If you can make, say, 6-1 and 6-4 units, anyone pushing out 6-2 units instead?

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  If you can make, say, 6-1 and 6-4 units, anyone pushing out 6-2 units instead?

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   If you can make, say, 6-1 and 6-4 units, anyone pushing out 6-2 units instead?

Freddz posted 06-20-99 08:02 AM ET
Just curious...
When I make units, they either have no armor(and extra speed, airborn etc) or all armor so to speak. It is provided, of course, that everything has been prototyped...
MoSe posted 06-20-99 09:48 AM ET
With the catch that, given an involuted and not correctly documented unit cost formula, if you decide to build a max-1-1 unit, maybe you can try add some armor at the same cost, but up to a point. that is the unit cost is not a continuum, or linear if you prefer, but it jumps.
I haven't the figures in mind, but maybe a 6-2-1 unit will cost as a 6-1-1, but a 6-3-1 costs 1 more row.
At lest this is the concept, not the actual numbers.
Freddz posted 06-20-99 09:56 AM ET
Yeah... I was just curious to the designing principle you guys use... Guess that spoils the question a bit... So, is there any truth to the principle then (either low armor or high armor, no in between)?
Krushala posted 06-20-99 10:01 AM ET
I always put the best weapon and armor on my offensive units including aaa tracking. I play on huge maps and like keep my units alive as long as possible. Usually the best armor can withstand one rover attack. It takes longer to build, but I prefer to have fewer more powerful units than many weaker units. My garrisons always have no weapon though.
LoD posted 06-20-99 10:45 AM ET
I prefer blitzkriegs, so I tend to build all-weapons-no armor units or no weapons-all armor. However, I develop an "honor guard" of several all weapons-all armor units sometimes.
LoD
jimmytrick posted 06-20-99 11:05 AM ET
I do design a little variety because sometimes even if a unit costs a little more it might still be built in equal # of turns at a particular base.
Oftimes you can get a weapon for free with garrison units.
Of course I never stray far from the basic max-1-x or 1-max-x patterns that we all use.
I tend to use gas pods on offensive units a lot. After all you don't have to use them, but they are nice to have around if you need them.
MichaeltheGreat posted 06-20-99 01:52 PM ET
In the mid and later stages of the game when I have decent tech choices, I build every platform as a trained 1-1-whatever, or, as my tech improves, the highest initial levels I can build at my manufacturing cities without taking extra turns to complete. Once these units are build, I use energy credits to upgrade them to their combat configurations.
If I have Shard weapons, upgrading to Chaos is barely more expensive than missile, which is the same as hand weapons, so my "typical" late mid game defensive garrison unit is 8-8-1 Trance AAA. That way, the unit has a good choice whether to defend directly, or by attacking the invading unit.
With Mag tubes connecting my cities, I build a few SAM/AAA rovers or hovertanks, so I can use them as mobile anti-air units, since the vast majority of my air units are used offensively.
My standard offensive weapon is max-max-4 elite hovertanks, with deep radar and cloaked, amphibious or drop as the second enhancement choice, depending on the game. I usually build some of each type, but the mix depends on my needs. All my offensive weapons use deep radar as their first special ability.
I also max out armor on helos and needlejets.
jimmytrick posted 06-20-99 02:50 PM ET
MtG,
Sounds like survivability is your prime directive. Do you think such practices would work in, say, a PBEM when human opponents have equal tech to throw at you?
If you are buying everything you must have already won the tech race, right?
MichaeltheGreat posted 06-20-99 03:29 PM ET
Lt Col. JT, sir:
I buy everything for a couple of reasons - the biggest is the nature of my city development, which favors a large number of mid sized cities (less drone problems) and emphasizes energy production over resources.
Against the AI I am way ahead in the tech race, and even against human players, I'm usually up there or ahead, but at the cost of manufacturing ability (less problems with planet, however)
Against human players, in the early part of the game, they can't deliver much of a threat, so I just have my pathetic little scouts which take turns worm walking to make money and gain combat experience. I keep enough energy on hand to upgrade a few units to my best capability and always build the cheapest possible prototype of each tech I want to use, so if someone invades, the local scout infantry and scout rovers suddenly get some teeth.
The rest of my energy is constantly used to rush tech improvements and econ improvements, and I pod hunt voraciously, and have a huge former fleet to crank everything I can out of the land - much easier to support with lots of mid sized cities.
I've never had a PBEM or IP game last to the point where multiple players have orbital insertion/singularity/blah blah - by that point, it's like a knife fight in a New York alley, and normally conquest or cooperative political victory happens first.
Survivability is one of my big issues, since SMAC war is really just resource trading - I look at cash and resources taken away against those lost. At some point in a game, I may not have the ability to conquer someone, since I've emphasized economy and research while he's built an army, but if I can put a half dozen tough units at strategic spots in an enemy's heartland, and start slaughtering formers and killing improvments, his development slows down with little cost to me - If I take a borehole out of production, that's 6 resources and 6 energy per turn, times enhancements, till the enemy gets the borehole rebuilt. Do that enough times, and the enemy's ability to build and support units and hurt you is severly compromised - he's trying to repair damage and get your units off his ass, and you're just building and getting more advanced and stronger for when the real war comes.
The big problem in war before drop and orbital insertion is the time lost in getting units where I want them - the critical issue is not manufacturing, but logistics - only so many transports, and so many moves per turn, all vulnerable until they get on land, so I want quality mobile units that will survive for a while to do some damage.
Nell_Smith posted 06-20-99 03:35 PM ET
I usually try to stick at least some armour on offensive units, so that (a) they can act as temporary garrisons when you take an enemy base, and (b) they have some chance of surviving attacks while they're on the way to whatever it is they're trying to kill. I usually find that a 6-3-1 unit, say, survives much longer than a 6-1-1 and thereby justifies its extra cost. I only build offensive units without armour if I'm really pushed for resources and need offensive units in a real hurry. I also try to put at least half-decent weapons on garrison units, so that they have some chance of not just surviving attacks, but also of destroying the attacker.
Nell
korn469 posted 06-20-99 06:43 PM ET
personally in my opinion some of the best garrison units are 1-1-1 clean police units and 1-1-1 clean trance units. for one thing unless you have really good armor with AAA tracking these are by far thes best defenders against missles. the police units can control drones and they are quickly produced at new bases. these units are useful in multiplayer because the way production happens all human get their troops at the same time, so unless the attack for ce consists of more that one unit these can be used to hold off a on unit raid indefinatly. but besides those units here's my design philosophy.
offenseive units. best weapon. special abilities are a combination of nerve gas, drop pods, antigrav struts, empath, ecm(especially on infantry), high morale, or deep radar. then after the special ability i add free armor. on air units i always give them deep radar and high morale (unless they are already being prouced at elite status)with fusion/quantum/singularity reactors often times you can get decent armor for free.
defensive units. best armor. special abilities are a combination of AAA, trance, ECM, high morale, clean. then i add the best free weapon. since i think in most cases this is the weapon below their armor (if you have a units with 5 armor it can use impact weapons as it's gun and still cost the same)
korn469
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: If you can make, say, 6-1 and 6-4 units, anyone pushing out 6-2 units instead?
Freddz	posted 06-20-99 08:02 AM ET Just curious... When I make units, they either have no armor(and extra speed, airborn etc) or all armor so to speak. It is provided, of course, that everything has been prototyped...
MoSe	posted 06-20-99 09:48 AM ET With the catch that, given an involuted and not correctly documented unit cost formula, if you decide to build a max-1-1 unit, maybe you can try add some armor at the same cost, but up to a point. that is the unit cost is not a continuum, or linear if you prefer, but it jumps. I haven't the figures in mind, but maybe a 6-2-1 unit will cost as a 6-1-1, but a 6-3-1 costs 1 more row. At lest this is the concept, not the actual numbers.
Freddz	posted 06-20-99 09:56 AM ET Yeah... I was just curious to the designing principle you guys use... Guess that spoils the question a bit... So, is there any truth to the principle then (either low armor or high armor, no in between)?
Krushala	posted 06-20-99 10:01 AM ET I always put the best weapon and armor on my offensive units including aaa tracking. I play on huge maps and like keep my units alive as long as possible. Usually the best armor can withstand one rover attack. It takes longer to build, but I prefer to have fewer more powerful units than many weaker units. My garrisons always have no weapon though.
LoD	posted 06-20-99 10:45 AM ET I prefer blitzkriegs, so I tend to build all-weapons-no armor units or no weapons-all armor. However, I develop an "honor guard" of several all weapons-all armor units sometimes. LoD
jimmytrick	posted 06-20-99 11:05 AM ET I do design a little variety because sometimes even if a unit costs a little more it might still be built in equal # of turns at a particular base. Oftimes you can get a weapon for free with garrison units. Of course I never stray far from the basic max-1-x or 1-max-x patterns that we all use. I tend to use gas pods on offensive units a lot. After all you don't have to use them, but they are nice to have around if you need them.
MichaeltheGreat	posted 06-20-99 01:52 PM ET In the mid and later stages of the game when I have decent tech choices, I build every platform as a trained 1-1-whatever, or, as my tech improves, the highest initial levels I can build at my manufacturing cities without taking extra turns to complete. Once these units are build, I use energy credits to upgrade them to their combat configurations. If I have Shard weapons, upgrading to Chaos is barely more expensive than missile, which is the same as hand weapons, so my "typical" late mid game defensive garrison unit is 8-8-1 Trance AAA. That way, the unit has a good choice whether to defend directly, or by attacking the invading unit. With Mag tubes connecting my cities, I build a few SAM/AAA rovers or hovertanks, so I can use them as mobile anti-air units, since the vast majority of my air units are used offensively. My standard offensive weapon is max-max-4 elite hovertanks, with deep radar and cloaked, amphibious or drop as the second enhancement choice, depending on the game. I usually build some of each type, but the mix depends on my needs. All my offensive weapons use deep radar as their first special ability. I also max out armor on helos and needlejets.
jimmytrick	posted 06-20-99 02:50 PM ET MtG, Sounds like survivability is your prime directive. Do you think such practices would work in, say, a PBEM when human opponents have equal tech to throw at you? If you are buying everything you must have already won the tech race, right?
MichaeltheGreat	posted 06-20-99 03:29 PM ET Lt Col. JT, sir: I buy everything for a couple of reasons - the biggest is the nature of my city development, which favors a large number of mid sized cities (less drone problems) and emphasizes energy production over resources. Against the AI I am way ahead in the tech race, and even against human players, I'm usually up there or ahead, but at the cost of manufacturing ability (less problems with planet, however) Against human players, in the early part of the game, they can't deliver much of a threat, so I just have my pathetic little scouts which take turns worm walking to make money and gain combat experience. I keep enough energy on hand to upgrade a few units to my best capability and always build the cheapest possible prototype of each tech I want to use, so if someone invades, the local scout infantry and scout rovers suddenly get some teeth. The rest of my energy is constantly used to rush tech improvements and econ improvements, and I pod hunt voraciously, and have a huge former fleet to crank everything I can out of the land - much easier to support with lots of mid sized cities. I've never had a PBEM or IP game last to the point where multiple players have orbital insertion/singularity/blah blah - by that point, it's like a knife fight in a New York alley, and normally conquest or cooperative political victory happens first. Survivability is one of my big issues, since SMAC war is really just resource trading - I look at cash and resources taken away against those lost. At some point in a game, I may not have the ability to conquer someone, since I've emphasized economy and research while he's built an army, but if I can put a half dozen tough units at strategic spots in an enemy's heartland, and start slaughtering formers and killing improvments, his development slows down with little cost to me - If I take a borehole out of production, that's 6 resources and 6 energy per turn, times enhancements, till the enemy gets the borehole rebuilt. Do that enough times, and the enemy's ability to build and support units and hurt you is severly compromised - he's trying to repair damage and get your units off his ass, and you're just building and getting more advanced and stronger for when the real war comes. The big problem in war before drop and orbital insertion is the time lost in getting units where I want them - the critical issue is not manufacturing, but logistics - only so many transports, and so many moves per turn, all vulnerable until they get on land, so I want quality mobile units that will survive for a while to do some damage.
Nell_Smith	posted 06-20-99 03:35 PM ET I usually try to stick at least some armour on offensive units, so that (a) they can act as temporary garrisons when you take an enemy base, and (b) they have some chance of surviving attacks while they're on the way to whatever it is they're trying to kill. I usually find that a 6-3-1 unit, say, survives much longer than a 6-1-1 and thereby justifies its extra cost. I only build offensive units without armour if I'm really pushed for resources and need offensive units in a real hurry. I also try to put at least half-decent weapons on garrison units, so that they have some chance of not just surviving attacks, but also of destroying the attacker. Nell
korn469	posted 06-20-99 06:43 PM ET personally in my opinion some of the best garrison units are 1-1-1 clean police units and 1-1-1 clean trance units. for one thing unless you have really good armor with AAA tracking these are by far thes best defenders against missles. the police units can control drones and they are quickly produced at new bases. these units are useful in multiplayer because the way production happens all human get their troops at the same time, so unless the attack for ce consists of more that one unit these can be used to hold off a on unit raid indefinatly. but besides those units here's my design philosophy. offenseive units. best weapon. special abilities are a combination of nerve gas, drop pods, antigrav struts, empath, ecm(especially on infantry), high morale, or deep radar. then after the special ability i add free armor. on air units i always give them deep radar and high morale (unless they are already being prouced at elite status)with fusion/quantum/singularity reactors often times you can get decent armor for free. defensive units. best armor. special abilities are a combination of AAA, trance, ECM, high morale, clean. then i add the best free weapon. since i think in most cases this is the weapon below their armor (if you have a units with 5 armor it can use impact weapons as it's gun and still cost the same) korn469