Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

Carrier Tactics & Strategies, Small VS Big Ships Best Engagement Practices (Vanilla)

Discussion in 'Community Creations' started by .Luca, Jun 7, 2019.

  1. .Luca Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    30
    Actually used TTS to narrate this video because my narration is horrible :p I hope you guys find this useful c=

     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. domingo Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    34
    You don't want to speak to mic don't you ?

    My girl :)
     
  3. .Luca Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    30
    Yeah my narration skill is really bad and totally unsuitable for these kinds of videos :woot:
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  4. Stardriver907 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,755
    This was very well done. The information it contains, although useful, seems to exist only to justify the need to build and have a carrier. Some of it may be a bit confusing.

    This is my fleet's flagship, and it is a carrier (the one on the bottom):
    [​IMG]
    It is not, however, a military carrier. It does not carry fighters. It carries the rest of my fleet. It is armed, and the armament is defensive in nature. But, what if it were an actual military fighter carrier? How would your tactics play out?

    The ship is one kilometer long, How does that effect the "golden zone"? Automated turrets don't track as quickly as we would like, but dodging two turrets is harder than dodging one, and dodging eight turrets is harder than dodging two. This ship has significantly more than eight turrets that are specifically designated as anti-fighter. I have an equal number dedicated to anti-missile. Real life US Navy carriers run in a group of other ships and aircraft tasked to defending the carrier. That is a luxury I don't have, so I don't operate as if I do. For me, getting into a fight is a bad idea no matter how well armed I am. Right now my best advantages are that most players have no real strategy, do not know or understand naval tactics, and usually forget they are in space.

    For example, navy aircraft carriers do not put fighters inside to protect them. They are inside to keep the deck clear. Aircraft need runways to get going. Spacecraft don't need runways and they don't need protection. Keeping all your fighters in a hangar seems great until you find a significant force of enemy fighters bearing down on you and you have to get your fighters out of the tiny doorway you're usually forced to make in se. If the enemy disables your doors it won't matter how many fighters you have. If your fighters are already "outside" they will be able to deploy. If the enemy is shooting them up before they can take off you obviously waited way too long to launch. I can't tell you how delighted I am that most of my potential adversaries are putting their fighters behind doors.

    People seem to want what they see in sci-fi movies and tend to ignore what actually happens in the game when it comes to ship design and space combat. You, @.Luca, Have given it more thought that most and I applaud your efforts. Just keep in mind that in se there are no rules and "all is fair". You have more options available to you than WWII history or sci-fi stories can suggest. Space Engineers is uniquely suitable for exploring alternative solutions ;)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. .Luca Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    30
    Thanks Stardriver :D and nice ship! The golden zone would be on the edge of your turrets' range still :p
     
  6. Lord Grey Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    294
    I don't see a reason to build a carrier in SE if you don't have a relayable crew to play together. With about max. 16 players on the servers this seems not really an achievable thing. Scripts may make a drone carrier a usefull thing, but on the official servers they are deactivated. Also the PCU's per player prevent one from building a decent carrier. I'm also not a fan of simply adapt naval therms or apearance to space, that's a common failure in cheap SciFi. I recommend the Book Ender's Game from Orson Scott Card, it has some very good lessons on basic space combat taktics. Also the web page http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/.
     
  7. Stardriver907 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,755
    Well, I'm not going to stop building with crew in mind simply because the average server can't supply the manpower. That day yet may come. I have other uses for my ships. I have a 3D printer and I intend to print them out in a decently large scale. I also intend to use them as stage props in machinimas.

    Since we have never engaged anyone in actual space combat, anything written about it is just theory. Anything you can read about plain old combat will have to suffice. I recommend The Art of War. I might add that there is space combat and there is Space Engineers space combat. What you know about the game is just as important as what you know about fighting.

    When it comes to managing manpower and resources while engaging in combat in a hostile environment, the world's navies have covered a lot of ground with respect to instituting procedures that work. It's not the worst idea in the world to emulate them ;)

    I have always said that the early introduction of planets would curb the enthusiasm of most players to build spacecraft. It is evident that most of the ships people build are expected to operate in a gravity well with atmosphere. It is rare to see ships built to operate only in space, large or small. The same goes for space combat. Because players cling to the surface, they apply surface tactics in space. Four years of just space would have opened many eyes by now.
     
  8. Bullet_Force Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    281
    If play PVP like me the only kind of carrier you would ever want to make is a flatbed. Basically a bunch of heavy armor blocks (1x1x1 width) with a jump drive bolted on the rear and some defense turrets along it Relatively cheap and does the job.

    That said in it's my experience in PVP that you don't really need even a basic purpose built carrier. For one small fighters are pretty useless, they are too weak to compete vs large ships. Secondly if you really need to transport a small ship its far more economical just to bolt it onto a spare patch of land on the side of your battleship to jump it.

    The only time I've ever used a purpose built carrier was in the early days when I and my crew setup a fleet of small bombers. The carrier would jump to the target area, bombers would fly off fire their missiles and then return to carrier to re arm by merging up new missiles stored on the carrier. These days though its far easier just to have a script, projector and welder on the bomber to rearm itself.
     
  9. Stardriver907 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,755
    Well, if you use fighters the way they have traditionally been used, yes they are useless, especially against large ships that are even marginally well defended. That has been true in real life since about the time WWII came to an end. You won't see fighters going after large naval ships anywhere today except in sci-fi movies and games. Since their inception fighters go after ground forces, escort friendly bombers and attack enemy bombers, and go after other fighters. In SE a fighter simply cannot inflict enough damage on a really large ship. In other sci-fi games you shoot at a target until it explodes, then move on to the next. In this regard, SE ships are more realistic. Sending a missile through a two meter hole that leads straight to the main powerplant will blow up the powerplant and nothing else. SE battleships take forever to die, and they can probably outlast a number of fighters.

    That said, fighters are not necessarily "useless". There are some things they are well suited for, and having a carrier that can also repair, rearm and refuel them is not a bad idea ;)