Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

The subject has come up and frankly I don't have a good answer. I know what I do, and I have a feel for what I see other people do in games. But I don't have any good method of determining subjectively what is best.

So how do you design your ships? Frankly I tend to go balls out all weapons and little or no armor or shields. I will use stealth and scattering armor for their defensive bonuses, and on very large ships will start to put some high level phased shields on them once I have them.

Prior to that it's all about the guns. The strongest ones I can find and cram as many on there as I can. I might use a single shield as anti-boarding if my enemy is big on that. The normal armor I almost never use unless I need to fill a hole in a ship and nothing else fits. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I will grant that my method may not be particularly wise. And given my record in PBW games this is as good a reason as any as to why I lose more then my fair share.

I tried to do some simulations just now and with ships of similer weapons (Destroyers, DUC3's) one having armor and the other not. There did seem to be an advantage in performace of the armored ships at first glance. I haven't quite worked out the best ratio of guns to armor, but I did get some results that suggest some amount of armor is better then none, as long as you don't use too much to where you are pitifully outnumbered in the number of gun barrels.

However, upon reflectionI don't think my test was that conclusive. It occured to me that if one player took the time and research to develop armor they might not have equal weapons tech. So repeating my tests with destoryers with one with all DUC 3's and the other destroyers with armor and DUC 2's. In that test it did not seem to matter how much armor I used, the DUC 3 no armor ships did better.

So, it appears at least from my test that given equal weapons some armor is better then none, but armor will not make up for a deficency of weapons tech.

So how does an aspiring galactic emperor put this knowledge to use? Can anyone affer me some further enlightenment? Perhaps someone has developed a method of mathematically analyzing the problem rahter then brute force modeling?

And what about shields? There is just so much to consider.... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Geoschmo

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

In general for fleet combat, you will want to maximize your hitpoints * damage output.
Where hitpoints include all internals, armor and shields.

Be sure to take to-hit chances into account, as this will increase your effective hitpoints and reduce your effective damage.

This will maximize the amount of punishment you can dish out before being destroyed. (Or minimize the losses you take before winning)

Note that there will be a lot of rounding effects due to firing first, and crippled ships (for tiny fleets or single ships), and stuff like that.
Also, Special Tactics or Strategies, such as longer range weapons, or custom formations can also influence the results.

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

Having all guns means your ship loses weapons on the first shot a very large portion of the time, as they have lots of HPs and are likely to be hit first. Armor/shields allow the ship to absorb some hits before it loses any offensive capability. As armor and shields have much greater than 1 HP/kT, they are better for receiving those first impacts than your weapons (or engines!) are.

How much shielding and armor you use is not really an exact science, because you can never accurately predict exactly what your ships will encounter. The enemy could easily change their designs at any time. I usually stick ~40-50kT armor/shields on Destroyers and Light Cruisers. I rarely build Cruisers because they are an innefficient hull and BCs are always just a few turns away by the time I start researching Ship Construction past 4. Battlecruisers get ~80kT armor/shields (not counting stealth/scattering armor). Battleships get 120-160kT, depending on the nature of the enemy and what is more effective. I never build Dreadnoughts or Baseships because they are too slow for my tastes.

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I understand that and have always been aware of it. But in my mind I felt that the trade off was that I had more weapons to lose then the other guy so I could afford to lose more. Now I am not so sure this is correct, but how do you come up with a good ratio is what I am trying to determine. And where do you factor in the additional research cost of going for armor. If my second set of tests was accurate, all it took was a tech deficency of one level in weapons to make the armor irrelevant. Of course I am sure that there are more variables to consider, and different weapons might have different results even.

Maybe there is no good method and it's just throwing darts and seeing what sticks. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

My non scientific method only playing against TDM AI:
Max speed
Max guns
Add 2 PDC (if needed)
Add 3 Armor
Remove guns to fit
Ballence to fill every space by adding and subtracting armor and guns and PDC.
This usualy leaves 2 to 3 Armor III 1 or 2 PDC.

Against AI it seems to work.

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

I guess I go at it a bit differently.

I build my ships according to what I see on my enemy ships. In general, if I am in a defensive posture, I build ships with lots of firepower and wait at warp holes. If I'm on offensive mode, I'll use a bit more armor and shielding.

So, in the "Slynky Book of Ship Design", how ships are built depend on several factors and vary from game-to-game.

For example, if I find myself facing Asmala, I just go ahead and put the "coffin components" on board to save time http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

Well... when you have played many PBW games, you get an innate feel for what you will need at various times in the game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif My ship designs do vary depending on the enemies and other game situations and such; they just end up being rather similar from game to game.

Geo, I normally research to DUC V and PDC III before getting Chemistry or armor. Destroyers with 5-6 PDCs slaughter all early game fighter/missile rush strategies. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

Ok, adding a little more indecision to the mix. I ran some new tests. This time with LC's and large mount DUC V's. One fleet of all DUC V's and the other of DUC V's and armor. With armor I it was no contest. The All weapon ships had a clear advantage. If I stepped it up to Armor 3 it was not so clear. On balance the all weapon ships still won more battles, but they were dinged up pretty badly and the armored ships won a few.

So this get's me back to the research question. If I compensate for the higher cost in researching Armor 3 I will have to penalize that empire by giving it a lower tech weapon. But as even as it is now that will clearly push the advantage to the all weapon ships.

The more tests I run on the this the more I get to the conculsion that for fleet combat less armor or even no armor and all weapons is the way to go. What am I missing?

Now, clearly in a one on one fight the armor ship would have an advantage since he could survive the first couple shots. Shots which have a good chance of crippeling the all weapon guy by taking out his bridge or engines. But I think this advantage disappears in the mass of a fleet battle.

Help me understand it.

Geoschmo

[ July 25, 2003, 18:11: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ok, well that makes sense. But if that's the case why bother ever researching armor at all? Go to LC's and start researching shields. You need Physics anyway for all the better beam waepons, you can't stick with DUC's forever. And the only other good thing to come from the chemestry branch is resource manipulation. And you can do without that for a long time. Am I wrong? I am just trying to figure out when the armor should come into play.

Geoschmo

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

It is not easy to instruct ships to gang up on one ship and pound it. You must use "most damaged" as a first firing priority, but I often see such ships moving aimesly (poor pathfinding) and fire ineffectively from a long distance. IMHO, the most effective priority is "nearest" but that may lead to the spreading of fire and armored/shielded ships can Last longer even in fleet battles !

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ok, well that makes sense. But if that's the case why bother ever researching armor at all? Go to LC's and start researching shields. You need Physics anyway for all the better beam waepons, you can't stick with DUC's forever. And the only other good thing to come from the chemestry branch is resource manipulation. And you can do without that for a long time. Am I wrong? I am just trying to figure out when the armor should come into play.

Geoschmo</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">DUC -> PPB. Now the only protection for a long time is armor !

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The only protection against PPB, yes. But if my tests so far are accurate you are better off with no protection at all and just putting on more weapons. That's entirely the question I am trying to figure out.

Geoschmo

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Weapons and engines do add quite a bit of bulk to ships. Weapons contribute to both offense and defense, and are thus especially effective.

In comparison to the minimum 460kt of hitpoints on an LC, a few pieces of armor don't have a whole lot of impact.
Also keep in mind that you should subtract 10 points off the strength of armor, since if you don't put armor, there will still be 10 hitpoints from whatever else you put in there instead.

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ok, so maybe what I am seeing then makes sense? At least for the stock game? Perhaps the extra damage done by mounts makes standard armor pretty much a bad idea for combat ships? That would explain why it seems to give some value in destroyers but not in the LC's.

Or am I reading too much into it?

Geoschmo

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

[ July 25, 2003, 20:05: Message edited by: oleg ]

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ok, so maybe what I am seeing then makes sense? At least for the stock game? Perhaps the extra damage done by mounts makes standard armor pretty much a bad idea for combat ships? That would explain why it seems to give some value in destroyers but not in the LC's.

Or am I reading too much into it?

Geoschmo</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'd say that once you get in to mounts, which show up on the LCs, armour is only marginally effective but it is effective. Simply because if it soaks up even a little bit of damage overall that might be the difference between surviving one extra round to do damage or spread incoming damage (across more ships), and not surviving.

In a fleet battle, clearly, this can make a huge difference. But as others have pointed out, it also makes a difference who fires first.

In my latests games I've found myself tending to move away from putting armour on my LCs and instead going all weapons (because the LCs are kind of expandable so I go for max damage, though I do put on PDCs). But anything above that starts to get armour, usually about three Armour IIIs, which I think is about 90 hit points--good enough to deflect much or most of the hit of one heavy mount weapon.

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Not at all. Stock SEIV is very much offence orriented. May be the rational is that battles should be over in 30 turns ? If ships are ultra tough, battles can end in almost a draw. Then for example inferior fleet can survive warp point battle and move into the system. Or for example allow planet killer hide in the corner while other ships battle for 30 turns and then blow planet.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

I don't look for a complete super ratio, I think that's a waste of time. Instead, I think in advance what I want each of my ship designs to do. For example, many of my ships are supposed to outrange the enemy, and stay just outside his firing range to dish out the damage. Those ships will get missiles and long range guns, and little to no armor (EMC I do give every combat ship, because it's so space efficient. I give combat sensors only to ships that use several direct fire weapons, including point defense turrets.)

For a missile ship, I'll give them loads of missiles and a handful of point defense cannons. No armor. Sometimes I'll escort these with dedicated point-defense ships that have about ten point-defense cannons, a combat sensor, and one "anti-ship" gun because otherwise they'll run into the corner and I want them to stick with my combat ships. These don't typically get armor.
Then there's the "Tank" type of ship. I'll give this one anywhere from 120 to 300 tons of [organic if I picked that] armor, and a few guns. Those have orders to move in close to the enemy to soak up the damage while the other ships shoot at them.

Carriers have at least 90 tons of armor to protect their cargo; they also have heavy guns and orders to behave as a combat ship. Noncombat ships typically recieve one organic armor and one lightning beam so they can beat enemy noncombat ships, and protect themselves for a little while if isolated.
I built an "armored dropship" class with 5020 cargo space, three fighter bays, and 270 tons of organic armor. This can take a planet without damaging its facilities, and if the planet isn't guarded by combat ships, it wouldn't even need an escorting fleet.
Fighters and troops never recieve armor (too useless on them) but may recieve one small shield if the enemy is consistently shooting them down.

My research path always goes towards good weapons first, then armor/shielding, and then specialized weapons like engine and weapon destroyers and shield-depleter boarding craft. Those Last use one heavy shield depleter, a tractor beam, boarding parties, a couple of point defense cannons and all the armor I can cram into them.

Remember: armor gets damaged first so the reason you're putting it on there is to protect the other components. You armor ships that need to be fast, or ships that have weapons you don't want destroyed, or any ship that carries close to its maximum cargo capacity into battle. It also should be applied liberally to ships that want to move in close-range to fire their weapons.

I do believe in "a good offense", but I also don't like losing ships. So I try to defend them enough to survive the battle (even if they're useless at the end of it.) I also try to design their defenses such that they'll be useful throughout the entire battle. My all-purpose "Orca" class battleship has 120 tons of organic armor, 4 [heavy I think] lightning beams, 6 parasites, and 4 point defense cannons. This is effective against many combinations of enemy ships because it can fight at any range. In my TDM game against the AI, one of these is conquering an entire front of advance by itself (With one troopship) and is at Legendary (40%) status. Because the organic armor heals itself after battle, he's never had to go back for repairs. But otherwise I'd just accompany it with an "Angel" class repair ship.
I recently designed a bigger model all-purpose ship with more armor and bigger weapons (enveloping acid globules so it doesn't need to get close at all.) I believe I called that a "Juggernaut".

In the army once they asked us what the difference was between armor and artillery. I jokingly answered, "armor has little guns and a big body, and artillery has big guns and a little body." The armor are supposed to protect the artillery, who dish out the damage.

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

Just a note on shields... your designs will be vulnerable to ship capture without them. (Especially an WP ambush). So even though they are bulky and inefficient, I include just one even on my early designs.

If I see that a player is not using shields... I try and take advantage of this... hello boarding parties!

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

I think it depends somewhat on the exact match-ups. To-hit chances are important. For example, if your ships are hard for the enemy to hit, then being able to survive a few hits (or even just one) and still fight as well, can multiply a ship's effectiveness. On the other hand, if your ships are going to get pounded regularly, then it might make sense to try to get in as many shots as possible before they die.

Also consider cost. Weapons are more expensive than armor, especially organic armor, so the side with armor may be able to build and maintain more ships. Emissive armor looks better than regular armor until you consider the cost - it only seems to work well if you have a lot of tonnage to dedicate to it, and get one or two and then combine with lots of regular armor (not organic). Even then it's not that great, especially against powerful mounted weapons.

I can think of several other considerations which apply in different circumstances, too.

PvK

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

Seems like
Max Speed
Max ECM (if not facing the Big Tali)
3 to 6 armor III based on ship size
Couple of PDC
Max Offensive fire power.

I do tend to over simplyfy.

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

generally a ship without an armor or shields, i mean both, is too easily shot down. For shields, just get SD, its cheap. For armor everything works. BUT! once shields are down, every hit takes something out of your ship. And your lucky if it is a weapon. Because otherwise it might hit a bridge. Then your toast.

Armor is, supposedly, the backup of shields.

Now there is something else about shields. Not taking into account the defense bonuses from the high-tech armor, the racial armors are the best in the game and are best when put into massive quantities. For example i've found that a cruiser with like 5 OA and only a handful of weapons is extremly powerful, and very cheap. Then again a crystalline armored battleship is almost impenitrable to damage, resisting alot from every second shot.

In general some shields and some armor is a must, because every ship can do more - or at least soak up more damage.

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I know what you all are saying, and it makes sense in principle. But it just doesn't fit with what I see when I test it. I haven't tried shields yet, but at least for armor I see no point in using ANY once you get past LC's. The mounts make the weapons do just too much damage, even for Armor 3. That is unless you have a lot of armor, and then your ship is too weak to really hurt the other guy.

The only thing the armor does as far as I can tell is take up space better suited to more weapons. Your armored ships may Last an extra turn in battle, but the fewer weapons means your enemy Lasts longer then you do, and that is bad. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Now shields may very well have some value seeing as how they have a higher damage to size ratio then armor. As I said I have not tested that. And armor does seem to help with destroyers and smaller, assuming equal weapons tech. But the mounts make the damage too high for the armor to be an effective protection.

Now nothing I have said applies to organic armor or mods. I am talking only about standard armor in the stock game.

Geoschmo

[ July 26, 2003, 00:36: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

The way I see it, I sure hope that there is no optimum shield:weapon:armor recipe, and I don't think there is unless you lock down exactly what opposition you are facing. Everything about SE4 is about action & reaction. Feint & counter, advantage & disadvantage, etc. If you see your opponent's designs and don't react, you will probably be overrun.

The other part of the question, mentioned by others, is how the ships are used. I make different designs for offense, defense, and support. These are further different on how or where they operate:

how near to resupply? --- determines how much supply, solar collectors and/or quantum reactor used.

solo or in fleet? --- determines amount of PD, supply, and to some extent, strategy assigned. Also is affected by stage of game since fleets are more common later in game.

suicide mission? --- different design from a ship that I plan to keep around.

expected foe: planet? fleet? each affects design.

desired result: enemy destroyed? enemy captured? enemy delayed? enemy blockaded?

Which way is the front moving? Am I advancing or retreating? What is the urgency of attack? How does my economy support my military and compare to the enemy economy? Am I ahead or behind on research or intel?

All of these things affect my designs to some extent.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Maybe I just worry about too many things and should go all weapons.

Slick.

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">ROFL! I feel your pain slick. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

As others posted before, I like to include at least a shield to avoid boarding and help to avoid the Ionic Disperser's effects.
And also, design my ships thinking in how to take an advantage over the enemy's ships.

But think the most important to me is the question: will be my ships able to have a good hit ratio??? Can my ships avoid (at least some) of the enemy's shots??

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

Geo - with the exception of very early game armor is not a defense - its the backup of the shields. Meaning that if a shield IS breached, you dont lose components -- at least not instantly.

The point is that shields can survive partially - four armors will be 1 if hit by enough damage.

My opinion.

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yeah, what he said and what Master Belisarius said
"I like to include at least a shield to avoid boarding and help to avoid the Ionic Disperser's effects."

Try warping in and taking on a pack of fighters with no shields and no armor. All direct fire fighter weapons are weak, even the fighter PPB.

So even non phased shields have a purpose. Even if they use PPB and skip the shields, the shields will still protect against Ionic dispersers, Fighters, and Boarding Parties.

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

One or two normal shield gen III's on a destroyer can be very decisive against enemies who have no shields, no PPB, and no shield depleters. Quite useful for early-game wars.

PvK

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

Yeah, I need to get around to testing shields. I expect them to be effective. Even armor was for destroyers and smaller. I hope that shields at least prove semi usefull for LC's and above beyond just anti-boarding. the greater size to damage ratio should make the difference.

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Please don't forget ID. It was no coincidence MM was finally forced to do something about that uberweapon !

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">One of the main reasons I use armor is because it is cheap, and a lot of my designs end up with armor III on them just for the sake of keeping cost within the build-time cutoff points.

Re: Ship Design for Dummies, weapons, armor, shields, oh my!
 

Damaging Warp Points - up to 200kt damage, ignores shields, damage is applied to armor first.