Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
That said, I think the situation as a whole still needs work. The general advantage of fielding bigger guns and bigger ships is situational at best, non-existent at worst. I'm not saying that they should be directly better, but they should receive something in return for increased evasion vulnerability (guns) and decreased maneuverability (ships).
I think it mostly comes down to playstyle i guess. I use corvettes as PD platform in fleets and raiding in small groups. Destroyers mostly in support for those, beeing slightly more tanky and giving them the actual damage-setup. Then i have a mix of light cruisers ( S and M guns ) to deal with the small stuff. Heavy cruisers ( mostly M guns ) to deal with other cruisers. Battleships seperated into a tank-setup with 2 L guns and lots of S and M guns. The other one as pure L platform for artillery.
Yep, they don't. it's just counterbuilding. If someone has smaller guns on bigger vessels, then fielding larger vessels with larger guns should give him a tough time. Large vessels are slow, and not "evasive". If you outrange them with bigger guns it's a big problem for them.
There IS a flaw in the whole thing - the initial need for bigger ships isn't exactly big (no pun intended). But onve they are in the picture all manner of counterbuildery ensues.
If everyone is building small ships that means everyone needs small guns on those ships.
Small guns will "engage" closer foes, thus allowing a row of "glass cannon" ships with bgger range and less defence to safely fire from the back row while more "tanky ones take the heat.
But that of cause depens on wherther the defence VS offence module balance is up to par. And frankly, I don't know if it is. Personally I never ever considered toning down on gun power to feild berret defences, and I strongly doubt that it'd work all that well. But if it does, then well, what I said - tank + DD tactcs based on ranges. And you need size for rages.
Also, gigantic superships are pretty useless without propper support. Slow and huge targets.
And Galactica isn't that big, 1400 meters in lenght.
1 - Only the bigger ships have aura modules.
2 - You need bigger guns (and thus bigger ships) to deal with those aura fielding ships.
A small vessel fleet with smaller guns VS small vessel fleet with larger guns.
A large vessel fleet with smaller guns VS small vessel fleet with smaller guns.
A large vessel fleet with smaller guns VS small vessel fleet with larger guns.
A large vessel fleet with smaller guns VS large vessel fleet with large guns.
A mixed fleet of smaller and larger ships with smaller guns VS small vessel fleet with small guns.
A mixed fleet of smaller and larger ships with smaller guns VS mixed fleet with smaller guns on smaller ships and larger guns on larger ships.
A mixed fleet with smaller guns on smaller ships and larger guns on larger ships VS small vessel fleet with mixed size of guns.
If my theory is correct there should be some intersing results in those matchups.