Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Galactic diplomacy with extreme prejudice.
ZedF
Board Ninja
Board Ninja
Posts: 12576
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 7:13 pm

Re: Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Post by ZedF » Tue Mar 02, 2010 3:53 pm

Warcat wrote:There's something I can't understand. How can a Photonic torpedo be useful against a fast moving target, if it's not charging in front of the torpedo boat? Did you mean the kiting tactic (target, hit, turn and run)?

Kiting can work with photons, and will certainly work better than with disruptors, but I'm more referring to the amount of maneuvering that may be required to line up shots on targets that have closed to brawling range and may be maneuvering around your ships at odd angles because their formation has been broken (or yours has been.)

Burst damage on turreted mounts can have a similar advantage in some circumstances over higher DPS but less bursty weapons, but typically it's far less pronounced, as the turrets maximize the firing opportunities of the DPS weapons.
Zed's TARs (sample):
Fractious Allies -- Hiver vs. Hiver, with allies
Who Let The Bugs Out -- Hiver vs. Tarka and Zuul
Tarka Ascendant -- Tarka vs. Hiver and Zuul

Strategy & Tactics Forum Archive -- More posts on strategy, tactics, and TARs

Warcat
Posts: 1106
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 4:32 pm

Re: Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Post by Warcat » Tue Mar 02, 2010 4:54 pm

fiendishrabbit wrote:That means, if the Photon torpedo salvo would have missed, so would the disruptor salvo.
Not always, because a photon's salvo consists of four shots, while disruptor's only one. So there's a chance that if the first bolt misses, maybe the third or fourth could hit. But also that if the first hits the others could not, against a moving target.
ZedF wrote:I'm more referring to the amount of maneuvering that may be required to line up shots on targets that have closed to brawling range and may be maneuvering around your ships at odd angles because their formation has been broken (or yours has been.)

It's a little advantage I should consider. But it needs some micro to be sure to hit the target (fire at my target or hold fire for example), because a missed shot is worse with a low recharging weapon.

Anyway I see your (interesting) points. High burst weapons are a sort of 'fire and forget' weapons, thus helping you not to loose to much firepower even in furballs, provided to not miss the target.

Again another question: what's the difference between high burst weapon and alfa strike weapon? For me they are very similar to each other.

ZedF
Board Ninja
Board Ninja
Posts: 12576
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 7:13 pm

Re: Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Post by ZedF » Tue Mar 02, 2010 6:08 pm

An 'alpha strike' is a combat maneuver that involves unloading all your weapons in one overwhelming burst to try to destroy an enemy before they can effectively return fire. This sort of maneuver is facilitated by high burst damage weapons. So an alpha strike weapon, being a weapon suitable for performing alpha strikes, will generally be a high burst damage weapon. The terms are thus largely interchangeable.

Of course, that doesn't mean one always wants to use high burst damage weapons to perform an alpha strike. If your best burst damage weapon is DF racks with fission warheads, and your best DPS weapon is antimatter cannons, you might be better advised to alpha strike with your cannons. ;)
Zed's TARs (sample):
Fractious Allies -- Hiver vs. Hiver, with allies
Who Let The Bugs Out -- Hiver vs. Tarka and Zuul
Tarka Ascendant -- Tarka vs. Hiver and Zuul

Strategy & Tactics Forum Archive -- More posts on strategy, tactics, and TARs

User avatar
fiendishrabbit
Posts: 1789
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 12:37 pm

Re: Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Post by fiendishrabbit » Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:19 am

Alpha strike weapons also have the additional requirement that it should be easy to coordinate with other alphastrike weapons in order to achieve a shock effect.

As such "alpha strike weaponry" are generally also fairly long range, can be mounted in large numbers or have a mode of attack that is similar to other weapons that can be used on the same vessel or in support of that vessel. Or just "that dominating" (in the case of Projectors).

To illustrate it.
Battlebridge/Blazer cruisers are almost always pure alpha strike vessels while barrage cruisers generally aren't (but can be), even if said barrage cruiser might be loaded with high-burst weapons (beams&torpedoes and whatnots).
You can't trust the Liir. Never trust someone that smiles all the time.

Mesaia
Posts: 1926
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 3:53 am

Re: Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Post by Mesaia » Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:06 am

Ahh I see my mistake was getting mixed up over the recharge times of the Disruptors and the Photon Torpedos.

What do you guys thin k about the possibilities of FC-Bar-AM CR? DF-AMs in the mediums and Disruptors in the torpedoes.

Warcat
Posts: 1106
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 4:32 pm

Re: Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Post by Warcat » Wed Mar 03, 2010 7:52 am

what's the difference between high burst weapon and alfa strike weapon?
Got it. So, high burst weapons concentrate their whole damage in a very short period and are suitable as "alpha strike weapons" for an alpha strike attack, isn't it?
So for example high burst weapon are stormers, phasers, HCL's, beams, photons... guided torps and missiles too, I guess. While lasers, energy cannons and drivers are more suitable as "high DPS" weapons. And as you say, sometimes (as Mesaia's example) your best high burst weapon might be your best high DPS one too...
Mesaia wrote:What do you guys thin k about the possibilities of FC-Bar-AM CR? DF-AMs in the mediums and Disruptors in the torpedoes.

Considering your options, I don't dislike your design. Do your opponents field low recharging weapons? In that case, the Disruptor's effect is amplificated and disruptors become a better choice than photons. If not, consider that an Hiver FC-Barrage ship is a little tricky to maintain lined up to the target and you could loose lot of time in doing that, potentially lowering your torp's dps.

ZedF
Board Ninja
Board Ninja
Posts: 12576
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 7:13 pm

Re: Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Post by ZedF » Wed Mar 03, 2010 12:50 pm

You're relying on medium mount weapons for most of your damage. Hiver barrage cruisers give up 2 medium mounts to gain 2 torps and 2 small mounts, compared to armour cruisers. That means you're giving up 1000 turreted damage every 12s (after VRF) to get 600 disruptor fixed-mount damage every 12s. So from a total damage point of view, I think you're going to wind up doing considerably less damage with the barrage ships. The question is whether the disruptor effect is worth it.

Personally I would be considering using war cruisers, if available.
Zed's TARs (sample):
Fractious Allies -- Hiver vs. Hiver, with allies
Who Let The Bugs Out -- Hiver vs. Tarka and Zuul
Tarka Ascendant -- Tarka vs. Hiver and Zuul

Strategy & Tactics Forum Archive -- More posts on strategy, tactics, and TARs

Mesaia
Posts: 1926
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 3:53 am

Re: Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Post by Mesaia » Thu Mar 04, 2010 5:26 am

No Zuul so no War CRs. I got 4 Tarkans, 1 Liir, 1 Morrigi, 1 Human and 1 Hiver in this game. Morrigi CRs are superb long range targets for DF-AMs btw.

The biggest AI empire (a Tarkan one) had Disruptor Shields, Deflector Shields, Mark 4 Shields, Shield Magnifiers, Quantum Capacitors, AM Cannons, Heavy AM Cannons, AM Projectors, Gravy Beams, AM Torpedoes, Cutting Beams, Quark Resonators and +9999 to Tech Luck.
:|

'course, all that tech is negated by my superior tactical technique known as 'not charging in blindly while screaming war-cries'. If I were playing that AI empire, I'd have just stopped at long range and battered the Magnoceramic Hiver CRs to bits with Torpedoes and Heavy beams.

Warcat, the Disruptor Torpedoes are to take on the Disruptor Shield busting duties that were originally the province of the single Shield Breaker turret. I don't use the Disruptors as a damage dealer. As long as they can bust the shields during the head-on meeting phase, I'm happy. The DF-AMs will be able to fire past shields once the fleets have inter-penetrated.

Zedf, it's true that the Bar section has 2 less medium turrets, but I would actually only be giving up 1 medium turret from my broadside as the two missing mediums are located on opposite sides of the CR. The broadside that's facing away hardly gets to fire anyway. The large turret on the Ar that I'm currently using to house the shield-breaker gets converted to a double-turret DF-AM on the Bar. There's no change in the total number of DF-AMs but there's a effective gain of 1 DF-AM on the broadside and a loss of 1 APHD. 1 DF-AM has slightly more dps than a APHD.

The major reason why I considered the switch to Bar was the additional PD that the two small turrets gave me. The AI uses corrosive and nanite missiles on it's Bar CRs and Med platforms. The lower maneuverability is a small issue and I can no longer chase down the runners so I'd need to keep two or three of the Ar designs in reserve for chasing duties.

I just got Fusion Torpedoes. What if I switched the Large turret back to Shield Breakers and the Disruptors to Fusion Torpedoes?

I managed to get 3 Tarkan empires to surrender on the same turn :)

Only one of them surrendered to me though. The other two surrendered to no one and just shut down their empires.

Warcat
Posts: 1106
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 4:32 pm

Re: Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Post by Warcat » Thu Mar 04, 2010 7:57 am

Mesaia wrote:Warcat, the Disruptor Torpedoes are to take on the Disruptor Shield busting duties that were originally the province of the single Shield Breaker turret. I don't use the Disruptors as a damage dealer. As long as they can bust the shields during the head-on meeting phase, I'm happy. The DF-AMs will be able to fire past shields once the fleets have inter-penetrated.

Well, considered your Tarka opponent and its luck I wouldn't go with Fusion torps. There's a high chance that it has even missile PD or Phaser PD. I'd go with Disruptors all the way, to keep at bay its heavy weapons (Projectors, heavy beams and Torps). In a word, don't let it fire... Even if I fear its gravy beam, that can send your ships away and destroy your lines.
Do you have some corrosives/mines in your arsenal?

ZedF
Board Ninja
Board Ninja
Posts: 12576
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 7:13 pm

Re: Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Post by ZedF » Thu Mar 04, 2010 12:48 pm

Mesaia wrote:The major reason why I considered the switch to Bar was the additional PD that the two small turrets gave me. The AI uses corrosive and nanite missiles on it's Bar CRs and Med platforms. The lower maneuverability is a small issue and I can no longer chase down the runners so I'd need to keep two or three of the Ar designs in reserve for chasing duties.

I just got Fusion Torpedoes. What if I switched the Large turret back to Shield Breakers and the Disruptors to Fusion Torpedoes?

Fusion torps I find are pretty much only useful as a standoff weapon. If you need the PD, the barrage design with disruptors is probably the direction I'd be considering.
Zed's TARs (sample):
Fractious Allies -- Hiver vs. Hiver, with allies
Who Let The Bugs Out -- Hiver vs. Tarka and Zuul
Tarka Ascendant -- Tarka vs. Hiver and Zuul

Strategy & Tactics Forum Archive -- More posts on strategy, tactics, and TARs

Mesaia
Posts: 1926
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 3:53 am

Re: Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Post by Mesaia » Fri Mar 05, 2010 5:17 am

I don't work too well with corrosives as I'm usually nearly stationary while the AI is moving about. The enemy CRs don't last long enough for corrosives to be of much use anyway.

I just completed a SP giving me Fusion Cannons. DPS for Fusion Cannon at effective range is 25% higher than DF-AM. Which is very tempting...

On the other hand, DF-AM does full damage at all ranges whereas FusC does only 48% damage at max and point blank range... so it'll take the FusC about 30s before it beats the DF-AM on total damage (assuming 1 volley at max, and the rest at effective and none at point-blank). An iffy proposition I think. AM Cannons would beat out DF-AM in just 12s though which is much better.

I'm getting more and more impressed by the DF-AM as I play this game. :thumbsup:

The Tarkans are all surrendered at this point. I had marked this game as 'can't be lost from this point on cause I have as many systems gated as everyone else combined' at turn 70-ish but the fun's in the blowing of stuff up. I got a lot of fun when I discovered just how good the DF-AMs are. :D

ZedF
Board Ninja
Board Ninja
Posts: 12576
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 7:13 pm

Re: Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Post by ZedF » Fri Mar 05, 2010 12:38 pm

Fusion Cannons with Fire Control are pretty strong too, but I'd mainly take Fusion Cannons over DF-AM if I were fighting smaller targets such as DDs and needed the quicker recharge rate, or heavily armoured targets that are getting lots of deflections. Against other targets I'd probably stick with the DF racks.

You're correct that AM Cannons are generally going to be superior to DF-AM, barring absorbers or disruptor shields. No deflection, better accuracy, faster shot speed, better range, better recharge, more DPS... not much of a contest really.
Zed's TARs (sample):
Fractious Allies -- Hiver vs. Hiver, with allies
Who Let The Bugs Out -- Hiver vs. Tarka and Zuul
Tarka Ascendant -- Tarka vs. Hiver and Zuul

Strategy & Tactics Forum Archive -- More posts on strategy, tactics, and TARs

Warcat
Posts: 1106
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 4:32 pm

Re: Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Post by Warcat » Fri Mar 05, 2010 1:58 pm

Mesaia wrote:I'm usually nearly stationary while the AI is moving about.

Me too. Even with Liir.
The enemy CRs don't last long enough for corrosives to be of much use anyway.

I wondered if it were worthy to kite with some missile boats or minelayers to keep the distance from Tarkans and their long range weaponry, thus delivering some damage to them. But it seems you don't have to fight them anymore...

ZedF wrote:Against other targets I'd probably stick with the DF racks.
Seconded.

Mesaia wrote:I'm getting more and more impressed by the DF-AM as I play this game.
In my last Tarka game I sticked with Fusion-DF well beyond the fusion era. They really rocked against soft target. I won the game thanks to them.

Mesaia
Posts: 1926
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 3:53 am

Re: Lousy, Unimaginative Hiver Scientists

Post by Mesaia » Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:01 am

I noticed something while fighting the Liir, the DF-AM seems to lead the targets. Since the Liir will be moving at high speeds, the DF-AM will be leading the target by quite a large distance. With the Liir's tendency to jitter around their base vector, they don't maintain their vector for long, and DF-AM's attempt to lead the target will be way off. It sort of simulates a larger circular margin of error.

Though their DPS is lower, DF-AMs do more burst damage than even AM Cannons! They don't deflect all that much unless the angle is really low too.

From the wiki, AM Cannons have the same inaccuracy as DF-AMs for each of the range bands though AM Cannons have a longer effective range band. Can't say as to shot speed since there are tech that increase DF-AM shot speed and there's no info on it on the wiki. If it helps, the DF-AM will handily hit VN collectors on the initial volley.

I'll probably be wrapping up this game shortly, thanks for the discussions and help guys, I enjoyed it.

Post Reply

Return to “The Weapons”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest