The Perfect Cruiser

[Ur-Quan Lord 13]

So, just came up in another thread. Could you see what happens if you use those 20 extra power to change all the weapons, plasma and kinetic, to matter disintegrators? Keep them otherwise identical, and see who wins in a 40v40 (or whatever) match?

And you could also check it vs the corvettes... Though it would only have a chance of being better if you went all medium MD, while I think vs type 52 cruisers the large MD would be better.

 

[Demiare]

And now comes the Math...

Despite Paradox-related targeting quirks armor should be mathematically effective and I can prove that.

Here's coming a Warhammer, having 70% win ratio* over your Type-52. As bonus he's much less vulnerable to energy torpedoes and paired with corvettes really unstoppable.

*Test settings : 480 fleet size (120 cruisers) as my prefered size. Both fleets are done via cheats "research_technologies 1" and build on starport with Fleet Academy. Both fleets charge into each other from different sides of star system on Fast game speed (combat too going on Fast). 0 repeated tech, 0 admirals, 0 special resources.
There was 2 sets of 10 tries, in every set my cruisers able to achieve 7 victories and lose 3 times.

UPD. God damn it. Only now I'm found that my cruiser layout used T4 shield instead of T5... Well, let's call it "friendly advantage to shield users"

I'm using Advanced Ship Behaviour Modules mod, but it shouldn't have any influence as set to default Paradox settings. If you're really want I can reinstall pure vanilla game and re-run test with same settings.

UPD2. Done some more tests. While "Warhammer" losing to Type-42 battleships at fleets of equal fleet size (480), when I'm equal their fleet power by addition 10 more cruisers (120 warhammers had only 51.9K, compared to 60 Type-42 with 56.2K) - they begin to win over Type-42. Of course, warhammers unable to achieve victory against Type-41, but at least they're nearly to be hard counter to any cruiser or BB that based on anything except plasma cannons. I like it ^_^

 

[Frederick III]

So, generally I break my fleets into two different formations. I put Corvettes and Cruisers in one group, which charges the enemy and is loaded down with lots of plasma weapons and some energy torpedoes for some added weight. Then I put Destroyers and Battleships in a second group, loaded down with as much kinetic artillery as I can cram into them, and some tachyon lances for added throw weight (with flak in the Destroyer's remaining slots).

This way I get the best of both plasma and kinetics, and my KA Destroyers absolutely shred things - staying nice and safe at far range hanging out with the BBs.

 

[Meneliki]

Very nice!

That design is heavily invested into shields. I wonder how it would perform against a torpedo heavy fleet. (capital ships, i mean.. i feel like a swarm of high evasion torpedo corvettes would do well vs this too)

 

[LordMagus]

Here's coming a Warhammer, having 70% win ratio* over your Type-52. As bonus he's much less vulnerable to energy torpedoes and paired with corvettes really unstoppable.

Are corvettes useful at all, and if so, what design should I use? My current destroyer build is as Larknok, using autocannons.

 

[Meneliki]

Are corvettes useful at all, and if so, what design should I use? My current destroyer build is as Larknok, using autocannons.

Corvettes with high evasion can overwhelm capital ships that lack screens. Throw a torpedo on them and they become heavy bombers. Pretty nasty.

 

[scaper12123]

Very interesting stuff! Can't wait for the destroyer and corvette conclusions

 

[LordMagus]

Another question: The AI aren't really using battleships at the moment, only cruisers. What ship class and design would I use against other cruisers? Aim for Medium slots and go all out plasma?

 

[Jularbo Kizn]

I don't see why you would have more than one (L) wep on a cruiser when its only Battle computers are rush in Close range. Having one (L) would give you some extra damage at the 70-90 range limit but for huge Battles of over 300+ vs 300+ ships two or Three (S) or (M) would be much more beneficial.

 

[LordMagus]

From research on the optimal Battleship, we know that (until PDS gets around to addressing focus-fire issues) full-shield compositions will be the best at end-game.

I simply don't think that is the case. All the testing I've conducted thus far shows that armoured cruisers and armoured battleships are better than their shielded variants.

I don't see why you would have more than one (L) wep on a cruiser when its only Battle computers are rush in Close range. Having one (L) would give you some extra damage at the 70-90 range limit but for huge Battles of over 300+ vs 300+ ships two or Three (S) or (M) would be much more beneficial.

That really depends on the enemy fleet composition. I've tested cruisers specifically against Keepers of Knowledge, and 2 kinetic artillery + 2 plasma was much better than full plasma. By better, I mean losing 48 cruisers instead of 66.
EDIT: 1KA + 4 plasma is better if the enemy is using armour. 2KA + 2 plasma is better if the enemy is using shields.

 

[Demiare]

Are corvettes useful at all, and if so, what design should I use? My current destroyer build is as Larknok, using autocannons.

Very interesting stuff! Can't wait for the destroyer and corvette conclusions

Corvettes have only torpedo-build with neutron torpedo viable (and 3-plasma corvette against heavy armor).

Devastation torpedoes are total crap - they do even less damage against autocannon cruisers then neutron torpedoes able to.

I don't see why you would have more than one (L) wep on a cruiser when its only Battle computers are rush in Close range. Having one (L) would give you some extra damage at the 70-90 range limit but for huge Battles of over 300+ vs 300+ ships two or Three (S) or (M) would be much more beneficial.

Because we making our optimal designs to stand against FE (that have both a lot of shields and tons of armor). Against them 2KA + 2 plasma is better. And against ordinary AI you can win ever with missiles (yes, sometimes on forums appear that maniacs).

I simply don't think that is the case. All the testing I've conducted thus far shows that armoured cruisers and armoured battleships are better than their shielded variants.

Yes, it's why I'm opposed him initially - late game repeated tech don't buff shield regen at all, but buff both armor & hp, making armor build clearly superior in long run.

Even resource based +5-10% armor, +hp and +base shield - allow armor builds to overwhelm shield build very reliable even in hard-counter situation. Pure math behind it.

 

[GloatingSwine]

Corvettes have only torpedo-build with neutron torpedo viable (and 3-plasma corvette against heavy armor).

Devastation torpedoes are total crap - they do even less damage against autocannon cruisers then neutron torpedoes able to.

It's important to remember that if you build only torpedo corvettes they will do bad because they fail to focus fire. You're best building one in six as a torpedo corvette and the rest as plasma.

Yes, it's why I'm opposed him initially - late game repeated tech don't buff shield regen at all, but buff both armor & hp, making armor build clearly superior in long run.

Even resource based +5-10% armor, +hp and +base shield - allow armor builds to overwhelm shield build very reliable even in hard-counter situation. Pure math behind it.

Remember that the more +Armour buffs you have the less armour slots you need to reach 90%.

 

[Demiare]

It's important to remember that if you build only torpedo corvettes they will do bad because they fail to focus fire. You're best building one in six as a torpedo corvette and the rest as plasma.

Personal I'm dislike to use corvette-only swarms, so for me neutron's fire spread is blessing, not a flaw. But nice addition for others.

Remember that the more +Armour buffs you have the less armour slots you need to reach 90%.

And if you look at battleship thread - you can see that I'm already included that when were doing repeated techs tests =)

For cruisers you will need +40% armor bonus only to get that 90% damage reductions. So it's meaningless there.

 

[Diezy]

Also there's Neutronium and (possibly) Living Metal, adding extra 15% and 5%, so you'd only need +20% armor tech!

 

[Demiare]

Also there's Neutronium and (possibly) Living Metal, adding extra 15% and 5%, so you'd only need +20% armor tech!

*Blush a lot* This what's happening when you're becoming obsessed with testing and experimenting and not playing actual game.

I'm completely forget that Neutronium give us +15% armor and think that it give a mere +5% like Living Metal. That's really huge buff to armor-based build, thank you!