Home » Primary Racial Traits » AR » AR and Kill Starbase
| Re: AR and Kill Starbase |
Sat, 14 December 2002 11:28   |
|
 Apelord |
 | Master Chief Petty Officer |
Messages: 99
Registered: November 2002 | |
|
In your example of 12 nexi against 7 (you said 12 but only 7 will be used) jammer 50's here's what happens:
Armageddons: Accuracy ~97%, 3 per slot fired, Each slot fired does 764 damage to sheilds, same damage to armor. Hence you would need 7 ships per token to acheive 5000 armor damage per salvo thereby destroying an enemy ships per slot fired.
Omega's: Accuracy ~99%, 3 per slot, each slot does 474 damage to sheilds and armor. Hence you need 11 ships per token to to acheive 5000 armor damage per salvo.
So an equal fight is a stack of 11 Omega ships versus 7 armageddon ships all other things held constant to allow easy comparision of the two stacks, we need to look at the relative cost of 21 armageddons versus 33 Omegas. we'll leave the added ship cost out for now since we are interested in the efficiency of the investment in weapons. If Arms are cheaper then the added cost for additional Omega ships will only make the equation look better.
Arms Omegas ArmCostRatio
Iron 1407 1716 .819
Bor 483 594 .813
Germ 336 396 .848
Res 504 594 .848
So to generate the same firepower armageddons are 15-20% cheaper across the board. If you have to outnumber me 1.57 to one in total ships to be even on the battlefeild that sucks. Can you really count on having 57% (more once you factor in total cost cost of more ships) more resources and minerals than your neighbor? And if you had them why waste it on a design that allows them to stay competitive with you?
Welcome to the big leagues 
Now having said all that mouthful when are Omega's useful? They are lighter, therefore easier to design a gateable Nubian which could mean all the difference. Speed to the front,mobility,etc. are very important factors. They are also useful in counter design...
...
[Updated on: Sat, 14 December 2002 11:50]
"The object of war is not to die
for your country but to make
the other bastard die for his" -George PattonReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: AR and Kill Starbase |
Sat, 14 December 2002 11:40 |
|
| Apelord |
| Master Chief Petty Officer |
Messages: 99
Registered: November 2002 | |
|
| jeffimix wrote on Sat, 14 December 2002 08:53 |
Back on topic. I think that sometimes AR with kill star base feels cheap. However, with careful scanning and lots of freighters, and since you can just leave weapons off've starbases in end game, it isn't too bad. Bad at Home world though, very bad.
|
The problem introduced is not that you can't defend against the tactic, it's that the tactic is so cheap and available so early. By using jihad cruisers, a little bit of chaffe, and Kill Starbase orders you can exterminate your neighboring AR by 2440. You don't even need any bombers nor do you need substantial amounts of cruisers, just a dozen or so and 64-128 chaffe per major world, less if they haven't put up fully loaded Jihad Starbases (which they won't have very many of believe me).
Second place the AR weakness comes into play is that during the BB era starbases start getting swept aside so easily that you don't need Kill Starbase orders. One salvo from a stack of 30 Doom BB's and even Deathstars are toast. With it went a significant investment and a world. You may not lose much pop, but where you ging to put the pop? Remember AR's have a declining output of resources per pop unlike regular races where the relationship between pop and resources is linear. So not only do they become easy to collapse, but their resource output declines faster than other races because when they put pop into developed worlds they get less out of it. I.e. a normal race can uplift some pop, plop it on a back world and get the same amount of resources from it they were getting before. AR's don't they get fewer resources.
Bottom line is the AR PRT is fun to play (my fav for a long time), but if you EVER get placed on the defensive you're done. Good players will seize the opportunity to expand into your space so early that it is not likely you will live long. I have won games as an AR, but not against anyone who was an accomplished player and only twice without allies.
...
"The object of war is not to die
for your country but to make
the other bastard die for his" -George PattonReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: AR and Kill Starbase |
Thu, 02 January 2003 23:23 |
|
|
|
Apelord, the number of Jammers and Computers used is irrelevant. The max computing is 100%, and the max jamming is 95%. Adding more on either end past that point has no effect. Thus at max jam/computing levels on both sides, torps beat missiles easily, since there is only a net 5% computing to increase accuracy, leaving missiles a poor choice.
Missiles are primarily for use against targets that are not protected by sufficient jamming.
The Dopelar Effect:
The tendancy for stupid ideas to seem more intelliegent when they come at you rapidly.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: AR and Kill Starbase |
Sun, 12 January 2003 14:14 |
|
|
|
Directly from the strategy guide, Chapter 8:
"The maximum jamming for fleets is 95%--anything above 95% jamming by the formulas is still treated as 95% (unlike computing, which goes to 100%). The maximum jamming for starbases is 75%."
You a correct that it is on a 1-for-1 basis, and like you said, you are limited to a maximum jamming capability, but ALSO there is a maximum computing ability, making Torpedoes useful against extremely well jammed targets, since the net computing power can only be 5%.
"Summing up, when both computing power and jamming power are near their maximums, they can't move any more. Also, the adjusted accuracy tends rapidly towards the base accuracy of the torpedo, as both computing and jamming rise. That is why standard torpedoes work better against highly jammed targets."
The Dopelar Effect:
The tendancy for stupid ideas to seem more intelliegent when they come at you rapidly.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: AR and Kill Starbase |
Sun, 12 January 2003 16:19 |
|
|
|
So if I have super jamming AND super computing on my 'super-brain' nubian, then Torpedoes do better than Cap missiles? OR do both just shoot at 5% accuracy if enough super0jamming is applied.... Torpedoes be harder to jam so... more cost effective because of overhead of making so many more ships with less torpedoes?
But base accuracy can be jammed right? T
Then how does jamming reduction go for base accuracy?
Email me as ----jeffimix@----yahoo.com----
(remove dashes)
The spamatron! run!!!Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: AR and Kill Starbase |
Sun, 12 January 2003 18:03 |
|
| Apelord |
| Master Chief Petty Officer |
Messages: 99
Registered: November 2002 | |
|
Hmmm Quick testbed: 4 nexi against 7 jammer 30 Nubs.
Target ships have move 2.5 and a balance of sheilds and armor to make them last as along as possible.
Offensive ships have move 2.5, four nexi and a slot of omegas or a slot of Arms.
Ten offensive ships sent against 25 target drones>
Average Results:
Omegas: total damage 8085 sheilds, 7600 armor
Arms: total damage 11614 sheilds, 8075 armor
Omega's shot twice before targets disengaged
Arms shot three times before target disengaged.
The longer range of the Arms proved to be a distinct advantage since the targets couldn't manuever out of range.
Test was replicated ten times for verification.
Comparing cost (cost of omegas versus arm only) per damage dealt Arms were:
Iron: 5.4% more cost effective
Boranium:7.7 % more cost effective
Germ: .59% more cost effective
Res: 2.9% more cost effective
Bottom line is Arms do work better than Omega's in pure testing however they are heavier and more costly on a per unit basis (even if they are more cost effective) and this must be taken into account when designing a ship.
When the strategy guide was being written, the problem of answering everything with 'it depends' came up. While technically it is the correct answer, a guide couldn't cover all possibilities for design/counterdesign hence a conscious (and fairly contested) decision was made to write from the veiwpoint of presenting the most general rules which would allow players to come up to speed quickly and be competitive. Once they were up to speed, they would then begin to explore some of the nuances of tactics and strategy that were impossble to cover comprehensively. I do remember debating this section with Jason for a long time one night on IRC and the decision to recommend torps over missiles came down to the fact that successful missile designs require more finesse than do torpedo ships. Additionally the lower investment in torp ships means a faulty design doesn't penalize the player as much as a faulty missile des
...
[Updated on: Sun, 12 January 2003 18:49]
"The object of war is not to die
for your country but to make
the other bastard die for his" -George PattonReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: AR and Kill Starbase |
Sun, 12 January 2003 19:37 |
|
|
|
Well it'll take a couple to get them to the same level as Cap torps right? And then it'll take the same to get further... so you need more jammers?
Okay.
Email me as ----jeffimix@----yahoo.com----
(remove dashes)
The spamatron! run!!!Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: AR and Kill Starbase |
Sun, 12 January 2003 22:20 |
|
|
|
There's a difference between facing target drones attempting to disengage and fighting against combat ships. The Arm's extra range wouldn't help very much in that case. Perhaps you should test a set of otherwise identical vessels (7 Jam 30 and 4 Nexi on each, which a balance of shields and armor) plus a slot of Arms on one side, and a slot of Omegas on the other.
This should provide you with some data which will actually useful in terms of Missiles vs. Torpedoes in combat under high jamming.
I don't have time to do a test myself right now, so I just plugged in the numbers into the spreadsheet made by Jason Cawley.
Arms:
Accuracy: 31.39%
Expected Damage per Slot:
Raw Damage: 1575 (assuming 100% acc)
247.2 armor
382.3 shields
629.5 total
Omegas:
Accuracy: 80.40%
Expected Damage per Slot:
Raw Damage: 762 (assuming 100% acc)
381.1 armor
404.3 shields
785.4 total
So Omegas are, against a shielded target, about 1.25 times as effective per round fired.
[Updated on: Sun, 12 January 2003 22:32]
The Dopelar Effect:
The tendancy for stupid ideas to seem more intelliegent when they come at you rapidly.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: AR and Kill Starbase |
Mon, 13 January 2003 13:13 |
|
|
|
Nut once shields are gone... that dissipates, so torpedoes are effective in late game, and maybe some other odd times?
(nubian base armor makes them capable of using shielding)
Email me as ----jeffimix@----yahoo.com----
(remove dashes)
The spamatron! run!!!Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | |
| Re: AR and Kill Starbase |
Tue, 14 January 2003 11:17 |
|
|
|
*shrug* I used the latest version from his own website. The results still sound right to me. The Arms don't do anywhere near enough damage to compensate for their reduced accuracy. They'd need to do somewhere around 1000 to beat Omegas under high jamming.
You're right though, it all depends on the circumstances. That's why I was clear every time, to state "under high jamming" and "against a shielded target". Because those are two very important qualifiers for torps beating missiles.
The Dopelar Effect:
The tendancy for stupid ideas to seem more intelliegent when they come at you rapidly.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: AR and Kill Starbase |
Fri, 17 January 2003 13:10 |
|
|
|
...but if the ship is equipped with Arms it will never close to within sapper range, so they would be useless. Or do you use Maximize Damage, as opposed to Maximize Damage Ratio?
I'd prefer to put in some dedicated beamers to take down the shields, rather than take up slots on my missile boats.
There's also the other factor of chaff. Both Arms and Omegas will kill chaff at the same rate (correct?) and since Omegas are cheaper, you can take the same amount of resources and build a fleet that will kill chaff faster or build more chaff to protect itself, and I think that's another advantage to consider. That's just off the top of my head. I still need to work out the exact numbers.
I used two identical designs, and calculated the cost, and by Ironium, for the same cost, you could build 30 more X-Ray chaff per Omega Nub versus an Arm Nub. That is quite substancial when you get to large stacks. The savings in terms of Boranium and Germanium aren't quite as pronounced, and the resource savings are only enough for 6 more chaff, but I know that Ironium is the chief limiting factor in the late game. I used 4 slots of missiles on both designs.
So with stacks numbering around 50 Arm Nub in value, you could be facing 50 Omega Nub with 1500 more chaff than you have. 1500 chaff would mean (with 600 missiles firing on both sides per round) that you would get about 2.5 more rounds in on the enemy nubs with the Omegas. As the tokens get larger and larger, those 2.5 rounds of extra fire become more and more devastating.
Apelord, please, tell me where my logic is wrong there (I will admit to being a bit of a newbie in Stars!) And feel free to try a cost comparison and number of extra chaff with your own designs, because I'm still working on my ship designing skills.
[Updated on: Fri, 17 January 2003 13:13]
The Dopelar Effect:
The tendancy for stupid ideas to seem more intelliegent when they come at you rapidly.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | |
| Re: AR and Kill Starbase |
Mon, 10 May 2004 06:36 |
|
|
|
The reasons that the blackjacks on the starbases mangled the cruisers are simple.
1. The stations would have had higher init than the cruisers so fire first one the cruiser get in range.
2. The blackjacks are range 1 weapons on a station.
Always a good counter to blackjack ships hitting stations. However, I'm quite sure you'll face missiles or range 3 beamers next and with net damage orders on the attacking ships those station mounted blackjacks won't be firing.
Ptolemy
Though we often ask how and why, we must also do to get the answers to the questions.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Apr 25 09:24:05 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Ummm, sure! 
I do FREESTYLE math.
