Arcen Games

General Category => AI War Classic => AI War Classic - Strategy Discussion => : corfe83 February 10, 2012, 06:24:53 PM

: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: corfe83 February 10, 2012, 06:24:53 PM
So I've played a lot of games on 7/7 difficulty, and never won any of them. I always feel like I need both more offense and more defense than what I have :-)

I'm curious - to those of you who have won - how much of your knowledge do you spend on defense, and how much on offense? I usually try to spend most of it on offense (Mk. 3 ships + starships + economic unlocks). Perhaps 75% offense, 25% defense (by defense I mean turrets, mines, shields, fortresses, etc.)

For those of you who have won, what do your unlock patterns look like? How much do you spend on offense vs. defense - do you try to unlock all the Mk. 3 ships available to you? Or do you unlock all the turrets? Or what portion in between?
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: chemical_art February 10, 2012, 06:31:21 PM
Before fallen spire, I would usually only get turret MK II due to their very small knowledge cost. Sometimes, now with their reduced cost, I can also justify spider turrets. However, with the exception of laser MK II's, I find myself rarely, if ever, getting turrets unless I use them also for offense in the form of fallen spire.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: corfe83 February 10, 2012, 06:38:19 PM
How many Mk. 3 ships do you typically get to unlock by end game?

I'm playing the vanilla game (no fallen spire, etc.).
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: HellishFiend February 10, 2012, 06:51:40 PM
Tell us a little more about how you customize the game. Do you have any plots or minor factions enabled? What flavor of AI? Number of planets?

In general, except for a few every-game unlocks, I spend my knowledge entirely based on my needs at the time.  Here are my every-game unlocks:

Engineers mkII and III
Scouts mk II and III
ForceField gen Mk II and Hardened Force Field gen mk I
Fortress mk I

Aside from that, all my unlocks are situational. If I'm facing exo-waves and/or planning a high AIP strategy, I unlock Military Command Stations, higher mk Fortresses, Turrets, Tractor Beams, etc, and then upgrade my mobile ships only as necessary to take the planets I want to take.

If I'm planning a low AIP strategy, I unlock my mobile ships and occasionally a starship here and there. I also upgrade my economic structures due to not having an abundance of planets harvesting resources, and unlock defensive structures only when I run out of cap on the starting structures.

One of the most entertaining things about this game is the fact that the techs you unlock are part of the "grand strategy" of the game, so I highly recommend just picking a few must-haves and then unlocking the rest based on your plan of action. I think its more fun that way.

A beginner approach would be to only unlock mk II tech in something if you are perpetually capped out of the mk I version, and only unlocking new mk I techs as you absolutely need them (decloaker, etc). Just let your knowledge accumulate until you find yourself saying "I wish I had ______", and then unlock it.  :)
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: chemical_art February 10, 2012, 07:04:20 PM
How many Mk. 3 ships do you typically get to unlock by end game?

I'm playing the vanilla game (no fallen spire, etc.).

I almost always get, at the very least, MK III's for fighters, bombers, and my bonus ship (which I always choose and love). Some ARS ships I'll also upgrade, but that depends on what I get, but usually at least one of the many ARS ships I get is MK III.

EDIT: When I first start the game, I can either make the case for econ stations or military stations. Both are good. On large AIP games (or games with multiple fronts and /or cloacking units) I make the case for military stations, otherwise I make the case for economic stations. After the first 6 are placed, it is a good time to upgrade them to the next level. Other then making a 2 to 3 upgrades in defenses, most of my points go to fleet ships, which make up my offense. I can make the case toward end game for MK III lasers and basics, as well as spider and missile turrets, and in a few select cases fortresses, but this is the most I can spend on defense without fallen spire. Even then, I only spend points on heavy beam cannons.

***Extra edit: I always, ALWAYS get gravity turrets, and at least 2 upgrades to shields over time.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Hearteater February 10, 2012, 07:07:16 PM
Gravity Turrets are an always unlock for me.  So are Spider Turrets, but I don't generally get them until a little later.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Wanderer February 10, 2012, 08:22:34 PM
Offense first, then defense.  I can use offense as defense until I spread out a lot further.  A few minor exceptions would be grav turrets and warp detectors.  Then I'll push the upgrades on the Selected ship and one or two of the triangles depending on enemy usage.  I might also pop open tachyon turrets if I needed to.  I'll also concentrate on Econ II/III early for heavy economy behind the whipping boy I eventually setup.  Another early open for me is Raid Starship II/III.

I'll keep upping my attack power until I'm comfortable that I've reached beyond where I can reasonably respond to, then build up the whipping boy.  I'll keep pushing my offenses, and open up fortresses when I look to K-Raid once or twice.

I'll keep that up until the whipping boy starts taking heavy firepower that I start getting nervous that they'll pop through.  At that point either I'll invest in Logistic IIIs to guard the outer doors against teleporters or start investing in Basic IIs, Spiders, and Laser IIs.  This will go slow.  My priority will be beefing up to III's to make sure whatever Fact IV's I pick up don't go to waste.

From there, I'll usually just sit on K for new ARS builds or reaction choices.  Sometimes I need more tractors, or FFs.  Sometimes I need more grav turrets for random systems, or perhaps I'm feeling I need stronger starship power.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Spikey00 February 10, 2012, 09:06:25 PM
I'm a "capture all the planets" type of guy.  Right from the start I get MK3 economy stations and start butchering nearby planets up to a few manageable chokepoints.  MK2 ships then get unlocked, then MK3 engineers for universal CTRL-group.  Mid-game leans a lot more toward defensive tech:  forcefields and turrets, then fortresses.  I've come to really love Spirecraft attritioners + gravity turrets--I stack all the attritioners on that planet, my entire fleet guarding another chokepoint, and turrets/forts divvy on the others until all warp gates but ones connected to the attrition planet are destroyed.  Then I focus on capturing all the golems and ARS, then use the golems for the rest of the game with the MK3 engineers.  Fleet takes a defensive role. 

This is exactly how I played in my very recent 7/7 game.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: zoutzakje February 10, 2012, 09:51:58 PM
gravity turrets are a must for me. Tractor turrets as well. usually they get mk II or sometimes even mk III. Basic might get mk II, but that's about it for the turrets. Forcefields get unlocked all the time, mostly all of them (even hardened), but never fortresses. I go for offensive the most... and logistics commands all the time.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Shrugging Khan February 10, 2012, 10:11:33 PM
ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK
Defence? ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK
Then a hardened force field, mkII or mkIII basic turrets, maybe some grav turrets.
Then ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK some more.

Seriously. Mobile ships can double as defensive units. Turrets can not double as offensive ones.
So I only unlock the cheapest of non-offensive units, and concentrate all remaining knowledge on Starships, Fleet Ships, my Bonus Ship, and whatever Support Ships best help to get my fleet in order.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Martyn van Buren February 10, 2012, 11:49:10 PM
Back to OP, what stage of the game are you having trouble with?  Early game, you might want to work on how you lay out the "trap" around your enemy wormholes --- for me, that means enough tractors to hold about 120% of a normal wave (some are going to get shot down) plus a mix of mostly normal/flak/laser turrets but backed up by a few longer-range turrets, hopefully placed to hit two or three wormholes.  Usually at least one row of mines as well.  I try to have enough that I can leave, say, half a cap of Mk I cruisers on FRD and have them mop up a standard wave with minimal losses.  With advanced warp sensors you can build traps only when you need them and move the defending fleet ships around to meet incoming waves.  Forcefield over the command center/wormhole toward your homeworld also helps a lot, with military command centers for especially tough world to defend.  I rarely unlock any defensive structures early game.

If your trouble is more mid-to-late game, you'll likely need some unlocks, but you might also want to look into how you manage where attacks are coming from too.  There is a *lot* of information here on the fora and on the Wiki about using gate raiding to set up "whipping boys," massively defended worlds that take the brunt of the AI's attack.   In many of my games I wind up building a core that only has one or two worlds bordering warp gates, funneling attacks into a fortress world with dozens of turrets, defending ships, martyrs (for emergencies), waves of mines, and sometimes two-three fortresses --- of course, you have to have decent luck with the map layout for this to work, and during CPAs the AI doesn't need warp gates to attack you. Then I'll leapfrog into the galaxy, creating some lightly-defended forward posts that I'm willing to replace occasionally.

In general, though, for defensive unlocks I follow a rule Keith posted some time ago --- focus on offense most of the time, and wait til you get in trouble with defense to unlock defensive units.  I find I most often unlock force field IIs or hardened force field Is (just for the extra cap when I have too many wormholes to defend), turret IIs, and spider and gravity turrets.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: corfe83 February 13, 2012, 12:49:53 PM
I'm playing with no plots or minor factions enabled. All expansions enabled, normal ship types. I'm mostly having trouble with the end game. Sounds like many folks have success with offense-as-defense, and so I suppose I'll continue to work with mostly unlocking offense, as I do now.

I've setup extreme whipping boys that can even protect against CPA's in the past (only one or two entrances to the rest of the galaxy), but made the mistake of leaving an un-neutered Mk3 world right outside my whipping boy (the main entrance to the rest of the galaxy), which really screwed me over one game as the AI continually reinforced it, and it was just about impossible to get past it or neuter it. This time I tried the "gate raiding" whipping boy strategy, but my network of planets is too spread out to effectively protect against a CPA or the huge flow of core ships that will stem from the AI homeworld's 2x core raid engine guard posts when I try to finish it :-P

Every game I play I learn something, and I'm getting better. I guess I just have to keep at it. Thanks for the replies, everyone.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Nodor February 13, 2012, 04:44:04 PM
Your unlocks need to be designed to fit your play style and strategy.  My first order of business is ALWAYS mark 3 of the ship I chose when I selected my homeworld.   (Under the assumption it is my best available fleet ship)

And then I figure out what type of AIs I am facing, how they will attack and what defenses/offensive tools I need.

For instance, against the Shield Ninny and Fortress Baron investing in defensive structures is not a great idea.   Vs. the Backdoor raider and the Vicious Raider you had better have some serious turret  and forcefield placements.

I'll purchase Military command stations Mk 3 to counter the Stealth Master, Economic Command 3 to feed Starship building, or none if I'm going with just fleet ships.

If you are failing in the later half of the game, then it's probably more to do with not being set-up on the map on a strategic basis for eliminating home worlds.   In my experience, attacking home worlds is when you are the most vulnerable - because all of your mobile defense is engaged on offense.   Limiting entry points clusters CPA's and makes threat harder to bleed (this is bad), but makes turrets and fortresses more efficient (this is good).    If you are a high AIP player, then you will have a bastion of worlds that can fall before the AI closes on your homeworld  With a Low AIP strategy, you can sniper the homeworlds before they have built up 1K + Mk 5 ships.   

What you need in these cases is different enough that there is no "right"answer to what to spend on.


: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Martyn van Buren February 20, 2012, 07:13:17 PM
By the way, what kind of AIP are you getting to late game?  I go for a fairly low-AIP strategy, first building a defensible core and then using a lot of deep-raiding and skipping low-value or hard-to-defend worlds outside of my core whenever possible.  I tend to wind up with a few two- or three-world chains around advanced factories and important junctions and a few isolated worlds with just an economic command and a space dock to use as staging grounds for assaults, skipping one or two hostile worlds in between, so I tend to be around 400 AIP when I take on the first AI homeworld.  I think this is the low end of the normal range but not ultra-low, and I think it gives you a bit more room for error and makes the game a bit easier if you're not super efficient at defense.

You can use transports and player warp gates (not sure if it's the right word, a structure that warps new units directly to another world with a 1-minute wait) to build fleets up quickly during homeworld assaults, but otherwise I tend to build new fleets at the front.  Generally, this strategy allows you to focus most of your defenses on your own core, leaving behind a few caps of low-mark ships as defenders; except for factories and fabs you can replace outposts pretty cheaply, so you can just leave most of them with a minimal battery of turrets and let them be overrun once in a while.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: zoutzakje February 21, 2012, 05:56:10 AM
I always end my games with very high AIP. I don't skip any enemy worlds. If I see a nice target 5 hops away from any one of my planets, I will take everything in between as well. I do this for defense purposes. I put logistics commands everywhere, which allows me to travel really fast, to anywhere in my empire, neutering and gate raiding nearly every bordering planet along the way. And placing gravity turrets and tractor turrets everywhere really slows enemy ships down even more. they'll have a hard time getting anywhere.
And if I manage to find a botnet in the galaxy or a dyson sphere early game, my defense is pretty much done for the rest of the game. Besides, I love high AIP when I have a botnet. Higher mark ships and more ships to turn into zombies.
I played a few games where I didn't rely on the botnet or dyson (not because I wanted to, but because I couldn't reach the dyson easily early game and there was no botnet in the galaxy -.-), and they were pretty tough. Still managed to win though, even with high AIP.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Shrugging Khan February 21, 2012, 08:58:03 AM
Yeah, that sounds similar to my way.
When I find a Dyson or Botnet, I go all-out and conquer all the worlds needed to connect my territories, then defended by roaming zombies/gatlings.
If I can't get either, then I rely on cheap, lightly-defended highway systems, entrenched high-value islands, a transport-borne fast response naval force, and leaving as many worlds as possible merely neutered for low AIP. Possibly with some high-mark, high-speed fleet ships patrolling along a line of redirector posts.

In that sense, a Dyson or Botnet find are probably the single most decisive factors for my strategic conduct. I never even noticed that until you brought up the issue, but I suppose it really is a big deal.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: zoutzakje February 21, 2012, 11:38:06 AM
indeed. Dyson or Botnet are my primairy target whenever I find one. ARS? Advanced Factory? Who cares, I want that Botnet. Only if a botnet is in a quite tricky position (like bordering a core world), then I might decide to leave it alone. Until I find the dyson sphere, in which case it doesn't matter anymore.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Martyn van Buren February 21, 2012, 03:08:13 PM
Wow, are Dysons really that powerful?  I haven't played as much since I bought the expansions, and I'd sort of seen a Dyson as equivalent to human resistance fighters, which are nice to have around but are hardly going to save you if you don't build defenses properly.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Wanderer February 21, 2012, 03:14:53 PM
Dysons are mostly excellent at freeing up fleet resources from having to patrol the open edges of your areas.  They are VERY powerful if they're condensed into a world or 2 (imagine having 150+ gatlings on your whipping boy, it's quite nice).  They constantly spawn (though I think there's a galaxy cap) so if you dilute them through the backfield they're helpful in stopping the one-off attackers.

I'd have to say going back to the original question the more I evaluate this the more I realize everything I do is offensively orientated.  If I end up doing defensive unlocks it usually means the game is going bad for me.  Even things I unlock that are defensive in nature I do for offensive reasons.  IE: I unlock fortresses primarily for K-Raiding.  Same with high end Basic Turrets.  Middle Basics usually get scattered around to protect from light raiding.

Heck, I unlocked the Military III station to ATTACK with it! :)

So, definately offensively based.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: keith.lamothe February 21, 2012, 03:25:44 PM
It would be fun to make offensive use of turrets/fortresses/etc more of a thing in the future, though there are not-all-bad reasons the old beachhead (not the AI plot, the tactic) style has largely faded.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Martyn van Buren February 21, 2012, 04:16:19 PM
Oh, has it?  I'm quite glad to hear that; I've been feeling guilty for never really figuring out how to make use of beachheads.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Wanderer February 21, 2012, 04:45:10 PM
Oh, has it?  I'm quite glad to hear that; I've been feeling guilty for never really figuring out how to make use of beachheads.

Yeah, by the time you've built a good beachhead you could have rebuilt your main fleet twice.  It's tough to not have your fleet in there ANYWAY to cover the build.  I really will only beachhead if there's a fortress that's being finicky or heavily protected somehow.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: TechSY730 February 21, 2012, 04:49:54 PM
Oh, has it?  I'm quite glad to hear that; I've been feeling guilty for never really figuring out how to make use of beachheads.

Yeah, by the time you've built a good beachhead you could have rebuilt your main fleet twice.  It's tough to not have your fleet in there ANYWAY to cover the build.  I really will only beachhead if there's a fortress that's being finicky or heavily protected somehow.

I'll beachead in only three cases.

1. There is something on that planet I want, but I don't want to take the planet over for whatever reason. Right now, the most prominent example of this is knowledge raiding in hostile territory, though there may be a few other cases.
2. If the planet is fortified enough that just sending a fleet in there would likely end in failure, but I still need to take it out and there is enough room to setup a beachhead to support an attack.
3. I have nuetered a planet but even the small amount of reinforcements from the AI home, if allowed to build up, would become a problem.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Wanderer February 21, 2012, 04:54:32 PM
Oh, has it?  I'm quite glad to hear that; I've been feeling guilty for never really figuring out how to make use of beachheads.

Yeah, by the time you've built a good beachhead you could have rebuilt your main fleet twice.  It's tough to not have your fleet in there ANYWAY to cover the build.  I really will only beachhead if there's a fortress that's being finicky or heavily protected somehow.

I'll beachead in only three cases.

1. There is something on that planet I want, but I don't want to take the planet over for whatever reason. Right now, the most prominent example of this is knowledge raiding in hostile territory, though there may be a few other cases.
2. If the planet is fortified enough that just sending a fleet in there would likely end in failure, but I still need to take it out and there is enough room to setup a beachhead to support an attack.
3. I have nuetered a planet but even the small amount of reinforcements from the AI home, if allowed to build up, would become a problem.

KRaiding I assumed was a whole different ball of wax. :)  But yes, if you call dropping a few fortresses onto a planet plus huge turret banks a beachhead then I'll agree with you.

What turrets do you use in attack support?  LRMs and Snipers I'd assume, just curious though.

I hadn't thought of leaving a beachhead behind as a deterrent to build up on the planet, though it's not a bad idea.  I use my snipers/spiders though on the whipping boy and to protect my systems a lot though, so I'm not sure if I'd want to leave turrets there.  Particularly since they would then send every other system connected to it into permanent alert status.

Though that might have value too, but turrets need supply, so you can only do that on systems hanging off one of your own.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: TechSY730 February 21, 2012, 05:13:23 PM
What turrets do you use in attack support?  LRMs and Snipers I'd assume, just curious though.

Well, those two certainly get special emphasis, though I usually build a few of the other stuff to help take care of the things that will inevitably get close to the beachhead.
Fortresses are a big plus, not only for their offensive firepower, but also their ability to repair the defending and/or attacking fleet. If I find myself beacheading a lot, I will also unlock mobile repair stations, due to their superior repair range.

I hadn't thought of leaving a beachhead behind as a deterrent to build up on the planet, though it's not a bad idea.  I use my snipers/spiders though on the whipping boy and to protect my systems a lot though, so I'm not sure if I'd want to leave turrets there.  Particularly since they would then send every other system connected to it into permanent alert status.

Though that might have value too, but turrets need supply, so you can only do that on systems hanging off one of your own.

Generally I will consider doing this for neutered but still high Mk. planets adjacent to my "non-whipping boy" planets (if letting them build up has proven to be an issue for that planet), or in-supply planets in the path to one of my distant outposts. (I like to setup outposts in the late game, near the AI homeworld, so I don't have to travel quite so far for the final assaults, but not have to burn a huge amount of AIP to clear a path there.)
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Shrugging Khan February 21, 2012, 05:20:40 PM
I used to beachhead all the time, but those times are over.

These days, I just go for the old "surgical blitzkrieg" doctrine. Accumulate forces on one end of the wormhole, send them through, take out priority targets, then either colonise the place straight away if I need it and clean up later, or retreat if I'm done. If the place is full of high-mark mobiles, then I spam cheap distraction units into it perpetually while my Raid Corps move around and blow up whatever needs blowing up.

The only exception are, naturally, K-Raids.

For clearing out rogue threat, I usually use redirector posts and patrol units. Since it's a low-priority task, I don't want to commit immobile assets to it.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: keith.lamothe February 21, 2012, 05:26:14 PM
I wonder if there were some inexpensive and fast (probably not free/certainly not instant) way to "redeploy" existing turrets rather than a full scrap and rebuild...

But even there, would there be a point with "modern" combat dynamics (specifically speed, range, and how fast stuff dies)?
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: TechSY730 February 21, 2012, 05:33:40 PM
I used to beachhead all the time, but those times are over.

These days, I just go for the old "surgical blitzkrieg" doctrine. Accumulate forces on one end of the wormhole, send them through, take out priority targets, then either colonise the place straight away if I need it and clean up later, or retreat if I'm done. If the place is full of high-mark mobiles, then I spam cheap distraction units into it perpetually while my Raid Corps move around and blow up whatever needs blowing up.

The only exception are, naturally, K-Raids.

For clearing out rogue threat, I usually use redirector posts and patrol units. Since it's a low-priority task, I don't want to commit immobile assets to it.

Agreed, "surgical blitzkrieg" is the default strategy with me, unless I have a big enough armada to "bulldoze", in which case, I bulldoze through the planet.
Offensive beacheading is usually saved for the exceptional circumstances, like I cannot afford to divert enough of my fleet for "surgical blitzkrieg", so an offensive beachhead is used to make the small ships I do use for it last longer.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Wanderer February 21, 2012, 05:49:41 PM
I wonder if there were some inexpensive and fast (probably not free/certainly not instant) way to "redeploy" existing turrets rather than a full scrap and rebuild...

But even there, would there be a point with "modern" combat dynamics (specifically speed, range, and how fast stuff dies)?

It depends.  I could see a case, particularly in homeworld attacks and the like, where using the main fleet as a covering force while establishing a full force beachhead could be useful, or sneaking them in the back door or something.  I can't see using it often but it'd be REALLY nice if I could just move everything I built for the K-Raid instead of having to rebuild it all over again and give my economy basically a wrecking for each world I K-Raid.  It'd also be neat for being able to reposition your whipping boy, or prebuild defenses to leave behind when you've captured a world.

Actually, I could see a LOT of value in being able to packup turrets and redeploy them.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Wanderer February 21, 2012, 06:03:11 PM
One other problem with beachheading is wormhole guardposts.  You have to build off the wormhole, out of range of those turrets, and that can be problematic.  If you can kill the wormhole guardposts you probably aren't looking at a significant enough threat to beachhead anyway.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: keith.lamothe February 21, 2012, 06:09:43 PM
One other problem with beachheading is wormhole guardposts.  You have to build off the wormhole, out of range of those turrets, and that can be problematic.  If you can kill the wormhole guardposts you probably aren't looking at a significant enough threat to beachhead anyway.
But why do you have to care about the wormhole guardposts?  Their dps is pretty negligible, right?
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Shrugging Khan February 21, 2012, 06:19:14 PM
Yeah. I usually just make my K-Raid-Post right on top of them. Being able to ship units back and forth safely through the wormhole is more valuable than distance from WHGPs, IMHO.

For redeploying turrets, I'd suggest using a swallower-type unit. If it's possible. Grab turrets, move the unit, drop turrets at desired location. To balance it, make that transport unit lose health with a speed proportional to the number (multiplied by mk level or energy need?) of the turrets inside it. That way, the unit can't just drag a full load of turrets into the AIHW; but it can still be used to move them from one world to another. Or just from one position within one world to some more tactically convenient location.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: keith.lamothe February 21, 2012, 06:48:35 PM
Yea, I was thinking of something like a "turret transport" that would put the turret back in the same relative position as when it "loaded" (it would need to be able to load from X distance away)
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: TechSY730 February 21, 2012, 07:34:09 PM
One other problem with beachheading is wormhole guardposts.  You have to build off the wormhole, out of range of those turrets, and that can be problematic.  If you can kill the wormhole guardposts you probably aren't looking at a significant enough threat to beachhead anyway.
But why do you have to care about the wormhole guardposts?  Their dps is pretty negligible, right?

Yes, but anything above 0 dps is enough to make something ineligible for repair or assist for a good chunk of time.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Martyn van Buren February 21, 2012, 07:39:50 PM
I'm very happy with turrets as is; it makes sense to me that there's a significant commitment to placing them.  And I like that placing them kind of commits you to a particular defensive line and slows down the game --- I feel like one of the big high-level challenges in AI War is overcoming the urge to get into trench warfare where the AI can just wear you down.  Adding features that make it easier to keep your momentum seems like it would kind of move something that really should be the player's responsibility to the game.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Wanderer February 21, 2012, 07:41:57 PM
One other problem with beachheading is wormhole guardposts.  You have to build off the wormhole, out of range of those turrets, and that can be problematic.  If you can kill the wormhole guardposts you probably aren't looking at a significant enough threat to beachhead anyway.
But why do you have to care about the wormhole guardposts?  Their dps is pretty negligible, right?

Because you can't heal something that's taking fire.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Shrugging Khan February 21, 2012, 08:43:34 PM
I never saw the point in healing anything during K-Raids. Either you have enough firepower to keep the zombies at bay, or you don't. Either you kill them where they pop up, or they will overrun your perimeter eventually. Why keep flimsy engineers around that will probably just get shot by Ion Cannons?

All you need is Riot Starship, and more Riot Starship.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Wanderer February 21, 2012, 08:52:32 PM
I never saw the point in healing anything during K-Raids. Either you have enough firepower to keep the zombies at bay, or you don't. Either you kill them where they pop up, or they will overrun your perimeter eventually. Why keep flimsy engineers around that will probably just get shot by Ion Cannons?

All you need is Riot Starship, and more Riot Starship.

Heh, anyplace I K-Raid is almost always fully neutered, so no Ion Cannons.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: TechSY730 February 21, 2012, 09:03:37 PM
I never saw the point in healing anything during K-Raids. Either you have enough firepower to keep the zombies at bay, or you don't. Either you kill them where they pop up, or they will overrun your perimeter eventually. Why keep flimsy engineers around that will probably just get shot by Ion Cannons?

All you need is Riot Starship, and more Riot Starship.

It's not quite that "it works or it doesn't", but admittedly the times where an offensive beachhead would be worth it are not all common.
Raid starships can get you far, but sometimes even their raiding awesomeness is not enough.

And I would only use the flismy, mobile engineers for the initial setup, with enough of an escort to "distract" the ion cannons.
Once I got that fortress or mobile repair station, the mobile engineers become mostly expendable.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Shrugging Khan February 21, 2012, 09:56:11 PM
For the 4000 Knowledge the MRS sets me back, I can get Raid SSs mkII! And Riot mkIIs! Or enough turrets to plaster my defensive lines with for all my roaming patrols to come join the Raid! And fortresses? Expensive! I'd rather just use my fleet, which I can move about and re-use; rather than to have to scrap it afterwards.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: TechSY730 February 21, 2012, 10:08:59 PM
For the 4000 Knowledge the MRS sets me back

Oh yea, I forgot about their now crazy cost.

I would suggest a reduction in that cost. Mantis?
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Hearteater February 21, 2012, 10:22:51 PM
MRS or the Mobile Builder?
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Shrugging Khan February 21, 2012, 10:35:29 PM
Nah, their cost is fine. If anything, I'd even increase it.

Or lower it, but reduce their power and add an mkII version with faster regeneration speed (or more HP/armour. Or cloaking. Or faster setup speed. Or anything, really.)

In any case, as is, their cost definitely shouldn't be lower; seeing as they present a very unique utility to the fleet, and a force multiplier well worth the 4000K.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: chemical_art February 22, 2012, 01:11:16 AM
I see no need to use mrs's since engineers can accomplish the same goal. Granted, not as effectively, but MRS's are certainly no force multiplyer.

Now if they could repair during combat...otherwise, I could never justify them when I could just use current engineers, or save the points to get MK III engineers, which are 5x more useful then MRS.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Wanderer February 22, 2012, 02:33:46 AM
Hmmm, Khan, you appear quite correct.  I've been overbuilding badly trying to be able to K-Raid AND move my fleet around at the same time.  Park your fleet almost on top of the Cmd Station and just let 'er rip.  Hrm.  Interesting.

A quickie FF for protection, a 15 stack of Engi IIs for long haul repairs, and a grav/tachyon (for me) to counter blades/Space Planes.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Shrugging Khan February 22, 2012, 07:27:00 AM
Well, I DO play without AIP over time, so maybe unlike you, I just have the luxury of dragging my fleet off to babysit the K-Raid-Station for half an hour.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: orzelek February 22, 2012, 09:44:59 AM
Mobile repair stations are cool with one setback (except for K cost) - if they get damaged you better build new one because damaged one will regen for next hour.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: TechSY730 February 22, 2012, 09:49:31 AM
Small suggestion for MRSs

Mantis #6064 "Reduce MRS Repair Cooldown after move" (http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=6064) (http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=6064)
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Hearteater February 22, 2012, 10:14:26 AM
I've found MRS to be very useful.  The are great when paired with reclamation, wonderful when using teleporting ships (you'll hear about this in my next AAR), and they repair so much faster than Engineers I can just fly a fleet ball past my MRS to heal it.  If I was going to tweak the MRS I wouldn't change its cost, but I would reduce their regen time to 20 minutes (from 60), give them either Missile Immunity or cloaking (which would turn off when they are actually repairing).  I'd be able to use them a lot more offensively with those tweaks.  I could see the 60 second cooldown getting reduced, but I wouldn't go shorter than 30 seconds.  45 seconds might be nice.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: TechSY730 February 22, 2012, 10:17:26 AM
Yea, I also agree with reducing their regen time. It shouldn't be fast, but 1:00:00 to go from 1 HP to full is a bit too slow.

EDIT: Also put up on Mantis. http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=6066
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Catma February 25, 2012, 07:24:52 PM
MRS costs 4k knowledge... fortress costs 3k. Using forts offensively is impossible, but using MRSs offensively is extremely difficult. If the other side of the wormhole is really hairy, the MRSs will die, or will not be ready to repair before the fight is over. In either case you could send injured units back to a fortress on your side of the wormhole for the same effect. The utility advantages on the side of the MRS are nearly unrealizable.

In K costs, MRS = fortress + engie 2. MRS + 3k = Fortress + engie 3. It's not even a close comparison. Even if I can't repair properly, the cost I have to pay is metal/crystal and/or game time. These are much less valuable than K, in most cases.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Kittens March 01, 2012, 03:42:07 AM
MRS really isn't worth 4k. I just don't need it, for anything. On offense, I micro some engineers and get the same result, except they're more mobile. On defense, I build a fortress, which costs 1k less to unlock and shoots things besides. Sure it costs a ton to build, but if you need the ability to repair a large number of ships at the same time, that usually coincides with a frontier world anyway.

I don't think I'd consider unlocking MRS for more than 1.5k. I'd unlock them at that price if I'm too low on resources to build fortresses or if fortresses wouldn't provide enough benefit.

: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: TechSY730 March 01, 2012, 10:43:24 AM
MRS really isn't worth 4k. I just don't need it, for anything. On offense, I micro some engineers and get the same result, except they're more mobile. On defense, I build a fortress, which costs 1k less to unlock and shoots things besides. Sure it costs a ton to build, but if you need the ability to repair a large number of ships at the same time, that usually coincides with a frontier world anyway.

I don't think I'd consider unlocking MRS for more than 1.5k. I'd unlock them at that price if I'm too low on resources to build fortresses or if fortresses wouldn't provide enough benefit.

Given that fortress Mk. I takes only 3k to unlock, I wouldn't mind making the MRS 3k to unlock as well. No lower than that though. Rather, the MRS should be buffed to the point where it is worth 3k knowledge.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Nodor March 03, 2012, 12:15:44 AM
Mobility has it's uses.  I tend to build choke points with fortresses and turrets and then have a substantial number of relatively undefended "soft targets" during expansion operations. - for instance, cleaning out a dead end.    Having the ability to haul a MRS to a planet that's "defended" by an economic command station mark 1 and drop it on the rally beacon so when I route all of my wave response ships to the system prior to launching them into the next "expansion target" so I don't have to think about healing them, has substantial value. 


Note, in this case, I am advocating buying Fortresses and Mobile Repair stations - and using them in different ways.  I also tend to think that for most games the fortress is less valuable (stationary target, high energy/build costs) than a mobile repair stations.   
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: Wanderer March 03, 2012, 08:41:51 PM
I'm forced to agree with the MRS utility not being worth the K.  For equivalent K price I could get Engi IIIs and have IIs to help with construction back home.  Engi IIIs will repair a fleet in roughly the same amount of time and don't care if they've moved lately.  Heck, I usually let my Engi IIIs do repairs while the fleet's in transit.
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: PokerChen March 06, 2012, 08:57:18 AM
Pretty sure I've said this before, but I would always unlock Eng IIIs for repair duty instead of MRSes. In addition, IMO there isn't enough knowledge going around to justify unlocking every repair vessel between Eng, Transport II, Fortresses and MRS.

Perhaps we could adapt MRS vessels to have low rate in-combat repair? *hehehe* This could be an additional unlock... :P
: Re: Knowledge Spending: Offense vs. Defense
: TechSY730 March 06, 2012, 09:36:37 AM
Previously, the main reason people got MRSs was for their mass, mobile repairing abilities. That proved to be rather broken. So it was removed.

IMO, the problem is that the MRS didn't really gain anything in return to keep its old utility value, and its costs were not reduced accordingly for this lost ability.