Post reply

Warning - while you were reading 111 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!

Topic Summary

Posted by: Michael Sandy
« on: March 15, 2018, 08:53:58 PM »

But... it isn't 'really long ranged shots'.  The B and C components almost overlap!  Oh well, I will do some experiments, it isn't like I have anything else to do with my probe launching scout pinnace.
Posted by: Barkhorn
« on: March 15, 2018, 05:16:08 PM »

Could be the same thing that makes mass drivers not work in huge, multi-star systems.  You often can't launch minerals from a planet of one star to a planet of another.  The packets just sit, stuck in space.
Posted by: sublight
« on: March 15, 2018, 07:01:00 AM »

I've seen that occasionally when trying to use missiles as geo survey drones and other really long range shots. My tentative conclusion is that missiles remain stationary when the time-to-intercept : time-increment ratio is very large.
Posted by: Michael Sandy
« on: March 15, 2018, 05:42:20 AM »

Had a weird issue where when I fired missiles at a waypoint in the C component from the B-component the missiles didn't move at all.  I was overlapped with a gas giant for some of the shots, but not all.

Good thing I tested with recon missiles before wasting a year's production of missiles only to watch them not move, but has anybody else experienced that?
Posted by: Michael Sandy
« on: March 14, 2018, 01:11:50 PM »

One of the systems that has 5 cost 2 worlds has a lot of wrecks and I confirmed Precursor presence.  There are also 5 Lagrange points.  And one of those Lagrange points is within short missile range of the Precursor guarded worlds.  And 2 others are within LONG missile range of them.

The tactical options are simply amazing.  Anybody else had a major battle where Lagrange points played a major role?
Posted by: clement
« on: March 11, 2018, 11:53:37 AM »

Lucky lucky. You could develop a very strong and advanced civilization without much more expansion unless your geo surveys go badly.
Posted by: Michael Sandy
« on: March 10, 2018, 01:54:37 PM »

Further updates.

I keep finding ridiculously planet rich systems linked to the inner ring jump points.

5 cost 2 planets in one system, one only because it was .4 ATM oxygen.  A quaternary star system with all 4 stars within a billion km of each other.  3 more planets that are probably pretty juicy too.

Another system with over 100 moons, and a planet that is short on oxygen and a little cool.

And the very first system had a precursor on one planet, and 3 other terraformable planets.

So, the game thought I would be impressed by 5 2 cost worlds in one system?  How about 5 MOONS of a single planet that are all cost 2?!?

ONE system of the first five discovered didn't have a 2 cost planet.
Posted by: Michael Sandy
« on: March 09, 2018, 03:58:18 AM »

Further updates...

Found another jump gate.  And that jump point inside the orbit of Venus?  Pssshaw.  How about one within 3 million km of Earth orbit?  On the plus side, once I clear the aliens out, I can very rapidly exploit that system, but sheesh.
Posted by: Michael Sandy
« on: March 09, 2018, 01:12:47 AM »

Sooo, good news bad news.

The bad news is that the aliens detected the transit, wiped out my explorers, and immediately headed to Luna, Luna being slightly closer to the jump point than Earth.  My scouts had literally died less than a day after they were built.

The good news is that the aliens expended all their missiles on my civilian liners.  My obsolete, Nuclear Thermal engined liners.

The really good news is that the aliens apparently lacked any beam weapons.

The bad news is that the aliens were utterly fanatic, and even with the really awesome diplomats I have, I really doubt I am going to be able to establish communications with them.

The good news is that they rammed those liners until they died.  I have 3 alien wrecks in my system, and it only cost me a couple of explorers and some civilian ships!  Woohoo!
Posted by: Michael Sandy
« on: March 08, 2018, 09:20:57 PM »

Addendum.  For the first time ever, the first system I discover has a habitable planet.  And lots of wrecks.  And a bleeping jump gate back.
Posted by: Michael Sandy
« on: March 08, 2018, 09:09:48 PM »

For my latest conventional start, I decided to dump some ruins on LUNA to get my race thinking about aliens.  Then my first jump point found is inside the orbit of Venus, with a fricking Jump Gate.  Queue the probe with a really tiny fighter.  I thought about cheaping out, building just an engine and a fuel tank, but I decided to be nice, give them enough endurance and an engineering system so they could last enough for a retrieval mission.

I am RPing that communications are possible, even if transit isn't, but still.  This throws my schedule off a bit.  I had anticipated a somewhat more leisurely exploration, refitting my Nuclear Thermal ships to Ion while grav surveying was done and systems probed.  Suddenly all my grounded Geo Survey ship crews and officers are like, "Wha?!?" as the prospect of adventures at least a year earlier than projected are possible.
Posted by: Iranon
« on: February 27, 2018, 03:26:20 AM »

If it greatly reduces enemy hit chance and/or allows you to force a favourable engagement range, speed is priceless.
If it doesn't and you need to fight on your enemy's terms, speed is worthless. You'd be better off with armour/firepower/numbers.

You never know against NPRs, but against the usual suspects 6000km/s is either too fast or too slow. If I had to deal with 15000km/s enemies at Ion tech, I wouldn't try to compete on speed at all. Priority 1 would be heavy beam PD, priority 2 an offensive plan for when the enemy is out of missiles but still wants to play (several options, none of them without problems).
Posted by: Garfunkel
« on: February 26, 2018, 07:25:13 PM »

Oh wait, 6 km/s or 6000 km/s? The former is insanely slow, the latter is good for ion engines.
Posted by: Maul_Junior
« on: February 25, 2018, 11:55:09 PM »

Quote from: ExChairman link=topic=3808. msg106694#msg106694 date=1519131303
Welcome to Aurora  :D

Taken from Star Fleet Battles " SPEED IS LIFE!"

I prefer Jack Septiceye's "SPEED IS KEY!!!!1!"

Granted, that's from Bottle Run in, uh, that one game he used to play.

Quote from: Garfunkel link=topic=3808. msg106696#msg106696 date=1519143441
6000 m/s with ion engines (TL3) is not bad at all. 

that's what I thought.

Then I got my ass handed to me.
Posted by: Garfunkel
« on: February 20, 2018, 10:17:21 AM »

Apparently my 6km/s ion ships were way too slow.
6000 m/s with ion engines (TL3) is not bad at all.
Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52