[Updated on: Thu, 18 December 2003 20:12] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Hi!

Quote:

What I was implying is that you should only attack when you are sure you are going to win. If you need a calc to tell you whos gonna win, then maybe you should spend more time getting to know your own fleets and your enemy's. Its more fun than letting the calc play the game for you.

If I'd have done the Battlesim in my second intermediate game (tiny sparse, 13 players) I'd stay in it for much longer. It'd told me I should bring into the battle about 10 more Doom BBs to win without BB losses. But I haven't, and 've lost half the BB fleet. It was a fun game, but because of my lost ships much shorter for me then it should have been.
I've learned the lesson: when in doubt, do Battlesim.
I've learned another lesson: the Battlesim's max tech produces different results then the regular game. If the game is long and I invested much in it, I do an additional investment: the testbed with the same PRTs / tech levels I and my opponents have.
More MM? I LOVE it! It helps to win, and that's the ultimate fun.
BR, Iztok

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

The problem with that is: its all in the numbers.
This is not real war where a military units moral and other conditions factor into the battle.
In this game, your little fun would loose you the battle and maybe the game... besides... If I were the CinC and my generals did not calculate the success of the mission in relation to the furtherance of the overall strategy, well... we would be having a little talk...

At the same time, I understand that it is just a game and you need to have a little fun...

_________________________________________
Maybe we missed the point of having fun???
Paid for by the Campaign to make the game more FUN! and elect Rapid Weasel Network Supreme Anchor...

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Hm...

Battles are just a maths problem?
I HOPE that nobody claims that battle outcomes are preditermined!
Missiles have a CHANCE to hit, mass is RANDOMISED in battle.
There could be reinforcements arriving in the same place at the same time. You can find yourself fighting more than you bargained for, cause there might be a stealth fleet defending the attack point you've chosen.

No... stars! is much more than "build the mostest and the fastest"(thankfully)

And people, please stop fighting 5000+ nubs vs. 5000+ nubs battles! This strategy is so old, it's covered in mould!
If you overconcentrate your force, you leave most of your territory undefended, thus an inferior force can overrun your econ centers just 'cause they can win more battles by splitting their fleet up.

Scirmishes are fun, enjoy 'em! Besides you'll never get to fight a decider battle with a good general.

Report message to a moderator

Hi!

Quote:

And people, please stop fighting 5000+ nubs vs. 5000+ nubs battles! This strategy is so old, it's covered in mould! ... Scirmishes are fun, enjoy 'em!

You can not win the game only with skirmishing your opponent. To not lose you have to block his attack capability. That's usually done with skirmishing. But to make him quit or you win you have to either destroy his attack/defense capability or his production capability. Some races can go directly after the later (SS with stealing minerals, PP with packet-killing his planets), but other races have to use brute force (armed ships) to do the former before doing the later.

Quote:

Besides you'll never get to fight a decider battle with a good general.

No matter how good general you have(are ), you'll have to at some time. Either to win or to not lose. The real mastership is to know when and with what to fight to achieve your objectives. If that involves 5000+ nubs battle just go for it.
BR, Iztok

[Updated on: Wed, 17 December 2003 03:23]

Report message to a moderator

Naturally, but the point is still missed.

Imagine that you have 500+ planets 1000k res and unlimited minerals and fighting against a simular opponent (I know this can't be in stars! but I am exagerating to make a point ). Now, you can easily master 32k+ nubs. Say you have this master fleet, maybe two whatever...

So your fleet is nearly invincible, so you go and kick some...
but the thing is you leave most of your world's virtually defenceless,- no starbase can withstand 1000 nubs. So your oppenent splits their fleet in 32 taskforces 1000 nubs each. Individually none of those can compete with your master fleet so you can cut through their defences like knife though butter. But the thing is you need 1000+ years to take every one of their worlds.

For your opponent the story is different however. Their fleets are relatively weak but they are strong enough to take 32 of your planets at a time. So you see, your econ will be non existant in 500/32*2=32turns.

Without economy you can't build chaff or reinforcements, without chaff you're a dead meat, without reinforcements your fate is sealed. The only reason that decider battle tactic is often employed is that people can't stand waching their world's blown up one by one.

The races I design can usually recover all econ in 2-3 turns of complete annihilation. Good luck blasting me through master fleet.

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Watching the straw man chorus line dancing by...

The watch word for operational superiority is flexibility. Adjust your fleet sizes and dispositions to *effectively* use your ships in relation to your opponent's dispositions.

Assuming you know where he is... so always remember to keep your scouting and intelligence gathering up to date.

Crushing 50 ship "walnut" fleets with 5000 ship sledgehammers is generally not effective.

Having your 4000 ship fleet constantly retreating from a 5000 ship enemy fleet *might* not be effective. Depends on what the rest of your fleet is doing...

- Kurt

Report message to a moderator

Perhaps its time for a condensation...

maybe this will help http://classics.mit.edu/Tzu/artwar.html

Report message to a moderator

All this just proves my point. By splitting your fleet to hunt me down, you've just engaged in a tactic called... scirmishing!

And I also have a counter tactic, I'll try to lure you into intercepting one of my fleets while sending 4-6 of my other raider ships in the same palce. Say goodbye to your would be wanna be interceptor fleet!

IMOP it is all about balancing between force concentratation and econ damage caused effectiveness. And it IS FUN!!!

Sun Tsu Art of War, chp4 Weak Pts and Strong, article 11-19 are appropriate here I think. Especially article 13. It is concerned about stealth. Nubs should be stealthy! Also many of the arguments in the book are based on cut the root scheme where econ is slaughtered to force the enemy to fight. While true on Earth in stars! there is no direct support cost of starships, except for chaff. So the book is not entirely apropriate here.

Report message to a moderator

iztok wrote on Wed, 17 December 2003 09:04

Hi! Quote: So you see, your econ will be non existant in 500/32*2=32turns. And you suppose any competent player will just sit and watch your tiny fleets killing his planets, in his space, defended with his minefields and connected with his gate network?! Ekhm..., how many intermediate PBEM games have you finished until now? BR, Iztok

ARE YOU ACTUALLY IMPLYING THAT I AM A NEWBIE!!?

Oh DAMN... busted, AGAIN.



I think I have another commandement for you people:

*Do not argue with the TOP DOG, it will only get you killed.

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Thu, 18 December 2003 06:05]

Report message to a moderator

Hi!

Quote:

I'll try to lure you into intercepting one of my fleets while sending 4-6 of my other raider ships in the same palce.

Even if you have 6 fleets of 1/4 the strength of your opponent, your shields don't stack. While he'll be losing shields you'll be losing ships. And who says your opponent will not try to intercept other raider ships too and you'll face two or three fleets of 4*your ships?
The point is: you may not split your fleet if you don't have space superiority. In his space you have it only after the main fleet battle you had won. Even then a competent opponent keeps a backup. Using his gate network he can get a local superiority and you'll start losing your split fleets and believe me, that's not fun anymore!
BR, Iztok

Report message to a moderator

donjon wrote on Thu, 18 December 2003 05:01

Hmmm, no support cost in stars! ??? Have you never seen scouts chugging around at warp 1? Have you never seen an attack fleet so far from its planets, out of fuel, that it cannot move?

Guess who's using IFE/NRSE combo too often?

Maybe I should emphasize "No DIRECT support cost for STARSHIPS"
The way I see it a 98% cloak evac fleet will still be a 98% cloack fleet 100 yrs down if it does't engage in fighting...

The only major problem facing a super stealth fleet is slow repair rate,- game will be over by the time they fix their damage.

[Mod edit: fixed quote.]

[Updated on: Thu, 18 December 2003 18:59] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator

iztok wrote on Thu, 18 December 2003 08:27

Hi! Even if you have 6 fleets of 1/4 the strength of your opponent, your shields don't stack. While he'll be losing shields you'll be losing ships. And who says your opponent will not try to intercept other raider ships too and you'll face two or three fleets of 4*your ships? The point is: you may not split your fleet if you don't have space superiority. In his space you have it only after the main fleet battle you had won. Even then a competent opponent keeps a backup. Using his gate network he can get a local superiority and you'll start losing your split fleets and believe me, that's not fun anymore! BR, Iztok

Well if you can always design OSW(One Shot Wonder) ships: max firepower, A LOT of computers and LOADS of Missiles. Stars! is (un)balanced in such a way that computers are better than jammers. With equal no of comp and jammers computers win AND you get the first shot. Them OSW ships fire first, and THEORETICALLY blow twice their number from the opposing side. The fact that they get blown to pieces in the retaliation is complitely irrelevant...

The ONLY problem with this strategy is the presence of CHAFF.
I would imagine however that an SD can effectively remove chaff before the master battle... or bring MORE of THEIR OWN.

P. S. Has anyone ever come up with a "plausable" theory why chaff is getting hit instead of capital ship? I have a pet theory on this :
The chaff might be what they call "combat drone" and it sticks around capital ships in a 'furball' formation. So that way they can intercept the incoming missiles, effectively preventing "competent" capitains of the opposing side from targetting capital ships.

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Micha wrote on Thu, 18 December 2003 18:57

And with nubs on the opponent side too that means true stealth becomes very hard to achieve. (Not to metion an IS enemy of course.) mch

98%stealth(yours) + 98%stealth(theirs)= no stealth?

Aghm,.. where did MY stealth go?
I mean if NOBODY can see NOBODY, then surely at least SOMEONE must have at least SOME stealth?

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator