|  | 
| 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    
    
 |  | 
 
 
	
		|  |  |  
	
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				May 7th, 2001, 11:33 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Captain |  | 
					Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Dallas, Texas 
						Posts: 817
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Ramming/Kamakazi tactics 
 Here is an idea for you;Since the drone pictures are not being used. I added a new ship to the ship construction. I called it ram ship and set the requirements to be computer core and armor. I have not finished tested them yet since I just got done setting them up.
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				May 8th, 2001, 01:45 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 Sergeant |  | 
					Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Miami, FL U.S.A. 
						Posts: 290
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Ramming/Kamakazi tactics 
 FYI, if you ram and both ships survive, then both ships will occupy the same "square", not really that important but an interesting side note...  as this means the restriction that ships can't occupy the same "square" is imposed rather than an integral part of the hardcode. |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				May 8th, 2001, 01:58 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 General |  | 
					Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA 
						Posts: 3,070
					 Thanks: 13 
		
			
				Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Ramming/Kamakazi tactics 
 In one of my current games, back when I was losing 2-3 technologically inferior destroyers for every enemy light cruiser I was crippling, I designed a suicide escort with nothing but the requied control sections, engines, and a Cobalt Warhead. I didn't think that design would survive to close with its target, so I tried adding armor and point defense to a frigate Version. The frigate would have cost more than my front line LCs, and the destroyer Version that added another weapon was more expensive than my first cruiser design! Obviously, I never actually built any of these. By the time I'd researched fighters, my casualties were more managable, so I haven't tried a kamikaze design for them yet. 
 ------------------
 Cap'n Q
 
				__________________Cap'n Q
 
 "Good morning, Pooh Bear," said Eeyore gloomily. "If it is a good morning," he said. "Which I doubt," said he.
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				May 8th, 2001, 04:52 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 Sergeant |  | 
					Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Richmond, VA 
						Posts: 274
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Ramming/Kamakazi tactics 
 Sounds like the kamakazi and ramming rules need some work.  I hope MM is listening.
 In a perfect game, all available technologies should have viable strategies...
 
 Ken
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				December 15th, 2001, 03:12 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Colonel |  | 
					Join Date: Jan 2001 
						Posts: 1,661
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Ramming/Kamakazi tactics 
 IMO ramming is a valuable strategy. Another topic is the cobalt warhead. In my experience if you use the cobalt warhed on a ramming ship both ship get destroyed. I am not sure if that's always the case, more testing would be needed. But I think the high cost of the cobalt warhead makes this not a very attractive weapon. You probably get a better deal with a lot of armor on a ramming ship. |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				December 15th, 2001, 03:50 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 Second Lieutenant |  | 
					Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Australia 
						Posts: 409
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Ramming/Kamakazi tactics 
 quote:my experience if you use the cobalt warhed on a ramming ship both ship get destroyed.
 
 
Nope. That's not always the case. 
 
I've been doing some testing yesterday and my conclusion is that ramming ships are just too expensive. Same goes to the fighters - a large fighter with 2 kamakazi warheads will cost you around 650 minerals depending on your design, and it did only 18 damage each! How many will you need to take out a line Barium class DN of mine with 3000 shields?
 
Edit: Just did a ramming test with my line coloniser and it did only 186 damage, destroying itself in the process. That's hardly a dent in my DN's shield!
 
[ 15 December 2001: Message edited by: CW ]
				__________________A propeller is just a big fan in front of the plane designed to keep the pilot cool. Want prove? Stop the prop and watch the pilot break out in a heavy sweat!
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				December 15th, 2001, 05:47 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 General |  | 
					Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Ohio, USA 
						Posts: 4,323
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Ramming/Kamakazi tactics 
 quote:Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
 My idea was to make long-range "smart" missiles out of fighters; make a 1 KT size and a component that flies and rams. But it never did even a half of the rated damage- though I *was* only testing it against shields..
 
 Phoenix-D
 
 
This is using a fighter as a substitute drone.      Drones use ramming as their main form of attack. They are essentially cruise missiles. Once you have drones I think you'll not bother with kamikaze ships or fighters. 
 
But remember, the percentage of damage caused by ramming, to both the target and the rammer, is settable in SETTINGS.TXT like so many other things. I've set my ramming damages VERY high (300 percent for both) because realistically you should not expect to survive collison at the speeds represented in space combat. This makes ramming very effective, but also invariably fatal unless there is a HUGE size difference between the ships involved. It does make drones more powerful, though.    |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				December 15th, 2001, 08:01 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Captain |  | 
					Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Oh, I\'m out there 
						Posts: 805
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Ramming/Kamakazi tactics 
 Wow, I didn't know you could change the ramming values.  Thanks for the info. |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				December 15th, 2001, 08:22 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 National Security Advisor |  | 
					Join Date: Nov 2000 
						Posts: 5,085
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Ramming/Kamakazi tactics 
 Well, the problem I had with ramming is the warheads never did anything, i.e. the ship without the warhead did as much damage ramming as the ship WITH the warhead.
 Phoenix-D
 
				__________________ 
				Phoenix-D
 
I am not senile. I just talk to myself because the rest of you don't provide adequate conversation. 
-Digger |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				December 15th, 2001, 09:15 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Colonel |  | 
					Join Date: Jan 2001 
						Posts: 1,661
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Ramming/Kamakazi tactics 
 In my experience the cobalt warheads work. If you put several Typ III on a ship you can do quite a lot of damage! But I always lost the attacking ship even if its destruction potential (of the cobalt warheads) was greater than the target. And the cost of the cobalt warheads is too high. I reduced it to 100 minerals and 200-400 radioactives for level I-III. |  
	
		
	
	
	
	
	
	
	| 
	|  Posting Rules |  
	| 
		
		You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts 
 HTML code is On 
 |  |  |  |  |