Ophiuchus wrote: ↑Thu Nov 28, 2019 2:22 pm
You should start a recent build, it looks you have outdated data. E.g. stealth carriers are solved(in my opinion).
I've played the most recently released build ( 0.4.8 ). The only more recent github change I know of that would affect this (
#2343) keeps fighterless carriers from maintaining blockades. That is definitely a move in the right direction, but, in my opinion, it doesn't solve many of the problems of stealth carriers discussed in
that thread, esp. that stealth carriers have too much power relative to their cheap cost, including the power to whittle down arbitrarily large fleets with absolutely zero losses, and without much recourse for the opponent, esp. not any recourse that the AI knows how to use. Are there other recent changes I don't know about? If so, why haven't they been released?
Ophiuchus wrote: ↑Thu Nov 28, 2019 2:22 pm
fighters (esp. Interceptors) can be cheap and easy to field and "regenerate" in supply so they have the cannonfodder problem in special way.
I agree that, over a long run, drones could be replenished repeatedly, making them more economical cannonfodder than straight decoys like comsats are. This is one reason, among many, to think that there are problems with stealth carriers who can be assured of surviving for that long of a run. However, I don't think this consideration applies to non-stealth carriers, as they require a heavy upfront investment to
maybe get this long run payoff, and they face a serious risk of getting shot down in Round 1 of each combat, and so
on average, I think they provide fewer decoys/cost than straight decoys do, and certainly not many more. Of course this may vary depending upon how well armored your carriers are, how many other ships including straight decoys are screening for them in Round 1, which opponents you fight, whether your straight decoys are cheap comsats or more expensive flux ships, etc... But most ways of keeping your carriers from getting blown up on round 1 cost further PP, and hence reduce the cost-efficiency of using carriers to provide decoys for later rounds. So, again, I'm not convinced that (non-stealth) carriers pose a special separate problem here, so I would encourage that a solution to whatever problem targetable drones might have be bundled together with a solution to the decoy problem, e.g., reducing the targeting priority for *both* drones and unarmed decoys.