Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Academy » HP, HG or -F
| Re: HP, HG or -F |
Sat, 14 June 2003 07:53   |
|
|
|
The only -F races I've really toyed with to any successful level are IT and SD.
IT because of the gating - never ever ever letting a planet over the 250,000 population mark is wonderful.
SD because the problem I've always had with -F is once i've expanded as far as I can before hitting someone who's a better player than me (and that's pretty much everyone) I'm suddenly defending... which is hard work with a -F I've found.
HP - I hate playing this type. It's just TOO slow off the block. If i meet a HP in a game I'll normally try to wipe them out as soon as possible because the longer I wait the harder it will be to do so!
HG is the best balance I've found - gives you the competitive edge to take on a -F and the resource output to compete with that HP you'll meet 70 turns from now.
Hybrids I only use in the enormous games because I hate reaching 2450 and having less than 10k... unless I'm -F... but 10k is usually my benchmark for a -F race depending on who and what i wun into.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: HP, HG or -F |
Mon, 16 June 2003 11:04 |
|
 Crusader |
 | Officer Cadet 2nd Year |
Messages: 233
Registered: January 2003
Location: Dixie Land | |
|
I think I want to tackle this subject with a little more in-depth discussion. Not to the point that say, a JC would take, because all the numbers have been thrown about heedleesly in the past. All you have to do is get on Google and run a few searches. But there have been numerous debates, discussions, and just plain feuding over such things as race design. Of course, everyone generally has a favorite.
I tend to wimp out and go with HG because it is generally "safer" in the type of games I like to play in. I tend to wander toward what is now being called "vanilla" games. No special rules, no team play, no universe redesign, role-playing optional, etc, etc. I also tend to play in games that I host. I suppose someone lacking diplomatic skills would call me a "control freak".  The only HP race I played was a medium uni, normal density, with only 5 races in the game (I did not host this one). I had plenty of room to expand and I started in a good position to one side, so folks could only come at me from 2 sides. However, the last game that I hosted was a 13 race giant, but I limited the # of planets per race ratio by choosing the uni size that would give me the # of worlds I (we)wanted, and then used the stretch utility to make the universe larger. But I digress. 
Has anyone considered how a player's personality might dictate how well they do with the different race designs? One of the reasons I like to play SS is because I like to sneak about, watching other races when they do not think that they can be seen, and see what they are up to. When I get into a war, I tend to like to counter-punch, instead of rushing to the offensive. (Large invasion fleets destroyed over a large production center does wonders for the available mineral supply  ) It just seems to me that a player should consider just how he likes to play the game before deciding on a race design, and design his race to fit his mode of play. Someone who is just simply naturally cautious in his game play would, to my mind, tend to play a -f race poorly. Conventional wisdom (and I refer to that because I've not played -f in PBEM) does seem to indicate that early war is essential to a -f race's long-term survival, while still heavily playing the diplomatic card to prevent an early alliance rising up against their early aggression.
HP races want to see alliances form up in a game, probably as early as possible. At the least, they want to have non-aggression pacts and tech-trading agreements on all fronts. HG's want to cause division. They want to find at least one other race with aggressive tendencies to work with on taking out someone fairly early in the game, preferably someone who is not a next-door neighbor, and pick someone else apart. Kinda like Germany and Russia handled Poland in WWII. -f races, being a heavily-modified HG race, tend to want to play strategies similar to the HG. Take out someone early, perhaps with the aid of another, while being nice to others who might be offended by early aggression.
JC referred to HG's as "predators". They survive by feeding on others. If you are a predator-type, you should play a design that takes advantage of that trait. 
This does not mean that universe design does not play any part in which race design you should pick for a game. (See above) It does not mean that people should not play around with different race designs and play them in games. How else are you able to figure out what your opponent might be up to/are capable of?  
And, yet, I find I have a question for those of you as full of answers as I seem to be. How do YOU determine what type of race your fellow opponents are during a game? People do not usually reveal that information willingly, as a general rule. If you are an HG predator looking for an easy HP prey, what criteria do you use to determine just what they are. Do you simply rely on their responses (i.e.-do you simply expect meek, non-aggressive, "I want a pact" types to be HP's?)? Are there p
...
Nothing for now.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| Re: HP, HG or -F |
Wed, 09 July 2003 05:42 |
|
|
|
Or a HG IT.
One of my favourite plans when playing IT is to ramp up to large freighters ASAP and then crash and burn a colony with 100k of colonists + 200kt of minerals (to smack up a stargate).
With 19% growth you can launch such a colony ship every 2 turns IIRC... maybe wait an extra 1 turn every once in a while.
If the colony is particularily far flung I chuck in an SFX. I can be doing this by 2410 easy...
As with all things in Stars! there's always an exception and always a but.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | |
| Re: HP, HG or -F |
Wed, 09 July 2003 17:16 |
|
|
|
I usually keep the santa maria colonizer until I start running tight on slots (this is usually situational since I use more slots during wartime than peacetime). When I start running low, I will make a warp-10 LF with colonizer module and it will serve douple duty as both transport and colonizer.
Paladin
"There is no substitute for Integrity"Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: HP, HG or -F |
Wed, 09 July 2003 19:16 |
|
|
|
Going back to the IT PRT...
The LF with the coloniser pod (no coloniser ship) I generally crash and burn that one ship with a few kt of G and I. This makes life easy when it comes to building that first gate.
IIRC I put 20kt of I, 180kt of G (for a starbase or factories) and then 1000kt of pop.
With 1/1000 setting for pop resources you can colonise on one turn and start to produce a stargate, the next turn you carry on building, and by the 3rd you have a stargate.
A LF with engine and pod costs around 140 resources without Miniturization. A santa maria style ship costs around 50.
I usually use the LF coloniser design as my main stargate to stargate transport ship... it makes it a multi role ship design.. because it carries and it colonises. Added bonus of clearing up a design slot for more important things... like ships with guns n stuff.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: HP, HG or -F |
Tue, 18 November 2003 02:21 |
|
| Sinla |
 | Warrant Officer |
Messages: 132
Registered: February 2003
Location: the Netherlands | |
|
| Cirrus wrote on Tue, 18 November 2003 07:28 |
What do HP, HG, -f actually mean?
|
Those are referred to as the 'basic' economymodels (page 5 of the custom race wizard):
HP = Hyperproducer: 1/2500 popeff., but factories at least something like 15/8/21. Ramps up quite (well, very) slow, but the maximumoutput per planet in resources is higher. Don't forget the checkbox 
HG = Hypergrowth: 1/1000 popeff, 'standard' factories (12/9/16 is best, but could be less effecient). Ramps up pretty fast, less resources on each planet.
-f = factorlyless: popeff. is best kept at 1/1000, but if they think they can afford it, people sometimes take 1/900 (or even better?). Factories at 5/25/5, you don't build any!
This is compensated by the great habs (1i is probably best) and some great tech (3.5 cheap), which you both can afford due to the lack of points you spend on your factorysettings. Strong starter, bit weak in the midgame (try build a BB ).
1WW (OWW) = 1 world wonder. Great factories, great everything really. Except all habs are at their narrowest (and mostly on the right edge). You don't see these too often (maybe some tiny universe for fun). Observer races also have these settings most of the time.
QS = Quick start. Great facs and research. Bit low on the habs, made up by speed in the beginning of a game. sometimes referred to as a hybrid IIRC (a bit HG, a bit HP),
HTH
[Updated on: Tue, 18 November 2003 11:46]
If you can't beat me... Run away...Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: HP, HG or -F |
Tue, 18 November 2003 10:18 |
|
| Steve |
 | Officer Cadet 1st Year |
Messages: 217
Registered: November 2002
Location: 40 deg N, 90 deg W | |
|
| Sinla wrote on Tue, 18 November 2003 02:21 |
| Cirrus wrote on Tue, 18 November 2003 07:28 |
What do HP, HG, -f actually mean?
|
...
HG = Hypergrowth: 1/1000 popeff, 'standard' factories (16/9/12 is best, but could be less effecient). Ramps up pretty fast, less resources on each planet.
...
|
I can't get my race design wizard to do any better than 15 resources per 10 factories 
No trees were harmed in the making of this sig. However, many electrons were terribly inconveniencedReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: HP, HG or -F |
Tue, 18 November 2003 11:27 |
|
| Micha | 
 | |
Messages: 2342
Registered: November 2002
Location: Belgium GMT +1 | |
|
| Steve wrote on Tue, 18 November 2003 16:18 |
| Sinla wrote on Tue, 18 November 2003 02:21 |
| Cirrus wrote on Tue, 18 November 2003 07:28 |
What do HP, HG, -f actually mean?
|
...
HG = Hypergrowth: 1/1000 popeff, 'standard' factories (16/9/12 is best, but could be less effecient). Ramps up pretty fast, less resources on each planet.
...
|
I can't get my race design wizard to do any better than 15 resources per 10 factories
|
Hehe  I think he meant 12/9/16, ... or 15/9/12??
mch
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: HP, HG or -F |
Sun, 23 November 2003 14:23 |
|
| mlaub |
 | Lieutenant |
Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003
Location: MN, USA | |
|
I almost invariably take 20% PGR if I have a -f IT.
That's a waste of points, IMO. 19% is fast enough, and it is considerably more expensive to get the 20% on a wideband -f race. I just played a 19% -f IT, and I had no problem finding a use for the 159 race points I saved. Although, 80 pts from 18% to 19% is definately worth it.
A -f IS can survive a lower GR, as you probably surmised, the growth in orbit adds a lot over time. Plus, later in the game a -f IS can overpopulate planets to the 3x lvl, and gain double the resources on planets. As with everything else, it usually depends on the players ability to make a strategy like this work.
I've played all the different types, but mainly only play HG's and some -f's now. The only HP's I play are HE's, but that's like playing a TT CA in many respects... 
-Matt
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue Apr 16 17:13:18 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Re: HP, HG or -F
