Weapons

[Danny]

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.

[James Sterrett]

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).]

[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

[General Hawkwing]

quote:

---

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

---

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).]

[Psitticine]

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 , 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!

[Talenn]

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...

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

[Shepherd]

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.