| AR and zero to no LRTs |
Fri, 17 January 2003 20:36  |
|
|
|
Since the no LRTs thread seems to have some discussion on AR without LRT I'll start one here (so they don't have to get off track). It has been said by people before that AR can do without ARM on the newsgroup.... I have read it but I am not very good at AR, only mediocre. AR without ISB is however manageable, it is harder than with but the real trick I believe is to get Deathstars faster. There is an article (maybe I can find link later) by one player who could play AR very well (25K and other silly benchmarks) without ISB, he recommended against them in fact. I will also say that other races get hampered probably as much as AR in a no LRT game. Without IFE there will be a much slower start giving the AR more time to build standard miners et cetera.
Email me as ----jeffimix@----yahoo.com----
(remove dashes)
The spamatron! run!!!Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: AR and zero to no LRTs |
Fri, 17 January 2003 20:51  |
|
|
|
If you consider the things AR needs....
Fast freighters - transportation of colonists with minimal deaths
Ironium - catch 22 here - to get the mineral you need mining ships, mining ships need the mineral.
Bigger starbases - orbital forts fill to 25% / 33% very quickly - i.e. you need something bigger - space dock is cheap and bigger and with Max tech the route I use tends to be fort, dock, ultra, deathstar - missing starbase entirely.
so ISB and IFE are no brainers. ARM is a personal choice. As Apelord has pointed out ARM is secondary to TT. This is because not only do you get better quality planets (habitability is biggest aspect of the econ equation) but you can terraform 30% quicker per terraform.
I think AR is a PRT that really *needs* LRTs to get the best out of it. Alas with theno LRT game I get the feeling I'll end up slating all that I wrote saying it can be done, or I'll agree due to my crushing defeat.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
