Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Academy » Cruisers vs Battleships (Re: Maybe i am a little thick but...)
| Re: Cruisers vs Battleships (Re: Maybe i am a little thick but...) |
Thu, 18 March 2004 18:28   |
|
|
|
| Kotk wrote on Thu, 18 March 2004 10:20 |
 About 100 BB battle was decisive? What?!?  In medium game? Where went the 1000+ nubian fleets? 
Try winning intermediates and come back. 
|
When my main opponent is losing his main worlds factories intact at an increasing rate, and he loses one of his major fleets, it is decisive - the last nail in the coffin. The game was pretty well decided even before that unless a major backstab took place.
My friends are tech ahead and now starting to crank out the warships full steam (Weapons is maxed out, Const will be soon).
As someone here said its best to try and win in your best era. That is what I was doing. Rather than focus on Const, I helped my allies do what they did best (weapons was maxed out, Const soon as well), while cranked out warships, doing energy and other needed techs, and forcing war.
My main opponent (who may have had a chance at early nubs) was forced to constantly fight from turn 30 onward full steam. Earlier, when I was closing on the enemy HW, a certain weaker friend (who I had saved from enemy early aggression) had dropped out at a crucial time, making my main forces suddenly both gateless and trapped by formerly friendly minefields. Otherwise game may have been over much sooner.
Why don't you quote numbers in a medium - normal density... including number of players, when you had to go to war full steam and what handicaps were imposed on you?
Our theme game forced 15/x/25 factory settings, which leaves less points for things like hab and tech.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Cruisers vs Battleships (Re: Maybe i am a little thick but...) |
Fri, 19 March 2004 09:10 |
|
|
|
It was turn 82, not 100 when game ended.
BET is not an advantage in the beginning - it can help later, and it is not a super LRT, just an LRT that plays different and matches a different style of play. It can do some overall good in the right hands.
Golden era for my HE is battleship era where BET and flux caps do most good. Gateless is a factor entire game.
| Quote: |
So ... you killed that JoaT with having bigger economy, more minerals, better technology and wider alliance or you killed it with that BET?
|
Best answer I can give is healthy eccon, friends, and strategy (timing, etc). There were diplomatic battles for non-committed players, etc. Joys of being scary is other side says 'we need to stop the monster'. Joys of diplomacy is one works for the common good to keep friends happy which may not be my individual good (tech order, etc).
I had lots to learn and made certain mistakes being a newbie.
JOAT was eccon ahead at beginning, probably not by much. He was cranking out ships well, in the end he was suffering mineral depletus (while I was saving up for endgame, better mine efficiency).
I had wider alliance, there were some complexities of diplomacy to get that (and try and keep it). I was doing most of the warship building and battling while my friends who were more late game strengths were building up strength (for late game which never came).
I hear some insist on HE 4% or 5% as somehow being best. I played 6%, in right hands may actually be better IMO (less early game weakness). I have heard some insist on certain comparisions between 5% and 6% that I have proven not true.
[Updated on: Fri, 19 March 2004 09:11] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cruisers vs Battleships (Re: Maybe i am a little thick but...) |
Fri, 19 March 2004 13:31 |
|
 mlaub |
 | Lieutenant |
Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003
Location: MN, USA | |
|
| multilis wrote on Fri, 19 March 2004 08:10 |
BET is not an advantage in the beginning - it can help later, and it is not a super LRT, just an LRT that plays different and matches a different style of play. It can do some overall good in the right hands.
|
The only time I have ever been able to make BET work, on paper + in a real game, was playing a WM in a team game. Midgame BC's, were a little cheaper, but not significantly enough to justify the LRT. However, as it was a team game, building Doom MPS DN's proved to be the best use of the LRT I have ever seen (Dooms for R6, MPS wasn't planned, but was really helpful). The only reason that this was feasible, was that my 2 teammates were building the beam Nubs (transfered to me, ofc) and dumping all the extra Iron and Germ they could muster for the missile ships. Plus, no one had an IS, which made the cloaked DN's incredibly powerful.
So, we were getting a dual boost from the cheaper weapons, and BET savings. Plus, I never had to build cutting edge ships, so I was receiving the best benefit expected. I sat down after the game and figured out the cost difference between having the LRT, and not having it, vs. the issues encountered in a real game situation. Unequivocally, the answer I came up with = *never again*.
The key problems with the LRT, were not the associative problems with cutting edge tech, although that did have an ingame effect. No, the clincher for me was that the savings in costs were not enough to offset the component differences in going to the next level. Meaning, yes, you do save a bunch of res. and metal on building Juggs vs Arms/Dooms, but the FP + range + init difference was to great.
| Quote: |
Golden era for my HE is battleship era where BET and flux caps do most good. Gateless is a factor entire game.
|
As to saying this is an advantage to an HE, you are (or will be) dead wrong. BB's are just a stepping stone to the Nub era. Planning you races future on a transitional stage is silly when you have no other weapons platform between a BB and Nub. While it may work in some situations, and game parameters, overall it is not a wise choice. Also, Cutting edge ships are usually the *only* advantage that a HE has in the Midgame. A properly run HE can hit Nubs very quickly, faster than many other races. So, with 1 LRT, you essentially take away 2 HE advantages...
-Matt
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cruisers vs Battleships (Re: Maybe i am a little thick but...) |
Fri, 19 March 2004 15:03 |
|
|
|
I said for my style of HE which is different from your style. My style of HE loved battleship era. Style includes race settings, tech research order, tactics.
BET and horde are not for everyone, just as AR is not for everyone.
I was doing quite well fighting cruisers with my destroyers, jugs with my jihads, etc. There are some technical details to why I actually enjoyed doing this (more complex theory).
I had all techs fairly high to gain extra miniturization bonus which also helped in other ways. Energy helped against bombing. Bio helped with good smart bombers.
Matt says never again with his experiance. I say sure, again.
I play different, I could see real cost savings benefits, including for stuff like flak which can outway the price and give one extra thing to trade in diplomacy (ships).
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun May 12 09:14:18 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
