design strategies

[Trev_lite]

i looked for a thread were people shared there ship designs are debated what way to design ships was the best. if there is a thread for this just post the link here and feel free to lock this thread.

i was thinking of playing a distant worlds game with no automation and want to see what everyone's opinion on what techs and weapons are the best and how they make there ships different from the autodesigned ones.

besides answering my questions feel free to get into a massive debate on ship design philosophy or what weapons are the best and so on.

[Plant]

Most ship design threads devolve into people posting their roleplaying designs and everybody nodding along, as there isn't much to say about other peoples' roleplaying.

I tend to design and use one main combat ship. I used to design one for each weapon, but only for fun. Chooses escort, frigate or destroyer, as I can call them Name Mk and it will show up on screen neatly lined up as Name Mk 048, so I can easily create fleets. Fleet countermeasures and targetting are also added to each ship, as I can't be bothered to carefully allocate a specific amount of ships which are near identical in every respect but the tiny amount of space devoted to fleet ecm and targetting. Depending on my mood, either every ship after a certain size has troop transport, or I just design a dedicated troop transport with greater shields and speed and thrust vectors.

My design philosophy for a ship intended for combat is to design for a single main weapon type, be it beams, phasors, torpedoes or missles or whatever. This is becaase I think that having one gun means that there is a definate range where you can place your ships where they can do the maximum amount of damage, compared with any other ship weapon design.
Of course, it also means that there is an area of definate weakness, but that usually isn't a problem since in return the AI doesn't design for single weapon ships, and you are usually fighting over something.

I design for enough reactors to sprint and shoot all weapons as designing for being able to cruise and shoot all weapons, usually only gains a very small increase in space available for weapons or defence and hence combat power, whilst being able to sprint is a great boost to tactical capability.

I usually start the design with adding miscellaneous stuff like sensors and ecm and command centres and life support and proximity sensors and scanners, then add an appropriate and small amount of that anti fighter weapon, and ion defence. I take a good estimation of how much power I need for sprint and firing all weapons. The remaining space is subdivided equally into weapons, shields and engines. I sometimes design for less engines if I find I need the extra combat power against other ship designs, but space allocated to weapons and shields are the same, with a little juggling for weapon space already devoted to energy production.

The reason for equal space devoted to main weapons and shields is that is how to devote the space for highest combat ability.
I don't allocate much armour because in the original Distant Worlds it was near useless and got used to not assigning much, and also that they use up the vital carbon fibre resources.

Generally speaking, I aim to use up as much space as possible unless the energy needs cannot be met by adding more space, which sometimes occurs at the lower size limits, but rarely at the larger ones. The larger, the better, as certain important components such as hyperspace don't get any bigger, the larger the ship is, so a larger ship is naturally more efficient, as well as that 1 ships twice the size and cost of 2 ship destroys and survives against those 2 ships.

[CyclopsSlayer]

Typical Design strategies;

-Light Classes: All Escort/Frigate/Destroyers I keep limited. As I was once told that Intelligence Ops would primarily grab these 3 classes.

-- Escort <200 size, speed, ~<15% Weapons, minimal defenses, Hab to >200 Boarding strength.
-- Frigate <250 size, speed, ~20% Weapons, minimal defenses, Hab to >200 Boarding strength.
-- Destroyer <300 size, ~20% Weapons, increased defenses, Hab to >200 Boarding strength.

-Command Class; Cruisers. Only used mid game.

-- Cruiser, <400 size, ~20% Weapons, increased defenses, Hab to >300 Boarding strength. Hyper Deny

-Capital Class; Capital/Carriers

-- Capital, as big as allowed, ~>25% Weapons, ~>25% Shield/Armor, once size >1000 2-4 Fighter Bays. Hyper Deny. Prox scanners
-- Carrier, as big as allowed, NO Direct Fire weapons, 40% Fighter Bays, ~25% Shield/Armor, Hyper Deny, Prox Scanners.

-Transport

-- Troop Transport, 5-6 Troop Bays, speed, agility, heavy defense, ECM, NO weapons. Hab to >300 Boarding Strength.

[Panpiper]

My design 'strategy', such as it is, is to field the largest ships I can, no exceptions. I never build anything but the largest. I will often however break these into two 'classes'; cruisers and capital ships. They are identical in every way, but that way I can stagger their upgrading such that I don't wind up with all my ships in refit all at once. These ships are always placed in fleets, usually in groups of only two if just picketing or being put on auto. I never let my ships engage as singletons. I virtually never lose a ship.

The build strategy is fairly simple. I use torpedoes for maximum range, I have no other offensive weapons on my ships (very occasionally I will have ion cannons if I have to deal with silver mists). I focus virtually all weapons research on pushing torpedoes. Early-mid game I will make a token investment in ground troops, mid range armour and point defence (point defense does get pushed, but not as much as torpedoes). The ships I build are set to stand off for both stronger and weaker opponents. They have as many engines as weapons as well as a really good turn rate. I will have about 60-80% as many shields as weapons (shield ratio increases as the ships get bigger). While it is true that mathematically an equal number of shields to weapons is better if involved in a straight up slugfest, my ships are rarely in such a situation.

The enemy is virtually never able to maintain it's desired range. My ships will nimbly turn and with their speed maintain 'their' desired range, which for torpedoes is usually outside of the enemy's range. It does happen of course that the enemy can temporarily be within range, but torpedoes pack a serious wallop at close range, so that is rarely a problem.

I will tend to have about half as many point defense as I have torpedoes, more if a fighter armed opponent has been giving me a fight. Obviously other nifty gear like Hyperdeny, etc., is also added, given that these are big ships that can handle them. My gun ships do not carry troops. My troop ships carry no guns (other than point defense).

[ReadeB]

Frigates - Defensive Fleets - Best Weapon and Best Shields, try to keep acceleration, turning time, and range within acceptable ranges. Extras targeting, counter measures, repairbot

Cruisers - Attack Fleets - Same as above except built for longer range.

Destroyers - Attack Fleets, Capture fleets - Same as cruisers except add Assualt pods, hyperdeny and tractor beams.

Carriers - Same as cruisers except add Fighter bays, fleet targeting and fleet countermeasures.

Add engines and fuel by resulting performance desired vs taking whatever performance results from adding a few things

[Spidey]

I use torpedoes for maximum range

Standing off with torpedo weapons is sort of silly, isn't it? The damage loss is going to nerf the heck out of your otherwise impressive damage, making confrontations longer than they really should be. If you're building huge ships then why not invest in the armor and shielding necessary for point blank confrontations?

Heck, I'm doing that with size ~500 destroyers and things tend to die long before they get into trouble.

These ships are always placed in fleets, usually in groups of only two if just picketing or being put on auto.

I do that with frigates, as it happens. Two size 350-400 boats with a bit of shield and some firepower. Not enough to deter actual invasions but enough that random pirates are blown apart before they create problems.

[Panpiper]

Standing off with torpedo weapons is sort of silly, isn't it? The damage loss is going to nerf the heck out of your otherwise impressive damage, making confrontations longer than they really should be. If you're building huge ships then why not invest in the armor and shielding necessary for point blank confrontations?

Given the choice between a fight that lasts 40 seconds in which my ships emerge utterly unscathed because the enemy couldn't touch me, or a fight that lasts 20 seconds except now my shields are severely weakened and I can't get into another fight quickly, I'll take the longer fight. I send two such ships into a pirate infested system with numerous bases, ships, etc, and I don't even need to watch them, they will clear the system every time and be unhurt. A fleet of four of them will take out legendary pirates.

[Spidey]

But are your ships emerging unhurt because your torpedo weapons rock at max range or because things close the distance, minimize the damage reduction, and consequently get blown to bits?

I'm just saying, with a weapon that does 30 damage at range 500+, losing 4 per 100 on range ought to make a difference.

[CyclopsSlayer]

Admittedly using only the highest tech weapons for comparison - Distant Worlds Weapon Comparisons

The result is in "Damage per Second per Size"


However, as good as the direct fire guns are, I am beginning to think none can hold a candle to Fighters. Unless Point Defense has an entirely different combat system, equivalent spaces of Fights Bays vs PD guns, the ship mounting the PD will be LONG dead before the PD kill more than a few fighters at most.

[Panpiper]

ORIGINAL: Spidey
But are your ships emerging unhurt because your torpedo weapons rock at max range or because things close the distance, minimize the damage reduction, and consequently get blown to bits?

No, my ships almost always maintain range, they are designed to be nimble and fast. The only exceptions are occasional and short lived when they warp in too close or something, but they quickly separate the range anyway. Yes, they do lower damage at their maximum range. The thing is that the enemy does NO damage at that range. My ships will typically have 12 to 15 torpedoes, and it doesn't take all that long for them to knock out enemy ships.

[CyclopsSlayer]

Terminal Point Defense (best in game)
Project size 3840k
Improvements to Terminator AutoCannon
Size 3 Static Energy Used: 0
Close-in weapons system that fires deadly bursts at enemy fighters, disabling or destroying them.
Damage 8
Range 250
Energy Used 6
Speed 660
Damage Loss 1 per 100 distance
Fire Rate 0.48 secs
Opens up: -


versus...

Heavy Assault Bombers

Project size 7680k
Advanced StarBomber
Top Speed 130
Turn Rate 52°/sec
Shields 30
Targetting 60%


Countermeasures 83%
Bombing Damage 22
Bombing Range 340
Bombing Fire Rate 2.70 secs
Opens up: -



Superiority Fighters

Project size 7680k
Superiority StarFighter
Top Speed 165
Turn Rate 62°/sec
Shields 30
Targetting 60%
Countermeasures 92%
Bombing Damage 7
Bombing Range 240
Bombing Fire Rate 0.70 secs
Opens up: -


=-=-=-=-=-=-
Anyone know the Combat Accuracy formulas? Would be nice to know how Base + Speed + Size + ECCM + ECM + Range = %Hit

[Panpiper]

How are fighters at penetrating high level armor? Of course, my range attenuated torpedoes probably aren't better.

I think a large part of my own success is due to being able to quickly gain a massive technological advantage.

[Spidey]

Panpiper, could you summarize one of those fast and nimble big bruisers, just for fun? I'm sort of curious to see how your ranged torpedo designs stack up against my own size 350-500 point blank torpedo destroyers.

And Cyclops, I'm sure your carrier approach is quite fearsome but it's totally the space version of 'death by a thousand cuts', isn't it? Spidey wants big boom!

By the way, does anyone know if area weapons can do much of anything against fighter hordes?