MOO2: Capturing Antaran Vessels; Ultimate weapon
P. Guenette
A very efficeint method of capturing Antaran ships is by use of assault
shuttles. Especially closer to the end of the game. If you have good
engines, then build a fairly large ship, put on a Sub-Space Teleporter, and
augmented engines if you need it. A time-Warp Facillitator also helps.
You should be able to get in behind the antaran ships before they get to
go. If you are right next to the backs of their ships, launch your
shuttles, and they will board the ship before the antarans attack. This
means that you have a very good chance of capturing ships (unless they
self-destruct). If your shuttles dont make it before the antarans turn,
they will be oblitterated by their pulsar.
Also, the BEST weapon in the game is the disrupter. It can give up to 500
damage per shot, with about 50 being able to fit on a Doom Star (as oposed
to maybe 2 Stellar Converters doing 400 damage):
n Heavy AutoFire Disrupters
Achilles Targeting Unit (bypasses armor)
High Energy Focus (+50% damage)
Structural Analyzer (*2 damage)
With a ship like this, and with a whole HELL of a lot of HyperAdvanced
Techs, I was almost able to destroy the entire Antaran homeworld with 1
cruiser! (Only thing left was a nearly destroyed Star Fortress. I could
do it if they didn't have their reflection sheields)
Also, anyone able to beat a high score of about 13700? (Impossible, +300%
score!)
Timo Pietila
P. Guenette <guen...@cadvision.com> wrote:
>A very efficeint method of capturing Antaran ships is by use of assault
>shuttles. Especially closer to the end of the game. If you have good
>engines, then build a fairly large ship, put on a Sub-Space Teleporter, and
>augmented engines if you need it. A time-Warp Facillitator also helps.
>You should be able to get in behind the antaran ships before they get to
>go. If you are right next to the backs of their ships, launch your
>shuttles, and they will board the ship before the antarans attack. This
>means that you have a very good chance of capturing ships (unless they
>self-destruct). If your shuttles dont make it before the antarans turn,
>they will be oblitterated by their pulsar.
Capturing antarans in later game:
2 death rays (No HV. with HV you could easily kill opponent)
5 tractor beams
<As many as you can fit> stasis fields
time warp
sub space teleporter
augmented engines
Just fly next to opponent and shoot it with death ray and board with one
marine. Use stasis fields to put rest of the fleet waiting to next
capture.
>Also, the BEST weapon in the game is the disrupter. It can give up to 500
>damage per shot, with about 50 being able to fit on a Doom Star (as oposed
>to maybe 2 Stellar Converters doing 400 damage):
Plasma cannon is better (look below).
>n Heavy AutoFire Disrupters
>Achilles Targeting Unit (bypasses armor)
>High Energy Focus (+50% damage)
>Structural Analyzer (*2 damage)
1 HV AF disrupter 1 HV plasma (much smaller than AF disrupter)
High Energy Focus x 1.5 High Energy Focus x 1.5
Structural Analyzer x 2 Structural Analyzer x 2
= 3 x 1.5 x 2 x 60 = 540 = 4 x 1.5 x 2 x 45 = 540
--
Timo Pietila
Email: tpie...@ratol.ratol.fi
or
Email: timo.p...@ratol.fi
Matt Wigdahl
Timo Pietila (tpie...@ratol.fi) wrote:
: P. Guenette <guen...@cadvision.com> wrote:
<snip>
: >Also, the BEST weapon in the game is the disrupter. It can give up to 500
: >damage per shot, with about 50 being able to fit on a Doom Star (as oposed
: >to maybe 2 Stellar Converters doing 400 damage):
: Plasma cannon is better (look below).
: >n Heavy AutoFire Disrupters
: >Achilles Targeting Unit (bypasses armor)
: >High Energy Focus (+50% damage)
: >Structural Analyzer (*2 damage)
: 1 HV AF disrupter 1 HV plasma (much smaller than AF disrupter)
: High Energy Focus x 1.5 High Energy Focus x 1.5
: Structural Analyzer x 2 Structural Analyzer x 2
: = 3 x 1.5 x 2 x 60 = 540 = 4 x 1.5 x 2 x 45 = 540
: --
: Timo Pietila
: Email: tpie...@ratol.ratol.fi
: or
: Email: timo.p...@ratol.fi
Doesn't the above calculation assume no blockage by shields? All 540 from
the disruptor will hit one shield -- the plasma will spread over all four.
Also, won't the plasma's damage get blocked at each shield facing? Of course,
the AF disruptor will get blocked on each pulse, too...
I use plasmas a lot myself, but they aren't without disadvantages.
Matt Wigdahl -- Athame Software
mwig...@sound.net
Jonathan Aitken
Vs Antarans is the post (or has this discussion got more general?) - only damper
to worry about (and reflector), no shields.
Jonathan
gut...@ix.netcom.com
Matt Wigdahl wrote:
>
> Timo Pietila (tpie...@ratol.fi) wrote:
> : P. Guenette <guen...@cadvision.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> : >Also, the BEST weapon in the game is the disrupter. It can give up to 500
> : >damage per shot, with about 50 being able to fit on a Doom Star (as oposed
> : >to maybe 2 Stellar Converters doing 400 damage):
>
> : Plasma cannon is better (look below).
>
> : >n Heavy AutoFire Disrupters
> : >Achilles Targeting Unit (bypasses armor)
> : >High Energy Focus (+50% damage)
> : >Structural Analyzer (*2 damage)
>
> : 1 HV AF disrupter 1 HV plasma (much smaller than AF disrupter)
> : High Energy Focus x 1.5 High Energy Focus x 1.5
> : Structural Analyzer x 2 Structural Analyzer x 2
>
> : = 3 x 1.5 x 2 x 60 = 540 = 4 x 1.5 x 2 x 45 = 540
>
> : --
> : Timo Pietila
> : Email: tpie...@ratol.ratol.fi
> : or
> : Email: timo.p...@ratol.fi
>
> the disruptor will hit one shield -- the plasma will spread over all four.
> Also, won't the plasma's damage get blocked at each shield facing? Of course,
> the AF disruptor will get blocked on each pulse, too...
>
> I use plasmas a lot myself, but they aren't without disadvantages.
Neither of you two guys are considering range dissipation. If I
remember correctly, the disruptor doesn't have any. It also depends
upos the enemies technology. I am currently playing a game where my
disruptor equiped ships consistently outperform my plasma cannon equiped
ships (they are the same exept for weapons loadout). This is however
the first time I have had a game last as long as this one has. Usually,
the advent of plasma cannons markes the death of the computer's races.
chuck
Alan Kohler
In article <330022...@ix.netcom.com>, gut...@ix.netcom.com says...
>
>Matt Wigdahl wrote:
>> : >Also, the BEST weapon in the game is the disrupter. It can give up to
500
>> : >damage per shot, with about 50 being able to fit on a Doom Star (as
oposed
>> : >to maybe 2 Stellar Converters doing 400 damage):
>>
>> : Plasma cannon is better (look below).
>>
>> : >n Heavy AutoFire Disrupters
>> : >Achilles Targeting Unit (bypasses armor)
>> : >High Energy Focus (+50% damage)
>> : >Structural Analyzer (*2 damage)
>>
>> : 1 HV AF disrupter 1 HV plasma (much smaller than AF
disrupter)
>> : High Energy Focus x 1.5 High Energy Focus x 1.5
>> : Structural Analyzer x 2 Structural Analyzer x 2
>>
>> : = 3 x 1.5 x 2 x 60 = 540 = 4 x 1.5 x 2 x 45 = 540
>> Doesn't the above calculation assume no blockage by shields? All 540 from
>> the disruptor will hit one shield -- the plasma will spread over all four.
>> Also, won't the plasma's damage get blocked at each shield facing? Of
course,
>> the AF disruptor will get blocked on each pulse, too...
>>
>> I use plasmas a lot myself, but they aren't without disadvantages.
>
>Neither of you two guys are considering range dissipation. If I
>remember correctly, the disruptor doesn't have any. It also depends
>upos the enemies technology. I am currently playing a game where my
>disruptor equiped ships consistently outperform my plasma cannon equiped
>ships (they are the same exept for weapons loadout). This is however
>the first time I have had a game last as long as this one has. Usually,
>the advent of plasma cannons markes the death of the computer's races.
Plasmas DO have range dissipation penalty, disruptors have none, plus plasmas
have to chew on 4 shields vice (usually) one. However, after minaturization,
I think that being able to fit more plasmas in the same space make them a
better anti-ship weapon to mount. If I have both tech available at high
enough level to have autofire disruptors, I'll usually mount plasmas as a main
weapon and about 1/2 as many AF disruptors for a little extra long range punch
and against planets with barrier or flux shields (which plasmas have more
problems with - NO, I DO NOT USE BOMBS AT HIGH TECH LEVELS - THEY'RE A WASTE
OF SPACE).
--
* DO NOT AUTO REPLY TO THIS POST - MY REPLY TO LINE IS IN ANTI-SPAM MODE *
Alan D Kohler
hwk...@poky.srv.net
"Villains, I say to you now, knock off all that evil!" - the Tick
The Searcher of Knowledge
I like Gauss Cannons myself.. my new found strategy of researching only 4
techs until they are maxed (shields, construction, biology, chemistry)
works great with it. :)
*Um don't send spam here either lest your account be deleted in a most
untimely fashion*
y
--
==============================================================================
Jesus Saves!!!! But Gretsky recovers.. he shoots.. he SCORES!!!!!!!!
==============================================================================
Timo Pietila
>> : >Also, the BEST weapon in the game is the disrupter. It can give up to 500
>>
>> : Plasma cannon is better (look below).
>>
>> : >n Heavy AutoFire Disrupters
>> : >Achilles Targeting Unit (bypasses armor)
>> : >High Energy Focus (+50% damage)
>> : >Structural Analyzer (*2 damage)
>>
>> : 1 HV AF disrupter 1 HV plasma (much smaller than AF disrupter)
>> : High Energy Focus x 1.5 High Energy Focus x 1.5
>> : Structural Analyzer x 2 Structural Analyzer x 2
>>
>> : = 3 x 1.5 x 2 x 60 = 540 = 4 x 1.5 x 2 x 45 = 540
>>
>> Doesn't the above calculation assume no blockage by shields? All 540 from
>> the disruptor will hit one shield -- the plasma will spread over all four.
>> Also, won't the plasma's damage get blocked at each shield facing? Of course,
>> the AF disruptor will get blocked on each pulse, too...
>Neither of you two guys are considering range dissipation. If I
>remember correctly, the disruptor doesn't have any. It also depends
Correct.
>upos the enemies technology. I am currently playing a game where my
>disruptor equiped ships consistently outperform my plasma cannon equiped
>ships (they are the same exept for weapons loadout). This is however
It depends of your strategy. In bigger ships you can fit enough plasmas
that this 'four shield blockade' is minor problem (range dissipation still
exist). You can fit more plasmas than disruptors in any ship but there
have to be enough space to those weapons that odds turn in plasmas favor.
If you are using small ships that cannot be equipped with heavy amount of
plasmas then it is better to use disruptors. In addition to that small
ships are not in front line in battle screen so no dissipation gets even
more important. My favor strategy is to fit one or two death rays in every
plasma cannon ship to make hole in opponents shields and to destroy ground
defences.
Robert Schneider
Bunches of little weapons are useful against computer players, but against
the Antareans with their Reflection Shields it sucks. In one game, I
attacked Antares with seven Doomstars. Each one was equiped with 76 heavy
mount, continuous, shield piercing, auto fire, etc. phasors. I had
earlier whipped
the Silicoids' 33 battleship attack fleet easily. But against the
Antareans every 1000 points damage resulted in 1500 points damage against
my own ship until late in the combat. The good about Stellar Converters
is that they can't be reflected which is a good reason to consider using
them in the nose bleed tech levels.
Rob Funk
In article <ademonE5...@netcom.com>, ade...@netcom.com says...
>==============================================================================
>Jesus Saves!!!! But Gretsky recovers.. he shoots.. he SCORES!!!!!!!!
>==============================================================================
That is Gretzky with a Z.
--
Rob Funk
Email to: rf...@his.com
http://www.his.com/~rfunk/index.html
Roger Books
Robert Schneider (pho...@engrs.unl.edu) wrote:
: Bunches of little weapons are useful against computer players, but against
You know, I really wonder about the published damages. I thought it
said an SC does 400 points damage, however, when I shot a Starbase with
one the little damage numbers said 1700+, and this was after shields.
I normally wouldn't have built SC but I was going for the 2 turn win
when my opponent had 10 systems. To each system I sent a Plasma-TT
and a max defense Converter TT. Of course, I chuckled evilly to myself
every time I destroyed a planet. All 10 fleets arrived the same turn
of course. I just wish I could of had a fleet sent to each planet, but
the game doesn't work that way.
All fleets 1 turn away from the Meklars worlds, I declared war. The
Meklars welcomed war with me.
Roger
Ian
bo...@no.spam.here (Roger Books) wrote:
>You know, I really wonder about the published damages. I thought it
>said an SC does 400 points damage, however, when I shot a Starbase with
>one the little damage numbers said 1700+, and this was after shields.
It is enveloping - 400 points of damage against EACH shield (there are 4
shields).
Brian Trosko
Ian <iadm...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
: >said an SC does 400 points damage, however, when I shot a Starbase with
: >one the little damage numbers said 1700+, and this was after shields.
: It is enveloping - 400 points of damage against EACH shield (there are 4
: shields).
Which adds up to 1600 damage, so your answer still doesn't solve the
discrepancy.
Jonathan Aitken
There are lots of ways a weapons base damage can be increased - crew experience
(I think), high energy focus (X1.5), structural analyzer (x2 after shields),
leaders abilities (+ x points base damage) etc etc. I'm guessing the person
using it had a least one of these operating - probably HEF.
J. Aitken
Ed Eichendorf
In article <5e2a19$b...@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>, Brian Trosko <btr...@primenet.com> wrote:
>Ian <iadm...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>
>: >said an SC does 400 points damage, however, when I shot a Starbase with
>: >one the little damage numbers said 1700+, and this was after shields.
>
>: It is enveloping - 400 points of damage against EACH shield (there are 4
>: shields).
>
>Which adds up to 1600 damage, so your answer still doesn't solve the
>discrepancy.
What other equipment was on the ship? High energy focus? Moleculatronic
Computer? IIRC the damage from a SC is 1760 points which would be a 10%
increase.
--- --- ---
Ed Eichendorf ...drawn up between the Ambassadors from Plutonia and
ik...@i1.net Desdinova, the foreign minister. These treaties founded a
secret science from the stars. Astronomy. The career of evil.
Paul Schaaf
I've had SC do over 3000 damage before. I assume maybe it uses the beam
mods even though it's a special.
---------
Paul Schaaf
sch...@u.washington.edu
On 13 Feb 1997, Roger Books wrote:
> Robert Schneider (pho...@engrs.unl.edu) wrote:
> : Bunches of little weapons are useful against computer players, but against
> : the Antareans with their Reflection Shields it sucks. In one game, I
> : attacked Antares with seven Doomstars. Each one was equiped with 76 heavy
> : mount, continuous, shield piercing, auto fire, etc. phasors. I had
> : earlier whipped
> : the Silicoids' 33 battleship attack fleet easily. But against the
> : Antareans every 1000 points damage resulted in 1500 points damage against
> : my own ship until late in the combat. The good about Stellar Converters
> : is that they can't be reflected which is a good reason to consider using
> : them in the nose bleed tech levels.
>
> You know, I really wonder about the published damages. I thought it
> said an SC does 400 points damage, however, when I shot a Starbase with
> one the little damage numbers said 1700+, and this was after shields.
>
Jonathan Aitken
Two heavy death rays and a transporter are a bit smaller (400 vs 500 at early
stages) and available earlier if you want it, and you get the satisfaction of
getting some of their ships as well. SC does seems to use weapons multipliers
(as it should - its just a huge plasma cannon, although targeting specific
systems/structures does seem a bit redundant if it can crack planets). I think
SC should get reflected for consistencies sake - I cant see why it shouldnt if
the ship survives (I'm sure lots of reasons could be made up to explain it,
but....).
Jonathan
Imaginactra
nos...@dummy.com.au (Jonathan Aitken) gabbed:
>Two heavy death rays and a transporter are a bit smaller (400 vs 500 at early
>stages) and available earlier if you want it, and you get the satisfaction of
>getting some of their ships as well. SC does seems to use weapons multipliers
>(as it should - its just a huge plasma cannon, although targeting specific
>systems/structures does seem a bit redundant if it can crack planets). I think
>SC should get reflected for consistencies sake - I cant see why it shouldnt if
>the ship survives (I'm sure lots of reasons could be made up to explain it,
>but....).
>Jonathan
Actually, the SC's are enhanced by some of the multipliers. I
experimented with some of them, and did find that structural analysers
and leader bonuses add to their damage.
I do believe the reason they are not reflected is the nature of the
hit. It is an enveloping implosion that does not actually hit the ship
with the beam itself, unlike the plasma cannons, which hit, then
envelope by sort of "flowing" around their target. The animation
showing the drilling effect is sort of a "second mode" the weapon can
be used in.
Jonathan Aitken
The book specificaly states that its basically a giant PC. I already said that
it does seem to receive bonuses. As I said you can make up a reason to explain
why it shoudnt get reflected (as you have), but theres no real reason why it
should be the exception.
I've also been looking at HV, AF, SP phasors recently with Achilles targeting -
v. interesting at high tech levels. Goes straight thru shields and armour
directly to structure and systems etc.
Jonathan
Thomas M. Holsinger
nos...@dummy.com.au (Jonathan Aitken) wrote:
>The book specificaly states that its basically a giant PC. I already said that
>it does seem to receive bonuses. As I said you can make up a reason to explain
>why it shoudnt get reflected (as you have), but theres no real reason why it
>should be the exception.
>I've also been looking at HV, AF, SP phasors recently with Achilles targeting -
>v. interesting at high tech levels. Goes straight thru shields and armour
>directly to structure and systems etc.
>Jonathan
What I've heard about version 1.3 indicates that phasors will be the
most effective weapons.