The best ship?

[Imperial Good]

The reality is late game you will not be sending S or M ships to fight big targets with plasma and gravatons anyway. Given the Asgard literally one shots both K and potentially even I. The only way the AI can kill a player flown Asgard is if they thrown enough fighters at it to eventually strip some turrets. The XL main battery can kill any L or bigger ship long before they can fire back.

Katana is purely for the speed. Like always, speed is good. Saves the player time, and lets them run away should they need to. Anything too heavy for a Katana to handle, such as a fighter swarm, the player will just bring in a heavier ship like a Syn or Asgard.

[LameFox]

I would say that's more of a mid game concern than late. When I have captured a bunch of ships and don't want to lose them then I will send something big like a borrowed Intervention Corps Asgard. When I have a bunch of factories and a shipyard and can afford losses I will just send whatever I most feel like watching at the time, because they are all ultimately renewable.

[Eyeklops]

though with the changes coming to the phoenix, it might jump into 1st

I'd love to hear more about this.

[grapedog]

though with the changes coming to the phoenix, it might jump into 1st

I'd love to hear more about this.

viewtopic.php?f=146&t=442925#p5087546

Looks like the developers didn't know that the phoenix was pausing for reloading and apparently, unlike the other destroyers, the phoenix doesn't have to reload i guess. So it should see its DPS from the main batteries increase by a substantial amount.

[budforceuk]

Between the Katana and Dragon Raider........

You know what, on paper the Katana is better, particularly the shield.

But........

Despite its speed it "feels" a lot heavier than a Dragon Raider, I find with the Katana as you turn in a fight, as you change direction you are constantly fighting against your own inertia which is effectively slowing you down, whilst this is nowhere near as bad on a Dragon Raider.

So yes the Dragon Raider is more paper tank, you take a lot less damage because you can change direction a lot faster.

Dragon Raider also has more guns, and can put out a lot more DPS if you use those close range flak guns.

Dragon Raider aesthetics are much better in my option the Katana is ugly.

But, on the flip side the Katana just does have so much more tank, and outside of combat it's faster for travelling about in.

I've played a lot with both ships and it's a close call.....

I think the Dragon Raider scales better against the Katana depending on your skill, Katana is more forgiving.

[Ragnos28]

Between the Katana and Dragon Raider........

You know what, on paper the Katana is better, particularly the shield.

But........

Despite its speed it "feels" a lot heavier than a Dragon Raider, I find with the Katana as you turn in a fight, as you change direction you are constantly fighting against your own inertia which is effectively slowing you down, whilst this is nowhere near as bad on a Dragon Raider.

So yes the Dragon Raider is more paper tank, you take a lot less damage because you can change direction a lot faster.

Dragon Raider also has more guns, and can put out a lot more DPS if you use those close range flak guns.

Dragon Raider aesthetics are much better in my option the Katana is ugly.

But, on the flip side the Katana just does have so much more tank, and outside of combat it's faster for travelling about in.

I've played a lot with both ships and it's a close call.....

I think the Dragon Raider scales better against the Katana depending on your skill, Katana is more forgiving.

Dragon Raider is a big no no for me, since I engage 3 xenon M and lost Chace one as the other 2 keep pew pew me in the back.
So, no thank you, I will have my shields in my Katana pls And yes, if you fly a Katana, it will reach your destination fast.

[grapedog]

Between the Katana and Dragon Raider........

You know what, on paper the Katana is better, particularly the shield.

But........

Despite its speed it "feels" a lot heavier than a Dragon Raider, I find with the Katana as you turn in a fight, as you change direction you are constantly fighting against your own inertia which is effectively slowing you down, whilst this is nowhere near as bad on a Dragon Raider.

So yes the Dragon Raider is more paper tank, you take a lot less damage because you can change direction a lot faster.

Dragon Raider also has more guns, and can put out a lot more DPS if you use those close range flak guns.

Dragon Raider aesthetics are much better in my option the Katana is ugly.

But, on the flip side the Katana just does have so much more tank, and outside of combat it's faster for travelling about in.

I've played a lot with both ships and it's a close call.....

I think the Dragon Raider scales better against the Katana depending on your skill, Katana is more forgiving.

Dragon Raider is a big no no for me, since I engage 3 xenon M and lost Chace one as the other 2 keep pew pew me in the back.
So, no thank you, I will have my shields in my Katana pls And yes, if you fly a Katana, it will reach your destination fast.

3-5 enemies, a Dragon Raider should handle without much issue, just gotta use hit and run and not get into an actual dogfight... but anything more than 5 or 6, and the Dragon Raider gonna have trouble. If I'm trying to wade into a swarm of 20-30 P's, M's, and N's... I'd much sooner take my Nemesis, or even a Katana. Hell I'd probably take a Cerberus over a Dragon Raider in any kind of big fight... Dragon Raiders are great at running away constantly, and then coming back and nibbling at the edges of an actual fight where real ships are doing the actual work.

[mr.WHO]

Battleship: Asgards, for obvious reason and would be still best even if Xenon I would be flyable.
Carrier: Raptor, also obvious, the only shortcoming is single M-dock, but medium ships are crap outside of player use anyway.
Auxilary ship: Honsu - best storage and ease of use of terran resources.
Destroyer: Osaka, kinda working compromise between Rattlesnake and Syn.
Frigate: Cobra (if you want more turrets), or Falx (if you want more gun mounts).
Corvette: Kinda even between Katana, Dragon and Nemesis - personally I use Katana due to durability and high speed.
Gunboat: Jian - the condensed 6 turrets are actually fun to use and single gun mount can be used for Meson to one shot small targets.
Heavy Fighter: Chimera - simply the best in all categories and overall general stat mix.
3-gun fighter: Asp - just like Chimera.
2-gun Fighter: Mamba - just like Chimera, alternatively Takoba for extra durability over agility/speed.
Scouts: Nimcha - all scouts sux, but Nimcha extra shield adds a little bit survivability.

Edit:
Kinda loosk like vanilla ships, other than Nemesis sux ass.

[Panos]

Hi guys, I have a question for you.
What are the best ship for the all class? I'm not interested about the aestethic, but only for the military view

If you have COH the Terran lineup. Great frigate, corvette, destroyers (take your pick), has battleshop and even the Takoba is amazing.

[Alm888]

Carrier: Raptor, also obvious, the only shortcoming is single M-dock, but medium ships are crap outside of player use anyway.

Slow as a snail. And not that durable in actual combat, so… it would be unwise to use her in Defense Platform assault (plasma turrets will turn a Raptor into mincemeat) and as a mobile fighter base she is… not very mobile.
For the price of one Raptor (27,7 - 37,5 MCr) one could get 3xColossus Vanguard (8,5 - 11,6 MCr), and that is not counting those 101 turret price tags, and get 120 S + 30 M hangar storage and 30 launch tubes (a Raptor has no launch tubes) in addition to 24 S docking pads (vs. 21 of a Raptor). Plus, overwhelming speed advantage.
So… Is Raptor the best carrier?

Heavy Fighter: Chimera - simply the best in all categories and overall general stat mix.

Debatable! No, Chimera is not the best ian all categories: Pulsar Vanguard has more weapons, Moreya is faster, pretty much everything has more shield generators.
Plus, Chimera's cost-effectiveness is questionable: four engines are not cheap, especially SPL Combat Mk4 ones, and the hull itself is twice the normal price (288 - 389 kCr price range vs. 144 - 195 kCr of Eclipse Vanguard), so… given equal Cr amount what would you chose: 1xChimera or 2xEclipse Vanguard?

2-gun Fighter: Mamba - just like Chimera, alternatively Takoba for extra durability over agility/speed.

Wut?
Takoba is only 100HP weaker and marginally less nimble than Mamba, but way more speedy (459.3 vs. 340.5 m/s). In fact, Mamba is quite un-Splitty: unusually slow and has more than one shield. And for a S-class ship speed is life. If anything, only Perseus Vanguard is close enough.

[Ragnos28]

Carrier: Raptor, also obvious, the only shortcoming is single M-dock, but medium ships are crap outside of player use anyway.

Slow as a snail. And not that durable in actual combat, so… it would be unwise to use her in Defense Platform assault (plasma turrets will turn a Raptor into mincemeat) and as a mobile fighter base she is… not very mobile.
For the price of one Raptor (27,7 - 37,5 MCr) one could get 3xColossus Vanguard (8,5 - 11,6 MCr), and that is not counting those 101 turret price tags, and get 120 S + 30 M hangar storage and 30 launch tubes (a Raptor has no launch tubes) in addition to 24 S docking pads (vs. 21 of a Raptor). Plus, overwhelming speed advantage.
So… Is Raptor the best carrier?

Yes, it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccNBsTc8hzo&t=821s

[Alm888]

So… Is Raptor the best carrier?

Yes, it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccNBsTc8hzo&t=821s

Ah, I've watched your video previously.
The one in which your Raptor was nearly totaled by a single Branch 9 Destroyer K.
And, while we are at it, watching you butchering Chimeras with TER combat engines is painful. Stop. Just stop! Switch to SPL Combat Mk4 right now, because you are basically making sitting ducks out of already not-so-fast fighters.
Those losses are unacceptable! In 3.30HF3 my squad of 40 Chimeras from a Colossus had obliterated Argon shipyard, losing only one (or not losing anyone, I don't remember -- it's been sooo long ago). In Sector, of course (OOS the station would obliterate all fighters without a problem).

[Ragnos28]

So… Is Raptor the best carrier?

Yes, it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccNBsTc8hzo&t=821s

Ah, I've watched your video previously.
The one in which your Raptor was nearly totaled by a single Branch 9 Destroyer K.
And, while we are at it, watching you butchering Chimeras with TER combat engines is painful. Stop. Just stop! Switch to SPL Combat Mk4 right now, because you are basically making sitting ducks out of already not-so-fast fighters.
Those losses are unacceptable! In 3.30HF3 my squad of 40 Chimeras from a Colossus had obliterated Argon shipyard, losing only one (or not losing anyone, I don't remember -- it's been sooo long ago). In Sector, of course (OOS the station would obliterate all fighters without a problem).

The losses were my fault not the engines. I did not let the Chimeras to land and repair and I just keep sending them to keep taking that explosion dmg I should have them just engage the immediate capital threats, have them land, then send them again.
Also the Raptor have lost all M turetts (so much for my missile experiment), in 5 seconds of the engagement, and despite having some closed calls, a Collosus would have been long dead.

Anyway, with a crippled Raptor I have clean a heavily defended Xenon sector, I don't see any other carrier doing the same

[mr.WHO]

stuff

Heavy Fighter: Chimera - simply the best in all categories and overall general stat mix.

Debatable! No, Chimera is not the best ian all categories: Pulsar Vanguard has more weapons, Moreya is faster, pretty much everything has more shield generators.
Plus, Chimera's cost-effectiveness is questionable: four engines are not cheap, especially SPL Combat Mk4 ones, and the hull itself is twice the normal price (288 - 389 kCr price range vs. 144 - 195 kCr of Eclipse Vanguard), so… given equal Cr amount what would you chose: 1xChimera or 2xEclipse Vanguard?

2-gun Fighter: Mamba - just like Chimera, alternatively Takoba for extra durability over agility/speed.

Wut?
Takoba is only 100HP weaker and marginally less nimble than Mamba, but way more speedy (459.3 vs. 340.5 m/s). In fact, Mamba is quite un-Splitty: unusually slow and has more than one shield. And for a S-class ship speed is life. If anything, only Perseus Vanguard is close enough.

Why do you care for Raptor durability?
Carriers shouldn't be used to storm frontlines against stations or other ship (still it can kill anything other than Xenon I and Asgard).
3x Collossus is 3xmore bother and 3xmore AI retardation in practice.
Last but not least, complaining about speed on XL ships? really? Snail pace is a Snail pace, no matter if it's Raptor or Collossus, it doesn't need to be fast.


Chimera is best because it has overall best survivability. Pulsars are glass cannons and die in droves. Chimeras not so much.
The very same is with Asp and Mamba. This is not visible in stats, but among my 10 carrier battlegroups with all races, somehow Split fighters are most survivable both IS and OOS.
Not to mention they are crazy powerful in player hands.

[Ragnos28]

Why do you care for Raptor durability?
Carriers shouldn't be used to storm frontlines against stations or other ship (still it can kill anything other than Xenon I and Asgard).
2x Collossus is 3xmore bother and 3xmore AI retardation in practice.
Last but not least, complaining about speed on XL ships? really? Snail pace is a Snail pace, no matter if it's Raptor or Collossus, it doesn't need to be fast.


Chimera is best because it has overall best survivability. Pulsars are glass cannons and die in droves. Chimeras not so much.
The very same is with Asp and Mamba. This is not visible in stats, but among my 10 carrier battlegroups with all races, somehow Split fighters are most survivable both IS and OOS.
Not to mention they are crazy powerful in player hands.

Exactly, ppl keep trying to use carriers as destroyers and when they fail at their "asign" role they go...boooo carriers suck

I also like the Chimera because of the hard point configuration, 4 bolt/gatling and 1 slot is free to put a torpedo/missile launcher, so even if all amunition is spent, their anti-fighter capabilities remain high.

[Alm888]

ppl keep trying to use carriers as destroyers and when they fail at their "asign" role they go...boooo carriers suck

And who is to blame them? That is, considering Raptor is a carrier trying to convince everyone she is a battleship.
Want some good carrier with good performance and without battleship-wannabe ambitions? Use Colossus (or XL-hairdryer, AKA "Zeus")!

[KextV8]

XL: Asgard, Highest individual firepower ship in the game.

L: Syn, Highest individual Firepower L ship in the game, and also the most durable. Very hard to accidentally lose.

M: None of them really stand out so far for me to consider one the best. If I was forced to pick one, it would probably be the Katana because I'm normally in an M to travel. If I was going to fight in an M, maybe Kurokami.

[Ragnos28]

ppl keep trying to use carriers as destroyers and when they fail at their "asign" role they go...boooo carriers suck

And who is to blame them? That is, considering Raptor is a carrier trying to convince everyone she is a battleship.
Want some good carrier with good performance and without battleship-wannabe ambitions? Use Colossus (or XL-hairdryer, AKA "Zeus")!

I agree that the number of L turrets on the Raptor is not consistent with the role of the ship. it is somewhat against "nature" as carriers don't have big guns, but anti fighter weaponry.
And I do like the esthetic of the Colossus and the fact that it is a "pure" carrier, but 40 fighters are not sufficient, imo, to deal with multiple I's and K's. On that note, I like the Argon ships because they don't have an "I win" ship, no uber Asgard that steamroll everything, no Raptor + 100 Chimera that can clear a Xenon sector by themselves (especially, if you put torpedo launchers on some of the Chimeras)...for argon, you need a proper fleet, with fighters on intercept, destroyers for long range dmg, maybe some torpedo boats and gunboats (Cerberus and Minotaur).

Now, that I think about it, I am tempted to make a young gun start, use only argon tech and ships and join the wars the argon are involved in, against HOP and split

[Ragnos28]

XL: Asgard, Highest individual firepower ship in the game.

L: Syn, Highest individual Firepower L ship in the game, and also the most durable. Very hard to accidentally lose.

M: None of them really stand out so far for me to consider one the best. If I was forced to pick one, it would probably be the Katana because I'm normally in an M to travel. If I was going to fight in an M, maybe Kurokami.

I agree with your list, mainly because the Asgard and the Syn are the remnants of my favorite ships in X3 TC, namelly the Valhala and the Tyr I think my stats in X3 shown, favorite ship: Tyr
And on the subject of the Syn, I remember putting paranid plasma on the L turetts and taking those terran vs xenon, blow up stations missions..is like the poor man Asgard

For M ships, commonwealth: Nemesis Vanguard and the terran Katana, with Katana having a slight advantage with travel speed (favorite ship to do missions in).

[KextV8]

Chimera is best because it has overall best survivability. Pulsars are glass cannons and die in droves. Chimeras not so much.
The very same is with Asp and Mamba. This is not visible in stats, but among my 10 carrier battlegroups with all races, somehow Split fighters are most survivable both IS and OOS.
Not to mention they are crazy powerful in player hands.

I swarm Moreyas cause they are cheap to build, get the job done, and with the triple cargo type you can even ghetto assign some of them to trading/resupplying aux ships.

My shipyard craps them out a hundred at a time so I dont even really care if some die.