Ion cannon vs. PPC

[jamafish]

so I just thought of something on this playthrough.

Once your shields are down, your hull is essentially soft jelly for pretty much any weapon out there that does decent damage to hull right?

So for a main gun on let's say, a titan, wouldn't 6 Ion cannons and 2 PPCs be better than 8 PPC's?

This way, the Ion cannons tear through the shields like a hot knife through mushy ice cream and then the ppc's finish off the hull, which is ridiculously easy to destroy anyways?

Debate?

[Alan Phipps]

Where I can, I mix IonC, IBL and PPC in a capital anti-capital turret. This mix gives the complementary weapon effects that you mentioned, has the advantage that the turret starts turning and tracking when the target enters the longer PPC range so that by the time it is on target, fires and the first bullets arrive the target is likely to be entering IonC/IBL effective range as well as for PPC (ie weapon energy efficiency). It also looks really good when that mix fires and it uses a selection from across the heavy weapons that you can find/buy/capture/make and so is probably easier to supply.

I avoid GC where there may be OOS usage as ammo/non-ammo mix can play tricks OOS.

[Triaxx2]

4/4 with GC works better. Your alternate weapon is going to fire anyway, so using the GC, which doesn't use energy, but is excellent against hull. Keeps the IC's firing longer if you've got a lot of shield to deal with.

[SIMON POPPLEWELL]

I've often mixed thse weapons, especially on my Boron game start. They are quite effective when on a Thresher, 5xPPC/IC.

[Spychotic]

In short - yes. Mixing IC and PPC in proportions of 6 to 2 respectively is pretty much optimising your kill time for enemy capitals.

Many a time has Gauss Cannon been touted as the anti-hull complement; I don't subscribe to this line of thought as in my opinion, M2s have enough laser energy to sustain fire for more than enough time to kill multiple enemy M2s, thus making the non-energy-using GC pretty pointless, and the hull of ships is so weak in comparison to the shields that only one or two would be necessary anyway. As has been said, a third point against them is that OOS a ship with no ammo for its weapon will completely lock up.

Spike

[garv222]

When I'm using a M2 to fly as a personal ship, I do like to put IC in the front. I used to put IPG until I realized that the firepower that M2's throw at each other is so destructive that speed usually wasn't an issue. Considering that shields make around 90% of the damage that is being traded in combat, it makes sense to have a weapon that does considerably more damage to shields.

I'm not really sold on the idea of using GC in combination with IC. I'd need to look at some numbers to really find out if it's worth doing. Most of the time I'm flying in a M2, by the time a target's shield's are down, the shots still traveling to the target are more than enough to finish the job. Not saying GC aren't deadly, just that I think IC are better anti-capital ship weaponry.

[LTerSlash]

Yeah and hull arent the problem in killing M2 either...

GC are especilly usefull in the Shrike and on M1s, like the Condor and Raptor, a Raptor with GC on sides can kill everything like a M2 whiout a problem.

Now, there is a problem with IOC, it has a lower range than a PPC, so placing it on front turret may not be a good idea.

It seems useless to me... now the GC, it has almost the same shield damage than the PPC but it has more than twice the fire rate than a PPC or IOC, and its a bit faster too. That comes at the cost of much shorter range, the GC can land amost 3 hits on a target at the same time that a PPC or IOC and hit it once, that is almost 120K shield damage in the same time that a PPC can do 46K or 66 the IOC...

I i had the ammunition fabs to support it, i whould choose PPC on front for long range fire and GC on sides. I see not uses for the IOC...

[AgamemnonArgon]

I prefer PPC in a none mixed turret.
Also like the Gauss Cannon but one does need out of sector ships resupplied with ammunition or as stated they can stop firing.
Ion Cannon are still rather useful and I will use those if none of the above are available.

[Geek]

It seems useless to me... now the GC, it has almost the same shield damage than the PPC but it has more than twice the fire rate than a PPC or IOC, and its a bit faster too. That comes at the cost of much shorter range, the GC can land amost 3 hits on a target at the same time that a PPC or IOC and hit it once, that is almost 120K shield damage in the same time that a PPC can do 46K or 66 the IOC...

No. Damage is already listed by second, so taking account rate of fire again does not work.

In my experience, because M2 are very slow, the range advantage of PPC outweigh by far the greater damage of IC.

[deca.death]

Debate?

We talked about IonC very recently. In short: It's a draw. Yes they are 50% more effective vs shields but they have 50% more weight too, and noticeably shorter range. Which reminded me, I have brigantine somewhere almost fully equipped with IonC's. Got to test that thing.

[Infekted]

In a personal M2 I load up full PPC. The range advantage is sick. If you put your ship in reverse you can kill two oncoming Ks before they even start firing..

If I have time, and am within 5-6km of an enemy I swap in ICs to the front. The shield damge in that case is definately better.

For AI controlled M2s I usually go with full ICs. Simply because they don't take full advantage of the range of PPCs.

As mentioned GCs will gimp your M2 whilst OOS.