Small ship designs? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> The War Room



Message

Jorgen_CAB -> Small ship designs? (11/19/2013 12:33:50 PM)

I just bought the game a couple of days ago and are still learning things...

Aside from this designing my own ships is sort of the thing that I like to do in games like this.

My question is what the size of a ship design actually do aside from presenting more targets to the enemy?

I mean, all other considerations a bigger ships is just more effective in all other respect if I understand the game mechanics correctly.

It is not harder to hit a smaller ship or is it because the ship is larger on the map?

Smaller ships have no benefits in speed or turning rates? (Even though smaller ships should be more efficient at this using real physics in space. Less and more compact mass mean less stress in a hull during maneuvering and acceleration.)

Smaller ships should be harder to detect, having a smaller energy output from engines and a smaller EM signal overall.

I can see that using giant ships can be a problem when you can build really large ships but overall it is better with one size 300 ship over two size 150 in almost all instances. If I want more targets for the enemy I can just through on some fighters in my ships.

Am I missing something?



loki100 -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/19/2013 1:07:38 PM)

I don't pretend much expertise but I've started to design very specialist small ships that usually operate with something else.

So one design has a decent shield/armour and boarding pods. I've got these in an otherwise normal fleet (just into the warp age) of all round destroyers. Called my boarding fleet they ... well you can guess. They have almost no weapons so are pretty cheap to build and maintain.

Another I use for deep raiding. So they have close range weapons, some torpedos, almost no defense, but move fast and manouvre well. Very good for economic warfare - obviously toast if something serious catches them.

I'm thinking of another small ship to carry long range scanners - defense and speed and fuel here.

So I have an all round destroyer design that is my mid-game workhorse. I could build cruisers but I'm holding off till I think I need bigger stuff. My 'small' ships are all single role optimised, rather than all-rounders.

Appeals to me, but no idea if this is 'right'. But then I like the role playing aspect of DW.

Edit - should say that as a player you can design any size in any of the notional classes (up to your build limit). So its a conscious decision to build smaller, and that is why I've gone down this road of either armour or weapons plus a particular set of characteristics in planning my designs. So you can go for brute speed - more reactors etc or more mobility - the vectoring element ... and try to think about how you'd like this ship to behave. In my case, the boarders are good at manouver and average for speed, the raiders are speed merchants but a bit sluggish in movement.



Jorgen_CAB -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/19/2013 2:02:58 PM)

Yes... I'm more into the role playing aspect of the whole thing as well. My question was perhaps more of a game mechanic one.

Since I have not gone very far into the game, starting all over several times to learn and understand things I have not experimented with any really large ships yet.

My biggest ships have been 300 in size or there about.

My current designs were an Escort with only beam-weapons at about 2/3 the size of a Frigate or Destroyer. My Frigates and Destroyers were of the same size but very different in role. The Frigate has been a quick response ship that mostly relied on speed and firepower and medium defenses. The destroyer was similar to the frigate but less speed and more firepower and defenses. The frigate and destroyer were simply as big as I could make them, no reason not to the way I saw it. So between 200-300 in my case.

Going forward I was thinking of making Frigates and Destroyers in sizes of 300-500, Escort in sizes of 200-300 and the rest as big as I can make them. Capital ships are just that, huge battleships that basically should act as the backbone of any fleet with all the stuff I need for offensive action. Destroyers will be the escort for capital ships while Escort ships are escort for the fleet as a whole or act as very fast fire-brigade squadrons in conjunction with Frigates as defense forces. I could see a strong offensive fleet be something like 2 battleships, 2 carrier and 3-5 destroyers per battleship/carrier and one Escort ship for every ship in the fleet. A smaller fleet would be 1 Battleship/Carrier, 3-5 Destroyers and 5-8 Escort ships.
Cruiser would be fast raider as big as any battleship but very fast ship (not necessarily fast in maneuvering speed though). Their role is to act as deep raider and attack weak points. They can act on their own or in groups up to about three. They would be fast enough to be able to evade any real threats. Cruisers would have some troops, fighters, point defenses and close order weaponry. Perhaps even warp inhibitors to trap weak and slow enemy ships.

When it comes to the size of my smallest ships they seem to be really expensive if below 300 in size in comparison for how efficient they are, thus I figured that my escorts should be around 250-300 in size in the later part of the game.



Plant -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/19/2013 10:47:42 PM)

I think it was said that smaller size ships have a bonus to evade, but I don't have source, or know if it is true, or just a figment of my imagination.

Other than that, there isn't any game mechanic device which would make it so you would make a smaller ship more effective than a larger ship, combat wise.



Mastik -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/19/2013 11:25:33 PM)

I like to limit my escorts to 300, load them up with missile launchers, minimal shielding, and any extra speed i can manage. Setting engagement rules to standoff should (hopefully) keep it out of range of enemy weapons.



Jorgen_CAB -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/20/2013 1:13:43 AM)

From the in game encyclopedia the size, speed and maneuverability of a ship will have a relatively big effect on how hard they will be to target.

I will try and aim for about 250 in size for my escorts but I will use more close range weapons to draw on benefit of them irritating the enemy and dodging their shots. Once their shields are down to 50% they will retreat and recharge and then get back in again.



Plant -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/20/2013 2:22:08 PM)

The thing is though, we don't actually know if that effect occurs or not. A lot of things in the game encyclopedia has changed or don't work as they should.
Your best bet is to either pm the developer, or post in the main section of the forum.

Interesting though, how you go from asking a question about game mechanics and then decide to talk about roleplaying.



Jorgen_CAB -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/20/2013 5:31:41 PM)

Yes... I'm mainly interested in the mechanic of the game.

I think that my rant was mainly about my observation and experiences so far and what I did to test how things worked.

I have done some more observation and it does seem that a ships size in combination with speed and manoeuvrability has an impact. This seem to be more obvious at long ranges than short ranges against fast weapons such as beams. At longer ranges smaller ships seem to have a significant advantage (giving same speed and turn rates) than a bigger ship.

My conclusion so far is that smaller more vulnerable ships should be armed with long range weapons and I find missiles to be the most useful weapon so far.

Putting beam weapons on them seem to be a poor use of the smaller platforms. In the same way that it is a waste of resources to build fast manoeuvrable large ships for the same reason. Large ships seem better for heavy combat ability so they can take and hold objectives, smaller ships are not as useful for that.

So far my observation seem to confirm that smaller ships is harder to hit, at least in some situations. I will continue to use my smaller ships as WWII torpedo boats but with missiles instead of torpedoes. They will still be quite vulnerable against fighters though so a few PD weapons would perhaps not hurt when that is a threat.



ReadeB -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/21/2013 2:23:45 PM)

So far, I haven't seen any reason not to build ships to the max size. Bigger definitely seems better in terms of survivibility and putting more damage on target.

In MOO2, I used small very fast ships for boarding, but here you have to batter down the shields first. Not sure if I see any reason in the state sector for small ships given the current mechanics.

I would enjoy a dynamic of hiding from other ships and sensors by landing small ships on planets and moons, powering down in asteroid fields or gas clouds, orbiting gas giants within radiation belts or rings etc. This would necessitate regular patrols for a closer look and little more cat and mouse. Currently, I just station Explorers with long range sensors in deep space to keep an eye on things.



Plant -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/21/2013 7:56:54 PM)

Very funny Jorgen_CAB, I can't tell if you are doing it deliberately, or you are completely unaware of yourself.



Jorgen_CAB -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/21/2013 9:12:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Plant

Very funny Jorgen_CAB, I can't tell if you are doing it deliberately, or you are completely unaware of yourself.


Don't really know what you mean... I was talking about my experiences about the game mechanics, or what?



Jorgen_CAB -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/21/2013 9:27:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ReadeB

So far, I haven't seen any reason not to build ships to the max size. Bigger definitely seems better in terms of survivibility and putting more damage on target.

In MOO2, I used small very fast ships for boarding, but here you have to batter down the shields first. Not sure if I see any reason in the state sector for small ships given the current mechanics.

I would enjoy a dynamic of hiding from other ships and sensors by landing small ships on planets and moons, powering down in asteroid fields or gas clouds, orbiting gas giants within radiation belts or rings etc. This would necessitate regular patrols for a closer look and little more cat and mouse. Currently, I just station Explorers with long range sensors in deep space to keep an eye on things.


I just restarted a game now and will try some interesting tactics.

The way I see it, if you build some ships with a smaller size you can be in more places at the same time. Although it will require more micromanagement. A ship does not have to be bigger than it can defeat a station by itself.

No reason to use a sledgehammer to hammer in a nail!

My reasoning here is to build a Frigate class whose mission it is to raid and work behind enemy lines, take the fight to them instead of sitting and waiting. The same tactics will be used against pirates.

I certainly agree that in pure combat fleets the majority of your ships should be quite large to get that offensive punch.

It would still be interesting to know the game mechanic behind a ships size and speed and how that factor in to the hit rate of weapons, if it even does?
It seems as if it has an effect, at least against missiles and torpedoes.



ReadeB -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/22/2013 1:37:28 PM)

Raiders might be interesting as long as you can refuel somewhere. Never played as a pirate.

Although I kind of don't want to take the pressure the pirates provide off other empires in far off regions. Mostly I see very weak empires trying to deal with powerful pirates, and losing.

When I am expanding, I use sledgehammer attack fleets to keep pirates from raiding my newly "acquired" colonies. I try to catch as many pirate ships at their spaceports as possible.

The one recent tactic I've started using is using single destroyers to go and capture pirate Constructors. That's when sending the large fleet is a waste.



Jorgen_CAB -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/23/2013 11:13:38 AM)

We are drifting from the core question, but I believe that is answered anyway... ;)

I'm just in the beginning of my first really serious game now and my ship designs are still really small (230 size) so all ships are pretty much max size. But I find that ships below 250 in size is very hard to make into something useful other than scouting/exploring with.

My current plan is to build a ship that is a mixture of scout/raider. With raider I mean a ship that can take over enemy stations or destroy them. I believe a ship like this will have to be about 300-350 in size and they will operate more or less in small squadrons but will attack on their own in enemy systems. I might also design a specific support ship for them to carry fuel and able to repair them, sort of a command ship/base.

I can also see the reason to build military patrol ships (which will be my escort ships perhaps) at sizes of about 400-500. Their main role is the patrol of star systems. Each ship will usually patrol a sensitive installation and several can be in the same system and back each other up. Their main function is to operate with speed and ranged weapons, they are not suppose to fight heavily armed gunships.

I will then design sledge hammer fleets that will be held behind the lines in common areas used against invasions or invasions of my own.

I would also planning of a few naval shipyard planets. Basically a place where I have lots of naval shipyards. My plan was that in peace time my fleet should not be so large, mainly patrol ships and some fleets for defense. Once I enter into a war I will simply mass produce ships very quickly. When the war is over I will decommission most of those ships. The maintenance in the game is pretty high in comparison with the cost and I seem to be able to make a turn around on a decommissioned ship in about three to four years. I think I also will save on money on refits as well, not sure.

All in all, I find ships that are small somewhat useless as a fighting platform. Mostly because they need lots of engines, thrusters and other stuff and very little space is left over for weapons. That make them useful mostly for scouting and raiding and defending against similar ships at most. They serve no other purpose in my military combat fleets.



Plant -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/23/2013 9:10:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorgen_CAB


quote:

ORIGINAL: Plant

Very funny Jorgen_CAB, I can't tell if you are doing it deliberately, or you are completely unaware of yourself.


Don't really know what you mean... I was talking about my experiences about the game mechanics, or what?


I noted that you say that you are interested in the mechanics of the game, and then you talk purely about roleplaying. So in responce you then you did exactly that in your next post. And in another thread too.



Plant -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/23/2013 9:27:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorgen_CAB

The way I see it, if you build some ships with a smaller size you can be in more places at the same time. Although it will require more micromanagement. A ship does not have to be bigger than it can defeat a station by itself.

No reason to use a sledgehammer to hammer in a nail!



In practice, you only need to be able to have one ship per system to be able to have a presence to defend everything.



Jorgen_CAB -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/24/2013 1:21:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Plant


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorgen_CAB

The way I see it, if you build some ships with a smaller size you can be in more places at the same time. Although it will require more micromanagement. A ship does not have to be bigger than it can defeat a station by itself.

No reason to use a sledgehammer to hammer in a nail!



In practice, you only need to be able to have one ship per system to be able to have a presence to defend everything.


I was not talking about defence here... ;)



Jorgen_CAB -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/24/2013 1:22:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Plant


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorgen_CAB


quote:

ORIGINAL: Plant

Very funny Jorgen_CAB, I can't tell if you are doing it deliberately, or you are completely unaware of yourself.


Don't really know what you mean... I was talking about my experiences about the game mechanics, or what?


I noted that you say that you are interested in the mechanics of the game, and then you talk purely about roleplaying. So in responce you then you did exactly that in your next post. And in another thread too.


Yes it sometimes get mixed up in each other, no big deal. You are allowed to talk about both if you feel like it. ;)



Plant -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/24/2013 5:11:50 PM)

Alternatively, you can talk in this thread which you have made, instead of randomly posting in another thread that bears no relation to this one.



Jorgen_CAB -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/24/2013 9:13:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Plant

Alternatively, you can talk in this thread which you have made, instead of randomly posting in another thread that bears no relation to this one.


I will... ;)



Jorgen_CAB -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/24/2013 9:15:08 PM)

Comments from that "other" thread...

quote:

Explain to me how having 2 or 3 ships instead of one bigger ship can result in the larger ship being destroyed? As long all ships are designed in the same way except for size, and with the same amount of resources used.


On a tactical scale they are not as potent, I know that. I'm talking about on a strategical/logistical scale. Smaller ships can be constructed faster than larger ships and can be at more places at the same time.


On equal size/resources they are not as efficient in a combat ability. I use more or less maximum ship size for all my combat fleets at the moment.


quote:

Next bit is you trying to justify your saying of smaller ships confusing the enemy and some random babble. I'll respond to it with more effort than you put in. NO.


On a strategic scale you can when you send them in to attack enemy infrastructure and freighters, combined with warp inhibitors on some specially designed ships. It is micromanagement since the AI automation does not handle such things very well.

You build ships just big enough to destroy enemy bases. Cheaper than sending your fleets...

quote:

Then you say smaller ships are useful in engaging multiple installations at the same time. Just how many installations are you attacking that you need to build smaller ships so you can attack very single one? A well developed enemy system might have 5-10 bases. And an empire woul have a few of those. At any point in the game, you probably have enough economy to attack every single base with the maximum tehnology size ships. Not that it is possible, since the interface isn't good enough that you can attack every installations at the same time.


Might be the case, I have not ventured into the game that far yet that I have had to send hordes of ships into enemy territory. but my strategy has worked against the ones I have encountered so far.

I tend to just have defensive fleets before I go to war to save credits. I then mass produce these frigates (and other fleets) and swarm the enemy as much as I can to disrupt their infrastructure. I might loose some of them but they loose much more. The fleets will engage and fight the enemy fleets.

I don't use the small ships any more for defense other than in some systems that is relatively far away from my bases. Their role is only to engage and stall, not to win. I just keep one perhaps two ships in a system. They use hyper-drives that jump quickly but not that fast, they primarily defend single systems. These are Escorts ships at 250-300 in size. Their main threat is Pirates, these bastards tend to attack in several places at times. So having two ships can be useful instead of one bigger ship, but often I just send one ship.



Plant -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/25/2013 2:57:22 PM)

Double posted.



Plant -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/25/2013 3:24:56 PM)

quote:

I'm talk about on a strategical/logistical scale. Smaller ships can be constructed faster than larger ships and can be at more places at the same time.
Strategically, you should be able to build enough ships at maximum size of your tech level, to be everywhere you want a ship to be.
Logistically, the same amount of resources used to build smaller ships is just as fast as one to build a larger ship.

Note that I am being fair because I want to compare, not to push an agenda. I don't compare one larger ship vs one smaller ship in combat, because they have different resource requirements. I assume that they use the same amount of resources and change the number of ships accordingly. So think logically, and compare thing with equal amount of resources. Assuming you have enough construction yards for your smaller ships, everything has the same construction speed per resources. Only that the larger ships are much more combat power per resource used.

quote:

On a strategic scale you can when you send them in to attack enemy infrastructure and freighters, combined with warp inhibitors on some specially designed ships. It is micromanagement since the AI automation does not handle such things very well.
I'll respond to this babble with more effort than you put in. NO.

quote:

You build ships just big enough to destroy enemy bases. Cheaper than sending your fleets...
You went from saying you want a ship just big enough to destroy an enemy base, to comparing fleets. Does not compute.

quote:

Might be the case, I have not ventured into the game that far yet that I have had to send hordes of ships into enemy territory. but my strategy has worked against the ones I have encountered so far.
OK, so you are saying this strategy is an reason for smaller ships. Only that you never done this strategy ever. But it works. Sense, it doesn't make any.

quote:

I tend to just have defensive fleets before I go to war to save credits. I then mass produce these frigates (and other fleets) and swarm the enemy as much as I can to disrupt their infrastructure. I might loose some of them but they loose much more. The fleets will engage and fight the enemy fleets.
I didn't ask. Also, this is nonsensical babble, unrelated to anything. You seem to speak in buzzwords that don't mean anything in context.

quote:

I don't use the small ships any more for defense other than in some systems that is relatively far away from my bases. Their role is only to engage and stall, not to win. I just keep one perhaps two ships in a system. They use hyper-drives that jump quickly but not that fast, they primarily defend single systems. These are Escorts ships at 250-300 in size. Their main threat is Pirates, these bastards tend to attack in several places at times. So having two ships can be useful instead of one bigger ship, but often I just send one ship.
Why stall, when you can win? If you have more than one ship in a system, you might as well have lesser numbers of more cost effective larger ships. It is rare that systems are close together enough that hyperdriving ships from another system can arrive in time to prevent damage.










Jorgen_CAB -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/25/2013 8:47:02 PM)

You don't seem to really read what I write or choose to not understand, I really don't know which!?!?!

quote:

Strategically, you should be able to build enough ships at maximum size of your tech level, to be everywhere you want a ship to be.


No... not if you want to be economical. I just leave one sometimes two ships in a system to patrol. In my current game that is a frigate type ship at size 300 my maximum size is 400 with carriers at 600. These 300 size ships can't really destroy anything but they have good shield, armor and is fast. Their role has been to stall and it has worked.

quote:

Logistically, the same amount of resources used to build smaller ships is just as fast as one to build a larger ship.


In my experience it seems to be faster to build smaller ships. In the current game I built a few naval shipyards. Basically just shipyards. About 12 yards for one plant of each type, I think you can even build more yards. Smaller ships don't have that many components and you can build pretty many of them of you like to build a swarm fleet. Though, I have not gone crazy about it in my current game.

I said...
quote:


On a strategic scale you can when you send them in to attack enemy infrastructure and freighters, combined with warp inhibitors on some specially designed ships. It is micromanagement since the AI automation does not handle such things very well.

You said...
quote:

I'll respond to this babble with more effort than you put in. NO.

Well, you babble all YOU want... I did just that in my game yesterday!!! [8|]

quote:

You went from saying you want a ship just big enough to destroy an enemy base, to comparing fleets. Does not compute.

No I did not... you send a ship big enough to destroy a base and not a fleet to do it. I usually send one squadron of a number of ships as their are targets in that system and attack. (scouting and/or intelligence gathering is very important first)
At the same time I would send my fleets or just baits elsewhere to distract the enemies fleets.

Later in the game it might get more true that I need bigger ships. Certain pirate ships are still very powerful and require my best ships to defeat them. But overall my tech level is better than most other empires. I can ONLY speak for my current experiences, not future ones.

quote:

OK, so you are saying this strategy is an reason for smaller ships. Only that you never done this strategy ever. But it works. Sense, it doesn't make any.

NO!!!
Not what I said at all... do you read what I write or just assume?
I said I have not sent huge numbers of ships because I have not gone THAT far into the game yet. I have still used the strategy but on a smaller scale because it is still early in my first real game. I'm not saying that things can change down the line either.

quote:

I didn't ask. Also, this is nonsensical babble, unrelated to anything. You seem to speak in buzzwords that don't mean anything in context.

Are you for real... [8|]
I'm now not allowed to flesh out my answers because you might get upset... I suggest you don't read what I write then. [;)]

quote:

Why stall, when you can win? If you have more than one ship in a system, you might as well have lesser numbers of more cost effective larger ships. It is rare that systems are close together enough that hyperdriving ships from another system can arrive in time to prevent damage.

I have several system where this is the case. There are also some which it is not the case and those are a problem for sure. Why are your mind so arbitrary?
Not all wars is about conquering as they are about just beating them to settle a peace deal. I might not want to overextend myself.



Plant -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/26/2013 5:35:45 PM)

quote:

quote:

Strategically, you should be able to build enough ships at maximum size of your tech level, to be everywhere you want a ship to be.


No... not if you want to be economical. I just leave one sometimes two ships in a system to patrol. In my current game that is a frigate type ship at size 300 my maximum size is 400 with carriers at 600. These 300 size ships can't really destroy anything but they have good shield, armor and is fast. Their role has been to stall and it has worked.


Um, the point is to be economical... Ok, so you leave 2 ships in your system. Why 2? Why not make it one ship with the power of 2? Afterall you got the tech to do so, correct? Isn't that far more economical? Now they can stall and take twice as much damage without being destroyed. Not that it matters, since usually you can't warp in quickly enough from another system. Though if you are building ships with barely any weapons, it's uneconomical anyhow as you are paying maintenance for a ship that really isn't doing anything till the system they are defending is attacked.


quote:

quote:

Logistically, the same amount of resources used to build smaller ships is just as fast as one to build a larger ship.


In my experience it seems to be faster to build smaller ships. In the current game I built a few naval shipyards. Basically just shipyards. About 12 yards for one plant of each type, I think you can even build more yards. Smaller ships don't have that many components and you can build pretty many of them of you like to build a swarm fleet. Though, I have not gone crazy about it in my current game.


Why? Why do you always talk about irrelevencies about your game? Why do you cover up your nonsense with random verbiage? Why do you ignore the three lines below this one, where I already explained to you, not to compare one ship with one ship? Instead compare the resources used. If you are building many small ships as you already said, then you can just as easily build lesser numbers of larger ships. Same amount of combat power and resources used, at the same speed.

quote:

quote:

I'll respond to this babble with more effort than you put in. NO.

Well, you babble all YOU want... I did just that in my game yesterday!!! [8|]


You said, "These smaller ships can often confuse the enemy and that will mean they manage to fire of less offensive rounds or do it in an ineffective way." I ask for an explanation.

Then you said, "According to the in game help it appear that positioning do have an impact on the efficiency of the firepower of a ship. If it means it can shoot less shots or the take longer to fire or are more inaccurate it does not say. I do take it as if it in same way at least have an impact." This makes no sense.

Then you said, "On a strategic scale you can when you send them in to attack enemy infrastructure and freighters, combined with warp inhibitors on some specially designed ships. It is micromanagement since the AI automation does not handle such things very well. "

I feel justified in calling out that you don't explain what your wrote and respond with irrelevent, inaccurate and nonsensical replies. Hence babble.


quote:

quote:

You went from saying you want a ship just big enough to destroy an enemy base, to comparing fleets. Does not compute.

No I did not... you send a ship big enough to destroy a base and not a fleet to do it. I usually send one squadron of a number of ships as their are targets in that system and attack. (scouting and/or intelligence gathering is very important first)
At the same time I would send my fleets or just baits elsewhere to distract the enemies fleets.


What is this? We are talking about ship sizes. So apparently a smaller ship is capable of destroying a base, but if you designed larger ships, you would send a fleet to destroy a base. And then you carry on to say you send a squadron of ships anyways. Which is totally different from what a fleet means! You make no sense.

quote:

quote:

OK, so you are saying this strategy is an reason for smaller ships. Only that you never done this strategy ever. But it works. Sense, it doesn't make any.

NO!!!
Not what I said at all... do you read what I write or just assume?
I said I have not sent huge numbers of ships because I have not gone THAT far into the game yet. I have still used the strategy but on a smaller scale because it is still early in my first real game. I'm not saying that things can change down the line either.


Yep, that is exactly what you said. And then wrote it again. But then you say that is not what you wrote at all. lol. This is getting ridiculous.
Shall I break it down for you?

You have a strategy.
It involves sending out small ships to every base the enemy has.
You use this strategy to justify smaller ships.
You say "but my strategy worked against the ones I have encountered so far."
You have never done this before.
Your reason for not doing this is becasue ou haven't gotten fair enough in the game (whatever that means), and that you have done this on a smaller scale (meaning that you never done this before).
This doesn't change from the fact that you propose a strategy that you have never done.
And you propose this strategy to justify smaller ships.

Except it doesn't anyways, as long as your economy is strong enough, that you can build a larger ship for every base.
And the interface isn't good enough to do so.

quote:

I'm now not allowed to flesh out my answers because you might get upset... I suggest you don't read what I write then. [;)

That'll be because your fleshing out involves distraction and makes no sense.
And since your "fleshing out" are dispersed across 2 threads and many posts, prcisely because you don't explain anything, they are hard to link up.

Example; saying that it's economical to use more resources to defend a system. And with that "economical" more amount of resources, it can only stall, so you have to use an even greater amount of resources just to defend that system.

Example; comparing attacking with one smaller ship with many larger ships. Then you say you attack with many smaller ships anyways.

Example; talking about many smaller ships confusing an AI so they shoot less, and you did it yesterday! Only that I can't work out what you did yesterday, as you never explained it, and then talked about soemthign else.

Example; a strategy, you have never done, but you assure me that it works.

You repond to logical reasoning with irrelevent nonsense, which doesn't hold up when examined on what they mean.
In fact, that's all you do, resplendent with smilies.

Sadly, because they make no sense, it takes more effort to explain why they don't make sense than it does for you to type them.





Jorgen_CAB -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/26/2013 11:11:13 PM)

Unfortunately you are wrong on all your interpretation and don't seem to actually read my posts. I'm beginning to think you just argue for the sake of arguing.

This will be my last post on the matter...



1. I have used the strategy of sending smaller ships (about 300 size) to engage enemy mining/gas/research stations and civilian traffic. I also used special warp inhibitor ships to trap and destroy construction ships and other civilian ships.

2. These ship was only built for this particular purpose and was retired after that particular war. In this case size 300 or 400 would have accomplished the same thing. so I did save on resources for building a slightly smaller ship.

3. I used scouts to gather intelligence on enemy positions before I even started my production so I could estimate the need.

4. I used my fleets, ships of Carriers (600 size), destroyers (400 size) to bait and destroy part of the enemy fleet.

5. Overall I had less naval firepower than my enemy. They had lot's of firepower tied up in defensive bases and such which I hardly bothered to engage at all. I just destroyed their infrastructure which seemed enough to get a good peace deal with minimum of hassle to my economy.

6. I have only limited experience so I can only speak for that and my ONE single game I have played, are playing with. 1400 stars, 10x10 with extreme cost to technology. I'm up to about 3 in average tech level.

7. I admit things CAN change later in the game, but at the moment this strategy seems to work pretty well. And I don't mind micromanage my ship either when I need to.



Plant -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/27/2013 7:28:13 PM)

There is no discussion when one side is intent on obfuscation.



HectorOfTroy -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/28/2013 9:45:42 AM)

How about you leave his thread alone if you don't like what he writes or as you say he is 'babbling' on and not making sense.

No need to cause arguments here or take upon yourself to call him out for not making sense, etc. If you think he is not making sense, just ignore his posts.



Icemania -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/28/2013 10:02:40 AM)

To provide a more construction tone ...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorgen_CAB
Although I do seem to experience that the smaller ships get hit less often than my larger ships and bases.

This is not my experience but happy to proven wrong. Can you provide evidence that can be replicated?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorgen_CAB
No reason to use a sledgehammer to hammer in a nail!

I agree with the concept but still find it most effective to use the biggest size available.

As technology improves, to minimise the sledgehammer, I station less ships around each colony for defence until there is only one, have fleets with smaller numbers ships, and start using Explorers / individual ships to destroy Pirates Mining Bases and eventually Spaceports.

It's only really late game, when one ship of maximum available size is so overpowered that it can take out anything 10x over, that I find this relevant to ship size.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Plant
Sadly, because they make no sense, it takes more effort to explain why they don't make sense than it does for you to type them.


Hmm.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Plant
Real world economies are unpredictable, but in the real world, tax systems are predictable.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Plant
PS GFC as an acronym for Global Financial Crisis? Oh really? It has never been refered to as GFC. Don't make up acronyms please.




Plant -> RE: Small ship designs? (11/28/2013 2:07:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HectorOfTroy

How about you leave his thread alone if you don't like what he writes or as you say he is 'babbling' on and not making sense.

No need to cause arguments here or take upon yourself to call him out for not making sense, etc. If you think he is not making sense, just ignore his posts.


Yes, how about you leave this thread alone. Or just as you recognise your right to reply to me, you recognise my right to reply to him.

Or you could try reading and replying to him in all earnestness. Then watch has he necromances another thread in an offtopic manner, and every reply is as contradictory and disconnected to what he is claiming to respond to.

And as you sincerely reply to his replies, as you slowly respond down his post, trying to connect the irrelevencies and incoherent reasoning, you arrive at the realization of the abject horror that are his posts.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
5.765625