.com.unity Forums - Torpedo question

Page 3 of 3

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- Space Empires: IV & V (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - Torpedo question (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=10729)

oleg	November 17th, 2003 11:06 PM

Re: Torpedo question

I am on the PvK side. After all. his mod is better http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Hey, hey, just kidding !!! Oleg goes under cover. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Fyron

November 17th, 2003 11:58 PM

Re: Torpedo question

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif His mod is just playable SP. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

PvK	November 18th, 2003 12:05 AM

Re: Torpedo question

Fryon wrote:

Quote:

Regardless of your extreme nit-picking over semantics, my arguments are still valid.

Naturally. I wasn't denying the validity of most of your arguments, as far as they go. I was pointing out the exaggeration of some of your assertions in some of your one-liner emails, and some conclusions about the uselessness of some techniques.

I'm sorry it wasn't clear to you what points I was and wasn't trying to make. I don't think we actually disagree on much here, except for what the likely situations are, and therefore which decisions make sense, and which techniques are useful, in unmodded play. I think our play experiences have been a bit different, from our different play styles, and the different games we've been in.

There might be a few disagreements about details of the effects of Max Range/DGH tactic, but I'd just be repeating myself, or bringing up more play examples, so I don't see much point in doing that. I don't intend any offense, but one and/or both of us have been failing to follow the other's line of thinking when making counter-arguments on some points.

Fryon wrote:

Quote:

It is rather rude to talk about someone in the third person when they are "present", you know.

Not if one isn't addressing that person. I had no intention of being rude. When I referred to you in the third person, I was responding to Maerlyn's post:

Maerlyn wrote:

Quote:

...
if you ask me: its 2:2 until now, but both of you should try to stick to the assumptions made in the beginning and not bring in possible additional weapons or other components in order to strenghten your arguments. (as both of you did)

PvK

oleg	November 18th, 2003 12:28 AM

Re: Torpedo question

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif His mod is just playable SP. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

SP is all what I enjoy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif , and I don't like multiplayer - put your definiton here about the concept of play before your inuendo !

PvK	November 18th, 2003 12:54 AM

Re: Torpedo question

Gee, I prefer Proportions MP to Proportions SP, myself.

PvK

CNCRaymond

November 18th, 2003 01:03 AM

Re: Torpedo question

I wish I would have gotten into this discussion when it was started. In one of my current games, a race is using Torpedo class ships with APB's. His fleet is set to Max range attacks and thus far he has been very successful with these tactics.

When used correctly Torpedo heavy fleets can be most effective.

Fyron

November 18th, 2003 01:15 AM

Re: Torpedo question

PkV wrote:

Quote:

Naturally. I wasn't denying the validity of most of your arguments, as far as they go. I was pointing out the exaggeration of some of your assertions in some of your one-liner emails, and some conclusions about the uselessness of some techniques.

One-liner emails? Of course if you take single sentences out of context they tend to transmit a vastly different meaning than they had originally... I was not exaggerating anywhere.

Quote:

I'm sorry it wasn't clear to you what points I was and wasn't trying to make. I don't think we actually disagree on much here, except for what the likely situations are, and therefore which decisions make sense, and which techniques are useful, in unmodded play. I think our play experiences have been a bit different, from our different play styles, and the different games we've been in.

I see.

Quote:

I don't intend any offense, but one and/or both of us have been failing to follow the other's line of thinking when making counter-arguments on some points.

I don't really see that, unless you want to say that the line of thinking differs from the content of the Posts... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Quote:

Not if one isn't addressing that person. I had no intention of being rude. When I referred to you in the third person, I was responding to Maerlyn's post:

Which is a problem, as a forum thread is more akin to a big conversation with everyone in the room than separate converastions in different places (when the discussion remains on the same topic, of course)...

PvK	November 18th, 2003 02:07 AM

Re: Torpedo question

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
One-liner emails? Of course if you take single sentences out of context they tend to transmit a vastly different meaning than they had originally... I was not exaggerating anywhere.

I meant one-liner Posts. And looking back, I see only one of them was literally a one-liner post. These were the assertions I was referring to originally, and these were the points I was trying to stick to in each part of the discussion.

At first I thought you meant to exaggerate, but now it sounds like you maintain them to be true, within your doctrine, where you assume certain situations and game style choices are the way to go. Apparently this includes expressions like "extremely inefficient" to mean "have disadvantages that make me usually not want to use them, because I don't expect their strengths to come into play". Any misunderstandings others might have about this, they have to pry out of you with lengthy arguments.

I don't know of a way to link to a specific post, but below is the text of the email which I thought defined the topic.

I wrote:

Quote:

Sorry Wardad. I was just exaggerating and teasing Fryon about his exaggerated teases. Staying on topic, I'd say Fryon was either wrong or exaggerating or incomplete about such things as:

"... Baseships, which are extremely innefficient..."
- Baseships have some inefficiencies, and some efficiencies. Their strengths can be played so as to make them undeserving of the label "extremely inefficient".

"That [Taera: "PvK said you need to ditch the APM or your ships will stick around and get out gunned."] only works if the enemy is using small fleet sizes Taera. Otherwise, it makes no difference (except to make some ships unable to fire) because the ships will be blown up in a single round anyways."
- These are exaggerations. Max range with ships that need to reload will tend to improve their effect and survivability, unless there are so many ships that they can't actually move backwards. Also, even in huge/dense ship battles, there are still a significant number of ships which don't get blown up in a single turn.

In reply to Ed Kolis:
"Hmmm... so if I get what you're saying, weapons with a low rate of fire and long range (like missiles and advanced torpedoes) are really sort of like a damper field that blocks half, two thirds, or three quarters (depending on if you're using fire rate 2, 3, or 4 weapons) of damage, because you only get shot at by the rate-1 weapons when you move into range...

Of course that wouldn't work when the enemy has faster engines, but then for assaults against satellites, bases, and planets... "

Fryon quipped:
"It also does not work very well when the enemy goes the same speed as you either."
- Depends on your definition of "very well". It does often have a good effect, even if the enemy has the same speed, because in most cases the resulting range and concentration of enemy ships is reduced during turns where the friendly ships in question are reloading.

Now, I'm not asserting that such tactics are enough to tip the scales set by the rather lame torp stats versus the rather good APB XII stats in the unmodded game, but they do have positive effects in many situations.

It was clear to me from Fryon's winking smilies (" ") that he was teasing and exaggerating, but I thought maybe some newer players might get the wrong idea.

PvK

Looking back at that, I think it still summarizes my position on each point. All your (Fryon's) statements which I quoted are based on valid observations, but are over-statements of them, or at least represent a specific doctrine rather than being valid general statements.

PvK

Fyron

November 18th, 2003 03:23 AM

Re: Torpedo question

Quote:

At first I thought you meant to exaggerate, but now it sounds like you maintain them to be true, within your doctrine, where you assume certain situations and game style choices are the way to go. Apparently this includes expressions like "extremely inefficient" to mean "have disadvantages that make me usually not want to use them, because I don't expect their strengths to come into play". Any misunderstandings others might have about this, they have to pry out of you with lengthy arguments.

Again, refer to the post about the phrase "extremely inefficient"... I already said it was not the best term to use there. It was not lengthy, it was a single sentence! And it was several Posts ago, yet you are still hung up on that single phrase. And, of course, taken in context in the original post that term was used in, it is not quite as extreme as you are making it out to be.

My "doctrine" is just the mechanics of SE4. nothing special. "Certain situations" are the most common ones given late game, where APB XII and QT V (as well as baseships) come into play. Huge fleets are the rule of thumb; those that split their fleets into many small squadrons tend to get overrun by those grouping their ships into big fleets. Unless, of course, you play high tech start, which is a whole different beast.

Note:
These are Posts, not emails.

[ November 18, 2003, 01:24: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

PvK	November 18th, 2003 04:05 AM

Re: Torpedo question

Well if you like dismissive exaggerations:

Perhaps you had more repetitive play experiences in your unmodded SE4 MP game sessions than I did, featuring everyone waiting to have thousands of ships with APB XII before starting any wars.

PvK

Fyron

November 18th, 2003 04:10 AM

Re: Torpedo question

I usually start wars with just a few dozen ships armed with DUCs, sometimes with PPBs... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif Those people that wait until they get APB XII before they start conquering usually get overrun by those that start off their happy-go-lucky conquering sprees earlier.

And, I used no so-called "dismissive exaggerations".

[ November 18, 2003, 02:11: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Maerlyn

November 18th, 2003 10:29 AM

Re: Torpedo question

ok guys, thanx once more. and I still would really appreciate more strategy discussions like these!

(like f.e. how do this DUC ships you, Fyron, use in early combat, look like? (given low tech start, no special tech tree selected, and an unmodded game.) I guess light cruisers with Propulsion lvl 1 and mounted DUCs lvl IV, but are you already using armor/combat support/sensors or any stuff like these? are you supporting them with a few Capital Ship Missiles lvl 1 ships? are you going for armor or combat support/sensors or PD first in your tech tree? are you using mine sweepers, as early mine defens is very common, how many mine sweepers do you usually use in the beginning? and so on and so on...)

but beside these strategic discussions I would suggest that both of you, PVK and Fyron, end your discussion about "exaggerations", "One-liner emails", "over-statements" and the definition of "extremly inefficient" right here.

let me asure you that these was a very nice discussions with an awful lot of good points on both sides, but it is a characteristic of a good discussion that there cannot be a "winner".
(and since we have reached the point where both start repeating themselfs I�d like to call this a tie at this point and end it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

however, thanx a lot! and some answers for my questions to Fyron up there would be very appreciated. you can easily rip apart these answers of Fyron, cant you PVK http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif (as he will start exaggerating again for sure http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif )

[ November 18, 2003, 10:00: Message edited by: Maerlyn ]

tesco samoa

November 18th, 2003 06:24 PM

Re: Torpedo question

P.S.

Both Fyrons and PVK's stances on combat work for engagements under 400* ships....

Once you get to the magical 400 barrior forget everything you were doing before. Its a complete new system of fleet setups etc... Due to the fact that the game cannot handle placing all those ships effectivly.

This is where the BaseShip vs Battleship really shines if your baseship is designed properlly vs your opponent. As the first 3 to 4 rounds will be complete slugfests. So it is recommended that you punch very hard on the first round. And then soak the damage during the receiving round.

For less than 400

If a player is using the BB system against your base ships. Attack him on warp points... This will be to your advantage. If they are using SD 's or the engine one on the APB BB... They will close to a range where your BS will be able to hit the BB and inflict some damage. And always set you base ship to target nearest nearest nearest... with a Point blank then ram stragety. Your shield depleters and engine destroyers will have a greater range and when one ship slows down an enemy BB the next BS will destroy it

Another advantage of BS vs BB is that when you lose ships vs happiness... it does not affect it as much as you have less ships http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif --- So I believe

* -- number picked out of a hat...

tesco samoa

November 18th, 2003 06:25 PM

Re: Torpedo question

Maerlyn

PVK and Fryon have been enjoying this style of conversation for as long as i can remember. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Fyron

November 19th, 2003 06:53 AM

Re: Torpedo question

Oleg and PvK (and anyone else), would you like to submit some strategies to the Ultimate Strategies Mod? It would be a great service to the community. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

PvK	November 20th, 2003 05:20 AM

Re: Torpedo question

If/when I get some time and inclination, sure, though I'll have to study what's already there.

PvK

Atrocities

January 2nd, 2004 10:25 PM

Re: Torpedo question

This thread has a lot of excellent topics and discussion in it. A must read for any new player.

Fyron

January 2nd, 2004 10:40 PM

Re: Torpedo question

Quote:

Originally posted by PvK:
If/when I get some time and inclination, sure, though I'll have to study what's already there.

PvK

Had time or inclination yet?

PvK	January 3rd, 2004 12:16 AM

Re: Torpedo question

Nope. I had (made myself take) a bit of time and energy, but was more inclined to do other things, such as try to fiddle with improvements to Proportions mod (didn't get very far, unfortunately), playtesting the next SE4 patch beta, running my CMBB campaign, and playing Dominions II.

I will mention an interesting technique I've tried with some success, though. Fleets with just a few ships in them (i.e. 2-5 ships per fleet), in a formation designed to have them operate as an actual team. This allows you to design the ships as a small complementary squadron. For example, you can have an anti-ship ship concentrate on firepower, and then give it 1-4 escorts that will deploy immediately around it and provide support such as PD, or shield buffers or vice versa - if your opponent tends to target largest or most powerful, you can put a large ship that can take a lot of damage (lots of shields, before enemy has shield depleters), with one or more other ships that have all the firepower but won't be targeted because the enemy will favor the "damage soaker". Or other ideas - depends on the enemy. Anyway, I've had some good success with this sort of thing in some situations, particularly in some competetive games where I needed to do something fancy to try to get an advantage. Definitely a micro-management exercise, however.

PvK

oleg	January 3rd, 2004 05:16 AM

Re: Torpedo question

Yes, it works fine when you employ less than 30 ships. After that it is a pain to Shift-Attack 10+ fleets http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

But I like this tactic in Proportions or AIC games where I seldom have too many ships.

Atrocities

January 3rd, 2004 09:36 AM

Re: Torpedo question

Quote:

and playing Dominions II.

Do you like Dominions II and if can you tell us little more about the game. (I know it a shrapnel released game, but nothing else.)

thorfrog

January 5th, 2004 09:37 PM

Re: Torpedo question

I'd like to hear how many of you have modded torpedoes. This is what I changed:
-added +15% to hit bonus

Any other ideas??

Fyron

January 6th, 2004 02:52 AM

Re: Torpedo question

P&N, Devnull and Adamant all have them with bonuses to hit. Devnull gives no bonus to AM Torp, and +10 to all QT. Adamant and P&N give +15 to AM Torp, and +17 to +25 to QT.

[ January 06, 2004, 00:55: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

PvK	January 6th, 2004 04:01 AM

Re: Torpedo question

I modded torpedoes in Proportions mod. I think the main change was to simply increase damage from pathetic to respectable. I might have increased their supply usage a bit too. The low-level ones are even good in Proportions on a cost-efficiency basis. I know many players like to increase torpedo accuracy based I guess on the notion that "they're guided", but I tend to like them more as a hard-hitting weapon.

The unmodded torps are pretty contemptible in my opinion. It's very hard to find good things to say about them, especially at low levels. Only the "first shot wipeout" or "hit and run" aspects seem to have any chance of giving them any advantage over other weapons.

PvK

Fyron

January 6th, 2004 04:04 AM

Re: Torpedo question

Forgot to mention that I increased their range as well in Adamant. Didn't think they needed a damage boost with both range and to hit increase...

[ January 06, 2004, 02:05: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

PvK	January 6th, 2004 04:14 AM

Re: Torpedo question

Quote:

Originally posted by Atrocities:
Do you like Dominions II and if can you tell us little more about the game. (I know it a shrapnel released game, but nothing else.)

I love Dominions I and II! At the things it does best, there is no competition. Excellent and extremely varied turn-based strategy in an original-yet-historically-derived highly-magical fantasy/medieval setting. It's one of the few games that combines an enormous number of factors, units, equipment, conditions, and stuff into one setting, and does a very good job of their values and interactions, so things stay in proportion and generally make sense, and there are always new situations springing up, and new strategies and techniques to try, even after huge amounts of play. Heaps of detail and humor and weird and interesting stuff.

If it might be your sort of game, I'd recommend trying the demo, and/or visiting the forum topic here.

PvK

Fyron

January 6th, 2004 04:43 AM

Re: Torpedo question

Dominions is too complicated in areas that should be simple, and too simple in areas that should be complicated. The interface is one of the worst offenders. Most of the game's information is not presented in a very well designed manner. Too many times am I left wondering "what the hell just happened," "what the hell does this do?" or "how does this work?" There are no global reports to be found, at all. There is no way to tell a territory to repeatedly build some units. You have to click many many times to do so. I have no idea at all how the tax incomes are figured out, and there is nothing in the game to indicate how such is arrived. It seems loosely based on population, but that is obviously not all there is too it. I also have no idea why they seem to vary from turn to turn. The resources my territories have vary over time, for no reason that I can see. Often, I will have some territories that NEVER recruit any units, no matter how large of a gold surplus I have. And yes, they do have some resource production. A lot of the log Messages the game sends are lacking in useful information. There is no way I can figure out to match the name of a nation to its territory, flag, or anything it possesses. This is just poor game design. There should at the very least be a window you can access that displays all empire names next to their flags. Starting a new game just to figure out which empire is which is an absurd solution. Even with maximal useage of gold income and as much expansion as can be done, the AI still manages to ammass several times as many units as I ever can. Even when I manage to defeat their forces that are attacking me, they just bring in 2-3 times as many as they just lost, in the next turn or two. I am thinking it has hidden cheating bonuses to income and such so over used in games... The unrest level of territories doesn't seem to be very consistent. There are too many undefined options for the orders for your troops in combat. There is no simple indicator telling you whether you have troops in a territory or not on the map. There should also be a separate indicator telling you whether you have heroes or not there. I could go on, but I shall stop here. All in all, Dominions 2 (as well as 1) come up lacking to me. It does have some nice ideas, but the game seems rather unsophisticated. Maybe I should go post this in the Dominions forum...

[ January 06, 2004, 02:49: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

PvK	January 6th, 2004 09:16 AM

Re: Torpedo question

Mostly, you just haven't figured stuff out yet.

PvK

narf poit chez BOOM

January 6th, 2004 10:17 AM

Re: Torpedo question

well, if someone gave him some pointers...

Atrocities

January 6th, 2004 11:04 AM

Re: Torpedo question

WOW Fyron! Man I have never seen him so riled up before over a game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Fyron

January 6th, 2004 04:45 PM

Re: Torpedo question

*whistles non-chalantly*

Note that I was actually playing the Dominions 1 demo, not Dominions 2. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif Nothing to see here folks, move along.

*whistles non-chalantly*

Fyron

January 6th, 2004 04:51 PM

Re: Torpedo question

Quote:

Originally posted by Atrocities:
WOW Fyron! Man I have never seen him so riled up before over a game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Then you do not remember all those Posts about Civ 3... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:16 AM.

Page 3 of 3

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page