Re: Would you use this giant remote miner?
 

this is a very good but extremly time consuming strategy. i often use medium ships (~cruiser) for that - i load it with normal BR,LS,CQ, then Ion Engines III and the rest with the miners. Then i set orders - go to site -> sentry -> go to ressuply -> repeat orders

and you can forget about it, just check once in a while if it is producing less than it is costing.
Also, if an enemy comes in simultanous, the ship will just break the sentry and go to the ressuply post - probably better defended, and will effectively dodge any possible combats http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Would you use this giant remote miner?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'm sure you know that resupplying is really a waste of time as it has no effect on mining the field. Only thing it does is of course keeps it full of supplies so that when you go to move your ship to a different location that it can move at full speed instead of just 1. But leaving to do so limits your overall production from the field as you have to pay the maint to travel to the resupply base and back.

Re: Would you use this giant remote miner?
 

True enough, but later in the same post Taera mentions the fact that the miners heard for cover if an enemy approaches. This would require them to maintain supplies. And while sending them for resupply does temporarily halt production, getting killed stops it permenantly. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Well, at least until you build a new miner. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Geoschmo

Re: Would you use this giant remote miner?
 

No one has mentioned Large Sats. with minors. Is it because of the micro manegment night mare or?...

Re: Would you use this giant remote miner?
 

Large sats are a "don't bother" research item in my book. I go for the mega-bases instead, because you get so much more resource out of them. Large satelites just don't fit enough miners for my money. This is, of course, a personal preference thing. I just feel like the large sat would be getting very little out of the asteroid belt considering I'm permenantly reducing it's mining potential by 1% each turn. But I am a bit of a tree hugger http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Would you use this giant remote miner?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Those are far down in my research priorities. Like a broken record ... If a ruin gives me sat tech ... I will send a constructor ship to a asteroid sector. I'll launch a miner, farmer, rad..um..radder? I'll top it off with maybe an attack sat, maybe large sensor/scanner sat, and a cloak sat to cloak the stack.

It will give me a few resources, and it will cover some maintenance when I go MEE. When TDM modpack sensor ships find them, the AI will waste some time blowing them up. A mine or two is fun.

But none of this will ever fool a human.

[ July 22, 2003, 19:24: Message edited by: Arkcon ]

Re: Would you use this giant remote miner?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Large SATs with MINORS?

Why in no time those children (minors) would be crashing the SATs into each other like bumper cars. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
Any kindergarten teacher could tell you about micro management nightmares. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Would you use this giant remote miner?
 

Yeah, what Wardad says! And the minors crashing the sats is not all. Child labour is Banned also. It's illegal http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
* minipol quickly opens his designs book and erases the minor driven sats *