Home World Forum
Stars! AutoHost web forums

Jump to Stars! AutoHost


 
 
Home » Primary Racial Traits » WM » WM in a Nubless game?
Re: WM in a Nubless game? Thu, 12 June 2008 05:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
iztok is currently offline iztok

 
Commander

Messages: 1192
Registered: April 2003
Location: Slovenia, Europe
Hi!
Micha wrote on Wed, 11 June 2008 09:57

BTW, this discussion is one of the ever recurring threads, and always fun. Smile

Smile Smile Smile So true. Check this thread in RGCS from August 2003: Dreadnought vs Nubian

BR, Iztok


[Updated on: Thu, 12 June 2008 05:46]

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Thu, 12 June 2008 06:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
magic9mushroom is currently offline magic9mushroom

 
Commander

Messages: 1191
Registered: May 2008
I just read most of it. Decent arguments on both sides but the nub camp ignored the fact that DNs can counter design too.

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Thu, 12 June 2008 06:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
AlexTheGreat is currently offline AlexTheGreat

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 661
Registered: May 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
magic9mushroom wrote on Thu, 12 June 2008 02:33

Objection: of course DNs can be counterdesigned by nubians. I never said they couldn't be. However, that doesn't do anything about the fact that AMP DNs will kill AMP nubs where iron is limiting. Also, MegaD DNs will kill MegaD nubs.

Also, if I do choose to go with MegaD DNs, I may well put on a slot of nexi to outinit you again, and you die..


Of course you can add computers ... up to a limit that does not apply to the nub. Of course you can counter ... up to a limit that does not apply to a nub (you can put anything you like into any slot).

magic9mushroom wrote on Thu, 12 June 2008 02:33

You've forgotten that I can counterdesign just as fast as you can, the only difference being that if you out-counter-design me in a battle, you still lose most ships, whereas if I out-counter-design you, I win with 50% still alive. You can't just say "I'll always have the design which is best for killing you" because despite the mobility advantages of Nubs, I can still often trick you. And of course, we're talking DN vs. WM nub here, for non-WM nub both will win, with DN probably taking less casualties due to higher divisor.


OK, one final analysis. Let's just say that the counter works your way (AMP v AMP) - in other words my design is about as bad as it can be (I'm out-inited & have the same range thus removing the nub "move last" advantage).

In that case the AMP Nub (this time it's a WM nub but the speed advantage is useless since the nub inappropriately used AMPs) is as follows:
DN AMP: Trans-star, 8 CPS, 8 Org, 38 AMP, 8 cap, 2 def. Cost (I/B/G/R): 179/664/162/1196
Nub AMP: Trans-star, 3 CPS, 9 AMP, 9 cap, 15 def. Cost (I/B/G/R): 114/165/108/456

# Nubs needed to destroy 50 DN = 84 (11 Survive}. Note that the 11 Survivers are included in the cost as if lost:

Cost per DN destroyed: 191.5/277.2/181.4/766.1
Cost per DN: 179/664/162/1196

The nub cost compared to the DN is now (I/B/G/R): +6% / -58.3% / +12% / -35.9%

IMO that still f
...

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Thu, 12 June 2008 07:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Soobie

 
Officer Cadet 3rd Year

Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007
Location: Australia
magic9mushroom wrote on Thu, 12 June 2008 16:03

Also, if I do choose to go with MegaD DNs, I may well put on a slot of nexi to outinit you again, and you die.

You've forgotten that I can counterdesign just as fast as you can,

Reads like you are playing devils advocate for the sake of playing devils advocate.

It just all seems wrong to me. Putting aside the fact that nubs use less mins, nubs are also cheaper in resources.

For example, to my eye the person building nubs can play catch up with a new nub fleet faster and more efficiently than a person trying to play catch up with a new DN fleet, in a non-BET universe.

While I'm not against the thought of building a DN fleet as a counter to an existing nub fleet as an unexpected/surprise tactic, I don't think it would be the rule: I think it would be the exception.

Let us know how it goes in a live scenario between 2 or 3 relatively equally skilled players in a relatively balanced environment and preferably intermediate or above Smile

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Thu, 12 June 2008 07:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
magic9mushroom is currently offline magic9mushroom

 
Commander

Messages: 1191
Registered: May 2008
I'm a beginner, and mostly theoretical. But I'm about to host a game with some friends, and I might end up in that situation.

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Fri, 13 June 2008 03:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
iztok is currently offline iztok

 
Commander

Messages: 1192
Registered: April 2003
Location: Slovenia, Europe
Hi!
magic9mushroom wrote on Thu, 12 June 2008 12:24

I just read most of it. Decent arguments on both sides but the nub camp ignored the fact that DNs can counter design too.

Nonbody objects that DNs can't be used as counterdesign to Nubs. But in a real game it's somewhat problematic.

Short story: by building DNs the WM player will use quite some minerals and also reveal his DN designs. Both these facts will work against him if others get Nubs.


Long story Wink :

In a game a WM will usually get his DN hull 10 - 20 turns earlier than other player(s) will get Nubs. Since he knows he has big advantage with his DNs over BBs Weights, and that this advantage will be (more or less) gone when others get Nubs Sick, will he very likely use it and build _lots_ of DNs to get into a significantly stronger position (by making his oponent(s) weaker Hit over head 2 Guns Dead ) in that timeframe (at least that's what I'd do Twisted Evil).

Let's assume he and his friend succeded in his plan: they removed one player entirely wOOt 2, and severely crippled another neighbour Yes, but the "AntiWM" alliance on the other side of the universe managed to get to Nubs without being involved in mayor wars Yuck. They have now less planets than his alliance just got, but more minerals, since he and his victims used or destroyed most of their mined minerals. However AntiWM aliance has most of their planets at peek production, while in his new conquest there are mostly empty or bombed-out shells Wheelchair that need 10-20 turns to become productive.

But he'll not get them, as the AntiWM alliance on the other side of the universe just started building Nubs, that are (unfortunatelly) well tailored to his main two DN designs Evil or Very Mad. Since they know how many he has (they did ther info gathering Sneaky), they'll also not overbuild (just the amount to successfully wipe out his main fleet and the flet of his friend) Evil or Very Mad and save minerals to counter his counter Furious.

So what can he do now? If he faces those Nubs he'll lose badly Dead . If he counter-designs those Nubs Thumbs Up he'll give even more of his rather scarce min
...



[Updated on: Fri, 13 June 2008 03:12]

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Fri, 13 June 2008 03:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
magic9mushroom is currently offline magic9mushroom

 
Commander

Messages: 1191
Registered: May 2008
The situation you describe is game over whether or not DN vs. Nub is involved. So it doesn't count at all. How does that prove inferiority of DNs, I ask?

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Fri, 13 June 2008 07:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
iztok is currently offline iztok

 
Commander

Messages: 1192
Registered: April 2003
Location: Slovenia, Europe
Hi!
magic9mushroom wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 09:49

The situation you describe is game over whether or not DN vs. Nub is involved.

Not true. Just take the Nub hull out, and the situation is very different (note I'm assuming W-26 on both sides), because successfully countering the DN with the BB is MUCH harder. If your assumption would be true, no one would ever win as a WM.

BR, Iztok


[Updated on: Fri, 13 June 2008 07:39]

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Fri, 13 June 2008 09:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
LEit is currently offline LEit

 
Lt. Commander

Messages: 879
Registered: April 2003
Location: CT
iztok wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 07:38

Just take the Nub hull out

The question is not what happens if the nubian isn't around, but if, once it is available, should the WM switch to nubians or continue to use DNs for beamers. In your case, as long as the WM's ally isn't another WM and does trust the WM enough to give ships, it probably makes sense to go to nubians, to combine both ships of both races into one stack (the WM will have to give his production to the ally, who will give it back, otherwise they'll be in two different stacks).



- LEit

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Fri, 13 June 2008 20:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
magic9mushroom is currently offline magic9mushroom

 
Commander

Messages: 1191
Registered: May 2008
iztok wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 21:38

Hi!
magic9mushroom wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 09:49

The situation you describe is game over whether or not DN vs. Nub is involved.

Not true. Just take the Nub hull out, and the situation is very different (note I'm assuming W-26 on both sides), because successfully countering the DN with the BB is MUCH harder. If your assumption would be true, no one would ever win as a WM.

BR, Iztok



What I meant is that in that situation (overstretched and need time to develop planets before a counter-attack, enemy's counterdesigned your fleet) it matters jack and squat whether you're using DNs, BBs, or Nubs. As long as they have Nubs, they can counterdesign you, and hence in this situation you will always lose. But this doesn't prove the inferiority of the DN hull, it just means that any DN design can be counterdesigned. Big deal, since the Nub can be too. I agree that killing DNs with BBs is difficult, but that's not my point. My point is that even if you were also using Nubs, you would still lose badly in this situation.

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Fri, 13 June 2008 21:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
magic9mushroom is currently offline magic9mushroom

 
Commander

Messages: 1191
Registered: May 2008
Soobie wrote on Thu, 12 June 2008 21:02

magic9mushroom wrote on Thu, 12 June 2008 16:03

Also, if I do choose to go with MegaD DNs, I may well put on a slot of nexi to outinit you again, and you die.

You've forgotten that I can counterdesign just as fast as you can,

Reads like you are playing devils advocate for the sake of playing devils advocate.

It just all seems wrong to me. Putting aside the fact that nubs use less mins, nubs are also cheaper in resources.

For example, to my eye the person building nubs can play catch up with a new nub fleet faster and more efficiently than a person trying to play catch up with a new DN fleet, in a non-BET universe.

While I'm not against the thought of building a DN fleet as a counter to an existing nub fleet as an unexpected/surprise tactic, I don't think it would be the rule: I think it would be the exception.

Let us know how it goes in a live scenario between 2 or 3 relatively equally skilled players in a relatively balanced environment and preferably intermediate or above Smile


I'm not playing devil's advocate, I believe what I'm saying. You also have ignored miniaturisation.

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Sat, 14 June 2008 07:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Soobie

 
Officer Cadet 3rd Year

Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007
Location: Australia
magic9mushroom wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 10:32

I'm not playing devil's advocate, I believe what I'm saying.
Fine.
Quote:

You also have ignored miniaturisation.
I have? OK, I think you need to post some designs and go in to the detail AlexTheGreat did.

I can't see a Beamer DN using less res or Bor than, say, 1.5 semi-decent beamer Nubs if the techs are equal. I'll also take a stab and say that the germ use will be really close. Ir, the DN will use less. But Ir use in beamers is usually a secondary concern imho. I'm thinking Bor and/or Res are going to be the limiting factors here, so I'm going with the nub.

I also can't see a missile DN using less Ir, Germ or Res than about 1.5 missile nubs (Arma or Omega) ... wait ... I can imagine a DN using marginally less germ and about the same res as 1.5 nubs. But only just. I'm tipping Ir and Germ are gonna be the limiting factors here, so I'm going with the nub.

I was a fly on the wall for a great game where the WM player and ally had the others so much on the defensive they just didn't have a chance to get to nubs usefully because they were desperately trying to defend. Nubs finally arrived for some but it was just too late to be useful. Watching low tech DNs going around trashing everyone left, right and centre is beautiful to behold. Scored a great education out of that game. But the strategy there was very different to pitting DNs against Nubs on equal terms.

Perhaps you're right and DN is the superior warship hull in all situations (which is the position you seem to be taking here) and it's just that I use the hull incorrectly. But, personally, I just don't see the DN as the all-time be-all and end-all warship hull in all circumstances when the nub is around.

edit: typo
...



[Updated on: Sat, 14 June 2008 07:54]

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Sat, 14 June 2008 08:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
magic9mushroom is currently offline magic9mushroom

 
Commander

Messages: 1191
Registered: May 2008
Soobie wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 21:50

magic9mushroom wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 10:32

I'm not playing devil's advocate, I believe what I'm saying.
Fine.
Quote:

You also have ignored miniaturisation.
I have? OK, I think you need to post some designs and go in to the detail AlexTheGreat did.

I can't see a Beamer DN using less res or Bor than, say, 1.5 semi-decent beamer Nubs if the techs are equal. I'll also take a stab and say that the germ use will be really close. Ir, the DN will use less. But Ir use in beamers is usually a secondary concern imho. I'm thinking Bor and/or Res are going to be the limiting factors here, so I'm going with the nub.

I also can't see a missile DN using less Ir, Germ or Res than about 1.5 missile nubs (Arma or Omega) ... wait ... I can imagine a DN using marginally less germ and about the same res as 1.5 nubs. But only just. I'm tipping Ir and Germ are gonna be the limiting factors here, so I'm going with the nub.

I was a fly on the wall for a great game where the WM player and ally had the others so much on the defensive they just didn't have a chance to get to nubs usefully because they were desperately trying to defend. Nubs finally arrived for some but it was just too late to be useful. Watching low tech DNs going around trashing everyone left, right and centre is beautiful to behold. Scored a great education out of that game. But the strategy there was very different to pitting DNs against Nubs on equal terms.

Perhaps you're right and DN is the superior warship hull in all situations (which is the position you seem to be taking here) and it's just that I use the hull incorrectly. But, personally, I just don't see the DN as the all-time be-all and end-all warship hull in all circumstances when the nub is around.

edit: typo


Oh sorry, I seem to have misunderstood you too Surprised . I meant in hull costs, you meant in whole ship costs. Whoops. Beamer DNs will indeed use a lot more res and bor than beamer nubs ship for ship, but that's countered by having much higher firep
...

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Sun, 15 June 2008 01:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Soobie

 
Officer Cadet 3rd Year

Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007
Location: Australia
magic9mushroom wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 21:39


Oh sorry, I seem to have misunderstood you too Surprised . I meant in hull costs, you meant in whole ship costs. Whoops. Beamer DNs will indeed use a lot more res and bor than beamer nubs ship for ship, but that's countered by having much higher firepower (3-4 times), which brings things back to roughly equal terms after the beam defs are weighed in on the side of the nubs. Missiles: it doesn't really matter that a missile DN costs 1.5 times the iron, because it has double to 2.5 times the firepower. And it has bigger slots = more kills to boot. They are without doubt the best torp hull IMO. And I don't think DNs are the be-all and the end-all of endgame ships, nubians are far better for defense because of their gateability, which no DN has. They also are reasonably equal in beamer-to-beamer matches, which makes them a good choice for counterdesigning DNs. But in missile-beamer, beamer-missile, and missile-missile, they just can't compete pound for pound with DNs IMO, which makes DNs the best choice for offensive operations.

hmmm ... suffice to say if I'm going to be using a mixed fleet and I'm probably going to go with (beamer DN or beamer nub) and missile nub for mobility in offence or defence and to balance my metal use. I'm unlikely to use missile DN despite those big ship-killing slots because of their expense in Ir & Res, their inability to gate and their vulnerability to chaff.

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Sun, 15 June 2008 01:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
magic9mushroom is currently offline magic9mushroom

 
Commander

Messages: 1191
Registered: May 2008
Gates are not around when you're on the offense. Guess what you want to be doing as a WM? Rolling Eyes

Also, WHAT EXPENSE IN IRON? DNs are much, much cheaper per torp than Nubs.


[Updated on: Sun, 15 June 2008 01:56]

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Sun, 15 June 2008 02:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
vonKreedon is currently offline vonKreedon

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 610
Registered: March 2003
Location: Seattle, WA USA
Regarding gates and offense, you have to get your production to the concentration points and having your production gatable means that your concentration happens much faster and effectively.

Regarding the relative mineral costs, you have to take in the context for Nubs. In the late game the remaining races in contention are constrained by minerals at their production centers. The per weapon cost may be better for the DN, I'll take your word for that, but the per ships cost is substantially less for the Nub. This means that your mineral constrained production centers can produce more Nubs than DNs. This tends to mean that overall your stacks in combat are more robust because the Nub has higher base armor and its stacks will tend to have larger shield pools. When you add in the ability to gate the stacking advantage for the Nub in the late game really adds up.


[Updated on: Sun, 15 June 2008 02:25]

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Sun, 15 June 2008 02:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
magic9mushroom is currently offline magic9mushroom

 
Commander

Messages: 1191
Registered: May 2008
My point though, was that an assault fleet designed to go into enemy territory and destroy anything that moves would be better off with DNs. I stand by that.

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Sun, 15 June 2008 02:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Soobie

 
Officer Cadet 3rd Year

Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007
Location: Australia
magic9mushroom wrote on Sun, 15 June 2008 15:25

Gates are not around when you're on the offense. Guess what you want to be doing as a WM? Rolling Eyes

Also, WHAT EXPENSE IN IRON? DNs are much, much cheaper per torp than Nubs.
Wait. You don't think gates are useful in offense? Oh my.

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Sun, 15 June 2008 03:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
AlexTheGreat is currently offline AlexTheGreat

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 661
Registered: May 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
magic9mushroom wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 21:02

I'm not playing devil's advocate, I believe what I'm saying. You also have ignored miniaturisation.


My figures are for a WM at full miniaturisation for both DN & Nub. I designed (emulated your) AMP DN & designed an appropriate AMP Nub. The figures are copied from there, they are not estimated.

The # nubs needed to defeat 50 DNs are also precise - it is not an estimate.

So let me repeat:
84 nubs defeat 50 DNs (11 nubs survive).

Cost per DN destroyed: 191.5/277.2/181.4/766.1
Cost per DN: 179/664/162/1196

The nub cost compared to the DN is now (I/B/G/R): +6% / -58.3% / +12% / -35.9%

This is the worst case from the nub point of view. If the nubs used a bank of Nexi or range 3 weapons they win if the nubs outnumber the DNs 6 to 5 (Nexis added) or 11 to 10 (range 3).

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Sun, 15 June 2008 13:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
LEit is currently offline LEit

 
Lt. Commander

Messages: 879
Registered: April 2003
Location: CT
magic9mushroom wrote on Sun, 15 June 2008 01:55

Gates are not around when you're on the offense.

Gates should be around when you're on the offense. They can go up very quickly if you drop 1.1 million pop on a good world. Even 550 resources (a 50% world) can get a gate up pretty fast, 2 or 3 turns IIRC. Then your new production can gate in and you can keep the offense going. If you don't (or can't) do that, then your offense will stall, and get surrounded by mine fields, and cut to pieces.



- LEit

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Sun, 15 June 2008 14:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Micha

 

Messages: 2341
Registered: November 2002
Location: Belgium GMT +1
LEit wrote on Sun, 15 June 2008 19:54

magic9mushroom wrote on Sun, 15 June 2008 01:55

Gates are not around when you're on the offense.

Gates should be around when you're on the offense. They can go up very quickly if you drop 1.1 million pop on a good world. Even 550 resources (a 50% world) can get a gate up pretty fast, 2 or 3 turns IIRC. Then your new production can gate in and you can keep the offense going. If you don't (or can't) do that, then your offense will stall, and get surrounded by mine fields, and cut to pieces.

Very true. (Though you want to build some defenses first before your start your gate. A skilled opponent will for sure try to use packets to wipe out the planet and stall your offensive.)

mch

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Sun, 15 June 2008 14:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Micha

 

Messages: 2341
Registered: November 2002
Location: Belgium GMT +1
With regards designs: you probably won't see T-S 10 engines on either a DN or nub designs that often, ... I only saw it once or twice in the +30 games that I can remember over the past 10 years ...
Except for team games a race that can research the T-S 10 either has no expensive pop (few races have that), or has so many resources and peace for so many years it doesn't need to build a fleet in the first +70 years of the game. However the most likely reason is that a race has run out off minerals and can't feed its production centers with enough minerals to keep up the ship building while all other more important techs are already researched. Why else spend 700k into prop after prop12?

You'd probably see IS-10 variations a lot more often, which sets the DN back even more versus the nub hull since it has 5 engines to the nubs 3. I would compare designs with that engine. If you do end up in the T-S situation than I have to agree with vonKreedon and his sketch of the late game situation.

vonKreedon wrote on Sun, 15 June 2008 08:24

Regarding the relative mineral costs, you have to take in the context for Nubs. In the late game the remaining races in contention are constrained by minerals at their production centers. The per weapon cost may be better for the DN, I'll take your word for that, but the per ships cost is substantially less for the Nub. This means that your mineral constrained production centers can produce more Nubs than DNs. This tends to mean that overall your stacks in combat are more robust because the Nub has higher base armor and its stacks will tend to have larger shield pools. When you add in the ability to gate the stacking advantage for the Nub in the late game really adds up.



Partially off topic:

Personally I have a preference to build FM DNs (and even FM nubs), mount 2 OT's in the front slot and you have 2 1/4 speed after adding the WM bonus.

Benefits:
- cheaper DNs (cheaper nubs as well of course, but they benefit less) with at near full tech saving you roughly 50/100/50/200 (
...

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Sun, 15 June 2008 18:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
magic9mushroom is currently offline magic9mushroom

 
Commander

Messages: 1191
Registered: May 2008
Of course, the thing is, I'll always take IFE and never NRSE with WM, and often even CE, so I don't think I'll be using IS-10s at all.

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Mon, 16 June 2008 05:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Soobie

 
Officer Cadet 3rd Year

Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007
Location: Australia
magic9mushroom wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 08:17

Of course, the thing is, I'll always take IFE and never NRSE with WM, and often even CE, so I don't think I'll be using IS-10s at all.

Why would you never take NRSE with WM?

Report message to a moderator

Re: WM in a Nubless game? Mon, 16 June 2008 06:07 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
magic9mushroom is currently offline magic9mushroom

 
Commander

Messages: 1191
Registered: May 2008
Expensive and not particularly good for heavy DNs that need to plow through minefields.

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic: BET
Next Topic: -f WM
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Feb 28 08:33:45 EST 2020