More CIDS questions

[General Miles Avatar]

and you dont need to really research the higher levels of CIDS either. Those of you that went the fighter craft tech path will realize that there are fighters that really help defend the fleet against

other fighters misslies drones and even mines!

[Locklyn]

Yes but do remeber that much like certain ground tech, an Fighter that for example has a Fair Rating split between Missile Strength and Point Defense is not equally good at point defense as an equal amount of the same tonnage of pure CIDS. Noone even knows how they are split, 50-50, 30-70 etc etc? This may become apparent with the new ANZ though

 

Locklyn

[General Miles Avatar]

I dont know about that. Some of the ANZ i have received on certain advanced fighters techs

show impressive ratings in several categories.

 

your right about the New naval combat doc though. We may finally find out how the different

tactics affect the ratings.

 

For example.. I suspect that 'cover' will provide more CIDS coverage where 'deep strike'

may use more of the fighter crafts missile rating.

[Locklyn]

Hmmm...The way I've understood it (The way several more wiser species have explained it in slow big words) is that say that you have a 100 ton Fighter:

 

Just like any weapon system, it deals a fixed damage per tonnage commited/battle

This fixed damage is dependant on the rating of the Fighter (Poor/Fair etc)

 

Ie 100 tons of weapons deal the same damage within their damage rating whatever their type of damage is BUT the Fighter/Drone being expendable munition have a slightly higher fixed damage per ton than other systems.

 

Now, multirole Fighters have 100% capacity of tonnage divided into the fields they cover ie PD and Missile Strength. Perhaps you have Impressive in both, this only means that the tonnage % devoted to that field will be adjusted by that generation of tech. Ie a 1000 ton (yes they exist) fighter that has Impressive Coherent Beam, Impressive PD and Impressive Sensors might actually be 400 tons of Impressive Beam Weaponry 400 tons of Impressive PD and 200 tons of Sensors. The actual rating dependant on the total amount of tonnage devoted to each field.

 

Now, this sounded plausible to me which might mean it is complete hogwash wich is one of the reasons I am looking forward to the naval combat document from Pete

 

 

Locklyn

[Locklyn]

I believe the various Fighter and Drone options (if they are in fact working as intended) to be more of an adjuster on the whole fighter system, ie Cover would raise the PD by so and so much whilst lowering the offensive strike. The thing I don't get is that Pete has said that All fighters combine their offensive punch into the collective firepower that is dealt out in globs right, so what good is having different carriers on different DLs with varied Fighter and Drone options?

 

Another thing I hope the naval combat document will clear up

 

Cheers

/Locklyn

[Sssarass]

A quessstion for anyone.

 

Hasss anyone with a fighter or drone fleet been in a battle where they won againssst CIDSss and actually lossst sssome fightersss/dronesss?

 

Thanksss, Sssarasss

[WKE235]

A quessstion for anyone.

 

Hasss anyone with a fighter or drone fleet been in a battle where they won againssst CIDSss and actually lossst sssome fightersss/dronesss?

 

Thanksss, Sssarasss

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

YEP!

 

My big battle in Diocles involved lots of drones and fighters on my side. Over half survived the battle, despite the thousands of CIDS in place (but of course, the carriers died .. so I lost the survivors, darn it).

 

Had another battle versus a fleet with No CIDS. Took 70% damage to the ship, but won. All drones survived, but, I lost 70% of the drones as the drone racks were to damaged to recover all drones.

 

A third battle. I launched 1500 attack fighters at a fleet of NSI ships with 38,000+ CIDS .. and ended up being a floor mop as the CIDS blew away the fighter fleet VERY quickly (or so it appears).

 

Finally, in a Defense (for me) battle, I was attached by a mass of Fighters and had few CIDS for defense (almost Nil). But, my screens protected the big ships, I destroyed the carriers quickly, and the attacker had a low Fire rate. My defense won and crushed the opponent.

 

So, a little of everything...... battlewise.

[Locklyn]

YEP!

 

My big battle in Diocles involved lots of drones and fighters on my side.  Over half survived the battle, despite the thousands of CIDS in place (but of course, the carriers died .. so I lost the survivors, darn it). 

 

Had another battle versus a fleet with No CIDS.  Took 70% damage to the ship, but won.  All drones survived, but, I lost 70% of the drones as the drone racks were to damaged to recover all drones. 

 

A third battle.  I launched 1500 attack fighters at a fleet of NSI ships with 38,000+ CIDS .. and ended up being a floor mop as the CIDS blew away the fighter fleet VERY quickly (or so it appears). 

 

Finally, in a Defense (for me) battle, I was attached by a mass of Fighters and had few CIDS for defense (almost Nil).  But, my screens protected the big ships, I destroyed the carriers quickly, and the attacker had a low Fire rate.  My defense won and crushed the opponent. 

 

So, a little of everything...... battlewise.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

All these battles WKE! Whatever happened to the peaceful existence you had envisioned? A couple of queries though:

 

The first battle, your fighters were operational throughout the battle despite losing the carriers correct? Since my understanding was that they stopped fighting first when there were no more capital ships left on one side.

 

Secondly, how is your perception on damage handling in the game? Is damage just less cargo space and hitpoints left or have you found it consistently to impair damage delivered also? Whatever happened to the earlier issue of how damage was repaired?

 

Cheers

 

Locklyn

[General Miles Avatar]

actually I would think that 1000 ton fighter has a phenomenal rating. The 500 tons ones are still

in the impressive category. I too eagerly await the New Naval Combat Doc. I think it will go a long ways towards clearing up many nagging questions... at least it hope it does.

[Locklyn]

Actually when you think about it, even with Impressive ratings, a fighter twice the tonnage, divided perhaps over more fields, is more efficient Now turns are done and the long wait sets in, will there be more battles in the Vietarmis region or will the GGT forces have triumphed over the dastardly dropped Empires

 

/Locklyn

[athonian]

thats about what i say.

[Hughestrog]

Are all CIDS at the 'Fleet' level?

 

Or are a % of the rating at the 'Fleet' level, with specific ships having higher defensive bonus for having them?

[Ur Lord Tedric]

Are all CIDS at the 'Fleet' level?

 

Or are a % of the rating at the 'Fleet' level, with specific ships having higher defensive bonus for having them?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Ah ha!

 

Another one where we're making some sensible guesses from what we've teased out.

 

CIDS weapons have a Point Defense rating. This both acts as an individual counter (defense) to incoming Missiles (from fighters, drones, missiles and torpedoes) before remaining strength impacts the shields and then integrity/armor. Just as a ship's manoeverability does too - they are both one of the weapon-specific defense vectors.

 

CIDS and some percentage of PD-capable fighters depending, we think, on the Fighter Tactic(s) chosen, also act at the 'Fleet Level' to actively destroy Fighters and Drones. Whether any losses to F&Ds occur before they launch missiles, or after, is anyone's guess.

 

It's one of those things for the NCS... It's now so universally well known that we can apply an easily understood abbreviation....

 

Chief Warmaster to Ur-Lord Tedric

[ali-t-akua]

CIDS provide point defense damage mitigation to the ship on which they are installed. They also provide umbrella coverage for the entire fleet, adding to the mitigation for other ships. The umbrella bonus is not as high as that given to the CIDS ship itself.

 

This quote is from Eternus's Oracle Reader.

[Hughestrog]

Not as high?

 

I know, I'll have to wait for the NCS.