SE4 Strategy - An Art or a Science?
 

Hi all,

I've just completed my 7th multiplayer game (Maelstrom..been running since mid Last year).
I've witnessed hundreds of combats and puzzled over the setup of 50 or so human empires.

Now my quesiton - "Is the strategy to this game an art or a science?"

By art I mean does it rely on player skill, the ability to know when and where to attack and when to retreat, etc, etc.

By science I mean is it purely empire setup and research goals. Then build the correct fleet makeup and go whack.

Now I tend to believe its pretty much a science. Empire setups by experienced players are converging to the one model, ship designs are starting to all look the same. There might be some variation depending on personal taste and what was found in ruins but I'm convinced there is a model for success and if one player is using it and you are not then your in big trouble.

Of course I'm really only talking about strategies vs humans. Versus the AI you can pretty much do anything you want http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Cheers,
Askan

Re: SE4 Strategy - An Art or a Science?
 

I'd say it depends on if you're playing to see who conquers all first (science) or if you play a more diplomatic/roleplaying game (art).

[ 24 April 2002: Message edited by: Spoo ]</p>

Re: SE4 Strategy - An Art or a Science?
 

I believe that is more important (and more fun) to mix up your strategies. That way neither human or AI can take advantage of your weaknesses without you knowing a comeback strategy. That is to say that all strategies do have a weakness. IMHO

Re: SE4 Strategy - An Art or a Science?
 

Interesting.
I wouldn't agree that all strategies have a weakness thou.

Re: SE4 Strategy - An Art or a Science?
 

Name one and we'll see.

And please let it not be anything spawned by GUTB. Those are from the Wile E Coyte school of strategy, i.e. they don't need any extra help in taking themselves apart.

Phoenix-D

Re: SE4 Strategy - An Art or a Science?
 

I agree with Askan in that if you are prepared to really crunch the numbers, you will find that certain gameplay models are clearly superior.

It doesn't matter though, because every mod, every patch and every scenario shifts the game balance and so the "ideal model" has to be rediscovered.

Re: SE4 Strategy - An Art or a Science?
 

OK...I'm going to put my combat simulator where my mouth is.

Although I do concede that mods make the ideal model harder to obtain, and some modders attention to this area (I'm thinking the brilliant proportions mod) show that others are aware of the "problem".

The combat engine is heavily weighted towards offensive/defensive bonuses

Now any conquest strategy, whether long term or short term has to take advantage of this simple fact.

To demonstrate the weight try this.
Design a light cruisers with 6 large mount DUC 1's. Now design another one exactly the same with combat sensors 1 and ECM 1. Simulate a combat between these 2 designs, noting the obvious that the ship with the sensors wins most of the time.
Increase the combat to 10 ships a side, noting now the the ships with the sensors with all the time with max losses of 3.

That is the advantage a berserker culture with 15% aggresiveness and 10% defensiveness has against a race with no bonuses in that department.

Not overwhelming but a start.
Now assume we're playing some 2k empire setup. With this its quite reasonable to build a race that is berserker with a 20% aggresiveness and a 20% defensiveness. To facilitate this we may take penalties in cunning (even with non-existant cunning its still quite easy to block intel coz defence is much easier than attack), strength and repair.

The next important bit is your research strategy. Most big time warring starts after turn 30 or so. Your simply aiming to get your to hit and defense bonus as high as possible by that time.
To do this go for
1. Sensors and ECM (obvious)
2. Steath and scattering armour (level 3 in both gives you 30% defence).
3. Training facilities. A fully trained ship in a fully trained fleet is +40 attack and +40 defence. Now this is massive. This is nothing but devastating to the unprepared player.

The other key points are mines and point defence. Mines ensure a big war won't break out too soon (and always build explosive warheads II so scattering armour won't bust your field).
Point defence to negate any missile strategy (if the fact that all missiles seem to target the lead ship didn't already).

Don't worry to much about the fighter..the fact they don't get racial (i believe) or experience bonuses and to get sensors or ecm you have to research levels in fighter means even they'll have hard times hitting your ships.

Shake and bake and prepare to serve nothing but cold fury. Soon you too will be getting those 100 ships dead to loss of your one results that we all know and love.

Oh...this strategy does have a counter. When the enemy is adopting the same one http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Cheers,
Askan

Re: SE4 Strategy - An Art or a Science?
 

It comes down to:
Science:
Concentration of Effort
Economy of Force
Mobility
Techonolog
Art:
Designing the Ships
Reading your opponent
Taking / Making Calculated Risks
Correctly Employing the Sciences, (that is the hard part).
There are several examples in recent history of technology and training that are reflectect in the numbers you point out.
I once saw a book on "numbers and warfare". I don't remember the title. I'll try to find it and post it here. Anybody know of it?

Re: SE4 Strategy - An Art or a Science?
 

You listed a quite a lot askan. Especially given the fact that you stated real combat starts by turn 30.

I agree that the SE4 model lends itself to one ideal ship type which dominates over the others, but if combat starts around turn 30, no one can possibly research everything you mentioned before one's empire comes under attack.

Harken back to our game where I got my *** handed to me because I failed to develop and implement two things in time...mines and some kind of sensor to pick up ships with stealth armor. You were able to slip by and glass my home worlds.

In all actuality, when you did attack, I had already developed mines, and was in the process of building mine layers and mines. As far as the sensors go, when I got hit, they were the next thing in queue. Little too late though.

However, at the same time, I had spent much more time researching offensive tech, ship construction, ecm, combat sensors, weapons, etc. I am pretty sure I had slightly better fleets and a larger economic base.

I guess my whole point is...if combat starts by turn 30 on average, it's not the fact that there is an ideal game plan that matters, it's what you research and implement first which can win or lose the game.

So the answer is....

Intuition...

If you get out of the first 100 turns in a strong position, then it becomes a science.

Re: SE4 Strategy - An Art or a Science?
 

I think that's 90% science and 10% art.

But think that some people learn fast (usually playing against a more experienced player), and other people, never will learn how to play although could play a lot of SE4 games...

In SE3 times, I have taught (yes, literary I have taught!), about my tactics and strategies near of 12 players. I could be a bad professor (admit), but only 2 or 3 became really good players.

Then, although I think that play SE4 is a science, also I believe that not everybody learn at the same speed. In my view, it makes the difference.