Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Well, if realy, i do not think that its such a good idea.

Mine is a mine, and the size only matters in the damage which it can do, its cost and build time.

The mine sweeper makes mines to self-explode. Whats the size matters?

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

I agree with Taera on this - a mine is a mine. (unless it's yours=-)

Let me get this right though, if I have a minefield of 50 mines (for example) my enemy would need 10 ships with 5 Minesweepers each to clear it without damage?

Wow. That's a lot of ships. Would it be cheaper maybe to build a "mine sacrifice" ship - really big with loads of shilds to go in first and soak up the damage?

BTW T_R - I love your shipset. I playd against it a fw times and it was a great enmy. Really stubborn, I couldn't get it to surrender no matter what.

------------------
There is an exception to every rule. Including this one.

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Shields are not active against mines. However armor is so your mine sacrifice ship would need to be armor heavy and not shield heavy.

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

I think a mine sweeper should be able to clear a certain tonnage of mines.
Because right now it's better to use small mines instead of larger ones, why?
Because a mine sweeper can only sweep, for example, 10 mines and IIRC large mines are three times bigger than small mines.
Then if you could choose between 30 small mines or 10 large ones, which would you choose?
right, 30 small ones

I would probably only use larger mines if you could put large mount warheads on them, twice or three times as much damage but only 1.5 times bigger and more expensive

[This message has been edited by LemmyM (edited 10 April 2001).]

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Well, consider that - when encountering mine field, you enter a fight with them, and mine sweeper will act like PDC. You appear at close range, and mines approach you every turn..

------------------
Emperor Klis't of the Taera Republic.
Proud member of the League of Empires.
E-Mail -
Ora Planet - Taera Republic - League of Empires

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Ohwell, posted twice...

Anyway,
About the racestyle, i spent hours working on politic and anger files... http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

------------------
Emperor Klis't of the Taera Republic.
Proud member of the League of Empires.
E-Mail -
Ora Planet - Taera Republic - League of Empires

[This message has been edited by TaeraRepublic (edited 10 April 2001).]

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

I agree that at the moment it is not very attractive to build larger mines (I never do!). The idea of counting the larger mines as three units for the minesweeping would be one possibility. Or if you would restrict the ability to sweep larger mines to sweeping components of higher tech levels? Or a combination of both: Large mines cannot be sweept by sweeping components level I and II, level III will sweep one large mine, level IV two and level V three. For small mines everything remains as it is and for medium mines it is in between.

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

I think that having larger mines have more hitpoints against minesweepers is a good idea.

Say 10, 15, 20 HP for the mines,
and a minesweeper does 10 damage per hit.
(MS V gets five shots.)
Then, large mines are harder to kill, but not too much more.

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

The way I thought mine worked was each mine attacked a ship and if , after taking the armor into effect, the ship was destroyed then the next mine attacked the next ship. If the first mine did not kill the ship, all damage was considered repaired and the next mine attacked the ship and so on. Is this correct?
If it is then there is a good reason to build large mines, as they can do more damage. If not then large mines don't appear to be very useful. I have only used small mines so I don't know how it works exactly.

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Also, take into account that Organic Armor III can basically ignore all mines except Large Mine w/ 2 Warhead III's. It has been stated in other threads, so check 'em out. Organic tech is pretty powerful as it is - if you only use small mines (per discussion below) you will NOT be effective against Organic tech.

Also IMO, a mine is a mine is a mine.... Sweeper I, sweep 1 mine, Sweeper II sweep 2 mines, etc..

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

I dont think the large mines should be considered three mines.

the game allows for 5000 units.

[This message has been edited by AJC (edited 10 April 2001).]

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

I say increase the limit of units in space and leave the mines alone.

If you shoot a explosive device, no matter it's size, you basically stuff it. It would be disabled or destroyed by the gun shoot.

So one mine per sweeper gun is realistic.

If you want to protect the large mines then either mix in unarmed small mines, cheapness!, or design a dummy mine which is very cheap and weighs only 1kt. This would add more realism than changing the sweep/ mine ratio.
Why don't you also have a high level mine head which skips armour!!!! So much for high level organic armour <insert evil laugh!>

[This message has been edited by Aussie Gamer (edited 10 April 2001).]

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Nitram Draw and rdouglass, you have it wrong. The damage done is not per mine but per warhead. Each warhead in mine will hit ship separately, so it won't make any difference if you are using small mine with Warhead I or large mine with Warhead I. You will only make more hits, but won't be able to penetrate organic armor (100 mine warhead I damage vs. 150 organic armor 3) or any armor that has such resistance (like crystalline or stealth armor).

Basically in order to penetrate high resistance armor you need better warhead that makes better punch. Usually mine warhead II is enough to penetrate all armor.

Large mines have purpose in later games when large class starships come into game. When a fleet of 50 dreadnoughts enters a minefield (with restriction of 100 mines per sector) you won't be able to destroy them with 100 small mines, but large mines will do the job.

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

[quote]Originally posted by Aussie Gamer:
[b]I say increase the limit of units in space and leave the mines alone.


during a recent game I had 1400+ units in space. I set the limit to 5000 units. You can make this the default in the settings.txt file as well as bump it up during set up.

Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

If a mine sweeper ship with five Mine Sweeper I components encounters a mine field with five small mines, it will sweep the mine field and take no damage. If it encounters a field with five large mines, what happens? Doesn't it also sweep those five mines and not take damage?

What would y'all think about asking Malfador to count a large mine as THREE mines where mine sweeper components are concerned?

In terms of realism, I would agree that it makes much more sense for all mines to be considered equal. But given the limit of 1000 units in space and the AI's tendency to build large mines, I wonder if it might not be a good idea to change how things work. Any thoughts?

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Daynarr,
You are correct. There sure are a lot of topics on mines when you search it.
What about modifying the size and damage of warheads?
Keep the current one. Create a new warhead that does 150 points of damage and won't fit in a small mine, one that does 200 that will only fit in a large mine, a 50 point one that is about 1/2 the size of the 100 point warhead.
That way no component by itself would defeat every mine and you could fit about the same number of damage points on the mines as you can now and allow about the same number of attacks per mine size.
Does this make sense?

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

What we need are warheads that are more efficient, but only fit on large mines.

There has to be an advantage worth spending money for the larger mine, and a ton of research to do two extra levels in mine tech.

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

IMO, it would be unfair to strenghten(sp?) up the mines, as not everyone uses mines widely. Those who do not like mines, or simply dont use them well, will be in disadvantage.

------------------
Emperor Klis't of the Taera Republic.
Proud member of the League of Empires.
E-Mail -
Ora Planet - Taera Republic - League of Empires

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by suicide_junkie:
There has to be an advantage worth spending money for the larger mine, and a ton of research to do two extra levels in mine tech.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, you do get better mine sweeping components for those extra levels in mine tech... doesn't that justify the tech cost?

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

well, not completely, you ( me really ) still don't use the larger mines.
maybe they can be put in different tech trees

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Shrinking the warhead somewhat, and requiring mines to use small sensors might help. You'd only need one set of sensors for a large mine, so you could get more bang for the kt. One could also considerably lower the per-sector mine limits...

------------------
-- The thing that goes bump in the night

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Daynarr:
Nitram Draw and rdouglass, you have it wrong. The damage done is not per mine but per warhead. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Boy, I was involved in many of those previous threads and I STILL got it wrong. I HAD thought it was per mine and not per Warhead...

Well, I guess that Organic Armor III IS impervious to mines then - TOTALLY IMPERVIOUS. That seems to throw a balance off somewhere in the racial tech area IMO. Besides, I no longer use mines against AI - seems too unfair against the AI (OK - go ahead and flame now.. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/blush.gif )

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

It is kind of unfair to use mines against. against a human though it is a different story.
I think that no one component should be 100% effective against mines. That is one of the beauties of this game, there are no guarantees.

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Can anyone verify rdouglass's assertion that organic armor III is totally impervious to all mines?

If that's true, then I agree with him -- that's unbalancing.

[This message has been edited by dmm (edited 11 April 2001).]

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

I did a little testing. Armors that have a greater strength then mines warhead are not hurt by them. This includes Org arm II and scattering armors.

I do not think there are current armors that are greater than 200 resistance so warheads II and III will damage ships with 'heavy' armors

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Again a suggestion!
Make some more levels in mines and include an armour skipping component. Thus removing the Organic Armour III problem.
That way the other components can stay the same.

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

ISTR another thread that suggested putting armor-skipping/anti-weapon/antiengine/etc. components on mines. They'd be "one-shot" weapons like nuclear-pumped lasers would be. Has anybody tried to mod components like this?

------------------
Cap'n Q

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

If you want to defend against Organic armor with mines just put larger warheads on them. A medium warhead does 200 points of damage, enough to destroy one organic armor component. IIRC once an organic armor component is destroyed it does not regenerate. Takes larger mines to stop them but it can be done.

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

I have put anti-engine on a minehead it seem to work!
Can't see why the components would not work, except as pointed out during those threads, the mines will keep going off if there is an enemy ship in the square. So if you load um up with anti-engine/ anti-weapon they will all go off as the ship is still alive.
But they would make for excellant bobby-traps and also for those empire who use boarding parties!!! No engines- No supplies before fight- no shields/ weapons

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Has anybody tried putting shield disruptors & boarding parties on a mine?
What about a really expensive alliegiance subverter?

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Boarding parties on mines? Thats cold, real cold!

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

From the previous mines thread IIRC shields are not active against mines.
As for boarding parties...... now there's a good idea http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

As or sweepers treating large mines as 3 targets....nah. It would be better if there were large warheads to justify larger mines, say something that could seriously dent an organic kamikaze minesweeper. 400 damage and 15 - 20kt space requirement, expensive to build of course.

Allegiance subverters may work, it could trigger a combat though. So every ship that gets subverted then has to fight the rest in the minefield (allowing them to kill the mines with point defense and projectile (?) weaponry.

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Boarding parties- Now your just being silly, they would require quater and life support!
Remember mines don't attack like usual ships as they don't iniate combat they just go off, very unfair advantage with boarding parties. And also shields are not up during mine attacks so shield depletors are of no use.
I think that engine, shield, and weapon destroying components would be OK but anything alse would unbalance the game.

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Man, how big would that mine have to be?

Capt, that mine over there is as big as a ship.
oh my god, it's full of people.

or maybe;

What the hell? were did all these tiny people come from? get my fly swatter would you.

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

LOL!

This reminds me of a time long ago when I was playing Stratego with my father. He was chasing me all over the board with a piece, and I didn't know what it was. Finally, I attacked him. I told him my piece was a '9'. He announced his piece was a 'bomb'.

I guess I forgot to tell him bombs don't move. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Allegiance subverters may work, it could trigger a combat though. So every ship that gets subverted then has to fight the rest in the minefield (allowing them to kill the mines with point defense and projectile (?) weaponry.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nope. All the mines go off before combat happens, so either,
A) all the ships get converted/destroyed
or
B) the mines run out, and all the ships you captured now attack the enemy ships who survived.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Boarding parties- Now your just being silly, they would require quater and life support!
Remember mines don't attack like usual ships as they don't iniate combat they just go off, very unfair advantage with boarding parties. And also shields are not up during mine attacks so shield depletors are of no use.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Shield DISRUPTORS, not depleters, silly http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Capt, that mine over there is as big as a ship.
oh my god, it's full of people.

or maybe;

What the hell? were did all these tiny people come from? get my fly swatter would you.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Marvin's instant martians, just add water!
Put your guys in cryo/stasis/whatever, and quick-thaw them when the enemy appears.

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

How about biological warfare mines? They cause a plague on a ship that spreads wherever the ship goes.
How about neutron bomb mines? They kill the crew and reduce the ship movement.
A little variety is great!

Re: Should large mines be counted as three mines for sweepers?
 

Unfortunately, ships don't carry plague, and theres no warhead type to destroy Bridge/lifesupport/crewquarters, so that would mean hardcode changes.