Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ogredpowell]

read the forums some, but still have questions

Strike Craft: I 100% notice when the enemy or I have superiority.  I've done some reading, but I dont always 'feel' the difference when I use different loadouts on my condors.

Is the following correct? Bombers kill ships, easily killed by fighters and PD.   Interceptors kill bombers, torpedos, but can be fragile.   Heavy fighters are all-rounders. 

If that is right, why not just use heavy fighters and bombers? or do interceptors chew up heavy fighters?


Fleet comp: just got to the point that I'm fielding a couple of cruisers, and now destroyers seem to be a straight upgrade from frigates in all roles.  I use my leftover cerberus to gaurd my carriers, and leftover wolves to chase down routed ships or 'clean up'.    Am I missing something? Are frigates secretly fighter slaughterers and I'm just missing it?


Missle cruisers/frigates: are they any good? seem to lack staying power w limited ammo

[Igncom1]

From my recollection, interceptors tend to be armed with point defence weapons like vulcans, pd and burst lasers. Where as fighters are more often armed with proper sized cannons like motors, ion cannons, machine-guns (which double as PD) and IR Pulse Lasers. Other then that they are functionally the same, interceptors are often in larger squads and have less HP too, but having more fighters effectively make up for that in my opinion. Bombers are purely for attacking purposes and have missile weapons that are only usable on proper star-ships.

Interceptors are like having mobile point defence, having talons or wasps near a friendly ship can easily defend it form enemy missiles. Fighters are more like having an extra frigate and can easily take down larger ships in numbers. (Note, interceptors in large numbers can also do this, especially if they have a weapon that deals hight explosive or energy damage.) Bombers are mobile missile/bomb launchers and are honestly better then any missile weapon in the game because they never run out of ammo and take it at long ranges to the enemy.

The terms used for interceptor and fighter are not great in my opinion. Better to think of interceptors as fighters, and fighter as gunships/corvettes.

[DatonKallandor]

Bombers usually have missiles that need to reload. Interceptors and Fighters don't go after other strikecraft, they still just kill ships like bombers. Fighters are generally a little slower and tougher, but the big difference is they have decoy flares that distract enemy PD. But there's really no hard distinction beyond the flares - you've got strikecraft that need to reload after attacking (bombers) and you got everything else. They all attack the same targets (ships).

[Plantissue]

You really need to try out the different loadouts to get a feel for them. Every LPC behave different and can be used differently. What is labelled as fighters, heavy fighter and interceptors seem to behave in the same way. Bombers do unload their missiles then return to be reloaded.

It could be said that bombers can avoid being shot at by PD as they spend less time around their target. All the different fighters can be killed PD. Interceptors don't specifically kill bombers; everything can shoot at bombers. Interceptors don't have to be fragile either. Sparks for instance are tough. Heavy fighters are not all-rounders, I think there are only two of them and they shine best in different and specific roles. You should try out different loadouts and then make opinions on them, rather than read their role and work out what that role is. I feel like you are too attached to their description. They are more flavour descriptions than descriptions of role.

Destroyers are generally meant to be better than frigates at general fighting. However I find that many frigates will still be useful, especially when you are playing with a fleet with only two cruisers. It's not really that much better for such relatively small fleets where the range synergy doesn't happen. Frigates can be useful simply by existing even in not directly fighting. A single Wolf can be useful in drawing away large portions of an enemy fleet for instance. At least till a bunch of fighters appear. People find that Tempests can be used even in the late game. Individually piloting frigates usually make them better than destroyers for directed damage at useful points in the battle as they are usually faster. You'll probably find that cruisers seem to be a straight upgrade to destroyers as well. Again, the problem is that you are thinking in terms of the labels attached to the ships instead of the ships themselves. Each ship have different roles. It's not that useful to think in terms of what their hull size description is for what they can do.

Frigate are not "secretly fighter slaughterers". More of the opposite.

Why ask, about missile loadouts when you can play with them and form an opinion all of your own? Then you can tell us your experienced opinion, instead of it being affected by others.