|
| Re: More Nub Design |
Thu, 29 June 2006 09:39   |
|
|
|
So ... 8 slots of surprize.
You forgot 3 slots of BD... leaving you 5.
I am not sure why caps are 'optional' but 3 slots of BD aren't. If you choose BD and jammers, you are still vulnerable to torps and you don't have a lot of hit.
Sometimes BD are more useful, but sometimes caps are.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: More Nub Design |
Thu, 29 June 2006 12:38 |
|
|
|
| Quote: |
did not say that the 3 BD-s are not optional on beamer nub
|
You said:
| Quote: |
I kind of support iztoks opinion here.
|
Since that came right after iztoks:
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
We should make it a game rule that all my enemies must have this design as mainline ship.
|
I can easily sign that rule...
|
You left impression that you might "kind of agree" 3 slots BD are required.
| Quote: |
Mega disruptor/Syncro Sapper
|
May not matter depending on setup.
There are specialty counters that weaken "Mega disruptor/Syncro Sapper nubs" threat. As well, after enemy chaff is dead, your missiles/torps go to work, meanwhile his range 3 beamers are too busy backing up from your AMP nubs to hit your chaff.
[Updated on: Thu, 29 June 2006 12:39] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: More Nub Design |
Fri, 30 June 2006 16:06 |
|
 mlaub |
 | Lieutenant |
Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003
Location: MN, USA | |
|
| Kotk wrote on Fri, 30 June 2006 06:15 |
| TheShadow7478 wrote on Fri, 30 June 2006 03:55 |
Do you spend a slot on jets (or overthruster if necessary) to get that 2.5 movement?
|
Rarely. Mainline beam nub is usually AMP nub. AMP nub reaches opponents back row at round 3 regardless if battle speed is 2.5 or 1.75. But there may be cases, never say never. 
|
Slower beamers open up the door to Kaufman retrogrades, retreating missile fire. Sometimes I use retreating Mega D and/or gate-able Omega Nubs as a attrition force. They retreat successfully against slower ships, and can dole out alot of damage over a few turns. You may lose a planet or 2 in the interium, but the attacker loses his fleet eventually. I used this on a couple of occasions to great effect. Don't forget the suicide chaff killers.
Other than that, the difference between slow and fast is usually 1 round of missile attack. If your opponet doesn't have missiles, or they are little compared to what you have, then the extra round might be fine. Or it may be moot if you brought enough chaff.
| TheShadow7478 wrote on Fri, 30 June 2006 03:55 |
How important is the trans star engine, and at what point are you committed to 1 design for you frontline beam nub?
|
| Kotk |
TS is nice, but it costs lot of resources to research. Say ... with propulsion expensive you can build about 1000 IS-10 nubs instead going from P16 to P23.
|
Agreed, but if you can stay out of the fight till you get TS, you will have 7%? more ships for your metal. That can make a real difference. Plus the weight difference can give you design options. Also, if you have 2 mainline designs, and your opponet used Big Muthas, you will have a big problem...
-Matt
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: More Nub Design |
Thu, 13 July 2006 20:12 |
|
| LEit |
 | Lt. Commander |
Messages: 879
Registered: April 2003
Location: CT | |
|
With some searching, google finds this:
http://www.darkshire.org/~jhkim/public_html/sfb/glossary.htm l
Searching for
Kaufman retrogrades
doesn't find it.
But
Kaufman retrograde tactic
does.
(normally I'd put it in "'s, but that is meaningful to Google, so I thought this format would be clearer)
It seems to mainly be a Star Fleet Battles term.
[Updated on: Thu, 13 July 2006 20:13]
- LEitReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: More Nub Design |
Fri, 14 July 2006 14:30 |
|
| mlaub |
| Lieutenant |
Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003
Location: MN, USA | |
|
| PricklyPea wrote on Fri, 14 July 2006 11:29 |
what about the BB question? when would/should you build BBs when starting in a max tech game?
|
In a max tech game? IT might make a case, but not sure it would be worth it IMO. Oh, I can certainly see building them...but they would be slow boats, sp 1.5 or worse. You would want to put a Nexii on the nose, or a 3 Nexii stack on a nub would beat it's init. Other thing I don't like about the BB is that it only has a base of 2000 armor (which sucks if you chose RS), and no chance of jamming if you go the init route.
Other thing is that a Nub can be customized to fit with your fleet, easily. I can put jammers on it to the point of making sure they are the last to be shot. Or deflectors, if missiles are not a concern. I can build designs with less torps that make them gateable in an emergency. Losing <10% through gating vs. >18% is much less tragic.
Truly, the only time I have built missile BB ships in the Nub era, is when I already had a huge stack, and the stacking bonus made it more reasonable to continue the design.
-Matt
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: More Nub Design |
Fri, 14 July 2006 23:49 |
|
|
|
Another use for BBs is suicide attackers, sometimes they are cheapest way to out init opponent to get one strategic shot off. Shot may be to destroy chaff, bombers, sap shields, or hit his chaff killers and other ships with gattlings.
Suicide tactics become more useful if more than 4 players on battleboard.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
... but the logic behind these on AMP nub is very simple. Without at least 3 slots of BD-s on AMP nub ... Mega disruptor/Syncro Sapper nubs built for same money destroy AMP nubs before they get to range 2.