<html><head></head><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:13px"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1558823734878_5458"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1558823734878_5457">Good write up on freighters galactic and andromedan (The Andromedans I know are happy with andromedan CS)</span></div> <div class="qtdSeparateBR"><br><br></div><div class="yahoo_quoted" style="display: block;"> <div style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, Sans-Serif; font-size: 16px;"> <div dir="ltr"><font face="Arial" size="2"> On Sunday, 26 May 2019, 3:25, Matt <matt@mattnet.org> wrote:<br></font></div> <br><br> <div class="y_msg_container"><div dir="ltr"><br clear="none">> Sorry it's 2 issues<br clear="none">> 1. Speed<br clear="none">> 2. Power<br clear="none">><br clear="none">> It's not just speed, its any power loss is catastrophic, make sense?<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Sure, the CS has less static power. But with any batteries, the CS has <br clear="none">much more power than the FT.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Power curves:<br clear="none"><br clear="none">The CS has 8 static power and 30 (!) reserve power. After Panels and <br clear="none">Life Support the CS has 4.5 static pwr left. So it can run at speed 12 <br clear="none">and run LPFC without dipping into it's batts.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">The FT has 14 static power and no (!) reserve power. After Shields, Life <br clear="none">Support, LPFC, and 20 movement, it has 3 power left.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Damage Tolerance:<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Presuming that the CS doesn't dip into batts for reinforcing it's panels <br clear="none">(an unlikely situation, but run with it) then the CS being chased will <br clear="none">suck up 18 damage before internals. If someone manages the 5% chance and <br clear="none">tags a panel, the power dumps to the fronts and becomes a non-issue in <br clear="none">the short-term. Otherwise, it's greater than 18 perfect-roll internals <br clear="none">before all batteries are hit (averages make it more like 28 internals) <br clear="none">and the CS is then unable to clear the panels or run the ship. This <br clear="none">makes for 46 damage before the CS becomes a wreck.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">The FT has 12 shields on the flanks and roughly 6 more internals <br clear="none">(depending on how kind the DAC is to one ship or another.) The less <br clear="none">shielding and greater volume balance out, leaving them both at <br clear="none">approximately the same durability levels when taking a single volley.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Things change in the favor of PA panels when taking several hits, as the <br clear="none">panels can be cleared while the shields cannot be. Additionally, the <br clear="none">Panels can be made to absorb 12 more damage if the CS is willing to <br clear="none">spend a couple of battery power - the FT can only add 3 in order to do <br clear="none">the same.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Panel leakage happens when the CS takes 6 disruptor damage or 9 damage <br clear="none">while reinforced, on the rear panels. This hits hull (3) and then cargo <br clear="none">(12) before it can hit anything else. The chances of this hitting <br clear="none">something important over the course of the game is very slight and <br clear="none">requires that the opponent not use large volleys. Small volleys <br clear="none">constitute a best case for the Andromedans because of a host of other <br clear="none">interactions - In short, don't use small volleys if you want to kill CSs.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Seeker Defense:<br clear="none"><br clear="none">The FT has a pair of Ph-3s (good to kill off 1-2 drones) and a drone <br clear="none">rack (if running LPFC, you would have to silence a Ph-3 to use anything <br clear="none">else in the Option mount) that could kill another drone.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">The CS has a pair of Ph-2s and a pair of mines. Because a Ph-2 won't <br clear="none">auto-kill a drone, you'd be better off using them as Ph-3s against <br clear="none">drones and letting the capacitor give you a second shot for no extra <br clear="none">power. If the drones aren't bunched up, then the CS could kill the same <br clear="none">2-3 drones that the FT can kill. Otherwise it comes out in favor of the <br clear="none">CS when stopping a Scatterpack.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">When speaking of plasma, they are both in a similar pickle as their <br clear="none">phaser arrays are roughly the same (best case at LPFC is that the FT has <br clear="none">a Ph-2 and Ph-3, the CS has a pair of Ph-2s. 7.833 average damage vs <br clear="none">8.333 average damage, respectively.)<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Other bits:<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Electronic Warfare is an important piece of the puzzle. If willing to <br clear="none">forgo bricking the shield, the FT can put 3 into ECM. Without batteries, <br clear="none">this has to be allocated and the opponent can see and overcome this <br clear="none">level before firing. The CS can go all the way to 6 ECM (for 4-6 turns), <br clear="none">and in a fashion that leaves the opponent doubt as to how to allocate <br clear="none">their own counter-EW.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Disengagement rules for the scenario won't let anyone leave by <br clear="none">accelleration until the end of turn 7. The CS's can't do this at all, <br clear="none">and the FTs are generally either mostly dead or mostly untouched by this <br clear="none">point. Disengagement by distance is possible before this point - <br clear="none">something that the higher FT speeds make into a reasonable hope by <br clear="none">turn-5-ish. Disengagement by sublight evasion is certainly possible <br clear="none">except that the scenario victory conditions will turn into an Attacker <br clear="none">Victory, as crippled freighters don't give the defender any victory benefit.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Wrapping it up:<br clear="none"><br clear="none">The Free Trader can hit a higher speed - speed 20 (maximum allowed by <br clear="none">the scenario), while the CS is stuck at speed 12. This makes a late-game <br clear="none">disengagement a possibility for the FTs. In order to do that, it becomes <br clear="none">incumbant on the defensive Galactic ships to screen the freighters until <br clear="none">the freighters can get some significant distance from the attacker <br clear="none">weapons. In the case of the Andromedan defenders, they would have to go <br clear="none">more aggressive than a galactic defense would need to be. Considering <br clear="none">the Andromedan need for short-but-not-point-blank ranges, this dovetails <br clear="none">with their normal strategy fairly nicely.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">The Cargo Sleds have more durability in almost every situation. When <br clear="none">using reinforced panels, they can absorb 9 more damage. When using EW, <br clear="none">they can often get a shift. When setting up the opponent to hit a <br clear="none">different bank of panels, they can set up fresh "shields" for the next <br clear="none">attack. The only case that they can "merely" get parity to the Free <br clear="none">Trader is if they are dry of battery power and at the same time unable <br clear="none">to maneuver the opponent on a different bank (presuming the attacker <br clear="none">isn't simply dry of weapons for the next 10 or so impulses.)<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Different fleets and different systems employed by those fleets will <br clear="none">require different tactics. This applies to the defensive fleets and <br clear="none">their systems as well as the systems employed by the attacking fleets.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Since the Andromedans have slower freighters, then they need to adjust <br clear="none">their tactics accordingly: screen the vulnerable freighters with "naval" <br clear="none">ships. Since the Andromedans have close-in weapon systems, they need to <br clear="none">get aggressive. Since their panels make them class-for-class much harder <br clear="none">to score internals on, they can push harder to get that short attack range.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">The Galactics have their own challenges. Their freighters cannot stand <br clear="none">long-range sniping for long. Nor can they (on their own) dissuade an <br clear="none">opponent from chasing them by using (hidden) mines. This lends itself to <br clear="none">the Galactics needing to screen their freighters (as with the Andros.)<br clear="none"><br clear="none">The result (generally speaking) is a wash. Both sets of defenses screen <br clear="none">the freighters with the naval units to get the freighters outside the <br clear="none">envelope of the battle. The Free Traders are better at getting away on <br clear="none">their own and the Cargo Sleds are better at withstanding the barrage <br clear="none">until their screening units becomes to dangerous for the attackers to <br clear="none">simply chase the freighters.<div class="yqt8497023364" id="yqtfd14434"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">--Matt<br clear="none"><br clear="none"></div></div><br><br></div> </div> </div> </div></div></body></html>