Overcoming Screens...

[Prospective]

EEOC: Regarding that ship design with 5 MkIX shields... that'll be 1,250,000 shield points. While it's a lot for that size ship, remember that if your opponent is able to dish out globs that are large enough, that 1kton ship will still be destroyed. While it's impressive to have that kind of shielding, if the end result is that your 1kton ship is likely to be one shotted then why waste the resources to build the shields? Use the resources more efficiently and put armor on it which is much cheaper on a per ton basis (no need to build costly electronics).

 

WKE: Your point is well taken. In most cases you will design a 1kton screen ship to be destroyed. Trying to design a 1ktonner to survive is a worthy exercise but frankly, it will take a healthy amount of luck to get 2 combat rounds out of a 1kton screen when going against a halfway decent opponent. You could luck out and your opponent may have a high enough FC rating such that it 'dilutes' his damage globs to fall below the total hit points of your 1ktonner.

[SargonKingOfSlith]

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.

 

After rereading all this stuff one more time again, I’m beginning to lean back toward this side of the fence. It just makes so much sense that sensors should help with target selection in some way. But there is still a big fly in the ointment.

 

Each glob selects 2 possible targets. It’s my understanding that these 2 potential targets are selected randomly. Then the more interesting one is selected as the actual target. “Interesting” was Pete’s word and I think he emphasized it a couple times. Which makes it seem likely that sensors help determine which of the 2 are more interesting.

 

But here’s my problem. If 2 potential targets are randomly selected from a fleet that consists of 1000 screen ships and 1 killer ship. Then the 2 potential targets will almost always be 2 screen ships. So almost every glob of damage will still hit a screen ship.

 

I don’t remember Pete ever hinting that there was a way to increase the number of potential targets above 2. Maybe sensors achieve this, maybe they don’t. Maybe there is some new ship component we haven’t discovered yet that does this.

 

I have sensors out the ying-yang. The only ones I’m missing are FFS and the Mass Detector Sensor. Nothing on my Researchable Items list gives an ANZ description that says it increases the number of potential targets.

[Drasn]

I was re-reading Eternus's compendium, gleaned from the forums, and found this nugget from Pete. Here's a link to the thread.

 

Sensors

Sensors are essentially dual-purpose items: they act as defensive systems and supplement the fire control systems by spotting potential enemy vessels. They are not mandatory, but it’s probably a good idea to equip your warships with at least one Sensor.

[WKE235]

I was re-reading Eternus's compendium, gleaned from the forums, and found this nugget from Pete. Here's a link to the thread.

 

Sensors

Sensors are essentially dual-purpose items: they act as defensive systems and supplement the fire control systems by spotting potential enemy vessels. They are not mandatory, but it’s probably a good idea to equip your warships with at least one Sensor.

 

It says the same thing in the Naval Combat primer. You know, it amazes me. RTG has provided detailed information on fire control and how legendary characters impact it, detailed information on weapons fire and how they degrade versus deploy locations, even detailed information on Drones versus CIDS and how losses are calculated (I was amazed when that was volunteered). But every time someone asks Pete to provide information about sensors, to clarify how sensors supplement fire control, or even asks simple Yes/No questions, he refuses to say anything. That is pure B.S. IMHO. Why in the HELL provide all of this other information, and then be quiet about how sensors supplement the fire control systems? It makes no freaking sense.

[El Capitan]

Each glob selects 2 possible targets. It’s my understanding that these 2 potential targets are selected randomly. Then the more interesting one is selected as the actual target. “Interesting” was Pete’s word and I think he emphasized it a couple times. Which makes it seem likely that sensors help determine which of the 2 are more interesting.

 

Sargon,

 

I obviously missed something or am having a "senior moment". Where/when did Pete mention something about picking interesting targets?

[Desmodus]

............... That is pure B.S. IMHO. .................... It makes no freaking sense.

 

As can be said of the majority of your 800+ posts

[rotor911]

There are some side effects of the Fighter and Drone Operations Options that are related to targeting, providing for further

differentiation between the choices, and not all of the FOO and DOO modifiers are identical. For example, Deep Strike is an

attempt to target rear area enemy ships if the opportunity presents itself

 

Just to add my grain of salt...

[Prospective]

WKE,

 

Thanks for re-iterating that comment about sensors and the rulebook. As most of us 'older timers' are aware, before the naval combat primer was released, we were all pretty much left to guess as to how exactly the combat system worked. This included defenses, fighters, drones, missiles, computers, SENSORS etc.

 

Then a great day came. RTG provided us with a document that contained an explanation as to how the combat system works. This document provided a level playing field for all of us to understand the intricacies involved. However, it now appears that the combat primer MAY not be entirely complete, specifically in relation to sensors.

 

We know for certain that in a non-combat role, sensors open up other interesting technology. We also know that sensors primary role in a naval combat is to provide a defense against the mine weapon line of technology (presumably it acts the same way that any other specialized defense system works with regards to naval combat). And, from Pete's confirmation that the ANZ for the sensors are accurate (and not fluff) "The ANZ's for those items are accurate"; apparently they do have a function in combat that involves targeting. What is unclear is how they actually work in combat.

 

With this comment a bit over a week ago, Pete has bowed out of the discussion: "Doesn't seem wise for me to say much of anything else on this topic.". It's not really clear why he backed off his interaction with us. One might venture to guess that he is afraid of revealing too much information. If that was his reason, he should reconsider since it's an invalid reason. For it to be valid would mean that it was wrong of RTG to release the naval combat primer. There were no hysterical cries of being unfairly disadvantaged when the details of the combat system were revealed. And there had to have been players who had spent a lot of time and real world $$ analyzing battles they were in order to extrapolate how the system actually worked. That being the case, why would there be any issue now? What is so important about sensors and FC/targeting in naval combat?

[Breoghan]

Couldn't it be, simply, that there ARE people who have forked out mega-real-world-bucks on research, who would in turn feel themselves swindled if others got it all effectively for nothing? That makes a whole lot more sense to me than claims of inconvenient unreasonable RTG information dissemination, and certainly puts the restrained hints in a new light.

 

...just a thought on the matter.

[EEOC]

The question on screens is what is a reasonable glob damage from an enemy. 50 fire control is reasonable which would mean globs would be huge. (assuming capital ships).

 

Assume enemy can do 3B damage then globs would be 60M or 6M at 500 fire control. That's huge damage.

[Prospective]

Breoghan,

 

Since sensors play a role in naval combat (Pete has already confirmed this is true when he stated that the ANZ's for sensors are accurate), and if most of the mechanics of naval combat have been revealed in the naval combat primer, then why are sensors a special case?

 

 

Not to be rude, but to say;

 

"that there ARE people who have forked out mega-real-world-bucks on research, who would in turn feel themselves swindled if others got it all effectively for nothing"

 

doesn't make any sense. Research is one area where everyone has an equal amount of output in this game. Everyone gets 25 RC's max, no exceptions. No one can pay more real world bucks in order to get more research output.

[SargonKingOfSlith]

I was re-reading Eternus's compendium, gleaned from the forums, and found this nugget from Pete. Here's a link to the thread.

 

Sensors

Sensors are essentially dual-purpose items: they act as defensive systems and supplement the fire control systems by spotting potential enemy vessels. They are not mandatory, but it’s probably a good idea to equip your warships with at least one Sensor.

 

Good find! Thanks!!

 

 

Each glob selects 2 possible targets. It’s my understanding that these 2 potential targets are selected randomly. Then the more interesting one is selected as the actual target. “Interesting” was Pete’s word and I think he emphasized it a couple times. Which makes it seem likely that sensors help determine which of the 2 are more interesting.

 

Sargon,

 

I obviously missed something or am having a "senior moment". Where/when did Pete mention something about picking interesting targets?

 

Sorry, I'm working from memory here. I know, the older I get...

I don't remember where it was, I just remember that Pete's use of the word "interesting" really stood out at the time. It made me wonder how the game engine determines which one is more interesting. At the time I assumed the ship at the closer deployment location would always be considered more interesting - thus the effectiveness of screens at low DL protecting bigger ships at high DL.

[El Capitan]

Not to be rude, but to say;

 

"that there ARE people who have forked out mega-real-world-bucks on research, who would in turn feel themselves swindled if others got it all effectively for nothing"

 

doesn't make any sense. Research is one area where everyone has an equal amount of output in this game. Everyone gets 25 RC's max, no exceptions. No one can pay more real world bucks in order to get more research output.

 

 

By "research", I think he's referrig to experimentation within the game, not the research that's generated by research centers. Stuff like building up large fleets to run mock battles, etc. That's what can cost real world bucks.

[El Capitan]

Sorry, I'm working from memory here. I know, the older I get...

I don't remember where it was, I just remember that Pete's use of the word "interesting" really stood out at the time. It made me wonder how the game engine determines which one is more interesting. At the time I assumed the ship at the closer deployment location would always be considered more interesting - thus the effectiveness of screens at low DL protecting bigger ships at high DL.

 

I can't confirm or deny that Pete used the word "interesting", but the way I remember it being explained is that each glob randomly picks a target. The program then looks to see if there are targets that are in closer deploy locations. If there are, there is a high percentage chance that the closer target will be selected.

[Lord Deependra]

After much consideration, I am going to build the biggest ships I can afford and throw them singly at my enemies. Since I am presenting only 1 target, all the computers and sensors on the enemy fleet will be just wasted tonnage.