Deviding your fleet can be handy IF all your fleets can cope with the enemy. If not, the biggest will win...
So I'm wondering what you would are the best General Use Fleets ratio wise for the different builds. I can understand why all the different builds are useful but I'm having a hard time figuring out how to make a cohesive build out of it. Or better, what tends to best 'punching outside its weight class' — as I'm currently stuck in a game where my early pacifism hemmed me in hard.
So not to be too big of a Necromancer, but these kinds of Stat Heavy threads are very hard to filter through for particularly useful information.
So I'm wondering what you would are the best General Use Fleets ratio wise for the different builds. I can understand why all the different builds are useful but I'm having a hard time figuring out how to make a cohesive build out of it. Or better, what tends to best 'punching outside its weight class' — as I'm currently stuck in a game where my early pacifism hemmed me in hard.
All designs listed in my guide linked by Torakka are currently more or less viable. If you want a generalist fleet the AB-2B2M2W is probably your best bet, but a fleet of TB-2KA2P will faceroll most things either.
Having actually played a bit I found that you want to get to at least cruiser tech asap and then build either Plasma cruisers or some variant of the C-1B1ET3P "Swiss Army Knife". The important bit is to not bother with corvettes and destroyer anymore and depending on how many ships your economy can support you may even want to disband corvettes and destroyers for more cruisers.
As soon as you have battleships build only these with some loadout of your preference. Refit to max armor TB-2KA2P for fighting FEs.
I am really, really glad to see such diverse Battleships are of so much use and especially that Hangars are now useful. The last Meta I played was Giga Cannon & 4 KA on Battleships, 50/50 6 Plasma 6 Flak Cruisers and a field of Picket Destroyers. I hope the next patch brings back mixed fleets though
The main reason we can get away with battleship monofleets is that BBs with all L weapons can still hit corvettes with enough regularity that they wipe them out with minimal losses.
The main reason we can get away with battleship monofleets is that BBs with all L weapons can still hit corvettes with enough regularity that they wipe them out with minimal losses.
S plasma is 40% armor ignore, so... 46% effective? But, gotta take down the shields somehow. My design is usually 1 S kinetic, 2 S plasma. Still does not work.
Try mining laser +100% armor penS plasma is 40% armor ignore, so... 46% effective? But, gotta take down the shields somehow. My design is usually 1 S kinetic, 2 S plasma. Still does not work.
Because TB-2KA2P will still have 20% accuracy against corvettes and more or less one-hit them. The damage output of any corvette design is pathetic compared to that. It gets even worse for the corvettes if you outfit the BBs with high tracking weapons. It's a mineral efficiency thing and corvettes are utterly worthless currently.Try mining laser +100% armor pen
And disruptor +200% shield damage
If anything I'm surprised corvettes fare so bad with you guys.
So we have a Battleship (1.6k minerals) with 70-90 dps which only actually deals 20% damage (so effective dps ~16) vs 5 corvettes (1.6k minerals) with 5.7-6.7 dps which deals either 20 dps (disruptor +200% vs shields) or 5.7 dps (100% armor ignore).Because TB-2KA2P will still have 20% accuracy against corvettes and more or less one-hit them. The damage output of any corvette design is pathetic compared to that.
Which as a rule BB's don't have. Because those high tracking weapons usually have bad secondary performance (little armor ignore compared to L weapons)It gets even worse for the corvettes if you outfit the BBs with high tracking weapons. It's a mineral efficiency thing and corvettes are utterly worthless currently.
If anything I'm surprised corvettes fare so bad with you guys.
So we have a Battleship (1.6k minerals) with 70-90 dps which only actually deals 20% damage (so effective dps ~16) vs 5 corvettes (1.6k minerals) with 5.7-6.7 dps which deals anywhere between 20 dps (disruptor +200% vs shields) and 5.7 dps (100% armor ignore).
Well 16 dps vs 25-100 dps. I think I know which one wins.
Well 16 dps vs 25-100 dps for each Battleship you field. I think I know which one wins.
Other thing is that by the time I can build battleships, I am also doing everything I can to alleviate late game performance lag. This includes building only BBs to minimize the number of ships. In my last game with 600 stars, 1x planets, I faced down the Unbidden with a doomstack of 500 BBs. I had to zoom out from battles and just mouse over the fleet icons in galaxy view to keep track of how things were going.
Except tests say otherwise, as others have explained in the posts above mine. Theory is worthless if you omit or forget important variables. I'll tell you what happens:So we have a Battleship (1.6k minerals) with 70-90 dps which only actually deals 20% damage (so effective dps ~16) vs 5 corvettes (1.6k minerals) with 5.7-6.7 dps which deals either 20 dps (disruptor +200% vs shields) or 5.7 dps (100% armor ignore).
Well 16 dps vs 25-100 dps for each Battleship you field. I think I know which one wins.
IF you give those BBs Arc Emitters then yes, it's not a one sided win for corvettes but a major advantage for BBs. But generally people roll with Tachyon Lances.
So your 40 BBs vs my 200 Corvettes, you lose 40 BBs and I lose 60-70 corvettes.
Also, this. I've done corvette swarms lategame. I will never do that again.Other thing is that by the time I can build battleships, I am also doing everything I can to alleviate late game performance lag.