-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Mother nature strikes another blow!
Question, are we going to refit our existing Gnats, or will we simply station them on a planet as a last line of defense while new Gnats get built?
It is certainly time to see to the defense of the colonies.
Back when I started this game, I was a complete noob... so my initial PDC (Planetary Defense Complex) designs were not very good. In particular, they didn't have any room inside them for Ground Troops. This was probably a major mistake, since Troops inside PDCs can defend the PDC, while it in turn defends them. It seems to me that it's just about time to redesign some new PDCs, build pre-fabs of them, and ship them out to the colonies to be assembled. Since we are going to be doing that, we might as well station our obsolescent Gnats on PDC Airbases, to defend the colonies, while building a new line of Fighters for our Carriers.
Speaking of which... what sort of Fighter design do you favor? A higher-speed Gnat (13,000+ kps) armed with one torpedo which stacks 21 FTRs per Carrier, or a slower (but still fast) heavier fighter with two torpedos which stacks fewer (probably 15 or so per carrier) but packs a heavier punch?
I like the light, quick ones, but I'm open to discussion on the subject.
Back when I started this game, I was a complete noob... so my initial PDC (Planetary Defense Complex) designs were not very good. In particular, they didn't have any room inside them for Ground Troops. This was probably a major mistake, since Troops inside PDCs can defend the PDC, while it in turn defends them. It seems to me that it's just about time to redesign some new PDCs, build pre-fabs of them, and ship them out to the colonies to be assembled. Since we are going to be doing that, we might as well station our obsolescent Gnats on PDC Airbases, to defend the colonies, while building a new line of Fighters for our Carriers.
Speaking of which... what sort of Fighter design do you favor? A higher-speed Gnat (13,000+ kps) armed with one torpedo which stacks 21 FTRs per Carrier, or a slower (but still fast) heavier fighter with two torpedos which stacks fewer (probably 15 or so per carrier) but packs a heavier punch?
I like the light, quick ones, but I'm open to discussion on the subject.
I was a fan of the original Gnat design, so I see no reason why we should not continue with such a program.
Heavier fighters should be for planetary defense, not carrier ops.
Mark me down as in full favor of a faster, one missile Gnat that allows our carriers to hold many of them.
Julius Strange has formed a Xeno Team to investigate the mysterious deserted cities on the captured planet of El Dorado.
How much speed would a two missile design lose? I'm happy with the Gnats, but after a certain point the extra strike ower is more useful.
Also, that's a great find with the intact cities. Hopefully they left more than the kitchen sink behind.
Also, that's a great find with the intact cities. Hopefully they left more than the kitchen sink behind.
I disagree that extra strike power is more useful. We can carry more 1 missile Gnats than a slower multi-missile alternate in our carriers.
Like before, I agree with TheLoneGunman, and I also favour the Gnat-design of lightweight faster fighters.
From what I can see, it's going to be just as easy to simply scrap our old Scout Ships and build new ones, rather than try to refit them to modern types. They were built at the beginning of the game, thirteen years ago, and have simply fallen too far behind the curve to be profitably refitted.
How does this look for a Scout Ship? Smaller, nearly twice as fast as the current model, cheaper and quicker to build, and capable of both Grav and Geo survey, plus carrying an EM detector to find alien-occupied worlds.
How does this look for a Scout Ship? Smaller, nearly twice as fast as the current model, cheaper and quicker to build, and capable of both Grav and Geo survey, plus carrying an EM detector to find alien-occupied worlds.
15 Fighters with 2 launchers each will put more warheads on target than 21 with 1 each...
15 x 2 missiles or 20 x 1 missile. I prefer a design that can out run 10000 kps, but beyond that the extra punch would be a big help, in my opinion.
15 slower, easier to kill fighters versus 20 faster, harder to hit fighters that can return to their carrier, rearm, and strike again.
Remember what happened to our slow fighters the first time we fought an engagement with the Prix.
Not only that, but by having 20 Gnats (plus the leader), we actually give the enemy more targets to attack and waste missiles on.
Only true if they all reach firing position. The tiny ones are harder to see (smaller target cross section, harder to get a radar lock on them), harder to hit (faster targets means extra to-hit penalties for the attacker) and because of their faster speed, they will be exposed to fire for a shorter period before reaching attack range.
... it's a trade-off.
Our dismantling of the first three Prix wrecks produced only minerals plus 1100 research points worth of tech info, but we hit the jackpot when we started dismantling that PD PDC that we destroyed. We got a FC that can fire on res-1 targets at 38 m-km, three armored magazines and twenty-eight fast-firing size-1 PD launchers.
seeing that the charlies can field normal ships going 7000+kmphr I don't see the reasoning in having 10000 as a mark besides it being a nice number.
Are we keeping that equipment or attempting to reverse engineer it?
So how are relations with the Chix currently?
From a diplomatic standpoint I suggest that we continue on the path of peace and commerce with any species not hostile to us until we are fully prepared for a prolonged conflict. I believe eventually we can turn them into client states am I correct?
From a diplomatic standpoint I suggest that we continue on the path of peace and commerce with any species not hostile to us until we are fully prepared for a prolonged conflict. I believe eventually we can turn them into client states am I correct?
We've encountered plenty of Prix ships that exceed 9400 kps, so "a design that can out-run 10,000 kps" just means "faster than our opponents".
I'd like to keep the FC, and maybe some of those PD tubes, since they probably have a reload time of five seconds compared to our ten seconds.
The Chix are at nearly 300 relations, with a trade treaty. My own view on diplomacy is that we should attempt to establish a Galactic Federation, with Humanity in the driver's seat.
EDIT: Another point in favor of using lots of tiny Fighters instead of two-thirds as many larger, two-missile Fighters is that each Fighter lost during the run-in only reduces our salvo by one missile, rather than by two.
21 1 missile fighters vs 15 2 missile fighter...the 1 missile solution is superior (in terms of firepower) if we expect to lose 10 fighters per carrierload or more. Otherwise the 2 missile solutions is preferable. (ie at 9 fighter lost on either side, we have 12 missiles to each side. 8, we have 13 missiles for the Gnats II vs 14 for the midrange ones), etc.
Of course, that doesn't account for the extra ease of killing larger fighters.
Of course, that doesn't account for the extra ease of killing larger fighters.