Best ship form?

[VoiD]

Just wondering, which is considered better? Spreading thin lines to get as many wings noses and engines as I possibly could or making a bulky square-ship with less weapons and more bonuses for the sub modules?

[Ai]

Most will focus more on speed and shields(nose and engines), but It's up to you really.

Do you want more

Shields ? More Noses.
Speed? More engines.
Turn rate? More wings.

Bonuses are helpfull when in the mid game and you have a few but powerfull weapons to boust.

[Bozobub]

Both approaches have pros and cons. Here's my opinion of various strategies:

"Stick" builds (including modified versions that "bend"):

Pros

• Most powerful, overall, for total weapon strength.
  
• Allows more flexibility in weapon loadout.
  
• Easy to build.

Cons

• SUPER-heavy, compared to full or partial synergy builds. Sticks simply cannot be as agile (speed + turn rate).
  
• Much more expensive to build/upgrade; they have many more components to deal with.

Synergy "bricks"

Pros

• Can have HIGHER stats (not counting weapons) than any stick build.
  
• Much lighter, in comparison to sticks, thus MUCH more agile. There really is no contest. In my opinion, they're simply the most fun to fly.
  
• Allows effective "hit and run" tactics against very strong enemies. This is especially useful for killing motherships inside a strike craft (SC) swarm when you're in a hurry. If you kill the SCs first, the motherships will simply field more, until their replacements are used up; this is good for gaining blueprints, not so good if you want a quick battle =).
  
• It's MUCH cheaper! There's fewer components to buy/upgrade, that simple. You can get a very strong synergy build going significantly earlier than a good stick.

Cons

• Not quite as strong as stick builds, re: weapon power, even with the synergy bonus. Remember, also, that sticks get a small bonus for most cores ^^'.
  
• Somewhat less flexible. You simply can't carry as many different *types* of weapons.
  
• Mistakes in both build and piloting can be *extremely brutal*. You can't fly them the exact same way as stick builds and expect to do very well.

"Partial synergy" builds happen to work well, by the by, and end up pretty much the "happy medium" between the two styles (although I personally still tend to prefer full synergy). Here's an example of what I mean. At the time, it was actually somewhat *stronger* than my full-synergy brick, w/o becoming especially "porky":
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1124794833
(By turret: 7x Sniper, 2x Plasma, 3x Flak, 2x Zapper hangar, Zapper pod; the final design also had the medium nose on the right side)

Tl;dr? All three approaches can do just fine, but they definitely play very differently.

[VoiD]

Thanks!

[Bozobub]

Certainly. Remember, btw, that this is NOT "gospel", just my own take as an EA player ^^'...

[Balavaeros]

This build is really working for me atm. It handles perfectly for swinging around targets while unloading plasma rain. I haven't really tried an endgame stick build yet though.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1199964266

[Bozobub]

Remember, place your "home" core at the center-rear of any build, because *it determines your ship's center of mass*. This can make a HUGE difference in handling.

@Ichabod: Good aesthetics, but you have a LOT of "dead" slots that have no weapon attached (I count 10). Two isn't a big deal but you're sacrificing a lot of power ^^'.

The main reason I "bend" stick builds, is to give them more wings, and thus a good bit more maneuverability. Plus it looks cool. But remember, EVERY bend creates 1 dead slot, period. And that engine blocks so many =x.

[Balavaeros]

Hmm.. Yeah now that you mention it I do see what you mean, maybe it'd be better if I changed the rear end to a T shape, could still keep those 2 big wings, which is originally why I made it that way to squeeze them on with my last couple core unlocks.
I'm playing on a different PC now but I'll play around with it tomorrow when I go back to that game

I do like the "weight" to be on the front though for the way I play that ship

[Flash]

Originally posted by Bozobub:

But remember, EVERY bend creates 1 dead slot, period. And that engine blocks so many =x.

Fun fact: If he was using the size 3 science engine he would have been able to place small wings on most of those dead parts. It seems like a bug but it works.

[Bozobub]

I'm aware. Check my Steam Gallery sometime; part placement order matters =). The devs have said this is NOT a bug, btw, and is WAD (Working As Desired). In other words, it's just a visual artifact, not busted game logic.

For example, look at the front of this build (credit to Manwue for the original chassis):
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1123465451
That center bit is actually 2 medium wings overlapping a 1-slot nose AND each other. While this build works fine, it has an issue with ships getting stuck in the center during rams; it's mostly an aesthetic flair here for kicks (I build a LOT of variants ^^'). Doesn't it look like the ship is held together by massive cables?

I actually most often end up doing this with engines and wings, I'll note, and for practical, rather than aesthetic reasons, but *shrug* why not fool around? You DON'T need any kind of "uber" build to rampage about the game, honestly, unless you have the recurring horde enabled, so have fun with it!

[Balavaeros]

Fun is the most important thing for me - and I'm having lots. I see now that changing my ship will impact my fun because the rear wings (plasma) need to be able to fire past the front wings as well as backward. I don't really NEED those middle wings to be big though, they're only flak and bombers, so maybe I can figure something out. Meanwhile I'll try the science engine and squeeze a couple SRM wings in there.

[jamesc70]

A 'U' design is by far the best. I was struggling until I made this one, and then facerolled the last battles without taking any health damage.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1200312036

10x cannons front - 2 side double streamers, 2 inside double front, 2 cockpit
2x Defender Hangar (16 ships) in center area and 1 defense cannon between them
4x Lasers left and right back
Rear Flak and defense cannons

Melted the boss, only taking 30% shield damage

[Bozobub]

"By far the best"? No, although "U" builds certainly can do well.

One notable issue with a "U" build, for example, but not an inverted version, is that it's relatively weak at ramming, due to the small noses and the fact that ships tend to get stuck in the middle of the "U"s arms ^^'.

Here's a somewhat older inverted-"U" 15-core design, to show you what I mean:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=847305333
(By turret: 4x Particle Hose, 3x Plasma, 4x Flak, 2x Zapper hanger, Assault hangar*, Zapper pod)
This is a CQC-speced ship (Close Quarters Combat) but you can replace the Particle Hoses with Pulsers or Snipers for a long range build.
________
*Assault drones were nerf-hammered into "Defensive" drones, sadly, which are nearly worthless. If you're copying this design, use another Zapper hangar instead =).

[Odbarc]

Originally posted by Ichabod:

This build is really working for me atm. It handles perfectly for swinging around targets while unloading plasma rain. I haven't really tried an endgame stick build yet though.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1199964266

That is the fattest, ugliest thing I've ever seen.
Great design.

[Bozobub]

Like I said, I like the aesthetic xD.

[jamesc70]

Originally posted by Bozobub:

"By far the best"? No, although "U" builds certainly can do well.

Care to elaborate? I tried synergy with 3x3 weapons... can't hold a candle to a U design. Even your ship listed is the same idea - your 3x noses are similar to my side/inner/nose setup.

That ship I posted just easily won a fight against 2 zombie captains (100+ threat) and a base, and I didn't even bother to evade or boost the shields. No synergy/block build I've tried allowed that.

As for ramming... think I've done it twice by accident; kind of a dumb way to fight in this game imo. A sawblade (whatever it's called) beam by itself is more effective for removing parts if that's what you are getting at.