| Re: Cruisers vs Battleships (Re: Maybe i am a little thick but...) |
Tue, 16 March 2004 22:36   |
|
|
|
| Inquisitor80 wrote on Thu, 04 March 2004 21:41 |
OK i guess but where does the second B come from?
As far as i can see BBs are not very efficient.
They are only gateable by IT and take way to much minerals.
it would seem that a lot of cruisers would be better than a few BBs
|
The amount of minerals a design takes is more a matter of the details than it is Battleship vs Cruiser. I was building horde style mineral lean battleships.
Cruisers will tend to lose the init war to a battleship. If you have lost the init war, you may wish to look at destroyers depending on your tech levels and race settings and the roll of the beamer in question.
Or even wierder, frigates...
The whole horde idea is to have some sort of tech behind fleet of ideally one set of beamers and use the shear mass of overwhelming shields and armour to survive till you get your blow. Tech behind can mean very mineral lean.
Of course nubs are the cheapest armour hull. But pre-nub, destroyers can be the best after miniturization (depending on your settings and tech levels).
And frigates... have a way of laughing at those expensive missiles that can only destroy one ship per blow. Frigates offer the best super shield horde (which of course will be countered with sappers. But you then counter with sapper killer battleships, and your frigates are nice secondary missile chaff).
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
