Finally tried 0.4.8...

Describe your experience with the latest version of FreeOrion to help us improve it.
Forum rules
Always mention the exact version of FreeOrion you are testing.

When reporting an issue regarding the AI, if possible provide the relevant AI log file and a save game file that demonstrates the issue.
Message
Author
ovarwa
Space Squid
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 3:22 am

Finally tried 0.4.8...

#1 Post by ovarwa » Fri Oct 19, 2018 10:17 pm

Hi,

Basic Environment:

Fedora 25. 4GiB RAM. i5 (2c4t) integrated gfx. HDD. In /sys, cpu set to performance, and minfreq boosted.

Build Experience:

I built it myself, since there is no package yet. The Linux instructions mostly worked, except that many dependencies were not listed, and I had to figure these out as cmake failed repeatedly. I'd have made a list for other people, except that I didn't realize that there would be more than one or two omissions until too late in the process. Running make without -j is probably safest, since specifying too high a value will freeze the system, requiring a power cycle.

The make took ~30 minutes. The instructions recommend 6GiB as a minimum, but it ran just fine with my lower specs.

I had to run make install afterward; I don't remember if that was in the instructions.


Fullscreen issues:

The script that enables/disables fullscreen by default does not write good information to the config file, so setting fullscreen on doesn't work. Editing the config by hand (<enable>1</enable>) enables this.

If you are in fullscreen, leave fullscreen to desktop and then return to FreeOrion, you are not quite in fullscreen: There is a band across the top of the screen containing the desktop wallpaper. Going to the video page of the Options menu and clicking Apply restores fullscreen.


Stability issues:

The program often freezes and sometimes (twice so far) crashes to desktop. What do I mean by freeze? The music and graphics stop for 2-20 seconds.

None of the following solve the problem: Disable audio. Disable graphics options that the UI menu suggest slow performance. Reduce the default threads for various things to the recommended 1 thread. Reduce max frame rate to 15.

The HDD is not active during these events, and there is no swapping.

Gameplay:

There have been various changes and new features, but overall the game plays similarly to 4.7 (and 4.6).

The stockpile is ok; it does not change that it is better to really be in supply but makes things more forgiving when systems are cut off. Seeing how it actually worked in play helped me understand the documentation.

I continue to utterly fail to appreciate fighters. I might be missing something.

The research and industry curves seem unchanged: It seems as though the early-midgame lasts a long time until suddenly you blow through much of the research tree. The value of various techs seem unchanged too, though some techs have been changed, added and removed. The Robotic line of hulls seem to remain a great default; there seems little reason to do anything else except just to try something else.

The game start screen has more knobs, which is nice, but the documentation is sparse. I'm playing with the defaults set, which may or may not be the proper game experience. I prefer how the old version showed me the actual random seed rather than the current implementation in which the field just says "Random."

Has anything much been done with AI? I have things set on Maniacal, which seems to be the default, and my sense is that the AI is less aggressive than before. The AI also seems to build more colonies, almost keeping pace with me. The AI does not understand how to group ships into fleets, or that troop ships need to be escorted, resulting in my being able to deal with a stronger invader piecemeal, without losing a ship. I had some tame Snowflakes, so was able to watch a war on my periphery, in which one AI faction was able to invade the home system of another faction with a stronger military, because that stronger faction had left its homeworld poorly defended, having sent the bulk of its ships off to a war of choice against various entities guarding good systems far away. Speaking of snowflakes, I was both pleased but disconcerted when I was able to park a single Large Snowflake on top of a bunch of unescorted Flux Troopships in the middle of nowhere, and destroy them over the course of a few turns because they did not move.

I'll definitely play a bit more, try some of the new and changed species, etc.

Anyway,

Ken

UrshMost
Space Kraken
Posts: 105
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 2:32 am
Location: Great White North Eh

Re: Finally tried 0.4.8...

#2 Post by UrshMost » Sat Oct 20, 2018 12:54 am

re: fighters

It took me a while to figure out fighters too, until I finally started wondering why some battles that should have gone clearly my way I was losing.

Fighters themselves don't do a lot of damage, especially in relation to the weapon slots that they are taking up, but think of them as chaff or drones that distract the enemy gunners and you start to see their use.

If you have five ships and ten fighters in your fleet in a battle, roughly two thirds of the enemy's shots for the second battle round are going to be targeted at your fighters. It appears that each weapon randomly chooses an enemy target, whether it be a planet, ship, or fighter, and the choice is not affected by whether another weapon has targeted that same object. So a single fighter might for example, get fired on three times in a single round, even though once would be enough to destroy it. Those are three shots that are not doing significant damage to ships.

Conversely, if you are fighting an enemy fleet that contains a bunch of fighters, a lot of your firepower in the second and third battle turns will be going to knocking out those fighters, and if you don't have any of your own, the enemy ships will be hammering away at your ships without taking much damage in return.

I tend to start building ships with fighters when I hit the Self Gav hull, but every ship I build from that point on has at least one set of hangers and launch bays.
Windows 7 64bit, AMD 8 Core, 8 GB
Nvidia GTX 670 @ 3240x1920
FreeOrion Build: Latest Windows Test Build

User avatar
Oberlus
Small Juggernaut
Posts: 738
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Finally tried 0.4.8...

#3 Post by Oberlus » Sat Oct 20, 2018 2:38 am

re: fighters, with current implementation they are OP.

Even robotic hulls can use them effectively instead of a shield part. They are most cost-efficient.

Mid game bombers are good enough, late game fighters are better (eg. with Titanic hull, 3 hangar + 4 launch bays, rest of extern slots for armour and your best energy weapon with mre armour than guns and the core slot for extra speed, spinal cannon or whatever you like).

ovarwa
Space Squid
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 3:22 am

Re: Finally tried 0.4.8...

#4 Post by ovarwa » Thu Oct 25, 2018 9:32 pm

Hi,

Fighters:

I do understand about the chaff aspect. A bomber is cheap compared to shields, but not by much; a bomber plus a launcher is not cheap compared to an armor plus a shield. Armor is dirt cheap in this game! That said, it is much cheaper to research. But you can start the game with Flak, to deal with those pesky Fighters; 0 research is cheapest.

On the other hand, provided your ships don't get too pulverized in Round 1, the defense provided by Fighters is cumulative across an entire fleet, unlike shields and armor. And there are currently very few things worth doing with internal slots. Maybe a shield. Maybe an engine. Maybe stealth. That leaves hangers. Of course, until late game ships, you don't have many internal slots to deal with; an engine is subtly powerful, and shields are great against the early to mid AI and monsters.

Still, I admit that I found a use for Fighters: If your species has Bad Pilots, the penalty for fighters is less onerous than for normal weapons. A SG hull with 2 fighter bays, 3 launchers, a Spinal Cannon and the rest armor is perhaps not the optimal ship for a normal species, but pretty much negates the penalty.

But for most species, wouldn't you rather populate your SG with flak, armor, direct fire, a shield and an engine?

Especially if you want your ship to venture out of your supply lines?

--

AI:

It occurs to me that I probably play with different settings from most. I like Many planets. I set monsters and specials Low, because I suspect the AI struggles with them more than I do. I set Natives to None, because I prefer empires that are distinctive past the very earliest game and prefer not winning the game based on finding the perfect complementary Native early.

I then notice that high-research species are totally awesome compared to others. Scyllor are fantastic, Gysache are still good, etc. When I play as something like George, I can still do well but notice that my production and research curves don't do nearly as well; it seems that this is the way the game is supposed to feel, with a longer midgame. I suspect that the AI doesn't know how to leverage high research, because their growth curves aren't as obscene as mine. It is also possible that I do not yet know how to properly leverage high production; still, Egassem bottlenecked by the Laenfa are in a world of hurt. The Laenfa will inevitably be crushed... after the Egassem manage to research very good sensors, by which time other factions will have researched past their innate production advantages.

The AI almost knows how to play; in some other games, I watch the AI accumulate a killer fleet near me faster than I could initially respond. At one point, it could have jumped on me overwhelmingly. Instead, it dispersed the fleet and sent it elsewhere! The dispersal was as bad as the withdrawal: By dividing the fleet into dribs and drabs moving at different speeds, I was able to interpose a large force (but still vastly smaller than the AI's original fleet) and destroy the AI's ships piecemeal. (Fast ships are disproportionately powerful against the AI because it understands nothing of maneuver.)

As usual, Phototropic is more of a penalty than a bonus. And getting a good special early kind of ends the game. An early white kraken will conquer your first neighbor, especially if said kraken is not guarded by a monster (making it *very* early.) You don't even have to pay for it. Death Rays are kind of nice too...

Bugs:

The issue with the config file is not fixed permanently by setting it manually, because any other change to the config file will overwrite the change. :/ The UI did not let me assign arbitrary keys to various functions, and trying to set these in the config file worked sometimes (as for changing the map screen semantic from panning to scrolling) and not others (using 'p' instead of 'ctl-p' for production.)

The pedia is sometimes flat out wrong. For example, it claims that the Scattered AH has no core slot but it does (in the focs). It would be nice if it grabbed its information directly from the focs, or similar data files. Similarly, the only way to discover the effect of Bad/Good Pilots on fighters is by reading code; the game itself provides no indication that there is any.

Not technically a bug, but it would be nice for the keys used to pan on the map to instead pan the research screen when that is open. Having to scroll with the mouse or by yanking the screen isn't so great.


Anyway,

Ken

ovarwa
Space Squid
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 3:22 am

Re: Finally tried 0.4.8...

#5 Post by ovarwa » Fri Oct 26, 2018 8:23 pm

Hi,

AI:

It is very good in the early game at detecting a situation in which it might get away with a single-troopship invasion, and making that happen. It isn't as good at backing off from this, possibly as a side effect of its forgetting about larger, hostile fleets in the area. Overall, though, a good thing.

Fighters:

I tried the early fighter strategy with George, along the lines suggested by Oberlus. This does work well, not because the ships are good but because they can be produced early. Singly, they kind of suck. A robotic hull with 2 laser4 and shield3 is better than one with flak and a bomber, same armor. Even for a small fleet of the same pp, the former is better. (Try 3 of the former vs 4 of the latter.) Where I'd normally use one ship for patrol, I found myself needing 2 or 3 (except against scouts). They also don't have staying power for multi-turn combats. And you need an increasingly large fleet to deal with planetary defenses. But you can start building the carriers much earlier because it only requires tech for the hull and the basic fighters, to alleviate pressure, forming them into ever more dangerous fleets. They also never become truly obsolete: The bomber scales with research and the flak gun remains just as useful for AA and grudge damage. A bunch of these can happily escort a better fleet later in the game.

This doesn't work well with Organic Hulls, because it takes too long to get there. One would think it would be even better to try a Symbiotic Hull with 2 bombers, which costs about the same, because if 1 is good, 2 are better! But no: It takes too long to get there, and the ships are specialized (unable to deal with planets). Still, it is kind of cool when your enemy cannot see your fleet throughout the combat. It isn't enough though: In a 1:1 combat, you will end the first turn with 1 bomber that will not regenerate unless you retreat. The enemy ship will be somewhat damaged and yours will be untouched. But if you are defending a system with that ship, and an enemy troopship will arrive in a turn or two, he has won. And if you are attacking, you haven't done enough damage to make a difference. This last issue is true for RH, but you get there much earlier.

So I admit I was wrong: There's a strong use case, to get an early start on a large fleet of ships that are marginal on their own but useful in larger quantities and for a long time.

(It's not enough to deal with a situation in which you're in the middle of a low-monster galaxy, close to and surrounded by too many aggressive enemies.)

Anyway,

Ken

ovarwa
Space Squid
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 3:22 am

Re: Finally tried 0.4.8...

#6 Post by ovarwa » Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:34 pm

Hi,

More thoughts:

UI: Could use an overhaul. I find myself needing to do way more clicks than needed. The map always being in the background gets in the way. My experience could be tainted by the game's sluggishness and instability on my system. Clicking and double-clicking on things (especially in queues) doesn't always work. It would be nice to be able to do a lot more from sitrep, such as going directly to the production screen focusing on a planet that is mentioned there. If this is supposed to already happen, it's not working for me... or I'm doing something wrong (which is still a UI issue). It would be nice to be able to enqueue a colony on a planet with an outpost directly from system view or sitrep. EG, right-clicking on a planet name in sitrep or system view should give me a bunch of options, more than just suitability. In ship design, it would be nice not to double-click for each item installed; single-click should be sufficient to install or uninstall a slot; it would also be nice to obsolete more than one design at a go.

AI: Did I mention that it doesn't really understand what a fleet is? Yes, I did. I notice that it knows how to outpost a planet with kraken/snowflakes/etc, which is good; it does not seem to think about letting them grow into larger forms, though in one game, it was moving a kraken (slowly, because it's a kraken!) toward my system, and it grew into a great kraken on the way (passing through the correct system). Imagine my surprise.... It does not really understand about pursuing a hull line, instead researching robotic, organic and asteroid all at once. It likes building lots of shipyards, genome banks... perhaps to compensate for insufficient understanding of supply?

Game start options: I've changed these from my usual defaults (no natives, medium starlanes, mature galaxy, high planets per system, low monsters and specials, 20-25 systems per player), trying out normal monsters, planets and specials but 25-30 systems per player. This definitely changes things! Perhaps the game is designed more toward settings of this kind. Supply matters more, Trith are comparatively better. Broad tolerance is still pretty worthless, and narrow tolerance very painful, except for Trith. It takes a bit longer to get rolling. I enjoy seeing a variety of little planetary goodies because it's fun to go after the little goodie; I think the game would do better with more little goodies (and more kinds than we usually get) and fewer huge goodies, especially unguarded huge goodies. Scylior remain awesome; good pop plus 200% research plus preferred research focus is the best research in the game, and good pop means that industry is no slouch either, and there's no penalty. Gysache are not nearly so great; their nerf seems to have been successful. Even as George with these options, keeping every George planet permanently focused on production or perhaps growth, I suspect that most of the tech tree will be exhausted before Turn 200.

Fighters: Trying to use them more. While playing gysache, I noticed that Oberlus' bomber recommendation wasn't working so well because of the Gysache penalty to the bombers; the Gysache penalty to flak made that weapon silly. So I tried a robo-loadout of interceptors and 2 lasers, which is a rather more expensive ship but which packed a rather powerful punch, even for Gysache. The lack of armor made the ships fragile individually, but in groups of 2 or more, the swarm of interceptors made that irrelevant. It's sort of splitting the difference on research; shields and zortrium are not required, and the upgrade to laser fighters and laser4 can happen later. Fighters seem clearly the best, but I'm wondering if Interceptors are better than Bombers, even if you aren't Gysache, unless your research really sucks.

Hulls: I suspect this needs an extensive redesign. There aren't many options for internal slots now that most options do not stack. One engine, maybe. One stealth component, maybe. Fuel is rather worthless. Detection is usually useful only on a scout, not on a typical combat vessel. One shield, maybe. The rest are hangers, and fighter hangers have an awkward 3 craft. (BTW, I think it would be cooler to call these mecha; just me. And you could have multiple types, including ground support. So a normal mecha preferentially attacks another mecha if possible, a heavy mecha preferentially attacks a ship if possible, an assault mecha preferentially attacks a planet, if possible, and adds some strength to any ground invasion, a utility mecha doesn't attack anything but repairs damage between rounds of combat...) And maybe guns can also come in multiple types at every tech level, such as a rapid fire version that fires multiple weak shots preferentially at fighters (er, mecha :) ), a normal version that preferentially fires full strength at ships, and a heavy gun that goes in a core slot. Maybe the time has passed for the entire idea of internal slots; sure, hulls simplify, with a slot loadout being #slots+maybeCore, but that might be a good thing, allowing for each hull line to progressively add more slots (5 slots, 6, 7, 8... 16+core). And then combine the hangers and launchers, so a ship can easily sport multiple types. And maybe get rid of the hulls that no one uses anyway. And more, better options for the core slot that start earlier in the tech tree. And the tech tree for asteroid and organic hulls really needs some thinking. Eg, why would I ever want a heavy asteroid hull when I could have an SG, which is so much better for a very small price difference? 20 speed, 50 structure, 1 core slot, -1 internal slot. Perhaps if the different hull trees offered different benefits, not just related to the hulls.

Fleets: Obviously, it's better to consider fleet deployment rather than ship deployment; a look at what the AI does ought to confirm this! Perhaps I'm also supposed to think of things in terms of fleet design, rather than ship design, building different kinds of ships with diverse capabilities and assembling them into a fleet greater than the sum of its parts. I find that what actually happens is that I *assemble* fleets and sometimes have to shift gears, which promotes building one versatile design at any given level of tech development, and sending groups of these on missions as ships become available, either because I have just built them or because they have concluded a previous mission.

Anyway,

Ken

ovarwa
Space Squid
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 3:22 am

Re: Finally tried 0.4.8...

#7 Post by ovarwa » Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:12 pm

Hi,

More on fighters: I find that relying on fighters as the main armament very much peters out in midgame, when it becomes more important to pummel planets that have increasing amounts of 'shields' and firepower. But I've come around to the idea that all ships should have some, and the first ships don't need much else.

Anyway,

Ken

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 12287
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Finally tried 0.4.8...

#8 Post by Geoff the Medio » Sat Nov 03, 2018 8:49 am

ovarwa wrote:
Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:34 pm
I enjoy seeing a variety of little planetary goodies because it's fun to go after the little goodie; I think the game would do better with more little goodies (and more kinds than we usually get) and fewer huge goodies, especially unguarded huge goodies.
Do you have any suggestions for new "goodies" ?

User avatar
Oberlus
Small Juggernaut
Posts: 738
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Finally tried 0.4.8...

#9 Post by Oberlus » Sat Nov 03, 2018 10:19 am

ovarwa wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:12 pm
I find that relying on fighters as the main armament very much peters out in midgame, when it becomes more important to pummel planets that have increasing amounts of 'shields' and firepower. But I've come around to the idea that all ships should have some, and the first ships don't need much else.
In mid game I use self.-grav. hulls, which can have 2 hangars, 2 or 3 launch bays and 4 or 3 slots for armour and direct weapons. These hulls already have 100 HP, which made them rather sturdy. If I have more production than my enemies I will favour more weapons and less armour. In any case, a squad of a few of these ships with plasma or death ray weapons is able to flat down any planetary system except those well defended with fleets. The fact that you can't have good fighters without researching first the corresponding good weapon, and that the best hulls always have many more external slots than internal ones, implies to me that I can never rely on fighters as the main armament: I always have a sizeable amount of weapons in any fleet. Only exception is when creating stealth carriers, utterly effective against empires with less detection than your stealth.

Jaumito
Space Kraken
Posts: 155
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 3:42 am
Location: Catalonia, France, Europe, Earth, Sol, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Virgo Cluster

Re: Finally tried 0.4.8...

#10 Post by Jaumito » Sat Nov 03, 2018 3:55 pm

Oberlus wrote:
Sat Nov 03, 2018 10:19 am
In mid game I use self.-grav. hulls, which can have [...]
Yes, they're way too good. I changed that and made Nanorobitic Maintenance a prereq for SG hulls, and swapped their research cost and time. Now in midgame I have to choose between Nanorobotic and Large Asteroid hulls. At least there's a choice.

ovarwa
Space Squid
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 3:22 am

Re: Finally tried 0.4.8...

#11 Post by ovarwa » Sun Nov 04, 2018 5:55 am

Hi,
Geoff the Medio wrote:
Sat Nov 03, 2018 8:49 am
ovarwa wrote:
Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:34 pm
I enjoy seeing a variety of little planetary goodies because it's fun to go after the little goodie; I think the game would do better with more little goodies (and more kinds than we usually get) and fewer huge goodies, especially unguarded huge goodies.
Do you have any suggestions for new "goodies" ?
Sure. None of these are epic, and all perhaps underwhelming deliberately, since the idea is that there should be lots of these, and that finding something unguarded early in the game should not be a problem at all:

A one-time bonus of rp or pp when an outpost is established.
A specific technology becomes available for a discount once an outpost is established and its requisites have been learned.
+1/turn bonus to rp or pp for a colony, regardless of focus.
A specific structure of which enough remains to be useful once an outpost is established and the structure's tech prerequisites have been researched. (So advanced stuff is not available too early.)
The wreckage of a ship that is repaired and ready for use when an outpost is established and the ship's tech requisites have been researched. (As above.)
Population growth on this planet is greatly accelerated.
Pre-existing planetary defenses.
Planetary defenses rejuvenate faster.
+1 supply at this world.
Ships repair a bit faster here, cumulative with other effects.
An outpost in this asteroid belt makes it especially good for hiding fighters, allowing its owner to have pre-launched them before any combat that occurs in this system, so they are ready on Round 1 rather than Round 2.
An outpost here provides a small shield benefit to your ships in this system.
...penalty to enemy ships in this system.
... bonus (or penalty) to all ships in this system.
A colony on this planet can draw from the stockpile at an accelerated rate.
+1 growth special (for your type) that does not require a growth focus.
If you have an outpost here, your ships starting a turn within 50uu have a speed bonus.
If you have an outpost here, enemy ships starting a turn within 50uu have a speed penalty.
Detection range from an outpost here is increased.

Reasons for and names of any of these are a matter of aesthetics.

Anyway,

Ken

ovarwa
Space Squid
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 3:22 am

Re: Finally tried 0.4.8...

#12 Post by ovarwa » Sun Nov 04, 2018 6:31 am

Hi,
Oberlus wrote:
Sat Nov 03, 2018 10:19 am
ovarwa wrote:
Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:12 pm
I find that relying on fighters as the main armament very much peters out in midgame, when it becomes more important to pummel planets that have increasing amounts of 'shields' and firepower. But I've come around to the idea that all ships should have some, and the first ships don't need much else.
In mid game I use self.-grav. hulls, which can have 2 hangars, 2 or 3 launch bays and 4 or 3 slots for armour and direct weapons. These hulls already have 100 HP, which made them rather sturdy. If I have more production than my enemies I will favour more weapons and less armour. In any case, a squad of a few of these ships with plasma or death ray weapons is able to flat down any planetary system except those well defended with fleets. The fact that you can't have good fighters without researching first the corresponding good weapon, and that the best hulls always have many more external slots than internal ones, implies to me that I can never rely on fighters as the main armament: I always have a sizeable amount of weapons in any fleet. Only exception is when creating stealth carriers, utterly effective against empires with less detection than your stealth.
*chuckle* I think I'm defining mid-game as the point where RH with bombers and flak no longer cut it for planetary assault, and I want to build SG with something better than flak.

But I'm also thinking that maybe it's sometimes good to get lasers *and* bombers onto a RH and deviate to laser4, even though that is ultimately a waste of rp, because it postpones that mid-game point. (Although maybe not, since around this time we start seeing planets with weapons >30.)

I'm still thinking that getting rid of internal slots is a good idea. Then stretch out each line of hull tech, so that techN gives a hull with BaseSlotsForLine+N slots. Then each line of hulls provides a basic special hull benefit, and possibly other benefits as you get deeper into the line. I also think that the ship building at the homeworld should be unique (repairs damage) rather than favor the Robotic line of hulls.

Anyway,

Ken

ovarwa
Space Squid
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 3:22 am

Re: Finally tried 0.4.8...

#13 Post by ovarwa » Sun Nov 04, 2018 7:04 am

(I have mixed feeling about stealth carriers. When they are effective, they are very effective. Perhaps too effective against the AI. So I don't feel clever about using them. But when they are not, they are really, really bad, and this route really has to be chosen at the expense of more mainstream and versatile opening strategies.)

User avatar
Oberlus
Small Juggernaut
Posts: 738
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Finally tried 0.4.8...

#14 Post by Oberlus » Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:49 am

ovarwa wrote:
Sun Nov 04, 2018 6:31 am
*chuckle* I think I'm defining mid-game as the point where RH with bombers and flak no longer cut it for planetary assault, and I want to build SG with something better than flak.
Woa, you mean you are attacking planets with flaks and not even a single MD/laser per hull? If that's what you mean, you are bold.
Also, if at your mid game you only have laser and not plasma, that's a different strategy than mine. Except in some special starting situations, I will get first Nascent AI, then Laser and Robotic Hull with the rest invested on the Adaptive Automation path, and some growth techs if required for non-invading expansion. By turn 50-70 I must have AA, laser weapons, laser fighters and the second tier armour (never remember its name), which is more than enough to take down planetary defenses of systems with several planets. By turn 120 I generally will have Quantum Computation, plasma (weapon and fighter) and self.-grav, and maybe also death ray techs if I wasn't unlucky with the species. I think I also call mid game when my robos with laser or plasma can't stand the big shots of planetary defenses, but by then I must have better hulls.
Jaumito wrote:
Sat Nov 03, 2018 3:55 pm
Yes, they're way too good. I changed that and made Nanorobitic Maintenance a prereq for SG hulls, and swapped their research cost and time. Now in midgame I have to choose between Nanorobotic and Large Asteroid hulls. At least there's a choice.
That is just great. I shall change my installation the same way.

User avatar
EricF
Space Dragon
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 10:12 am

Re: Finally tried 0.4.8...

#15 Post by EricF » Sun Nov 04, 2018 1:02 pm

ovarwa wrote:
Sun Nov 04, 2018 6:31 am

But I'm also thinking that maybe it's sometimes good to get lasers *and* bombers onto a RH and deviate to laser4, even though that is ultimately a waste of rp, because it postpones that mid-game point. (Although maybe not, since around this time we start seeing planets with weapons >30.)
Huh, you just described what I would call my Early Game ship. :)
RH w/LB +2 armor and a Laser w/Bomber Hanger.
Upgrade with Plasma when I get it. Build nothing but these until I get SG.
Last game I still had a bunch of these still around included in my Fleet of SG heavy carriers.
Last edited by EricF on Sun Nov 04, 2018 1:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply