Overcoming Screens...

[Locklyn]

I agree with the honorable cestvel here, Mass Detectors, in that which they have been discussed on forums old and new, have been as discussed as solutions to the formerly defunct cloaked ship phenonomen, though what Pete could have added, repaired, reinstated or otherwise kicked is not for me to know.

 

 

/Locklyn

[Prospective]

Cestvel,

 

That's the conventional wisdom, that MD sensors are used to detect cloaked ships and it makes a lot of sense. Of course, if cloaking has not yet been implemented, I'm not sure how the conventional knowledge was developed, as there is no way to test it versus regular sensors or versus no sensors at all. My understanding is that cargo ships routinely detect cloaked ships.

 

What also makes a lot of sense is that it helps to distinguish a 1kt ship from a 1Mt+ ship which would theoretically allow a ship commander to make a better decision as to threat level of a enemy ship.

 

Does anyone out there have experience with using mass detector sensors in combat with an enemy force consisting of many screen type ships and some large ships? If so, would you mind posting the battle and the results?

 

I'm guessing there won't be any postings as those that have developed it have no interest in sharing (makes sense) and the rest of us haven't used them and have no way to know. But Pete did say there would be a DOH moment and I think that applies to using MD sensors. How many of us have really just followed the unconventional "Conventional" wisdom and written them off as "cloaked ship detectors" and moved on to other tech since cloaks don't work? I know I'm guilty of it.

 

Remember all, I'm interested in getting faster turn results. If eliminating thousands of screens from the database will do it, I'm for it. Think about it. If you ever got involved in a war and had to put up 1000's of screens, how much would it cost you in real world $$$ when you can build a maximum of 50 ships per order? One number thrown about was someone had 30-45 thousand of the screens to defend their HW. At 45k screen ships, that would end up being just over 22 TURNS worth and at $6 per turn, that's over $132 real world dollars spent just to field that many screens.

 

It behooves all of us to avoid Screen Defense Syndrome. All the SDS does is to allow those players with deep pockets to 'buy' a victory. Isn't that the thing that killed off the previous version of SN? The ability for the deep pocket players to buy overwhelming fleets?

[cestvel]

Well, the tech after Mk I Mass Detectors explicitly states cloaked ships.

 

Not barring other uses, of course.

 

And its only $6 for setting up 40 XSHIP commands running for a bit more than 20 turns to achive 45k screens.

[TErnest]

At 45k screen ships, that would end up being just over 22 TURNS worth and at $6 per turn, that's over $132 real world dollars spent just to field that many screens.

 

It behooves all of us to avoid Screen Defense Syndrome. All the SDS does is to allow those players with deep pockets to 'buy' a victory.

 

Or it could just cost a single $6 turn fee for a 35 or 40 XSHIP orders, plus one year's time. Or considerably fewer orders for a longer period of time. I do not think that the deep pockets arguement holds in this case.

 

TErnest

[WKE235]

Cestvel,

 

That's the conventional wisdom, that MD sensors are used to detect cloaked ships and it makes a lot of sense. Of course, if cloaking has not yet been implemented, I'm not sure how the conventional knowledge was developed, as there is no way to test it versus regular sensors or versus no sensors at all. My understanding is that cargo ships routinely detect cloaked ships.

 

What also makes a lot of sense is that it helps to distinguish a 1kt ship from a 1Mt+ ship which would theoretically allow a ship commander to make a better decision as to threat level of a enemy ship.

 

Does anyone out there have experience with using mass detector sensors in combat with an enemy force consisting of many screen type ships and some large ships? If so, would you mind posting the battle and the results?

 

I'm guessing there won't be any postings as those that have developed it have no interest in sharing (makes sense) and the rest of us haven't used them and have no way to know. But Pete did say there would be a DOH moment and I think that applies to using MD sensors. How many of us have really just followed the unconventional "Conventional" wisdom and written them off as "cloaked ship detectors" and moved on to other tech since cloaks don't work? I know I'm guilty of it.

 

Remember all, I'm interested in getting faster turn results. If eliminating thousands of screens from the database will do it, I'm for it. Think about it. If you ever got involved in a war and had to put up 1000's of screens, how much would it cost you in real world $$$ when you can build a maximum of 50 ships per order? One number thrown about was someone had 30-45 thousand of the screens to defend their HW. At 45k screen ships, that would end up being just over 22 TURNS worth and at $6 per turn, that's over $132 real world dollars spent just to field that many screens.

 

It behooves all of us to avoid Screen Defense Syndrome. All the SDS does is to allow those players with deep pockets to 'buy' a victory. Isn't that the thing that killed off the previous version of SN? The ability for the deep pocket players to buy overwhelming fleets?

 

Well, I have an empire Mk III Mass Detectors and Gravitic Sensor Webs (just in case cloaks ever DO work). But, I have no desire to attack any neighbors with that empire. Maybe I'll contact them and try to work something out.

 

Of course maybe the real answer is RTG wants us to keep building screens? I hate to accuse them of something as petty as being capitalists . It's just until you pointed out the cost I never thought about the $'s they earn from all the screen ship building. I would be one of those "deep pockets" you refer to, and honestly I haven't even looked at what I'm spending on the game in quite some time. I did start adding up all the orders for ships over and time and .. well .. gee, I could have spent all of that on a nice vacation in Florida. So maybe this is all part of some great conspericy by Pete to get us all to spend more money searching out the answer building tech and ships and such. If anyone spots Pete stopping in at the BMW dealer or Boat shows, we'll have the answer.

[Prospective]

Well I learned something new. I was unaware of an XSHIP order. I guess I should re-read the rules more often. My deep pockets comment was made prior to that revalation (for me) so perhaps it's not overly accurate. Even with the XSHIP order, it's gonna take a whole bunch of turns to get up a sufficiently large force, so if you want them quick then it's gonna be costly real world $$$ wise.

 

As far as the next level of tech after mass detector ships, it says "Even cloaked ships can be detected by proper use of xxx technology", so yes it does mention cloaked ships but not exclusively.

 

Remember, I'm just thinking and theorizing out loud. Sensors and MD sensors may not be this holy grail against screens. But, I know that I have never tested this theory and so far no one out there has indicated that they tested this theory (and backed it up with a couple battle posts to prove or disprove that sensors are not useful). I still feel this theory makes alot of sense.

 

If you recall, Pete did say that HE thought the pre-req's to this screen defeating system made sense. He also said that undoubtedly people who had this tech would have a Homer Simpson DOH!!! moment when they found it. Pete also sait it wouldn't take 5 years to develop... so far sensors/MD sensors used in combat fit all those criteria.

[El Capitan]

What also makes a lot of sense is that it helps to distinguish a 1kt ship from a 1Mt+ ship which would theoretically allow a ship commander to make a better decision as to threat level of a enemy ship.

 

 

The key word here is theoretically. Trying to get to combat program to think for you and analyze what is a threat and what is not is way beyond the ability of this game. Besides, it would be too easy to fool.

[Prospective]

El Capitan,

 

Yes, as I've stated a couple times in this very thread, I'm just "noodling out loud" hoping to find a solution to these screens. Everything herein is theory and in no way do I claim to know any more than anyone else regarding this subject. If I did know, I'd spit it out because I'm tired of Saturday nite turn results due to massive quantities of 1kton screen ships.

 

As far as it being beyond the ability of the combat program to distinguish the threat level of different ships in a fleet, I disagree when it comes to the screen ship tactic. Here's why.

 

The way this game is set up, use of the screen ship tactic presumes you are using the cheapest most disposable ship buildable which is a 1k ton ship. The sole function of a screen is to provide a decoy, taking the hit that was meant for a 'valuable' ship. This extends the 'lifespan' of your valuable ship, allowing it to dish out more firepower than it would have if the screen ship was not around. Since the ship is designed to be sacrificed, there is no sense in using more than the minimum material to construct it.

 

Based on those presumptions, it's quite easy to figure out what ship is a valuable ship and which ship isn't. The more valuable ship has a higher mass than the less valuable ship. Therefore, if you have a sensor that can determine mass (eg: the Mkx Mass Detector Sensor), you have a solution. THEORETICALLY. No one knows if this actually works or not. If they do know they aren't saying (not a surprise there). But the theory has the advantage of making real world sense. Obviously that does not mean it makes game sense however.

 

Of course, the 'Mass Detector' solution is NOT foolproof once you get away from the screen ship tactic. For example, it's very possible to have a 10Mt ship constructed of 1st gen technology and a 5Mt ships built with higher than 1st Gen components. In that battle, the smaller ship may be more of a threat than the larger ship and the use of a mass detector to determine threat level is less useful.

 

But, bear in mind that the whole point of this discussion is how to defeat screen ship tactics, not a general treatise on naval combat.

[WKE235]

Of course, the 'Mass Detector' solution is NOT foolproof once you get away from the screen ship tactic. For example, it's very possible to have a 10Mt ship constructed of 1st gen technology and a 5Mt ships built with higher than 1st Gen components. In that battle, the smaller ship may be more of a threat than the larger ship and the use of a mass detector to determine threat level is less useful.

 

What your stating shows that no matter the technology in use, having large number of ships is still a key (just one key) to victory. I mean, if the opponents do not have the ability to bypass small ships to fire on capital ships, then you need large screen fleets to draw off and disperse enemy fire power while protecting your capital ships. If your opponent can bypass the small ships (what ever the method), then the small ships become the weapons platforms and the capital ship becomes one massive block of Tckon armor to soak up the enemy fire round after round. Note that no matter the method, all ships must be defeated (or the battle ended by a bored computer). So even if you get past the small stuff to start, you still have to come back to it. IN other words, screen ships are still vitally important.

 

You could try to cover all the combat methods with one style of screen ship. There is some dang decent small size weapons out there along with powerful sensors, engines, and fire control systems. So you could in theory design a 2-3 K that would produce lots of FC and Firepower. If you build up a screen fleet using these smaller weapons, you might be ready for either combat style. And then the capital ships are pulled in depending on the needs.

 

Overall screens (just in a different style / size / design) will likely still be the best way to build any fleet. For a fleet you want to fool the enemy into wasting as much fire power as possible away from your key combat assets. And screens still appear the best choice (just with a varying role depending on the techs in used).

[Prospective]

WKE,

 

Remember, everything I have said is a theory, yet to be proven. Until someone tests it and posts the results (not likely so you'll have to test it for yourself to know for certain), it's just a theory.

 

But yes, if it turns out that sensors (presumably mass detector sensors) are able to determine the size difference between 'screen ships' and 'capital ships' AND the result of that determination is that your ships ignore the screens in favor of targeting the capital ships, then a perfect way to defeat that would be to construct powerful screen ships and make your capital ships large, cheap, stupid, blocks of metal that are designed to take the hits and allow your screens to survive. Essentially, this would be the 'Anti Anti-Screen ship tactic'.

 

Perhaps these 'powerful' screen ships would not be 1kton ships since they cannot mount NTWD units. But, the key would be for the dangerous ships to be smaller than the decoy ships.

 

Ultimately, this would mean that no matter what, a great quantity of ships will defeat a lesser quantity of ships. Which means, that the database will always need to handle an increasing load. Turns will not begin to arrive till Sunday night or even Monday as the combat system crunches through the numbers of small but powerful ships.

 

Phew… it's enough to cause one to take up drinking.

[Octus Imperium]

WKE,

 

Remember, everything I have said is a theory, yet to be proven. Until someone tests it and posts the results (not likely so you'll have to test it for yourself to know for certain), it's just a theory.

 

But yes, if it turns out that sensors (presumably mass detector sensors) are able to determine the size difference between 'screen ships' and 'capital ships' AND the result of that determination is that your ships ignore the screens in favor of targeting the capital ships, then a perfect way to defeat that would be to construct powerful screen ships and make your capital ships large, cheap, stupid, blocks of metal that are designed to take the hits and allow your screens to survive. Essentially, this would be the 'Anti Anti-Screen ship tactic'.

 

Perhaps these 'powerful' screen ships would not be 1kton ships since they cannot mount NTWD units. But, the key would be for the dangerous ships to be smaller than the decoy ships.

 

Ultimately, this would mean that no matter what, a great quantity of ships will defeat a lesser quantity of ships. Which means, that the database will always need to handle an increasing load. Turns will not begin to arrive till Sunday night or even Monday as the combat system crunches through the numbers of small but powerful ships.

 

Phew… it's enough to cause one to take up drinking.

 

 

Take up? What do you mean take up? Oh, meaning consuming more by taking up (more). Now I get it...

 

Seriously, you started an excellent discussion. I have rethought my research priorities once again. Perhaps many have forgotten about FCS, FPS, SLY, Mass Detectors, Defense Directorates, Universal Translators, science drones etc as some have focused on Computers and advanced forms of combat displays/communications toys. While numbers will provide an (as in one) advantage, it will not be the only advantage. Just as tech is only one of many potential ways to skin the creature. (No offense to our feline companions in space....)

 

But ain't it fun? All except the waiting until Saturday night part.

 

Octus

[El Capitan]

Very well put WKE.

 

 

 

Ultimately, this would mean that no matter what, a great quantity of ships will defeat a lesser quantity of ships. Which means, that the database will always need to handle an increasing load. Turns will not begin to arrive till Sunday night or even Monday as the combat system crunches through the numbers of small but powerful ships.

 

 

This is exactly the point I was trying to make. We're all in this thread trying to find out what Pete was reffering to. So yes, all of this is theoretical. That's obvious. I'm merely pointing out that the current line of thought (mass detectors/threat analysis) has some major flaws or drawbacks to the point that it's not likely to solve the problem of turn processing time.

 

Look at this as a constructive debate, not a personal critisism. For brainstorming to really work, someone has to play the role of Devil's advocate. Otherwise, the ideas and thought processes become stagnet and flawed. So, when someone presents a countering view, you can either agree with it and move on to another thought or disagree and provide a strong line of reasoning why you disagree.

[WKE235]

Since this is all theory, lets continue the thought. Part of the theory that large numbers and quantity of ships will still be part of battles is based on the assumption that battles will always be fought to the death. IN other words, when I come flying into space over your HW and a battle starts, it will continue until one side or the other is wiped from the galaxy.

 

SO .. is this rule iron clad? Are space battles "to the death" or where all ships on one side are gone? We know this is not an iron clad rule. I myself have a one on one ship battle where both ships had weak weapons and at deploy location 12 .. and eventually the combat stopped and my ship "ran away". So battles are not always to the death. And while ship capture rules have changed, it is still possible to end a battle by capturing the other ship (or ships).

 

SO, in theory, might there be a tech or ability that allows you to fly in over the HW, blast the big capital surface forts, and truely IGNORE the small ships so the battle ends??? Or maybe even capture all the small ships (thousands of tractor beams??)? Or maybe something that draws combat out so long the battle ends (like we've seen happen with ground battles)? Imagine that. Someone flys into your fleet, battle ensues for a bit, and then it stops .. allowing them to land a colony beacon and start an invasion.

 

Need more fuel to power my thinking on this....

[EEOC]

you can actually do quite a bit.

 

there are 6,7,8 and 9th gen weapons at 100 tons.

 

So you do one of these for 100 tons

mk IX computer for 100 tons (81000 for 1000 tons = 81 globs)

mk VI antimatter or MK whatever total conversion

MK I NJD

100 fuel tankage

5 x MK IX force shield

 

so you get some protection, a 81 glob ship that can pump out 256k-1m damage and you can make a 1000 a turn.

[WKE235]

The disadvantge to screen ships is they DO get destroyed. So you do lose materials. While Capital ships might be damaged but at least they can head for a repair ship or home base to repair (meaning no lost armor, weapons, and the like). Below is the most current Repair Bay description, where Pete increased the amount of points it can repair to 125 Million integrity a turn. Which is important when you have 10 billion integrity ships flying about.

 

If you're building surface forts, Tckon armor seems to be a better protection choice than the Mk IX Force Shields. Also on a ship, I would devote 50 of the fuel tanks to 50 tons of CIDS (always nice to have some missle / drone defense). One large tanker ship that deploys to location 12 can easily cover the fuel needs of the screen ships if traveling over many jumps.

 

And lets not forget fun with worm holes. Even a screening force can get across vast distances of space with worm hole generators leading the way. No AP to use, no AP set to 0 when jumping. A screen force with just nuclear jump drive engines and say 50 fuel tanks (the other 50 devoted to CIDS of course) can become a very dangerous force using worm holes.

 

 

Repair Bays contain extensive maintenance and repair facilities along with damage control parties trained in the repair of surface fortresses, orbital installations and starships. Inter-ship Cargo Barges are included so that engineering teams and any bulky equipment they might need can be sent to exterior portions of the vessel they are repairing or even to other units in the same fleet. In this way a ship equipped with Repair Bays assists in repairing any other ship, surface fortress or orbital installation in their fleet. Repair Bays have a higher-than-usual structural integrity value to simulate emergency battle repairs, but they add substantially more capability during post-battle repairs (executed following all other actions in a turn cycle). Fleet repair capability is increased by about 125 million integrity points of damage for each Repair Bay installed on a ship in that fleet. Ships always try to repair themselves completely if they can before drawing on fleet damage control parties, to allow repair teams to be available for more heavily damaged fleet assets. Lightly damaged ships tend to be repaired completely before more heavily damaged ships are attended to.