View Full Version : Strategy tip for carriers
October 17th, 2000, 09:37 PM
The best configuration for a user-controlled carrier is vital stuff(engines, etc.), enough fighter bays so the requirement goes away, any extras (ECM, shields weapons), and fill the rest up with cargo bays (they hold more than fighter bays). You wont be able to launch all your fighters in one combat turn, but your carrier can hold many more fighters. I had a light carrier with about 150 light fighters. And you can still launch them all in one strategic turn.
Note: light carriers can use heavy weapon mounts
October 17th, 2000, 10:14 PM
Thats interesting.....Cargo Bays you say.....Hehehe A Large Transport could suddenly become Rather Deadly!
LOL! Use Large Transports as your carriers....create HAVOC in Multi-player games as Hordes of Escorts Die at the hands of the Fighters!! http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif
October 17th, 2000, 11:47 PM
sorry to dump on your strategy, but those ships will not be able to launch fighters very fast -- as in you can only launch so many fighters at a time in combat (you can launch all fighters in the regular view)
This was fixed a while back
You can make carriers like that, but their combat usefullness drops
October 18th, 2000, 12:28 AM
This is most useful if you want to launch fighters strategically, but I find it effective in combat. I have my carriers built so that I can launch about 15 fighters per combat turn. I find that to be enouch. In most cases the sides start far enough apart to be able to have anywhere from 25-75 fighters in the air by the time the two meet in combat. The volume of fighters more than makes up for the advantage of point defense. Sometimes I back up these carriers with missile frigates. If an enemy w/ pt defense fires on the seekers, they have to deal with the fighters and vice-versa.
October 18th, 2000, 01:11 AM
Actually he is right and HISTORICALLY it makes sense. Most people who think carriers suck are using them wrong. Unless you have a VERY fast ship, or get lucky and land in the middle of the task force, by the time you reach a carrier he will normally have had 4-6 turns (at least) to launch fighters. Once they form up they can be devastating.
Most folks put too many fighters bays and then skimp on fighters. For a carrier to make sense it should be able to carry more fighters than it can launch (many more). In fact some of those should be specialized. I send out assault fighters and bombers to the target and then have slow fighters with tons of weopons as CAP to defend the carrier.
Sarge is coming...
Director of Covert Ops
October 18th, 2000, 02:07 AM
Well,, the early launch stratege is only useful if the enemy is coming after your fleet and you are out gunned.
When I am chasing down an enemy I prefer to keep the fighters in the bays until my carriers are close enough that when I launch the fighters,, they can immediately fire without moving so they don't activate the enemy PD weapons.
I am currently using a carrier as an exploration ship when I play a High Tech start game.
Carrier--- Master computer, quantum reactor, max engines, 14 fighter bays, repair pod, 2 organic armor, 1 shield, 2 PD cannons, 1 Ionic disperser, combat sensor, and a long range scanner.
The 28 fighters have are armed with shield depleter and electric discharge.
October 18th, 2000, 02:55 AM
Well... here is my carrier design (max tech for demo)... and I also use a mix of specialized fighters.
Master Computer 3
Quantum Engine 3 x 6
Fighter Bay x 15
Storage Bay 3 x 3
Phased Shield Gen 5
Wave Motion Gun 3 (Heavy Mount - Not Large but Heavy)
This gives me 80 fighters (40 assault 20 bomber and then whatever else I want, depending on what the carrier is doing) and a carrier more than capable of taking out those running away freighters all by its lonesome. No PD you say? That is what those escorting Frigates are for isn't it? IRL carriers go with Cruiser support and destroyer support. This is the modern navy and I find it works rather nicely in SE4 as well without the massive behemoth Battleships and Dreadnoughts which are notably missing from modern navies and my SE4 armadas. And with 480 damage every third round at range 8 I don't worry about weak transports. Don't even bother with fighters on those guys.
October 18th, 2000, 04:22 AM
Hmnn,, well I primarily use a 4 ship fleet with 3 designs. 1 Explorere, one of Ship 2 and 2 of ship 3.
Ship one is the explorer.
Ship 2 is another carrier.
14 fighter bays
2 organic armor
1 shield generator
1 heavy mount ionic disperser R6 120
(should take out 6 engines per shot)
1 heavy mount hyper-plasmic bolt Rg 8 150/90
28 of the same fighters as on the explorer
1 shield depleter Range 2 15X14=210
1 Electric discharge Range 3 20X14=280
Ship 3 is a cruiser
2 organic armor
2 shield gen
1 large mount shield depleter R7 300
(1 large mount ionic disperser R6 80
(should take out 4 engines per shot)
1 large mount hyper-plasmic bolt R8 100/60
1 large mount enveloping acid globe R8 200
The first 3 are fire rate 1. The acid thing is fire rate 2 and very effective against planets.
October 19th, 2000, 03:57 AM
I have to totally agree with you, fighter capacity is very important. But, if you can only launch like three fighters a turn, it wont be too long before they get over to you, and you wont have much of a fighter group (By the way, Ive gotten fighters with 9 moves, and well armed. So in a carrier vs carrier, I could launch a lot of fighters fast, while you launch 2 or 3 at a time. I would zoom over, and pound you easily) Of course, Im assuming that all fighters are in the hangars before combat begins.
My goal with carriers is to balance launching capabilities with cargo, I try to be able to launch 15-20 fighters a turn or better, and that leaves enough room for Cargo Bays.
Also, I forget about CAPs. Having a group of fighters patrolling with the carrier would be a good defense idea (but fighters cannot go through warp points! so your carrier would have to recover fighters, go through the point, and relaunch)
[This message has been edited by Instar (edited 19 October 2000).]
October 19th, 2000, 07:29 AM
It's also good to have a group of fighters in the same fleet outside of the carrier. "On patrol" if you will. Also, you can't have a carrier that launches only 3 fighters per combat turn. All carriers must be at least 50% fighter bays. With level 1 bays on a light carrier you can launch about 14 fighters per turn(1 per bay). You can launch 2 per fighter bay at level 3 doubling your launch capacity at higher techs.
October 19th, 2000, 07:54 AM
Cargo works in place of those fighter bays. At least always has for me. If one was stupid they could make a carrier without any fighter bays.
October 19th, 2000, 10:32 PM
Carriers are an important part (some would say core) of any combat fleet. The demo reduces their effect because of the limitation on fighter research level. They can be expected to play a larger role in the full Version and most multiplayer games. As to design, defense of the carrier is extremely important. A carrier's most dangerous opponent will be fighters from opponent carriers. Remember the Battle of Midway. Point-def is a must, along with shields. A carrier should not have to carry any large weapons (maybe a meson bLaster if you have 30kt left). Fighters also should be used as interceptors, not Last line defenders for the carrier. Destroyers should fill this role, while you send the fighters and LC's into the thick of it. Again, remember the battle of Midway. If you don't recall it, read about it!
October 20th, 2000, 02:14 AM
Yes, you have to arm carriers, or else they die real fast! I usually put some PDs on, and maybe a few regular weapons
You have to have good fighter weapons and stuff too. You can make all kinds of fighters now, bombers, etc
October 20th, 2000, 05:40 PM
I agree that PDs are needed. In my post I said the PDs are a MUST. I would not consider PDs an offensive weapon. My point is that the fighters need to be used as the weapons for carriers. Use the space you would use for other weapons for more cargo/fighter bays and shields/PDs.
I would qualify my statements by pointing out they have only been used in tactical combat.
October 21st, 2000, 12:04 AM
Well, I know that I shouldnt put weapons on my carriers. When I do, I never use them anyway.
Hey heres a question:
How many fighters should be on CAP? Maybe 1/4? I think that should be enough. When youre near to enemy areas I figure that you should increase it. SInce I never used CAP Id like to hear what yoiu think
October 21st, 2000, 05:14 AM
Hmnnn, I always put the biggest Ionic Disperser I can on my carriers. Lets me slow down the enemy capital ships so I can keep the carrier out of heavy weapon range. That has also always been an asset of sea going carriers. As a Last resort they launched every plane they had and ran like hell and most carriers could outrun almost everything except destroyers.
In space it makes sense for Carriers and all other ships to have the same speed, so,, to me it makes sense to put an engine damaging weapon on the carrier and be able to regain the old seagoing advantage.
October 21st, 2000, 12:08 PM
Slightly off topic, but in that sense: wouldn't it be a good idea to give small ships (escort, frigate, destroyer) additional movement points ? It would mirror their advantages in real (maritime) warfare. It would also increase the incentive to still build them in later game where they could still be used as hunters and AA ships.
October 21st, 2000, 03:45 PM
You do get some advantages. You can put more engines on the smaller ships which does make them faster than the capital ships. Also, because of their size, they are harder to hit that then bigger ships.
October 22nd, 2000, 11:45 PM
I usually back up my carriers with Point Defense frigates.
October 23rd, 2000, 04:32 AM
Here's a Question for the Beta Testers....can you take a LARGE Transport...Deck it out with Fighter Bays (say 10?) and with its mandatory Cargo bay requiremnt....then add whatever you think should go in....and then.....does that make a Good Strategic Carrier?
Because if it does a Carrier GROUP could be led by one Heavy Carrier with 1-2 Support Carriers (which can also transport Population in emergencies)
This would allow even some of our Smaller Fleets to be equipped out with a Modified Transport Carrier......Rebles did it in Star Wars! http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif
It could also be used as a "Mopping up carrier" to deal with problem sectors from Enemy raids....2 AMS vessels with a few Destroyers and Badabing badaboom! a Small Strike Carrier group equally as good in Attack and Defence....and possibly at a lower maintainence cost!?
Could that be tried for me please? http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif
October 23rd, 2000, 06:28 AM
I'll play around with it tomorrow and let you know. I usually don't mess with carriers personally. Should be interesting.
October 23rd, 2000, 08:39 AM
Actually, even a medium transport makes a pretty decent auxiliary carrier. Since the "aux CV" doesn't need to be used in combat, it only needs a very few fighter bays (to launch fighters in case it gets trapped into combat).
Otherwise, just max out on cargo bays and you can carry A LOT of extra fighters. These make for quick resupply of your carriers after a battle, especially if the carriers are in a forward area fighting away from your planets. Thus the "aux CVs" can be used as excellent ferries to move replacement fighters to the front, keeping the carriers on the front lines.
Makes for kind of a WWII feeling with supply lines and all. I kind of like it myself.
October 27th, 2000, 11:12 PM
While defending a warp point I had a combat the other day with a carrier/fighter using AI. The enemy fleet contained the carrier (about 40 fighters) and 2 LCs. The carrier had 1200 shield points but NO weapons. The AI chose to launch all fighters and sent them to attack (good) but also sent both LCs (bad). My fleet of 2 LC's with CSM and DU, and a heavily shielded destroyer with marines (used in previous combat and on way to repair)and 1 repulsor. The AI focused on destroyer (because of relative shield strength??) letting my LCs circle the battle and take out the carrier. I lost a specialized destroyer but by taking out the carrier I eliminated the fighters' ability to warp. I then backed my LCs through the warp hole waited for their LCs to come through and defeated them. Upon arrivial of a anti-fighter/CSM destroyer I re-entered the warp point and cleared the fighters.
The lesson: Carriers must have PD, and be protected during combat.
October 28th, 2000, 12:01 AM
Teh only problem with using cargo carriers as fighter carries is they are limited in the amount of fighters they can launch at a time. So the Star wars use of them isn't really practical.
Seawolf on the prowl
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.