Federation - Small Destroyer Saber

posted on June 16th, 2011, 6:10 pm

Sabres are a perfect counter to Dominion Bombers. Their low defense value means that they will be targeted first while avoiding getting hit almost completely. Plus their long range means that they deal increased damage to bombers and can keep up with them in speed.

The thing is, the Dominion player will know you are going sabers before the he builds bombers, so he wont build them.

posted on June 16th, 2011, 6:16 pm

The thing is, the Dominion player will know you are going sabers before the he builds bombers, so he wont build them.

thats true for sabre spam from the start, but there is no cost switching from double yard chassis 1 spam down to sabre spam when you notice the bombers. you then get to keep the yard at your exp.

if u notice bomber spam before u start making sfc u can have the constructor at your exp make a yard there instead of sfc and do sabre spam.

as sabres as targeted first they serve their purpose.

posted on June 16th, 2011, 8:10 pm

@myles

I disagree, sabers do not do extremely well against b5s.....

posted on June 16th, 2011, 8:28 pm

I can see some of the issues people have with the saber going away once cover fire is no longer an issue, and also when the Fed redo happens and they replace the chassis system with whatever it is they're planning.  Once you buy chassis 1, the monsoon and intrepid tends to become a bit sexier.  The monsoon doesn't cost much more and is a little more user friendly.

The saber is a nice ship for all those reasons people have mentioned.  Pretty cheap anti torp defense and so forth.

posted on June 16th, 2011, 8:36 pm

I can see some of the issues people have with the saber going away once cover fire is no longer an issue, and also when the Fed redo happens and they replace the chassis system with whatever it is they're planning.  Once you buy chassis 1, the monsoon and intrepid tends to become a bit sexier.  The monsoon doesn't cost much more and is a little more user friendly.

The saber is a nice ship for all those reasons people have mentioned.  Pretty cheap anti torp defense and so forth.

And to add. The coverfire is hard to do in some situations. It's very micro-intensive.

posted on June 16th, 2011, 9:46 pm

I can see some of the issues people have with the saber going away once cover fire is no longer an issue, and also when the Fed redo happens and they replace the chassis system with whatever it is they're planning.  Once you buy chassis 1, the monsoon and intrepid tends to become a bit sexier.  The monsoon doesn't cost much more and is a little more user friendly.

The saber is a nice ship for all those reasons people have mentioned.  Pretty cheap anti torp defense and so forth.

Is the coverfire issue going to be fixed soon?

posted on June 16th, 2011, 9:49 pm

@myles

I disagree, sabers do not do extremely well against b5s.....

i point to that replay where boggz dealt with the cover fire issues and kited the fighters. it takes a long time, but they get the job done, ranking a lot from the fighters, the carriers just dont get close enough, and b5 spam doesnt get the super spam numbers to just run into the clusterf**k of sabre fire that early.

posted on June 17th, 2011, 3:03 am

Yes myles, if you remember i recorded that replay.....

Firstly that is really the only game ive seen where anyone has used that vs b5, and secondly you might want to take another look....

Sure boggz spammed sabers, but honestly he only won that because of the fleet of warpins, he could not get any kills with the sabers, and only got one veteran, sure he got some ranks but in the end, the warpins punched it in for him.  Because at the end, when boggz got some nice warpins, ambasadors and galaxys, that could really punch in the power, the b5s and all the fighters went for the sabers with cover fire, which created a nice "barrier" for the warpin ships.

I thought then and i still believe that the b5s coulda rushed in there and blown the crap out of those sabers.  S

posted on June 17th, 2011, 9:59 am

Yes myles, if you remember i recorded that replay.....

you say that like it gives u some enhanced perspective. as it was recorded, everyone saw the exact same thing you did, and i think that those sabres did a good job. the warpins on their own would never have caught the b5 and would have never escaped from chasing b5 and fighters. it was the sabres doing the kiting that was keeping boggz alive.

once replaceweapons issues are gone the sabre will be a lot more useful.

stop overusing elipses too

posted on June 18th, 2011, 6:39 am

No, i say that so you understand that i saw the replay, I know everyone saw the same thing, the point is it was one game where that tactic was recorded, and the only where ive seen it succesfully used.

You may want to go back and watch it again, myles.  I think its fairly clear the sabers wernt doing crap, and it was the warpins that killed all the large ships, the sabers soaked up fire.  But honestly i think if the dominion had just gone in there they coulda crushed those sabers....

posted on June 18th, 2011, 7:22 am

As mentioned the Sabre is a decent anti torp ship. If a player tends to throw lots of torp ships at me then sabers do a fairly good job since the miss rate against them is pretty high. Regardless of my build order I'll almost always constantly churn out Sabres the second the yard goes up until I research the next level chassis and shift into either Monsoons or Intrepids depending on what the enemy is building. I personally don't feel the Sabre is totally useless, but other then kiting short ranged units I don't think it really stands out as useful either after the first ten minutes of the game.

posted on June 18th, 2011, 10:14 am

I personally don't feel the Sabre is totally useless, but other then kiting short ranged units I don't think it really stands out as useful either after the first ten minutes of the game.

Well, I think Starcraft is a good benchmark for a strategy game. In this game, every Unit has his function over the hole time... I can understand the arguments of some players, but to handle a long range weapon ship, it is very intensive in time (micromanagment) and it is not really effective. When I play Starcraft, I use all the zerg-units in every part of a match. In Fleetops, there are different phases where I use different ships... because of technical improvements. Another gamestyle of course... For me, I don't use the saber. The strategies you mentioned, are not effective for me. 

posted on June 18th, 2011, 10:21 am

You may want to go back and watch it again, myles.  I think its fairly clear the sabers wernt doing crap, and it was the warpins that killed all the large ships, the sabers soaked up fire.  But honestly i think if the dominion had just gone in there they coulda crushed those sabers....

you may want to tone down your provocative language, i disagree, i think the sabres were very effective............................................................................

posted on June 18th, 2011, 10:40 am

I think the Saber could be far more attractive if it would cause cover fire to more ships.
In the moment I can send a mixed group of sabers (hyper on and off) or a group with just hyper on into the fight. All other ships affectet by cover firer are to slow to group them with sabers. And correct me if I am wrong, but they are all long range.
But it is nearly pointless to send sabers together with the lvl 1 chasie ships. The speed is good enough but they don't add much to the fleet.
If sabers would effect all small sized ships and some choosen others I think there would be sabers in every fleet, even later on. Later on the role would change from a torptank to a torptank and a little supporter triggering effects. I think that is the gameplay the feds will going in the future for far more ships.
Cover fire could have some different effects depending on the ship.
But in the moment they are just torptanks and the cheap ones targetet first. Most of the time this is not needed and with just Ints and Moosons you are far more cost effective.

posted on June 18th, 2011, 11:04 am

I think the Saber could be far more attractive if it would cause cover fire to more ships.
In the moment I can send a mixed group of sabers (hyper on and off) or a group with just hyper on into the fight. All other ships affectet by cover firer are to slow to group them with sabers. And correct me if I am wrong, but they are all long range.
But it is nearly pointless to send sabers together with the lvl 1 chasie ships. The speed is good enough but they don't add much to the fleet.
If sabers would effect all small sized ships and some choosen others I think there would be sabers in every fleet, even later on. Later on the role would change from a torptank to a torptank and a little supporter triggering effects. I think that is the gameplay the feds will going in the future for far more ships.
Cover fire could have some different effects depending on the ship.
But in the moment they are just torptanks and the cheap ones targetet first. Most of the time this is not needed and with just Ints and Moosons you are far more cost effective.

i think it would be too useful if it affected other ships, it does only affect long range ships, which emphasises that the sabre provides cover fire for ships like itself.

other ships will probably get their own cool synergies. it shouldnt be sabre doing all the work for the whole fleet.

take bomber spam, monsoons counter bomber spam ok, but sabres are actually better as they dont suffer from bomber passive against SR. and they dodge over 50% of the torps, monsoons dodge 40% and the passives counter each other out (50% both ways). the sabre can also kite to a degree, and occasionally cover fire will cause everything to miss. the sabre (with hyper on of course) has 10 more speed than bombers, so can chase them down, and the bombers cant fire back.