SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

I have been playing SEIV with the TDM mod for some time. In that version my early game research priorities are to get CSM-II, DUC-III, and PDC-III. I then create a small weapon platform that has 1 missile, 2 DUCs on large mounts and 2 PDCs. This allows you to tag threats at 10 squares with CSM and then 8 with the DUCs which gives at least 1 and usually 2 firing opportunities before the attacker can respond. Building a handful of these on a planet makes it pretty safe from most early game threats, especially using tactical.

So, I followed the same strategy last night with the SE-V demo and got completely glassed by 4 frigates with 3 DUC-II each against 5 of my WPs. I did add combat sensors to the platform. First, large mounts do not appear to give a range benefit over a standard mount. Second, to hit modifiers seem to strongly favor the attacker in this case. The 5 CSMs that got away all hit one FG and then the remaining 3 FGs destroyed the WPs. End result was one glassed planet vs. 1 dead enemy FG,1 badly damaged and 2 fully intact. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/Injured.gif

Need a new strategy. The FGs did not have PDCs, so I will go with an all CSM platform and see what happens. Two good notes is that a small WP can be built on any planet in 1 turn as opposed 2 in SEIV and cargo space on domed worlds seems to be way up. Any comments on what works are more than welcome.

Also note, the computer attacked with 4 FGs on turn 30 because I built a colony in his space (after a few warnings). This was followed by another attack of 5 FGs on a different colony with similar results 2 turns later. All that from the peace loving Abbidon Enclave. I guess the AI is not so bad as in stock SEIV.

TM

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

Something looks wrong here : you had 5 CSM, 10 DUC on Lge mounts and 5 PDC (useless in this case), the frigates had total 12 DUC and your WPs were destroyed ? What were the structure points of each ?

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

Hmm, I would guess that mounts aren't properly working in that case. Planets get a 30% combat bonus by default, plus combat sensors (if you use them), and a 200% defense penalty, it's hard to miss something as big as a planet.

Combat works much differently now, ships/planets/etc, are set to evaluate weapons use vs targets. I think an example would explain it better:

You have a ship with five meson blasters and two targets.
You go into combat and let the computer do the fighting.
2 hits will kill each ship (assuming both hit). The computer (fighting on your behalf) will fire 4 at the first ship and 1 at the second. The weapons are evaluated at half damage (ie the comp fires twice the damage amount needed for a kill), to maximise the chance of hitting.
If one target is in range, while one is not, the computer will (possibly) unload completely into the one availible target, which is bad, because that second ship might be within range 2 seconds later...while your missiles will need 4 more seconds to reload.

My suggestion, build (at least) twice as many WPs as think you might need.

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

PDF, your analsis is correct. The WPs are 200Kt with no armor. I think the Abbidon frigates had something like 345 structure points. I assume this must include armor because they are only 250Kt ships.

TM

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

The structure does not include armor. The amount you're seeing is due to the fact that each engine has 20HPs for 10kT structure...

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

I agree with doubling WPs, at least. I think I might try puting some in the cargo hold of my colonizers because you can't build them fast enough on a new colony to stop a determined attacker that is established and wants you out of the system. This was usually not a problem against the AI in SEIV.

TM

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

So Kwok, you area a Beta tester. What works for early game defense?? I need some sage advice.

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

Fighters are probably overpowered in stock and will be helpful against the AI - although their combat hull bonuses are not being applied.

Which AIs are being aggressive in your experience?

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

In this game the Abbidon are being very aggressive about getting me out of their home system. I sorta started it by killing one of their ships that was blocking a warp point in my home system, but since that they really took the gloves off.

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

Personally, I'd consider that reasonable behavior. You attacked them and then settled in their home system..

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

I agree completely that it is reasonable behavior. That's why I am surprised. The stock AI in SEIV rarely acted that realistically.

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

LOL, true, very true!

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

"Proabably" overpowered? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif Unless you're going up against a dedicated PD ship (which I haven't seen the AI field yet), fighters will obliterate any ship. For example, my current battleship designs carry enough PDCs to effectively counter the missile barrages of enemy battleships, and take 5 turns to construct. I can build 25 fighters in 5 turns, and those 25 fighters have managed to destroy 3-4 battleships quite easily. So yeah, if you want to cause the AI serious pain, go with fighters.
Just not too many, since the demo crashes when a large group of fighters all fire at the same time. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

As for the OP, I'd guess your problem probably comes from the missiles. What unfortunately seems to happen in SE5 is that the AI will unload all it's missiles at the first target to enter firing range. I've had cases where a planet capable of launching 100 missiles at a time has been attacked by frigates that die after one or two hits. But what ends up happening is the first frigate to enter range gets 100 missiles launched at it, and the others close to firing range while the missiles are reloading. End result is usually one dead ship and a glassed planet, which is kinda crap, given that the planet theoretically had the ability to wipe out the entire attacking force before it entered weapons range.

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

Hmm, all this sounds rather buggy/unbalanced ... I would have expected better balance/more sensible combat in this 5th SE installment http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

You'd think so wouldn't you. But then, stock SE has never really been balanced. Such niggling details have been left up to our lovely modding community. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

Should planets actually get more defense penalty than, say, a space base or satelites? I mean, sure, you can hit a planet easily enough, but trying to hit a tiny installation on the planet is alot harder.

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

I refer you back to said SE modding community. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Seriously though, the planetary defense penalty is good in the sense that I'm sure I'm not the only one who watched in horror as one of their ships closed in on an enemy planet, fired all it's weapons... and missed completely. Nor, I'm betting, am I the only one who cried "You missed a planet?! How can you miss a planet?!!" But I do think there should be some representation of the fact that while it is very easy to hit a planet, it's a fair bit trickier to hit a specific target on a planet. I can't think of how that might work though. Maybe planets should have a large amount of leaky armor, thus making it so that while you may be guaranteed hitting the planet, hitting a weapon's platform or population in general would become considerably harder.

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

Well, the animation just needs to show the shots hitting the _planet_, but whether or not that does damage to anything meaningful, should be another matter.

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

This can be partly compensated for with the new detailed damage types. You can set a specific percentage of its rated damage that a weapon does to armor, shields, and interior components. You can also set a specific percentage of its rated damage that it does to target types, like ships vs. units. So, Phased Polaron beams might be nasty weapons in ship vs. ship combat but they are probably wimpy against big concrete bunkers on the surface of a planet. Well, you can mod that now.

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

Maybe it's just me, but why go for larger hull sizes when you can mput Heavy mounts on a level 7 frigate?

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

Because you can put Massive Mounts on a Baseship?

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

Just need some Concrete Armor components for weapon platform.

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

I agree that any ship should be able to hit a planet but the real question is can it hit a dug in and camouflaged gun emplacement or missile battery. Remember how hard it was to take out a few Scuds in the desert. They used basic camouflage techniques like nets and buildings against the best satellite imagery, IR detection and millimeter wave radars. Not quite as easy as just hitting the Earth. I don't know how to implement in the game but the real issue is detection. Once a static emplacement is detected it should be fairly easy to hit, baring ECM or other targeting disruption. This should give at least the first shot to the WPs

In general military terms it takes a minimum 3x advantage to take on a dug in enemy and that ratio will result in significant casualties on the attacking side. I am assuming that any militarily competent race will dig in, harden and hide it's WPs.

Basically I think that defenses in SEV are too weak. This was a problem when SEIV first came out as well and was later corrected for the most part.

TM

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

Does sound like a bug in the weapon allocation routine. It should only assign a 150% overkill as a default, and this should be adjustable, not 100 missiles at one frigate

TM

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

AFAIK, it is adjustable, in Settings.txt

This section:

Estimated Targeting Damage Percent for Torpedo Weapon := 50
Estimated Targeting Damage Percent for Directed Torpedo Weapon := 50
Estimated Targeting Damage Percent for Beam Weapon := 50
Estimated Targeting Damage Percent for Bolt Weapon := 50

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

One possible difference: Are Overkills being computed once per target or once per targetting ship?

If fire allocation can be done on a more global basis, rather than an individual shooter basis, then better performance will result.

With this in mind, here's an interesting idea for a useful technology: Have "Target Linking" that allows several ships to make Overkill calculations as a group.

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

Its adjustable, but the problem is the targetting AI sees "ok, only one target in range, might as well shoot everything".

The damage percent is also adjustable in the strategies.

Re: SEV early game battle strategy vs. SEIV
 

The decision to shoot everything is bad from both a tactical decision making point of view as well from the perspective of ordnance usage, which can become an issue. Hopefully the AI's behavior in this regard can be modded.