What the Different of Energy and Bullets

[Sarkas1704]

Hello there. Want to know what exactly is the different betwenn the Laserweapons and Bullet weapons. I Have read Shilds work like a second layer around the ship and when bullet hit them the must destoy this layer first. But Engergy weapon goas better on Armor and the Hit rate ist much higher than Bullets. Some say Energy Weapons are better. I have played all time with bullets and projectile weapons. Am i Wrong the whole time?.

[Casper]

Energy weapons have much wider ranges so they have the opportunity to do more damage, but they do much less damage against shields. Some projectile weapons ignore shields entirely so if you want to min/max its best to look at the defenses of the enemy ships and build to counter them based on their physical/energy and plating/shielding. I usually just try and keep them balanced, but if you went 100% energy or 100% projectile you could use modules that specifically boosted that damage type as well.

[Sarkas1704]

Yeah i know about the Modules. But i wonder why some say "Engergy is best in Endgame" but other say "Projectiles are the best". I really haave play my 90 Hours of playtime Projectiles Only because everytime the AI goes Shild and Energy. A Very little time was both but this was Early game. In midgame they all goes Shild and Energy. But i want understand why peoples say This or This is better.

[Elitewrecker PT]

The AI refits their ships based on what their enemies are using, not because it's better or worse.

IMO - energy, specifically beams, are my preference because they cut-out range considerations from battle tactics, so I only have to consider what tactic to use based on its effect and what lanes to place my ships based on the enemy least optimal ranges.

[DasaKamov]

Originally posted by Sarkas1704:

But i wonder why some say "Engergy is best in Endgame" but other say "Projectiles are the best".

Because everyone has different opinions on what they consider to be the "best". ;)

[utilityguy]

Originally posted by Elitewrecker PT:

The AI refits their ships based on what their enemies are using, not because it's better or worse.

IMO - energy, specifically beams, are my preference because they cut-out range considerations from battle tactics, so I only have to consider what tactic to use based on its effect and what lanes to place my ships based on the enemy least optimal ranges.

I've since went into the strategy of refitting my ships to dupe the a.i in what they think is the correct counter. Do I want to use Boarding pods? Then my ships will be 100% armor, no shields, in order to force the a.i to use only beam weapons--allowing my pods to land.

Of course, after a while, I just go the route of making my ships capable of defending and attacking any type of enemy ship--just so that I don't need to continue countering designes.

[Casper]

Basically every module available has some value.

Boarding pods are OP if you are up against a faction without manpower bonuses or modules equipped. I once lost my biggest fleet because I dropped their manpower off to invade a system and then ran into a fleet with about 1/10th my power. Lost literally every ship because for some reason the AI was spamming boarding pods.

Energy is amazing if the enemy is dumb and doesnt use shields.

Physical is best if you can use tactics in a way to keep them at their optimal range (Or cloak them until they are close range for short ranged weapons).

I havent experimented with squadrons and the other weirder weapon modules but they all have a place in high level play to counter some battle strategy.

[Freny]

1) Shields counter energy weapons. Projectiles ignore shields, except for the part of the shield that adds protection against projectiles (the different shield types tell you how much of that). Armor does nothing against energy weapons, but they add health to ships. Critical hits ignore defenses and go straight against ships' health.

2) Missiles get countered very easily with bullets. Normally, 1 slot with bullets is all you need to shoot down most of the missiles. Bullets are short range and do very little damage in other ranges.

3) The way range works is that the battle starts at the longest range chosen between 2 opponents on the first phase and moves one step closer towards the shorter range each subsequent phase. Thus, if the ranges chosen are Long and Short, the guy with the short range weapons has to survive 2 phases while doing very little damage, with the most important phase being the first one when both sides have all their ships intact.

4) Small ships have very little health, thus it makes sense to have more armor slots than shields. Medium ships and Carriers have a health pool large enough to favor shields more because while they are up they provide some projectile protection as well.

About the Energy vs Bullets thing: you might have only half the fleet left by the time you get to short range (bullets) and missiles get countered easily. Not taking into account range considerations, 1 module of bullets cancels out more than 1 missile slot, so it is a losing proposition. You might have some success mixing in some swarm missiles so you get more of the heavier payload missiles to land, but I doubt the opponent will chose long range if he sees you have mostly projectiles plus long range rating. Also, ships get focused on ES2 combat, in that combat fire is directed to the same ship, resulting in quite a bit of overkill. Thus, another factor for beams (on top of equal effectiveness at all ranges) is that beams are instant, while lasers and projectiles travel. Hence, you might be completely wasting a 2nd volley of missiles on an already dead ship because the 1st volley might still be in transit.

I could tell you more about how lazy (and crappy) ES2 combat is, but in the end if you are playing vs AI it is a mute point because the AI wasn't programmed beyond the initial land grab, so don't expect any real challenge fighting the AI. Suffice to say the way they coded Fighters, in that once they shoot down a Bomber they all go back to their ships (combat is focused) instead of going after another Bomber, which makes them useless, and if you add the fact that Bombers ignore combat lanes, that's all you need to know if you thing about it (without even knowing about lanes' paths and blind spots).

[Sarkas1704]

Originally posted by Freny:

1) Shields counter energy weapons. Projectiles ignore shields, except for the part of the shield that adds protection against projectiles (the different shield types tell you how much of that). Armor does nothing against energy weapons, but they add health to ships. Critical hits ignore defenses and go straight against ships' health.

2) Missiles get countered very easily with bullets. Normally, 1 slot with bullets is all you need to shoot down most of the missiles. Bullets are short range and do very little damage in other ranges.

3) The way range works is that the battle starts at the longest range chosen between 2 opponents on the first phase and moves one step closer towards the shorter range each subsequent phase. Thus, if the ranges chosen are Long and Short, the guy with the short range weapons has to survive 2 phases while doing very little damage, with the most important phase being the first one when both sides have all their ships intact.

4) Small ships have very little health, thus it makes sense to have more armor slots than shields. Medium ships and Carriers have a health pool large enough to favor shields more because while they are up they provide some projectile protection as well.

About the Energy vs Bullets thing: you might have only half the fleet left by the time you get to short range (bullets) and missiles get countered easily. Not taking into account range considerations, 1 module of bullets cancels out more than 1 missile slot, so it is a losing proposition. You might have some success mixing in some swarm missiles so you get more of the heavier payload missiles to land, but I doubt the opponent will chose long range if he sees you have mostly projectiles plus long range rating. Also, ships get focused on ES2 combat, in that combat fire is directed to the same ship, resulting in quite a bit of overkill. Thus, another factor for beams (on top of equal effectiveness at all ranges) is that beams are instant, while lasers and projectiles travel. Hence, you might be completely wasting a 2nd volley of missiles on an already dead ship because the 1st volley might still be in transit.

I could tell you more about how lazy (and crappy) ES2 combat is, but in the end if you are playing vs AI it is a mute point because the AI wasn't programmed beyond the initial land grab, so don't expect any real challenge fighting the AI. Suffice to say the way they coded Fighters, in that once they shoot down a Bomber they all go back to their ships (combat is focused) instead of going after another Bomber, which makes them useless, and if you add the fact that Bombers ignore combat lanes, that's all you need to know if you thing about it (without even knowing about lanes' paths and blind spots).

Thank you very much this is what im searching for :D

[Hobo Misanthropus]

Aside from edge cases like utilizing the UE's Sheredyn Slug battle tactic, guns are purely a defensive weapon. You can stack these on your Cruisers and Escort destroyers to deal with enemy bombers and/or missiles. In terms of damage, they are quite poor. I would simply keep them on Cruisers though, as the smaller escorts are better served using something like a Hyperium laser, and you'll probably win before you unlocked extreme AGNs (You should probably go for the TERACO and Anti-Gluon beams anyway, but there are ways to get both exclusive techs via hacking/tech trades)

As mentioned, since Missiles are easily countered with guns, and the AI really likes guns, usually missiles are a poor choice.

In addition to all this, one critical weakness of shields makes the usage of energy weapons for big damage universally more reliable: While the Hull Plating absorption statistic on Armor actively NEGATES a portion of the damage, the shield absorption statistic on shields simply refers to how much of a shot's damage is taken from the shield, instead of the hull, until that shield is completely depleted. In essence, shields are simply an HP boost, not actual protection, with the exception being the Anti-Matter class shields which provide an evasion boost (And the only protection against railgun attacks)

Further in Laser Weaponry's favor is the fact that once they do punch through the shield, they negate 80-90 percent of enemy hull absorption, dealing nearly their full raw damage with every hit. This is especially useful to get around the pesky Orichalcix Armor late game which effectively heals the ship when it's shot by a kinetic weapon.

Even on the carrier front, Energy Weapon options just overperform their kinetic counterparts. The best-case scenario of a carrier rush with the hard-to-obtain quest-only Aadamantian Fighters and Bombers, with Sherdyn Slugs (Or Get Lucky if you are non Sheredyn), results in (On average) a bomber DPS only around 66% more powerful than the Much easier to obtain (But also quest locked) Anti-matter bomber. however Ideal scenario means the bomber is not taking any return fire. As said earlier, the AI really loves to use guns. The Anti-matter bomber has a massive evasion boost, which can be further enhanced with certain modules to enable the bomber formation to evade nearly 80% of incoming fire, effectively quintupling their health and thus keeping the bombers in the fight longer. Where as the Kinetic bombers might get one or two good ship kills, a single carrier packing a compliment of bombers can solo any 30 point fleet but a full extreme AGN slug fleet, provided you abused lane mechanics to keep it safe.

Usually the best energy weapon composition is mixing both lasers and beams. Lasers have higher in-lane DPS provided you actually reach a medium range phase at some point, Beams only slightly outdamage them at the other ranges. So the traditional setup, is to mount your beams dorsally (Top) to maximize their cross-lane firing angles, while mounting lasers on the ventral faces (Side).

For some more generic combat tips:
Approach combat almost like you would an MMO or Tactical RPG with party composition.

Your Escorts and Coordinators should be built like tanks, to soak and draw fire. As the game progresses, you can evolve your small escorts into support/utility with modules like antimater/quadrinix lock on, ori bot swarms, siege and invasion modules, etc.

Your Hunters and Attackers should be built like glass cannons. Maximizing their DPS, and in any case where you can choose between a defense module, and a support module that increases damage, choose the later. (EG: Intensifier units)

Carriers can do it all. While they specialize in the carrier role, it is neither required, and often suboptimal to use them in that role. Some juggernaut plating, a self-sustain module and a whole lot of firepower can see a single carrier keep the rest of the fleet safe while dishing out considerable firepower itself. While Bombers are inarguably the highest theoretical DPS weapon in the game, they only start their damage at phase 2, and the vast majority of fights could be and should be resolved before bombers even become a factor. But there are some small fleet composition strats that involve abusing carrier all-lane attack with bombers and blindspots. No player will ever fall for it if you play online though.


You'll also find quickly that all races military are NOT equal. Where as the Craver and Riftborn ships are DPS powerhouses than can end a fight with one salvo, Unfallen and Horatio ships overstack support or in the worst cases, defense slots, requiring your designs and tactics to adapt.