Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

« Back to Chat

2440 days, 9 hours, 2 minutes ago

echoclusterveteran

Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

When the endgame comes, it's clear that whoever's got the most ships has a huge advantage and that seems to matter more than even strength of economy, number of planets, strength of firepower, or position. The reason that none of us seasoned players wants the 500-ship limit to go away is that we know that domination within that limit is ultimately the way to win.

However, more than once I have made the "quantity mistake" in a big way and learned a huge lesson from it. By "quantity mistake" I mean (1) building the second starbase too early (2) rushing the limit, and (3) overvaluing spacefillers; while simultaneously (1) failing to get some way to defend myself and (2) failing to expand, or expanding but not exporting enough clans.

Every time I have made this mistake (and I am embarrassed to say I have made it many times), it has resulted in a very big early thrashing and a painfully lost game.

My real-life financial advisor once told me that effective investing is fundamentally a balance between fear and greed. At least for me, my downfall in Planets has always been greed.

Yes, I understand that Cyborg need the second starbase quickly (maybe even by turn 4) (and Rebel, Fascist, and Empire maybe almost as quickly, for various reasons). But no matter who you are, you've got to strike balance between quality and quantity in the early game or you're toast. Balance means (1) fill your fleet with ships that maximize your positional and tactical possibilities, and (2) for God's sake, don't economize on beams, even if you're Robot or Colony.

I don't play chess (I just study and read about it), but why is it that, even at the championship levels, the most common response to d4 d5 is the Queen's Gambit? The best players are quite often willing to sacrifice material for quality, knowing that it will likely be duly compensated sooner or later.

2440 days, 8 hours, 2 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

As Taurus nears it's end most people will have the same question when looking at my fleet: why so much junk? It's a trundling mass of rust, non-standard bolts, mismatched and often contradictory engines, guns, tubes and a big pack of seemingly useless probes. I talk some about this now, but once my turns are visible it'll be easier to explain.

The answer is simple and yet complex at the same time: VGA planets is a zero sum game. The very best players understand this principle, even if they've never heard of game theory. Emork, othrym, dines and several other top players which I could mention all understand very clearly the cost of a ship slot and they will use this leverage to their advantage often going to extremes to avoid losing a ship or to capture/destroy another (I'm not joking and I'm guilty of this as well).
Before the ship limit your entire focus should be on taking up as many ship slots with as many useful ships as you possibly can. It's not an option. If you fall behind in ship slots, starbase count and linked to that planet count, then the zero sum comes to smack you in the face, hard, you lose.

At all times you want your opponent to lose more than you do. There are several ways of going about this, and some races naturally excel at it most notably the pirates, the crystals and more subtle and frightening, the borg. The first two are obvious ship capture races. The third is trickier but is in fact also a ship-capture race and furthermore can eliminate heavy warships incurring essentially no losses AND build it's own heavy warships thereby owning the PBP arena like no other race.
The key point here is if you're not part of these 3 "golden" races your chances of increasing ship count, thereby increasing territory, therefore winning the game are intimately tied with your *initial* ship count at ship limit. Tom will often be seen harping about killing crystals, borg and pirates early, and he's absolutely right, specifically because they rule the zero-sum and you will eventually lose. Now there are many things that can get in the way of the basic mathematics of the game, most notably starbases breaking ships, racial abilities, and the all important positioning, the game wouldn't be fun if it were simple math right? By the same token ignore the simple math to your great detriment.

I'm not advocating you fill slots with SD1 SDSF. There's a time and place for that as well, but really you should be building "useful" ships and concentrating on them having a "perfect" shiny weapon array is the easiest way to lose. Ten mark4 Trex is more than twice as dangerous as five mark7 Trex. Similarly 20 SD 1-5 golem is about 50 times as dangerous as 5 transwarp h.phaser golem. It's NOT linear, specifically because there's a 500 ship limit. The time to design your high-tech fleet is after ship limit, using PBP, diplomacy (fed) and strategic use of recycling.
Some races excel at maximizing the punch from their less-than-high tech ships, most notably the colonies and yes again, the borg.

Sitting at the only race with 3 bases in 6 turns of Sagittarius I'm positive Dines would like me to shut up right about now...

2440 days, 7 hours, 32 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Very interesting topic. Let me share some figures from Scorpio, so you can see how a Crystalline could out build all others and hit the ship limit with second most ships right behind the Lizard.

My strategy was clearly quantity as you can see below..

Turn 1, i build a Emerald (MK7, Transwarp, Disruptors). A ship that i build until now (with better beams).

From turn 2, i was save due to the fact that i could lay webmines. So i had no big need to invest in security and focused on eco.

I filled the ship queue with:

- Onyx (StarDrive 1, x-ray no tube)

- MDSF (Warp 6 or higher)

- Rubys (Warp 7(2) or higher, x-Rays to Disruptors, Mark 3 (1), Mark 4 (3), Mark 7 (12))

To save money some only have 1 tube as it is enough to lay mines.

All Emeralds have TW and MK7.

With this low quality fleet, by simply stealing others the ship slots they need, i was Military power 4th by turn 25th. 1st was Lizard, 2nd Empire (free fighters), 3rd Robot (Fighters & mines). A Crystalline do not need military power as long as i have a MK7 Ruby and a good eco. My fleet was very defensive, that may be the reason why it took so long, i had to steal my attack fleet first. But better slow and steady then dead. I build Diamonds and Thunders later, (I have more T-Rex then Diamonds now :P ), but i used them mainly as bait or to kill highfueler. Without me accepting a battle to free up ship slots, Lizard could build 500 SB and have 1000 PBP, he will not build a ship. He still has the better eco, but it does not matter as long as i control the ship slots.

The more ships a Crystalline has, the less sweepers he face. MK7 is your Quality, if you reach that, go for Quantity.

2440 days, 6 hours, 45 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

That's pretty much exactly the distribution I expect from an expert crystal although I'm surprised you forgo the diamond flame until after ship limit but I presume you know your neighbours by that point and the need is not there.

By contrast my fleet at turn 23 in Taurus
8 cubes all Disruptors only 2 TW
21 FCC only 8 TW (!! poverty !!)
30 probes
4 LDSF
5 MDSF
1 STF
1 Iron slave
1 Ruby donated by an over-zealous crystal

2440 days, 5 hours, 28 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

This is something I've been thinking about too, as I find I typically end up with a whole lot of ships in my games. I think DM's ship list shows one big reason: the lack of transwarp engines (I know it's a little different for the borg, but still). I've heard some advice to always put transwarps on everything, and noted someone recently comment that they had past bad experiences towing ships into battle, but I've always been of a different opinion, namely that good engines are nice to have, but not as important as more guns.

My thinking is that high quality engines are pretty much the most expensive part of any ship, while a ship with no engines still moves just as fast when it's towed (and as a plus, can't hit a mine). Building ships without good engines frees up resources for more ships and more bases to build them, giving you more guns. I am a big fan of the "trailer" system. You can build a lot of ships that can be towed around and still be useful, while expanding the things the towing ship can do. Even things like a swift heart with tech 1 engines that seems pointless can be filled with cash, cloak, and be towed by a freighter. If the freighter is taken, the cash will still be safe and can be picked up by another ship later. Even freighter hulls with no real engines can be towed around, to expand cargo capabilities of your warships. And why put engines onto a battleship you're just going to smash it into something else anyways? Since there is no engine-shield-bonus on .nu, it fights exactly the same with tech 1s. My darkwing with blasters and mark 4s was quite capable of taking out a pirate homeworld in an early strike, even though it had to be towed there by a resolute.

I've found that playing this way gives me more options, and as has been noted, every ship I have is one you don't, which is huge. If you have 30 warships at the ship limit, and I have 130, I don't care if yours are all teched out carriers. You simply can't be as many places as I can, so whatever you take I'll just take back once you move on, or compensate for by taking other things in places you aren't. I don't even really have to fight your ships if I don't want to.

Anyways, I wonder if other people also build so many "trailers" and are happy with the results. Maybe better for a different thread in fact, but to tie it to this, I would say I definitely lean towards quantity over quality, and it seems to work well for me. My really nice, fully equipped ships usually start trickling out near or after the ship limit, once my overstretched economy has a chance to catch it's breath

2440 days, 4 hours, 45 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Every ship you build is a ship you don't have to kill on the battlefield. That way a SDSF can take out a cube, a gorbie or a golem by a simple fact that it exists and the big ship is in a queue waiting to be built.

2440 days, 1 hours, 38 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

On Big Beefer's point, I tend to put transwarps on all my ships early, because the first 25 turns (or so) are really a race for planets and bases. I need my running shoes on. If I have reasonable luck, I've found a money producing rock & then I'm not to worried about the cash expense for top engines. The minerals are more unpredictable, and I have to play that by ear.

Towing your Gorbies & Golems sounds like a solution, but that tow ship hits a mine, or otherwise gets taken out of the equation, and you're left with a slow sitting duck, that can't chase anything. I still build a few low tech carriers when I have to, but would rather not.

2440 days, 1 hours, 12 minutes ago

echoclusterveteran

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Hey everybody,

Thanks for continuing this thread even though the discussion started elsewhere. I also have been thinking a great deal about this lately and it's going to take me a while to unpack the very helpful information you guys have written. I have a few observations and a few questions.

DM: I think your zero-sum description might have hit the nail on the head. I am very interested in game theory and have studied it, though I won't claim any any expertise in the matter. One question that comes to mind is that, currently on Nu almost all games are decided through number of planets and not number of ships. (As a side note, there have been some proposals for alternate victory conditions, including time limit games and scenarios, at http://planets.nu/discussion/variety-in-starting-and-victory-conditions among other places.) I know that you're not yet free to talk completely about Taurus, but for a long time Othrym did have the most ships. Are you able to make a direct connection between your zero-sum axiom and winning the game when victory is decided by number of planets and not by number of ships?

>> At all times you want your opponent to lose more than you do. DM, are there no exceptions to this statement in your opinion?

>> Now there are many things that can get in the way of the basic mathematics of the game, most notably starbases breaking ships. I don't understand this sentence. Would you mind explaining?

>> The time to design your high-tech fleet is after ship limit. That is a truly fascinating statement. I actually think I agree with this 100% in principle, but this only works if you are not being attacked! I've played Crystals a lot and have found myself absolutely unrecoverably decimated when I have a Lizard or another strong-early-game neighbor next to me who knows how annoying I'll be if he doesn't take me out early. Without high beams and Diamond Flame battleships, there is simply no way to defend. In my experience, even building a second or third starbase within the first 15(!!) turns often prevents one from building defenses because everything Crystalline is so damned expensive. Webs are useless if you don't have the money to keep laying them.

I've got more to say and a few questions for the others who have posted here, but let me wrap this up with an observation: I'm very convinced that the ability to build something useful for 1 PBP is a very significant race advantage.

Fed: Bohemian/Eros
Lizard: Eros
Bird: Swift
Fascist: NOTHING USEFUL
Privateer: NOTHING USEFUL
Cyborg: B200
Crystal: NOTHING USEFUL
Empire: PL21
Robot: NOTHING USEFUL
Rebel: Falcon(!!!!!!!!!!!!)
Colony: NOTHING USEFUL

At the highest levels of play, if indeed the zero-sum concept as stated by DM is the ultimate (perhaps only) winning strategy, the three races that should be unbeatable are Lizard, Cyborg, and Rebel. (Lizard gets included in this because Eros not only terraforms but also spreads propaganda.)

2440 days, 0 hours, 10 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Just a brief note because much of my game is based on this very key element. I believe in Quality over quantity. But hey, as a Lizard, I LOVE crap ships !!!! There is NO such thing as a useless ship!

I start right off the bat building a M7 cloaking torp ship that destroys my economy. But this ship over the long run destroys 10-15 other players starting crap ships because it is better and bigger. It controls areas far from my/everyones starting point. But once these few nice ships are out of the way, it's to the junk pile to start looking. As long as it has a beam, it hisses. A Lizard should NEVER not build a ship. The more the merrier. By the end of the game, half my ships are really crap. If it says I have 120 ships, I really only have 60. That's why it is scary if another race had 80 ships and I have 120. Because I know he really has that many ships.

I used to not believe in building sdsf's as a lizard. But I even build those now. Once I hit the ship limit and I have 20 PBP's (which ANY Lizard should always be up at the top there), then I just trade that sdsf with W1 engines for a W9 towing Eros that teraforms. It's a great trade. I would do the same thing if I was a HYP race, especially a Falcon. But also any other HYP race when I know I can HYP in to carry MC's or do a blitz minesweep with a pack.

So what do I believe in? Quality. What do I end up doing for the most part... Quantity to make quality. IN the end though... Having the highest quality small ships will NEVER help you when faces by a task force of large carriers coming to pay a visit ;-).... but maybe, just maybe.... that quantity of hissers got you the needed fighters to fill your base and a few extra thousand torps for your cheap platforms. Good for defense, but not offence. For offense, you need quality as the Lizards. maybe not if you have FCC's to chunnel though. For me, I NEVER build a large warship unless it has at least W6. I do NOT like to depend on towing and end up getting stuck somewhere. Believe me, as a Lizard, I LOVE seeing a task force coming at me and they are towing all their big ships. I salivate. I know I will be getting LOTS of KP's.

That's it for me and it's just a Lizard point of view. I think it is really a race by race decision and even situation by situation plan.

-=The DragonDejhi=-

2439 days, 23 hours, 8 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

It's good to see many top players voice their opinions on the forum in one thread!

I'm not free to talk completely about Taurus just yet as you say ECV but I can answer most of your questions with more to follow upon game's end and I'm sure othrym has much to say on this topic as well. The reason VGA planets is such a good game is because it's hardcore game theory, really every aspect about it is well thought out at a game theory level.
What you're describing in terms of dying to an early fleet waltzing in on you is a positional defeat. You lose because you lost a critical piece of the map, aka your homeworld. That's why in my statement I say "the all important positioning". Similarly all things being equal if I get a firecloud near your homeworld and on your edges before say turn 50, you are dead. You have to do something, anything to stop that or your position is too weak to recover from, it's over.
If you look at othrym's comments carefully in Taurus, he talks about the "omnipresent fireclouds" and so you can connect the dots. There's more to it than just that of course but it's a big big big problem.

The mathematics of the zero-sum game play out more specifically in the end-game where empires are large, distributed entities and positional victory may not be viable (ignoring the firecloud). I.E. when you are trading ships, the normal queue is crawling and borders fluctuate. This is when it hurts, a lot, to lose 3 battleships for a single heavy carrier for instance.
The starbase changes this ugly trade in a way that allows for a torpedo race to cede ground exchanging maxed out bases for (with any luck) heavy carriers and no losses, or if they decide to take some losses one battleship + base will take down any heavy carrier. A strong torpedo race player will often cede ground in this way to whittle down an enemy fleet. The corollary is you have to take the ground back otherwise those planets will produce ships in the normal queue and you are in point of fact, dying to the carrier race's mathematical game.
To win and win with force you do in fact want them to always lose more than you do in terms of ships. Bases can always be rebuilt, the capital of VGA planets is ships.

And yes your observations about the 1 PBP ships are very relevant.

There are no unbeatable races, but at the highest levels you need to watch carefully the 3 races that defeat the mechanics of "trading ships", the borg, the pirates and the crystals can all get away with something for nothing.
Lizards are definitely NOT an unbeatable race, they suffer enormously as the game progresses, more than any other race if left to their own ship list. All their capital ships trade the worst of any race and their primary means of taking starbases, ground attack through a cloaked ship, gets worse and worse as the turns grow longer and clans multiply all over the place and the distances get longer and longer and minefields more prevalent. Their racial advantages can become utterly trivial in the face of borg, colonies, crystals, klingons. It's not easy being green and alone.

If you wonder why I'm so active of late it's because I'm half dying from the flu right now...

2439 days, 21 hours, 18 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

merlin

some thing people over look is the need to get at least one merlin built before the 500 ship limit hits. with a merlin and several freighters you can turn 4 or 5 planets into starbases and have good ships in the build que.

2439 days, 15 hours, 32 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

@donaldworrell - is that merlin issue one whose importance varies by race? I expect to find that a mineral shortage is the cap on my pre-shiplimit carrier construction, as, say, Colonials or Robots, and will need to be delivering a Merlin fairly quickly once a Bovinoid planet is found.

2439 days, 15 hours, 26 minutes ago

echoclusterveteran

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Call me stupid if you want, but I build usually Merlin before the second starbase as Crystals in a regular game.

Stellar Cartography changes everything, though, because if you have access to planetoids you don't need a Merlin or NRS anywhere in the vicinity. Planetoids are very, very, very good for Crystals since the Ruby/Emerald can transport so much in and out.

It depends somewhat on race, but more on what minerals you have immediate access to and at what densities.

2439 days, 14 hours, 59 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

greetings,

i agree with most that has been said about the importance of shipcounts and quality. while i do not want to repeat the arguments for high/low engined ships i suggest to never build a useless ship.
ECV said, that some races to not have usefull ships to build, i strongly dissagree here. whenever you want to build a small freighter, get a NFC (neutronic fuel carrier instead ),

nfcs can be used to empty your border planets which will slow any enemy attack on you down. also you can bring in additional fuel to your own attack groups. fuel is one of the most critical ressources when advancing into an enemy territory (if your opponent is skilled) so being able to have and produce neutronium is mandatory for military success. you can have a 3:1 shiplead but if you cannot move your ships they are worthless.

that is why i suggest building nfc's on low bases and getting at least 2 neutronic refinery ships before the ship limit hits. you should also have at least 1 merlin as donaldworrell suggested.

i sympathise with you DM, the flu has hit me hard too....

2439 days, 13 hours, 40 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

This discussion here is properly more helpful then 90% of the guides at Donovans.
But its not just filling the Queue with crap, you need to walk the small line between Quality and Quantity.

1) Usefull ships.
Build a ship on every starbase every turn. SDSF is your minimum option, its just to block other, If you plan ahead you can do better, try to build a usefull "block". Most races benefit more from a Warp6 MDSF (extra Cargo/ local supporter) or a Warp1 NFC (extral fuel tank). I am not a fan of that SDSF strategy. I use all my crap ships even later, instead of recycle them. In Scorpio i still use 2 SDSF with Warp 4, they move every turn to bring 70 minerals to a planet 16ly away. No need to get towed, no need to recycle. A warp 6 or 7 ships is also cheap but can move on it´s own. I call them local supporters, they will get towed if a TW ship is near by, if not they just take a little longer until they arrive. No need to planet hop in your core area later in the game.

2) Second Starbase & Merlin
Most of the TW addicted players preferGhipsoidal. I prefer Humanoids as you can build all those Warp 1 Merlins, NRS, Carriers, Lokies, Onyx. All high Tech hulls that will not move on thier own. That way you can leave the hull tech on your homeworld on 6 and raise it later. If you do not have a Humanoid planet you need to raise your HW to Tech 10 to build the Merlin.

3) Trailers
Eco Trailers are OK as they are save and not on the front. You can also make some Combo attack trailers, But as soon as you have to Intercept, you can´t use it. We battle for ship slots, so a ship that moves on it´s own is 1 slot, a trailer needs 2.

5) Early race for planets
As long as you are not the Borg, focus on Quality and not Quantity in regards of planets. You can capture planets in the middle game, before they have a Starbase on it, until then, get your surrounding support planets up and running. My first Emeralds captured about 10-15 HYP outposts, they already had some factory and mines on it, but not a single kt has left the planet. (beside some fuel). No need to be the first on a planet, if you can get it later anyway. I would recommend to ignore that 1 clan scout drop advice that is in most guides, drop the minimum amount of clans so they can grow on their own if you do not have the clans on board to drop the amount to tax the max.

DM, there was no need to build a Diamond before the shiplimit. No one will attack a Crystalline that has more ships then you. Especially not if your own fleet is crap and you do not have good sweepers. You would not have attacked me with your fleet listed above in turn 25, do you?

2439 days, 12 hours, 30 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

@dm - regarding your three golden races, I would like to add one more. The fascists.

I've had much success trading ships with the fascists. Their ships have a very low cost in PBPs, and combined with glories (which you gain PBPs for using, hurray), most battles tend to gain me more ships than I loose. Of course that requires me to be the aggressor - either attacking a concentration of enemy ships, or using D7s to ensure that the enemy has several ships located as the same spot for maximum glory-effect.

The only issue with the fascists is the PB9 limit... If I have several "encounters" during the same turn, I run out of priority builds that I can place behind the queue - and using PBP to gain ships on the normal queue is a waste.

2439 days, 12 hours, 28 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

I agree with you Space, the guides on Donovan's are useful but lacking.
I too will use an SDSF occasionally though the probe is my natural default.

On the other hand I disagree that I wouldn't attack you with my fleet vs yours. :P
8 cubes with disruptors and fireclouds on turn 23 you're calamari rings squid! It's ~10k sweeping power I can summon on a dime. The fireclouds will charge your webs, take a hit, drop to warp zero, become a chunnel target, and warp in cubes in the same breath. It's a very one-sided conflict borg vs crystal in the early game, if I so desire I can always make progress towards my intended target and once I'm there you're (most distastefully) actually going have to fight to a loss. I warp in a starbase, drop mines and leave a firecloud in a warpwell and it's very rough for you to do much without allied help/cloakers as the territory seals up and your core is simultaneously threatened. It's very rough. End game, different matter entirely and many factors can contribute to win/loss on either side most notably alliances.

That being said, anything other than borg vs. your starting fleet in scorpius is in for a very bad few months, I definitely agree and has been doubtlessly been proven by your excellent play.

2439 days, 12 hours, 12 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Spacesquad, I agree 100% regarding dropping enough clans to grow (unless it's a totally worthless rock, then I drop 1) and would also drop 4 supplies. My "race" for planets doesn't mean I'm ignoring the 5 or 6 rocks nearest my HW. I just want to be near the top of the of the list (ships+planets+bases) when that 500 limit hits.

You mentioned this:
" My first Emeralds captured about 10-15 HYP outposts..."
That brings to mind how soon you are willing to let your position be known by sending that Emerald into open space. Do you find it better to stay hidden, or to get a mine-layer to your far borders before turn 10?

2439 days, 12 hours, 10 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Yes Jobo, we're both fond of fascists and it takes an experienced hand to guide them to victory.
The reason they are not part of the golden 3 is specifically because they simply can't always win out in exchanges. We both know the cargo size of say the rush class, it's just not going to go down without significant losses. I know rebel controlled rush is the worst-possible scenario for klingons but there are many others somewhere in-between nearly as unpleasant. Very skilled fascist is very threatening, always. They are in my personal opinion the best torpedo race.

2439 days, 12 hours, 5 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

i have a different opinion. scouting and dropping 1 clan on a planet usually is the best strategy, you mark your territory, negotiations with other races may be easier (if you already have planets closer to their territory and you know what planets are valuabe and which are rocks.

2439 days, 12 hours, 0 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

In general, there's already a consensus building, and I need to say that Fruchtquake already summarized my own opinion very well, particularly the "never build useless ships".

There's one more aspect which I would like to stress which is related to this motto: Planning and moderation.

It never ceases to amaze me how many players seem to blindly build the biggest ship they can momentarily afford without regard for the future turns. Have you ever watched professional pool billiard players? They don't concentrate on holing their shots, they concentrate on keeping position for the NEXT shot. At the very least, when you're finalizing your turn 10, you need to know exactly what you're going to build in turn 11 already, and that you'll have the necessary resources for it. You should NOT end your turn building your favorite ship, and then start your next turn trying to figure out what to do best with the minerals and cash you have available.

Always be aware of resource shortages and adapt to them. Try to keep a small cash and mineral reserve on your bases so that you keep flexible.

o Stagger your resource usage. Nova - Eros - Eros is decidedly inferior to Missouri - Diplomacy - Kittyhawk.

o Short on Tri or Moly? Keep in mind that your Gemini supports other friendly codes than "lfm", too.

o You've got no Merlin, have invested heavily in freighters and are short on Dur on your planets? Maybe you should avoid Disruptors for now.

o You started a base in the periphery? Be aware that outside resource logistics will be tricky, and that you need to adjust your builds so that the base can build multiple turns on its own devices.

To cut a long story short, while it's better to build W1-SDSFs than nothing, it usually indicates a failure in proper planning. You should not have built the last "normal" ship prior to it, but something smaller instead. And every race can build useful ships without big investments in cash or minerals.

2439 days, 11 hours, 59 minutes ago

emork the lizard king

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Spacequad>> ... you need to walk the small line between Quality and Quantity ...

That is exactly what I think. You have to find a good balance. But this balance is another one for every race because of those very different ship lists and tactics - also settings, neighbours and playstyle have an influence.

If you think about spending minerals, money and logistic capacity for building another base then figure out what you will get from this base, how useful this stuff is for you and what you could have built somewhere else with the spent resources. Many factors to consider ...

2439 days, 11 hours, 50 minutes ago

emork the lizard king

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Jobo>> ...The only issue with the fascists is the PB9 limit...

You know that you can use each pbX code on more than one base? The limiting factor is the number of your bases. As a Klingon or Lizard I normally have one or two bases set on each pb1-pb3 code and a whole lot of bases set on pb7 (good fillers) and pb8 (bad fillers). Not the bases in front of the queue of course.

2439 days, 11 hours, 46 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

As a further aside pba, pbb, pbc may show up with a nice shiny "I'm useful" color in the gui but in fact they don't work.

2439 days, 11 hours, 41 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Rather than repeat myself, here is the link where I express many of my thoughts regarding quality vs. quantity and how many ships to build as the game progresses:

http://planets.nu/discussion/nu-planets-turn-progress-guide

2439 days, 11 hours, 5 minutes ago

echoclusterveteran

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Fruchtquake >> ECV said, that some races to not have usefull ships to build, i strongly dissagree here. whenever you want to build a small freighter, get a NFC (neutronic fuel carrier instead ),

I must have given the wrong impression. I build lots of NFC, for money-moving and also because they have 2 engines and cost no fuel to move. (Great for strategic recycling)

But also there are 3 races that cannot build the NFC (Fed, Cyborg, Robot) if I'm not mistaken.

And they can't hiss and they can't rob....

2439 days, 10 hours, 59 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

@Tom & Quark
I try to stay hidden as long as i can. By the time i left my cluster i was the lowest in planet count (13 planets). I already knew my neighbors, had my cash planets running and layed my first webs. My emeralds moved to planets in the middle or to isolated planets where i could be sure that there is no base (borg had no base at all) Most of those planets have been Rebel HYP outposts. He was not directly next to me, so no need to negotiate, (sorry Tom Graves) because he need a Rush to kill my Emerald and 20 more turns to move it there. I ignore all HYP planets in my border negotiations. I´m sure sometimes you can use your outpost to bluff and negotiate a better border, sometimes the turns you invested to mark them with 1 clan are just lost.

2439 days, 10 hours, 55 minutes ago

echoclusterveteran

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

>> By the time i left my cluster i was the lowest in planet count (13 planets)

I've decided to avoid looking at the scoreboard before turn 20 because it causes my ego to stand in the way of making good decisions :P

2439 days, 3 hours, 39 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Quantility.

2438 days, 22 hours, 19 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

do not get me wrong spacesquad,

there are different playing styles for each player. there are different styles for each races and there certainly are different styles of playing regarding the situation (quality of playing, neighbours, distance between planets (especially for races that are usually weak at the beginning) etc. ).

this goes along along with your "game plan", a topic that has been briefly touched by mentar before.
planning, evaluation and reevaluating situations, involving events in the cluster (wars/alliances/nap's/ship trades/etc.) and adapting to your enemy movements. everyone not being your ally can and most likely will become your enemy (most liekly when you are close to winning via planetary count).
basiclaly you want to antizipate your opponents plans, ship movements and diplomatic efforts.

ECV : as for the nfc : you are right, that is why i always try to get NFC's if playing a race that cannot build them. usually you will get them for a small price because your neighbours do not see it's potential.

this discussion is growing in complexity and i encourage others to partizipate and share their thoughts. after all - everyone of us can still learn ... .)

2438 days, 21 hours, 42 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

I agree with spacesquad on the HYP ships. I ignore those planets in negotiations.

The Cyborg and Empire ships are probes and the Falcon is a civilian ship. I kill/capture them on sight and don't count any planets they have colonized. to the quality vs. quantity question.

SDSF are valuable for Borgs and Empire. Borgs use them for money shuttling so we can shuttle 30,000 - 50,000 MC per chunnel. Empire finds them very useful, We have a plethora of bases and they need constant supply of Trit and Moly to build ftrs. Cheapo W1 SDSF work great.

But, in the end , there are 11 different answers for quality vs. quantity (1 for each race). In fact, considering the variety of possible neighbors, their attitudes, and planet arrangement and types, there are probably thousands of answers.

2438 days, 16 hours, 37 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Just to add my 2c worth, I am mostly a Fed player (though I am currently kicking around a few other races too - know thy enemy) and for us we can do both quantity and quality. In my current Fed game I have 117 ships and we are just about to hit the ship limit. I have 91 warships and actually fewer terraformers than is usual for me.

The Fed Super Refit is one of the most underestimated bonuses in the game. The ability to throw out a Tech 1 Missouri and leave sitting around my starbase should not be ignored. Once that ship limit hits and I build up resources at my starbases every one of those fillers turns into a high-teched battleship. And when you really have very few resources on a starbase, building a Bohemian or Eros as your filler is great, lots of temp changing to make those native planets even better. Gotta love Bovi Unity planets at 50.

The lack of a NFC really bites, I had 1 game where I was shipping fuel around with terraformers! But they do make great little money transporters, and I can usually keep quite a few ships employed shipping money!

2438 days, 14 hours, 17 minutes ago

star72066

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Mentars post speaks volumes and many others have layed out some useful information. In the end, race, experience, planets, opponents, alliances, and circumstances all play a role but it's imporant to note that support ships are every bit as imporant as capital ships and vise versa.

A workable balance is probably the most effective route to take and you have to view it in terms of fleet and race/empires capability instead of a single ships capablity. Make every ship count towards the ulimate goal in some capacity and guage each build with getting the most towards that goal without losing sight of your coming builds and their contribution to that goal, then assess it as a whole. Experience is irreplacable in these calculations and decisions as there are so many factors to consider. What might be the best sequence of builds for one game, will kill another.

There is no universal answer to this question and only through experience can one find the balance needed for each situation to produce consistant winning results.

Experience is the best teacher here.

2438 days, 13 hours, 41 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

@jobo: I mean to recall that setting multiple bases to a FC pb1 is working for all of them, but have no idea in which order they would get processed. I'm not sure about it, but with a bit of luck I'll be able to find the right turn in my last game to confirm.

Has anybody else tried that?

2438 days, 13 hours, 26 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Excellent thread! There's a lot you can learn from this.

I have a questions regarding DM's answer:
"You know that you can use each pbX code on more than one base?"
Thanks for that. Didn't know it as well. But how does Host handle this?
Is the order like this when building ships: pb1, pb1, pb2, pb2, pb3, etc.?

2438 days, 13 hours, 24 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

The pbX codes are processed by id order if i remember right.
Donovan knows these kind of things ...

2438 days, 13 hours, 23 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

I agree with essentially everything that has been said in this thread, there are good opinions, large variations in opening strategies, different approaches to what is useful and racial variations in ship list and design.
I would like to stress again, particularly for those in a highly competitive championship game, what you cannot, absolutely cannot have happen is fall into the quality trap whereby what you deem "useful" is only a TW, markX flavor. You must carefully plan your strategy and balance all variables from neighbours to territory but your ship building strategy should NOT be predicated on ship quality. Strive for it but do not fall behind in ship count and directly tied to this, starbase count, it's a death trap. Like my earlier link, the only thing that matters is what a man can do, and what a man can't do.

All bases set to pb1 will cycle in ID order. Then all bases set to pb2 likewise. I think I have a clear example of this in one of my games but it will take me time to dig it up.

2438 days, 13 hours, 20 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

I was just reading it on Donovan's today.

It goes to the player with the most priority points and then goes to his lowest pb code. If there are more than one with pb1, it will go with the lowest planet id. After that build it recalculates who has the most priority points. If it is the same player, then his next pb1 will get built

2438 days, 13 hours, 0 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

I had to update this as there is a few ships that can help but always seem to be overlooked.

Fed: Bohemian/Eros
Lizard: Eros
Bird: Swift
Fascist: Low tech pop ships
Privateer: Lady royale
Cyborg: B200
Crystal: Opal
Empire: PL21
Robot: NOTHING USEFUL
Rebel: Falcon(!!!!!!!!!!!!)
Colony: Lady royale

2438 days, 11 hours, 2 minutes ago

echoclusterveteran

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

No, dethsturbed, the Lady and Glory ships cost more than 1 PBP. That was the point.

2438 days, 10 hours, 52 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

I think he meant it as a list of what ships to build if you can't build a well equipped ship before ship limit or when the base is coming up in the queue after ship limit.

2438 days, 10 hours, 36 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

This is an awesome thread

2438 days, 10 hours, 31 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Kedalion is correct.

I know they are not 1 PBP but in the end those races get ships that are much more useful to build in place of those.

2438 days, 10 hours, 25 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Working the ship queue is crucial. There is a time when the ship limit is near that you want to have a ship building at every SB so you will know where the ship queue starts in this game. In fact, if you have an isolated base, you want at least a SDSF being built so you will know when the ship queue passes that spot. In these cases ship quality is a bonus; the quantity (building a ship to mark the ship queu) is paramount.

In fact, I always want to know where the ship queue is, so I will always build at least a SDSF, even when I take over a lost position and will never have use of PBB's.

2438 days, 8 hours, 24 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Not sure if anybody noticed, but the ID of the next base in the queue used to be visible in the turn data... :D

I thought that was a bit too easy and it was removed quickly after some complaints. The field is still there right at the beginning of the data set, but it is always set to 0.

2438 days, 8 hours, 15 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Thanks guys for the explanation. Learned something new today... :)

2438 days, 7 hours, 37 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Good catch, kedalion.

Actually, I would prefer if it had remained (and I had noticed (grin)). However, since Joshua seems determined to exactly mimic THost, I can see why it was removed.

Considering how important controlling the ship queue is to victory, this would be a good addition for beginner games (max = Midshipmen). This would impress on newbies the importance of economics.

P.S. Nakor: I have seen your profile. When it comes to Fascists, I don't think you have anything left to learn. Can't wait until you get into a championship game as Fascists.

2438 days, 5 hours, 59 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Since we are talking about ship quality and rule changes, has the elimination of the tow-break chunnel made any difference in the Taurus game? (Was the rule change in effect since the beginning of the game?)

Thanks,

Mike

2438 days, 5 hours, 45 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Sure though I think it belongs more in the general Taurus thread, which you guys are free to ask questions about the game in (we may or may not reply...). Tow-chunnel is still active in Taurus and has of course been used to great effect. The elimination of it would would have very significantly, though not completely, changed the outcome of the game.

2438 days, 4 hours, 51 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

I just noticed that the Campaign version does change the 1 PBP dynamics (free ships, only) (Races that have NOTHING USEFUL in the regular game):

Fascist: Medium Transport

Privateer: Medium Transport

Crystal: Medium Transport

Taurus Class Transport

Only the poor Robot is left with no useful 1 PBP ship.

2438 days, 4 hours, 38 minutes ago

star72066

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

I guess it's SDSF for the Robot and in late game scenerio's it's as useful as the rest, since the purpose is to dominate ship slots at that stage. The focus is denial.

2438 days, 4 hours, 31 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

With a mass of 80, Q-Tankers cost 2 PBP's.

2438 days, 4 hours, 28 minutes ago

star72066

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Yah I just saw that MJ - I revised but it hung your follow up post in which you corrected the Q-Tankers pbp costs. It was an easy assumption to think that the Q-Tanker was under 50 Kt's, it's not, your correct.

2437 days, 20 hours, 18 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Thanks, mjs. Would love to participate in a championship game once. :)
But there always seems to be something new to learn about Planets, even after playing it for years. And that is something I really like about the game.

2437 days, 16 hours, 55 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

here is a list i made for a priority point thread,
how much which ship costs, gives when destroyed, and gives when recycled.
could be useful for building better 'quality'...

priority points.pdf

i personally find the averages interesting

2437 days, 15 hours, 45 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Thanks TL, that's a nice little set of charts. It's better then the "chicken scratch" charts I have lining my VGAP notebook ;-)

2437 days, 14 hours, 13 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

TL. the averages need to be weighted by the frequency of construction - e.g. nobody every builds a Moscow, and, say, Colonies never build a Scorpius and very rarely build a Neutronic (as an Aries is better and cheaper unless you expect to be clearing webmines).

2437 days, 10 hours, 10 minutes ago

star72066

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Good Stuff TL - (Printed) Saves going back and forth to the ship data base.

Now, could you add a fuel tank capacity row for Pirate commanders.

2437 days, 8 hours, 28 minutes ago

echoclusterveteran

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

@ Spacesquad - What is your opinion of Crystals building ships such as the Topaz (transwarp, heavy phaser) before the ship limit to use for strategic recycling later?

@Beefer - I think trailers are great but I still put the best engines possible on them in a lot of cases. SuperStarDrive 4 works a lot better than StarDrive 1 in the rare case that they need to move on their own. In my opinion, anything that takes more than 2 engines probably deserves to be a trailer by default. Other notable trailers would include LDSF, Lady Royale, Onyx, Gemini, Aries, Nefarious, Saber, etc. Can you or anybody else speak about trailers from a specifically Bird Man perspective? When you tow you can't cloak and that's the biggest problem, right?

@Dragondejhi - There is NO such thing as a useless ship! - nicely said!! I hate the guides at Donovan's that say "don't ever build this ship". As soon as you figure out the awesome possibilities that a Small Transport opens up, you won't say that anymore. The absolute only never-ever-build that I can find on the entire ship list is the Colonies' Scorpius. I see that the campaign upgrades are seeking to redeem the Scorpius, which is good - Colonies need a good intermediate carrier.

@ DM - At some point, I'll be interested in knowing why you consider Cyborg to be among the "ship stealers" and none of the other firepower races. Pretty much anybody can specialize part of their fleet with gamma bombs or with (heavy) disruptor and use ntp at the right moment to capture ships, right? Or is there some secret you're not sharing :)

@ Mentar - See my "@dragondejhi" above. To your main points, however, I couldn't agree more. One reason I often actually enjoy taking over established positions instead of starting new games is that the first 20 turns stress me out a lot. That's also the reason I haven't played Feds since the 90s :P Your point about remaining flexible is a good one. A lot of people will find you early and want to trade ships with you and you need to be ready to build what they ask for if the possibility of a good deal comes up. (I played Crystal once and had a Fascist message wanting to trade me a cloaker for an Onyx very early in the game. I'm like, uh, do you want a gold nugget with that?)

2437 days, 7 hours, 5 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Some secret I'm not sharing. Yet.
You've gotten a lot of info out of me as it stands ECV! Even if you evade the fangs of the flying dragon, the winds that gust around it will immobilize you completely and its claws will rip you apart.

2436 days, 9 hours, 3 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

@ ECV
I never build Topaz. Usually i try to build usefull ships that i do not need to recycle later. The ships i build on a new base are:

NFC (Warp 1)
13 D / 13T / 20M / 23MC ( +300 one time for hull tech Level to 3)
Usually you can build it the first turn of the new base.

MDSF (Warp 6)
8 D / 8 T / 21M / 119MC ( +1500 one time for Engine tech Level 6)
Once the Tech is upgraded, you can build it from supplies selling only.

Ruby ( Warp 6 / Mark4)
42 D / 58 T / 74M / 229MC ( +1000 one time for Torp tech Level 5)

Ruby (Warp 6 / Mark 7)
41 D / 58 T / 81M / 329MC ( +1800 one time for Torp tech Level 8)
To build a Warp 8/ MK7 Ruby you need 623mc only (+6700mc total for TechLevels). Its a ship that you can always use for minelaying and as a 370kt freighter. On a Native planet where you get 600-700 + 120 supplies, you get the Techlevel quite quick. Maybe you get extra Tech from Natives or some Avians that give you 1000mcs or more.

2435 days, 11 hours, 37 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

ECV, I agree with putting the best engines you can on a ship, but I would also add that engines are often the last thing I upgrade at a base. Ships that are capable of fighting, sweeping, and/or laying mines are usually more attractive to me sitting still than ships that can move a little bit, but can't do much else.

Also, I've only played the birds once (in the game I'm currently in), so take that into account, But as the (very late) ship limit draws near, I find roughly a third of my ships do not have transwarps. Roughly a quarter of the non-transwarps have "passable" engines (split between 6s & 7s) and the rest have 1s. The hulls that have crap engines cover pretty much the full spectrum, swift, white falcon, resolute, darkwing, as well as all sizes of freighters and of course refineries.

I think the birds can make great use of trailers mainly as a defensive and economic tool. Yes, not being able to cloak is a disadvantage of towing (though not as much as hitting mines I think). But I figure by the time I start towing ships, I've built another base (since everything from the home world WILL have transwarps), and by that time neighbors are probably known, not that much need to hide who I am. And most of the ships towing early would likely be freighters anyways. Usually, the trailers are towed up right behind the front lines, not into the combat zone itself, so being seen is not that big an issue. If the ship towing them is a combat ship, it usually then cloaks and continues on to the front, if a freighter, it heads back to do freight business (and eventually tow up another ship). Then the trailer hopefully just sits there cloaked, holding as much fuel and cash as it can, possibly some key minerals if it has a large cargo hold. Make torps for minefields if so equipped. This way if the planet is taken in a counterattack, it can not be used by your enemies as effectively for resupply. The main purpose is to slow down an attack against you and make it less profitable to your enemy. If you see the attack coming, you can pick up clans the turn they arrive, and ground attack after they move on, or force them to leave a ship behind to guard. Both are good for you. If you can pick up all the clans, the planet won't even fight, which is good for maintaining native populations. Better armed trailers can set a PE and ambush small incoming ships or other cloakers/probes trying to be sneaky. And they can't be towed away. Plus, each trailer is that many more clans I can bring to the front every time I tow it, which is always of primary importance to keep that economy kicking. Eventually as the front moves outward (assuming my ships with engines continue to do well and expand), the trailers can be picked up by another outgoing ship and the whole process repeated.

Anyways, I've rambled on a bit that, but in summary, as the birds I've found them quite useful. Especially since I want to have a LOT of ships, and have tried (and failed) to push an early ship limit. Because once that limit hits and we start "trading ships", I don't think the birds do so well.

I guess to the maxim "Don't build useless ships", I would add a little corollary: "A ship doesn't have to move on its own to be useful."

2433 days, 7 hours, 57 minutes ago

echoclusterveteran

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

I have a few games going right now that are in dominant endgame positions. As I look at the whole map to piece together where everything is in each of these games, something occurred to me that should have been very obvious but for some reason never solidified in my mind .....

The ratio of ships to planets is 1 to 1.

At the beginning of this thread was a chess analogy, so here's another. A chess game is 32 pieces on 64 squares. A Planets game is 500 pieces on 500 "squares" (with each token being able to be on more than one square at a time, and with more than 16,000,000 possible locations between squares).

This is obvious, I know ... but it's become useful since I'm looking at several big positions right now, for me to remind myself that if there's a huge invasion in one area then there is another area that is entirely unguarded. The law of averages is a very safe bet.

2433 days, 7 hours, 37 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Ship count can be misleading, though. 10 Robot warships likely means something very different than 10 Fed warships.

2433 days, 7 hours, 21 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Well yes the general rule is if you have few ships and a large territory then the opponent with more ships will conquer your territory expending ships - thereby the territory and ships will roughly balance.
However what's also important by chess analogy is the value of the pieces and the size of your opponent, like Bacchus points out. If you have an army of pawns, gaining territory is very expensive. That was othrym's dilemma in Taurus. His army is made up of 4 beam MBR and taking borg bases let alone normal bases is very rough going. Furthermore even if he goes for the ship sacrifice(s) to gain territory using say a BR or two to shoot down fighters and bringing in a heavy carrier he knows somewhere a cube gets built by freeing up a ship slot, the cube takes out statistically ~4 bases before going down all on it's lonesome, so it's a spiralling nightmare even if ships > planets. Too many pawns, and if he can't rob he's stuck and will eventually shrink. The great wall of borg bases is pretty damn imposing. I'll go into detail about this soon.

The analogy also breaks down when dealing with specific racial abilities, some races like klingons, empire, rebels and to a lesser extent the lizards can gain territory through their racial abilities alone, pillage, SSD, RGA and ground combat. So their planet count can naturally exceed their ship count. Likewise the borg can use the positional leverage of the firecloud to control a larger territory than their ship count, the crystal can use webs. Push comes to shove though, insufficient ships to planets will mean the size of the empire will contract. Greater ship numbers to planets and better ships means the size of the empire will expand (again, "better" is more like X battleships and Y carriers not the individual engines and guns).

2433 days, 1 hours, 59 minutes ago

echoclusterveteran

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

DM, I'm not disagreeing with you at all, but I'd like to press you on one point. Do you really think that the person with the most ships at any given moment is winning the game? Because it sounds like that is what you are implying.

Othrym had the most ships in Taurus for quite a while, right?

I'm playing a game right now with good players in which the ship limit has not arrived (6-7 turns away). If you have the time, would you mind looking at the data and giving your opinion? http://planets.nu/games/50461 - the numbers speak for themselves as to the progress of the game so far. I don't intend to change my strategy in that game, but in your opinion am I shooting myself in the foot by rapid expansion rather than trying to get 6 or more starbases by turn 20? Or is this really just a race difference?

It seems that that there are 4 races that must be protective of their home territory at the expense of planetary expansion: Fed, Crystal, Robot, and Colony; because those are the 4 that have neither cloakers nor hyperdrive ships for quiet, larger territorial expansion. So my typical early-game approach as Privateer has been to take as much (not necessarily contiguous) territory, sneak around, and get eyes everywhere possible. Having talked strategy with you at length, I know that your basic Borg strategy is to get solidly all over the map before turn 10.

Since this thread is all about Quality vs. Quantity, particularly in the early game, do you feel that this applies to planets as well as to ships in one way or another? I'll be very interested in your opinion on those numbers.

And I'd be interested in hearing anyone else's perspective also! It benefits us all to clarify the value and balance philosophies that define what it takes to become a player who consistently wins.

2433 days, 1 hours, 50 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

we must move clans and build starbases. starbaes can kill most ships.

2433 days, 0 hours, 41 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

ECV, It comes down to the zero sum nature of the game. If you hold the ship slots, I have to take them away from you. Every ship slot I take away from you is a gain for me, that's what zero sum means. That's how you "win" and win by a crushing victory. That is VGA planets, boiled down to it's mathematical essence.
The goal may be planets and territory controlled but the vector towards that goal is always ships and it is a snowballing effect, ships beget planets, planets with starbases beget more ships and so forth.
Now if I build my fleet out of SDSF, I am not winning, that's the extreme of the quantity vs. quality debate. The other extreme is only to build TW, mk7-8, capital ships. And what I'm saying is the true balance is to build the most useful ships you possibly can at all times with a strong emphasis on most. Useful ships are NOT the TW, mk7-8 h.phaser beasts. Those ships have their time and place, but it's almost universally well after ship limit and well into the end-game. Determining exactly what is a useful ship is one part strategy and many parts experience. Spacesquad will preferentially forsake tubes, BigBeefer will preferentially forsake good engines and I'll forsake pretty much everything and hit you with sacks of disjointed rust (and it'll hurt too, because there are a lot of 'em).

Amongst good players the person with the most ships at any given point is winning. A good player will not have a fleet of SDSF, instead he will have useful ships. Joshua is winning Dagaba sector at the moment. To beat Joshua, you will have to go and take his ships away. That simple.
If you can do it without losing ships yourself, or making beneficial ship trades, you will win. The races, the abilites, the ship battles, the starbases, etc... those are how you whittle him down.
Rapid expansion by many races, particularly borg and pirate is rarely a bad idea. You can win the zero sum game with no/small losses. But even these races need to pay very close attention to not fall significantly behind because it can be difficult, sometimes enormously difficult, to make someone part with his ships once he has them in his grubby little hands. Just TRY and make say spacesquad part with a ship, I can guarantee you without knowing the scorpius war in detail at all, it's like pulling teeth. He will trade when he "feels like it" and that means: it advantages him.
I would say joshua with 8 bases and 230 ships yet to build vs. an average of 2 bases for the other races is primed danger of running away with the game. The military score indicates he's not building SDSF. A tactical alliance with tom and you're all in a world of hurt. You need more bases, not tomorrow, but now.

In terms of quality vs. quantity of planets it is the same. More is better. A boiling rock with no minerals and no natives is a useful planet. You can put factories on it to generate income, it can harbour a starbase and when it comes its time, most important of all: it can build a ship.
Whatever your border agreements are, whatever diplomacy and shifting around you have to do, yes try for quality planets but always, always get more than the next guy.
In Taurus I went to war with Emork over 5 planets. Rough diplomacy, really rough.

2432 days, 23 hours, 26 minutes ago

star72066

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

The foundation to any winning position is a strong economics. If you look at the first two championship winners(And I have not), you will find one thing in common about both - An incredible economical empire. There are other factors to winning a game, but without a strong economic foundation, you cannot win. Planet resources, lead to starbases, which lead to ships/torps/fighters and also the ability to build more of such faster, and knowing how to put that together in the most productive and quickest way possible is the key and being able to build upon that turn after turn in the most productive and quickest way possible is the key. It takes planning and experience. The first 25 turns of a game is a lot of fun. Every planet you land is like opening up a new treasure chest.

What to build, when to build, how to build, starbases as well as ships, comes down to experience. Taking what you have available in planets and getting the most productive and largest fleet out of those planets on a turn by turn basis. As you add planets, you add productivity. It's a lot of balance and it definately takes experience. Some games can afford you quality and some games you scrap out quantity and in rare games when you hit the jackpot on starting planets, you get both. Seeing what you have, knowing what you can get out of what you have, and doing that the most efficient way possible in ending with the most productive fleet possible. It is a balance that takes experience, but once you master that economic foundation and getting the most out of what you have, your a factor in some way or another in every game.

quality or quantity answers itself, by getting the most capable productivity out of a fleet, for what you have to work with in planet resources. There is no universal answer to this question other than experience will tell you.

2407 days, 0 hours, 45 minutes ago

echoclusterveteran

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

I've got some more ideas and questions on this topic based on some recent turns, so here's one on the "quantity" side of the debate.

Just out of curiosity, when was the last time that any of you used a "land and disassemble" (aka colonize) mission, and what was the reason? Have you ever found it worthwhile to give up a ship slot in exchange for supplies, clans, and 75% of the minerals, while receiving no PBP?

Recently, in a game that has almost ended, I used it to colonize a straggling amorph planet simply to help get the victory countdown moving along as quickly as possible. I knew I'd never need the ship again nor did I care whether the queue was moving or not. I think that's a legitimate use and doubt anybody would disagree.

Also, while having not experienced this myself, I can imagine another possible use. Let's say you have a naturally very valuable ship (cobol, firecloud, damaged cloaker, etc.) orbiting your own starbaseless planet, and the ship is low on crew and you just need to get rid of it because it's likely to be captured by an approaching opponent in combat Or perhaps you're surrounded by webs and see no other way to avoid losing your valuable ship. "Land and disassemble" seems a reasonable desperation move in this unfortunate situation.

But I'm right now considering using it in an early-game situation right now to gain supplies and clans in a positionally important spot. Would you expert players be categorically opposed to such a move due to the early-game loss of the ship slot?

Are there any other situations where high-level players find the "land and disassemble" mission acceptable?

[Not including mass suicide, of course.]

2406 days, 19 hours, 5 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Captured enemy freighters are also regularly beached if they are in a danger of being recaptured.

2406 days, 14 hours, 40 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Echoclusterveteran,

Just a quick comment: Are you sure that you don't get pbp's for colonize mission?

From http://planets.nu/documentation/priority-build-points: "You get 1 PBP if you set off a glory device or colonize/scrap a ship."

That would make the colonize mission quite a bit more appealing - just recognize that it happens after the first build phase and before the second (so pbp calculations will adjust based on combat).

I think?

2406 days, 14 hours, 40 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

deleted double post

2406 days, 14 hours, 38 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Well, I'm pretty certain that when I had to colonize my entire fleet to avoid capture by the cursed Crystals I didn't get PBP for that. Certainly got minerals.

2406 days, 14 hours, 36 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

J-zan I read that as well before but it does not seem to be correct. I tried it several times and did not seem to get a PBP from colonization.

On unrelated note, how do you get 11 warship builds with 25 bases while I get only 5 with 52 bases and having 2 more PBP....grrr! Time to freeze the queue again.

2406 days, 14 hours, 15 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

I just did a quick check in a private game. There are NO pbps for land/dissamble mission! So we have a bug here...

2406 days, 14 hours, 12 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Yes, there are many good reasons to use the "colonize" or "land and disassemble" mission and they are all situational. You're scuttling a ship, and it has to be done with very specific intent.
I use this mission the most with probes, specifically the cheap and plentiful B200 that can't jump more than once. Probes often end up deep behind enemy lines and have no way home, particularly if the planet is very isolated and happens to be a paradise. The probe is often low or empty of supplies and clans at that point and really should be broken apart to kickstart assimilation.
In RARE instances you should in fact scuttle a cube to build a starbase. A cube separated from fireclouds and starbases by more than 600 ly or so can happen (your fault, the opponent or whatnot). The cube is then PBP for the enemy, one way or another. What you want to do is hit a goldmine planet, break the ship apart, build a base with it and queue in a PB1 firecloud. Hopefully you're sitting at ~20 PBP and some recycling can regain the seemingly lost position in 2 turns.

2406 days, 14 hours, 6 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

..you get pbp's from recycling using a star base, but not from the disassemble mission, that's at least how it works here. can't remember how it was in the old days...

2406 days, 13 hours, 16 minutes ago

emork the lizard king

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

My (bad) memory tells me: No PBP for colonizing ships in TimHost.

2406 days, 12 hours, 38 minutes ago

echoclusterveteran

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Ok this is a question that I know the answer to :)

YES PBP for recycle, destruction in ship-to-ship combat, glory device, or glory device destroying another ship.

NO PBP for anything else, including Colonize (a/k/a "Land and Disassemble" on Nu).

It's inconsistent with some versions of the documentation but not a bug.

When Host 3.2 came out, you got PBP for capturing as well as for destroying ... Tim figured out that there were lots of ways to exploit the priority system, so that's why PBP are only awarded in the 4 conditions mentioned above, and that's the way it has been ever since.

The origin of the "colonize/scrap a ship" in the documentation is direct from the host320.txt documentation.

2406 days, 12 hours, 32 minutes ago

echoclusterveteran

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Sorry for the huge letters above .. somehow they got big and I could not figure out how to make them small again

2406 days, 12 hours, 32 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Cool. Glad I got this answered before I relied on a colonization tactic that wanted pbp's..... now if the documentation could be cleaned up for those of us whose memory of the old days is so foggy.....

Azzazzello, you don't really want to freeze that queue... I promise....

Sorry for changing the discussion briefly - errr, I like Quantity.

Also, thanks to all you vets for your thoughts; this discussion is really enlightening for those of us still learning (relearning) the game.

2406 days, 12 hours, 28 minutes ago

echoclusterveteran

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Yea, that's why it would not be good for "land and disassemble" to award a PBP. At a starbase you can only recycle one at a time, preventing you from suddenly harvesting an entire fleet for PBP. You have to at least have enough starbases to recycle them at and a way to get them there.

2405 days, 10 hours, 30 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

interesting topic.

My approach for the Birds is always to put Transwarps or at least t8 on every ship you intend to move to enemy territory. a Resolute with transwarps, x-rays and mark4s is more useful than Resolute with t4 engines, heavy phasers and mark8s. I want to be mobile and try to hit where it's least expected.

A few exceptions I can think of depending on circumstances

-defensive Dark Wing against an early strike or at an isolated starbase (if she survives, can be put to use in offense, see below)

-starbase breaker where it doesn't matter that the enemy can see you coming. Usually not the case for doing an early strike yourself - if I see an uncloaked Bird ship approaching, I assume a w1 Dark Wing in tow and plan defenses accordingly. So seeing a Dark Wing uncloaked with no apparent reason most likely means a duet.

-sweeping in some cases

2158 days, 23 hours, 47 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

The Bird's greatest enemy (other than the cursed POP ships) are mine fields. Putting x-rays on your ships makes them vulnerable. I would rather have w7 engines but Disruptors as my beam.

In my first Bird game I put x-rays and w9 engines on all my ships and sent them off to find and kill the enemy. Next thing I knew I had an entire fleet of Resolutes and Dark Wings stranded in warp wells futilely sweeping with x-ray beams, waiting for the time I could get back-up ships with real beams built and down there to aid them.

2158 days, 10 hours, 53 minutes ago

RE: Quality vs Quantity: A VGA Planets Inquiry into Values

Quality all the way. I won't build crap ships and will hunt down those that are out there.

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, and the jury is still out in a bunch of games I took over.

Maybe I care more about actually playing than winning. And I see 100 useless ships as not playing.