Home » Primary Racial Traits » AR » TT AR
|
Re: TT AR |
Tue, 27 May 2008 07:31 |
|
Soobie | | Officer Cadet 3rd Year | Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007 Location: Australia | |
|
ummm ... because the difficulty for AR is lasting to the late game?
Just sayin
Edit: I'd contemplate taking TT instead of IFE in a packed universe. But I'm taking it for the discount on terra, not for the wider terraforming with higher bio. AR has so many tech priorities: En, W, Con are all massively important. Making Bio important too is pretty counter productive.
[Updated on: Tue, 27 May 2008 07:37] Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: TT AR |
Tue, 27 May 2008 21:34 |
|
magic9mushroom | | Commander | Messages: 1361
Registered: May 2008 | |
|
However, I don't see the problem with designs such as the following:
AR
IFE, TT, ARM, ISB, NRSE, CE
44 wide centered grav (0.53 to 1.88), 42 wide centered temp (-84 to 84), 58 wide centered rad (21 to 79)
1 in 7 overall
15%
1/10
en + con + bio cheap, weaps normal, prop and elect expensive.
Alternatively,
AR
IFE, TT, ARM, ISB, NRSE, CE
46 wide centered grav (0.52 to 1.92), 46 wide centered temp (-92 to 92), 58 wide centered rad (21 to 79)
1 in 6 overall
15%
1/10
weaps + con + bio cheap, en normal, prop and elect expensive.
Both of these keep nearly all the yellows at TT20 and live everywhere with decent hab at TT30.
I don't see the problem
[Updated on: Tue, 27 May 2008 23:27] Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: TT AR |
Wed, 28 May 2008 04:47 |
|
magic9mushroom | | Commander | Messages: 1361
Registered: May 2008 | |
|
Micha wrote on Wed, 28 May 2008 18:24 | IMHO AR *needs* an immunity, else you have all too crappy planets and AR depends on the hab %. And now ... ow ... where did all my RW points go?
|
however, TT gives better eventual hab (and way more perfect greens, good for AR) than an immunity, almost as good as two, and costs far less than one, let alone 2, immunities. The numbers are (perfects that is):
non-immune: 3.7%
one-immune: 11.9% for rad immune, 10.8% grav or temp
TT non-immune: 28.3%
bi-immune: 31.3% for rad non-immune, 34.4% grav or temp
TT one-immune: 45.9% for rad immune, 41.7% grav or temp
TT bi-immune: 61.6% for rad non-immune, 67.8% grav or temp
Seeing as most common AR design I've heard of (and the one you'd prefer I'm guessing?) is the grav immune, I've got 2.5 times your perfects. I don't see hab as a problem in that way, especially since I'll get terra faster than most (just research bio for terra, plus ener for resources, rather than nasty combos).
Micha wrote on Wed, 28 May 2008 18:24 | And (again IMHO) if you start taking CE to get your race design out off the red points you're going from bad to worse ... I tried CE ones (in a duel) and it was a complete disaster, totally could not fit it into my playstyle (and that is getting to rusty to change it )
|
I'll admit that I'm a real newbie to Stars!, but CE helps with NRSE as far as I can see, and AFAIK it doesn't kill colonists if the freighter doesn't engage (OfC it does lose growth, but IS-10 with CE is still faster than warp 9 without), and you'd be mostly on the defensive, using gates, with a race like this, no? Also, you start at prop 2, which is always nice since your Pinta starting ship will have a FM, and you don't have to research it before moving (also, I'll admit at the outset that I don't mind any amount of MM, before you point that out )
Micha wrote on Wed, 28 May 2008 18:24 | ... Sure IT could live with it but AR being as vulnarable as it is already it doesn't seem a good idea, same for weap or eny normal (although AR pays more than usual for cheap eny) ...
mch
|
weap normal puts you 2 levels behind, no more. Plug it into the Fibonacci sequence. Along with the fact that you are already behind in weaps anyway due to low resource count, hence you have to trade anyway... I think it not too bad a choice.
eny normal I'd prefer not to do either, hence why I put the other first, even though doing it that way gives you 33 points.
[Updated on: Wed, 28 May 2008 04:58] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: TT AR |
Wed, 28 May 2008 08:27 |
|
iztok | | Commander | Messages: 1210
Registered: April 2003 Location: Slovenia, Europe | |
|
Hi!
magic9mushroom wrote on Wed, 28 May 2008 10:47 | TT gives better eventual hab
|
The keyword is eventual. An AR needs to live that long to get benefits form TT terra techs. Since AR is the most easily killed race in early and mid game, and one of the most difficult to kill in late game, most players take their chance rather early. Not having an immunity makes AR just slower == even easier target.
If you still don't belive us, I suggest you to run a 100 BB testbed in the same tiny dense uni with your AR, an AR with one immunity, and a HG JoaT, then compare the results. IMO you'll be heavily disapointed by the non-immune-AR peformance.
BR, Iztok
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: TT AR |
Thu, 29 May 2008 02:57 |
|
iztok | | Commander | Messages: 1210
Registered: April 2003 Location: Slovenia, Europe | |
|
Hi!
magic9mushroom wrote on Wed, 28 May 2008 14:50 | Are you saying 100 Arm BBs ASAP or 100 BBs ASAP?
|
From RGCS:
---
the "std BB test".
Std BB testbed: alone in a small, packed, maxmins, accbbs, nre (comets!).
Std BB design: BB-TGD-organic-bears-3bsc-3jam20-OT-20arm missiles (can be buildt by all PRT/LRT combos).
Tech required to build 'em: 10-24-12-13-11-7
Build 100 benchmark BBs, the year you manage to do that is your benchmark. For example, a decent (non-CA) -f race can do that ~2455. There's HGs that do it in the mid 40ies ofc, and I've seen people claiming they do it in the low 40ies with special QS races.
---
BR, Iztok
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: TT AR |
Thu, 29 May 2008 04:02 |
|
magic9mushroom | | Commander | Messages: 1361
Registered: May 2008 | |
|
And about my other points? I'm not good at race design, so what should I use as the "immune AR" and the "HG JOAT"?
Edit: BTW, I consider that benchmark biased against ARs, since it focuses entirely on weaps, and pays no regard to a) AR energy, or b) AR construction. Hence AR needs to research more to build this than anyone else. I know weaps is the most important tech, but still I already know my race will lose this due to standard weaps alone. Remember how the point of my race was to be mobile due to large hab, not to be superpowered early? I'll do a 2450 test now against a 3i AR and against the ARvids, and tell you the results. Suggest anything else I should put it against.
[Updated on: Thu, 29 May 2008 05:35] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: TT AR |
Fri, 30 May 2008 09:45 |
|
iztok | | Commander | Messages: 1210
Registered: April 2003 Location: Slovenia, Europe | |
|
Hi!
magic9mushroom wrote on Thu, 29 May 2008 10:02 | Edit: BTW, I consider that benchmark biased against ARs
|
It's not biased. It's game reality. While AR is without decent amount of remote miners to cover its mineral hole, is it vulnerable to every race with decent production, tech and minerals.
Quote: | what should I use as the "immune AR" and the "HG JOAT"?
|
JoaT:
IFE, NRSE, OBRM, NAS, RS
Grav immune, temp 36 wide shifted 20 clicks from the edge, rad 36 wide shifted 16 clicks from the edge (1-in-7), 19%
pop: 1/1000
factories: 11/9/13 3g
mines 10/3/13
weapons cheap, con normal, rest expensive, 0 points remaining.
Population is your strenght, so scout agressively, prioritize terraforming to grow more pop.
---
"Lone" AR:
IFE, ISB, LSP, RS
Grav immune, temp -120 - 0, rad 16 - 60 (1-in-7), 15%
Divisor 10
weap, con cheap; en, prop normal; elec, bio expensive.
14 points to min conc.
Minor problems:
- unusual combo: grav immunity and IFE and ramscoop engines,
- has pen-scanners, but elec expensive,
- has only standard remotes, so it will need to research expensive elec-7 to get super-robo-miner as the first and the last one ever used.
---
"Team" AR:
Check kotk's rad-immune designs. They're near perfect.
Quote: | Suggest anything else I should put it against.
|
Small normal or dense uni, 2 expert Turnindrines (SS), that will be "flooding" you with beta DDs in early game, 1 expert Robotoid HE for late-game problems. Make them allied, so they'll not attack each oter. Enjoy (if you can ).
BR, Iztok
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: TT AR |
Fri, 30 May 2008 22:56 |
|
magic9mushroom | | Commander | Messages: 1361
Registered: May 2008 | |
|
iztok wrote on Fri, 30 May 2008 23:45 | Hi!
magic9mushroom wrote on Thu, 29 May 2008 10:02 | Edit: BTW, I consider that benchmark biased against ARs
|
It's not biased. It's game reality. While AR is without decent amount of remote miners to cover its mineral hole, is it vulnerable to every race with decent production, tech and minerals.
|
I'd agree, but that's not my point. My point is that AR will have far better shields and probably better armor by the time they get Weap 24. You have a point though.
iztok wrote on Fri, 30 May 2008 23:45 |
Quote: | what should I use as the "immune AR" and the "HG JOAT"?
|
JoaT:
IFE, NRSE, OBRM, NAS, RS
Grav immune, temp 36 wide shifted 20 clicks from the edge, rad 36 wide shifted 16 clicks from the edge (1-in-7), 19%
pop: 1/1000
factories: 11/9/13 3g
mines 10/3/13
weapons cheap, con normal, rest expensive, 0 points remaining.
Population is your strenght, so scout agressively, prioritize terraforming to grow more pop.
|
That's close to the Feds, right?
iztok wrote on Fri, 30 May 2008 23:45 | "Lone" AR:
IFE, ISB, LSP, RS
Grav immune, temp -120 - 0, rad 16 - 60 (1-in-7), 15%
Divisor 10
weap, con cheap; en, prop normal; elec, bio expensive.
14 points to min conc.
Minor problems:
- unusual combo: grav immunity and IFE and ramscoop engines,
- has pen-scanners, but elec expensive,
- has only standard remotes, so it will need to research expensive elec-7 to get super-robo-miner as the first and the last one ever used.
---
"Team" AR:
Check kotk's rad-immune designs. They're near perfect.
|
LSP with 15%? En normal? No ARM? Okay, I'll give it a shot, but I think that's one thing my TT AR could actually beat.
iztok wrote on Fri, 30 May 2008 23:45 |
Quote: | Suggest anything else I should put it against.
|
Small normal or dense uni, 2 expert Turnindrines (SS), that will be "flooding" you with beta DDs in early game, 1 expert Robotoid HE for late-game problems. Make them allied, so they'll not attack each oter. Enjoy (if you can ).
BR, Iztok
|
As I said, I'm new to Stars!, so I might not do too well there, but I can try
On why I made this race and think it's not crap, here's my reasoning:
ARs are not particularly weak in the first 30 years IMO, as they have similar resources to others and others are pumping a lot of theirs back into facts (otherwise they'll get eaten for breakfast). However, in the mid-game, ARs are extremely weak, as by this point everyone else has far more resources and fleets big enough to crap on SBs. Hence you have this race, a semi-HP design, giving up a bit of early strength (through to 2450) for ridiculous growth after that as planets turn green and start bringing in the resources, allowing you to survive until minerals kick in and you win. The idea came from reading a couple of old Jason Cawley articles and the AR Guide by Leonard Dickens. I agree that it is possible to kill this race with a lot of early pressure, but that's the same for all HPs. The idea here is that by the end, you should be able to live anywhere, hence you can Mao much more easily than with a hab of 1/2 (what your submitted one ends up with). (Also it means you get more resources, of course). I'm not saying that it is a better design all-round , just that it has its merits and is hence a reasonable race to play.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: TT AR |
Fri, 30 May 2008 22:59 |
|
magic9mushroom | | Commander | Messages: 1361
Registered: May 2008 | |
|
Soobie wrote on Sat, 31 May 2008 01:15 | Ooooo .... En normal
If I was going to play En normal, I'd be inclined to run with something like:
AR
ISB, LSP, RS
G: 0.75g - 8.00g
T: 16ºC - 136ºC
R: Imm
(1 in 5)
15% GR; 1/10 divisor
W, P, C cheap; En normal; El, B Exp.
Radram LF ftw
Also there is a bias towards better starting greens by edging G - With En normal, could swap G & T around
Even with AR I don't know if I'm a fan of LSP, but if any race can deal with it it'll be AR (and -f HE ofc )
Just sayin'
|
Again, LSP with 15%? Ouch. And what's that about edging grav being better?
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | |
Re: TT AR |
Mon, 02 June 2008 07:13 |
|
Soobie | | Officer Cadet 3rd Year | Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007 Location: Australia | |
|
The extreme habs for grav and temp are less likely (up to about 8 clicks in, iirc) so the tendency is for grav and temp not to be near the edge. Therefore if you edge your race hab to include the extremes (which won't occur as often) it means that temp and grav will tend not to be at the extreme of your starting hab zone, but somewhere closer to the middle. From the perspective of your race, it means the starting green is better.
Since AR relies on hab for Res on a planet, having a tendecy towards better starting greens is good because you get more res from the get go.
*Eventually* you may be marginally worse off because you have less overall greens BUT when calcuating res, even reds are considered 25%, so really who gives a toss? By the time I care about terra of the -15%s I'm swimming in pop and they can stay red rather than eventually terraforming them to, say, 20%. pffft.
Flip-side: edging = better cohab.
Thanks, I'll keep edging my grav or temp for AR - I find it useful.
edit: grammar
[Updated on: Mon, 02 June 2008 07:17] Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: TT AR |
Tue, 03 June 2008 05:50 |
|
Soobie | | Officer Cadet 3rd Year | Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007 Location: Australia | |
|
Snippy?
hahahaha
ahahahahaha
I was being matter-of-fact after a couple of drinks. I saw it that you asked why edged. I explained why edged. It wasn't clear to me that you were commenting on LSP.
I'd be more inclined to say this is snippy:
magic9mushroom wrote on Sun, 01 June 2008 17:03 |
@LEit: That's a pretty screwed up comparison you've drawn there.
|
OK, now I'm being snippy. You got to me. I'm out.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | | | |
Re: TT AR |
Wed, 04 June 2008 01:00 |
|
|
Getting back to the subject, I thought I would share a comparison between a TT AR & a nonTT AR in universes of the same definition (6 players, medium, normal, distant, unclumped. Diplomacy banned).
Wizard (I hope & doubt that he will mind me imparting this info since Sixpack1 is over) played the nonTT AR in Sixpack1 which I hosted. I was originally & independantly going to use a race design that was very similar but, since Wizard is the host of Sixpack2, I thought it looked too much like a clone so I redesigned the race as a TT AR.
Race design
Common: IFE,ARM,ISB,NRSE,NAS,RS. 15% growth, divisor=10. En/weap/con cheap, Prop/Elec exp.
Wizard: Habs=Grav Imm 1/7. Bio Exp.
Me: TT. Habs=no immunity, 1/5. Bio Std.
This comparison ends in 2460 since my game is still on. Wizard is on line 1 & I am on line 2 in each pairing.
...... # .. Avg .. Pop ... Surface(1000kt) ..... Min.rate (kt) .... Equiv
Year Plan . Val ...(k) . Iron . Bora . Germ . Iron . Bora . Germ .. Mines . Res
2410 .. 7 . 63% .. 296 .. 0.8 .. 0.6 .. 0.3 ... 69 ... 57 ... 62 .... 20 .. 0.7
....... 3 . 74% .. 297 .. 0.5 .. 0.5 .. 0.6 ... 61 ... 43 ... 53 .... 20 .. 0.5
2420 . 16 . 54% .. 886 .. 1.7 .. 1.7 .. 1.1 .. 191 .. 196 .. 165 .... 20 .. 2.4
...... 14 . 52% .. 726 .. 0.9 .. 1.3 .. 1.2 .. 141 .. 142 .. 132 .... 20 .. 1.7
2430 . 19 . 63% . 2192 .. 3.1 .. 3.7 .. 3.0 .. 503 .. 477 .. 422 ... 216 .. 4.9
...... 21 . 46% . 1709 .. 1.4 .. 2.6 .. 2.3 .. 363 .. 333 .. 342 .... 92 .. 3.5
2440 . 19 . 81% . 6008 .. 7.1 .. 8.9 .. 6.2 .. 928 .. 887 .. 807 ... 722 .. 10.6
...... 28 . 50% . 4031 .. 3.2 .. 4.4 .. 3.4 .. 533 .. 514 .. 497 ... 380 .. 7.1
2450 . 19 . 88% .14711 .. 9.5 . 20.4 . 13.7 . 2846 . 2904 . 2688 .. 4988 . 17.4
...... 22 . 53% . 9133 .. 4.3 .. 3.5 .. 4.8 .. 958 .. 910 .. 854 ... 416 . 10.5
2460 . 17 . 89% .23378 . 27.7 . 34.9 . 26.4 . 4120 . 3675 . 2831 .. 9928 . 21.2
...... 23 . 60% .17106 . 11.2 .. 9.2 .. 8.3 . 2249 . 2052 . 1851 .. 2346 . 17.2
What Happened Next?
As most of you know, Wiz
...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Jun 15 17:22:19 EDT 2024
|