Conquest is F tier while Scarab is somehow C tier, yeah ok I've seen enough.Well Scarab has 3x time feature, Conquest can't even fire his guns at the same opponent and has a terrible shield, also extremely bad at the ai hands. Conquest just must be player-driven
I'd probably put most of the Midline range at the top as while they aren't great at doing multiple things at once, what they do well they are the best at.I agree with Drover and Sunder and I also respect Hammerhead in battle. But I do not usually aim for midline/low tech ships due to low flux capabilities. I'm also note that in combat 1v2 often ends dramatically for the "1" even if "2" has a class lower, so I try to outswarm enemies, the only weakness frigates have — peak performance time.
Their destroyers pack the best bang for buck in the game, with super ballistic hammerheads, deathbeam sunders, and fighter swarmer drovers! Not that pirate refits really count, but pirate Falcons also pack the most medium missile mounts at a hilariously low costs, letting you outright delete large portions of an enemy fleet within seconds.
I'm a big fan of all the battleships, supercarriers, and battlecarriers for their ability to just pack the most of the stuff you really want in a no-nonsense package. You want cannons? Onslaughts are cost effective beasts who bring energy blasters! Paragons are mobile deathstations and tank damage like you wouldn't believe. Astrals can volley out more bombs and torpedoes then should be physically possible to fit within their hulls. And Legions are a all in one package fleet that does all the work that smaller carriers, gunboats, and their escorts would be doing otherwise.
I don't play as much with the smaller ships as I'm too often getting into armada battles that they just get shredded faster then my Sunders are already.
Though my criteria are different, since my first filter is burn level (no cruisers until I go cruiser-burn, no capitals until I go capital-burn) and the second is quality of a ship: it has to be either expendable or exquisite. My ships should either die without much notice, or not die at all.
How did Venture escape F tier?
No LP ships?
Venture has a lot of uses and is a lot stronger than people give it credit for.This.
Unlike Aurora and Shrike (and Afflictor too) which are fantastic AI ships /sConquest is F tier while Scarab is somehow C tier, yeah ok I've seen enough.Conquest just must be player-driven
poor Mule is at F tier. I'd say it's the best hybrid ship we haveA fair point. Because Mule is good. (imo)
I don't post often, but this is offensively bad that i had to. ;D
No.
You are wrong.
S tier is missing HH. SO HH with reckless officer and sparks is the most consistent ship in the game for just 10DP. Only rivaled by falconP that's even not on the list (look here for falconP builds https://youtu.be/Xjgv1EqMWnY?t=926). Also doom is probably the best economy ship for player to pilot, since it kills more and faster than paragon saves you supply and real life time. Although not as good against remnants and stations.
Tempest S tier? How?
Even now i do think shrike with a cost of 8 DP is maximum you can get for a gunship, need officers ofc, but anyway.Unlike Aurora and Shrike (and Afflictor too) which are fantastic AI ships /sConquest is F tier while Scarab is somehow C tier, yeah ok I've seen enough.Conquest just must be player-driven
I didn't want to be rude but thankfully MrDaddyPants said what I had in mind, this whole list is just comical. The ships are good enough only if you put the right weapons on them. I can immediately tell from your list that you played with ''wrong'' builds on some ships or just gave AI something wacky. Obviously you said it's a personal list so it's not fair to say it's wrong, but it hurts to see it honestly. I'd suggest you experiment a bit more with some different builds this time.
Also where's the Prometheus Mk II?
You guys are defending Venture which is basically a missile meat bag (and also eats missiles from enemy ships) while the poor Mule is at F tier. I'd say it's the best hybrid ship we have, unless I'm forgetting something.
What the hell is a gunship? First I thought you meant small ships that don't have much except one or two guns useful only for harassment, but then you called Aurora a gunship so I have no clue. If it just means ''it has non missile weaponry'' then almost everything is a gunship lol.I understand gunship as a mobile front-oriented ship for harassment (not suppression and also not alpha-strike), with a good shields (0.8 or less) for a flux trading. Weaponry for such gunships are pulse and ir pulse lasers. Also hardened shields and shield conversation is almost a must since such ships are trading non-stop.
But I am really curious on that F tier Conquest, can you please post your build here? I'm betting on a thousand credits it's gonna be a symmetric build.
I don't post often, but this is offensively bad that i had to. ;D
No.
You are wrong.
S tier is missing HH. SO HH with reckless officer and sparks is the most consistent ship in the game for just 10DP. Only rivaled by falconP that's even not on the list (look here for falconP builds https://youtu.be/Xjgv1EqMWnY?t=926). Also doom is probably the best economy ship for player to pilot, since it kills more and faster than paragon saves you supply and real life time. Although not as good against remnants and stations.
Tempest S tier? How?
Thanks for reminder of a Falcon (P) I rarely see it, but will try next time a couple of it. Interesting build with hammerhead, a use of it large OP amount. I like to play with reckless officers too, btw. Tempest is my favorite due to a high speed and harass capabilities.
Hehe, I used to pay attention to tier lists. Then I tried the vanilla Legion, a ship almost universally viewed as meh. With it I was able to shred anything (sans any red skills mind you) including Alpha cored Radiants. Me thinks these tier lists might be HIGHLY subjective. Anyway, I see you are rating ships with converted shuttle bays/sparks fairly highly...might I suggest the Valkyrie. With a recovery cost of 3, it is by far the cheapest way to get sparks on the field.
One Scarab configured this way can *flawlessly* solo almost any Frigate or Destroyer. Some cruisers.
https://imgur.com/a/3FfvWzGI've seen some changes I can understand, some up or down for one tier or two, but. What about Mora? It's tanky, but it's not that carrier should have. Atlas mk.2 with a burn 6? It is good for a DP cost, but campaign-wise absolutely not.
To me-
S tier- basically game breaking. Clearly too good/designed to end the game.
A tier- never ever sad to have in my fleet
B tier- more than happy to have at any point, but might drop for an A tier if i feel like trying harder.
C tier- serviceable but probably not in a late game fleet.
D tier- the only ship i have in here is an afflictor that I don't recognize...so if i did have one i'd say "ship that could use some work"
E tier- Stuff that seems meant to be in a player fleet that probably should never be in the player fleet.
F tier- Arguably a waste of asset work/target practice only.
I should add than anything down to C tier i'll usually play with in a themed run where i try to impose rules on myself to make things more interesting.
In general i think people sleep on a lot of the hulls because there really isn't any in game reason to experiment with them, but things like the venture/condor pull a lot more weight than given credit.
https://imgur.com/a/3FfvWzGI've seen some changes I can understand, some up or down for one tier or two, but. What about Mora? It's tanky, but it's not that carrier should have. Atlas mk.2 with a burn 6? It is good for a DP cost, but campaign-wise absolutely not.
To me-
S tier- basically game breaking. Clearly too good/designed to end the game.
A tier- never ever sad to have in my fleet
B tier- more than happy to have at any point, but might drop for an A tier if i feel like trying harder.
C tier- serviceable but probably not in a late game fleet.
D tier- the only ship i have in here is an afflictor that I don't recognize...so if i did have one i'd say "ship that could use some work"
E tier- Stuff that seems meant to be in a player fleet that probably should never be in the player fleet.
F tier- Arguably a waste of asset work/target practice only.
I should add than anything down to C tier i'll usually play with in a themed run where i try to impose rules on myself to make things more interesting.
In general i think people sleep on a lot of the hulls because there really isn't any in game reason to experiment with them, but things like the venture/condor pull a lot more weight than given credit.
I see people likes Lashers, but anyway, it's only for early game.
Legion S tier, Onslaught A tier — burn 7, both slow AF, has many weaknesses. I do must say, my Onslaught well helped me destroy couple T3 stations, but I would not take it to ordinary battle.
Mule, Venture, Gemini — at some point they are necessary or given at start, but honestly, I try to get rid of them asap. From my pov they can win in a battle only if they outtime their opponents since that types of ships has great peak operating time.
Also I put monitor in S tier because with some perks it can indefinitely tank stations most heavy fire which helped me a lot. It is really game-breaking.
Legion S tier, Onslaught A tier — burn 7, both slow AF, has many weaknesses.Such as?.. I can't honestly name a single one. Both ships are great both in player and AI hands, carry enough weapons to trade with any capital and win (or pop out of existence any ship below 15 DP in seconds), have a decent speed, armor and enough OP to install every hullmod you've ever wanted.
I will gladly take Gemini's and Mule's into my fleets!I'm with you on Mule, it's an amazing support ship (HVD+2xSalamander+2xNeedler and ConvHangar is my go-to choise) with good speed, armor, cargo and low maintenance profile. Pirate version is even better.
Exception here is Shepherds, which tend to survive, give nice drone support, and give salvage benefits as well. They are some of my favorite ships for early game!
Exception here is Shepherds, which tend to survive, give nice drone support, and give salvage benefits as well. They are some of my favorite ships for early game!
Thank you! For anyone who plays the game legitimately (i.e. doesn’t use an exploit to amass ridiculous wealth bypassing the early game), Shepherd is king. It’s cheep, good in early combat, has good campaign stats, cheep to recover, improves salvaging, makes surveying cheep, etc. Of all the ships in the game, it’s the only one I would ever consider giving an S tier. The reason being is that it is the only ship, if deleted from the game, would make the game significantly harder for me.
1 Salvage rig, 1 Buffalo and 1 random combat frigate basically equals 3 Shepherds (in and out of combat), give or take. Surveying bonus is nice but not critical, as you'll always have some extra supplies in your cargo anyway. It's a great ship, but not necessary irreplaceable.
Well I was bored so I made my own list, and as OP I took campaign stats into account.A good tier-list. Roughly, I disagree only with Centurion and Shrike. Stop hating Shrike! >:(Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/ndplhtg.png)[close]
Sorry for the quality, also I should've probably inserted another row for some tiers, looking at it now it looks suuuuper wide.
I honestly don't hate it, actually it's pretty good for having frigate burn. But I've seen it die stupidly soooo many times, if it weren't for that it would easily be B tier, Pirate Shrike even higher. And that's another thing, regular Shrike is worse despite having MORE OP than the (P) version. It's just a Sabot Pod tax The Ship.Meanwhile, Sabot Pod is a rare, elite blueprint, and finding one to buy is not easy, which means Shrike may not find a pod early enough when Shrikes are useful.
I honestly don't hate it, actually it's pretty good for having frigate burn. But I've seen it die stupidly soooo many times, if it weren't for that it would easily be B tier, Pirate Shrike even higher. And that's another thing, regular Shrike is worse despite having MORE OP than the (P) version. It's just a Sabot Pod tax The Ship.Meanwhile, Sabot Pod is a rare, elite blueprint, and finding one to buy is not easy, which means Shrike may not find a pod early enough when Shrikes are useful.
I have gone through the game without finding Shrike and good enough weapons before it has become obsolete.
At least the (P) is much easier to find (loot one from pirates), and it does not need Sabot Pod. Normal Shrike should just be Shrike (P) with +5 OP.
I realize the astral is *really* boring to fly, but come on y'all, search your souls. You know it's the second best ship in the game, objectively.
Recall with 6 bombers is absolutely broken, only ridiculous fighter swarms stops it, as there's nothing vanilla with enough PD to counter it (Unless you face a radiant which has rolled 5 paladins and is using the buddy system).
For a less objective take on ships, I also feel like everyone severely undervalues how many sabots a gryphon can bring to the party. Tossing out 7,000 kinetic damage with one click, backed by locusts or hurricane/reapers/hammers from the large means you get to choose 6 ships that WILL die, and threaten another 6 before you autoforge a fresh set of sabots. All on a ship that can be chain deployed 5 times from 100% cr before even reaching malfunction threshold. Yeah, it's slow, it's paper, has bad weapon arcs for its ballistics, and the AI can't pilot it at all - but that's some great combat efficiency for something without fighters.
People tend to often forget downsides when something seems very strong to them. Like people see a 4 Tach lance Paragon (which isn't even that great always) and immediately call it broken despite its flaws. There are very few truly broken ships in the game. This is why I have lots of ships in A tier. With the right build, most of the ships can be really really useful in battles, but that doesn't mean they're perfect.Everyone has different definitions of broken which often muddles things.
FooF, I'd call Omen S tier for late game (ant tournaments...) because its arguably equal to the tempest in value (just a very different role), but is only 5 DP instead of 8. In an endgame battle where the player is DP limited that matters a surprising amount. It can pretty easily have 10k shield hitpoints in a 360 bubble, making it significantly tankier than a Tempest as long as it doesn't get hit with shield piercing weapons, and as you said murders fighters and can disable bigger ships. Best bang for buck anti-fighter in the game, has improved sensors, ECM built it, and is cheap. And in late game fights I don't really need Tempests - they don't have long enough PPT and are liable to get popped, plus cost the same DP as a Shrike which is more reliable - but I do need anti-fighter/lockdown escort frigates.
In parts of the game where the Tempest still shines, I'd call it significantly better than an Omen - in those stages I'd put omen at A.
I just wish they could last a little longer in combat before being murdered by the lack of combat readiness.
Are people really putting officers on Omens in late game?Frigates tend to pop out of existence without one. Even Omen, at least in modded game. It's not like you can deploy 10 capitals/cruisers simultaneously, might as well make those little bathtubs as effective as possible.
Frigates tend to pop out of existence without one. Even Omen, at least in modded game. It's not like you can deploy 10 capitals/cruisers simultaneously, might as well make those little bathtubs as effective as possible.
At battlesize 500 you have 200-300 DP to use. For 10 officers + player deployment even for minimum 200 DP, average ship is at least a cruiser. It's not like having exactly 200 is that optimal either - reserves are nice to have when you need to grind down multiple expeditions/etc.I prefer 400 and small-ish fleets, which usually means being heavily outnumbered. My usual setup is AI Paragon, hyperagressive Onslaught with all de dakka, plus some carriers/missile boats and a bit of pocket change aka frigs. So yeah, in my case 10 officers is almost overkill ;D
Everyone has different definitions of broken which often muddles things.So wait you're telling me the most expensive ship in the game is better than everything else the player can get? Why that's preposterous!! It's 60 goddamn DP, basically a battleship and a half if you look at other examples. If hypothetically speaking, we had a capital that's maybe 70 DP or even more, would you call that thing broken because it's stronger than other ships? Hopefully this Paragon circlejerk will stop once we'll be able to get Radiants in our fleets.
For all intents and purposes a paragon basically ends the game currently. If you get one it's trivial to load it up with an even half decent loadout and steamroll almost all the remaining content. Is that "broken?"...i dunno...probably not. There's obviously supposed to be an average player path through the game, and it ends with something like a paragon taking down stations and fleets. Does it have flaws? Sure...but the amount they actually matter in vanilla is pretty minor given that nothing in the base game actually exploits them.
That said, is it too good? I think so, but i'm also highly in favor of stretching out the early and middle game as they have some really interesting choices that don't get emphasized because of how easy it is to skip them, especially once you know what you're doing. I also have to fight the urge to just mass produce them the moment I get a colony that can because...well why not? Same issue with other ships that appear to be above curve (drover being an obvious outlier because it's clearly not supposed to be that game warping).
Hopefully this Paragon circlejerk will stop once we'll be able to get Radiants in our fleets.
I remember something like that too.Hopefully this Paragon circlejerk will stop once we'll be able to get Radiants in our fleets.
If I remember right, it would only be a single not-player-pilotable Radiant with low max CR at best. If Radiant also gets a DP nerf (40 is ridiculously cheap for a ship arguably stronger than Paragon), it may end up mostly useless to player.
The Paragon's only real weakness is its speed and insane deploy cost.And that's why it's not S tier, unlike some other problematic ships.
If money were actually a real limitation the fact that it's the most expensive ship might matter, but I can't even remember the last time I bought a paragon from a shipyard, and if you're capable of building one at a colony you're capable of affording it.Everyone has different definitions of broken which often muddles things.So wait you're telling me the most expensive ship in the game is better than everything else the player can get? Why that's preposterous!! It's 60 goddamn DP, basically a battleship and a half if you look at other examples. If hypothetically speaking, we had a capital that's maybe 70 DP or even more, would you call that thing broken because it's stronger than other ships? Hopefully this Paragon circlejerk will stop once we'll be able to get Radiants in our fleets.
For all intents and purposes a paragon basically ends the game currently. If you get one it's trivial to load it up with an even half decent loadout and steamroll almost all the remaining content. Is that "broken?"...i dunno...probably not. There's obviously supposed to be an average player path through the game, and it ends with something like a paragon taking down stations and fleets. Does it have flaws? Sure...but the amount they actually matter in vanilla is pretty minor given that nothing in the base game actually exploits them.
That said, is it too good? I think so, but i'm also highly in favor of stretching out the early and middle game as they have some really interesting choices that don't get emphasized because of how easy it is to skip them, especially once you know what you're doing. I also have to fight the urge to just mass produce them the moment I get a colony that can because...well why not? Same issue with other ships that appear to be above curve (drover being an obvious outlier because it's clearly not supposed to be that game warping).
@Daynen
It was hard putting both Mk II capitals on my list because they're both good for their DP but the campaign stats absolutely kill them and make them unwanted. Atlas Mk II just dies to a sneeze while being awfully slow so that's another reason why some people put it so low. It's like a glass cannon but one that has been tied to a tree like a pinata.
Non-Paragon chat:
What ship do you think has the most longevity in your fleet? As in, if you picked it up early game, you might still reasonably use it late game?
Apogee is probably #1 for me. Never mind being able to acquire it at quick-start, it is generally useful throughout the entire game in combat and for its logistic bonuses.
#2 is the Tempest. Crushes other Frigates early, excellent harasser in mid-game and superb anti-fighter late-game (though I do have to retreat it at a low CR). Even without officers, they do well.
#3 is a tie between Hammerhead and Sunder. Both are able to punch at Cruiser levels for brief moments and they typically can stay out of harms way, or at least defend themselves against heavier opponents. Super late-game they lose their luster but they are always welcome fire support options. They're also great for auto-resolve or pursuit situations.
What ship do you think has the most longevity in your fleet? As in, if you picked it up early game, you might still reasonably use it late game?Well aside from Drover being the obvious choice, Heron is pretty damn useful whatever you'll end up doing. I agree with Sunder but I also want to add the Eagles, those things are so damn reliable in AI hands, only dying when you majorly screw something up.
What ship do you think has the most longevity in your fleet? As in, if you picked it up early game, you might still reasonably use it late game?Apogee. I can start with one, and I keep one all the way to the final endgame fleet.
...
Non-Paragon chat:
What ship do you think has the most longevity in your fleet? As in, if you picked it up early game, you might still reasonably use it late game?
...
...
Non-Paragon chat:
What ship do you think has the most longevity in your fleet? As in, if you picked it up early game, you might still reasonably use it late game?
...
This is completely by accident, and not what I wanted to happen, it just happened: The Centurion.
Yes, the little dinky frigate thats not anywhere near anyone's top of the tier list has stayed with me from the very start of a campaign all the way through multi ordo fights. I bought it for being cheap tough gun frigates to help me in early game and then it just refused. To. Die. I've used Omens and Tempests in the same fleet, and while they have that sweet system/offense they both have a tendency to... pop. Meanwhile I watched my Centurion about to get hit by a reaper with shields down and high flux, began to say F in my head, and then was shocked when it slapped on its system and tanked the hit. (Granted it was damaged enough that I retreated it, but still!)
I don't feel any need to really bump against the 30 ship limit in order to kill everything, so this little frigate just hangs out in my fleet. I deploy it whenever there is room (its only 4 DP) and it putters around as an escort/killing fighters/distracting the enemy. I've got a kinetic, an HE, an ion cannon on it, and a reaper, so it is a pretty reasonable little combatant that can help against larger enemies by disabling, shoots down fighters and missiles pretty well when they come nearby, and I cheer every time it sinks its reaper into a cruiser or battlecruiser. It basically became the fleet mascot.
So... while I still wouldn't put the Centurion at the top of the tier list, I have a great fondness for them and consider them useful at every stage.
Yes, the little dinky frigate thats not anywhere near anyone's top of the tier list has stayed with me from the very start of a campaign all the way through multi ordo fights.*looks at my tier list* > literally the first ship in A tier. I'm a no one :'(
What ship do you think has the most longevity in your fleet? As in, if you picked it up early game, you might still reasonably use it late game?Besides ships with logistic advantages (Apogee, Shepherd, freighters, tankers), it would either be Hammerhead or Conquest. Hammerhead is easy to acquire early on and will last for some time. Conquest is harder to get, but it will serve me until the very end of the game.
What ship do you think has the most longevity in your fleet? As in, if you picked it up early game, you might still reasonably use it late game?
MRM-heavy Buffalo MkII fleets delete pirates while simultaneously attracting them with high sig and low DP cost.
If you're grinding system bounties for early credits and faction standing, they're amazing value when massed. Highly recommend trying them out. Just make sure to trigger all missiles on a tactical laser or other "rangefinder" weapon.
Edit: they're also Destroyers, so once you have a bunch of hullmods and the +10% OP skill you can field fighter screens.
The best fleets are carrier fleets. Just spam fighters and bombers that have 5000 range and are undodgeable. They will shred any fleets without full radius shields. The AI also freaks out and tries to attack fighters if they do not have fighter superiority which means you'll win most engagements if you can secure the void space. Then you slam on long range missiles on your carriers with missile racks and delete whole fleets.True, but i'm also using a single protective ship in front of my carriers to scare foes
Fighter spam is the easiest thing to farm AI cores - they can't teleport away from long range fighter swarms to vent. Its the same for attacking bases. You just park outside the range of stations and send in fighter squadrons to delete it.
low tech ships are automatically better because there are no mid or high tech tankers. Therefore if you want a mono-colored engine trail fleet you must use only low tech ships.
The hound should be higher. Put reinforced bulkheads, maybe blast-doors, and it's survivability rises. With a hypervelocity driver tacked on it makes for a good, cheap arty piece.
Why Lasher is so low? It's OP thanks to low cost, Feeder and many weapons mounts. SO playership it's brutal.The whole list is so cursed that most people missed Lasher being in E tier.
why do people like Bowling Ball Ship so much; flux shunt is cool but I never thought of the monitor as an S-tier ship
Can we talk more about the Conquest being F tier? It's probably my favorite ship: obviously can't beat a Paragon 1v1
SpoilerThe Conquest is not F-tier by any stretch. I think it gets a bad rap because people expect it to be something it's not. It's an opportunist, not a slugger, and its not not supposed to be trading shots with capitals but rather with cruisers. It's a cruiser-killer. It outmaneuvers the Dominator, outguns the Eagle/Aurora, and can lay waste to Destroyers. Its shield is a tell-tale sign that it's not supposed to take a lot of hits: not only is it in a limited arc but it has poor efficiency.
A well-built Conquest is like most of the Midline fleet: a really good generalist that gets out-shined by the specialists in their respective niches. I like flying Conquests as a flagship because I don't feel like I lose a lot speed going up from a Cruiser but boy do I gain a lot of firepower. I don't expect it to take on well-built Paragons, Onslaughts or Stations by itself but I know I can take out about anything else.
If it specializes in anything, its sustained firepower. With its superb dissipation and capacity, along with the efficiency of Ballistics, it wins almost all flux wars if armed correctly. I don't think its maximum focused firepower is top-tier but it can sustain it, which is important in its own right.
Odyssey is in about the same boat but it trades some firepower for extra burst speed relative to the Conquest. It can also absorb more damage because its shield efficiency is stellar.[close]
Odyssey has 1x shield efficiency btw. Its much better than conquest at 1.4, but not really amazing in comparison to ships like paragon (.6).
Most high tech ships (Paragon, astral, hyperion, omen, scarab, medusa) have .6 efficiency