Print

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

[Warnoise]

So I tried to field different fleets of various techs ships.

I made 1 high-tech fleet, 1 mid-tech fleet and 1 low-tech fleet (4 capitals, 5 cruisers, the rest are frigates/carriers)

I used them against remontant Ordos.

High-tech ships performed far better than the other two. Next come the mid-tech which also did pretty well, and lastly came the low-tech which every time sustain tons of damage when they win.

So why would anyone use low-tech ships? They are supposed to be the most admired of the bunch, but is armor even important in this game? One harpoon can destroy the armor of everything other than a fully armor buffed onslaught.

The lack of shield coverage makes low tech ships in general very weak against fighters and phase ships.

Imo low tech ships should be attack oriented ships that get in your face and unload hell on you, but ironically it seems mid-tech ships like the hammerhead are designed for that.

So what advantages would low tech ships in general bring to a fleet?

Can anyone tell me what are they meant to be? Unfortunately currently the game lack the weapons that go well with the burn drive skill (low range but very high damage)

What would you add to make low tech ships in general perform closer to their counterparts?

[Tartiflette]

Low tech is fine, once you have good officer skills they perform as well as high tech for cheaper.

[TaLaR]

The only big problem low tech has is that optimal play-style for them is to aggressively trade armor and ammo for flux advantage.
AI doesn't do either. Armor is just extra survival buffer after shields for AI, while ammo is generally wasted by using it when low-tech ship has no opportunity to capitalize on flux advantage gained.

[Grievous69]

Whaaaaat? Did you miss all of the buffs in the patch notes? Low tech is going to be better than ever.

@TaLaR
What ammo? Ballistics neither have ammo nor clips like before, and if you're thinking about missiles I'd argue high tech ships are more reliant on them than low tech ones. I agree that AI can't really armor tank but honestly, will all the defensive combat skills it doesn't even need to, the ships become straight up unkillable unless you hurl a ton of torpedoes at them. We'll see how it will fare out with new skills and Heavy Armor buffs.

[Goumindong]

Low tech is just fine and only getting better in the next patch. Radiance can be a bit of an issue but only because it’s annoying when they keep running away.

[SCC]

From your description it sounds possible high-tech fleet had more DP than other fleets.
Harpoon might destroy the armour of many ships in one hit, but it's hardly a cakewalk to get it there.

[Null Ganymede]

On the campaign map, lowtech does *need* the free-repair skills to keep it cost-effective in close fights.

Other than that it's got the best guns (all damage types! max range!) and an armored fallback plan for getting flux-locked. Low-tech best-tech.

[sector_terror]

The only big problem low tech has is that optimal play-style for them is to aggressively trade armor and ammo for flux advantage.
AI doesn't do either. Armor is just extra survival buffer after shields for AI, while ammo is generally wasted by using it when low-tech ship has no opportunity to capitalize on flux advantage gained.

hat's about the half of it. The low tech ships aren't something the AI are good at handling. They aren't terrible at it to be fair, but raw warships(onslaught and dominator) are not their best. apparently Alex has been messing with the AI given the hilarious twitter post of "safe place to burn drive" in front of 3 enemies of the same class. The AI was not that kind of stupid before so it's definitely a glitch from changing around the AI. We'll see if it gets better after that.

[Nafensoriel]

The best way to understand low tech is to put oneself into the captains position for the ship when the shields have just gone down.

The low tech captain doesn't care. He lowered the shields on purpose for more dakka. Any hull damage sustained can be replaced by random pieces of whatever ship he is about to destroy.

The mid tech captain gets nervous but doesnt stress it to much. He's got speed. A hit to the hull cuts into his bottom line but its not to be unexpected in combat situations.

The high tech captain begins screaming at the crew to get those damned shields online NOW or they wont be able to afford food for the next month and by goods did they just shoot out his cabin? The High tech crew wishes they had stayed on the carriers in the back.


Low tech tends to always do better in the players hands because we tend to look at things like "who has reapers in the area and am I near flux cap?".

[Thaago]

...

Low tech tends to always do better in the players hands because we tend to look at things like "who has reapers in the area and am I near flux cap?".

I'll second this. When I'm playing low tech I'm often paying a lot more attention to the surrounding region and incoming fire than in other tech levels. I want those shields to stay down 95% of the time, so I have to watch out for ships with anti-armor.

[Megas]

I tried full low-tech against Ordos a few times, and they work surprisingly work.  I felt less control than I do with other tech types, but if AI Onslaughts and other ships get on a good roll, they will smackdown Radiants and others fast if they try to flee.  One time, I lost only two Enforcers against a full Ordos fleet.  Onslaughts just kept charging and running down fleeing Radiants.

Enforcers were disposable grunts.  They did their job and took hits that would have gone to more important ships like Onslaught.  If Enforcers died, so what! I just recover them or build more.

High-tech works decently, too.  I probably had the worst luck (read: most casualties) with midline.

[Warnoise]

I tried full low-tech against Ordos a few times, and they work surprisingly work.  I felt less control than I do with other tech types, but if AI Onslaughts and other ships get on a good roll, they will smackdown Radiants and others fast if they try to flee.  One time, I lost only two Enforcers against a full Ordos fleet.  Onslaughts just kept charging and running down fleeing Radiants.

Enforcers were disposable grunts.  They did their job and took hits that would have gone to more important ships like Onslaught.  If Enforcers died, so what! I just recover them or build more.

High-tech works decently, too.  I probably had the worst luck (read: most casualties) with midline.

How did you manage to do it with low tech?

My problem was that my enforcers get to max flux very quickly and onslaught and dominators get surrounded and murdered by lasers.

I had to equip Mr fleet with anti remnant weapons In order to win.

Also the lack of protection with low teach rear sides make them extremely vulnerable to fighter spam.

It would be great if low tech ships have better flux dissipation. I'd go full aggressive fleet. But unfortunately that doesn't work

[Igncom1]

Can't say I'd se enforcers in any capital ship battle personally.

But otherwise Yeah I've run down the smaller ordos fleets with low tech battleships and battlecarriers. Gotta set them to eliminate the enemy battleship the moment they are spotted and give them no quarter.

[Thaago]

For fighting Ordos with low tech I alter the kinetic - other ratio even more in favor of kinetic and let sheer firepower win the day. Enforcers aren't very good at present, though they are getting a really big defensive buff next version, might make them competitive filler ships.

[Schwartz]

Low-Tech simply needs the Shield Bypass from Starsector+ or the Shield override that's coming in the new patch.

If you then use armor and hull tanking officers in these and give them decent EMP resists, they should perform very well and are quite cheap to maintain.
Low-Tech is not weak by a long shot, but it needs proper loadouts to be effective. Better AI shield control is what's missing from making them truly deadly in AI hands right now.