Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mini]

On another note, do anyone remember the precise effect of the atmosphere on beam weaponry?

I believe it is reduced linearly, with 0 atm being no reduction and 1 atm being 0 effect.

[Jacob/Lee]

Oh man, new games suck. I forgot how painful super crappy Magneto engine tech is.

Also, I'm organizing my Galactic Map a new way, this guy knows how it's done.

[Ehndras]

How would one reorganize their galactic map? Mine's so god damn confusing.

[Jacob/Lee]

How would one reorganize their galactic map? Mine's so god damn confusing.

Do you mean how you reorganize it, or yours is so badly laid out it is painful to look at?

Also, bah, my damn useless scientists. I have 15 of these guys in Missiles and Kinetic Weapons and Energy Weapons field but 1 in Construction and Production and 2 in Logistics. I have none in genetics and defensive systems, jeez. We aren't even fighting yet.

[Areyar]

@ organizing systems on the galacticmap:

I tried to organize them so that
-jumpoint connections were in the general direction they are in the system map, also tried to
-honorate the time taken for travel between systems.
-(and ownership as well)
systems tend to form branching chains with anm occasional loop back (due to how connections and new systems are formed), those loopbacks play havoc with your carefully laid out galactic map even if they provide handy shortcuts. Unfortunately, they need to be long connections in order to lay out the systems crammed in between.

Hub/node systems get more space than deadends or connection systems as they need the space to lay out those connections in an orderly fashion.

[Duuvian]

How would one reorganize their galactic map? Mine's so god damn confusing.

Do you mean how you reorganize it, or yours is so badly laid out it is painful to look at?

Also, bah, my damn useless scientists. I have 15 of these guys in Missiles and Kinetic Weapons and Energy Weapons field but 1 in Construction and Production and 2 in Logistics. I have none in genetics and defensive systems, jeez. We aren't even fighting yet.

Hehe, scientists. They all want to be marine biologists. (I feel this joke doesn't make sense to anyone but me. Basically the joke is that you have too many scientists doing what they want and not what you need.) Joke = explained too much = not funny

EDIT: Don't you edit your post now, guy after me, people in the future need to understand what happened here lest they make the same mistake.

[Felius]

How would one reorganize their galactic map? Mine's so god damn confusing.

Do you mean how you reorganize it, or yours is so badly laid out it is painful to look at?

Also, bah, my damn useless scientists. I have 15 of these guys in Missiles and Kinetic Weapons and Energy Weapons field but 1 in Construction and Production and 2 in Logistics. I have none in genetics and defensive systems, jeez. We aren't even fighting yet.

Hehe, scientists. They all want to be marine biologists. (also that strange aurora/antique scientist joke has no useful purpose)

That's why one of the first things I did was build up to 10 academies. At 50 officers per year I don't get any real shortage of scientists after a few years of build up.

[The Scout]

Would a size 100 missile do alot of damage? Might throw one of them on every ship.
What's the best long range weapon other then missiles?

[tompliss]

a size 100 missile would be heavy => need much agility and engines to ba able to hit => not THAT much warhead.
Plus, it would be only ONE missile to get down, for your oponent => easier than 20 size 5 missiles...

So that's not such a good idea...

For long range, the best thing is a MIRV, with drone engine on the first missile, with classic missiles inside.

[The Scout]

other then missiles?

You seemed to have missed that.

[Azkul]

What's the best long range weapon other then missiles?

Particle beam

[tompliss]

Particle beam

It's not THAT clear :
Lasers have longer range, but damage decreasing with it. Particle beams have fixed damage => better damage at full range (which is half, or 3/4 of laser's, IIRC).
given the big difference of damages, particles beams should be better in most cases (as doing 2 damages to an armored ship with a hyper-heavy laser is pointless), but they can't be used in point defence, so laser can be a better tech investment.

[forsaken1111]

IIRC Railguns can do more damage overall than lasers as the fire 4 times

[Smitehappy]

IIRC Railguns can do more damage overall than lasers as the fire 4 times

Yeah but while the total damage for comparative laser tech is one-third higher it's divided up into 4 separate shots, meaning it has a harder time penetrating armor. Railguns also have a shorter range than lasers but I think they make up for this by using less power. Don't hold me to that though

Also does anyone know have to spend research points? I wanted to select my starting tech on my new game but I can't for the life of me figure out how to spend them.

[Felius]

IIRC Railguns can do more damage overall than lasers as the fire 4 times

Yeah but while the total damage for comparative laser tech is one-third higher it's divided up into 4 separate shots, meaning it has a harder time penetrating armor. Railguns also have a shorter range than lasers but I think they make up for this by using less power. Don't hold me to that though

Also does anyone know have to spend research points? I wanted to select my starting tech on my new game but I can't for the life of me figure out how to spend them.

Turn space master on and give yourself the tech. The research points will reduce by the respective amount. There's also nothing stopping you from expending more. It's more of a mild suggestion to facilitate book keeping than a hard rule.