Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Academy » Macro mineral management
| Macro mineral management |
Sat, 25 October 2003 23:45  |
|
 Zathras |
 | Crewman 1st Class |
Messages: 32
Registered: September 2003 | |
|
At the macro level, one should consider the consumption of minerals.
As with much of the game of stars!, it is a matter of balance. If you find a way to consume your minerals in consistent manner, you are better of than the same race with no IR and lots of BO an GE.
This subject could be its own thread.
Briefly, some factors:
a) amount of chaff
b) missile v. beamers composition
c) factory settings, ( -f provides a bunch of Ge )
d) use of organic armor
e) type and amount of electronic gadgets
Zathras
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| Re: Macro mineral management |
Sat, 27 December 2003 12:48  |
|
| Orca |
 | Chief Warrant Officer 1 |
Messages: 148
Registered: June 2003
Location: Orbiting tower at the L5 ... | |
|
The short version - attempting to plan out your minerals from year 2400 through year 2500 is unfeasible due to counterdesign and other issues (not the least of which is how much of which minerals will actually be available). Instead, I prefer to tailor my mineral usage to my current mineral stockpiles.
Early on (through cruisers), minerals in general aren't really an issue - once you've gotten past the initial movement crunch. Jihads are nicer than the earlier weapons (colloidal phaser exempted), but are chaff for the thresher when more powerful weapons come out. Don't build more jihads than you absolutely have to.
Later than Jihads, I find a general mix of approximately 40% mineral investment in beamers, 40% in missiles, with 20% going to support ships and the like. Every 5 years or so (less if mineral stockpiles are low) I re-evaluate my mineral stocks and tweak things to keep things on an even keel.
Jesus saves.
Allah forgives.
Cthulhu thinks you'd make a nice sandwich.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Macro mineral management |
Sat, 27 December 2003 15:46 |
|
|
|
| LEit wrote on Wed, 24 December 2003 10:51 |
Short answer: rush to nubians and build beamers. They cost about equal amounts of iron/bora/germ, you can usually build huge piles of them if you have enough resources (which you needed to get the tech for these things anyway).
|
Short answer: design a quick start race and rush to cripple LEit before he gets nub tech
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Macro mineral management |
Mon, 29 December 2003 17:18 |
|
| Kotk | 
 | Commander |
Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003 | |
|
| Quote: |
Return to the five year plans   ...ehem.
|
Why not? 5 years build is about right size fleet to attack someone early or midgame. So check it out if you are able to build 5 years in a row or run out of something somewhere.
Endgame... sure, check the minerals how often needed. Low with germ then maybe research electronics some levels to miniaturize the germ cost, throw factories out of queues, put superlatanium on design, put muthas on design, build few Arma BB-s... overcloakers ... whatever. Unused minerals are wasted minerals. Only AR take it easy like "what mineral mm?  Send 25 freighters of stuff to planet where something is less than 2000kt".
| Quote: |
My guess is that jihads were meant to be put on starbases, not the ships- comp/jihad combo on cruisers/dest is way to vulnerable to counterdesign IMO, although jihad DD could be made viable for short range surgical strikes vs. all beam starbases. 
|
Lets say i would get them jihads with SS HG about 2435. They make quite cheap solution to kill someone unneeded and take his territory. Doing same with bazookaes is lot more expensive resource-wise so fine deal with SS. Opponent got about 5 noteworthy planets (rest are way under development), 8k econ and 12k to go for jihads of his own, low defenses, empty orbitals, thinks that war starts at 2460 and is blind as mutt as well. Bang and bang and down to 4k, better planets taken over with probably most installations and minerals. Nothing to counterdesign there... check the technology browser, war is over by 2445. 
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Macro mineral management |
Tue, 30 December 2003 09:41 |
|
| Kotk |
| Commander |
Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003 | |
|
| Quote: |
Heh,.. looks like no'une heard about the 5 yr plans to perceive the irony... 
|
The communists only dreamed about ultimate control like you have when playing stars. So what does not work with real people works very well with "pop". 
| Quote: |
Aghem... You attack one of 'em worlds- fine.
|
Year 1... SS attack 2 or 3 of his main worlds simultaneously with relative weak arms (20 missiles) but OK bombers + pop bomb. That makes opponents 9K econ to drop to 6k econ... he has 12K to go to Jihads and about 3K to go to deltas. 
| Quote: |
Year two 32 jihads per stardock on every planet with at least 4 comp and better armor/shielding+ some planetary defences.
|
Year 2. Opponent researched deltas and maybe put up betas here or there or built some bazooka cruisers. 7k to go to Jihads. SS attacked another 2 worlds dropping opponent to 5K econ, the attack fleets are closing to opponents HW. Same time tossed up forts with gates at what were opponents two main planets before.
| Quote: |
Turn 3-4 all defences are up and starfleet building is in progress. Whatever that guy was doing while yea were building that jihad cruiser fleet? Where are the mines, the fleet?
|
Years 3-4 SS cleaned HW and gated in 40 gatling cruisers or 80 gatling DD-s and some more SFX-es to keep everything under control. Opponent: HW and breeders gone, 3.5K econ from 10 little colonies ... can build deltas at the rest of the forts if there are iron or may research one year more for Jihads... does not matter.
| Quote: |
I mean with prop you take, that stardock is likely to take at least two shots from 'em 32 jihads with 4 comp that are two times cheaper at least than your fleet one on one. I mean, does the concept of cost effective war ring any bells? i. e. didn't WWI teach people not to throw infantry at machine guns? Hellooo...? At least 5 cruisers gone before a single shot is fired, how is THAT for a counterdesign? What do you have a hundred jihad cruisers to spare? What if they have elec10? How are you going to get past at least 50% jamming with demented 2 tech slots on cruiser?
|
You helloo and helloo there and ring the bells too lot. I have used such effective war in practice. Just do not run out of fuel and do not have too few bombers.
Why no elec 10 at 2435? Because it costs 20K for my average opponent.
Why SS needed 100 jihad cruisers?  I was talking about 15 jihad rogues or 30 Jihad DD-s, couple of gatling DD-s to sweep casual minefield or to beat any gated together skirmishers, few SFXes, some freighters and about 90 M-80 minibombers as first wave. All together it costs about 9K resources so 4 planets build it 2 years. Second wave costs about 10k mostly gatlings because it needs to be light to come from 100/250 gates and can absorb any orbital fire the leftover 200-300 resource colonies can make, trust me.
Testing some of my SS HG-s against AI-s i have reached needed tech by 2432 without holding the econ development. All the fleet is built in the 2433-2438 range from 4 planets and at 2445 the war is over.
Do not overestimate the orbitals. Full jihad station does kill none from 40 bazooka cruisers before it die from their fire, testbed it out.
...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | | |
| Re: Macro mineral management |
Wed, 31 December 2003 06:40 |
|
| alexdstewart |
 | Chief Warrant Officer 2 |
Messages: 164
Registered: July 2003
Location: Brisbane, QLD. | |
|
Hmm... an SS bend on galaxy domination attacks me the weaker opponent with combined force approach- while I have only minimal reserves and few defences- my goal is to waste the attack and preserve my econ. Well you can't ask for anything easier can you?
At least I should have a few year warning as you sweep the mines- that's something. The only thing that comes to my mind is speed 2.25+ sapper gatable cruiser. Set orders to disengage hit:
Turn 1: Sappers close in range and (hopefully) sap the shields off the missile ships (if any) the space dock fires the jihads then at the missile ships, probably inflicting significant casualties. Then the beam cruisers fire at sappers, damaging mostly only shields. Then missile fleet fires at the sappers and quite possobly heavily damages/destroys a few sappers. (or destroys them outright- the only important thing is that the missile ships have no shielding left)
Turn 2: sappers take sap more of the remaining shields, starbase fires at the missile ships again, killing many, while beamers take shots at sappers, probably killing them all. Missile ships, of 15 original rogues only about 5 remain and they would not be able to destroy the starbase at first shot.
Turn 3 If any sappers remain, they escape. Space dock takes a shot at the missile ships probably destroying all of them. Beamers close in range and destroy the space dock.
The result- at the cost of few suicidal sappers and a cheap stardock the entire missile component is destroyed- that got to be worth something- with sufficient number of sappers it is possible to give some dent to the master fleet itself with minimal resources. Or just outmanuver it with high speed missile ships of your own. Life is not hopeless after all...
In the Future there is only WAR...
Therefore our extinction is assured, it is just a matter of where and when.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | | | |
| Re: Macro mineral management |
Thu, 01 January 2004 14:39 |
|
| Kotk |
| Commander |
Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003 | |
|
| Quote: |
But I still don't know how yea are going to defend the shield poor missile ships against sappers?
|
Early there arent them. Later there is serious gatling stack with armed/any. Jihads fire starbase/any. 15 SS rogues have 4725 dp shields. So useful pulse sapper fleet can be built only at 2 developed planets with good germ.
Chaff is also present... not in huge numbers but about 100 or so. Mostly for throwing one chaff at every orbit to make everything visible and every design known when built. If i get sapper alert then chaff will be used to absorb orbital missiles.
| Quote: |
Also 90 minibombers? If your 're an SS why would you want to use the minibombers? I know that gatability is an issue but trading 91%(at least) cloaking for for gatability is a bit too much, espessialy if you only need 5 LBU bombers to level any mediocore planet- could easily be assembled into a fighting force with the added benifit of one hit resistance to minefields, suicide assassins etc.
|
Minibombers are cost efficient and gateable. Speed, cost and numbers are key impotance, so 75% cloak must be enough. LBU is not needed early. 90 minibombers kill ~300% of pop and 1260 installations. Spliting it into 3 fleets gives 3 defenseless planets died and only 200 mines and 200 factories destroyed from each leaving about 400/400 to SS. Gathered tohether they kill about 700 installations versus heavy defenses so kill a planet with 2 years.
What minefields? I think i had DD-s for them? Victim is not SD. SD choose only if its HP (so few minefields) or 2 against one and you know your partner is good at it. Kamikadze attack takes 2.25 speed, range 5 weapons and better init than that of gatling cruiser. What race can design it at 2435? If theres so powerful race why i am not dead already?
| Quote: |
Also since you obviously used this tactic before,- what would be the diplomatic fallout of such a sneak attack?
|
Only twice in real game. Everything depends on diplomatic situation. Once victim was IT when other neighbours JOAT and other IT were planning fighting together a SD that was not my neighbour. Both insisted to have long term peace with me. I offered them technological support agreeing windyly HOW powerful and dangerous these SD-s are long term. JOAT said i must not worry he is #1 and planning to take my victim as next and i can join if i want. So i colonized some low planet near that IT HW somewhere, built fort+ defenses/mines ... IT noticed it, built few bazooka DDs (to tell me his tech?) and pop dropped there and i made a bit noise how that bad IT attacked poor, peaceful and defenseless me. My fleets were already gathering... 10 years later i was #2 after that JOAT but at lot bigger territory and no diplomatic problems.
| Quote: |
People are paranoid enough about SS, so wouldn't they be compelled to form defensive alliences when they see their neighbour eradicated so quickly?
|
People are not paranoid about SS. People are smart. They know that SS is expensive PRT, not too good in econ and often (like also WM) played by weaker players. So they push into diplo channels paranoia to achieve a ground to fight that SS. JOAT cannot say it because everyone see its lie. JOAT put his frigate minelayers with 25ly from each other and no SS will starting pass from electronics 17. See: 20(non pen) x 17(elec tech) x 2(from NAS) x 2%(versus 98% cloak) is 13.6 Once SS prove theres nothing easy to pick their neighbours are quite respecting.
...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Macro mineral management |
Fri, 02 January 2004 00:33 |
|
| alexdstewart |
| Chief Warrant Officer 2 |
Messages: 164
Registered: July 2003
Location: Brisbane, QLD. | |
|
Sorry to bother but in the fleet you have, missiles are range 5 and therefore will not fire at turn 1 at the starbase at all. The sappsers are GATABLE- draw your own conclusions 
The sappers are also expendable- it doesn't matter if they die, as long as they sap the shields BEFORE the starbase fires. If you have chaff, the problem is worse, I would use somewhat slower gatlings to fininsh off the the missile ships, chaff AND beam cruisers (probably won't since they are lighter and range 3- so I need gatling destroyers). After the first battle of this kind- you'll destroy the sappers and the gatlings and the starbase for sure, but in the following battles, your heavily shielded cruisers are vulnirable to be outmanuvered by some fast tropido cruisers that would be able to wear you down eventually. Or by a cheap sapper starbase backed by some more conventional sappers and missile ships. The combo is more than cappable to wreck more damage when it costs even against overwhelming odds.
Hm... in reality when an SS attacks at multiple fronts AND without warning a weaker oppenent- well there is little you can do but make 'em pay.
P. S No need for LBU? Against HP's!? Yeah sure... Ah, sorry I forgot- you'ra a HG
In the Future there is only WAR...
Therefore our extinction is assured, it is just a matter of where and when.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | | |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat May 04 18:49:35 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
) Stardocks do have room for 48(!) jihads and 4 comp. Well 48*85*0.67(accuracy)=2743 raw damage
Usual beam cruiser has 700 armor+ 336 shields. As SS i would take shadows instead of wolverine and that makes it 420 from 4 shields. 
40 cruisers 15% damaged. One SFX heals most of it with one year. But i had the jihad rogues too, remember? So these usually kill that dock at turn 1 and so i needed only about 20 gatling cruisers to absorb the orbital Jihads shot, not 40. Any sort of gated together beamers that try to reach my rogues will die against them. 
Exactly! 
