Ranger cruisers

[Talon Karde]

Hello there !

Do you use Ranger cruisers? I am a bit... surprised by their performance. I fond them less usable than Adamant frigates. Adamant seems more usefull with their Vipers and better broadside capabilities. Which is kinda weird as cruisers are supposed to be more armored vessels. I even prefer Corvets for the hit and run, missile unload tactic.

Am I missing something?

[Khan Boyzitbig of Mercia]

Originally posted by nephilimnexus:

Slot 1: Nuke
Slot 2: Nuke

Bring one cruiser, eliminate two Base Stars. Good trade.

And then the basestar launches a Comet PCM.

[Chibbity]

Originally posted by nephilimnexus:

Slot 1: Nuke
Slot 2: Nuke

Bring one cruiser, eliminate two Base Stars. Good trade.

The Janus is better for this to be honest, since you can bring 3 Nukes (or 2 Nukes and Torps/Etc..); and it's heavy armor means it can get closer and survive longer. Once the Nukes are gone, resupply it with Torpedoes or something else.

Originally posted by Khan Boyzitbig of Mercia:

And then the basestar launches a Comet PCM.

This^

You have to be very careful using Nukes and focus on taking down anything that could turn them back on your ships first, being closer to your target helps as well; it gives them less time to react. A Nuke that's flying for several turns is an easy target.

[Sabaithal]

Originally posted by Khan Boyzitbig of Mercia:

Originally posted by nephilimnexus:

Slot 1: Nuke
Slot 2: Nuke

Bring one cruiser, eliminate two Base Stars. Good trade.

And then the basestar launches a Comet PCM.

Or warpdrivers.

Also one nuke will not kill off a base star on its own.

If your strategy is to spam nukes you should use the Janus instead. Cheaper to field, and 3 munition slots.

[konzacelt]

I prefer to use nukes on mid-sized ships that I know will cause me problems, like Revenants and Phobos'. Can usually 1-shot them. Basestars typically have too much nuke defense to make them worth it: interceptors, comets, PCM, wardrivers).

Also: Put nukes in your Celestra, you almost never run out of any other munition.

[twosnark]

Not sure what game you are playing, but in my games a single nuke can't fully take out an Archane - - > Let alone a base star.

and by the time you can *target* a base star; all the raiders have either been destroyed (base star no longer a real threat) or they are munching your fleet beyond repair. I should not infer that base stars are no longer a threat; but once the cylon gun ships and raiders have been dealt with; I find that you can generally park your fleet behind a battlestar flak wall and slowly stroll upfield to shotgun basestars at point blank range.

. . .not to mention if there are comet PCMs and wardrivers about. . .nukes are best left onboard and not deployed.

[Sabaithal]

Asteroid mines FTW, especially when the cylons start spamming basestars. Really helps even the odds.

[Chibbity]

Originally posted by twosnark:

. . .not to mention if there are comet PCMs and wardrivers about. . .nukes are best left onboard and not deployed.

I gotta disagree, 3 Nukes on a Janus was a mainstay of my fleets for the entire base campaign; and they did insane amounts of work.

As long as you are careful about when and where to deploy them, they will absolutely tip the scales of any engagement in your favor; you just gotta be very pro-active about clearing the board of anything that could stop or re-route them.

As far as I was concerned there were 2 types of enemy fleet I encountered:
A. The fleets without much anti missile stuff, which I promptly cut in half with my Nukes; and then mopped up the remains.

B. The fleets with way too much anti missile stuff, which didn't have enough brawlers and line ships to win a straight up fight with my fleet anyways, so swap the Torps in from a Celestra onto your Janus; and just play the battle as normal.

All that said, using Nukes or not comes down to playstyle and preferences, not saying your way of playing is wrong; but leaning on Nukes is definitely doable.

[twosnark]

Egg on my face: I didn't see the last 8 or so comments when I posted.

What you describe about the Janus I could see working.

Don't get me wrong. . .there is a time and place for nukes. Particularly when you face one of the BIG fleets that has 20+ raider squadrons, and 4-6 brawlers. Campaign missions where cylons are coming from all directions is also a nuke-worthy scenario. Generally - - I keep two nukes on the celestra and shuffle them out to Adamants if I think things look like they are going to get gnarly. I don't like firing them off because of the cost - - - generally 90 pts a pop with Deadelus on a "-40% supply" world on Fleet Admiral level. I have had bad experiences with torps and nukes bankrupting the colonies.

An obvious exception is when Deadelous is on the board. With the shipyard present; dance and fade tactics don't really work and you can't hide the shipyard behind a flak wall. Plus Daedelus takes the support slot - - - so generally there is no Celestra to beef up the battleline. With "free" reloads from Deadelous, I load every ship with either nukes or torps and go to town.

Personally; I never really got into the missile boats. I have had some fun with a pair of Rangers basically drowning cylon fleets - - -> but one you get to the 8,000+ level - --> these ships become a bit risky. Hitting a dust or nebula map makes things very problematic for a missile fleet. Get a pair of archanes with Comet PCMs. . . . and you really start looking for the viper slots on the cruisers ;) I have also had problems as soon as I put a Jupiter in the fleet. With a Ranger up high. . . and revenants down low; I just have issues getting around the flak wall- - -> Unless I really pull the missile boats forward. . . where they become missile bait AND no longer are providing anti-raider fire.

My most recent campaign had two fleets with a pair of Rangers at the 7,000 pt level. It was a nice changup; but once I got to 8,000pt level; the Atlas carriers came to the fore.

I guess I should give the Rangers/Janii a better go next time around. Maybe I now have the skills to make them work. (In the last campaign; I managed to keep Minerva's in the fleets all the way to the 8,000 pt level -- - -which caused problems in the past. I even had a Minerva in a terrifying battle against a 14,300 toaster fleet that pelted the formation with 34 raider squadrons (I broke down and scum saved; came back with a bunch of debris mines))

[House of Dust]

Originally posted by twosnark:

came back with a bunch of debris mines))

That reminds me - Ranger with 2x Debris mines. I've only ever done this once or twice when faced with an unfavourable engagement, but damn, I felt sorry for the raiders.

[twosnark]

OOOHHHH. I like the idea of Ranger with 2xDebris. Then swap out for Torps when the raider battle is over. . . .

I looked at my notes: The battle I am thinking of was a 14,300 fleet. 6 x Cerebus, 4 x Archane, 6 x Talon. 34 squadrons. This fleet jumped onto a colony; so I didn't really have a choice regarding defensive fleet. But seeing 16 dradis blips in the setup screen was a serious clue I was in trouble.

Against this, I had a Minerva, 2 x Artemis; and 4 adamants and a Celestra. So. . .I did not have super thick flak walls of a jupiter available. Even with stacked ships, this fleet simply could not shoot down raiders fast enough until I put 3 x Debris into the adamant squadron.

When someone makes that serious of an attempt to wipe you out (34 squadrons!); I don't feel bad about employing serious defensive firepower ;)

Note: Put six Cerebus together; and those little pew-pew guns really add up!

[Sabaithal]

Originally posted by twosnark:

OOOHHHH. I like the idea of Ranger with 2xDebris. Then swap out for Torps when the raider battle is over. . . .

"Zerg rush this you frakin toasters!"