Torpedo question

Fyron · #1 November 13th, 2003, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by oleg:

quote:
Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
NSP is a weak weapon to begin with, only useful in a minor support role.

Not sure about this. One hit from a massive mount NSP can fry the interior of most ships, leaving the empty armour shell It does not really mater how good and powerfull was that ship. It is a toast in just one shot.

But that requires using Baseships, which are extremely innefficient...

And then, the weapon can not fire again for what, 3 more rounds? Think of how much more damage "normal" weapons could do in that time. Even though they have to get through shields (and armor, which is nothing) first, a shield depleter or two will take care of that nicely.

Fyron · #2 November 13th, 2003, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by spoon:

quote:
Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Perhaps you should test based on equal costs of ships on each side, rather than just equal tonnage of weapons? Give each side as many ships as they can build for 200,000 resources (total), for example.

I used 1,000,000 resources as the base:

If you include all resources, then the torps win 4 out of 5 times (44 PPB ships vs 56 Torp ships).

If you just compare mineral costs, then PPB ships win most of the time (60 PPB ships vs 63 Torp ships).

Question is, then, how much the Rads cost hold up your ship production. Although also important: you might be able to build a decent torp ship one turn quicker than a decent PPB ship just based on the mineral difference (for my tests, PPBs ship cost 17,550 and Torp ships cost 15800. At that point in the game, my shipyards are usually building at about 4500, so the likely answer for me is no...)

Torps did better than I thought they would, but I still think they could use a boost, especially if you factor in their research cost...

Now test those torp ships against APBs.

And do some MBs for good measure.

oleg · #3 November 13th, 2003, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
... And then, the weapon can not fire again for what, 3 more rounds? Think of how much more damage "normal" weapons could do in that time...

How can they do anydamage if they are all dead in one round ?

Maerlyn · #4 November 13th, 2003, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DeadDireWolf:
Do you guys let the computer handle the battles? That's the impression that I get.

he DeadDireWolf, in multiplayer games there is no tactical combat, all combats are done by the computer. this means that "we", hm, no, actually: them, are only talking about computer resolved combats.

DeadDireWolf · #5 November 13th, 2003, 09:35 PM

Now it all makes sense.

Do you guys play against the computer at all anymore?

Also, is there anyway to rename the entire system or do you have to do it one at a time with the 'name' button?

Atrocities · #6 November 13th, 2003, 09:44 PM

I do by nature still play single player because I know no one else who plays the game other than the people here and one friend. But hot seat play is kinda boring.

Fyron · #7 November 13th, 2003, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by oleg:

quote:
Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
... And then, the weapon can not fire again for what, 3 more rounds? Think of how much more damage "normal" weapons could do in that time...

How can they do anydamage if they are all dead in one round ?

Because you will only destroy all of the enemy if you outnumber them and vastly outgun them... and NSP don't have that great of a range, combined with being on really slow ships, so you will rarely get to fire first, unless you fight defensively at a WP, which is not that common of an occurance in most situations.