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

[Gryphin]

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.

[Taera]

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.

[geoschmo]

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

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.

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 ]

[Slick]

The way I see it, I sure hope that there is no optimum shield:weaponor 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.

Maybe I just worry about too many things and should go all weapons.

Slick.

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by Slick:
Maybe I just worry about too many things and should go all weapons.

Slick.

ROFL! I feel your pain slick.

[Master Belisarius]

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??

[Taera]

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.

[Wardad]

Originally posted by Stone Mill:
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!

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.

[PvK]

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

[geoschmo]

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.