Re: (FT) when FT3? Armor vs shields?

Beth Fulton wrote:

> In the end I think it comes down to what you like and how you like to
command.

I did a few calculations regarding shields vs armour the other day. Came
up with some surprising results:

>From a purely Mass viewpoint, the break-even point is reached when the
number of hull boxes and armour added together is about 18. If you have
18 hull/armour, then adding 3 hull/armour gives you about the same
benefit as a level 1 screen (assuming your opponent is using nothing but
beams). If you have significantly more hull/armour, then you're better
off buying screens than hull/armour.

It's greatly complicated by several problems:
a) Screens can go down due to internals.
b) Opponents generally don't use all beams.
c) 3 mass of screens cost 12, vs 9 for 3 hull/armour (including the 1 pt
for each mass of structure, otherwise 9 vs 6)

What it boils down to is that for anything smaller than a light cruiser,
use armour not screens. For Heavy Cruisers up to Battlecruisers, use
screen level 1. For anything larger, screen 2 is the way to go. The
greater the proportion of non-beams used by the enemy, the larger the
ship required before break-even is reached.

The more hull/armour your ships have, the better screens look. But then
again, the better weapons look too, as otherwise you have  a ship which
can take it, but not dish it out. 

For such a simple system, it's surprisingly rich, and not particularly
susceptible to over-optimisation. 
-- 
	      http://www2.dynamite.com.au/aebrain 
aebrain@dynamite.com.au     <> <>    How doth the little Crocodile
| Alan & Carmel Brain|	    xxxxx	Improve his shining tail?
| Canberra Australia |	xxxxxHxHxxxxxx _MMMMMMMMM_MMMMMMMMM
 abrain@cs.adfa.edu.au o O*OO^^^^OO*O o oo     oo oo	 oo  
		       By pulling MAERKLIN Wagons, in 1/220 Scale