Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition

[nuclearslurpee]

Unless you use SM to do something else, that's pretty much it. It's not communicated by the game (as usual), but really if you plan to be conquering planets you have to invest a lot into ground forces from the beginning of the game, because it will take easily 10-20 years to build up the army sizes you need to invade planets.

I read your most impressive thread on the subject, which was what convinced me I had absolutely no chance of invading.

I actually do like the way it works out quite a bit, as it means you cannot just go from having a bunch of garrison brigades to being planet-conquering Space Mongols by clicking a button like in many other games. It does however mean that if your rather small army decides to go a-conquering, you will have to content yourself with glaring angrily at the NPR home world for a few dozen years. This is not the worst problem to have as glaring angrily is a time-honored tradition with a long history in warfare.

[Droll]

Unless you use SM to do something else, that's pretty much it. It's not communicated by the game (as usual), but really if you plan to be conquering planets you have to invest a lot into ground forces from the beginning of the game, because it will take easily 10-20 years to build up the army sizes you need to invade planets.

I read your most impressive thread on the subject, which was what convinced me I had absolutely no chance of invading.

I actually do like the way it works out quite a bit, as it means you cannot just go from having a bunch of garrison brigades to being planet-conquering Space Mongols by clicking a button like in many other games. It does however mean that if your rather small army decides to go a-conquering, you will have to content yourself with glaring angrily at the NPR home world for a few dozen years. This is not the worst problem to have as glaring angrily is a time-honored tradition with a long history in warfare.

I will say that if one does not want to spend 10s of years to test out homeworld conquests, try playing a precursor/ancient race start where you SM your self massive tech advantage (in this case weapon and armor). Having an armor tech advantage is absolutely massive in ground combat and will allow you to win on the offense even when outnumbered.

You can also take it to its extreme by extending tech lines if you are willing to mess with the DB.

[nuclearslurpee]

I have a question regarding the intricacies of FFD components for ground forces.

Ground attack fighters which are assigned to support a ground formation with a FFD element have, per Steve's rules posts, the same targeting options as heavy bombardment. It's not completely clear to me, but I assume this means that it has the same targeting options as a HB element which is firing in support of a front-line formation and not just "it can hit anything on the field".

Specifically, per the rules posts:

Once all front line attacks have been concluded, each unit in each element providing supporting bombardment will engage either the hostile formation being targeted by the friendly formation they are supporting, or one of the hostile formation's own supporting elements (counter-battery fire). If the hostile formation is targeted, each unit in the supporting artillery element engages a random element in the hostile formation, with the randomisation based on the relative size of the hostile formation elements (the same as front-line vs front-line). If a hostile supporting element is targeted, all fire is directed against that element. This represents the difference between providing supporting fire in a combined arms front-line battle and targeting specific hostile artillery for counter-battery fire. The decision to target the hostile front-line formation vs hostile support elements is based on the relative sizes.

This means that ground attack fighters supporting a ground formation can only attack (1) the enemy formation which was targeted by the friendly formation being supported, or (2) any enemy formation which is supporting the enemy formation which was targeted by the friendly formation being supported.

For a front-line formation being supported, this is all well and good...now, here is my question: if I assign ground attack fighters to support a supporting formation which has a FFD element, which is in turn supporting a front-line formation, what target options do the fighters have?

I can imagine two possibilities:

• Because the ground fighters are resolved as part of the supporting bombardment step in a ground combat tick, they have no target option because the formation they are supporting did not, itself, have any target until this step.
• The ground fighters can target the same formation the supporting formation targets.

Essentially this question boils down to: Are FFD elements in support or rear echelon formations useless? 

[TMaekler]

V1.13 has blinded me.  Can't find the option "Hide Fleets in Orbit"...  Anybody an idea where I can find it? Thanks.

[Density]

V1.13 has blinded me.  Can't find the option "Hide Fleets in Orbit"...  Anybody an idea where I can find it? Thanks.

On the default Display tab, right hand column, four up from the passive vs signature checkboxes.

[unkfester]

What are the advantages of particle lance?  I have just researched it, and I can't see any advantages over normal particle Beam. It heavier than particle beam of same size and slower rate of fire.

[Warer]

What are the advantages of particle lance?  I have just researched it, and I can't see any advantages over normal particle Beam. It heavier than particle beam of same size and slower rate of fire.

They do all their damage like this
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
This is rather self explanatory no?

Or more clearly they`re the best anti-armor weapons in the game, they deal damage in a 1xN column, N being thier damage

[gpt3]

What are the advantages of particle lance?  I have just researched it, and I can't see any advantages over normal particle Beam.  It heavier than particle beam of same size and slower rate of fire.

Particle lances are great anti-armour weapons (a strength-12 particle beam will pierce 3 layers, a strength-12 particle lance will pierce 12 layers).  However, as you noticed, lances are bulkier and slower to recharge, so they're worse against shielded or lightly-armoured targets.

[TMaekler]

Refit Ships Automation

How do you do exchanging of refitted ships whilst not interrupting existing transport queues? I am happy with the system I have but was wondering if it is any efficient... .

So how do I exchange for example my cargo transport ships in the case of having created a better (read faster) new class? Well, first, all my transport queues send a message to the log when they enter the system where I can exchange them to newer ships. A bit annoying to always get these messages in the log, but I only need to put my attention to them when I actually have a new ship class.
In that case I then send an equal in number fleet with the new class to that transport fleet to join as a sub fleet. When they have joined I exchange all ships between fleet and subfleet, detach the subfleet and send them to undergo refit. The exchanged fleet now is equipped with the new class and can continue its cycle of transport uninterrupted.

Anybody an idea if and how that could be optimised for less micro?

[Andrew]

Is ECCM on a missile fire control cumalative with ECCM on a missile or redundant in that the best is used?

[Droll]

Is ECCM on a missile fire control cumalative with ECCM on a missile or redundant in that the best is used?

Neither, both are necessary. On the MFC, it negates the range penalty of enemy ECM whereas on the missile it negates the hit chance penalty of ECM.

[nuclearslurpee]

Is ECCM on a missile fire control cumalative with ECCM on a missile or redundant in that the best is used?

Neither, both are necessary. On the MFC, it negates the range penalty of enemy ECM whereas on the missile it negates the hit chance penalty of ECM.

To clarify, one will work without the other, so it's more precise to say that both have a complementary purpose. If you have ECCM on the MFC but not the missile, the range penalty will be reduced but the missile %CTH will still suffer the penalty.

[Kiero]

Do aliens also have civilians for transporting their goods?

[Droll]

Do aliens also have civilians for transporting their goods?

They do have 100s of freighters/colony ships but I think the AI just uses them like the player would use state owned commercial ships. I haven't really noticed a separate civilian subconcious tied to NPRs.

[TheTalkingMeowth]

Do aliens also have civilians for transporting their goods?

They do have 100s of freighters/colony ships but I think the AI just uses them like the player would use state owned commercial ships. I haven't really noticed a separate civilian subconcious tied to NPRs.

Other way round. NPR's do not have to transport their minerals or fuel (those get moved "magically"). Only installations and population, which are moved using the civilian fleet logic.

NPRs, in fact, have ONLY civilians.