Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Academy » Ramscoops and minefields
| Ramscoops and minefields |
Fri, 18 September 2009 07:31  |
|
 Mark Hewitt |
 | Master Chief Petty Officer |
Messages: 105
Registered: June 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada | |
|
Sometimes, your ships are just going to take mine hits, at least in standard minefields (very common, and always and sometimes twice a year in SD detonating minefields). In light of this, when do you want to go with standard engines to reduce the damage (besides dedicated minefield hunters), and when does the lighter weight and cost of ramscoops say use them anyway (assuming you're not NRSE, although NRSE could still have IFE and the Fuel Mizer)?
Considering fleets with 5 or more ships only, every ship will take as many hits as engines it has. And if any ships in the fleet have ramscoops engines, that's 125 per engine instead of 100. A few hulls can take the hit if they have standard engines but not ramscoops (e.g. Large Freighter with Cow-hide Shields, SS Stealth Bomber) so it's a survival issue with them.
But support ships can affect other hulls. The Super Fuel Xport may always die no matter what in a mine strike (unless you're IS with Croby Sharmor or have the Langston Shell), but if it had ramscoops every other ship is going to take 125 per engine no matter what they are actually mount.
The most common use of ramscoops is to reduce the cost of warships and freighters. They can use separate fleets that move together to keep them away from ships with standard engines to limit the ramscoop contagion.  But they'll take more damage when they do strike mines if they have ramscoops. Is the accumulated minefield damage ever enough to justify the cost of going with standard engines?
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ramscoops and minefields |
Fri, 18 September 2009 09:00  |
|
| scottrick49 |
| Master Chief Petty Officer |
Messages: 98
Registered: August 2003
Location: Minneapolis, MN | |
|
If I have ramscoops, I use them whenever possible.
I feel that most ships which cannot survive a minefield strike with an extra shield or two, probably shouldn't be speeding through minefields in the first place. Super Fuel Xports are an exception, but they are so cheap that changing from ramscoop engines to standard ones make them cost nearly twice as much. You generally only need one with your main fleets to help speed-up repair, so just send it along and if it is destroyed by a mine, who cares! - just send in a replacement the next turn.
Large Freighters (if they have a chance of getting hit by a mine) are usually carrying pop, and I'm pretty careful with my pop so it usually isn't an issue. If you are attacking a world surrounded by a minefield, just don't send the pop the first turn. Or if you must send pop with your initial attack through a minefield, send it in ramscoop galleons rather than a large freighter with standard engines.
Ramscoop galleons are almost the same price as a standard engine large freighter:
Galleon with (3x) Trans-Galactic Super Scoop (prop 12)
177 resources, 88 iron, 17 bor, 53 germ
Large Freighter with (2x) Interspace-10 (prop 11)
220 resources, 70 iron, 50 bor, 41 germ
So really Galleons are a pretty good option if your alternative is a non-ramscoop large freighter.
So I got a little side tracked there, but to answer your question, yes I think the extra minefield damage is acceptable when you consider the savings ramscoops give you.
scottrickReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ramscoops and minefields |
Fri, 18 September 2009 10:52 |
|
|
|
If I had ramscoops available, but substantial minefields to go through... I'd use the rams and channel some of the resource/mineral savings into extra chaff / sweepers. Use your extra chaff to crash sweep any field that you didn't have time to sweep and the problem disappears
[Updated on: Fri, 18 September 2009 10:53] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ramscoops and minefields |
Fri, 18 September 2009 11:03 |
|
|
|
If you are fighting a SD, you need a spcialized mine sweeper design:
* cheap (because you need lots of them)
* fast (to escape from the minesweeper-hunters and to catch the minelayers)
* with enough shields and armours, that a stack of 5 ships can sustain 4 hits by mines (2 due to speed, 2 due to exploding fields)
Fulfill 2 of the above 3 criteria and you have a good design. If you can fit all 3 criteria, great. If then it is possible to use your ramscoops, fine, otherwise you might want to use standards.
Ships not specialized in minesweeping I'd recommend to use with whatever engine suits you. Mines are of no concerns to them because they should NEVER cross a minefield. Minefields are taken care of before, by whatever means.
[Updated on: Fri, 18 September 2009 11:09] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Ramscoops and minefields |
Mon, 21 September 2009 11:15 |
|
| Bukane |
 | Crewman 1st Class |
Messages: 33
Registered: November 2005 | |
|
| scottrick49 wrote on Fri, 18 September 2009 09:00 |
Ramscoop galleons are almost the same price as a standard engine large freighter:
Galleon with (3x) Trans-Galactic Super Scoop (prop 12)
177 resources, 88 iron, 17 bor, 53 germ
Large Freighter with (2x) Interspace-10 (prop 11)
220 resources, 70 iron, 50 bor, 41 germ
|
Wait a sec... Galleons need 4 engines, so they are a bit more expensive. Also, the LF has 20% more room for the passengers. Plus it flies warp 10 vs warp 9 in your example... And if either hits a minefield when flying alone, it's dead anyway.
For dangerous missions, minefield-wise, sending shielded galleons in the same fleet as battleships would be an option though.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| Re: Ramscoops and minefields |
Wed, 23 September 2009 15:09 |
|
| Micha | 
 | |
Messages: 2342
Registered: November 2002
Location: Belgium GMT +1 | |
|
| mlaub wrote on Tue, 22 September 2009 21:01 |
I just can't imagine spending that much time on a stars turn. Even 2hrs is baffling, unless we are talking about a late game huge/packed...
|
Late game, large/normal, "at war" with almost everyone (the way I like it <g>), one of them SD (me too), 3 fronts (not all equally active), ...
At top moments skirmishing with the SD alone took 2-3 hours, analyzing movements in previous turns etc. Next time I'll keep peace with him. 
Add another 2hrs to the 5-6hrs for testbedding every now and then, and (re)analysis of empire wide (+/-100 planets) building.
Diplomacy, I happily cut there to at least somewhat reduce the time. Heh, most of the times however that came back to bite me, and very likely in this game once again. <shrug> I prefer fighting above walking hand in hand with everyone for most part of the game.
I don't mind the time spend, I like MM ...
mch
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ramscoops and minefields |
Thu, 24 September 2009 01:39 |
|
|
|
| Micha wrote on Wed, 23 September 2009 15:09 |
Late game, large/normal, "at war" with almost everyone (the way I like it <g>), one of them SD (me too), 3 fronts (not all equally active), ...
At top moments skirmishing with the SD alone took 2-3 hours, analyzing movements in previous turns etc. Next time I'll keep peace with him.
|
That sounds familiar.
If that's me then I thank you for the compliment! 
If it makes you feel any better my turns are taking 6-9 hours too. Though that is partly because it's my first attempt as a SD. I should have it nailed next time 
I'm sure I would have lost a long time ago if I spent only 2 hours on each turn.
If it's not me then forget the above (except for time needed per turn).
| Micha wrote on Wed, 23 September 2009 15:09 |
I don't mind the time spend, I like MM ...
mch
|
We noticed!
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ramscoops and minefields |
Thu, 24 September 2009 04:01 |
|
|
|
I hope I never have to face Micha playing a SD. It sounds... Painful.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | | |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 02 14:29:50 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Well, getting a 5-6hrs turn done in only 2 does that to you. 
I just can't imagine spending that much time on a stars turn. Even 2hrs is baffling, unless we are talking about a late game huge/packed...
