Prev: Missile storms Next: Re: Why big ships are too good...

Re: Why big ships are too good...

From: Binhan Lin <Binhan.Lin@U...>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 1996 14:38:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Why big ships are too good...



On Sun, 8 Dec 1996 SGibson260@aol.com wrote:

> We had a really big game where I ran a 200 mass super ship (the
Asteroid
> Fortress  BVS Kraken).  It took two ?Nova Cannon? blasts on two
subsequent
> turns, and lost two full rows.  She lost about half of her 17 A
batteries,
> and three of her five shield generators (I had built redundant systems
for
> just this eventuality.)  Since she was left alone foe the next three
or four
> turns, I was able to bring all but one A battery back on line with my
damage
> control parties.
Have you tried making superships modular?  I.e. a 200 mass supership is 
borken down into 4, 50 mass units with 1-2 sections having engines, 1-2 
sections having the FTL (Original costs are based on the total 200 mass 
though)  This allows level 3 shields on 4 sections for a total of 12 
shield units, up to 4 hits on engines and 2 hits on FTL.  It also gives 
12 firecontrols.  It's almost equivalent to buying 4 Mass 50 ships
flying 
in very close formation.  Other sized ships are also possible, i.e. a
150 
mass is 3 sections, a 180 is 3 sections of mass 60 etc.  each module 
should be mass 50 or greater and they should all be equal.

--Binhan

Prev: Missile storms Next: Re: Why big ships are too good...