Home » Primary Racial Traits » IT » -f benchmarks (IT or ithers) (Should a -f race monster conventionally?)
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers) |
Thu, 13 September 2012 15:19 |
|
|
[XAPBob wrote on Thu, 13 September 2012 15:54]I'm clearing 10k in 2440 with 7/14/8/10/7/4
I control two HW, and 60% of the map (not all occupied yet, but only token resistance remains - enough to save me some colonisation modules
I've picked up a few (expensive) techs from battles (4*L 4*N 2*P), none of my "key field" research has been stolen thus far.
I lead the universe in economy (by 50%, despite recent MM failings) and tech (equal lead with the AR). Recent focus on building fleets of bombers has slowed my research, but they will move on to the next planet which needs them
Don't let the AIs fool/teach you into bad playing habits. Even the strongest AIs are bad.
The primary reason why I, too, suggest testbedding in a very similar setup than the real game: it's at least better than letting your race run in an empty universe. It gives you hints wether your start might be too slow, wether you run into mineral shortages, wether precious tech items you thought essential to your strat might come in much later than expected... so, as a beginner it helps you to get a feeling for your race design and how those choices in the race wizard translate into the gameplay.
Since the AIs have some very stupid habits, you actually should play against them as if they were smarter. So don't milk them for tech. The opposite is true for a real game, whenever an enemy gives you the possibility to gain tech from him... go for it. Well, sometimes the diplomatic turmoil might be contraproductive and weighing pros and cons might be wise (but more fun it is to follow the irresistible lure of somebody offering you "free" tech on a plate *grin)
For the Fledgling Admiral settings the beginner's aim should be to conquere an AI-HW within the first 40 years. But try to do it as if they were smart mean humans and not stupid AIs... which means try to build an attack/bomber-fleet which would be capable to strike successfully vs a HW for which the owner has 1-2 turns to prepare for your incoming fleet. And imag
...
[Updated on: Thu, 13 September 2012 15:20] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
-f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Wed, 12 September 2012 14:32
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Thu, 13 September 2012 04:07
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Thu, 13 September 2012 09:54
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: Altruist on Thu, 13 September 2012 15:19
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Fri, 14 September 2012 05:07
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Sat, 15 September 2012 03:12
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: Altruist on Sat, 15 September 2012 14:37
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Sun, 16 September 2012 03:17
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: Altruist on Sun, 16 September 2012 08:39
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: Coyote on Sat, 15 September 2012 18:20
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: Altruist on Sat, 15 September 2012 22:39
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Sun, 16 September 2012 03:10
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Sun, 16 September 2012 13:14
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: Coyote on Sun, 16 September 2012 14:44
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Sun, 16 September 2012 14:47
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Mon, 17 September 2012 02:17
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Mon, 17 September 2012 04:54
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Mon, 17 September 2012 07:37
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: Altruist on Mon, 17 September 2012 23:12
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: Coyote on Tue, 18 September 2012 01:56
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Tue, 18 September 2012 06:16
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Tue, 18 September 2012 08:44
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Tue, 18 September 2012 10:32
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: Altruist on Tue, 18 September 2012 12:35
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Wed, 19 September 2012 06:07
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Wed, 19 September 2012 09:15
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: Altruist on Wed, 19 September 2012 13:51
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Thu, 20 September 2012 11:27
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: ccmaster on Mon, 01 October 2012 15:25
|
|
|
Re: -f benchmarks (IT or ithers)
By: XAPBob on Mon, 01 October 2012 13:58
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 16 18:02:16 EDT 2024
|