SAC 5

Discussion of current challenges, tournaments, and general discussion about anything relating to the online challenges part of GSB
thc
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:51 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby thc » Sat Sep 04, 2010 6:24 pm

Missiles: Scramblers make this untenable.


5-14 up. Pure missile spam. :p

Edit: Updated. Disregard the first one, I didn't use up all the credits :p
zGeneral
Type III Robot
Type III Robot
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 10:54 pm

Re: SAC 5

Postby zGeneral » Sat Sep 04, 2010 8:24 pm

SAC-5-15 IS UP

Update:
I have received many messages in game that SAC5 is getting stupid and brainless.
what I was trying to do is to make it impossible to break the 3 challenges chain. so if SAC-5-14 is an extreme case for ranged attack, SAC-5-15 is an extreme for close ramp attack. that was the idea behind it.

I think we have reached a dead lock now.
zGeneral
Type III Robot
Type III Robot
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 10:54 pm

Re: SAC 5

Postby zGeneral » Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:00 am

SAC-5-17 is UP
an updated version of 15
123stw
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:00 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby 123stw » Sun Sep 05, 2010 4:13 pm

18 UP

4614400

I am trying to be creative here.
thc
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:51 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby thc » Sun Sep 05, 2010 7:25 pm

19 posted. Fighterless missile spam.

STW, can't help but think your fleet would be a lot more dangerous if you could get those frigates and cruisers to attack at the same time

I think we have reached a dead lock now.


Not even close. It may not even be possible to create a true deadlock with just 3 fleets. :p

We could make this more challenging by pushing up the difficulty to depth 4 instead of 3, but that's mostly up to STW.
123stw
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:00 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby 123stw » Sun Sep 05, 2010 8:00 pm

thc wrote:19 posted. Fighterless missile spam.

STW, can't help but think your fleet would be a lot more dangerous if you could get those frigates and cruisers to attack at the same time

It has other problems depending on how I deploy it. Unless I use a strict escort it's fairly easy for the challenger to engage them at different time. Using escort will make the frigates useless since they can't have both escort and keep moving at the same time.

I think we have reached a dead lock now.


Not even close. It may not even be possible to create a true deadlock with just 3 fleets. :p

We could make this more challenging by pushing up the difficulty to depth 4 instead of 3, but that's mostly up to STW.

The whole point of depth 3 is to prevent deadlocks and increase activities. You know what happened to RCIX-SAC.
thc
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:51 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby thc » Sun Sep 05, 2010 8:16 pm

123stw wrote:It has other problems depending on how I deploy it. Unless I use a strict escort it's fairly easy for the challenger to engage them at different time. Using escort will make the frigates useless since they can't have both escort and keep moving at the same time.


You're just not being creative enough ;)

There is a way.
123stw
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:00 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby 123stw » Sun Sep 05, 2010 8:39 pm

Nope there isn't. Unless you mean everything having the same speed stacked together, which obviously won't work for other reasons. I might as well repost 8 if I do that.

Fairly easy to engage those 2 separately otherwise, since the challenger has full control of how much distance and at which corner they wish to engage in. Even fleet that has the same speed stacked to a single point can be broken apart with decoys. That's just the advantage the challenger has.

The only fleet that can't be engage separately are stationary stacked missile spams.
123stw
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:00 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby 123stw » Tue Sep 07, 2010 2:05 am

Now that stacking is fixed, everyone okay with it being banned from future SAC?
thc
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:51 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby thc » Tue Sep 07, 2010 2:07 am

Yep. Seconded.
123stw
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:00 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby 123stw » Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:23 am

Do you think we should post an unstacked version of 19 and 18? Or do you think we should let them get flush out naturally?
follick
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 276
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:43 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby follick » Tue Sep 07, 2010 7:23 am

I would suggest leaving challenges already posted but ban stacking for all future challenges.
123stw
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:00 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby 123stw » Tue Sep 07, 2010 8:54 pm

Lol I beat this with my order fleet but accidentally named it 6-20. Gonna repost it in a few minutes.

Edit: Fixed
thc
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:51 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby thc » Wed Sep 08, 2010 2:22 am

5-21 posted. Basically the same as the last SAC-6 :p
zGeneral
Type III Robot
Type III Robot
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 10:54 pm

Re: SAC 5

Postby zGeneral » Wed Sep 08, 2010 3:53 pm

22 is up
it is a better version of 6 and 21
sorry for copying it but I needed to get 19 of the way. it was so ugly and not fun
19 out of the way, no stacking as agreed ;-)

Return to “Challenges and Tournaments”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest