| weapons expensive |
Sat, 22 March 2008 17:01  |
|
 knightpraetor |
 | Chief Warrant Officer 1 |
Messages: 154
Registered: October 2006 | |
|
Does anyone risk doing this?
I notice that everyone in my games tends to have weapons expensive. Trading for weapons tech sounds like it would be really easy. Also, as WM I started with high weapons, and haven't really gotten a benefit from taking weapons cheap so far.
especially in a 50 turn game, i feel like it was a waste to get W cheap? In a short game is it better to just take everything expensive?I have too many cheap techs, which both helped and didn't help. I stole some techs here and there, but i felt with the amount of fighting i did I could have stolen more with worse tech settings. Most of the fights that occur are one-sided, so i feel even with worse ships, it wouldn't have made a difference. if you are fighting equal # or worse, are outnumbered, then you should be trying to avoid engagement i would think.
Plus it's stressful to worry about people stealing tech off your new designs.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: weapons expensive |
Sat, 22 March 2008 17:59  |
|
|
|
| knightpraetor wrote on Sat, 22 March 2008 15:01 |
Does anyone risk doing this?
I notice that everyone in my games tends to have weapons expensive. Trading for weapons tech sounds like it would be really easy. Also, as WM I started with high weapons, and haven't really gotten a benefit from taking weapons cheap so far.
|
Interesting, from my experience most players choose weapons+con cheap (unless they are planning to trade something else for weapons+con.)| Quote: |
especially in a 50 turn game, i feel like it was a waste to get W cheap? In a short game is it better to just take everything expensive?I have too many cheap techs, which both helped and didn't help. I stole some techs here and there, but i felt with the amount of fighting i did I could have stolen more with worse tech settings. Most of the fights that occur are one-sided, so i feel even with worse ships, it wouldn't have made a difference. if you are fighting equal # or worse, are outnumbered, then you should be trying to avoid engagement i would think.
|
too many cheap techs is expensive usually one chooses one or two| Quote: |
Plus it's stressful to worry about people stealing tech off your new designs.
|
a WM has to be very careful not to give away weapons and needs to remember that weapons is important and is probably the prime researching he should be doing especially in a short game like 2451.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: weapons expensive |
Sun, 23 March 2008 07:01 |
|
| m.a@stars |
 | Commander |
Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left | |
|
| knightpraetor wrote on Sun, 23 March 2008 00:12 |
lol, whoops...looks like i typed the opposite of what i said. What i meant was that most people have weapons cheap. They might be willing to take something else normal, but never weapons.
Anyways, i never know how much cheap technology is too much.
I assume that is proper grammar?
how much cheap technology is too much.
how many cheap technologies are too many.
those are the two possible clauses...?
|
Well, more than two cheap techs should show in your racewizard points total as costly enough to make you think twice. 
As for weapons tech expensive, it is usually only taken in team games, or with a powerful econ and enough controlled space to make the gamble worth the risk. 
Last but not least, Warmongers have this unique advantage of being able to know everybody else's designs before battle, so you should try to battlesim every scuffle before you actually risk your precious ships and make sure you can win. Remember fancier weapons can be beaten by superior numbers and/or crafty counterdesigns. 
[Updated on: Sun, 30 March 2008 07:15]
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme!  Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: weapons expensive |
Sun, 23 March 2008 09:52 |
|
| Micha | 
| |
Messages: 2342
Registered: November 2002
Location: Belgium GMT +1 | |
|
| knightpraetor wrote on Sun, 23 March 2008 00:12 |
Anyways, i never know how much cheap technology is too much.
|
Depends on the race/game/etc you are playing. As for pure RW points: you should stop at 3.5 cheap techs. After that you get a penalty and are paying a lot for each step to take another field normal or cheap.
What does 3.5 mean? For example:
3 cheap (1+1+1) + 1 normal (0.5) = 3.5
5 normal (5*0.5=2.5) + 1 cheap (1) = 3.5
Using the last example to check in the Race Wizard: with 6 normal going to 5 normal and 1 cheap costs you 43 RW points, taking another cheap costs you 130 RW points, the next cheap costs you 217 RW points ...
As for the "depends" situation, HP usually take 1 cheap (weap) and the rest expensive, they have enough resources to burn through the expensive fields. -f on the contrary usually go 3.5, they have no factories to support their research. HG are a bit more flexible ...
For different game setups: in a slow tech game cheap techs are IMHO worth the cost! The last game I played like that even researching normal cost fields hurt like hell ...
In a short game going all expensive could be an option, IIRC players in duels (ending in 50-60 years) used that with succes.
| Quote: |
I assume that is proper grammar?
how much cheap technology is too much.
how many cheap technologies are too many.
those are the two possible clauses...?
|
Sounds fine to me, but English is not my mother language. 
mch
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: weapons expensive |
Sat, 29 March 2008 22:45 |
|
| Soobie |
 | Officer Cadet 3rd Year |
Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007
Location: Australia | |
|
| Micha wrote on Mon, 24 March 2008 01:00 |
... just lucky not all players joined against me ...
|
*makes a note to ensure all players align against Micha next time I am in a game with him, otherwise I will certainly lose*
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Or prop16 rams on your MMLs when your enemy obviously has no rams and stopped prop research at prop12. (hi AE!) 
