, 2012, 04:50:23 PM »

My biggest ship yard is only about 30ktons, I plan to make some heavier missile ships but later on when I better economy tech to afford it.
I finished adjusting my fleet per the suggestions given, smaller missiles and missile launchers (I invested in better missile tech also).

I also got rid of some lead ships that served no purpose. 
Posted by: scoopdjm
« on: January 21, 2012, 08:34:14 AM »

Wait so is this PURELY an invasion fleet? designed to destroy opposition and capture or destroy a system?
You should invest in a cruiser that's got 100 (or something that fits your needs) or so box launchers to destroy capital ships or bomabrd a planet.
Posted by: Charlie Beeler
« on: January 21, 2012, 08:00:01 AM »

I've found that ships equipped with jump drives can squadron-jump (with the usual scatter) even through a jump gate.

... you probably knew that, but most of the posts that I've read seem to imply that if a jump gate exists on a jump point, then standard transits are your only option.
Which is precisely what I said.

Too summarize,  reliance on gates only limits the play to standard transit only.  Add jump engines allows for squadron transit at all jump points.
Posted by: blue emu
« on: January 20, 2012, 04:12:36 PM »

If a jumppoint is defended your in for a possible world of hurt.  Using a jumpgate only lets you use standard transit...

I've found that ships equipped with jump drives can squadron-jump (with the usual scatter) even through a jump gate.

... you probably knew that, but most of the posts that I've read seem to imply that if a jump gate exists on a jump point, then standard transits are your only option.
Posted by: Jiman
« on: January 20, 2012, 04:04:36 PM »

Yes, thats why I spent time improving my tech.  "were" past tense :P
Posted by: Erik L
« on: January 20, 2012, 03:23:12 PM »

I spent some time improving my missile tech a bit.  Size 4 missiles were not doing enough.

Size 4, Size 8, Size 42. More tubes = more bad guys blowing up. Less tubes = you blowing up.
Posted by: Jiman
« on: January 20, 2012, 02:29:14 PM »

I spent some time improving my missile tech a bit.  Size 4 missiles were not doing enough.
Posted by: Thiosk
« on: January 20, 2012, 01:33:37 PM »

How would they know? -_-

Thanks Charlie Beeler. . .  Looks like I have to change more items on this fleet.


These are suggestions I would never consider, thanks all.  Ill put my updated version of my ships when I am done adjusting them.

This is really not something you need to concern yourself with.  I'm sure you'll be fine.  Send a primary scout wave through if you're really worried to see if you need to go in hard. 
If you had invaders coming through a jump point, you would probably put ships on it to shoot them in the face as they emerged.  The AI will do the same thing if your hostile ships are coming through their jumpgates.