Author Topic: Should FFD avoid combat or not?  (Read 765 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline trabber Shir (OP)

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • t
  • Posts: 69
  • Thanked: 13 times
Should FFD avoid combat or not?
« on: March 30, 2025, 10:21:53 AM »
I am embarrassed I can not find the answer to this. My gut says not, but real life FFD may always or never avoid combat depending on your definition of combat. So does FFD work while avoiding combat?
 

Offline xenoscepter

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1168
  • Thanked: 326 times
Re: Should FFD avoid combat or not?
« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2025, 12:46:31 PM »
It does.

Avoid combat gives a 80% "buff" to target selection, meaning they are 80% smaller for target selection purposes. But it also gives an 80% accuracy malus.

The buff applies to FFD units, but since the FFD is not a weapon for the purposes of the malus, it isn't affect by it.
 
The following users thanked this post: Xkill, skoormit

Offline Ghostly

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • G
  • Posts: 77
  • Thanked: 54 times
Re: Should FFD avoid combat or not?
« Reply #2 on: March 30, 2025, 12:48:32 PM »
FFD should have "Avoid Combat", but they currently have little use outside of roleplay reasons, as all forms of orbital bombardment are very, very weak and inefficient.
 

Offline Andrew

  • Registered
  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 778
  • Thanked: 159 times
Re: Should FFD avoid combat or not?
« Reply #3 on: March 30, 2025, 05:18:10 PM »
To be fair saturation bombardment with missiles or beams is quite good for wrecking a planet, and beam bombardment is a good way to neutralise STO. however an FFD is not needed for that and the equivlant cost of infantry with PWI will do more damage than an FFD with a 50,000 ton battleship on call, and you won't waste hours of your life setting up the bombardment. The nightmare of ineefectiual micromanagement which is fighters linked to FFD I will leave out in case it gives me nightmares tonight
 

Offline Xkill

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 122
  • Thanked: 18 times
Re: Should FFD avoid combat or not?
« Reply #4 on: March 31, 2025, 07:37:15 PM »
But what about using "fighters" that mass over 300 tons and sport huge weapons? An airship that might fit right in on Highfleet or something. I'm waiting on the new version before trying this, but it seems like it would cut down on the micro.
 

Offline Ghostly

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • G
  • Posts: 77
  • Thanked: 54 times
Re: Should FFD avoid combat or not?
« Reply #5 on: Yesterday at 12:01:29 AM »
To be fair saturation bombardment with missiles or beams is quite good for wrecking a planet, and beam bombardment is a good way to neutralise STO. however an FFD is not needed for that and the equivlant cost of infantry with PWI will do more damage than an FFD with a 50,000 ton battleship on call, and you won't waste hours of your life setting up the bombardment. The nightmare of ineefectiual micromanagement which is fighters linked to FFD I will leave out in case it gives me nightmares tonight

Aye, I'm a big fan of "terraforming" enemy planets with saturated beam fire to invade on more favorable terms myself, but engaging non-STO GU's with ship weapons is meaningless whether done with FFD or without.

But what about using "fighters" that mass over 300 tons and sport huge weapons? An airship that might fit right in on Highfleet or something. I'm waiting on the new version before trying this, but it seems like it would cut down on the micro.

You'd still have to consider the unfortunate mathematics of orbit-to-surface weaponry. A comparison I've done a while ago told me that my destroyer escorts fire 196 10cm railgun (10/20 damage) shots at 5200 BP for ~26BP/shot, and railgun fighters cost me 51 BP/shot, while it costs PW infantry 0.15 BP for a 15/15 shot, and 0.24 BP for CAP infantry to fire 6 such shots. Of course, a specialized anti-GU design (a beam base?) would be far more economical to field, but I don't think even that could overcome a hundred-fold difference in cost-efficiency.
 
The following users thanked this post: Xkill, skoormit