Weapons
 

Has anyone done a comparison of the various weapons in SE IV? For example, why you would use certain weapons, are there weapons that no one would ever use, etc? I understand some weapons bypass shields, or armor, etc, but for weapons with no special abilities, what are the preferred weapons?

Anyway, if someone could point me to a website, or e-mail me, I'd appreciate it http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

AndonSage

P.S. This game SCREAMS for someone to do a strategy guide.


[This message has been edited by AndonSage (edited 20 November 2000).]

Re: Weapons
 

The attached Excel file is a work-inp-progress, but it does begin to answer some of your questions. Sort it by selecting a calculation row, then sort through the Data -> Sort -> Expand method (this keeps the data from various rows together.)

The file lists the first and the final Versions, only, of all the ship-to-ship weapons. Small Weapons need to be on their own scale. Weapons that do not normal damage are not in it (no shield destroyers etc.) Weapons only available if you have a racial trait are in Blue. Column M lists special stuff - SW (#) = Seeking Weapon (speed); SP = shield piercing; AP = armor piercing; 4x SDam = Does quad damage to shields.

The things that need discussion are *how* to analyze the weapons. I use two formulae in this. First is column I:

Max Damage / Rate of Fire / Space

This figures the best possible case at close range: damage dealt per turn per unit of space.

However, calculation #1 fails to take into account the impact of a weapon's range. So the next calculation tries a different formula, column J:

(Min Damage / Rate of Fire / Space ) X (Range/3)

I divide the range by 3 because this is the base movement rate of most ship (yes, you get more with higher techs, but it's a good baseline. If you disagree, well, make your case. 8)

This yields a different set of Favorites. Notably, it places the Capital Ship Missile back nearer where it belongs in the early game - given room to run, cap ship missiles slaughter ships armed with DU cannons (until the PD cannon negates the missiles).

In both calculations, the Phased Polaron Beam comes off very well, even without trying to take its shield-piercing ability into account. I'm moderately convinced that the PBB is potentially one of the best toys in the game; it has a much better throw-weight than the WMG. [I'd like to see counter-arguments in favor of the WMG!]

The next calculation along, column K, shows efficiency if the weapon is in a Massive Mount, according to the range-adjusted formula (in column J).

Finally, column L is porked, as is the listing of total RP cost. I'd thought that the RP cost at medium followed the formula:

Cost of Level N = N * (Cost in File)

and thus the total cost to finish a given level =

Total cost = (cost in file) X ((Level^2)) + Level)/2

Unfortunately, it doesn't. My tech costs are off, and thus so is column L, which attempts to calculate the range-modified throw weight as adjusted by units of 10K Research Points. Even with porked costs, the Phased-Polaron Beam, the DU Cannon, the Cap Ship Missile, and the Anti-Proton Beam are stars - especially the AP and DU. The PBB has a better range-adjusted throw-weight, however.

I'd be very interested to see other formulae for calculating effectiveness, especially ones that take shield and armor piercing weapons into account well. (Very tricky, since you have to deal with their worth both when the enemy does and does not use the protection you have rendered useless.)

[This message has been edited by James Sterrett (edited 20 November 2000).]

Re: Weapons
 

One argument for WMGs takes into account their first-shot power. Namely, they're highly damaging range-8 beams that even get a substantial to-hit bonus (+30% if memory serves). On a faster ship, in a small-scale battle where manuevering is possible, the WMG-carrying ship may never need to get in range. With bigger ships and bigger firepower -- but *not* tougher components -- he who first blows away the other guy's shields and armor may be able to disable several weapons / engines / etc the next round. I'd argue that being able to do a lot of damage, first-shot, can be a very, very crucial advantage. It's a similar idea to that behind rocket pods for fighters; while they may not do much damage later in the fight (none, actually), it's no consolation to the victim if he's already been blown away...

Propulsion Experts + Religious suggests an interesting combo: a battlecruiser, with 6 Quantum Engines and a Solar Sail III, for a speed of 13(7), along with a Religious Talisman and Huge WMGs (doing something like... 420 ea? Don't recall). Given that most ships don't reach a combat speed of 7, and that most ships aren't terribly accurate at range 8 even if they *have* range-8 weapons (at least if the target has ECM III), the BC will probably be able to do a LOT of damage as long as it has the room to outrun its victim while the WMG recharges. That, plus the high damage gives a pretty good chance of breaching shields/armor faster...

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

Re: Weapons
 

Personally based just on the demo I like a couple big guns, Enveloping Acid Gobules, plus a couple Shard cannons, then you can get in take out there sheilds, after which you can blow there insides to bits with the low damage, low spaces using shards. In this way you can do some major damage to the emeny's vital componets on the first turn, and not just there shields and armor.

Plus the Acids only take 2 turns to recharge, not three like the WMG.

------------------
I AM Canadian.

Re: Weapons
 

Is there any advantage to doing more damage with 1 weapon, over doing the same damage with 3?

In raw terms (ignoring rate of fire), the WMG III has an efficiency of 2.0; the PBB is either 2.0 (closer range) or 1.66 at maximum range. But if my PBB ship survives, it will deliver that efficiency every turn (when RoF and range are factored in, efficiency is 3.33 (PBB) vs 1.78 (WMG); range favors WMG slightly). *If* you can keep the WMG ship hovering at a range of 7-8, then the PBB hosed; I accept without reservation that longer range will always win if it can be maintained. On the other hand, it takes a lot less research to get a PBB - and the numbers suggest it has a throw weight that is almost as good or better, depending on how you weight rate of fire and range.

Upshot: for a given amount of space, you can get more or less the same firepower out of a PBB as a WMG. If the single-shot power of the WMG has no intrinsic damage-dealing advantage over firing a number of PBB for the same result, why do it?

Partial answer: Because there's never an ideal amount of ship space. Thus, between our contenders, the best use of *70* hull spaces is a WMG (140 damage). But the best use of 90 or 120 hull spaces is 4 PBB (180/240 damage).

Doing some quick fiddles with the spreadsheet: in its range band, the only weapon better for damage/space at max range is the Enveloping Acid V, which fires every other turn *and* does more damage per space (2.5 to 2.0). It's a cheaper research project but requires special race traits, unlike the WMG. (If we factor in rate of fire, the Anti-Proton XII becomes a nice choice. 8)

Should the efficiency calculation weight range more heavily? (Not all battles allow you to maintain range: warp-point fights start at point-blank if one side is coming through the point.)

The Talisman + speed ship is an interesting concept. 8)


Watching all this, Cor has, several times, wondered if accountants would be more productive if their spreadsheets were disguised as 4X games. 8)

[This message has been edited by James Sterrett (edited 21 November 2000).]

Re: Weapons
 

There can be advantages for doing massive amounts of damage all at once. For one, if you anniliate your opponent in the first or second salvo, he can't fire back. You are rather unlikely to be able to do that with PPBs. Paired normal mount WMGs will punch through 1 shield generator (max tech) in one massive blow. PPBs will take three turns to do the same. If your enemy has a lot of shield renerators, then that large blow could be the difference between damaging his internals and not.

Phoenix-D

Re: Weapons
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
There can be advantages for doing massive amounts of damage all at once. For one, if you anniliate your opponent in the first or second salvo, he can't fire back. You are rather unlikely to be able to do that with PPBs. Paired normal mount WMGs will punch through 1 shield generator (max tech) in one massive blow. PPBs will take three turns to do the same. If your enemy has a lot of shield renerators, then that large blow could be the difference between damaging his internals and not.

Phoenix-D<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

PPB's don't need to punch a hole through normal shields. So you take one shot over 3 turns to take down shields. I fire 3 shots over 3 turns and destroy 3 componets. WMG's play a bigger role if phased shields are being used.
I tend not to play "start at max tech" games, so my views will be based on having to research.

[This message has been edited by General Hawkwing (edited 21 November 2000).]

Re: Weapons
 

Keep the effect Emmisive Armour is supposed to have as well. One 40 point bLast would deal 30 points of damage aginst Emmisive Armour I but 4 10 point bLasts would be completely absorbed.

Without that, or with bugged Emmisive Armour http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif, I'm not sure it matters except in that, if your target is hard to hit, 4 rounds would give you 4 changes to score with 1/4 of the damage and that might just make the difference.

Note that I'm talking about shots in the same round. Stretching out the damage over several turns is a different situation!

Re: Weapons
 

Is there a bug in the Emissive Armors? We've found it to be generally useless, especially compared to its SE3 counterparts. Of course, its also FAR lower on the tech tree... http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

Also, does anyone know what is or is not cumulative in terms of combat bonuses? It appears that the defensive bonus for Stealth and Scattering Armor are not cumulative with the Ship Size mod. Does the same hold true for ECM? Is there anywhere that lists all this stuff?

Thanx,
Talenn

Re: Weapons
 

In one game I played Last weekend, I happened upon a strategy that worked very well. I went out and swiped as many ancient ruins as I could find until I discovered the Massive Shield Depleter. Then I just researched ship construction. I had battleships with a large mount MSDs and peashooters tearing apart my opponents. A little luck required, but almost no research cost.

This points to the importance of 'first shot power' -- if the first shot takes all your shields down, you're crippled. That's a hard factor to take into account, though...perhaps in your spreadsheet you should weight the damage of the weapon and reduce the importance of space and fire rate. With a formula of (Min D)-(Space*0.5)-(Rate*10), the WMG jumps to the top of the list, followed by the Cap. Ship missle. The PPB drops to #10...but its other abilities still make it one of my Favorites. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif