Yes, the dmg/size ratios and cost of subspace blaster seems to suggest it should be sloted after phasers but before disrupter. But you would have to lower the research cost as well.
What's your problem mistoffeles?
Any tech at level I and II is the new, unrefined, "primitive" version of the technology, III and higher are refined, improved, and eventually perfected technologies. It is no surprise to me that a lower-tech weapon with a high degree of refinement would be better than a higher-tech weapon in its infancy, but you need the I and II versions to get to the III and higher.
I notice you left out the ultimate beam weapon, the Doom Ray. How come? Not much to say about the ultimate weapons , they have clearly the highest DMG/SIze ratios for their class and show a big improvement from the next best weapon. But you need to consider the research effort needed, something dmg/size ratio does not take into account, so I
Nanorippers and other ethical based weapons are obviously way superior in terms of Dmg/space ratios but at high cost. Nanorippers has around 0.5 dmg/size ratios. Post 1.1 it has being toned down quite a bit. Generally, you need to reach graviton IV to match nanorippers in terms of dmg/space. This is a RP saving of 15,975-6475= 9,500 RP, if you are willing to pay the $$ cost of nanorippers. IMHO it's not that big an advantage particularly given that nanorippers
If you are interested for missiles Positronic torperdo is worse than quantum torperdos, for all sizes except if you are using Large/hull AND 115% miniaturization. So again, don't stop researching at positronic torpedo!
If you are interested for missiles Positronic torperdo is worse than quantum torperdos, for all sizes except if you are using Large/hull AND 115% miniaturization. So again, don't stop researching at positronic torpedo!
This follows the same style of analysis as https://forums.galciv2.com/?ForumID=346&AID=116303 Basically I compare weapons within the Mass driver line. Newer tech weapons should have higher Damage/size ratios, given that they cost more monetary speaking as well as the research points invested. I compared all the weapons across all hull sizes from tiny to huge , and at 3 arbitary miniturization sizes 0, 40% and 115%. Interestingly enough Quantum drivers I , II appe
Why not? given that lasers scale the most with hull size, intution might tell you that lasers rock for small,tiny hulls... But wait for the mass drivers results, it has some pretty interesting results ....
oops the comment of subspace blasters versus disrupters I and II is wrong. Subspace blasters are not strictly worse, because it cost only 60 (not 65) and is cheaper than all disrupters. Still not cheap enough though, if you ask me for the power downgrade.
In theory subspace blasters are cheaper.....
I was intending to do an analysis of beams vs missiles but I realized analysis is complicated by the fact that efficiency of defense needs to be taken into account as well, so I shelved the project because I hadn't gotten defense stats yet. Instead what I'm doing is to analyze beam weapons only. Premise 1: The relevant criteria for comparison between beam weapons is DMG/Size component. Because of the way the combat system wor
but i will say that my mind CAN be changed if you can show me an example of any species turning into something else. and i dont mean a red rose turning into a yellow rose but i mean a rose turning into a pine tree. untill you can, you can talk untill your blue in the face and toss all the ransom noise you want out about micro vrs macro and this and that but the proofs in t
pointing out that single lines of DNA code change at random out of literaly hundereds, thousands, millions (the more complex the higher) of lines of DNA code is your proof that evolution, natures master plan and the God slayer that its touted as being is based on? If you think evidence for evolution is merely restricted to the observation that
I guess we'll all be newbies again for a few days..... Not exactly, it just makes us rethink our ship building and attacking tactics, colony management remains exactly the same. I love it! It pretty much neuters the advantage of the attacker, which is good for the AI, because most of the time, the attacker in battles are the
Interesting, I did my own analysis on weapons ONLY. Even if that is the case (and nobody has a specific formula for it, so I can't test anything), The formula for mininuraziation is well known now ,it's just makes the hull bigger new hull size= (1+ bonus/100) * hull space. And the info about size scaling with hull is available in
NOW this is where you can get bit in the ass. say you have your 10 planets, PLUS your home world. now your homeworld has 15 billion people instead of the 10 billion the rest of your empire has. when you jump that slider to 60% instead of earth having a moral of 98% its got a moral of 90% (since their over crounding moral hit is larger than the rest of the empire). but the
I've being using the same strategy as jk for a while already.
Let me propose one strategy general rule, and let the rest of you take a crack at it. Make sure your economy can maintain a tax spending of 100%, with acceptable tax rates (approvals say >55%), while not being in the red (short visits are okay, as long as they dont go over 500bc). If you can't, it's time to do something about it quick. I find that, if you can manage this you should be on your way and you can implement any strategy you want to win. If you can't, you better
It's when you get those 30bil+ pop planets that it starts to get difficult to manage, I prefer to just never let that happen. I also prefer to keep approval as high as possible, to get the most out of every citizen, factory, or other asset except in the very beginning, when I am riding the razor's edge of revolt to get as many planets as I possibly can as quickly as possib
Noble that's similar to how i play. One farm. I think though there's a big difference between building approval buildings on purpose to maximise the 100% approval bonus and what the original post sugguest which is basically to use approval builidings for fear of low approval. If you can reach 100% approval with just one moral building, you probably have a high approval rate 75% or so anyway. If you need to build approval buildings to keep your planets from rebell
Deleted
One thing it's missing in the the guide is powerful population boom startegy. That means, keeping taxes low to get 100% approval and doubling growth rate, and using morale buildings as sort of growth and economy buildings. True, but that's a fairly narrow specific strategy. I think the main problem though is that the the piece can't make up its mind i
I regret all of this anti-American feeling around the world, especially in the Western Europe. How quickly people forget what we have done for them and what we are continuing doing for them. Only Britain is holding on to the old friendships. Thus they are the only country in Europe that I listen to. You listen only to people who agree with you?
Told you so. In my very first game I tried something like yours, with tons of social bonus and research without economy, the results weren't pretty, There's a reason why econ picks are so expensive you know.
