Boarding and Ramming Targets

PvK · #1 May 27th, 2003, 05:19 AM

I think ramming does use the targetting orders to determine what to ram. However it doesn't work exactly the same way. Not sure what the whole story is.

Maybe I'm wrong, though.

PvK

[ May 27, 2003, 04:23: Message edited by: PvK ]

Rojero · #2 June 22nd, 2003, 05:53 AM

I just had a thought...it would be so cool if boarding actions were a subdivided into tactical combat, but then...it would take forever for combat ::

Taera · #3 June 22nd, 2003, 07:58 AM

you do realize this thread is a month old do you

oleg · #4 June 22nd, 2003, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Taera:
you do realize this thread is a month old do you

So ?

DavidG · #5 June 22nd, 2003, 03:16 PM

Teal - Did you ever try this with the targeting priority set at "nearest, nearest, nearest, nearest" I have notice in the past the my ships would ignore the first targeting priority and skip to the second for unknown reasons.

teal · #6 June 22nd, 2003, 07:44 PM

I just tried this in the simulator with targeting set to nearest, nearest, nearest, nearetst. The results are the same.

Situation: Enemy fleet has one BB armed only with minesweepers and 7 Light cruisers armed with PPB5. I have 15 Light cruisers armed only with armor and engines, set to ram with targeting priority nearest, nearest, nearest, nearest. In the simulation the BB runs for the corner, the ramming ships run after the BB and the PPB ships slaughter the ramming ships without taking any casualties. Take out the BB and its a whole different story.

This is really annoying actually. The all armor and set to ram strategy works decently well against an enemy who is well trained and/or maxed on defense when you are not. But it is so easily counteracted just by putting one of your support ships on a bigger hull that it's not even worth trying to do! Strike one for strategic diversity...

Taera · #7 June 22nd, 2003, 10:00 PM

"nearest, most damaged, fastest, strongest" (or weakest) works pretty well for ramming ships.