OA vs Shields

[Asmala]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
I did say higher level shields, not lower level.

OA III: 5 hp/kT
PSG V: 10.375 hp/kT (don't forget the structure of the comp itself)

Twice as much raw defensive strength.

Shields aren't so good those numbers would indicate. First there is the cost issue, PSG V costs 800 minerals when OA III costs 130 organics. The cost difference is remarkable, especially when you can get most of time surplus of organics.

If you use TDB against PSG V component's actual hit points are 375/4+40=134 -> 134/40=3.3 hp/kT which is less than OA III's 5 hp/kT. You can get same kind of result, though not so good, by using SD and a normal weapon.

[Fyron]

Except that the shields are actually still stronger than OA with a SD... Now if you can guarantee that 2 SD will always hit...

Also, TDB is a racial weapon, so not a good solution.

The cost of shields is not that significant in the long run.

[ December 26, 2003, 07:59: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[Asmala]

Why should 2 SD always hit? Of course there will be misses both in SD and normal weapons.

Btw, I've been astonished how ingeniously AI uses SD in big battles. If ship has SD and multiplex tracking and its primary target has no shields left it uses SD against shielded ship while using normal weapons against shieldless target. Impressive from AI.

I'd think the cost is significant particularly in the long run.

[Taera]

the point is, your shielded battleship would build in 4 rounds, while my organic ship would build in 3 or even 2. My ship would cost half as much to support, and for every shielded ship of yours i'd have two or three organic-armored ships of mine. And, the only true counter to my strategy is a racial tech people hardly ever take.

[Asmala]

Taera, you're a way too optimistic. Using armor instead of shield won't reduce the build cost that much. Also you won't have two or three organic armored ships against every shielded ship but perhaps 1.5 or even less. Remember engines, sensors, weapons and ship control costs a lot of minerals.

[oleg]

In any case, OA is by far the best ship defense in early/mid game - before phased shield are researched. The reason is blatantly obvious.

[Fyron]

Asmala, 2 SD would have to always hit for them to be effective in reducing the defensive strength of the phased shields below that of organic armor. If they miss, then they do not reduce the strength at all.

Taera... as Asmala said, that is not really true. Keep in mind that you will be able to support maybe 100 ships to my 95... the costs are not that much different. In fact, organic weapons tend to cost more than regular ones do (comparing similar weapon types, of which PPB is not one, as there is no shield-skipping organic weapon). Unless you use huge amounts of defensive components, this balances out the cheap cost of OA, leaving your ships costing aboue the same amount of resources. Again, unless you have only a few weapons and a lot of OA, in which case your ships will lack the firepower to do any real damage. Remember, fleet stacking means that your OA will not get much of a chance to regenerate for most of your ships. Sure, you can build them faster, but so what? You still have to pay for the construction and maintenance on all those ships, which is about the same as for a "normal" player. When you factor in the necessity of training your ships, the effective "build time" is increased by 7 turns (to get 20%, you can go with 18% for 6 turns if you like). So 11 compared to about 9 or 10. Not that significant. Forgo training and watch your ships lose horribly. Of course, you can always use the exploit and use a huge planet with 2 moons to get 3 training facilities, which leads you to 7 turns or 5-6 turns for max training... still not very significant.