Missile size vs point defence

[Norm49 (OP)]

Hi,

I am currently using size 2 anti ship missile on small bomber, i am satisfy with there performance but they are for attacking scout and small ship. Now i planing to build lager bomber, the current one is only good a shooting small ship.

I have to chose the size of missile i will use for this bomber, do i keep the same one or i also go bigger, a bigger missile will give me a a bigger wars heat, ECM and can be faster but what about there ability to pass point defence. Dose any one know the formula? I guess that a size 20 missile going 30'000km/s is easier to shoot down that a size 15 missile going 32'000 km/s. I would like to make some calculation to come with the right size of missile to do what i want.

Thanks

[Ulzgoroth]

Size has no direct impact on attack rolls. The rules for attacking missiles are almost exactly the same as the rules for attacking ships.

If your missile is larger than size 6, however, it does become easier to track with active sensors, because the sensors get less of a resolution penalty. If the enemy has missile tracking time bonus techs, that could result in a slightly higher chance to hit against the bigger missiles.

The major drawback of a large missile against point defense is that you have fewer of them. Two size 20 missiles are almost certainly easier to shoot down than three size 15 missiles or eight size 5 missiles. (The larger missile also will have a lower rate of fire, but it's likely the spacing of your antiship missile launches is already long enough that won't make a difference.)

[Norm49 (OP)]

ok thanks,

I know about size 6 being easy to track but i was thinking that a bigger missile was also easy to shoot down. I guest i will go with a size 3.5 or 4 depending on who many launcher i can fit on my bomber. I already know i big i want the bomber to be.

[Jorgen_CAB]

ok thanks,

I know about size 6 being easy to track but i was thinking that a bigger missile was also easy to shoot down. I guest i will go with a size 3.5 or 4 depending on who many launcher i can fit on my bomber. I already know i big i want the bomber to be.

Size 6 is as easy to track as a size 1 missiles... it is if they are bigger than size 6 they become easier to spot with active sensors not easier to shoot down directly. The tracking bonus can potentially make the beam to hit bonus higher on a missile larger than size 6 though. But AMM will never be shoot down a larger missile easier than a similar smaller missile.

For attacking ships then it is always a consideration of cost, speed, range, warhead and electronics. It also depend on your house rules... I never allow any ASM that does not have at least 0.25 MSP worth of electronics of some kind and the missile are to be fired longer than half the EM rate of the missile tracking system have in millions of KM, but that is a house rule.

You need enough missile to overwhelm the enemy but you also need enough punch to make a different if the do hit, you also need enough range to perhaps hit the enemy before they hit you, If you are too short range and the enemy is faster than you it might be hard to get to fire at all. There are so many factors you can say there is one best size.

I say that anything between 3-8 is Ok for different reasons... bigger than that and you probably should just multi stage missiles of some kind as they become rather easy to detect and track otherwise.

[Migi]

As a major tangent, the removal of armour made large missiles less competitive in my opinion. A sufficiently large missile would justify putting some MSP into armour to increase its chance of penetrating enemy PD layers, whereas smaller missiles would rely on numbers to do the same.

[Jorgen_CAB]

As a major tangent, the removal of armour made large missiles less competitive in my opinion. A sufficiently large missile would justify putting some MSP into armour to increase its chance of penetrating enemy PD layers, whereas smaller missiles would rely on numbers to do the same.

I agree to some degree with this. Although ECM should effectively do the same the problem is that ECM also make the missile allot more expensive and unless you have really high ECM value it is not as effective as armour was and armour also made the missiles cheaper not more expensive so there was even more reason to use it. You could add 0.51 MSP to effectively double the chance of the missile to survive a hit against most effective point defences.
A 10-20% reduction on hit makes little sense in most occasions to use for a reduction on either payload, range and/or speed (if not a bit off everything).