Tonnage and You

[ShadowKitsune]

Or a Victory! style Ordnance Report ...

[Laserwolf]

Or an expanded order:

 

 

LFE Fleet#1 Fleet#2

 

That would result in your starting your own battle between your own forces...

[ShadowKitsune]

Or an expanded order:

 

LFE Fleet#1 Fleet#2

 

That would result in your starting your own battle between your own forces...

That could be fun! Although expensive ... depending on how live the fire was.

[EternusIV]

Whoa----

 

Thats brilliant.

 

An order to test your own shps against each other

 

NICE

 

However, I suspect a sequal to the Naval Combat Primer of some sort to avoid such a potentially tragic mechanism.

[Laserwolf]

I think it would be a fabulous RTG money maker... imagine the test combinations... local access to a shipyard for REPR (repair) orders, a raise for Pete, more need to produce materials, a raise for Pete, an endless flurry of in-system combats for those data hounds and warmonger wannabes, a raise for Pete, and of course there is the joy of watching all those obsolete ship parts get scattered throughout your solar system...

[ShadowKitsune]

... and a raise for Pete. :lol:

[EternusIV]

ANDDDD...........

 

 

 

 

 

a raise for Russ!!!

[DWillard]

Don't know if we could realistically expect something like this but thought I would throw it out anyway (and its full usefulness won't be fully realized till we have better/more detailed battle reports) ---

 

How about a War Game type order. This could be done between your fleets or could involve fleets of another empire. You would get a battle report, just like a battle had occured, but no actual damage would be done.

 

This would be an extremely valuable order so some type of restrictions would be appropriate. Maybe you would get most of the battle report but not all that you would have if it were a real battle. Each fleet involved would have to issue the order. Maybe you would have to issue the orde twice in a row for each fleet (takes up more orders to reflect its value). If two or more empires are involved, they have to be total allies. Etc, etc.

 

Even though the fleets aren't actually destroyed, it would still be order intensive (building the fleets, getting them to the right location, etc.) and therefore beneficial to RTG as well.

 

Don't know if RTG would consider this but thought it was a cool idea. What do you guys think? Any thoughts/ideas how this could work??? (or reasons why it wont)

[woolfe99]

Relative damage has been kept fairly constant according to Pete as the per/ton damage rating is supposed to be similar for each weapon of the same generation. This is so no particular weapon will out do another weapon of a given tech level.

I can accept that thesis, though one thing throws a monkey wrench in it for me. If you look at missiles and torpedos, there are variations in warhead strength *within* a given generation. Some will "sacrifice warhead strength" for greater speed. To me that sounds like a tradeoff between damage and accuracy. One could look at those two concepts as two sides of the same coin of course: there's no real difference between having 50 of your weapons hit where each does 100 damage and having 100 hit where each does 50 damage. However, I should hope it's more sophisticated than that. I would think that against ships with poor maneavurability and/or point defenses, the higher warhead, slower ordnance will be more effective, but against higher maneuverability/good point defense targets the faster, smaller warhead versions are more effective overall. If that's true, and I certainly hope it is or all these variations in tech are just for show, that would negate this thesis at least in the case of missiles and torpedos. One thing we know for sure, you can pay the same research cost for 2 weapons that have different warhead strength ratings.

 

In a way, the variations I describe are similar to what you have for other weapon systems: they tend to be more or less effective depending on the particular defensive systems of the target. Heavy Torpedos are "better" given a low defense target, but given the presence of certain defenses, the Heavy become less effective as compared to other types.

 

- woolfe

[EternusIV]

I imagine that we could have the capability of having a tech advancement along the Computer System line that allows us to carry out battle simulations between designs.

 

That way, we wouldnt even have to build the ships....

 

It would be a two-three order process PER simulation

================================

1) Design Ship A

2) Design Ship B

3) SIM (Simulate battle) Design Name #1 Design Name #2

 

(I guess if you already have a few designs lying around it could be a one order process. Nevertheless, I can foresee some of us spending INSANE amounts of orders for this function)

 

One thing I like about this - is that it still motivates us to send ships to friendly neigbors willing to engage in "test" battles -- because we can only design ships that include our OWN technology.

[Laserwolf]

Thus resulting in a raise for Pete...

[hobknob]

Anything to give us much needed data, without breaking the game.

[DWillard]

I'd say you would have to build the ships or it could quickly get out of hand.

[Tokmok]

Hello

 

I have to choose between

 

Mk III nuclear engines

MK I Nuclear pulse engines and

Fusion Engines

 

 

which path is most optimal for a race without R-bonuses

 

thanks

[Laserwolf]

Pulse engines are for fighters and drones ONLY.

 

MK III Nukes supposedly consume fewer SRP than Fusion but are identical in cost, tonnage and thrust. No one knows what that cryptic fusion message "more likely to explode" really means. There is also the thought that knowing about fusion engines may be required to ultimately open up other "better" engines.