Home World Forum
Stars! AutoHost web forums

Jump to Stars! AutoHost


 
 
Home » Primary Racial Traits » WM » HP WM
HP WM Sun, 21 January 2007 16:07 Go to next message
Neo the White is currently offline Neo the White

 
Master Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 96
Registered: December 2006
I've read from several places
that Hyper-Producing WM is no good.

I can't really see how as it can get a lot of minerals fast not to mention resources. with of course a high PGR.

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Mon, 22 January 2007 06:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
tgellan is currently offline tgellan

 
Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 75
Registered: May 2006
Location: Luxembourg
Well, one is countering the other...

For WM the endgame tends to hold more disadvantages then advantages. First there's the fact that they can't produce any minelayers, and second that their planetary defenses are only the very basic ones. Then, their PRT gimmichs get outdated in the endgame when construction and weapon reach max levels. This forces the WM to view planets as more disposable that with other race traits. It also forces the WM to seak a descision before this stage of the game, thus WMs are generally the first to rush into battles, trying to make most out of their starting ships and weapon tec superiority, their invasion bonuses and later on their PRT gimmicks.

A HP trait on the other side, is slow to start as you've got to set up your economy, there are nearly no spare ressources you could put into an early war. Then the HP's economy will eat up any GE he can put his hand on, so no way to waste it on early fleets. Once the HP has reach the mid game, and is well established on a certain number of planets, those production centers are very valuable. They were created during several decades and huge amounts of GE. The HP cannot afford to lose them lightly and therefor need to be defended with all means. This means minefields, bases, fleets and efficient defenses...

Hope this is understandable...

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Mon, 22 January 2007 10:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Neo the White is currently offline Neo the White

 
Master Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 96
Registered: December 2006
Early war?

hmmm

withot ABBS
at the year 2447
HW has 3117 resources
12k Ir, Bo
and 5k GE

but yeah building up colonies will take time.

DD is a great asset vs AR Death Stars.

also DD if well armed outweigths BB even if they are more numerous.
especially in the case of Capital Missile DDs.

also minefield laying ships can be traded.

defences of WM are really... Mad2 I think it odd to not have WM have their laser defences.

but has anyone had real game experience with HP WM. theoretically and in case HP WM has more resources than other style WM then wouldn't it make bigger fleets?

and if the HW is strong then it shouldn't be problematic to deal with HG race who also builds ships only at HW at least till 2420?


[Updated on: Mon, 22 January 2007 10:55]

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Mon, 22 January 2007 11:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
tgellan is currently offline tgellan

 
Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 75
Registered: May 2006
Location: Luxembourg
Neo the White wrote on Mon, 22 January 2007 16:03

Early war.

at the year 2447
HW has 3117 resources
12k Ir, Bo
and 5k GE

but yeah building up colonies will take time.



Erm, year 2447 and early??? By early wars, I mean after 2410! and before 2420, at the very latest at 2430... (That's for AccBBS, add 6-10 years for non AccBBs)
In our current game (The Galactic Traders, 12 players, Pbem), we have three major wars, and all of them started well before 2430. I don't know all the details of those wars, as I'm not involved in all of them, but they happen rather close to my borders and some things happen to spread through the galaxy... One of those wars includes a WM, actually he's the target Very Happy
The reason is, he went on rampage since turn 2400!!! He killed everything on sight, well wasn't clever, as everyone just turned against him then Very Happy
But back to subject, 3117 per planet is fine, granted, but how many planets do you aim to claim by that time?
Consider that -f HG neighbour of yours, that only aims at 1000res / planet, or even less, but has got 50 planets by that time, where you only have 10? What I want to say by this, production per planet doesn't tell you anything, what you need is the grand scheme...

So much about 2447 and early. Even with non ACCBBS, that's still late for a WM...

Quote:


DD is a great asset vs AR Death Stars.

also DD if well armed outweigths BB even if they are more numerous.
especially in the case of Capital Missile DDs.


I guess by DD you mean the dreadnought (?)
I won't say that those are not an impressif force, but once Nubians are out, they are no longer that impressif. I can't check the base hull armor for them, but as I remember it's lower then the base armor of Nubians, and the costs are higher. I grant you that the dreadnoughts have a higher per slot firepower, which is an advantage, but then, if the costs are similar, this is the only late game advantage left...

Quote:



also minefield laying ships can be traded.




Sure, but you won't get them in
...



[Updated on: Mon, 22 January 2007 11:35]

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Mon, 22 January 2007 11:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kotk

 
Commander

Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003
Neo the White wrote on Mon, 22 January 2007 17:03

withot ABBS
at the year 2447
HW has 3117 resources
12k Ir, Bo
and 5k GE

Yes without ABBS HP-s are lot better because they got more time for HW buildup before need for colonization.

Anyway 3K @ 2447 ... sounds like a wet laundry? Smile

Quote:

DD is a great asset vs AR Death Stars.

Shocked DN is significally better asset vs AR Death Stars. AR is weakest of the races. Why you dont compare your HP WM with JOAT and/or IT HGs.
Quote:

especially in the case of Capital Missile DDs.

DD may have 2 computers maximum. 1 if you want to have shield too. So its terribly inaccurate as capital missile platform. Build one Death Star fully armored and full of jihads or juggers fill electronics with computers and jammers and then check how lot of DD-s it takes to destroy it. Then compare the costs. Laughing
Quote:

and if the HW is strong then it shouldn't be problematic to deal with HG race who also builds ships only at HW at least till 2420?

It is -F or QS who may be building something above couple of scout-hunt skirmishers before 2425.
Usually HG aims to build at ~2430 in AccBBS game (lets say 2437 without Acc BBS). From 5-7 better colonies that make 5-7k resources per turn comes fine enough fleet (or multiple) that no HP can fend off easily. Rest of HG colonies are still in development stage around 2430. But 10 years flat-out build from 5-7 colonies of JOAT and your HP WM is forgotten history by 2450.
...

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Sat, 27 January 2007 10:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Neo the White is currently offline Neo the White

 
Master Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 96
Registered: December 2006
Quote:

wet laundry
Laughing

well the other colonies are still lagging behind, even with ~303k pop they give max 342 resources.


Quote:

1 if you want to have shield too.


nope. still two Elect. slots only for Electronics.
Quote:


Build one Death Star fully armored and full of jihads or juggers fill electronics with computers and jammers and then check how lot of DD-s it takes to destroy it. Then compare the costs


and the cost of BB's would be not lesser.

Quote:

But 10 years flat-out build from 5-7 colonies of JOAT and your HP WM is forgotten history by 2450.


well yeah that's where WM get's out of luck Laughing

Quote:

In our current game (The Galactic Traders, 12 players, Pbem), we have three major wars, and all of them started well before 2430. I don't know all the details of those wars, as I'm not involved in all of them, but they happen rather close to my borders and some things happen to spread through the galaxy... One of those wars includes a WM, actually he's the target Very Happy
The reason is, he went on rampage since turn 2400!!! He killed everything on sight, well wasn't clever, as everyone just turned against him then Very Happy
But back to subject, 3117 per planet is fine, granted, but how many planets do you aim to claim by that time?


sounds like not a typical klingon attitude.
where's the planning???

Also sounds like a good WM style race design but not used to it's best.


Above all I keep 3i HE in mind when making races. so a max planetary resources must not be lower than 3000.
...



[Updated on: Sat, 27 January 2007 10:03]

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Sat, 27 January 2007 10:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Neo the White is currently offline Neo the White

 
Master Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 96
Registered: December 2006
I am trying now a different WM design

Klingons
WM

IS, NRSE, CE, OBRM, NAS

0,22 to 6.80 g
-128 to 184 C
15 to 95 mR

16% PGR

pop resources 1/1400

factories
10/13
7
18

mines
10
5
17

all tech expensive and no start at Tech3

----------------------------------------

doesn't seem to make it better than HP WM.

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Sat, 27 January 2007 14:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ptolemy is currently offline Ptolemy

 
Commander

Messages: 1008
Registered: September 2003
Location: Finland

I disagree with Kotk here re:
Quote:

DD may have 2 computers maximum. 1 if you want to have shield too. So its terribly inaccurate as capital missile platform. Build one Death Star fully armored and full of jihads or juggers fill electronics with computers and jammers and then check how lot of DD-s it takes to destroy


As soon as jihads are available, DD's with 2 jihad missiles and 2 basic computers brings the accuracy to 49%. They are cheap to build and are 'just' gateable through 100/250 gates with a fuel mizer. Stacks of 15 or more of these DD's are nothing to sneeze at and, supported with chaff they can easily kill early space stations with attack starbase orders. Effectively, 1 of every 2 missiles hit.

By the time any AR has reached death star construction tech, this all becomes a moot point. The AR enemies (if they are any good as players at all) will have battleships. Don't forget, any viable AR will have energy cheap since this is the most important tech - it controls resource growth. AR's will also try for cheap construction and cheap weapons. This eats up a lot of points.

Early AR death stars are not fully armed or shielded - the cost is too high. Taking the basic death star design down as soon as it shows up is when to hit the AR hardest in a long game.

Ptolemy


[Updated on: Sat, 27 January 2007 14:41]





Though we often ask how and why, we must also do to get the answers to the questions.

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Sun, 28 January 2007 14:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kotk

 
Commander

Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003
Neo the White wrote on Sat, 27 January 2007 17:20

I am trying now a different WM design

Klingons
**crap snipped**
doesn't seem to make it better than HP WM.

True. But try some classic WM? These are posted in lot of places?

Ptolemy wrote on Sat, 27 January 2007 21:40

I disagree with Kotk here re:
Quote:

DD may have 2 computers maximum. 1 if you want to have shield too. So its terribly inaccurate as capital missile platform. Build one Death Star fully armored and full of jihads or juggers fill electronics with computers and jammers and then check how lot of DD-s it takes to destroy

As soon as jihads are available, DD's with 2 jihad missiles and 2 basic computers brings the accuracy to 49%. They are cheap to build and are 'just' gateable through 100/250 gates with a fuel mizer.
...
By the time any AR has reached death star construction tech, this all becomes a moot point.


If to take my words back to context you are here actually agreeing with me. Wink

You talk about Jihad DDs like we both well know them that are lot of trouble in 2430-2440 frame. He was not talking about such DDs. WM HP cannot build them so early anyway.

He told he uses them as capital missile platform against Deathstars so two+ decades later. Surprised Also he left impression thinking that DD is better for capital missile platform than BB. In that context i said that DD is terribly inaccurate and/or shieldless. Laughing
...

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Sun, 28 January 2007 17:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joseph is currently offline joseph

 
Lt. Junior Grade

Messages: 440
Registered: May 2003
Location: Bristol
Your second race has quite a few problems which is why it doesnt out preform the HP WM.

Quote:

pop resources 1/1400

Wrong this should be either 1/1000 or 1/2500 (HP)
The points gained for the decrease in resources are too few to make it worth while for hybrids. Only chose another setting if there is a vgood reason and you know what you are doing.

Mines cost 5 - make this 3 it is cheap to do so and really pays.

Quote:

All tech expensive

Should always try to have at least 1 tech cheap. You get a lot of points for making the last tech expensive but you will pay for it in game by always being behind other in tech. (think why did the game designers give it that many points).

Also now I look at it your hab ranges are much too wide

Try this and you will see why others think both your HP and second WM are a bit outclassed.

Vanilla Monger

WM

ISB, NRSE, OBRM, NAS

0,36 to 3.20g
-112 to 120 C
23 to 79 mR
Total 1 in 4
17% PGR

pop resources 1/1000

factories
10
8
15
G ticked

mines
10
3
16

Tech Weap and Con cheap all rest expensive, start at 3.

Its not a fantastic race but should beat either of yours.
Look for articles on race design by Jason Cawley as this should help you more.



Joseph
"Can burn the land and boil the sea. You cant take the Stars from me"

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Tue, 30 January 2007 12:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Neo the White is currently offline Neo the White

 
Master Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 96
Registered: December 2006
Quote:

In that context i said that DD is terribly inaccurate and/or shieldless.


and based on what you say that they are less accurate???
it has more slots for computers. so???

also I know that capital missile DDs do much better vs fully operational Death Star than any freakin BBs. so???


[Updated on: Tue, 30 January 2007 12:08]

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Tue, 30 January 2007 12:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Iconian is currently offline Iconian

 
Officer Cadet 2nd Year

Messages: 233
Registered: January 2006
Location: Nevada, USA
Quote:

also I know that capital missile DDs do much better vs fully operational Death Star than any freakin BBs. so???


When you say "DD," are you talking about Destroyers or Dreadnaughts?

Usually, Destroyers are DD's and Dreadnaughts are DN's.

My my 2 cents



Yeah, bread too.

Don't Let the Stars! Fade Away

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Tue, 30 January 2007 12:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Neo the White is currently offline Neo the White

 
Master Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 96
Registered: December 2006

oops it is DN therefore.

Laughing

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Tue, 30 January 2007 12:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Neo the White is currently offline Neo the White

 
Master Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 96
Registered: December 2006
thx Joseph

wel l try to keep the factories better than in your example. Razz

i can't live without enough but umm I think 3000 total planetary resources should be enough for good WM.
yet the DN's need a lot of resources to make them FAST.

but still I think it a good race design.

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Wed, 31 January 2007 07:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Coyote is currently offline Coyote

 
Lt. Commander

Messages: 906
Registered: November 2002
Location: Pacific NW

You need to move fast as a WM. 17% PGR looks too slow to me. Try this QSish race:

Arashi
WM
IFE, NRSE, OBRM, NAS, RS
Grav 0.24 - 1.72
Temp -56 - 136
Rad 10 - 48
Total 1/8
PGR 19%
1/1000 eff
Facts 13/9/16/G
Mines 10/3/16
Weaps & Con cheap, En normal

I'll bet on this to crush any of your races if played correctly.


[Updated on: Wed, 31 January 2007 07:40]

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Wed, 31 January 2007 09:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Neo the White is currently offline Neo the White

 
Master Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 96
Registered: December 2006
wow that's better one...

except my tendency to add more habitat range from more expencive research not below normal. Laughing

the more better planets the quicker is the research.
and other things.


[Updated on: Wed, 31 January 2007 09:18]

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Sat, 03 February 2007 15:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ptolemy is currently offline Ptolemy

 
Commander

Messages: 1008
Registered: September 2003
Location: Finland

Quote:

Arashi
WM
IFE, NRSE, OBRM, NAS, RS
Grav 0.24 - 1.72
Temp -56 - 136
Rad 10 - 48
Total 1/8
PGR 19%
1/1000 eff
Facts 13/9/16/G
Mines 10/3/16
Weaps & Con cheap, En normal


I wouldn't bet on this race crushing anybody Coyote. As an HP it suffers from two flaws:

1. with 1 in 8 habitability the race will not have enough planets to produce the minerals it needs

2. with OBRM, it isn't going to be able to get the minerals it needs.

In my experience, you do not take less than a 1 in 4 hab range with OBRM to be competitive (unless you've used an immunity - then you can go to a 1 in 6 or possibly to 1 in 7). A compromise HP/HG design is the best for WM and should only be played in a minimum of a small/packed universe to ensure there are enough planets to make the galactic conquest viable.

Ptolemy



[Updated on: Sat, 03 February 2007 15:49]





Though we often ask how and why, we must also do to get the answers to the questions.

Report message to a moderator

Re: HP WM Sat, 03 February 2007 21:52 Go to previous message
Coyote is currently offline Coyote

 
Lt. Commander

Messages: 906
Registered: November 2002
Location: Pacific NW

Ptolemy wrote on Sat, 03 February 2007 12:48

Quote:

Arashi
WM
IFE, NRSE, OBRM, NAS, RS
Grav 0.24 - 1.72
Temp -56 - 136
Rad 10 - 48
Total 1/8
PGR 19%
1/1000 eff
Facts 13/9/16/G
Mines 10/3/16
Weaps & Con cheap, En normal


I wouldn't bet on this race crushing anybody Coyote. As an HP it suffers from two flaws:

1. with 1 in 8 habitability the race will not have enough planets to produce the minerals it needs

2. with OBRM, it isn't going to be able to get the minerals it needs.

In my experience, you do not take less than a 1 in 4 hab range with OBRM to be competitive (unless you've used an immunity - then you can go to a 1 in 6 or possibly to 1 in 7). A compromise HP/HG design is the best for WM and should only be played in a minimum of a small/packed universe to ensure there are enough planets to make the galactic conquest viable.

Ptolemy




On the basic QuickStart design style:

Huh? That's not a HP race. It's a QS... very similar to a race I ended up taking 2nd with in a 16 player medium (that was SD with 1/9 hab). It'll have no problems if played aggressively.
(If you don't want to play aggressively, why are you playing WM?)
THe SD variant I played did get out-ramped by a HP (I think it was JoaT) in the end, but the reason for that was the race was physically too far away from me to attack while it was vulnerable, and it had an unmolested start by allying with all its neighbors. I did manage to wipe out two races completely (an SD and a CA) and put the hurt on a few more. The basic race design is sound.

On OBRM:

There's no reason to not take OBRM in a situation where remote mining simply makes no sense. If you're going to be fighting early, remote minimg won't help you much. Without minefields your remote miners will be even more vulnerable than your planets. It takes a long time for remote miners to pay for themselves, and it seems to me to be a lot more cost-effective to build warships and bombers and gain minerals through planet conquest instead. And besides, you need
...

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic: Blitz race: Vloz'ress
Next Topic: BET
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Feb 20 06:50:55 EST 2018