posted 11-22-99 01:33 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although many people think that human carriers s#ck, if you use them correctly, they can be incredibly effective ships. My pointers for using UNS carriers.
When attacked by fighters: Release one or two of your own if there are a lot of enemies. HOLD DOWN the apple key to continuously fire your laser turret. The turret can deal with small ships well. If you want to get the job done fast, engulf them in magneto pulse fire.

When engaging cruisers and gunships: Fire your Lturret continuously throughout the entire battle. It slowly wears down shields. As soon as you can bring your Mpulse to bear, let 'em have it! Not many smaller ships can hold out under that kind of bombardment for long. Release a couple of fighters.

When engaging carriers: Release fighters to soften them up. The Lturret is fairly long range. The moment you come in range, FIREFIREFIRE!! And keep firing until the battle is done. Try to approach the carrier from the rear. The best use of the Mpulse is to close to point blank range and FIREFIREFIRE!! The human carriers are the best point-blank fighters. At this point you reveal how much firepower human carriers really have. Under a continuous bombardment of Mpulse and Lturret, the enemy's shields will go down fairly quickly. Keep it up, and try to stay to the rear.
When you're about to die and you know it: No, don't clap your hands. Keep firing at the weakest enemy ship while releasing all fighters. Try to put yourself in a position so that when you blow up, the shrapnel will hit something.
------------------
-Commander Cicion, commander of Audemedon 6th fleet
"Never tell me the odds!"
- Han Solo
IP: 207.76.182.254

Commander Cicion
Member posted 11-23-99 08:42 AM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, a pair of human carriers is a good combination. They provide good cover for each other.
------------------
-Commander Cicion, commander of Audemedon 6th fleet
"Never tell me the odds!"
- Han Solo
IP: 207.76.182.254

Admiral Darkk
Member posted 11-23-99 04:26 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
An interesting idea that can be done with human, indeed all carriers, is use them and their fighters as sheilds for your destroyer (I remember people saying how good human destroyers are).
------------------
We will trade and collect your skulls. It is better than you deserve.
IP: 165.247.134.28

Commander Cicion
Member posted 11-24-99 01:46 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting tactic, Admiral.
IP: 165.247.46.149

Commander Cicion
Member posted 11-29-99 08:57 AM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm just posting this to get it to the top of the board. I want someone else to respond.
------------------
-Commander Cicion, commander of Audemedon 6th fleet
"Never tell me the odds!"
- Han Solo
IP: 207.76.182.254

Commander Cicion
Member posted 11-29-99 01:44 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we go again!
IP: 207.76.182.254

Vegeta
Member posted 11-29-99 07:33 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To be perfectly honest, a human gunship is as, if not more, effective as a human carrier. First of all, they're incrediably fast for a gunship class, they have a laser turret so they cannot be harrassed by smaller ships, and the magneto pulse fires rapidly enough to slowly wear down bigger ships. Don't those weapons sound familar? Yes, they are the EXACT SAME weapons as the carrier has, except the carrier has fighters. And to top it all of, human carriers are big and clumsy, and those fighters are the worst in the game (Lasers do 15 DAMAGE! A Gaitori pellet gun does more damage than that!). To sum it all up, you're better off with 2 Human Gunships than a Human Carrier.
------------------
-Vegeta
(This message has been edited by Vegeta (edited 11-29-99).)
IP: 207.30.223.108

Commander Cicion
Member posted 11-30-99 05:26 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course, the carrier has far tougher shielding. They both can do tons of damage in the middle of a battle.
IP: 207.76.182.254

Admiral Darkk
Member posted 12-31-99 10:22 AM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people I played as humans did build carriers (I always build all gunships as Human and Gatori). They were always (I cannot recall at time when a guy with a carrier won) summarily defeated. Probably because the carriers drift around too much to be used as sheilds (most people don't try this anyway) and are too clumsy to use their mpulses much.
------------------
We will trade and collect your skulls.
Join SETI @ Home. (url="http://"http://setiathome.ssl.berekely.edu")http://setiathome.ssl.berekely.edu(/url)
Ohhh, another strong signal form Ishima.....
GameRanger aliases:
Admiral Darkk - when I'm playing Ares
Technocrat - when I'm playing anything else (usualy FPS)
Akira - when my friend is over and he wants to play on my account (It could be him or me, ask)

IP: 165.247.160.179

Commander Cicion
Member posted 12-31-99 04:52 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Their tough shielding more than makes up for their slow turning rate(Which is pretty good for a carrier). Once they DO bring the big guns to bear, The enemy is quickly pounded to dust.
------------------
-Commander Cicion, commander of Audemedon 6th fleet
"Never tell me the odds!"
- Han Solo
IP: 152.163.201.176

Admiral Darkk
Member posted 12-31-99 06:28 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 Gunships can bring twice the same guns to bear quickly. No contest.
Besides, the fighters aren't even a useful distraction and just add to your losses.
------------------
We will trade and collect your skulls.
Join SETI @ Home. (url="http://"http://setiathome.ssl.berekely.edu")http://setiathome.ssl.berekely.edu(/url)
Ohhh, another strong signal form Ishima.....
GameRanger aliases:
Admiral Darkk - when I'm playing Ares
Technocrat - when I'm playing anything else (usualy FPS)
Akira - when my friend is over and he wants to play on my account (It could be him or me, ask)

IP: 165.247.159.78

Jimi Hendrix
Junior Member posted 01-04-100 09:15 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I found that when playing another person who likes to build many small ships--2 carriers and 3 gunships usually prove to do well---(just as long as you release your fighters before you engage the other persons fleet-this helps provide cover while you sear through the sheilds of enemy ships with your hvd and gunships) The cariers also provide cover against big targets with their missles. That's just one of my tacticts hope you find some use for it....
------------------
guitar is where the music is
IP: 169.207.3.5

Firelizard
Member posted 01-05-100 07:16 AM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree. Whenever I play against people who build human gunships, I have been able to kill them easily. Sure, the laser is ok, but the carrier doesn't stand up well to a full barrage of magneto pulse/those yellow things on a destroyer. I've seen them done in by one (my) personal gunship with no wingman. Just get behind them, then they are too slow to hit you with magneto pulses.
Walter: Human Gunships are too slow. They can't do hyperspace at all.
------------------
Cap'n Hector has robbed the bank!
IP: 205.222.120.240

Commander Cicion
Member posted 01-05-100 10:05 AM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

No contest.
YES contest. Two carriers provide better cover for each other, and the fighters are a great bonus. Gunships are good attack ships, but are far more effective when backed up by a carrier or two.
IP: 207.76.182.254

Pax
Member posted 01-07-100 03:27 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Uhm.
AFAIK, the weapons systems for the Carrier and Gunship are identical. You're paying about twice as many resources for a Carrier, and the only advantage you get is shielding and some cannon fodder. And for that increase in shielding you get HORRID hyperspace acceleration, turning that is worse than the gunship, and laughable sublight acceleration. And this "backed up by a carrier" idea is absurd. What can a carrier do, other than fighters, that a gun ship can't? The only slightly helpful role I can imagine is as a target, so that other friendly gunships can take advantage of an enemy attacking your carrier. But for that kind of cost? Sorry, but I don't think it's a valid argument.
------------------
Pax
"Fools, the gods arn't listening" - Beserker, Force Ten from Stoneheim (url="http://"http://www.axis.n3.net/")www.axis.n3.net/(/url) - Now open!
IP: 158.123.252.2

Mag Steelglass
Member posted 01-07-100 07:29 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, here's the stats:
Gunship: Carrier:
Magnetopulse Magnetopulse
Laser Turret Laser Turret
None Fighters x10
Fast/Maneuverable Big/Clumsy
3000 shields 5000 shields
11 resource units 20 resource units
Now, if there are two gunships:
2 Gunships: Carrier:
Magnetopulse x2 Magnetopulse
Laser Turret x2 Laser Turret
None Fighters x10
Fast/Maneuverable Big/Clumsy
6000 shields 5000 shields
22 resource units 20 resource units
So, for 2 resource units, you get:
Firepower x2.
Speed/Maneuverability.
100 shields.
-10 fighters.
Seeing as UNS Fighters suck more than a black hole in an ocean, -10 fighters isn't a very big deal. Besides, 2 gunships can pick off 10 fighters rather easily.
Also, CANTHARAN CARRIERS, which I think we can all agree are better than UNS Carriers, can be taken down by ONE UNS GUNSHIP. The gunship will lose about 1/3 of its shields in the process.
I have complete faith in UNS Gunships.
IP: 216.26.39.217

Mag Steelglass
Member posted 01-07-100 07:30 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
It killed my spaces between my columns. Sorry if its hard to read!
IP: 216.26.39.217

Cotton Mouse
Member posted 01-09-100 12:21 AM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All you people claim you have killed a human carrier with a human gunboat, and there-fore the gunship is better. Big whoop. I have killed every carrier in the game except an audemadon carrier with a gunship. The cantharin carrier is almost as bad as the gatori one, because you can fly right by it without getting singed, as it's 3-shot turret is so slow. You just have to think about attacking it first, I can kill quite a few with just one gunsh of ANY species. In my eyes, the carrier food chain goes like this: (you vs. Comp)
Sal Carrier
Aud Carrier
Human Carrier
Ishi Carrier
Canth Carrier
Gaitori Carrier
Btw, the reason I placed the human carrier before the ishiman one is because the human carrier and ish are opposites. The human has a fast-firing weapon, and a very accurate turret which is also fast firing, and has a longer range than the ishiman's turret. The ishiman has a slow (2 shots per-sec) and very innacrate turret, plus the mostly unusable missles. This makes the ishiman carrier vaunrable to both small and large ships. The only thing it work well against are cruisers. Combining low sheilds with an easy target make a loosing combinatin to the carrier.

------------------
~(^..^)
IP: 206.102.3.115

Commander Cicion
Member posted 01-10-100 01:32 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pax, that "shielding and cannon fodder" Has many a time meant the difference between complete victory and annihalation. Carriers are made to survive multiple and extended combat missions over a period of time. Gunships aren't. And as for the gunships being backed up by a carrier idea, the gunships will swoop around attacking the enemy, while the carrier releases fighters to distract the enemy and pounds the enemies with its weapons. Chances are the enemies will concentrate on the rugged carrier, letting the more vulnerable gunships attack with near impunity.
And by the way, do you think that I ever would have posted this if I didn't already know that the weapon systems on a carrier are the same as the ones on a gunship besides the fighters?
IP: 207.76.182.254

Admiral Darkk
Member posted 01-16-100 10:14 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
First off Cotton - all carriers is the BEST strat for Ishimans and Cantharans. If you wish to debate it...
Next Cicion - Mag is right. Twice the capability. Fighters die in about 3 laser shots. Gunships can get that off in about a second. Furthermore carriers are too clumsy to pound the gunships while they are engaging the fighters. Of course, the fighters could try a monty python, but that would require human control. Zero contest. Especialy when the game has been going for a while.
Zip. Zilch. Nada. Nothing. Nilch.
------------------
We will trade and collect your skulls.
Join SETI @ Home. (url="http://"http://setiathome.ssl.berekeley.edu")http://setiathome.ssl.berekeley.edu(/url) Ohhh, another strong signal from Ishima.....

You're acting like fighters are as clumsy as carriers. They can DODGE shots easily enough. They last a little while. Trust me. The carriers are DEFINITELY NOT too clumsy to engage the enemy. They can turn faster than some other carriers and the laser turret and magneto have long ranges. PLUS they last much longer than gunships in the thick of battle. And what are "the gunships", anyway? I'm not talking about human carriers vs. human gunships.

By the way, WHAT THE HELL IS A MONTY PYTHON???!!!!!!
plenty of damn contest.

Zilch contest.
I have yet to se a fighter dodge a single Human gunsip laser shot that was in range.
You CAN fly a human carrir effectively by judicious use of hyperspace, but your HVD will get fried and your other carrires will too.
Not to mention the fact that the gunships will eventualy kill you too...
Give it up.
No offense, but that is one of the worst stratagies I've seen.
Almost like AUD carriers...

------------------
Commander-in-Chief of the Nijayias Interstellar Navy.

I give NOTHING up. I have played "Blood, Toil,"etc. over and over and over again, and I know what human carriers can do. Plus, you're still ignoring the shielding issue. If you're PLAYING as humans, you don't need to worry about a fighter dodging a HUMAN laser turret shot, now do you? Just in case you didn't hear, which you apparantly didn't, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT A HUMAN CARRIER FIGHTING AGAINST A HUMAN GUNSHIP!!!

------------------
Commander Cicion, commander of Audemedon 6th fleet

"Never tell me the odds!"
-Han Solo

Oh, I thought you meant Humans vs Humans.
What then? Humans vs Gatori? Easy victory.
Humans vs Cantharans? If they have the right ship mix you are screwd.
Humans vs Ishimans? Only if the are total newbies.
Humans vs Salrilians/Audemedons? Hah ha ha hah ha ha ha ha ha! Funny. For the Sals/Auds, that is.

Fact. The playtesters totaly missed the fact that human cruisers and carriers are totaly useless.

------------------
Commander-in-Chief of the Nijayias Interstellar Navy.

Fact: Human carriers, if you use them right, can take on any single opponent and do plenty of damage to it if it doesn't win the battle(which it will in many cases).

Fact: In "Blood..." , I have beaten an AUD CARRIER AND ITS ESCORTS with one human carrier and an occasional hit and run attack from a human gunship.

I agree with you about cruisers, though. the magneto is way too slow and the laser is not nearly powerful enough to make up for it.

------------------
Commander Cicion, commander of Audemedon 6th fleet

"Never tell me the odds!"
-Han Solo

I believe the argument was regarding whether carriers are worth the cost. The offshot discussion over what can kill what was evidence supporting or contrasting a person's believe on whether they were cost effective.

I don't have the time to discuss it at the moment, perhaps later. Just wanted to clear up the argument.

------------------
------------------
Pax - Drew Harry
sagitar@earthlink.net
(url="http://"http://www.axis.n3.net/")Ares Axis - axis.n3.net(/url)

"...they say that every five minutes someone dies in a car accident, but how often are there seven hundred and sixty one armless and legless corpses in one hangar?" - Terminal 2, Where are monsters in dreams, Marathon Infinity

Sure, but unless you personaly fly them they have no effectiveness. And you have to be a long-range-circling master, which few (not including me) are, or against something with no close-range punch. If you are flying your HVD, your carrier is toast. Or if you are flying your carrier, your HVD is toast. And 2 gunships probably could have done the same thing, as they have more firepower (same as a carrier on each) and better total sheilding.
Fact - carriers MUST be piloted by the player to be as effective as you say.
Fact - carriers have 1000 LESS sheilds than aprox. same cash in gunships.
Fact - each gunship has the same weapons as a carrier, minus the fighters.
Fact - fighters are next to useless.
I set up a test - 2 gunships vs carrier with no player interferance.
First test - fighters in. Result Carrier 0, Gunships 11.
2nd test - fighters out. Result still Carrier 0, Gunships 11.

Final Conclusion. Carriers not worth it.

------------------
Commander-in-Chief of the Nijayias Interstellar Navy.

Frankly, human carriers are identical to human gunships in every aspect that matters except defensive ability. A carrier is good to provide defense late in the game when things get entrenched - it will last long enough for the low-hyper-speed cavalry to arrive. The fighters are great for bait while turret lasers pound away. However, 3 gunships cost around as much as a carrier(?), total to 1000 more shield points, more speed and maneuverability, and three times the firepower.

Carriers are great for that warm, fuzzy feeling of security, but otherwise, IMO, screw it.

Carriers? Security?
Get the to a bin! (no offense, just wanted a Hamlet refrence)
Fighters aren't even a useful distraction, as evidenced by my testing.
Even with all fighters out the carrier couldn't kill either gunship.
Trying it against ish would be funny.
Sucky ships aren't security.
Of course, I agree that it does make you feel safer, but battleships (totaly outmoded in modern warfare) make carrier crewmen feel safe.
I also agree with you that it has no other use.
But defending a planet? Only a fool (no offense0 would.

------------------
Commander-in-Chief of the Nijayias Interstellar Navy.

Ah, but carriers are GOOD ships, especially when used wisely! Ay, there's the rub! Not only security but good offensive capability, too! Use them to keep enemies from escaping to the outskirts of the battle while your other ships swoop in and eat out the inside!

How are ships that are PROVEN to suck supposed to help out?
Did you pay any attention to my test?
And how would the carrier pick off escaping ships they can't get near?
And escaping ships can be picked off later at your leasure. If you build a ship just to pick off escaping ships you won't have enuff ships in the real battle to win. At least no as well as you might.

------------------
Commander-in-Chief of the Nijayias Interstellar Navy.

(This message has been edited by Fleet Admiral Darkk (edited 01-20-2000).)

sigh I say again, on MY computer, when I play "Blood" or "You should" I have proven that they do NOT suck. And they DO catch escaping ships. That's the point. If a ship flies to the outskirts of the battle, it gets bwasted.

------------------
Commander Cicion, commander of Audemedon 6th fleet

"Never tell me the odds!"
-Han Solo

Admiral, I didn't notice that in one of your responses up there you claimed that in order to use a human carrier effectively you have to be a "Long range circling master." I can't think of anything more UNtrue about human carriers. They are the most powerful at point-blank range because of their magneto pulse. You want to close in to point-blank to maximize the damage done(not to mention to prevent the opponent from using their missiles).

Point. You do need to use them close, I guess. I too have used them in "You Should...", but the points are,

• they are only effective if you fly them, and you need to fly your HVD,

• and they are less effective than a human gunship.

My test was to prove a carrier cannot beat 2 gunships. And it cannot. With both under computer control (a point that you totaly ignore, any moderatly-well-armed ship flown by a human is effective against computer ones) the carrier was unable to destroy either gunship even with all fighters out.

------------------
Commander-in-Chief of the Nijayias Interstellar Navy.

<Sigh> I am having Myth flashbacks... I seem to have stumbled across one of the numerous, recurring 'Are Cave Spiders Any Good?' and 'Are Thrall Any Good?' debates on the Nontoxic Myth forums.
In my experience, mass numbers will work for some people, and not for others. Because of their playing style. Unfortunately, in Ares, AI plays a lot of the game for you so it may not apply here. However, my experience, NO ONE UNIT can stand against 20 fighters (even the human's 15 damage X 20 = 300 damage/shot, call it 150 assuming half of them miss). Good luck building that many, though (you should be able to build 2 carriers, but get a gunship or two to hold out with that HVD in the event that your opponent decides to rush your planet in mid-construction). Grand total cost of a decent fleet (2 carriers, 2 gunships and the free HVD): 82 points. Your # of units: 25. Your opponent (assuming all gunships using that same 82 points): 5. Something's gotta give (I'm not sure of the exact maneuverability ratings, but I think the fighter is the fastest, most maneuverable ship class in multiplayer). Just make good and sure the fighters are all out, (set each carrier in turn as the controll unit and release all the fighters a little before the fight, hell, just release em all right away if you don't plan on using FTL soon) and if you can, get all those fighters to follow the carriers (target the carriers as you release fighters? Does anyone know if that works?) so that they form a nice cloud around the carrier. Just one. Don't even worry about the other one, hopefully it'll hit something with the turret, but it's really just there to add to your swarm. Oh, this tactic is not for the faint of heart or people that worry about the kills (But if you cared about that, you'd probably be one of those lame people who quit rather than seeing a game through if it will be costly anyway). Admittedly, a large swarm of cruisers is a lot more usefull most times due to more destructive weaponry and ability to use hyperspace (along with quicker build times, these are easier to replenish your army with than waiting for another carrier to be built).
So anyway, now that I've had my 2 cents it's time for a little hypocracy with my question: What the hell are you all doing here DEBATING over which is better? The only way to settle this is to PLAY ARES!!!!!

You don't GET an HVD in "You should..."

Yes, fighters are the fastest and most maneuverable class - in their species. Unfortunately, humans have the LEAST maneuverable ships in the universe, and their fighters are abysmally slow - not nearly fast enough to escape a gunship turret.

I DID PLAY ARES! In my totaly scientific test, one carrier even with all 10 fighters out is not a match for 2 gunships. And Binki - it's 6 gunships. And cruisers, what the hell are you thinking?!?!? HUMAN CRUISERS SUCK Έǰ!!!!
No offense, but I am tired of this. I'm getting my skilz back, so if any of you want to debate the value of human carriers and/or cruisers, come get some!

------------------
Commander-in-Chief of the Nijayias Interstellar Navy.

Why don't we just stop arguing? We can go on and on and on, and nobody will change their mind. Let's just stop now.

I don't wish to prolong a silly arguement, but I'm going to take a balanced perspective on this issue.

If you take relative costs and build times, you should have 2 gunships per Carrier. So, I'll compare the statistics first.

Shields, Gunships: 3000 x 2 = 6000
Shields, Carrier + Fighters: 5000 + 10(100) = 6000

An equal match, for shielding atleast. Carrier 0, Gunships 0.

Power, Gunships: 2(50) + 2(15) = 130
Power, Carrier: 1(50) + 1(15) = 65
Power, Fighters: 10(15) = 150

As far as weapons power, Carrier and its Fighter compliments win when added together. Carrier 1, Gunships 0.

Damage per Second, Gunships: 2(4 * 50) + 2(4 * 15) = 520
Damage per Second, Carrier + Fighters: 1(4 * 50) + 1(4 * 15) + 10(2 * 15)= 560

Close, but the Carrier and its Fighters still seem to lead. Carrier 2, Gunships 0.

Composite Model, Gunships: (6000/560) * 130 = 1393
Composite Model, Carrier + Fighters: ((5000/520) * 65) + ((1000/520) * 150) = 913

Being a composite model, this combines three models together, so its worth 3 points. Gunships win, clearly. Carrier 2, Gunships 3.

Clearly, this agrees with the observations of several that Gunships do better than a Carrier. Also, my Rock-Paper-Scissors theory agrees with this data and these opinions. I wish not to offend your view, Commander, but this is my opinion.

------------------
-Vegeta

Tournement Manager
Species and Ships Profiler
Beloved Overlord
(url="http://"http://www.axis.n3.net")www.axis.n3.net(/url)
(url="http://"mailto:blosse9@idt.net")mailto:blosse9@idt.net(/url)blosse9@idt.net