FANDOM


Attack vs. Defense Tech & Designs Edit

¿Which is the best design?

A lot have been studied about Attack vs. Defense Ship Designs. Tired of formulas I went right into practical testing.


I noticed the most common mistake mathematicians make is to compare 1 attack point vs 1 defense point. This is absolutely wrong! defensive components are smaller.


Thanks to hot seat cheat feature (see cheats and hot-seat) I was able to make two fleets.


One for All-Out-Attack Design. One for All-Out-Defense Design.


Korath Clan took the attacking Design

Terran took the defensive Design

Version 1.96 Twilight of the Arnor


Tech pre-requisites Edit

Korath Clan:

- Space Weapons (116 TP)

- Beam Weapons Theory (233 TP)

- Laser 1 (154 TP)

- Laser 2 (233 TP)

- Laser 3 (312 TP)

- Laser 4 (391 TP)

- Laser 5 (469 TP)


Total: 1908 TP


Terrans:

- Space Weapons (116 TP)

- Space Defense (116 TP)

- Shield Defense Theory (139 TP)

- Shield 1 (391 TP)

- Shield 2 (469 TP)

- Shield 3 (508 TP)

- Subspace Rebounder (154 TP)


Total: 1893 TP


Ship Designs Edit

Contenders' ships were designed according to their technologies. In fact both parties had a lot of technology including Miniaturization, but for the test we used a design for the above mentioned tech.

Attackers had full Laser V

Defenders had 1 Particle beam (very old!) and 6 subspace rebounder (defense 30 shields)


Contenders Edit

Korath Clan

2 Attackers (Medium; Beam 10;Shield 0; 28 HP; each ship)

Terran

2 Defenders (Medium; Beam 1; Shield 30; 25 HP; each ship) Defenders had the very old Particle Beam 1!!!

Battle Result Edit

After two battle testings Terran Defender won by a clear edge, killing both attackers and losing no ship. Taking only 13HP damage in the first battle and 16HP damage in the second battle. Korath Clan took 56 HP damage losing both ships.

The battle was very long and boring but defenders prevailed both ways.


This testing proves that Defensive Designs and Technology is way better than the popular All-out-Attack Design. Moreover, defensive components have 0 maintenance


In the tested case...

Attacker's Building Cost = 280 HP

Attacker's Maintenance = 11HP

Defender's Building Cost = 373 HP

Defender's Maintenance = 14 HP


Defender's high Maintenance takes place because Particle Beam 1 cost 14 maintenance while Attacker's Laser V cost 1 maintenance, but defensive components have no maintenance cost.


About Building Costs: I am very glad to pay the extra Defender's cost while these ships win battles every time and gather lots of experience.


Conclusions Edit

1) Defensive Designs and Technology is WAY BETTER than the popular All-out-Attack Design.

2) Defender's building cost is +30% and maintenance is zero for defensive components. But they made 3.5 more damage in the example, losing no ship.


¿Do I have to research Attack or Defense tech first?

I don't know. What I can tell is that you MUST make Defensive-Designs. In my games I research attacking tech first because AI values them more in the trade deal. Later on, I research the right defensive tech before engage into battle with someone.


¿What is the optimal Design Balance?

I don't know. More testing in needed. What I can tell is that the only optimal design is loading up the right defenses to counter your opponent. If you don't have the right defense, then make "all attack" designs.

Do this no matter the upgrading cost. The benefit of a right design is huge.

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.