ACTA:NA kurgan fleet composition: frigates vs destroyers

[Omega Rechara]

Greetings forum users, moderators, lurkers, et all. I recently started playing this game & have found it quite enjoyable; picking the Kurgan Caliphate as my fleet of choice. Though i haven't played many games with the rules set thus far, i none-the-less find myself wishing to expand my force & have thus come across a question for which i could find no answer in either searching the forums or using an internet browser search. Namely, whether it would be more worth it to add a blister of frigates or a blister of destroyers for some gunship support to my fleet (aside from the light carrier additions I'm considering as well). Currently I'm leaning towards the blister of destroyers but wanted to get a second opinion on the tactical options of frigs vs destros in terms of adding to a fleet.

 

[tneva82]

Unless kurgan fleet has some weird difference odds are destroyers are way to go. They generally offer you most bang for your buck.

Also you might wish to hold on the light carrier reinforcements. Fighters as they are are pretty crappy. There's rumoured to be upcoming change to them to make them worthwhile but so far a) we don't know when that upgrade comes official b) we don't know what the upgrade is. Could be just "nice boost but still underpowered" level.

 

[locarno24]

Unless kurgan fleet has some weird difference odds are destroyers are way to go. They generally offer you most bang for your buck.

Still pretty true with the Caliphate.

A Qawwas frigate has the same rocket broadside (near enough) as a Yildugh destroyer, and the extra turret isn't that much more gunpower (each twin heat blaster turret working out more or less equivalent to four more rocket tubes). That gives the Qawwas an effective broadside of 14 innacurate dice to the Yildugh's 20. Granted the turrets mean that the Yildugh is a lot better fighting to prow or stern, but I'd largely ignore that; they're manouvrable ships and you never want to do that if you can avoid it...

However, it's the toughness of destroyers that makes them a cut above - extra hull and extra shields makes them twice as hard to hurt with conventional weapons fire; three shields needing a 4+ takes 6 dice, four needing a 5+ requires 12. That's double the toughness. Granted, some weapones will bypass that, but it's a good rule of thumb.

Also you might wish to hold on the light carrier reinforcements

Kurgan Light carriers aren't too bad - they're the same as everyone else's carriers, and are only 'light' because the cruiser-sized Arigaba is a dedicated carrier too. Khabirs carry a nice quantity of heat blasters and are a bit tougher than most of their competitors. Their main advantage is in packing in tonnes of Khangard suicide fighters, which do hit like the proverbial.

 

[Greg Smith]

Please bear in mind that what you have seen so far may not reflect the final version.

But personally I think destroyers are the way to go in any fleet.

 

[locarno24]

Agreed. Frigates tend to be the tactical runts - Destroyers are the backbone of the fleet, cruisers are the cheapest way to get heavy weapons on the field*, dreadnoughts carry unique meson weapons*, scouts have special abilities (and apparently so too will raiders)...whilst frigates are essentially just a destroyer but smaller.



* In both cases aside from gunships. The Decados one is the only one so far but its not impossible we might see more gun-monitors as time goes on.