Nice chart. A definite must for newbies to learn.

I don't want to be an annoying man, but it would be complete to see the nanite swarms there, as the assault nanite is the anti-structure cruiser for the Vasari, and the other swarms are interesting too (though many players don't like the Rankulus but it's not that bad, only average..)

Nice work! Good to see people still have enthusiasm towards this game. 

These function as frigates, there is a combat nanite swarm that is a weaker light frigate, costs 40 antimatter for the Rankulus and lasts for 3 minutes, there is a practically unarmed healing nanite swarm (not sure of its name) that "attacks" one of your damaged ships and restores some hull(like 150 or 200, like the Overseer, just a weker version), and there is an assault nanite swarm efficient against buildings. The combination of these... not sure what it does, I never use that feature (level six Rankulus ability), I think it combines all nanite swarms deployed, to a single big light frigate swarm, although I am far from sure of it.... So a weak light frigate, a support nanite and an anti structure one (the greater nanite swarm will always be a mistery for me.. ) I guess they have the damage multipliers as their class, although only matters for the combat swarm, as that is the only one that can attack ships. I recommend watching the Rankulus abilities to make sure you write these names in the correct way as I can't really remember these nanites either, I rarely use them.

These nanites are not the strongest stuff, but Vasari frigates are quite expensive, and every nanite swarm costs only 40 antimatter, can be good addition to your fleet, and the AI always uses them as it has random as it's first capitalship choice I think (sometimes starts with Marauder lol), maybe helps players to know what are these nanites good for

maybe you should add the Vulkoras ability spawned bombardment platform, and the missile platform of the SOVA, to make this list even more perfect

Thank you!

Thks to all.

I knew some errors should be in this version (V. 1.0). Too much infos to handle...

Thks, Tyrchany. Sadly, I need more infos before including the nanite on my chart. I fair I will need to play advent before include these on my chart. Perhaps for a V.1.2 in few weeks.

However, for the Vulkoras and Sova abilities, you are right. I will correct this for for the next version available soon (I hope to release a V. 1.1 for next week).

Thks, HumbleUnity, I will correct these silhouettes for the V. 1.1. By the way, I am very happy that you have guessed so well how much I want this chart perfect ^^

Thks RiddleKing, I need to corret that too for the V. 1.1

Since it is obviously simply a problem of copy-pasting, I don't see clearly why you are coming again on that subject ? I don't find it a good joke...

That chart wouldn't look amiss from the Sins manual - it would have been nice (back in Trinity days) to have a printed version of that chart instead of the huge tech-tree poster.

Scout class frigates are conspicuous by their absence though.

Advent capital ship classifications aren't correct - Revelation & Rapture fulfil the assault (siege) & support roles respectively, while the Halcyon is their carrier.

Might be nice to use each race's starbase names though (Argonev, Transcencia, Orkulus), also Talion Saviour's construct abiliity is called 'Chrysalis'

As RiddleKing has noticed starbases appear to have titan abilities, same also goes for fighter/bomber squads - now that would be scary!

Cool!

I fully support other charts being out there, especially when the aim is to organize it in such a nice graphical format (I have no artistic ability. The colors on my charts are merely to differentiate things). Seeing as I am spending less time on the site than I have in the past, I'd even hand the reigns over to someone if they wanted them and could deliver.

However, I do want to offer some advice. There have been a number of different charts over the years, many of which were very pretty. The trouble is that they don't last because it takes a lot of time to make such a thing and then all the data changes with an update.

What you have is currently very unlikely to change unless a new expansion or sequel comes about, but realize that if you insist on a graphical approach, it has a time limit. For example, badken's chart. there is a couple of changes to the percentages, but the real problem is that now there are a lot more ships.

Even my chart suffered from this problem when Rebellion came out. I have it setup to easily extract all the data directly from the files, but organizing additional ships take work. The advantage of pulling it from the files is that when there is an update, I just have to click a few things and all the values are up to date; new things are still a problem though.

Would it be correct to say that bombers and fighters are weak against Flak, but do normal damage to other heavy armor types? Also, are heavy cruisers are strong against all light armor except from anti-module cruisers? I'm not sure what you're going for with this rating system, but it would probably be logical to change it to percentages instead of symbols, or have people agree on the general effectiveness of some ships against others (i.e, corvettes being strong vs. LRM in practice) and rate them accordingly.

No. So much seems off about this chart. What does attack level stand for? Why is the Ragnarov the only titan that doesn't have a max rating? Why is the Skirmisher considered to have a higher attack level than the Assailant?

How long have siege frigates had medium armor?