SAC 5

Discussion of current challenges, tournaments, and general discussion about anything relating to the online challenges part of GSB
123stw
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:00 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby 123stw » Wed Sep 08, 2010 9:01 pm

23 up. Swarm Mixed Rush. Easily beats 19-22.

Updated so fighters shoot at cruisers. Don't know what I was thinking setting them to shoot at fighters in a rush build, when the battle will end before the dogfight ends.
thc
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:51 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby thc » Thu Sep 09, 2010 2:01 am

24 posted. Anti-rush rad spam. I couldn't get it to perform decently against missiles, so I didn't even try. Butttt I think 23 gives it enough missile protection, anyway ;)
arakis99
Line Supervisor
Line Supervisor
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:39 pm

Re: SAC 5

Postby arakis99 » Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:44 pm

SAC 25 Order Radiation Damage anti rush that smashed rushes and counters other anti rushes well. However, this fleet should be *very* vulnerable to counters. Have fun.

4614821
123stw
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:00 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby 123stw » Fri Sep 10, 2010 1:58 am

26 up.

Yes it's swarm frigates again, but no stacking this time.
thc
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:51 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby thc » Fri Sep 10, 2010 6:04 am

Arakis, if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it at all. There's no point in spamming my inbox with asinine and belligerent messages, just because you're upset about stacked missile spam, which was EXPLICITLY allowed by the rules of this tournament before 1.47. In actuality, I was one of the biggest proponents for banning stacking in SAC, but of course, I was out-voted. But since it was in actuality allowed by the rules, I made it clear that I'm not going feel guilty by (ab)using it.

But even then, it didn't even matter since I could have gotten the same effect, in this particular case, by setting everything to escort like Follick did. The fact that they were stacked up was not the reason missile spam presented such a challenge.

You say that I need to "go away" and that I'm a "moron cheating POS," But honestly, you are the one that needs to go away. You've taken a friendly competition and turned it into something ugly. It just isn't fun anymore when someone is a complete dick.
thc
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:51 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby thc » Fri Sep 10, 2010 7:12 am

5-27 - colorful mixed rocket spam :p
123stw
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:00 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby 123stw » Mon Sep 13, 2010 1:40 pm

5-28 up. Nomad got a serious long missile.

thc wrote:The fact that they were stacked up was not the reason missile spam presented such a challenge.

Lol the reason is because it's a "Tribe" spam.
Kdansky
Type II Robot
Type II Robot
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:24 pm

Re: SAC 5

Postby Kdansky » Mon Sep 13, 2010 6:17 pm

123stw wrote:5-28 up. Nomad got a serious long missile.

thc wrote:The fact that they were stacked up was not the reason missile spam presented such a challenge.

Lol the reason is because it's a "Tribe" spam.

That is exactly what I planned to do. Better Missiles demands more missile spam, which is already one of the best strategies overall.

But 90'000 Credits? That requires me to deploy about 25 cruisers. I had a cutesy plan to maneuver mine, but with so much money, anything that is not pure firepower will likely be completely pointless. Having a second line of artillery platforms without defenses might be sensible even.
123stw
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:00 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby 123stw » Mon Sep 13, 2010 6:43 pm

After some number crunching. The nomad missile isn't that good even for long range. It's roughly the same dps as MWM at 1150.

Nomad Missile
7.304 DPS at 1150
9.324 DPS at 900 (capped)

MWM
7.21 DPS at 1160
16.72 DPS at 500 (capped)
User avatar
yurch
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 637
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:25 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby yurch » Mon Sep 13, 2010 7:48 pm

The tracking, speed/fuel, and decoy nature of the missile make it a bit more reliable under adverse situations. Hard to measure.

I'd say it's an alternative to the MWH provided the targets stay at 900+. An odd niche for sure.
123stw
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:00 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby 123stw » Mon Sep 13, 2010 9:57 pm

The tracking speed is misleading because with missiles, increase move speed lower chance to hit. With both having 0.5 turning, it is unclear how much more accuracy do Nomad Missiles have.

Decoy vs all active warhead will have no bearing since on average, the amount of damage scrambled will be the same. On the rare chance that opponent has a point defense scanner, then Nomad missile will be worst.

The 300 lowered fuel is indeed significant.

One thing for sure though, things that MWM have trouble hitting will be fast enough to get past 900 range against Nomad Missiles.

Edit: Field test show that Nomad Missile hit much more consistently, as their fast speed makes them go through scrambler easier.
arakis99
Line Supervisor
Line Supervisor
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:39 pm

Re: SAC 5

Postby arakis99 » Tue Sep 14, 2010 7:07 am

And now back to your regularly scheduled and drama free SAC. The competition is definitely kicking my tail. I can beat the individual challenges...eventually..., but finding a fleet to beat the last three has been eluding me. Thanks guys.
follick
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 276
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:43 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby follick » Tue Sep 14, 2010 10:26 pm

Perhaps we can come away from this with an agreement that being polite and civil is to everybody's benefit.

thc was not cheating. Before 1.47, stacking was explicitly allowed in the SAC.
arakis99
Line Supervisor
Line Supervisor
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:39 pm

Re: SAC 5

Postby arakis99 » Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:00 pm

follick wrote:Perhaps we can come away from this with an agreement that being polite and civil is to everybody's benefit.

thc was not cheating. Before 1.47, stacking was explicitly allowed in the SAC.

Just to be clear, I was not and have not commented on cheating or accused anyone of cheating in this thread or anywhere in this forum. IIRC There were 2 one line private communications between another poster and I on or around 9/4 that someone wanted to make an issue of in a public forum.

I concur with your point about being civil and polite regardless of the situation.
123stw
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:00 am

Re: SAC 5

Postby 123stw » Wed Sep 15, 2010 4:13 am

Have you tried the block feature?

Text does not convey much feelings, and that's all we get online. Without the ability to read body language or hear tone of voice, may people become autistic on the internet. Fortunately most games has the mute feature to block people I don't like.

Return to “Challenges and Tournaments”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests