Strategy Guide in the Archive

[JLXC]

You're VERY welcome, except for the fact that reading that guide for hours is not making me sleepy! Darn it!

[Dubious]

The zip file in the "Space Empires: IV - Modding and other Help Tools/Information" archive has been updated (same name: SE4 Dubious Strategy Guide). Link to the first 'Modding Tools' Archive page: http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/For...ML/000019.html

The "SE4 Dubious Strategy Guide" is an editted compilation of threads from the forum. It is a "work in progress".

Comments and additions or corrections are welcomed here.

Revision 10 June 2001: Added warning about avoiding corrupted save games under "GETTING STARTED"; added new sub-topic "Favorite Ship Designs" under "PROJECTING YOUR INFLUENCE"; added some info on missiles and torpedoes under sub-topic "Weapon Research Comparisons"; added some discussion about AI component use under "AI BEHAVIOUR" topic. Added new topic "STRATEGIC COMBAT".

[Dubious]

The zip file in the "Space Empires: IV - Modding and other Help Tools/Information" archive has been updated (same name: SE4 Dubious Strategy Guide). Link to the first 'Modding Tools' Archive page: http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/For...ML/000019.html (ignore posted date)

The "SE4 Dubious Strategy Guide" is an edited compilation of threads from the forum. It is a "work in progress".

Comments and additions or corrections are welcomed in the discussion forum under this topic.

It's been a VERY fruitfull week in the forum for the SG.

Revision 17 June 2001: Added "Formations" and "Cloaking" sub-topics under "PROJECTING YOUR INFLUENCE". Added discussion on using Ministers; the effect of Environmental Resistance, and unit limits under "AI BEHAVIOUR" topic; on Temporal Weapons and some old discussion about Emissive Armor under "Armor, Shields, and Damage"; some old info on Long Range Scanners under "Scanners and Obscuration"; about defending Warp Points under "Restricting System Access"; trading tricks under "Treaties"; subtleties of patching discussion under "PATCHES". "Favorite Designs" has been promoted into a major topic with specific ship and unit types as separate sub-topics to enhance searching, with MUCH added discussion including the enlightening "Face of the Enemy" thread and after-action report; added tip on achieving zero maintenance under "Combat Tips" topic (obsolete with the next patch which requires a minimum of 5%). Added new major topic "ANNOYANCES AND THE UNEXPECTED".

[Mordante]

Thanks dubious ...

I will be updating the "face of the enemy" after action report during the week (when I get some time) - it does have plenty of late game detail and some discussion of hideous weapons and grand engagements ...

like;

when exactly is it worth killing 5 billion of your own people with a system nova for strategic advantage?

what happens when 300 organic tech ships hits a fleet of 200 no-maintenance base-ships in open space?

why warp point combat highlights potentially the most exploitable limitation of the game so far ....

********************

[Suicide Junkie]

Did you catch the latest on Armor, Shields, Damage?

Basically, weak/small armor gets hit first most of the time.
Large/Tough internals get hit first most of the time.

The more extreme the difference in strength/size the more the above observations hold.

Ie. 1kT vs 10kT armor may be hit first 90% of the time, but 5kT armor vs 10kT armor may only be hit 65%of the time.

[Jubala]

sj, is this based on the size of the component or the damage the component can take? (tonnage space taken or tonnage structure)

[Dubious]

SJ: Yes I did get that included. Just missed adding it to the revision info. I've also added the Last two lines from your post below to the original information. Thanks for making sure I had caught it.

Mordante: Glad to hear it. I held off Last night as long as possible hoping it would go up before my self-set deadline, but I'm sure everyone would prefer to wait for a good writeup over a hasty one.

You might want to consider re-writing it as if an actual after-action report or historical analysis for submission to the Academy. It certainly fits into their "lessons" criteria, and it makes for interesting reading. Just assume the reader has no specific knowledge of the game (treat it as if it actually occurred) but has a general interest in strategic conflicts. Leave out the technical ship and weapon details but describe the general differences which had to be accounted for. Don't go light on the logistics difficulties either. An old saying goes "amateurs focus on the tactics, professionals focus on the logistics". This sounds like a classic example of that.