Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Academy » Chaff again
| | |
| Re: Chaff again |
Fri, 29 July 2005 16:17   |
|
 Robert |
 | Lt. Junior Grade |
Messages: 393
Registered: November 2002
Location: Dortmund, Germany | |
|
Well, I got most ideas from that article, but I think I go a bit further here and there...
When I mentioned a am not really finished with my site, I think about issues like:
- IT can overgate shielded chaff and end up with _highly_ damaged chaff that is attractive to missiles, but not to beamers. There are several similar ideas here in the forum, but scattered in several threads.
- I would like to add a few thoughts about battle orders, like none/none/max damage for chaff, so it cant be hit by enemy beamers in battle turn one.
- The pros/cons of different chaff design is not finished.
- some thoughts about chaffsweeping should be added.
- frigate chaff with single shield can be twice as efficient against jihads when split up (need 2 jihads)
some things I just forgot or did not know when I wrote that stuff...
Still, I dont mind if Ron hosts that page and I am willing to transfer all files so he can put them on his server (in fact it would be a honour!)
I think there are also some ideas not directly related to chaff that might be very interesting to newbies (like early cruiser designs)...
Whatever, if Ron likes it this page is open for improvements and I would not mind at all if it is tranfered to the autohost-server.
At this point I would like to thank Alter Ego again for helping me with my english on that page 
2b v !2b -> ?Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Chaff again |
Fri, 29 July 2005 17:15 |
|
| iztok |
 | Commander |
Messages: 1206
Registered: April 2003
Location: Slovenia, Europe | |
|
Hi!
| Robert wrote on Fri, 29 July 2005 17:43 |
PS: Will I finally get my Avatar for this? 
|
No, you won't. 
Seriously, your pages look nice, but there are some misleading info presented there. I'll start pointing at them with your
anti-chaff BB. IMO it is a regular beamer, as it has too low init to shot at chaff before missile BBs fire. For a successfull chaff-shredder you need better init than your mussile ships have, so you have to use computers instead capacitors - most of the time full 6 slots, as you want to shot at chaff BEFORE opponent's missile ships fire at your chaff-shredders.
When I'm already at anti-chaff ships, let's also take a look at anti-chaff-killer. Your example with an orbital isn't usefull in all cases, so we need a ship. To be successfull, it needs better init than chaff shredder has, so usually a Big Mutha Cannon is used here. With its very high init one can even use only 3 comp's and replace the rest of slots with capacitors, seriously increasing firepower. Also, that design only needs to move 2 squares in first round to be in range of chaff-killers.
Chaff designs
With really big numbers of produced chaff there are only two cost-effective designs:
- Scout with QJ-5 and x-laser and
- FF with QJ-5 and x-laser.
Let me explain why FM isn't appropriate. As first I need to use costs of items. I'll use them from a late mid-game, where most of the chaff is usually built: 13/25/13/17/14/9. At those levels I got the following costs for chaff:FF QJ-5 .. 4/2/3/10
FF FM .... 6/2/2/14
Sc QJ-5 .. 5/2/4/9
Sc FM .... 7/2/3/13
SFX QJ-5 16/0/5/46 As you can see there's a difference of 2 iron and 4 resources between chaff with QJ-5 and FM. Now multiply that difference with 10000 (to get at least close to the usuall number of produced chaff), and you'll see that I can buy for that difference 1100 SFXes (that will give more fuel this chaff will ever use), and I still have enough iron for 3 more missile BBs.
FF chaff has a problem - too much armor, compared to scout hull. Just for that reason a scout is usually 30-60% more attractive than FF. If using FF chaff one usually needs to include jammers in main warships. With scout's bigger attractivenes that could be avoided. OTOH when chaff's gone your ships become fully exposed to missiles, and that means a much quicker death to them, as if they'd have some jammers.
Also, as human players tend to use lots of shield sappers, I'd strongly recommend to check the attractivenes of main core ships WITHOUT shields. Can save you lots of lost battles.
Shielded chaff
I did quite some testing with that and have found one solution. You can find it at RGCS with keywords "Shielded chaff attractiveness problem solved". I don't recommend using "normal" shielded chaff without lowering its armor first, as just a new tech level can change its attractivenes with disastrous consequences.
BR, Iztok
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Chaff again |
Fri, 29 July 2005 17:26 |
|
| iztok |
| Commander |
Messages: 1206
Registered: April 2003
Location: Slovenia, Europe | |
|
Hi!
| Robert wrote on Fri, 29 July 2005 17:43 |
comments welcome
|
I have one addition.
Before one starts putting lots of minerals and resources into ships that are meant to be destroyed, it is good to know how usefull they will actually be. Therefore I divided the game into several phases, where chaff has quite distinctive roles.
1. Opening phase (most planets in growth, most tech around 6-8): you don't build much of warships here, so chaff isn't needed.
2. End of opening phase - out of place to expand peacefully (breeders held at 33%, colonizing yellows, tech: jihads, CCs, rest tech around 6-8). Chaff is too expensive to be used here. It is more cost-effective to build just more warships, but those will be very soon obsolete.
3. Early mid game (breeders at 50%, maxxing other planets, tech: juggernauts, BBs, gates 300/500, other tech around 10, race to Armageddons). With juggs chaff becomes cost-effective. Beam weapons too weak for dedicated chaff-killers. First serious battles.
3. Late mid game (most planets maxed, tech: armageddons, BBs, other from 10-16, race to Nubians or to extermination). Chaff plays major role in battles, that pop-up everywhere. Dedicated megaDisruptor BB chaff-killers, dedicated BMC BB killers for chaff-killers. Dreadnoughts rule.
4. Late game (some players already eliminated, weap & con 26, rest 14-24, available minerals dictate designs). Since lots of iron was used in previous wars, players prefer beamer nubs. Chaff is no more so important, as battles tend to last several rounds and chaff usuall doesn't survive the second one. Excellent dedicated chaff killers help here too.
BR, Iztok
P.S. Looks pretty obvious I'm on vacation, eh?
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Chaff again |
Sat, 30 July 2005 03:14 |
|
| Robert |
| Lt. Junior Grade |
Messages: 393
Registered: November 2002
Location: Dortmund, Germany | |
|
| iztok wrote on Fri, 29 July 2005 23:15 |
(snip)
anti-chaff BB. IMO it is a regular beamer, as it has too low init to shot at chaff before missile BBs fire. For a successfull chaff-shredder you need better init than your mussile ships have, so you have to use computers instead capacitors - most of the time full 6 slots, as you want to shot at chaff BEFORE opponent's missile ships fire at your chaff-shredders.
When I'm already at anti-chaff ships, let's also take a look at anti-chaff-killer. Your example with an orbital isn't usefull in all cases, so we need a ship. To be successfull, it needs better init than chaff shredder has, so usually a Big Mutha Cannon is used here. With its very high init one can even use only 3 comp's and replace the rest of slots with capacitors, seriously increasing firepower. Also, that design only needs to move 2 squares in first round to be in range of chaff-killers.
|
Well....
What you say is of course right. But the important thing to make it work is move 2.25 and range3. If you dont have that, it simply does not work.
The initiative is another issue and depends on his designs, it is more an improvement of the tactics related to the actual game.
The ratio of chaff to chaff-shredders is high, so you need only relatively few shredders for lots of chaff. So when you build them, you build only very few and want to use them asap. It is unlikely that the enemy will have chaff-shredder-shredders ready quickly, and when he does, simply build a new design and render them useles. chaff shredders will not survive any large battle anyway usually. And regarding his missileboats, I hope they will shoot my chaff first, not my chaff shredders. If he sets their battle plan to any/any/disengage so my chaff are too slow, then it is still cheaper to add some fast chaff (move 1.25)...
and so on and so on...
What I want to say is that there are many different ways to improve the chaff-shredder design or combine it with other ships, and I did just show what is absolutely needed, and thats move 2.25 and range3. Everything following that in more refined designs was not intended to be included there, as there are too much possible tactics, but yours is the most common one I agree.
| iztok wrote on Fri, 29 July 2005 23:15 |
Chaff designs
With really big numbers of produced chaff there are only two cost-effective designs:
- Scout with QJ-5 and x-laser and
- FF with QJ-5 and x-laser.
Let me explain why FM isn't appropriate. As first I need to use costs of items. I'll use them from a late mid-game, where most of the chaff is usually built: 13/25/13/17/14/9. At those levels I got the following costs for chaff:FF QJ-5 .. 4/2/3/10
FF FM .... 6/2/2/14
Sc QJ-5 .. 5/2/4/9
Sc FM .... 7/2/3/13
SFX QJ-5 16/0/5/46 As you can see there's a difference of 2 iron and 4 resources between chaff with QJ-5 and FM. Now multiply that difference with 10000 (to get at least close to the usuall number of produced chaff), and you'll see that I can buy for that difference 1100 SFXes (that will give more fuel this chaff will ever use), and I still have enough iron for 3 more missile BBs.
|
Thats right again, thanks for some numbers here.
In real games I use the scout-QJ5 nearly all the time, except for the small timeframe when the frigate is cheaper and only if I got good electronic tech to jam my BBs...
Still if you tend to chaffsweep a lot the x-ray is useles, and in the jihad-cruiser time I also like to have a single shield on a frigate hull sometimes, depending on tech and game (slow tech settings for example).
I cant compete with the math right now, but I know I did the test once and figured out that a frigate with shield was less expensive that 2 scout chaff, means that when split up it takes two jihads to kill it.
This is not cost-efficient, but when not playing against advanced players, then an enemy can easily underestimate the chaff and miscalculate how many of his jihads will be used for it - so it is in some small time window quite funny to use...
Anyway, in general you are of course right...
...
2b v !2b -> ?Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Chaff again |
Sat, 30 July 2005 03:25 |
|
| Robert |
| Lt. Junior Grade |
Messages: 393
Registered: November 2002
Location: Dortmund, Germany | |
|
| iztok wrote on Fri, 29 July 2005 23:26 |
Hi!
| Robert wrote on Fri, 29 July 2005 17:43 |
comments welcome
|
I have one addition.
Before one starts putting lots of minerals and resources into ships that are meant to be destroyed, it is good to know how usefull they will actually be. Therefore I divided the game into several phases, where chaff has quite distinctive roles.
1. Opening phase (most planets in growth, most tech around 6-8): you don't build much of warships here, so chaff isn't needed.
2. End of opening phase - out of place to expand peacefully (breeders held at 33%, colonizing yellows, tech: jihads, CCs, rest tech around 6-8). Chaff is too expensive to be used here. It is more cost-effective to build just more warships, but those will be very soon obsolete.
3. Early mid game (breeders at 50%, maxxing other planets, tech: juggernauts, BBs, gates 300/500, other tech around 10, race to Armageddons). With juggs chaff becomes cost-effective. Beam weapons too weak for dedicated chaff-killers. First serious battles.
3. Late mid game (most planets maxed, tech: armageddons, BBs, other from 10-16, race to Nubians or to extermination). Chaff plays major role in battles, that pop-up everywhere. Dedicated megaDisruptor BB chaff-killers, dedicated BMC BB killers for chaff-killers. Dreadnoughts rule.
4. Late game (some players already eliminated, weap & con 26, rest 14-24, available minerals dictate designs). Since lots of iron was used in previous wars, players prefer beamer nubs. Chaff is no more so important, as battles tend to last several rounds and chaff usuall doesn't survive the second one. Excellent dedicated chaff killers help here too.
BR, Iztok
P.S. Looks pretty obvious I'm on vacation, eh?
|
And just another addition:
I usually also think in phases:
- before jihads:
no chaff
- early jihads:
chaff not really cost efficient, but usuful against less experienced players or if you dont want to waste mins on ships that will soon be out of date. Usully my shielded chaff trick brings me one battle won cause I am underestimated.
- juggerBBs mid techs
electronic tech is low (no jammer30), frigates not much cheaper than scouts, I usually use scout-chaff and not much jammers on BBs.
- doomsdays/arms
no jamming and running out of chaff becomes hard. Usually frigates become much cheaper than scouts, el16 for jammer30 available, maybe I change designs to frigate chaff and start jamming my BBs to make sure.
- nubians+maxtech
depends, depends... beamers usually rule and the amount of missleboats on the board is relatively slow. chaff usually do not live longer than 2 turns anyway and battles last longer than 2 turns... It really depends on how much Ironium the enemy wasted before engame and how much is left... Open for nearly everything...
Just to give an alternative way of thinking, maybe better, maybe worse - still it is right that the importance, design and usability of chaff changes over time in a game...
2b v !2b -> ?Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Chaff again |
Sat, 30 July 2005 17:13 |
|
|
|
IMO chaff methods depend much on what you face.
We ALL have frigate chaff rather than scout based in TWW, from jihads to now fairly large doomsday fleets held or formerly held by some. (May have been a tiny bit of scout based for a turn).
In previous games it was more scout based.
Jihads "only" do 85 damage a hit. But suppose you face an enemy attacking you with dedicated sapper+jihad combo of ships? Lose your shields first round, then jihad(x16) BM takes out 1.3 battleships a turn... or a much cheaper 16 chaff per turn.
On other hand, the mineral hungry WM I took over in TWW was fielding mostly first strike beamers into jug era, so chaff wasn't so useful for my enemies. Even now, my doom missile boats only have 8 missiles each as I need to conserve.
And to repeat from a previous post, my oddball phasor bazooka frigate chaff appears to be working, I (barely) get by without jammers, I minesweep with the stuff, I win orbital checker chaff wars, as well as have a few minelayer kills. On downside, they are a bit more expensive (and I need lots of chaff as more beamer based warfleet).
[Updated on: Sat, 30 July 2005 17:16] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Chaff again |
Mon, 01 August 2005 04:19 |
|
| iztok |
| Commander |
Messages: 1206
Registered: April 2003
Location: Slovenia, Europe | |
|
Hi!
| Robert wrote on Sat, 30 July 2005 09:14 |
| iztok wrote on Fri, 29 July 2005 23:15 |
(snip)
anti-chaff BB...
|
Well....
What you say is of course right. But the important thing to make it work is move 2.25 and range3. If you dont have that, it simply does not work.
|
And if it doesn't shot BEFORE missile ships do, it doesn't work either.
On your web page you have an example of beating chaff-shredders with your missile boats moving back and shot at chaff-shredders instead of chaff. If those chaff-shredders would have first shot, that tactics wouldn't work, as they'd kill chaff anyway, and die thereafter (what they usually do - they are one-shot weapons).
To summarize all what we've written: chaff-shredders must have three abilities:
- battle speed more than 2,
- range 3 weapons and
- to fire those weapons before ANY missile/torpedo ship on battle board fire their missiles.
- They also need to work with the "maximize damage" battle order to avoid possibility to be distracted with some fast decoy ship(s).
BR, Iztok
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Chaff again |
Mon, 01 August 2005 10:20 |
|
|
|
| Quote: |
To summarize all what we've written: chaff-shredders must have three abilities:
- battle speed more than 2,
- range 3 weapons and
- to fire those weapons before ANY missile/torpedo ship on battle board fire their missiles.
- They also need to work with the "maximize damage" battle order to avoid possibility to be distracted with some fast decoy ship(s).
|
Have a sapper on your shredder, and it may not advance even with max damage orders (instead stop to sap enemy faster ships due to sapper bug/feature).
Described chaff-killers are still vulnerable to various tactics such as missile boats and most chaff disengage (favoured by SS power in TWW).
While everything shooting in right order is ideal, have seen things work even with wrong order... as long as chaff is dead before the chaff-shredders die, missiles do good damage round 2.
First strike attack beamers with slower battlespeed can also take out chaff round 2 right before missiles fire. Of course round 1 is nicer, but also more vulnerable to counter tactics, such as gattling/range 1/range 2 chaff defenders that destroy the chaff-killers before they get their shot off.
One other consideration is battleboard distance when extra parties show up in battle. In TWW the SS with doom missiles and chaff on disengage was nasty throwing traps with his friends picking off other warfleets, but got slaughtered when tables turned and he got caught in crowded battleboard beside first strike beamers.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Chaff again |
Fri, 05 August 2005 14:22 |
|
| Robert |
| Lt. Junior Grade |
Messages: 393
Registered: November 2002
Location: Dortmund, Germany | |
|
| iztok wrote on Mon, 01 August 2005 10:19 |
Hi!
| Robert wrote on Sat, 30 July 2005 09:14 |
| iztok wrote on Fri, 29 July 2005 23:15 |
(snip)
anti-chaff BB...
|
Well....
What you say is of course right. But the important thing to make it work is move 2.25 and range3. If you dont have that, it simply does not work.
|
And if it doesn't shot BEFORE missile ships do, it doesn't work either.
On your web page you have an example of beating chaff-shredders with your missile boats moving back and shot at chaff-shredders instead of chaff. If those chaff-shredders would have first shot, that tactics wouldn't work, as they'd kill chaff anyway, and die thereafter (what they usually do - they are one-shot weapons).
To summarize all what we've written: chaff-shredders must have three abilities:
- battle speed more than 2,
- range 3 weapons and
- to fire those weapons before ANY missile/torpedo ship on battle board fire their missiles.
- They also need to work with the "maximize damage" battle order to avoid possibility to be distracted with some fast decoy ship(s).
BR, Iztok
|
Hmmm.... no.... Maybe I did not have the ability to express what I wanted to say - ther _is_ a difference... As Kotk pointed out for most things there is a counter, if not everything.
Still there is a difference: if you dont move 2.25 and have range3 beams then you dont need a counter because it cant work from start off. That does _not_ mean it will work, but from that point on it is the counter, anticounter etc. game, but that was not ment to be part of the article - the simple message was, if you do _not_ move 2+ and have range3 beams, than it will definitely _not_ work, and if you do check for counters and anticounters...
I was thinking about including some examples on that, but there are simply too many ways to go from there...
Anyway - enough on that - I think we know too much about all that and it is no more difficult because of knowledge on game mechanics, but more difficult because of the foreign language and misunderstandings...
Anyway... I see this thread has been moved to Stars-Must-know and back again? Maybe someone should take "Living with chaff" and include some new ideas to give an overview here at the forum?
I think chaff is one of the most important things in Stars and should be included in some form in the "must know"...
Someone willing to do the job?
Robert
2b v !2b -> ?Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | |
| Re: Chaff again |
Wed, 08 November 2006 03:26 |
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Still if you tend to chaffsweep a lot the x-ray is useles, and in the jihad-cruiser time I also like to have a single shield on a frigate hull sometimes, depending on tech and game (slow tech settings for example).
|
The concept of 'chaff sweeping' in the classic sense doesn't have to do with the weapon on the chaff - it has to do with hitting the mines. For every ship that hits the mines a portion of the minefield is reduced (caused by mines exploding). For effective chaff sweeping you simply split enough chaff into single ship fleets making sure they all have lower fleet ID's than your attack forces and send them in all at the same time at warp 9. A large % of the lower fleet ID chaff ships hit the mines and wipe out the field and the higher fleet IDs main forces arrive at the planet - along with any of the few surviving chaff. The calcuation as to how many fleets (chaff) you need to hit mines to wipe out the field is quite simple.
Ptolemy
[Updated on: Wed, 08 November 2006 03:26]
Though we often ask how and why, we must also do to get the answers to the questions.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Chaff again |
Wed, 08 November 2006 04:50 |
|
|
|
My favourite non-chaff crash sweeper...the MASSES of mini-coloniser based ships left over when the finally become obsolete
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | | | |
| Re: Chaff again |
Wed, 08 November 2006 07:07 |
|
| mazda |
 | Lieutenant |
Messages: 655
Registered: April 2003
Location: Reading, UK | |
|
Ok, let's take OWKs 4 types and whittle them down to the two high-speed sweeping ones.
Sending ships in at high speed with the intention that some survive in order to sweep the field (for next turn).
Second is the collision sweeping where the intention is to hit the field and destroy it, or the part you want to travel through, this turn.
Put like this then it seems that crash is far more appropriate to the second type.
For the first the idea is to actually get to the waypoint and do some sweeping, for the second the idea is to hit the minefield - a ship that doesn't crash into the minefield, is in effect, a wasted trip.
However I still use chaff-sweeping to mean collision sweeping with chaff, and I'll use crash-sweeping to mean collision sweeping with anything else (DDs, SFX, minibombers).
For the first type of sweeping I don't really call it anything, I just call it sweeping, but I may add "penetration sweeping" to my terminology from now on.
Very late game I quite often use beam nubs to do crash sweeping.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Chaff again |
Wed, 08 November 2006 14:34 |
|
| mlaub |
| Lieutenant |
Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003
Location: MN, USA | |
|
| Ptolemy wrote on Wed, 08 November 2006 02:26 |
A large % of the lower fleet ID chaff ships hit the mines and wipe out the field and the higher fleet IDs main forces arrive at the planet - along with any of the few surviving chaff. The calcuation as to how many fleets (chaff) you need to hit mines to wipe out the field is quite simple.
|
FYI - For anyone who wants to Collision sweep larger or multiple fields, please pick a target co-ordinate that is not the same as the main fleets target. Collision sweeping is not an exact science, plus more fleets will survive the more mines involved in the attempt. IIRC, even a 30ly sweep could result in more than 128 tokens on the sweepers side of the battle. 128 tokens can be considered "your" allotment of tokens in a 2 sided battle, as the max tokens allowed in a battle is 256, and is shared by all the players. Battle board overloading is considered a cheat in most games, whether you mean to do it or not. So, as a host, I would presume the person(s) who entered battle with more than [ 256 / (# of players involved) ] as the player(s) who are at fault for the overload and take appropriate action.
You can still Collision Sweep easily enough, by picking a different co-ordinate along the same path, and there is no risk of overloading the battle board with excessive chaff fleets that survive. The co-ordinate can be as close as 1 ly from the main fleets destination.
-Matt
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat May 04 14:04:26 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
People tend to disappear from the Stars! scene ... 
