[geoschmo]

Originally posted by spoon:
Charts and formulae are the proof. Actual gameplay results are anecdotal, at best.

Uh, spoon. The gameplay results are the reason for playing! It's what makes this a game, and not just a spreadsheet or a ship design program. It's the only thing that can keep someone interested in this game for going on two years now.

You plan and strategize and think you have it all worked out and then still get beat anyway, and badly. Or you think you don't have a chance and something happens in the game and you end up on top. It makes me want to play that much more and figure out why it didn't happen the way I expected.

If this is what you really believe, I feel sorry for you. Because you are missing the beauty and the challange of the game.

It's not about the end. It's not about finding the best course form point A to point B, or the most efficent ways of killing the other guy. It's finding out what you are made of, and what your opponent is made of.

I don't disagree with you about your list of things that are smart choices. But they aren't the only choices. There are so many variables in this game that no one strategy can win every time, you said it yourself. And even a very good strategy is only as good as the paper it's printed on.

What separates the losers from the winners in this game is not the ones that design the best startegies. It's the ones that counter their opponents strategies the best. And that's not something you can plan. Unless you are playing against someone that plays the same way everytime.

Now, on to the specifics:

- Having three ship-training facilities on a sector is better than having only one.
Well, duh! But is it better than what you could have used those extra facility spots for? Depends on the spefic game, but I can think of several cases where it wouldn't be.

- Using PPBs in the midgame is better than using anything else.
Slightly maybe. You might be able to design an PPB ship that would defeat an equal size and tech cost ship in one on one combat. But what would it prove in a real game? Not much. Very few combats are one on one involving empires with exactly equal levels of technical development.

Having 125% defense + bezerker will make you unbeatable against people unaware of how combat works.
If you are playing against someone that doesn't understand how combat works, you are already unbeatable, combat bonuses or no.

- Having 110% Maint Reduction is a huge advantage over people who don't realize how broken Maint Reduction is.
See previous answer.

Geoschmo

EDIT: Dang it puke. You stole all my answers.

[ December 21, 2002, 22:04: Message edited by: geoschmo ]