Print

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

[albo_full]

witch carrier + 2 or 3 wings is cost effective? with the new cr update

[ValkyriaL]

Condor, every time. Gemini if you want some guns with you.

[Wraithbourne]

Cost effective is very debatable.  The Astral class is obviously the most effective pure carrier, most durable, best armed, offers the best support to the fighters thanks to the 3 flight decks.  But it uses up a lot of CR on every deployment and costs a lot more to run in general than any other.

I personally think if you arent using a very significant amount of fighters, 10 groups or so, then a single/pair of Condors or Gemini's gets the job done just fine, theres also ships like the Venture that can do some pretty heavy combat and have the one flight deck.  I think that the "battlecarrier" type ships are probably the most effective for situations were dps needs to be high, say you're in a venture facing off against an Onslaught with some torpedo bombers supporting you, the bombers will attack the Onslaught a lot more and therefore assist you more in that situation than if you were flying say an Aurora and had a Condor half the map away on carrier duty.

The vanilla game lacks a mid-range carrier at present, theres plenty of 1 deck carriers and then the Astral with 3, but I understand a 2 deck carrier is in the works so thats a gap likely to be plugged in the near future.  Aside from that I think the current range of ships offers a carrier for any situation and that the relative cost effectiveness of them all varies depending on situation.  An Astral chasing after small pirate groups is overkill, whilst a couple Condors trying to support 10-15 fighter groups against a Hegemony defence fleet probably wont be sufficient (and rather too flimsy if anything big burn drives over to them).

[BillyRueben]

Venture. Hands down.

It has a flight deck, enough missile slots to be excellent fire support, and has enough armor and hardpoints to be great in a fight in its own right.

[Thaago]

I'm a huge fan of the Venture also. Its single energy slot is the best uses of a heavy blaster of any ship imo.

[Megas]

The cheapest option, in terms of Logistics per flight deck, is the Gemini.  If you want a carrier that can fight and take care of itself, you are limited to Venture or Odyssey.  Atlas can serve as a viable carrier in pursuit battles, when the enemy tries to escape.

[Cosmitz]

Each version i mod the Apogee with one flight deck. It really should have one.

Here's the sprite i use:

[icepick37]

That would be CRAZY fun, haha. Well I can't wait for the new 2 deck midline carrier. It's gonna be the bee's knees. And hopefully stinger as well.

[Aeson]

If we're just talking about which one is most cost-effective, as in which one requires the minimum amount of supplies to recover from the CR reduction for deployment, then that would be the Gemini. (Incidentally, the changes listed in the 0.6.2a patch notes will not affect the cost efficiency in this sense.)

You have six options for carriers:
Astral:  -30% CR/deployment, +5% restored per day => 6 days to recover at 20 supplies per day => 120 supplies per deployment
Atlas:   -15% CR/deployment, +3% restored per day => 5 days to recover at 5 supplies per day => 25 supplies per deployment
Condor:  -20% CR/deployment, +10% restored per day => 2 days to recover at 4 supplies per day => 8 supplies per deployment
Gemini:  -15% CR/deployment, +8% restored per day => 1.875 days to recover at 2 supplies per day => 3.75 supplies per deployment (probably rounds to 4)
Odyssey:  -40% CR/deployment, +5% restored per day => 8 days to recover at 15 supplies per day => 120 supplies per deployment
Venture:  -20% CR/deployment, +10% restored per day => 2 days to recover at 8 supplies per day => 16 supplies per deployment

As such, the Gemini is clearly the cheapest carrier to field in terms of the cost of recovering the combat rating. However, there are other factors to consider:
1. Both the Gemini and the Atlas provide large amounts of cargo and fuel capacity relative to the other options in their weight class (Gemini - Condor, Atlas - Astral and Odyssey), but are relatively fragile
2. Crew requirements, in order from least to most:  Gemini (35), Atlas (50), Condor (65), Venture (125), Astral (350), Odyssey (400)
3. Whether or not you can use the carrier to replace another ship:  Gemini, Condor, and Atlas would only be deployed for the flight deck. Venture is a decent cruiser, Astral is on par with a heavy cruiser, Odyssey is almost equal in a straight fight to either of the two battleships, but not quite.
4. Is it more efficient to use my carrier to fill a secondary role (Venture - cruiser, Odyssey - battleship if there aren't any real battleships around, Gemini/Atlas - fleet tender) or to have dedicated ships? Is it worth risking the secondary aspect of the carrier I choose in fleet actions?
5. Tactical Speed, in order from greatest to least:  Gemini and Odyssey (50), Condor and Venture (40), Astral (30), Atlas (25)
6. Maximum Burn, in order from greatest to least:  Gemini and Condor (4), Venture and Odyssey (3), Astral and Atlas (2)
7. Deployment points required, in order from least to greatest:  Atlas (7), Gemini and Condor (9), Venture (12), Astral (22), Odyssey (25)
8. Where you want the carrier to be in your fleet - can you mount long/medium/short range large/medium/small weapons, which weapon types, how many weapons, and how tough is the ship (shields and hull)? (As it happens, the Venture has as much hull as either the Astral or the Odyssey and better armor, but less efficient shields with a lower flux capacity)
9. How many flight decks do you need to keep your two or three fighter groups in action in a typical battle? (Probably only one.)

[Linnis]

Venture gives also alot of cargo space.

Don't forget about the cargo space.

[Aeson]

The Gemini is just straight up better than the Condor as first carriers go.  Despite having slightly weaker armor it has much better defense and a more efficient shield as well as twice the cargo capacity.  It also costs less to deploy despite having slightly heavier armament.  In fact, the Gemini is the most economical carrier in vanilla with a mere 15% CR deployment cost and half the supply per day cost of the Condor's 4.

Well, there's also the upfront purchase and outfitting costs, which for the Gemini are slightly higher (13200 to buy a Gemini versus 9600 to buy a Condor, plus whatever you spend on weapons, which is probably again in the Condor's favor since small weapons are usually cheaper than medium weapons, although you don't have to fill the Gemini's medium mounts with medium weapons). However, the hull purchase cost difference is equal to the cost of only 30 units of supplies, and you'll have saved more than 30 units of supplies by going with a Gemini instead of a Condor after your eighth deployment of it, plus however many supplies you saved between recovery periods due to the lower ongoing supply cost of the Gemini (which is 0.2 supplies per day and 0.4 supplies per day during non-recovery periods for the Gemini and Condor respectively; as a result, if you aren't going into combat with any regularity, the break-even point on the hull purchase cost difference could be as far out as 150 days).

I suppose this means that I forgot two important criteria in my list of things to consider when choosing which carrier to use:
10. Up-front purchase and outfitting costs. Condors win as far as the hull cost goes, closely followed by Gemini; Atlases and Ventures are about twice as much as the Gemini, Odysseys are about 5 times the cost of Atlases and Ventures. Outfitting costs are more variable, but would likely go something like Atlas < Condor < Gemini < Venture < Astral < Odyssey.
11. Turn-around times. Condors, Ventures, and Gemini all take about 2 days to fully recover their combat readiness after deployment (assuming they don't sustain damage and you don't run into other issues like crew experience reduction due to crew death). Atlases take 5 days, Astrals take 6 days, and Odysseys take 8 days. If you want to have one battle after another, there are a couple obvious reasons why you might choose Condors, Ventures, and Gemini over Altases, Astrals, and Odysseys - lesser CR losses per deployment and faster CR recovery afterwards being the most notable.

[Megas]

As someone who ignores Leadership as long as possible, the most important consideration of carrier (aside from flagship) is how much Logistics (out of 20-30) it takes.  Gemini not only eats less Logistics than Condor, it also hauls more cargo.  The Gemini can also be armed with long-ranged medium ballistics and maul things if it can hide behind an escort.

By late-game, my main ship is often an Odyssey, which I use mainly as a faster Paragon-lite.  Its flight deck is a bonus.

[albo_full]

OMG i didn't expect all this info! thanks a lot i'll be testing the venture, thanks

[Cycerin]

The best thing about the Gemini is that it ties up frigates and fighters forever if they try to kill it. Those PD drones will overload a frigate in seconds and need to be slowly killed off before you can even think about downing the mothership.

[Jazwana]

Plus the PD drones can provide a fairly effective missile defense allowing you to equip something besides flak cannons (Heavy Maulers or HVDs anyone??)   This allows the Gemini fend off any pesky Hounds that slip by with ease.    I'm 100% in favor of Gemini vs any Carrier, especially when up against a Logistics limit.