I Did It.

[Fyron]

My statement was never meant to include a situation in which the defender has more defense than the attacker can ever under any circumstances breach. It was never meant to include a situation in which the defender has 12 CI 3 projects running. That is a very special and specific circumstance that is irrelevant to my general statement.

Massing your intel points is not meant to be more effective at getting the same number of projects through in the same amount of time. That is never what I said it was for. It is for breaching a high level of stored CI points all at once. If their CI projects are nearly maxed out (which always happens in games where both sides get some intel and there is a peaceful build-up), then spending X each turn on attacks can be blocked with Y CI production each turn, where Y is the equivalent to X in defense points. If you instead hold your attacks until a lot of projects are ready to complete at once, then you can get a larger multiple of X (C*X) all at once, which will not be canceled that turn by Y, and so a lot of stored CI points can be defeated in that turn. If C*X is large enough, you can get projects through in that turn. You will not be able to get them through in the next turn, because you can only get X attack points in, and they can still make Y defense points. So, you can get nothing to succeed by spending X each turn, or you can get some projects to succeed by massing C*X points into attacks and have them all finish at once.

If the defender has enough intel production to fill a few CI projects each turn, then of course nothing will ever be able to get through. I was never talking about such a situation.

[Phoenix-D]

Fyron, that's a special case in and off itself. In regular SE4, the largest project you'd want to use is 100k. CI3 holds 500k, so even ignoring all the bonus you need 5 of them to beat it. He can stop your massed attacks with just three CI projects and have points left over to smash a few more projects from other empires. Meanwhile, you have NO CI defense.

Even using the 150k project doesn't help that much. You can put a max of 1800k into a one-turn attack; that needs four CI3 to counter, nowhere near the max he could have.

In a mod, yes the CI points storeable would have to be raised if the cost of intel was raised, or this would work.

Phoenix-D

[Fyron]

It is not a special case, it is the general case. It applies to most game situations that are not the end-game.

[spoon]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
If you instead hold your attacks until a lot of projects are ready to complete at once, then you can get a larger multiple of X (C*X) all at once, which will not be canceled that turn by Y

But Y increases each turn by the same amount. If you take an extra 10 turns to launch your simultaneous attacks, then your opponent has an extra 10 turns of CI stored up.

[Fyron]

No, Y is constant. It is their production per turn, not their total storage. And, I quite cleary stated that their CI projects were nearly full. There would be no room for storing more. This is under the assumption that it is an intel war, and they are launching attacks on you too.

[ April 09, 2003, 01:37: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[Phoenix-D]

And, I quite cleary stated that their CI projects were nearly full."

And I quite clearly provided a rebuttel to that. Care to explain why you think its wrong?

[Desdinova]

fyron, in your statement are you assuming that the ci project is near to completion and by the time the enemy's intel attack occurs the ci will have completed and thus they will be starting over on accumulating points. if this is the case then you are correct a massive attack will breach where several smaller ones will not. if both atk and ci projects start at the same time and would complete at the same time then it would not make any difference. in the 2nd case then phoenix-d is correct. if i figured out the intel project correctly from the intel ideas thread and also that x and y are the same amounts.

[ April 09, 2003, 01:59: Message edited by: desdinova ]