Computer combat Q
 

Does having more than one Master Computer on a ship make it any less at risk to a computer virus armed foe? That is, would a target ship with 2 MCs have to be hit twice? If there were 3 MCs aboard, would it have to be hit 3 times? Does having more than one MC mean that the ship has to be hit in separate attacks from a computer virus component? Or, do more powerful or closer range virus hit spill over damage onto more than one MC with a single hit?

In non-Gold, a MC ship can still fall victim to the Allegiance Subverter even if it has a bridge, if the MC is hit first and THEN it is hit with the Allegiance Subverter. (IIRC, in GOLD, the MC protects against the Allegiance Subverter even after it is destroyed even if by computer virus)

I am in a high-high *non-GOLD* TDM game and the Cue Cappa AI designer correctly sequenced the design to put the computer virus ahead of the Allgiance Subverter in the firing order of the designs. Interestingly enough, the CC were on the other side of the map and I have been thrashing about with the others while the CC was been allowed to expand w/o check.

As a result, as I approach the end game, having almost fought through several other AIs, the CC finally appeared and are threatening to beat me for a rare loss in solitaire non-GOLD. They have taken away the systems in which we first met, on both fronts we share. The CC are way ahead on points and tech, and I will have to struggle simply not to lose on point differential. Huge fleets roam about, fully trained by psychic facilities, with at least a couple Mine Sweep Vs in each large ship, with virus compnents and multiple subverters along with the top psychic weapons. I am in a pickle!

I have had to resort to some unusual dodges, including leaving two AIs in the game! The first is useful as a source of ships I can steal (they have no intel), since I am no where near Quantum Reactor, I am letting them build me my fleet supply ships! In the second, I have allowed a Trade treaty just to help delay his collapse and letting the CC get at me on another front or two!

I am far from star destroyers, which might end up my only solution. For the moment, I will try Plague V kamikazes for his big worlds. Still, I have to deal with these fleets just to get to his systems.

Since each battle can not only be a loss, but a source of new ships from my own fleets (!), I have tried to devise more subverter resistant designs.

Any ideas?

Re: Computer combat Q
 

The extra damage from the shot will damage the next MC on the ship, if there is a second. There isn't too much point in having 2. If you want a backup, add one Bridge, 1 LS and 1 CQ. Immune to comp virus, and the ship is still immune to the allegience subverter after the MC is destroyed, as of the 1.84 patch.

Re: Computer combat Q
 

As I noted, this is a non-GOLD game. Thus, the 1.84 change does not help me.

Still, you did answer that extra damage spills over. Does the resistance of each MC equate to a number that has some relationship to the virus hit value?

Or, is the virus value just a probability of destroying the MC it is credited with first hitting?

Re: Computer combat Q
 

MCs are treated like any other component as far as HPs go. The damage from the virus is just a flat amount of damage applied to MCs on the ship. If the virus hits the ship, there is a 100% chance that 100% of the damage affects the MCs.

Re: Computer combat Q
 

Yes, but a 40 damage shot can take out two level III computers which have only 20 hitpoitns each.

Re: Computer combat Q
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Which is why level I computers are the way to go.

Re: Computer combat Q
 

They can still individually be destroyed by a level 3 virus in one shot. So unless you want to have a bunch of MCs, it is better to use level 3 as they are cheaper. A much better backup is a Bridge, 1 LS and 1 CQ. Not subject to the virus, and in Gold, the ship is still immune to the allegience subverter if the MC is destroyed. All you need is 1 of each of those components to not lose any movement points, or 1 MC.

Re: Computer combat Q
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">This is all you need?

Even on a Baseship?

Time to redesign...

Re: Computer combat Q
 

You need more than one LS/CQ for a Baseship, unless you put a Master Computer (to replace Bridge/LS/CQ). Then the Bridge/LS/CQ is only needed to pilot the ship without losing any movement point, as only one of each is required for this purpose, even for a Baseship.

Re: Computer combat Q
 

Which is what I said. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Computer combat Q
 

Let's see....

MC3 + Bridge + CQ + LS = 5,500 min, 1,100 Org, 1,000 Rad and 50 kilotons

Bridge + CQx5 + LSx5 = 5,500 min, 500 Org, 0 Rad and 60 kilotons

What, then, is the reason for using the Master Computer at all?

Either you are vulnerable to the Virus or you gain only 10 kilotons for the cost of 600 Org (no reall issue) and 1,000 Rad. I don't see how this is worthwhile.

Wait, I do see one small advantage. Leaving out the Bridge and whatnot, you can get a cheaper 'empty' hull, for retro-series startups.

If this is not worthwhile on a baseship I'm not sure it would be worthwhile anywhere.

Of course, there is the AC...

[edit: found an error. That should be like this.

Bridge + CQx5 + LSx5 = 5,500 min, 500 Org, 0 Rad and 110 kilotons

So you get 60 kilotons for the cost of 600 Org and 1,000 Rad, which isn't quite so bad.]

[ January 16, 2004, 17:39: Message edited by: Loser ]

Re: Computer combat Q
 

If your opponent is not using Computer Viruses (these are expensive to research in the vanilla game), then you will save some space with a Master Computer without any backup component and you will be immune to the Psychic converters.

Erh yes you were right Fyron, I guess I should read *carefully* the thread before answering to a quote. *Grumbles*

Re: Computer combat Q
 

I used the Subverter and Computer Virus in a GOLD PBW game. The results were not were not impressive.

The CV just stops the ships movement, but you have to get close to use it. The ship can still shoot even if it can't move. If the ship has the typical APB12 max range beam weapon, well it is still deadly, and your too close.

The CV may have some tactical applications, but for large fleets the hull space is better used for some more APB12s.


My game suffered partly because they changed the rules (revision upgrade) and killed the subverters advantage. It also suffrered because the racial points and research points are better used elsewhere.

I think that at one time, when the ship lost movement points (Br, ls, cq) it also lost some ability with weapons and shields. Maybe an earlier revision? Maybe SE3?

Re: Computer combat Q
 

SE3 had a random chance of some weapons not firing each round if its C&C components were destroyed if I recall correctly. It never had anything to do with movement points.

[ January 16, 2004, 18:41: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: Computer combat Q
 

So, back to my original Q, are there more resistant ship designs in the NON-Gold game to the virus+subverter combo?

I may try a slow base ship with APB-12s at max range in a fleet of Cap Missile V BBs with some fighters thrown in to attrite PD. Sure as heck, nothing else seems to have worked so far.

Maybe put some wormhole beams or repulsers on the base ship(s).

Re: Computer combat Q
 

No. Once the MC is down, the ship is vulnerable to AS in pre-Gold SE4.

Re: Computer combat Q
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Are you sure it does not work like engine-killers and other special weapons ? That is the residual damage is not stored between shots and it goes all or nothing (if you can't kill two MC in one shot, the second shot will not benefit from the first shot damage)?

Re: Computer combat Q
 

I did not say that I could ever make them not vulnerable.

I asked if there were any ideas as to making them more RESISTANT.

The H mounts for the computer virus give damge of something like 160, so multiple MCs would not appear to offer any chance unless I put more than 160 mass units into MCs. That would be 4 MC I's and a fifth MC.

The repulsers have a range of 4, it seems. Thus, the virus and subverter outrange it.

The wormhole random mover has a longer range than the Virus and subverter, so that might work sometimes.

Fighters are not much help, unless used with lots of missiles. In fact, given that the fighters dance around before they shoot because they like PD or something, I am tempted just to put kamikaze warheads on them.

<sigh>

Re: Computer combat Q
 

Building multiple MC's would be extremely wasteful in unmodded SE4 - it just takes another shot, or a larger virus gun, and MC's are expensive.

If you have a long-range weapon, you might be able to use Max Range/Don't Get Hurt strategy to keep them out of range.

Is SE4 1.49 before the fix that added a reload time when a ship gets subverted? If so, then if you can take one subverter ship with boarding (e.g. at a warp point defense), and/or intel, sometimes there can be a wacky subVersion chain-reaction.

You might want to look into large shielded fighters.

Ambush fleets at warp points.

Go capture their planets, avoiding their fleets.

Stellar manip them.

It's pretty tough to deal with virus + subverter in pre-Gold though - that of course is why the change was made.

PvK

Re: Computer combat Q
 

Oh, another weak idea: Single-weapon Escorts with an MC and an ECM, using a weapon with shorter range than your main ships (all ships using long-range Max/Don'tGetHurt) - so the Escorts deploy closer, and if they are using Target Nearest, the escorts will absorb some fire, giving your full warships more time to do damage.

If the AI uses only Target Strongest, you might be able to have "strongest" ships hanging out at long range (where hopefully they won't get hit too often), while "weaker" ships charge to point blank and hopefully do lots of damage.

Another weak idea: cheap ram ships. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

PvK

Re: Computer combat Q
 

Some thoughtful ideas - thanx!

I do see a problem with the escort idea, though. Specifically, I'd expect them to get "turned to the dark side" pretty quickly, and then sent back at me.

(For fans of Donaldson's "White Gold Wielder" series, there is a similar situation in there ;-) )

The escort strategy would work better if null space weapons could be used by the bigger ships and out to a useful range. However, the null space ones are outranged, and even Massive APB XIIs do not degrade the shield fast enough.

However, I might be able to put the base ship on max range do not get hurt, and launch many fighters and missiles. Those units cannot be turned against me, and I might be able to overpower their PD.

Worth a try!

Re: Computer combat Q
 

Escorts would only have a token weapon on them, to get them to engage and trick the enemy into using their weapons on the escorts. When they get turned, your ships should have target priorities that result in ignoring them, and they probably won't even hit (no combat sensors) and even if they did, it wouldn't do much harm.

But, the economy and reload and to-hit factors of the unmodded game may make the technique impractical.

PvK

Re: Computer combat Q
 

Aah! Ablative escorts!

I missed the full design aspect, especially the absence of Combat Sensors and token gun (like APBI, or something).

Maybe I'll try that ....

After all, I could avoid putting self-destructs in them and maybe even capture them back! Making them recycle-able! ;-)

Re: Computer combat Q
 

I like to have escorts and destroyers attached to my main fleet - they mainly have distance weapons ie missiles that can disable some of my enemies before i send the main fleet ships in.

Re: Computer combat Q
 

Can you orchestrate it well in Simultaneous?

I do not play tactical combat against the AI. I regard it as unbalancing and negative learning should I play against a human.