Home » Primary Racial Traits » HE » HE - usable?
| Re: HE - usable? |
Wed, 26 February 2003 11:24   |
|
| BlueTurbit |
 | Lt. Commander
RIP
BlueTurbit died Oct. 20, 2011 |
Messages: 835
Registered: October 2002
Location: Heart of Texas | |
|
| BackBlast wrote on Tue, 25 February 2003 23:27 |
| yucaf wrote on Tue, 25 February 2003 13:37 |
| BackBlast wrote on Mon, 24 February 2003 17:30 |
| freakyboy wrote on Thu, 16 January 2003 10:36 |
HE are easy as mittens to invade too.
An IS breeder fleet will be laughing all the way.
|
Until your breader fleet meets a small pack of Metas built to kill freighters (higher init than BB, few missles for the kill, high movement, no defences). *bam* One big, expensive resource down the tube, with the HE laughing as your big fleet was halted in their tracks. Meta morph is the perfect ship for killing your enemies' anti-planet ships (freighters, bombers).
Suddenly, even with a superior force, you can't kill his worlds fast enough to _hurt_ him.
BackBlast
|
Huuhgh? Metamorph with higher initiative than BB? What do you mean? And also, have you seen well defended superfreighters? They get good shielding and can jam quite well too. And the IS knows that his ships are precious. The escort will have a high initiative, anti-suicide design. He will probably use the same tactic as with bombers: don't expose them until the orbit is secured. You kill the starbase and orbiting ships and lay a minefield, then you can go into destroying the planet. And a well played IS always keep a good stock of flying orgies, he won't expose his only weapon to be destroyed in one shot.
How should we say that MM are  BAD warships?
Now to be back at Freakyboy comment, yes it's true that HE planets are easy to invade, however, there are many of them and they colonize like crazy. Can you invade faster than they can retake their worlds? (or are you letting all this population on those reds to prevent that?) Keeping all those planets defended against recolonization can seriously divide your offensive capabilities. Just a thought.
HE's have been for several years the killer race, just look at the old posts on the Newsgroup. Everybody feared them and at some point nobody wanted to play them because it was shooting season  when they were discovered. However the PRT was unfortunately modified, and without the gates, it has become a very difficult race to play, Micromanagement is hellish and in the wrong universe size / player density they just can't strive, as Apelord pointed very clearly.
FWIW,
YucaF
|
Higher initiative is simple. First, HE generally has a research advantage as they have a few more points to spend on tech. Electronics, I think, are on that list of desired fields to make cheaper if you could spend the points. So, if you have better computers, simple matter of adding enough to get that higher initiative. But lets assume this is not the case. A BB gets 10 initative. A BB can hold a maximum of 7 computers. Lets use supercomputers on both designs. 10+7*2 = 24 initiative. The MM has 2 initiative default, but you can also stick 12-15 computers on there and still have room for weapons. 2+12*2 = 26 initiative. Higher than the missle BB with max computers and you still have 5 slots to play with. Your only hope to counter this threat is a high initative beamer (full computers, and beams, but you need movement too, hmmmm...). Yes, this is not a cheap ship, but then, neither are your anti-planet ships. Kamakaze ships have their place.
It isn't uncounterable, but, if you do not anticipate it. You can kiss your offensive Orgy or bombers goodbye. Killing the Kamakazes is an art in design and counter design.. Since you are in his space he has the upper hand here I believe.
As for the MM being a good warship or not, I spoke up in the MM thread. IMHO they beat cruisers. A single slot for weapons is gernally a good thing. More room for defensive systems as well, or a few toys such as cloaks. Which are sometimes better than raw power anyway. I use them.
As for only bringing bombers into a safe orbit, that's not really what's at issue here.. Generally kamakasis would have their targets in sight before entering the battlefield. When your bombers/orgy does show up (however long you want to take) the kamis can go to work. If you think you can clear everything away and take every orbit to really make sure their safe... Overcloakers can still slip them in (metas are soooo nice that way  ). At any rate, I'm not saying this is the end all to strategy, but it works, it can be very effective. This is no chainsaw through wet tissue paper as some would make it out to be. And while you work on that planet I'll happily colonize a few more. 
And Metas can have higher initative than any ship they want to (at a cost)... Except when nubians come out. Then everyone can build Kamakazes. Though there would be little point in out initing a DN with a MM.
I beg to differ about micro management as well... I find it's worse when all your planets are different. Lets see, HW 100%, Hadies and BlueBoy are yellows, I need to terraform that 25% world over there some more. I need more terraforming tech. This world is at 31% capacity, it's not a breeder so we'll go ahead and fill it with more pop.. As opposed to a tri-immune HE where he can look at pop levels and instantly know where which planets are at. He will be more concerned about mineral shortages and getting the pop off the breeders than anything else. You quickly learn to use the planet listings to their fullest and it goes rather quick. Terriforming? What's that? Every world's a breeder. Unless I don't want it to be.... Anyway, I'm working my way through a game as an HE. I find I can do my turns in 20 minutes just fine. I spend far more time with diplomacy in my universe than taking my turn. We are in rougnly mid game.. I'm having a grand old time (I find diplomacy very fun, I don't think I'd like the hunt and kill HE years). Building fleets and gathering them is probably comparable to another race at this stage... I don't have vast quantities of planets more than my neibors, but planet for planet my race is about on par with most HGs (HP HE vs HG *insert PRT here*). Oh, and the universe is a Large... Maybe I'll update this and say it's painful in late game. But I think any race will be painful in late game in a large, if you are competative. Maybe I should say gleeful, you are conquering, are you not? This is the point, no? heh
My take on HE (as a fan)..
BackBlast
|
Interesting. When the Admirable speaks everyone listens. You could use more quotes? Well that solves the tree problem. Now all we have to worry about is the branches. 
BlueTurbit Country/RockReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
 |
|
HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: EDog on Mon, 02 December 2002 23:16 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Mangar on Tue, 03 December 2002 01:13 |
|
 |
Re: HE - usable?
By: jeffimix on Tue, 03 December 2002 07:01 |
|
 |
Re: HE - usable?
By: Stalwart on Tue, 03 December 2002 15:00 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: EDog on Tue, 03 December 2002 21:14 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: SimonM on Wed, 04 December 2002 17:43 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: johng316 on Fri, 27 December 2002 18:19 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Hetzer on Tue, 03 December 2002 16:11 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Apelord on Wed, 04 December 2002 17:55 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: jeffimix on Wed, 04 December 2002 20:15 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Apelord on Wed, 04 December 2002 20:35 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: tech25 on Wed, 04 December 2002 21:10 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: jeffimix on Wed, 04 December 2002 21:59 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Apelord on Wed, 04 December 2002 22:33 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: jeffimix on Wed, 04 December 2002 22:39 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Apelord on Thu, 05 December 2002 12:59 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Stalwart on Thu, 05 December 2002 13:58 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Robert on Thu, 05 December 2002 14:14 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Stalwart on Fri, 20 December 2002 15:54 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: EDog on Fri, 27 December 2002 22:40 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: jeffimix on Fri, 27 December 2002 22:55 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: jeffimix on Sat, 28 December 2002 19:19 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: zoid on Sun, 29 December 2002 16:27 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
 |
Re: HE - usable?
By: jeffimix on Sun, 29 December 2002 20:03 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: johng316 on Sun, 29 December 2002 19:40 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: zoid on Thu, 16 January 2003 00:36 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: zoid on Thu, 16 January 2003 17:21 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: jeffimix on Thu, 16 January 2003 23:56 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Sotek on Fri, 17 January 2003 00:17 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: zoid on Fri, 17 January 2003 00:40 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: zoid on Sat, 18 January 2003 04:41 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Sotek on Sat, 18 January 2003 05:18 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: zoid on Sat, 18 January 2003 14:51 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Sotek on Sat, 18 January 2003 20:32 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: zoid on Sat, 18 January 2003 21:43 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Sotek on Sat, 18 January 2003 22:27 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: zoid on Sun, 19 January 2003 00:59 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: ccmaster on Sat, 17 April 2004 12:42 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: multilis on Fri, 23 April 2004 14:48 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Steve1 on Sat, 24 April 2004 14:17 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Carn on Sat, 24 April 2004 14:34 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Hetzer on Sat, 24 April 2004 21:33 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: mlaub on Sun, 25 April 2004 15:35 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: ccmaster on Sun, 25 April 2004 15:40 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Carn on Sun, 25 April 2004 15:46 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: ccmaster on Sun, 25 April 2004 15:57 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: mlaub on Mon, 26 April 2004 11:14 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: ccmaster on Mon, 26 April 2004 15:44 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: mlaub on Mon, 26 April 2004 17:15 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: multilis on Mon, 26 April 2004 18:14 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Crusader on Mon, 26 April 2004 18:25 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: ccmaster on Tue, 27 April 2004 09:24 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: mlaub on Tue, 27 April 2004 15:06 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: ccmaster on Wed, 28 April 2004 09:25 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: mlaub on Wed, 28 April 2004 10:15 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Stalwart on Mon, 30 December 2002 00:10 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: johng316 on Mon, 30 December 2002 17:12 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Stalwart on Mon, 30 December 2002 23:05 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: zoid on Mon, 13 January 2003 19:19 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: zoid on Tue, 14 January 2003 19:47 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: yucaf on Tue, 25 February 2003 13:37 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: zoid on Tue, 25 February 2003 22:50 |
|
 |
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: yucaf on Wed, 26 February 2003 23:43 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Sotek on Sun, 19 January 2003 03:31 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: jeffimix on Sun, 19 January 2003 12:07 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Apelord on Mon, 27 January 2003 11:56 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: zoid on Tue, 28 January 2003 03:24 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: gible on Wed, 29 January 2003 05:18 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
|
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Steve1 on Wed, 10 September 2003 11:42 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: iztok on Wed, 13 December 2006 07:29 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Carn on Thu, 01 March 2007 08:36 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: iztok on Thu, 01 March 2007 16:05 |
|
|
Re: HE - usable?
By: Carn on Fri, 02 March 2007 05:05 |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Jun 08 14:12:37 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
