Page 13 of 50

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 11:29am
by Simon_Jester
PeZook wrote:If 90% if the MEHs construction budget is used for construction, where does the other 10% go? :D
...Replacing the battleship that got blown up fighting a Monolith, where else?
Chaotic Neutral wrote:Ok, my Empire's fleet list is done. Read it and tell me what you think.
I think you're desperately short on small hyper-capable patrol craft. In consequence, your fleet will be overworked and run ragged trying to chase stuff all over its border regions. Fortunately you're a relatively compact state and you didn't forget to make some of those heavy units into gunship carriers, so you at least stand a chance of managing border control with such a numerically small fleet. But it's still a significant oversight in my opinion.

I mean, you live right next door to the galaxy's densest concentration of orks; you're going to have random marauders barging into your space on a regular basis. It takes quantity as well as quality to counter that kind of thing.

I also think you could stand to come up with new names, perhaps more in keeping with the artistic theme of MEH. A "Multiuniversal Empire of Happiness" should have, say, Culture-style names for its ships, not just Star Wars ripoffs.
PeZook wrote:
MEH Wiki wrote:SD II (800$): The most powerful battleship in The MEHN, it has enough weaponry and shielding to go against any other ships in the galaxy. The Mark II is notable for having more firepower and shielding than the original, though it has fewer tractor-beams.
No it doesn't :D
Oh yes it does... briefly.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 12:12pm
by Darkevilme
Chaotic Neutral wrote:Ok, my Empire's fleet list is done. Read it and tell me what you think.
Okay I've just noticed this. You list interdictor ships in your fleets >.> mobile interdictors arent allowed. Look up the interstellar travel page on the wiki.

And i second Simon's suggestion, better names are needed even if you're gonna be the third or fourth player using the star wars empire fleet for their pictures.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 01:04pm
by Master_Baerne
Just the second, I think - Siege uses SW ships, mine are triangular but different designs (hence why I haven't been using screencaps), and I can't think of anybody else. Still, it just feels... meh.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 01:14pm
by Shroom Man 777
Short on inspiration, so I'm just going to make the Esper Games look like the Quidditch World Cup and the Tri-Wizard Tournament. :P

And, yeah, Bragulans.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 01:16pm
by Akhlut
Oh, how I love the Bragulans. :lol:

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 01:35pm
by Force Lord
:lol: I see what you did there Shroom. :)

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 01:51pm
by PeZook
Master_Baerne wrote:Just the second, I think - Siege uses SW ships, mine are triangular but different designs (hence why I haven't been using screencaps), and I can't think of anybody else. Still, it just feels... meh.
Anglian Star Cruisers are ISDs

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 01:52pm
by Master_Baerne
PeZook wrote:
Master_Baerne wrote:Just the second, I think - Siege uses SW ships, mine are triangular but different designs (hence why I haven't been using screencaps), and I can't think of anybody else. Still, it just feels... meh.
Anglian Star Cruisers are ISDs
I withdraw my previous post.

These aren't the factual errors you are looking for.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 01:54pm
by Steve
And, like Magister, I used a screenshot of the Executor to depict the King George XIV, one of the Command Flagship big-damned-ships of the Anglian Royal Navy.

Oh, I've updated the build rules on the wiki. New construction time rules are implemented.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 03:51pm
by Simon_Jester
[Insists that rumors of Umerian use of the three seashells are greatly exaggerated, due to a misunderstanding involving Spozavik's hotel room that will be cleared up in due time]

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 04:10pm
by Ryan Thunder
:lol:

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 06:42pm
by Chaotic Neutral
Simon_Jester wrote:I think you're desperately short on small hyper-capable patrol craft. In consequence, your fleet will be overworked and run ragged trying to chase stuff all over its border regions. Fortunately you're a relatively compact state and you didn't forget to make some of those heavy units into gunship carriers, so you at least stand a chance of managing border control with such a numerically small fleet. But it's still a significant oversight in my opinion.

I mean, you live right next door to the galaxy's densest concentration of orks; you're going to have random marauders barging into your space on a regular basis. It takes quantity as well as quality to counter that kind of thing.
I thought about this already, which is why I made sure warp-gates and Hyperspace lanes were on all of my planets. (Save for a missing hyperlane on the side opposite of the Orks.
Simon_Jester wrote: I also think you could stand to come up with new names, perhaps more in keeping with the artistic theme of MEH. A "Multiuniversal Empire of Happiness" should have, say, Culture-style names for its ships, not just Star Wars ripoffs.
Your right, I'll change the names around a bit, but I want to have them based primarily on Empire designs, The Leader likes them.

Simon_Jester wrote:
PeZook wrote:
MEH Wiki wrote:SD II (800$): The most powerful battleship in The MEHN, it has enough weaponry and shielding to go against any other ships in the galaxy. The Mark II is notable for having more firepower and shielding than the original, though it has fewer tractor-beams.
No it doesn't :D
Oh yes it does... briefly.
I've decided to replace the SSDs with ISDs and move everything else up, I felt like an SSD only twice the power of an ISD wasn't deserving of the title.
Mayabird wrote:You do realize that it takes years to construct ships, right? You know you can't just say "I'm gonna make more" and out pops a new batch of a bajillion warships?
That reminds me, what is the ratio of ingame time to RL? I was assuming I could pump out 6 800$ ships in one RL month.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 06:47pm
by Steve
Uh, you do know that each sector has five Earth-like planets, right? The idea is that with Home and Core sectors they're all either naturally Earth-like or fully terraformed Earth-like planets while for Midrange and Colonies, which you don't have, there's only one or two natural Earth-like worlds and the rest are in various stages of terraforming.

Edit: Discussing things with Jester, never mind this post.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 09:25pm
by Simon_Jester
Chaotic Neutral wrote:
Mayabird wrote:You do realize that it takes years to construct ships, right? You know you can't just say "I'm gonna make more" and out pops a new batch of a bajillion warships?
That reminds me, what is the ratio of ingame time to RL? I was assuming I could pump out 6 800$ ships in one RL month.
Ah... no.

If you've been following the game (even to the limit of paging back to earlier posts and checking the date/time stamps on old posts), you will note that one of our problems in this game is slow time progress. No, you cannot turn out 800$ battleships in one RL month, because the game doesn't progress at several years to the month. It's more like one month to the month; two months to the month if we're lucky and pick up the pace.

Moreover, given the speed at which ships move in game, you could easily be brought under overwhelming attack long before any ship you could construct (except perhaps for tiny ultralights) could be completed.

Building dreadnoughts is, at best, a long range plan. It's not something you can do on a whim to counter an enemy capable of beating your dreadnoughts one-on-one.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 09:32pm
by Ryan Thunder
Steve wrote:Uh, you do know that each sector has five Earth-like planets, right?
I didn't, and I would've liked to know that a while ago because now I have to rejig my wiki entry...

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 09:59pm
by Chaotic Neutral
I've made even more changes to my fleet, removing interdictors, making a new class, and upping the power of all ships but the corvettes and Acclamator, as well as giving the name changes everyone was asking for.
Simon_Jester wrote: If you've been following the game (even to the limit of paging back to earlier posts and checking the date/time stamps on old posts), you will note that one of our problems in this game is slow time progress. No, you cannot turn out 800$ battleships in one RL month, because the game doesn't progress at several years to the month. It's more like one month to the month; two months to the month if we're lucky and pick up the pace.
Ah, so why didn't you just say that ships over 200$ are unbuildable? :(

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 10:04pm
by Simon_Jester
Ryan Thunder wrote:
Steve wrote:Uh, you do know that each sector has five Earth-like planets, right?
I didn't, and I would've liked to know that a while ago because now I have to rejig my wiki entry...
No you don't. He changed his mind.
Chaotic Neutral wrote:I've made even more changes to my fleet, removing interdictors, making a new class, and upping the power of all ships but the corvettes and Acclamator, as well as giving the name changes everyone was asking for.
...Why does making your ships more uber help?
Ah, so why didn't you just say that ships over 200$ are unbuildable? :(
Because they're not, at least not in principle. It depends on how long the game lasts.

The key is to understand that your capital ships are valuable units, that cannot be casually replaced and should not be squandered. Which is very realistic; it's only in games that you can throw away battleships and go "Meh. I'll have new ones before my losses matter."

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 10:12pm
by Chaotic Neutral
Simon_Jester wrote: ...Why does making your ships more uber help?
Did you read the page? I removed the SSDs and moved everything else up. As a plus, all ships are now diamond shaped too. :D
Simon_Jester wrote: Because they're not, at least not in principle. It depends on how long the game lasts.
Simon_Jester wrote: The key is to understand that your capital ships are valuable units, that cannot be casually replaced and should not be squandered. Which is very realistic; it's only in games that you can throw away battleships and go "Meh. I'll have new ones before my losses matter."
Except that this way, nothing can be replaced without a massive amount of play time, by which your opponent may or may not still be playing. Not to mention that it increases heavy ship buildup such as my own, to make sure you can't attack a target without massive preparation because if you lose, your remaining forces will have no way to replenish themselves.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 10:46pm
by Steve
The thing is, CN, the STGOD is being heavily directed by story-telling, and it simply takes time, lots of time, for people with limited amounts of free time to do all their storylines.

I am considering that by New Year's we should think of announcing either a shift forward to Q4 3400 or even 3401, depending on how our stories are proceeding. But right now it's just a consideration, so please, no one freak out? :P

Also, with Wilkens' departure from the STGOD, I'm open to nominations to replace him. I believe we need someone who's not in the K-Zone to keep balance. Note that TimothyC is still the alt-mod - he has requested to not be bumped up to full.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 10:50pm
by Mayabird
I nominate Simon_Jester.
[line 2]

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 10:52pm
by Shroom Man 777
I second the nomination.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 10:58pm
by Lonestar
I nominate Shep.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 10:59pm
by Simon_Jester
My sincere thanks to Shroomy and Mayabirdie for their votes of confidence, and I have no other comment on this issue at this time.
Steve wrote:I am considering that by New Year's we should think of announcing either a shift forward to Q4 3400 or even 3401, depending on how our stories are proceeding. But right now it's just a consideration, so please, no one freak out? :P
My vote's for a shift forward to Q4 3400; Shroom's got the BEEEF coming up, for instance, and that's in Q4. But once we get to Q4, I think we need to commit to a jump to Q1 3401 in fairly short order- say, by the end of January or the first week of February.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 11:02pm
by Beowulf
Lonestar wrote:I nominate Shep.
I second. Vote Cthulhu! Why settle for the lesser of two evils?

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread IV

Posted: 2010-11-30 11:02pm
by Ryan Thunder
I'll support Simon_Jester, as well. He's pretty level-headed.