| Re: Fielded Kelarium |
Sun, 18 April 2004 00:05   |
|
|
|
A big question is... are you RS?
| Quote: |
relative light weight
|
I think 50kt is heavy.
On a starbase you often want armour to protect against missiles, weight doesn't matter.
For ships, it is often better to look at building more hulls and putting less weapons on each as a way of increasing the armour/weapon ratio.
For example:
A battleship costs 225 resources and yields 2000 armour.
Even if you havent taken RS:
10 x Fielded Kelarium costs 280 resources and yields 1750 armour + 500 shields. (Of course only 6 armours would fit on a Battleship)
So, would you rather have 2 battleships with Kelarium armour or 3 battleships with no armour and a few less weapons?
5 Fielded Kelarium on each battleship adds 250kt weight (but less fuel than 3 battleships). You have less shield slots but are more efficient in using booster elect/mech slots/engines. You have lost gatabillity and a fair bit of last move advantage due to lower weight chance.
And if you took RS which would have boosted your shields, the story is much more against Fielded Kelarium.
IMO, croby is often good, but Fielded Kelarium is usually only for Starbases and rare special situations where you want to alter the attractiveness order of your ships (which get attacked first) or want weight as part of an unusual overcloaking ship.
An example of an unusual overcloaking ship would be a battleship with 6xFielded Kelarium, 8xCroby Sharmour, 7 x Super Stealth Cloak, 20 x Epsilon Torp and ideally heavy engines, giving you 1200kt+ of 93% overcloaking mass that can hide stuff especially in orbit from penn scans and take out chaff fairly well.
A use for such a ship would be to hide some chaff from the enemy to trick him into battling your forces (that aren't over one of your gates, so he thinks he can count them all with penn scans).
...
[Updated on: Sun, 18 April 2004 00:24] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
