Author Topic: Passives: EM vs Thermal, which is better for what situation?  (Read 2807 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Llamageddon (OP)

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • L
  • Posts: 118
  • Thanked: 15 times
I'm not sure which is better in what situation. I put EM on my GEVs, reasoning that populations usually seem to have higher EM signatures. Converseley I use thermals on my GSVs as they are more likely to be around ships in open space so thermals are a better guarantee for detection. I'm not sure what is best in general for scouting/detecting for military fleets though.

Would you always try and have both? Specifically for detecting ships, is one better for detecting large ships and one better for detecting small ships? If I was saving space on a small passive scout to go ahead of my fleets, which would you recommend? Alternatively on a capital ship, for backup detection if there isn't a main sensor ship available, which would you go for? Is there a better choice for a carrier to detect passive targets for FACs/Fighters to launch at if not using active scanners?

Sorry for the barrage of questions, any insight would be most helpful.
Currently using Aurora 1.12 - Unmodded
 

Offline Demetrious

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • D
  • Posts: 65
  • Thanked: 40 times
Re: Passives: EM vs Thermal, which is better for what situation?
« Reply #1 on: October 26, 2020, 08:58:46 PM »
Thermal might be better for military scouts, as NPR ships actually seem to have a concept of EMCON discipline in this version; they don't always go running around blasting their sensors.  (From what I've seen; I haven't played much 1. 12. ) On the other hand, if they are on the EM should pick them up from much further away.

EM is very useful to have to help characterize hostile military ships.  Thankfully, the new sensor rules make smaller sensors much, much more effective so putting a small 50 ton (1 HS) EM sensor on your scout (or even your warships) for use when actually engaging contacts is effective and easy. 
 
The following users thanked this post: Llamageddon

Offline Froggiest1982

  • Gold Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • F
  • Posts: 1331
  • Thanked: 589 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: Passives: EM vs Thermal, which is better for what situation?
« Reply #2 on: October 26, 2020, 09:18:21 PM »
I put EM on my GEVs, reasoning that populations usually seem to have higher EM signatures.
Correct

Converseley I use thermals on my GSVs as they are more likely to be around ships in open space so thermals are a better guarantee for detection.
Correct

Would you always try and have both?
I always have size 1 EM, TH and Active in ALL ships. On commercial vessels it helps with detection of enemies and general contact tracing, in war ships they act as back up shall leaders or scouts be suddenly not available.

I'm not sure what is best in general for scouting/detecting for military fleets though.
It really depends of what the ship suppose to do to be honest. My scouts have only large EM and TH sensors as they usually unarmed and an Active Sensor will just make them more visible without any reason. However, if is a scout marauder tasked to hunt down commercial ships or to test enemy capabilities then he may have only Active Sensors as he may act with a passive sensor ship as support.

Specifically for detecting ships, is one better for detecting large ships and one better for detecting small ships?
TH Sensors will detect ships of any size in any case while EM sensors will be more effective in detecting Active Sensors so if the ship you are tracking have the Active Sensors on you will be able to spot it otherwise against ships they are useless.

If I was saving space on a small passive scout to go ahead of my fleets, which would you recommend?
As said, it depends. Is the scout for detection purpose only? If yes a big TH sensor is what you need. This will potentially also detect missiles.

Alternatively on a capital ship, for backup detection if there isn't a main sensor ship available, which would you go for?
Cannot really help here, I don't like "blind" capital ships.

Is there a better choice for a carrier to detect passive targets for FACs/Fighters to launch at if not using active scanners?
My carriers rely on small range sensors as they are used for their defenses and recon. However I always have 3 scouts acting as recon group. 1 Carries EM, 1 TH and one Active Sensor. Generally speaking though, I think that multi purpose carriers are not that advantageous as I've found out them to be neither fish nor fowl. I have 2 or 3 design of carriers depending on the mission which can alternatively act together.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2020, 11:11:25 PM by froggiest1982 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Llamageddon

Offline Llamageddon (OP)

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • L
  • Posts: 118
  • Thanked: 15 times
Re: Passives: EM vs Thermal, which is better for what situation?
« Reply #3 on: October 26, 2020, 10:24:48 PM »
Thanks for such a comprehensive reply, I think you covered everything I was wondering about. Now I have a much better idea of how I want to deploy sensors in my fleets.
Currently using Aurora 1.12 - Unmodded
 

Offline TallTroll

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • T
  • Posts: 154
  • Thanked: 19 times
Re: Passives: EM vs Thermal, which is better for what situation?
« Reply #4 on: July 23, 2021, 11:21:20 AM »
Bit of a necro, but I also wanted to add that when researching the EM sensor tech line, I always ensure that the EM Sensitivity tech is at least a couple of levels higher  than the Strength tech. This has 2 effects, making your Passive EM sensors better directly, and somewhat reducing the range at which your Active sensors will be detected, since your broadcast EM sig is related to Strength, but not Sensitivity Obviously, it's a bit inefficient in terms of RP, since you'd get the best possible sensors for a given RP spend by balancing research between the 2 lines, but for getting the best possible visibility whilst reducing the possibility of counter-detection, it is a better choice
 
The following users thanked this post: skoormit

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2822
  • Thanked: 673 times
Re: Passives: EM vs Thermal, which is better for what situation?
« Reply #5 on: July 23, 2021, 03:27:56 PM »
Bit of a necro, but I also wanted to add that when researching the EM sensor tech line, I always ensure that the EM Sensitivity tech is at least a couple of levels higher  than the Strength tech. This has 2 effects, making your Passive EM sensors better directly, and somewhat reducing the range at which your Active sensors will be detected, since your broadcast EM sig is related to Strength, but not Sensitivity Obviously, it's a bit inefficient in terms of RP, since you'd get the best possible sensors for a given RP spend by balancing research between the 2 lines, but for getting the best possible visibility whilst reducing the possibility of counter-detection, it is a better choice

This is actually in my opinion worth more than you might realise in allot of cases. Active strength can always be increased with just a bigger sensor so not a huge deal as cost are still the same, the sensor just are a bit bigger. In my opinion cost are generally the biggest issue with sensors. Having the technology for sensitivity at one or even two better than strength can be efficient. Those RP for active can probably be put to better use elsewhere most of the time.
 
The following users thanked this post: skoormit

Offline xenoscepter

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1154
  • Thanked: 317 times
Re: Passives: EM vs Thermal, which is better for what situation?
« Reply #6 on: July 23, 2021, 04:49:05 PM »
 --- In terms of research costs, EM is better than Thermal as your EM tech bleeds over into your Active Sensors as well. An Active Sensor with 10 Active Strength will have more range if it uses 10 EM Strength instead of 5. On top of that, increasing the EM strength of your Actives DOESN'T make them easier to detect, so it's more range for the same footprint with regards to detection. In terms of uses, Thermal is more useful than EM, as engines are harder to hide than Actives, broadly speaking of course...
 
The following users thanked this post: skoormit

Offline kilo

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • k
  • Posts: 249
  • Thanked: 46 times
Re: Passives: EM vs Thermal, which is better for what situation?
« Reply #7 on: July 24, 2021, 05:02:21 AM »
The AI tends to be quite good at radio silence. Many ships I was tracking in previous games sailed with their actives being off.  I used a lot of passive sensors in a particular game and they occasionally picked up fleets of the starting NPR consisting of 10 identical ships out of which one or two were pinging with their actives.
This is why I use thermals to track ships. EM sensors are good to identify command vessels though. They can be a prime target at range.
 
The following users thanked this post: skoormit