Strategy tip for carriers

[Darwin]

Cargo works in place of those fighter bays. At least always has for me. If one was stupid they could make a carrier without any fighter bays.

[General Hawkwing]

Carriers are an important part (some would say core) of any combat fleet. The demo reduces their effect because of the limitation on fighter research level. They can be expected to play a larger role in the full Version and most multiplayer games. As to design, defense of the carrier is extremely important. A carrier's most dangerous opponent will be fighters from opponent carriers. Remember the Battle of Midway. Point-def is a must, along with shields. A carrier should not have to carry any large weapons (maybe a meson bLaster if you have 30kt left). Fighters also should be used as interceptors, not Last line defenders for the carrier. Destroyers should fill this role, while you send the fighters and LC's into the thick of it. Again, remember the battle of Midway. If you don't recall it, read about it!

[Instar]

Yes, you have to arm carriers, or else they die real fast! I usually put some PDs on, and maybe a few regular weapons
You have to have good fighter weapons and stuff too. You can make all kinds of fighters now, bombers, etc

[General Hawkwing]

Instar,
I agree that PDs are needed. In my post I said the PDs are a MUST. I would not consider PDs an offensive weapon. My point is that the fighters need to be used as the weapons for carriers. Use the space you would use for other weapons for more cargo/fighter bays and shields/PDs.
I would qualify my statements by pointing out they have only been used in tactical combat.

[Instar]

Well, I know that I shouldnt put weapons on my carriers. When I do, I never use them anyway.
Hey heres a question:
How many fighters should be on CAP? Maybe 1/4? I think that should be enough. When youre near to enemy areas I figure that you should increase it. SInce I never used CAP Id like to hear what yoiu think

[wingte]

Hmnnn, I always put the biggest Ionic Disperser I can on my carriers. Lets me slow down the enemy capital ships so I can keep the carrier out of heavy weapon range. That has also always been an asset of sea going carriers. As a Last resort they launched every plane they had and ran like hell and most carriers could outrun almost everything except destroyers.
In space it makes sense for Carriers and all other ships to have the same speed, so,, to me it makes sense to put an engine damaging weapon on the carrier and be able to regain the old seagoing advantage.

------------------
Wingte

[jowe01]

Slightly off topic, but in that sense: wouldn't it be a good idea to give small ships (escort, frigate, destroyer) additional movement points ? It would mirror their advantages in real (maritime) warfare. It would also increase the incentive to still build them in later game where they could still be used as hunters and AA ships.

[Comar]

You do get some advantages. You can put more engines on the smaller ships which does make them faster than the capital ships. Also, because of their size, they are harder to hit that then bigger ships.

[Urendi Maleldil]

I usually back up my carriers with Point Defense frigates.

[T]

Here's a Question for the Beta Testers....can you take a LARGE Transport...Deck it out with Fighter Bays (say 10?) and with its mandatory Cargo bay requiremnt....then add whatever you think should go in....and then.....does that make a Good Strategic Carrier?

Because if it does a Carrier GROUP could be led by one Heavy Carrier with 1-2 Support Carriers (which can also transport Population in emergencies)

This would allow even some of our Smaller Fleets to be equipped out with a Modified Transport Carrier......Rebles did it in Star Wars!

It could also be used as a "Mopping up carrier" to deal with problem sectors from Enemy raids....2 AMS vessels with a few Destroyers and Badabing badaboom! a Small Strike Carrier group equally as good in Attack and Defence....and possibly at a lower maintainence cost!?


Could that be tried for me please?

"T"