Wyrdysm Games

My entry into the team-based custom fleet tournament originally spammed a ludicrous amount of mining beams.
However, I found scattterbeams to be even MORE effective. Mining beams may avoid deflectored sections, but when the whole front portion is deflectored, and there's a little gap at the back, the scatterbeams can exploit even that. Plus, they have longer range.

So Your ship is a Scatbeam Junkie? That's not good. (for me)

Actually anything with beams is bad for me. to a degree.

I think mining beams are superior to scatter beams somewhat.

They are wasted against small agile targets.

They might hit at a longer range, but they don't do very much damage at that range due to deviation.

They cost twice as much normally. While this isn't the case in Zancloufer's tournement, battleship class, I still find that mining beams are still competative over scatterbeams though scatter beams have alot more raw damage power.

Droid wrote:My entry into the team-based custom fleet tournament originally spammed a ludicrous amount of mining beams.
However, I found scattterbeams to be even MORE effective. Mining beams may avoid deflectored sections, but when the whole front portion is deflectored, and there's a little gap at the back, the scatterbeams can exploit even that. Plus, they have longer range.

Ha! I've found a way to go around that, which I've already mentioned earlier in the thread. Scatterbeams are still extremely short-ranged (450, according to Arcalane's guide), though, and that's their main weakness.

Pss...small size, high speed, armour reinforcement, long-range ship-based orange-coloured directed energy weapons = ALL YOUR SHIPS ARE BELONG TO US. Not to mention the current requirement for the fleet tourney...3 weapons max on a section, no overlapping, which...I guess I shouldn't say anything more.

Master Chief wrote:

Droid wrote:My entry into the team-based custom fleet tournament originally spammed a ludicrous amount of mining beams.
However, I found scattterbeams to be even MORE effective. Mining beams may avoid deflectored sections, but when the whole front portion is deflectored, and there's a little gap at the back, the scatterbeams can exploit even that. Plus, they have longer range.

Ha! I've found a way to go around that, which I've already mentioned earlier in the thread. Scatterbeams are still extremely short-ranged (450, according to Arcalane's guide), though, and that's their main weakness.

Pss...small size, high speed, armour reinforcement, long-range ship-based orange-coloured directed energy weapons = ALL YOUR SHIPS ARE BELONG TO US. Not to mention the current requirement for the fleet tourney...3 weapons max on a section, no overlapping, which...I guess I shouldn't say anything more.

Like I said before, mass beam ships = win.

However, exploiting AI = win too.

Did you guys ever have state how you wanted your fleet organized?

EndlessInfinity wrote:Did you guys ever have state how you wanted your fleet organized?

We were having an internal discussion that never got resolved.

antisocialmunky - your left most starting position and my layout I think works best for vs. Mothership - comments please?



Basically Citrus far left, CuddleFish halfway between, and the rest of the fleet just overlaps in the forward position - all on central axis. The screenshot was on a 5000x5000 sandbox, and for reference, the test Mothership pictured was 700 inwards from the centre dividing line (yes, we know you will place the Mothership wherever you want on your half - not that it will make a difference ).

antisocialmunky - I took your ideas for fleet vs. fleet and ran them looking like this (worked really well) :



Citrus & Cuddlefish in top left corner (overlapped), next downwards are Witch Maw Midget & Marble of Doom (overlapped), Aphelion & Sogeki Hei (overlapped) are next ones down. Finally, inwards and on the centre of the axis are Turtle & Jormungand. Once again the screenshot is on a 5000x5000 sandbox with the opposing test fleet 700 inwards from the centre.

I was suggesting a symmetrical distribution, but whatever works.

antisocialmunky wrote:I was suggesting a symmetrical distribution, but whatever works.

It may not look good, but I guess something that works effectively should do the trick for all of us.