Posted by: Barkhorn
« on: June 03, 2017, 11:52:34 AM »So assuming the Helgoland is meant to do point defense, not kill ships, I think the railgun one is best, but not by much. The Gauss one is a close second.
The railgun one's advantages is better firepower; it's got better rate of fire than the Gauss one. It might be a little worse at killing missiles than the Gauss variant, due to worse tracking speed, but it'll be better at killing ships because it has better RoF.
The Gauss one's advantages are armor and tracking speed. Because of the way damage templates work, 6 armor is MUCH better against beam weapons than 5 armor. To penetrate 5 layers in one hit, a laser needs to deal 12 damage per shot. To penetrate 6 layers, it needs 21!
Both the new missile cruisers are better than the original. It's up to preference really which you build. Do you want to be able to launch one huge salvo at the expense of not being able to use colliers?
Iranon is right about the Bem, deployment time, maintenance life, and range are probably mismatched.
Assuming the Thor is not meant to replace the Helgoland, I think your armament/sensors are odd. You've already got the Helgoland for missile defense, so why have the 10cm railguns on the Thor? Why not have more 20cm railguns? I'd ditch the small fire control too. Or just ditch the Thor completely and make more Helgolands.
I don't think the Thor is a bad ship, mind, just that it's niche already seems filled.
The railgun one's advantages is better firepower; it's got better rate of fire than the Gauss one. It might be a little worse at killing missiles than the Gauss variant, due to worse tracking speed, but it'll be better at killing ships because it has better RoF.
The Gauss one's advantages are armor and tracking speed. Because of the way damage templates work, 6 armor is MUCH better against beam weapons than 5 armor. To penetrate 5 layers in one hit, a laser needs to deal 12 damage per shot. To penetrate 6 layers, it needs 21!
Both the new missile cruisers are better than the original. It's up to preference really which you build. Do you want to be able to launch one huge salvo at the expense of not being able to use colliers?
Iranon is right about the Bem, deployment time, maintenance life, and range are probably mismatched.
Assuming the Thor is not meant to replace the Helgoland, I think your armament/sensors are odd. You've already got the Helgoland for missile defense, so why have the 10cm railguns on the Thor? Why not have more 20cm railguns? I'd ditch the small fire control too. Or just ditch the Thor completely and make more Helgolands.
I don't think the Thor is a bad ship, mind, just that it's niche already seems filled.