thinking: OA vs CA
 

There is the post Game Styles and it made me think. (hey, its my post, i can think as much as i want!)
When Organic Armor is compared to Crystalline armor, which is actually better?
So lets review the statistics.
Similar research costs, similar protection ration, similar size.
Organic costs organics, but then crystalline armor is only 70 (!) minerals and rads at level 3.
Organic is only useful when you have more than one. It only regenerates if there is another armor available. It also does no longer have the cancerous growth.
Crystalline armor does not regenerate but given a single shield component on the ship would give 15 points of damage off per armor component as long as there are shields and armor of this type available.

Lets summarize.
A ship with two armors. Organic ones:
One is destroyed and begins to regenerate. In the couple next turns the second one would be probably dead, too. OTOH it can regenerate armor without need to repair.
Crystalline ones:
Each hit is 30 point of damage off. Each, untill armor is gone, providing effective Emmisive Armor effect and distracting the fire of shield depleters sometimes. It requies repair after destroyed.

Anyone else is thinking now?

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

note: im my phrasing i obviously prefer CA which is true now. Ignore this, this was supposed to be an emotionless post. Just express YOUR thoughts.

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

Interesting ... never thought they were so close in cost/benefit. Other benefits:

for CA -- a ship must have shields, and they must be functional(have supplies, not be blown out by shield disrupters).

Additional benefit, weak weapons may never deplete shield enough to allow boarding parties to work(I've seen it tough enough on tactical, strategic is prob. tougher)

... for OA, you get defense vs mines and damageing sectors. But you're naked to boarding without shields.

Hmm... hard for me to decide which is better.

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

Given a decent amount of CA, you take half damage from enemy weapons.
Requires a shield generator.
Effective even in fleet situations.
Degraded by large ship mounts and high-damage/slow reload weapons.

OA seems to be a simplified Shield regeneration system.
No additional components required.
Very effective one-on-one, or at extreme ranges with low to-hit chances, potentially providing invulnerability.
Becomes little more than inert armor in fleet battles.

[ November 27, 2002, 19:38: Message edited by: Suicide Junkie ]

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

SJ: high damage/low reload weapons eliminate any bonuses from regeneration and whatsoever so thats not that much important.

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

High-damage low reload weapons will give your OA time to regenerate while they reload.

The CA just sits idly by waiting for the next hit.

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

My most liked advanced tech was organic armor but
after the new patch is released, OA will loose its power. Who needs regenerating armor if it regenerates only AFTER the battle? I don't see the point in that. If the ship survives the battle - there are repair bays/space yards to repair it.
Crystaline armor is nice but to spend 1500 points on armor that is just a little better than normal is way too much. I would beef-up research/construction for that amount of points and just put more normal armor/shields on a ship.

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I don't think that's how it's going to work. OA will still regenerqate during combat as usual, but it will also regenerate after combat, which it didn't do before.

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

CA requires phased shields - PPB makes CA ability irrelevant if your ship has just normal shields.

Re: thinking: OA vs CA
 

Right, dogscoff. I searched through the forum and found that OA will not PRE-regenerate.
Thanks for making such a simple statement and my life happier http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 28, 2002, 12:49: Message edited by: Pablo ]