Early Ships (missile features, deltaV expenditure analysis for missile tactics, design examples)

Store Page

Terra Invicta

All Discussions Screenshots Artwork Broadcasts Videos Workshop News Guides Reviews

Terra Invicta > Feedback > Topic Details

Pawleus

Dec 27, 2024 @ 5:20pm

Early Ships (missile features, deltaV expenditure analysis for missile tactics, design examples)

This post (and the next ones from the early ship series) contains data (all from 0.4.83) that can be considered as heavy spoilers - it's usually much more fun to figure them out by yourself but many details are unnecessarily hidden so it might not be possible for everyone. You don't have to know all these details to fight well because just thanks to TI combat experience you can fight by feel (as I have done in most of my campaigns) but you certainly can fight even better when you know all of them (and rules of movement from basic kinematics, of course).

To understand how to design more combat-efficient early ships you need to know first how missiles work and it can be problematic as the case of otherwise quite TI-knowledgeable Ericus1 proves again and again (even so spectacularly as eg. here: https://steamcommunity.com/app/1176470/discussions/0/7027393439964348160/?ctp=3#c4839771533596594021 ). I also had some errors in my knowledge about missiles in the past but I think I can finally provide all important small bits right.

-------------------------
Missiles (including torpedoes) can have 3 phases in their flight:

1. Starting acceleration phase (it ends when a missile reaches specified for it velocity relative to target - it's a hidden parameter)

2. Coasting phase (during which a missile can for short periods accelerate to correct its course when its target changes its vector of acceleration)

3. Final acceleration phase (it starts when a missile "decides" it has enough deltaV left for its final acceleration run to target)

Torpedoes can have enough deltaV and low enough acceleration so that their starting acceleration phase is actually their final acceleration phase so they can accelerate throughout their whole flight and enter the enemy PD envelope at higher velocities making them much better than non-torpedoes in the static combat (apart from having more deltaV for being better able to chase evading targets but current AI basically doesn't evade) - this is where Ericus1 is right. However, he and many others stop at that and for some reason can't see what are consequences of the starting acceleration phase, or rather the potential lack of it, for the maneuvering combat.

In TI combat, as in reality, missiles inherit the velocity vector of their launching ship at launch (even its turning vector is included) so at the start of their flight they can have more than enough relative velocity to target as to nullify the starting acceleration phase. Non-torpedoes usually still don't have enough deltaV to enter the final acceleration phase so the coasting phase begins immediately and if the launching ship is not under acceleration during the launch then the next launch starts placing missiles in their coasting phase beside the previous one, and the next one follows, and the next, until the launching ship starts to accelerate or all needed missiles are launched (or target or the launching ship is removed from combat) forming a perfect stack of missiles that can arrive at target at the same time (this is not a result of some freak luck as Ericus1 stated sometimes in the past but an easily achievable consequence of game rules).

This has profound impact on combat because even though the stack of non-torpedoes might enter the enemy PD envelope at lower relative velocity than in case of torpedoes the fact that missiles from it arrive simultaneously is a huge bonus and if the launching ship has enough deltaV even the relative velocity while entering the PD range can be larger - you can multiply in this way your combat effectiveness at the cost of expended propellant by the launching ship. It can be utilized already with early drives that can provide high acceleration with high enough deltaV while being enough propellant-efficient at the same time but far from enough was said about missiles, yet, so drives are for later to talk through.

-------------------------
I said that the relative velocity to target that ends the starting acceleration phase is a hidden parameter so you would probably ask how to design a ship for the maneuvering combat without knowing it? It can be done by experiment for every missile in the game but there is a much easier way if you look into the appropriate txt file (or just to the info below) - there is a maneuver angle parameter (as LorDC informed us 1.5 year ago, thanks for that), you take ctg from its value and multiply by missile deltaV to know exactly what this velocity is (with 0.4 up to 0.4.83 values):

1. Missiles with Fragmentation or Nuclear warheads - ctg 55 (Racers are an exception with 35) = 0.7 (eg. Pythons *4km/s = 2.8km/s)

2. Non-torpedoes with Explosive warheads - ctg 50 = 0.84 (eg. Cobras *3.45km/s = 2.9km/s)

3. Non-torpedoes with Penetration warheads - ctg 45 = 1 (eg. Lanceheads *4.36km/s = 4.36km/s, obviously ;) )

4. Torpedoes with Explosive or Nuclear or Antimatter warheads - ctg 40 = 1.19 (eg. Artemis *7.97km/s = 9.48km/s, Athena *12.83km/s = 15.27km/s)

5. Torpedoes with Penetration warheads - ctg 30 = 1,73 (eg. Hermes *4.62 = 7,99km/s, Ares *8.99km/s = 15.55km/s)

From all torpedoes only Hermes torpedoes can be considered for early maneuverable ships with deltaV not larger than 20km/s (and for me they are actually a weapon of choice for attacking fortified alien stations early) unless attacks are done without full stacking or they heavily endanger own ships. However, some decent level of stacking (up to the perfect stacking) can be achieved for torpedoes (especially with less than 8G acceleration) when they are launched during acceleration toward target (ideally, with resultant acceleration of launching ship and target the same as torpedo acceleration) so this alone is not so clear as it looks at first glance - they will still have problems to fight safely (more on fighting safely, later).

-------------------------
What's more, for non-nuclear warheads, especially non-Explosive ones (excluding also Antimatter explosions) it's important to know what their warhead mass is because they can't always utilize their full deltaV so how much damage is nominally listed for them might be heavily misleading (especially for those large deltaV torpedoes, eg. Poseidon). This is also a hidden parameter and you can see it in the file or indirectly you can count it from the listed damage and deltaV because for Fragmentation and Penetration warheads all damage is kinetic:

warhead mass = 2 * kinetic damage / (deltaV)²

The differences are especially important for Fragmentation and Penetration warheads (Explosive ones deal only 10% of kinetic energy damage and this is one of reasons why Athena is actually a comparatively weak torpedo for the maneuvering combat despite its innate explosive damage and good PD penetration in the static combat) and can be huge, eg. Vipers 50kg, Riverjacks 100kg, Lanceheads 200kg, Hestia (former Poseidon) 100kg, Hermes 750kg, Ares 1200kg - Ares is by far the most potent non-nuclear missile in the game although in the static combat Poseidon might be better if Ares can't cross the enemy PD envelope.

--------------------------
Another important feature of missiles (and projectiles, generally, but not plasma, apparently) is that their effective range is dependent on their relative velocity to target in relation to their nominal deltaV - it's almost irrelevant for the static combat and this is why it's usually missed by players but this is currently the most important feature of missiles in the maneuvering combat because it makes missile combat much more safe to the point that it can be always entirely safe for some missiles against aliens with current AI (and this is probably unintended by Devs). The equation is (thanks to Blaarg for drawing my attention to it):

Effective range = Nominal range * (1 + Relative velocity / Nominal deltaV of missile)

(where: Nominal range - the maximum range at which you can launch at 0 relative-to-target velocity (stated in weapon parameters), Effective range - the maximum range at which you can launch at a chosen relative-to-target velocity (effective range of lasers and plasma is defined differently)

and eg. Pythons at only 4km/s relative velocity have 1600km effective range while Artemis only 1500km so you can launch all Pythons (or at least one 4-missile salvo when your turning rate is largest possible) and start decelerating over 20s before entering Artemis effective range (which is shrinking to 1000km during the process of zeroing the relative velocity). This is even more easily done against all alien missiles (except Jewels) and you can destroy any alien ships without entering enemy weapon range throughout the whole combat (no matter whether Brilliant Sky or not) with some deltaV expenditure, after 0.4.47 often substantial.

That you can stay outside of enemy laser and plasma range has also another result (and after 0.4.47 you can actually do it more easily for weapons with ranges not larger than 1000km): armor becomes not needed luxury allowing your ships to be cheaper and to have more deltaV so their combat efficiency increases further.

--------------------------
Anti-missiles are also often undervalued by players that limit themselves to the static combat but they can shine in all their glory in the maneuvering combat despite their weak AI if you don't mind some additional micromanagement and you for some reason don't fight in an entirely safe way. In the maneuvering combat you usually don't have to launch all anti-ship missiles to destroy enemy ships even without Magazines so you can use leftover missiles as anti-missiles - there are many with the defensive mode, eg. even such good anti-ship missiles as Riverjacks, Vipers or even nuclear Pythons and amazing Sidewinders are also good anti-missiles (not as good as Racers but good enough). Thus, in the missile maneuvering combat you don't have to devote any weapon slots for just defense (projectiles you can easily evade at long range) and this makes the missile combat even more MC-efficient.

---------------------------
There is one more potentially important feature: you can actually outmaneuver any enemy missiles, including torpedoes, utilizing their limited turning rates. This is still possible in 0.4 versions but I haven't yet analyzed current parameters in details because this way is currently not needed at all (it was in the past and it will probably be in the future).

---------------------------
Examples of early designs and of deltaV expenditure analysis for missile tactics will be coming soon. Feel free to ask questions if something is not clear.

Edit: The warhead mass equation corrected thanks to Blaarg. The second "title" post is #4

Edit2: Updated the post to 0.4.83. Third "title" post is #8 and #9

Last edited by Pawleus; Apr 30 @ 12:32am

< >

Showing 1-9 of 9 comments

Blaarg

Dec 27, 2024 @ 9:16pm

Some minor comments and clarifications.

Kinetic energy is 1/2 * m * v^2, not m*v^2. You should also be using relative impact velocity in the formula, not deltaV.

The range formula only holds as written if the two ships are heading straight towards or away from each other. It is somewhat pertinent for static drift combat, as it means that your first volley will have all the shells with the same range land at the same time, even if their muzzle velocity is different. (So the first shell fired from a 3 slot siege coiler with a range of 900km & a vm of 4.7kps will hit the target at the same time as a the first shell from 4 slot hull coil battery with a vm of 8.1kps.)

Anti-missile missiles got a major buff in 0.4.44. Their effective range got tripled. If you are playing in a version prior to that, results may vary.

debott

Dec 28, 2024 @ 12:10am

Thank you! This is much appreciated, although I won't pretend to have grasped everything here.

Question for the uninitiated: What's static vs. maneuvering combat?
Is it cruising ahead at starting velocity vs. making heavy use of ship acceleration nodes? (Because I find the later is mostly reserved for the late game under sufficient tech; hence my confusion after reading "Early Ships" in the title)

Last edited by debott; Dec 28, 2024 @ 12:11am

Pawleus

Dec 28, 2024 @ 12:53pm

Originally posted by Blaarg:
Kinetic energy is 1/2 * m * v^2, not m*v^2. You should also be using relative impact velocity in the formula, not deltaV.

Oh, yes, thanks, of course I forgot about the "1/2" part!

However, you are wrong in your second sentence - the equation is only for counting warhead mass when you can't find it in the files so you take damage of non-explosive warheads listed in their parameters and their deltaV from there because the provided damage is counted by the game for this purpose taking the whole missile deltaV.

Of course, when you want to estimate the real damage during combat you have to take under consideration the relative impact velocity in the formula so you have to estimate the velocity first because eg. Poseidon will rarely use its all deltaV and enemy can add its own deltaV expended.

Originally posted by Blaarg:
Anti-missile missiles got a major buff in 0.4.44. Their effective range got tripled. If you are playing in a version prior to that, results may vary.

I have no idea why it was needed because anti-missiles already had large enough effective range pre-0.4.44, even Racers - I used Vipers and even Pythons in this role many times and apart from their bad AI they were great so I don't know what you are refering to with your "If you are playing in a version prior to that, results may vary".

Edit:

Originally posted by Blaarg:
The range formula only holds as written if the two ships are heading straight towards or away from each other.

I am not sure I understand what you mean. It always holds because of what the relative velocity is - the formula takes vector components of velocities between the ship and its target which is exacly what the relative velocity to target in this case means.

Originally posted by Blaarg:
It is somewhat pertinent for static drift combat, as it means that your first volley will have all the shells with the same range land at the same time, even if their muzzle velocity is different. (So the first shell fired from a 3 slot siege coiler with a range of 900km & a vm of 4.7kps will hit the target at the same time as a the first shell from 4 slot hull coil battery with a vm of 8.1kps.)

Yes, it's "almost irrelevant" only in comparison to its relevancy in the maneuvering combat :)

Originally posted by debott:
Question for the uninitiated: What's static vs. maneuvering combat?
Is it cruising ahead at starting velocity vs. making heavy use of ship acceleration nodes? (Because I find the later is mostly reserved for the late game under sufficient tech; hence my confusion after reading "Early Ships" in the title)

It is actually explained at the beginning of my second "title" post I am about to release :) You are basically right what they are but no, the maneuvering combat with expenditure of even more than 9km/s during it you can do well even with Teardrop Drive and Escort designs I will show in my third "title" post and you can have them in 2025/2026 so definitely early.

Last edited by Pawleus; Dec 28, 2024 @ 4:57pm

Pawleus

Dec 28, 2024 @ 12:56pm

The second "title" post.

The very first ships do not have techs to fight the maneuvering combat so they have to be for the static combat only (static combat is when you do at most small maneuvers only within formation). There are basically 3 lines that I would recommend but keep in mind they are intended only for small early defensive combat, for very early offensives against carefully chosen not fortified targets and some small support role later on - if you need ships for larger fights in the static combat you will probably be better off with larger ships even though they will be slower and generally less time-efficient.

........................................
1. Rad-heavy line when you do the early Jupiter Rush (the one in which you are able to build defensive ships at Jupiter before the Aliens even get there)

- https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/63711481632360233/074B80BE4D04336E7459E02A783604B99F4F5420/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false

2024/2025 design: it's the earliest warship design I would recommend for defensive purposes and you only need to research Artemis torps, Magazine and Targetting Computer I because the rest you already have doing the Rush (Lithium-Ion Battery, Aluminium Fin Radiator and Boron Carbide Armor are basic components). You start constructing them (even without utilities needed if they are not researched, yet) not earlier than you start building your first mine on Callisto so about 45 days after your non-military colonizing mission to Jupiter arrives (so just a colonizer) and the time of their construction is 90days so to be sure you can defend your Jupiter assets your colonizer has to be there about 135 days before the Aliens (4,5 months). If you at any moment see you can't do it it's better to change your strategy to the prolonged Jupiter Rush (the one in which you send a military colonizing mission so a colonizer together with warships in 2025/2026 or even 2027)

- https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/63711481632598866/2852ED8EF65D22215822A357256C8456F359604D/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false

2025/2026 refit: it's the earliest warship design I would recommend for very early offensives (for attacking early alien assets in the Asteroid Belt and early military colonizing mission to Jupiter) and new techs you need are: Salt Water Battery, Cobalt Dust Radiator, Nanotube Armor and CSC Fission Reactor III

- https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/63711481632683891/917DE44FB53722614FF828D82C4102557412EF7C/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false

The end of the line (almost) of refits if Rads are not an issue (but it's from the era when there is no need to build new ships of this design because you can have better based on better drives): Olympus Shaped Nuclear Torps, Adamantine Armor, Tin Droplet Radiator, Superconducting Coil Battery (almost, because technically you can still upgrade radiator, launchers and armor but I wouldn't bother)

- https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/63711481632745569/81C932E81C221FE633B27BCED250D83C8B89477A/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false

2025/2026 PD design for tanking damage (placed usually in the center of formation where it has the most chance to focus attention of enemy ships long enough for missile ships to do the full launch): 40-mm Autocannon paired with PD E-Beamer (later refitted with better tech to match the missile line and with PD Ion Battery)

- https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/63711481632822893/FFEAC908DF955A5413252A75530C7566113D8C23/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false

2025/2026 main PD design (placed usually close to the fringes of own formation to help the central PD ship combat enemy missiles): with PD E-Beamers and ISRU for saving Rads where you can (later refitted with better tech to match the missile line and with PD Ion Battery)

.......................................
2. Ion Drive line when you do the prolonged Jupiter Rush or just you fight early (especially without intention of doing early Jupiter Rush)

- https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/63711481632863802/CA4966C734C24D314C8505254BFB472853AE30F4/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false

2024/2025 design: the only tech with substantial research is Molten Core Fission Reacor I while Artemis torps and especially Ion Drive, Magazine and Targetting Computer I are cheap (additionally, you can construct its first version with Kraits and without Magazine and Targetting Computer for later refit). The rest is basic tech. Molten Core Fission Reactor you need for better refits later but if you for some reason developed Compact Solid Core Fission Reactor then it will be almost as good in the end so any Solid Core Fission Reactor can be used instead (I do them with Molten Core because I develop it fast, anyway, for designs intended for the maneuvering combat)

- https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/63711481632915863/4BA38AC1C4B7B1AF716114AE9B0FFB7CBDE14AF4/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false

2025/2026 refit for very early offensives and intercepting alien Transports during their deceleration, new techs you need are Grid Drive, Molten Core Fission Reactor III, Salt Water Battery, Nanotube Filament Radiator and Nanotube Armor

- https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/63711481632960252/1647B147B2A9D4557EB755B5173FC4A9F5C9E117/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false

The end of the line (almost) of refits (but it's from the era when there is no need to build new ships of this design because you can have better based on better drives): as above, Olympus Shaped Nuclear Torps, Adamantine Armor, Tin Droplet Radiator, Superconducting Coil Battery (almost, because technically you can still upgrade radiator, launchers and armor but I wouldn't bother)

You also need corresponding PD ships for this line, of course, as in the Rad-heavy line.

.........................................
3. Helicon Drive line when you need better ships for early offensives (eg. more propellant-efficient, faster, able for very limited but substantial maneuvers in combat).

- https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/63711481633662945/A4FCC0ECDE875945776059C89548831B21772E0A/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false

2026/2027 design for very early offensives and intercepting alien Transports during their deceleration, you need Helicon Drive, Molten Salt Fission Reactor II, Tin Droplet Radiator over what you had for 2025/2026 Grid Drive design.

- https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/63711481633743333/105FE5320DD755A89FF3EE3213149B447962DAB0/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false

The end of the Helicon Drive line (almost): Exotic Spike Radiator is a huge bonus here and worth its higher vulnerability (you can still refit armor and launchers but I wouldn't bother). This is the last design for the static combat I would create because in this era I am close to developing ships for the maneuvering combat that are even better for interplanetary transfers than the Helicon Drive line can ever be.

You also need correspoding PD designs, of course.

.......................................
The next post will be all about the main reason of this thread: the most combat-efficient early designs and deltaV combat expenditure analysis of them in the current TI.

Edit: Updating this post to the 0.4.47 change of Magazines (50% less missiles and lighter in effect) would demand changing all pictures which I have no time to do at the moment - just keep in mind they are slightly outdated (ships are slightly lighter so have slightly better parameters of movement but have less missiles).

Last edited by Pawleus; Jan 10 @ 1:57am

Pawleus

Jan 3 @ 8:15am

Wow, it turned out Devs were much too fast for me to end my third "title" post :) 0.4.47 changes (there is already 0.4.48) to human missile ranges very significantly nerf the hinted in the first "title" post apeal of the early maneuvering missile combat and this is good for the game because it was much too safe.

However, I don't think that changes to Magazines are enough to make very early offensives hard enough - the static missile combat using Artemis is still much too good in the early game (above missile designs for static combat are slightly outdated, now).

I will postpone the third "title" post to see exactly what works best and when but I can already tell you this:

1. Against fleets without missiles and Alien Plasma Cannons (they can have even Heavy Batteries) nothing substantially changes for own ability to stay outside of their range (it's just more difficult to guesstimate deltaV expenditures properly enough but you can count them precisely despite UI not helping) or to avoid projectiles

2. Against fleets with Alien Plasma Cannons (not just Heavy ones) you need substantial armor on tail for survivability because there is no way to stay outside of their range.

3. Against fleets with missiles there is no way to stay outside of their range so you need countermeasures (additional missiles for their anti-missile role or additional deltaV for missile avoidance maneuvers or PD ships).

I am not sure, yet, how well missile avoidance maneuvers work against alien missiles that were also recently changed.

Pawleus

Jan 4 @ 11:39am

And of course I was wrong because I didn't take all changes under consideration - the above 3 points should look like this (0.4.48):

1. Against fleets without missiles and Alien Plasma Cannons the maneuvering combat is actually easier than before because you can now deal with them without entering their range even applying charging tactics (I will explain them in the third "title" post but they are very straightforward and basically you charge ahead, launch&turn and escape) that demand only 4.2km/s deltaV with 2.4km/s relative velocity created.

2. Against fleets with Alien Plasma Cannons (including Alien Heavy Plasma Cannons) you need distancing tactics (they will be explained in details with a calculating spreadsheet in the third "title" post but basically you move away and at the right moment charge as above) and they are slightly harder than before because you need to be more precise in your deltaV expenditure estimations.

3. Against fleets with missiles you can still avoid entering ranges of all alien missiles while using distancing tacics but with substantially larger deltaV expenditures than before (still within reason for Pegasus Escorts but Teardrop Escorts are substantially worse against ships with similar acceleration).

Pawleus

Jan 10 @ 2:06am

The "title" posts are updated to 0.4.48.

For moderators: would you, please, move this thread back from the Feedback area to the Gameplay Disscussion one that I placed it in? I already made enough, I think, feedback about it earlier in my bug-reports and this thread is obviously a kind of a 0.4 guide to early ships as the first sentence suggests (players often ask about them in many threads so I finally decided to explain them in one place). In the Feedback it's probably mostly missed.

Edit: Probably in a couple of days I will find time to do the third "title" post (unless Devs throw wrench into it, again :) ).

Edit2: updated to 0.4.55. This "couple of days" turned out to be much longer (sorry, lack of time and some testing needed) but if somebody waits for it then rest assured I should finally post it in this very week (together with an external tool helping in the maneuvering missile combat).

Last edited by Pawleus; Feb 12 @ 8:31am

Pawleus

Feb 13 @ 4:45pm

The third "title" post, part 1 (because of character limit)

The most combat-efficient designs are currently and were even much more in the past (in 0.4 missiles in the static combat were buffed, which I think was mistake because it made very early offensives much more viable, while the maneuvering combat was generally nerfed, which is good because it was absurdly effective) are designs intended for the maneuvering combat (the maneuvering combat is when you do substantial maneuvers that are not within an otherwise static formation). It is obvious when you think about advantages that are in both attack and defense (also in how much more easy is to intercept enemy within close orbits using drives intended for this kind of combat). In attack, you can impart additional relative-to-target velocity for missiles or projectiles making their penetration of enemy defenses easier (not just by higher velocity in the enemy PD envelope but also by making their streams denser, up to perfect stacking) and their damage higher (with square relative-to-target velocity at direct hit) so you can use less missiles/projectiles (and their launchers) to the point where Magazines are not just unnecessary but actually contraindicated (as they make your ship substantially heavier and take a utility slot you can use for hydrogen storage modules). In defense, especially when you are more maneuverable than your enemy, it allows you even more:

- to choose the distance of engagement more safe for you than for the enemy (to the point where it's entirely safe for you - this is probably unintended by Devs) so you can have eg. less armor (down to no armor at all)
- to make incoming projectiles or missiles easier to deal with (up to entirely avoiding them) so you can have less slots devoted for PD (down to no PD at all)
- to have an option of disengaging in case you were unlucky or made a mistake during combat or you are just harassing the enemy fleet in order to buy time for the main attack with a different fleet etc.

What does it mean "more maneuverable" in this case? It doesn't mean you have more deltaV at all - you just need it enough to win or disengage in time. "More maneuverable" means you have larger combat acceleration (at least the same with larger turning accel) or much larger turning acceleration and combat acceleration not much lower. In 0.4 versions you can still have in the early game more maneuverable warships than the Aliens have - you just have to design ships that are small and light enough. That they are cheap at the same time helps additionally, especially as your space economy is still weak at this stage (or you just want more resources to develop it faster).

Initiative is also important because when the enemy just reacts to your orders because of TI's combat limitations you have always 1 minute of advantage in your movements (exception is when you fight against a fleet defending their station) which can be crucial in attack and in escape.

Before 0.4 you could start designing nice designs for the maneuvering combat with Solid Core Fission Reactors (Advanced Pulsar was great - far too good, actually). Currently I would recommend starting with Molten Core line as there is a very high probability you will be able to unlock Teardrop or Fission Spinner and a decent chance for Pegasus and Molten Salt Fission Reactors suite them well. Pegasus is still good enough that you can use it for local defensive purposes until you win the game so if you are able to research it the whole Gas Core line becomes a detour (except global Gas Core tech, of course) because you can go directly for Antimatter Pulsed Plasma Core Lantern (or good fusion drives but they are much more expensive to research). Without Pegasus you can go for Gas Core line drives, of course, (with the goal of unlocking better drives, with Firestar at the end of the line) using Teardrop or Fission Spinner in the meantime.

....................................................
My first design recommended, currently (0.4.83), for the maneuvering combat is from about 2025/2026 era (you can, of course, construct it without utilities, armor, with basic missile launchers, radiator and refit it when you can)

https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/63711481636009865/0069E4B2A8AA91C2FBB8D9262E7C69D0FE6BA439/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false

Molten Salt Fission Reactor is nice here if you can unlock it because designs with it are better and it can't be refitted from Molten Core Fission.Liquid Hydrogen Containment is a must as it makes a design more propellant-efficient. Riverjacks are currently the best low-tech missiles because of their much better effective range (Cobras have it best but they don't have the anti-missile mode) and 2x heavier warheads than in case of Vipers. Nanotube Filament Radiator is cheap in research and actually lighter here than much more expensive Tin Drop Radiator (open-cycle drive makes it light and the number of crew makes a difference) - its vulnerability is irrelevant in the situation when armor is symbolic. Nanotube Armor is at tail because of tactics involved in the maneuvering missile combat - you can add more at the cost of lowering its combat acceleration and deltaV.

You'd ask, why would you use such suicidal looking fragile ships? Firstly, look how cheap they are - it might be worth sacrificing them when you can win important fights. Secondly, they look suicidal but they are fragile only if they are hit and with the current AI they can fight without entering alien weapons range against all alien ships (how? later). Thirdly, in a particular situation that demands it they can be refitted fast to have more armor, although I would still place it only on tail.

On example of this design I will show you missile tactics and how you can count easily deltaV needed for maneuvers they demand. I encourage always check your designs in the Skirmish before constructing them because everybody makes mistakes and experiment will allow you to verify your assumptions and calculations. There are basically two ways (take under consideration that I describe here the state of the game in 0.4.83 - pre-0.4.47 details will slightly differ):

I. Charging Way, in which your acceleration toward enemy is your opening move.

Description: you immediately (so in the second minute) do the attack burn by accelerating towards target until you think you have high enough relative velocity and you are still safe enough, launch missiles while the main bulk of them is launched during coasting (even coasting during your 180-degree turn might currently be enough) to form missile stacks, turn at the end of the attack burn or at the beginning of the next minute (so your ship is coasting tail to enemy) and burn like hell trying to stay outside range of enemy weapons while launching missiles if not enough were sent and slightly changing directions if projectiles are incoming, ending with about 45° angle to enemy fleet direction (and ideally some deltaV for returning to homebase :) ), if unlucky in hitting enemy ships and some still operational are left then disengage when conditions are fulfilled.

Analysis of design limitations might look like this (support by experiment in Skirmish is helpful):

- 0.65km/s as the starting velocity set so you have 1.15km/s relative velocity (AI chooses 0.5km/s), assuming starting distance of 1225km (we are assuming the enemy has 1000km-range lasers; if you fight at an own station with a defensive module you can choose to fight behind your station so the distance is substantially larger)

- first minute of 1.15km/s will cover the distance of 1.15*60=69km so it lowers to 1156km

- second minute, your attack burn accelerates it ahead from 1.15 to 2+1.15=3.15km/s relative-to-target covering the distance of (1.15+3.15)*60/2=129km so it lowers to 1027km, enemy is passive in movement, you start launching Riverjacks (we are assuming they are used) 13s before the end of the minute (1 salvo of 8 missiles per launcher and 5s of cooldown - they will arrive later than the main stack) or you send some as anti-missiles if the enemy launches missiles. 2km/s deltaV expended in this minute.

- third minute, you make the 180-degree turn covering 3.15*4.5=14.175km that lowers distance to 1012.825km while launching your second salvo of missiles (half form a perfect stack that will arrive at enemy first) and make the escaping burn accelerating away while still launching missiles - the trick is to be tail to the enemy with 1000km-range lasers when you enter their range while at the same time avoid incoming projectiles. Before your relative-to-target velocity is zeroed the distance of 3.15*3.15*30/2=148.84km is covered lowering it to about 864km which is still outside of 800km-range of 256cm Orange and Violet Laser Cannon but already within 900-range of 128cm Violet Laser Battery (I have no idea why it has more range than 256cm Violet Cannon - looks like a bug).

2km/s additional deltaV expended for zeroing the relative velocity so you comfortably have up to 5.5km/s deltaV left for pure escape which is more than enough but your ship got 136km inside the assumed 1000km range of enemy lasers so it remains inside it for over 2 minutes and it's too long.

However, you can lower your starting velocity to 0.1km/s and in the second minute do the attack burn and turn which will result in 0.6+1.85=2.45km/s attack velocity so in the first minute 0.6*60=36km is lost, in the second 3.05*55.5/2+3.05*4.5=99km (rounded up), and for zeroing relative-to-target 2.45*60/2=74km (rounded up) which sums up to 209km - thus, when only pure escape is left you expended only 3.85km/s deltaV while you are still quite comfortably over 16km outside range of enemy 1000km-laser so entirely safe (probably not intended by Devs).

This way is propellant-friendly but the relative-to-target velocity is limited (in this case it's not even the perfect stacking velocity for Riverjacks) and you can't use it against missile ships if you want to stay outside of their range.

II. Distancing Way, in which your acceleration away from enemy is your opening move

Description: you immediately (so in the second minute) do the distancing burn accelerating away from target until you determine that after stoping your acceleration the pursuing ships will match your velocity (ideally at about time of the movement node so that enemy still accelerates for the whole next minute and coasts afterwards) at large enough distance that your planned attack run is at the same time safe for you and has high probability of destroying or heavily damaging all enemy ships (or at least mission or chosen ships), turn front to enemy at the end of distancing acceleration, coast until the distance to enemy stops increasing, do the attack burn until you create intended relative-to-target velocity (keeping in mind that enemy acceleration adds) and turn tail to enemy at the end of your burn (or at the beginning of the next minute).

The period after you stop your attack burn and enemy stops its pursuing burn I call the coasting launch phase which is when perfect stacking is possible and you launch missiles that create leading stacks for enemy PD to focus at. You can start your first salvo before this period and it will arrive after the stack - the second salvo time should come during the coasting launch phase if the first one didn't cover it or after if it did get covered (if after - missiles also arrive after the stack). Arriving after the stack allows them to choose targets of opportunity when their targets are totally destroyed and it can be important for non-shaped nuclear missiles because one exploding prematurely can destroy the whole stack (at worse the stack is suppose to give enough time so that missiles outside of it enter their final acceleration phase).

Immediately after the coasting launch phase the escaping burn should start and you form it so that it starts directly away from the enemy but at the end about 45° angle to enemy fleet direction is created - standard practice against the current AI when you want to be ready for disengaging, just in case.

Analysis of design limitations and needed deltaV expenditure became much more tight after 0.4.47 and basing it on feeling from previous experience is harder so I can no longer reliably do it roughly and fast in my head for low deltaV ships (perhaps I just don't have enough experience after the changes). I will give you access to the calculating spreadsheet I created for my brother but generally your reasoning should look like this:

1. it starts from the attack run and basing on your intended relative-to-target velocity you calculate how much distance you loose during the whole attack run so from the start of the attack burn until the relative-to-target velocity is zeroed in result of the own zeroing burn that is part of the escaping burn (assumption here is that the relative-to-target velocity is also zeroed before the attack burn)

2. when you know how much distance is lost in the attack run you know how far away you have to be at the start of it to reach your level of safety so in extreme (that is quite easily achieved currently) you detemine how far away you have to be for your attack run not to get you into range of any enemy weapon

3. you check whether your missiles effective range is larger than the distance you would be at the beginning of the coasting phase launch (or at the end of your attack burn) and if not you have to increase your intended relative-to-target velocity and return to the previous step

4. if enemy has missiles you check whether their effective range is smaller than distance you would be at the end of the coasting launch phase and if not you detemine how far away you have to be to make it happen

5. having the distance you calculate how large your distancing burn have to be to reach it while keeping in mind that from the third minute the enemy will try to pursue you so you also take under consideration the distance gained when your distancing burn stopped and the enemy tried to zero the relative-to-target velocity

6. all that is to do now is to make the assumption from p.1 happen so you calculate how much larger you distancing burn have to be to make the zeoring of the relative-to-target velocity (in effect of the enemy pursuing you) happen at about a full minute.

7. you compare the sum of your distancing burn, the intended attack burn and the own zeroing burn with the amount of deltaV your ship has and if the sum is smaller (especially much smaller) you know that the design (or just a particular combat it will take part in) is viable

Here you have the calculating speadsheet for this purpose (you can download it locally in the Excel or Open Office format and then change it as you see fit or just input data and read results):

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-7TTgKc8_1whWgTpP2rZsX0obm1WRY7iEg9N40aTTGE/edit?usp=sharing

(created by me in Open Office, transfered to googledocs, UI-polished and PL-version by my brother - still up to date in 0.4.83)

You can see it applied during a current campaign by my brother here (it's in Polish and he uses an excessive force but you can get an idea there, 4:11 if it doesn't show the correct moment, with another even bigger one at 8:35): https://youtu.be/q2B_OYD4vPI?t=251

Enjoy while it lasts but don't get too attached to it as it will most probably be changed by Devs (I bug-reported it after 0.4.41) because it's much too safe (just AI improvements are enough to make it much harder)

Edit: updated to 0.4.83

Last edited by Pawleus; Apr 29 @ 1:15am