100 delta DDs and 100*20 chaff, we need to not die first.
I suspect that this is about the only time when the AMT would be useful - it's MUCH more expensive in resource terms than other missiles, but by heck is it cheap in minerals, and it's highly accurate.
Chaff + AMT equipped scouts/DDs/frigates
Need silly high bio though

Quote:

In any case, this does seem fair, even if it is overly restricting (it bans conduct which cannot possibly result in the bug occurring).

The benefit is that the restriction is the same for both SD players, although it could be lifted slightly: You can't detonate a minefield which covers a special hull which is also in another SD minefield (Does the detonation check conflict with the possibility of hitting another minefield?)

Quote:

Okay, I'll walk you through what I'm talking about, since I've stated it twice now and you've accused me of missing your point when in fact you're missing mine.

High-tech player builds old, outdated ships. These ships do not cost the high-tech player very much, because they are miniaturised by his high tech.
High-tech player transfers these ships to low-tech, UR player.
When the low-tech player scraps these ships, they are scrapped for 90% of the (discounted by 30%) mineral cost of the ships under his own, much lower miniaturisation, which can be more than the high-tech player spent to build them (as miniaturisation can go up to 75%, the cost the high-tech player pays can be as low as 25% of the "value" of the ships of which the low-tech player receives 63%).
Low-tech player gives minerals back to high-tech player.
Minerals have now been created out of thin air via scrapping, which is the "exploitative" use that we are trying to ban.

This is why I refuse to specifically speak of engines in the rule against this exploit. Because the bug doesn't actually depend on Cheap Engines, simply on varying costs of components and hulls. The exploitative use that is banned is "scrapping ships for more than it cost to build them", and while Cheap Engines is the easiest method to enable this exploit, it is not the only method.

EDIT: There are a couple of other things that can play into this exploit: Bleeding Edge Technology on either side can create massive miniaturisation gulfs with no tech difference (build at 80% BET miniaturisation, scrap at 64% non-BET miniaturisation; alternatively, build at 0% miniaturisation, scrap at Bleeding Edge double-cost). IS/WM weapons premium/discount crops up too; although it's not quite powerful enough on its own, a couple of miniaturisation levels will allow free minerals.

BET double cost, WM/IS weapons cost difference are much more likely to be impacting. Although BET double cost is pretty close to equivalent to CE half cost isn't it? Wouldn't the 30% Transferred flag + 70% recovery bring it down to 90 odd percent of the original cost?
WM get's -25%, IS gets +25% costs: 75%->125% is less than the CE or BET differences.

Although a WM with CE, scrapping to a BET IS????