Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

shield distruptors are too expensive to be an effective counter.
In that case, just knock down any shields and burn their engines, thats not an answer though as SDs are way too expensive to be used effectively. and not too powerful.

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

You're better off using Tachyon Projection Cannons:[*]They are the same size and cost less.[*]They have better damage at range.[*]They have better damage/turn at range.[*]They do a better job of disabling enemy ships. Shield Disruptors kill shields and leave the weapon killing to you; TPCs kill weapons, and weaponless shielded ships aren't worth their maintenance.

Yes, reload is 4 for TPCs and 3 for SD's; but IMHO, the benefits of TPCs far outweigh that.

[edit] Not to mention that Shield Depleters are at least as effective as Shield Disruptors at taking shields out of the way.

[ December 04, 2002, 01:28: Message edited by: Krsqk ]

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

TPC is one of my Favorites. DUC/TPC + shields or armor can be very deadly early on, and TPC is the bets supplement for missile ships.

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

The point is that they are better against CA than Depleters are, because you don't get those weird extra damage effects going on. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Against non CA ships, Disruptors do indeed suck, as they do about the same damage as Depleters (and Shield Regenerators do too little to matter much in general).

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

Krsqk,

Your ideas work well against standard 'capital' ships with heavy direct-fire weapons. They are less effective against missile-bearing ships due to the extreme range disadvantage, and nearly useless against a race that emphasizes fighters (carriers) and/or drones. Units on a ship don't count as 'weapons' for the Tachyon Projection Cannon. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif So, about all you could do to carriers is destroy their PDC. As always, rock/paper/scissors offers a way around a supposed 'good trick'...

[ December 04, 2002, 02:12: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The problem with pre-regenerating was that the OA would start banking regeneration "points" from the beginning of combat, before the armor had even taken a hit.

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

Okay, you guys are right, it isn't logical that the OA would pre-generate healing... so I'd just suggest that the repair ability be bumped up from 10?/20/30 repair points per turn to say maybe 15/30/45 repair per turn to make up for the shortfall. This is of course entirely modable, so probably not something that needs to find it's way into a patch (does anyone play the original game anyway?).

PvK said:
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That's true, I didn't consider the absolute cost (and thus the maint. cost), just the fact that build time was improved. I guess my ships don't Last long enough to become a maintenance burden http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

cheers,
jimbob