some playing advice

For topics that do not fit in another sub-forum.
Message
Author
User avatar
Oberlus
Juggernaut
Posts: 771
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: some playing advice

#16 Post by Oberlus » Tue May 15, 2018 1:36 pm

I myself only put fighters (no bombers and no interceptors) in self-grav (one fighter bay, one launch bay) and titan hulls in the robotic line (the one I use the most), never in robohulls 'cause they have too few internal slots (and I want the shields!). Since these "carriers" (self-grav, titanic) also have plenty of space for weapons than I use, I call them "battlecarriers".
The bio line has pretty good hulls for dedicated carriers (high stealth, plenty of inner slots) like the bioadaptive and sentient (the flagship of bio line) hulls. With those, if you fit in a good stealth part and put in no weapons, you get "invisible" carriers that never get targeted in combat (unless the enemy has enough detection). At least for the current implementation (there are thoughts on making the launch of carriers "noisy" so that they could be detected)
The asteroid line also has several hulls appropriate to make "battlecarriers", with plenty of internal and external slots.

Sindarin1
Space Krill
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue May 08, 2018 10:10 am

Re: some playing advice

#17 Post by Sindarin1 » Tue May 15, 2018 9:28 pm

Another thing that i don't understand is the use of concentration camps, i think i'll use them to get rid of some xenophobic spieces i've got capturing planets but the xenophobic handicap lowers some production important sectors of the game i'm playing now
Sindarin1
Interested in both the fantasy topic and the space.

Jaumito
Space Kraken
Posts: 166
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 3:42 am
Location: Catalonia, France, Europe, Earth, Sol, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Virgo Cluster

Re: some playing advice

#18 Post by Jaumito » Sat May 19, 2018 8:41 am

Oberlus wrote:I myself only put fighters (no bombers and no interceptors) in self-grav (one fighter bay, one launch bay) and titan hulls in the robotic line (the one I use the most), never in robohulls 'cause they have too few internal slots (and I want the shields!). Since these "carriers" (self-grav, titanic) also have plenty of space for weapons than I use, I call them "battlecarriers".
Of course it doesn't matter against the AI, but if you're ever playing against humans, you'd better avoid mixed designs and rather go with both full guns and full carrier designs, so you can adjust your production depending on what the enemy throws at you. You can't play "rock, paper, scissors" effectively if you stick to an "everything is mixed" ship design philosophy.

phocas
Space Floater
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 9:28 am

Re: some playing advice

#19 Post by phocas » Sat May 19, 2018 2:15 pm

I myself only put fighters (no bombers and no interceptors) in self-grav (one fighter bay, one launch bay) and titan hulls in the robotic line (the one I use the most), never in robohulls 'cause they have too few internal slots (and I want the shields!). Since these "carriers" (self-grav, titanic) also have plenty of space for weapons than I use, I call them "battlecarriers".
maybe not if the ennemy has shields too

with laser tech level 4
full combat robot with 2x diamond aarmor 2 x Laser and 1 deflector shield (-5) cost 230 PP
it can do (11-5) x2 x 3 damages = 36 or 66 if no shields

robot carrier with 2x diamond armor and 1x flak cost only 160 PP and can do 8x4 = 32 damages
robot battle carrier with 1 laser and no flak cost 180 and deals 32+18 damages
fighter can take some of the shots then acting as virtual shields

for around 500 PP you can have 3 carriers or 2,2 combat ships

yes the carriers can take heavy damage and often are low HP after the battle but are usually not deads

User avatar
JonCST
Space Krill
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 4:28 am

Re: some playing advice

#20 Post by JonCST » Sat Dec 15, 2018 4:36 am

o01eg wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 2:11 pm
phocas wrote:
Sindarin1 wrote: Do you frecuently srap your obsolete ships?
.
as far as i know when you scrap a ship you get nothing back
Any existing ships increases cost of building new ships.
What would people think of putting some portion of the PP value of scrapped ships into the Stockpile?

Could be the cost of the hull, the hull plus equipment... which ever value is selected, maybe take a percentage off for demolition losses?

Would be pretty straightforward for ships which don't increase in cost over time (i'm thinking colony/outpost).

Should increase the number of scrapped ships by quite a bit, which would also maybe reduce the load on the server? As the number of ships proliferate, i'd expect the CPU usage to go up.

Jon

User avatar
Oberlus
Juggernaut
Posts: 771
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: some playing advice

#21 Post by Oberlus » Sat Dec 15, 2018 11:20 pm

JonCST wrote:
Sat Dec 15, 2018 4:36 am
What would people think of putting some portion of the PP value of scrapped ships into the Stockpile?
I think it is a good idea.
I'd suggest adding a game rule for the percentage of base cost of the whole ship (hull+parts) that goes into stockpile. Thus, a 0% would be like current implementation. Basing it on base cost (without the upkeep increase) would avoid any chance to get more PPs than invested (I mean, by building many of the cheapest ship possible before scrapping previously-built expensive ones).
Maybe you should open an issue (feature request) with your suggestion.

User avatar
JonCST
Space Krill
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 4:28 am

Re: some playing advice

#22 Post by JonCST » Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:50 am

Oberlus, thanks for taking the time to respond. You said:

> [...] percentage of base cost of the whole ship (hull+parts) that goes into stockpile [...]
> avoid any chance to get more PPs than invested [...]

Makes sense to me. As long as the original cost of the ship is preserved within it, that works well.

> I'd suggest adding a game rule for the percentage of base cost [...]

Maybe link to existing construction techs? Orbital construction = some, interstellar logistics = more, galactic = most?

Could also make location based. Scrap in space, nothing. At outpost 10%, colony 20%, shipyard 50%, dry dock 80%?

> Maybe you should open an issue (feature request) with your suggestion.

I'm very new here: can you point me towards what i need to read to do this?

Thanks.

Jon

Jaumito
Space Kraken
Posts: 166
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 3:42 am
Location: Catalonia, France, Europe, Earth, Sol, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Virgo Cluster

Re: some playing advice

#23 Post by Jaumito » Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:37 pm

JonCST wrote:
Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:50 am
Could also make location based. Scrap in space, nothing. At outpost 10%, colony 20%, shipyard 50%, dry dock 80%?
Ahem, I was expecting this. It's not that the idea hasn't any merit, but we're heading into serious micro-management issues here - so if returns from scrapping is ever implemented, I hope it'll come as an optional feature.

User avatar
JonCST
Space Krill
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 4:28 am

Re: some playing advice

#24 Post by JonCST » Mon Dec 17, 2018 6:10 pm

Hi Jaumito, Thanks for taking the time to respond.

> [...] micro managing [...]

Although i'm pretty new here, i have noticed that does seem to be an issue, and i kinda agree. FO does seem to strike a good balance here.

> [...] optional [...]

Well, like many other features, it's always possible not to use it, and just scrap ships regardless. But, avoiding micro-managing might be a good point for linking it to a tech rather than a location?

Thanks again.

Jon

User avatar
Oberlus
Juggernaut
Posts: 771
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: some playing advice

#25 Post by Oberlus » Mon Dec 17, 2018 6:25 pm

Let's continue this on the dedicated thread.

Post Reply