| -f / QS / HP in teams (split off from EAC vs IRC) |
Sat, 28 August 2004 14:57  |
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Score ranks: Team IRC 1st through 8th, EAC 9th through 16th (EAC may have one or more races tied for 8th place, but they can figure out that we have 1st through 8th).
|
If u have a bunch of QS type races and they have a bunch of HP type races, then they will likely try to stall for time till their eccons kick in.
Never underestimate your opponent.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: EAC vs IRC |
Mon, 30 August 2004 11:49  |
|
|
|
When I say possible HP, that may not be the classic definition, but more towards HP compared to team IRC. Just saying what looks like from the data we are given, lower scores at 2425 tend to hint at more HPish thinking.
We almost for sure are talking OA ships with TT available to terraform both sides. Choosing more narrow habs or lower pop growth rates are ways to be more HP ish (as well as the usual 1/2500 rather than 1/1000).
Scores can be misleading... having more wimpy warships and stardocks can give you a higher score, even if your opponent has 10% more resources (and a few high quality warships).
| Quote: |
But what if they will not get that time? In such a situation one usually tries to trade space for time, but against a QS he's going to be attacked quite soon with ships
|
One tries to compete with minefields to reduce speed of opponent, stardocks, and take advantage of how warpower doubles within a relative few number of years in early going which means by the time his warships are built, gathered and attacking your warships are near same count... and your opponent doesn't know where you'll gate them all.
I had a vaguely similar situation against Sotek in Transformers. I spent the early years hiding behind exploding minefields on my border planets while I built up their abillity to throw up well armed stardocks as best I could. My few warships were mostly snipers against his expansion areas that weren't defended well yet. (It is tricky working around even friendly minefields that explode over your planets).
It took till 2450 for me to have enough forces to feel safe for a massive counter attack, I didn't know what hidden forces or jihad starbases or suprise help from his Warmonger friend might happen. When I attacked, I tried to cloak some of my forces and suprise attacks including minesweeping chaff. Part of the hoped for plan was waiting for his fleet to show up so I could ambush but that didn't happen at first. Managed to ambush his jihads later though with a minefield chaff strike.
...
In a game like this one should not underestimate the power of energy tech... for defenses and mineral packet throwers (and better shields for your warhips to deal with jihads). IS race builds defences much cheaper than normal.
[Updated on: Mon, 30 August 2004 12:05] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: EAC vs IRC |
Mon, 30 August 2004 12:09 |
|
| Orca |
 | Chief Warrant Officer 1 |
Messages: 148
Registered: June 2003
Location: Orbiting tower at the L5 ... | |
|
| multilis wrote on Mon, 30 August 2004 08:49 |
When I say possible HP, that may not be the classic definition, but more towards HP compared to team IRC. Just saying what looks like from the data we are given, lower scores at 2425 tend to hint at more HPish thinking.
|
Uh, hello? If you read up, we think they've got 4 -f's, 3 HP's, and an AR. You don't *have* to operate in a complete information vacuum if you read...
[edit: added "to"]
[Updated on: Mon, 30 August 2004 15:51]
Jesus saves.
Allah forgives.
Cthulhu thinks you'd make a nice sandwich.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: EAC vs IRC |
Mon, 30 August 2004 16:50 |
|
|
|
| Quote: |
No it can't. Figure it out
|
When I mean HP I don't mean classic definition only but comparitively high production.
Start with a -f. Then up the number of factories and production per factory, but leave factory cost at 25 (which lowers the cost of having more factories). I call it a vampire race, needs either a friend or opponent to build factories.
Knowing that you have a friend with TT and orbital adjusters can mean a fairly narrow hab. IMO IS works best in such a setting.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: EAC vs IRC |
Mon, 30 August 2004 19:07 |
|
| alric |
 | Crewman 1st Class |
Messages: 38
Registered: September 2003 | |
|
| multilis wrote on Mon, 30 August 2004 16:50 |
| Quote: |
No it can't. Figure it out
|
When I mean HP I don't mean classic definition only but comparitively high production.
Start with a -f. Then up the number of factories and production per factory, but leave factory cost at 25 (which lowers the cost of having more factories). I call it a vampire race, needs either a friend or opponent to build factories.
Knowing that you have a friend with TT and orbital adjusters can mean a fairly narrow hab. IMO IS works best in such a setting.
|
Post up a race design then that meets your criteria plus all the "observed criteria" you'll find in previous posts on this thread.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: EAC vs IRC |
Mon, 30 August 2004 20:10 |
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Post up a race design then that meets your criteria plus all the "observed criteria" you'll find in previous posts on this thread.
|
Don't have much to work with... unless there is a discussion somewhere else as well. Orca alludes to previous mention of his info such as -f but I don't see any... the previous references could fit versions of QS as well. At end are quotes of what seems the most detailed.
The following is just a rough demonstration race:
IFE, IS, OBRM, NAS, RS
1 in 7 hab, no immunities, 19% growth,
1/1000 pop production, 15/25/20 factories, 10/3/10 mines,
2 cheap techs (rest expensive), box checked for rest at 3.
With orgy can eventually squeeze 5500 resources out of a 100% world given lots of time to build up.
Theory is such a race has a team of helpers including the OA ships with total terraforming and being IS can do bit of stuff even with red worlds.
| Quote: |
Team EAC has 2 SDs, 2 ISs, 2 CAs, an IT, and probably an AR. The SDs and ISs are their front line races (HWs right on the border), and are building colonies all over the place. Our guess is that the front 4 are fast, and the back 4 are going to be big.
|
| Quote: |
Uh, hello? If you read up, we think they've got 4 -f's, 3 HP's, and an AR. You don't *have* to operate in a complete information vacuum if you read...
|
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: EAC vs IRC |
Mon, 30 August 2004 20:21 |
|
| Orca |
| Chief Warrant Officer 1 |
Messages: 148
Registered: June 2003
Location: Orbiting tower at the L5 ... | |
|
| multilis wrote on Mon, 30 August 2004 17:10 |
IFE, IS, OBRM, NAS, RS
1 in 7 hab, no immunities, 19% growth,
1/1000 pop production, 15/25/20 factories, 10/3/10 mines,
2 cheap techs (rest expensive), box checked for rest at 3.
|
To quote Sotek, I am amused.
[Updated on: Mon, 30 August 2004 20:22]
Jesus saves.
Allah forgives.
Cthulhu thinks you'd make a nice sandwich.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Sure they do it in 4 steps. 
