Better Bombardment

[DeckPrism]

I have a theory about better bombardment that I have not tested but would be easy to test. I think I can destroy more population if 1, I control the bombarding and 2, unless you have a truely superior force, do a 25% bombard, wait for the planet to turn 25-33%, repeat. The theory is that where the population is with repect to your strike actualy matters. The downside, if I'm right, is the extra time this takes while waiting for the planet to rotate. On the other hand, if this works, you might not have to bomb it for as many turns.

The test involves doing this vs other kinds of bombardment on the same planet from a saved game. What do you think? Am I imagining things? :bulb:

[Beamup]

Just of the top of my head, I'd have to say you're probably imagining things. This would seem an utterly bizarre thing for QSI to waste a lot of some programmer's time implementing. But, I admit I have no evidence to back this up.

Would be really really weird if true though...:bulb:

[Strifeguard]

Since we're on the subject of bombardment, I thought I'd throw this out here:

Anyone else notice that ships equipped with DF weapons tend to be MUCH better at bombardment that ships equipped almost exclusively with fighters?

This never made sense to me. Shouldn't fighters be better at bombardment? After all, it seems like they'd be better at "pin-pointing" targets than shots fired from orbit. Then again, with complex scanners, why would they be better? I don't know, it's just bothered me.

[Litcube]

I thought bombardment implies an indirect assault.

[Patton1942]

Originally posted by Strifeguard
Since we're on the subject of bombardment, I thought I'd throw this out here:

Anyone else notice that ships equipped with DF weapons tend to be MUCH better at bombardment that ships equipped almost exclusively with fighters?

This never made sense to me. Shouldn't fighters be better at bombardment? After all, it seems like they'd be better at "pin-pointing" targets than shots fired from orbit. Then again, with complex scanners, why would they be better? I don't know, it's just bothered me.

You know, I thought this as well. Then I noticed (or I'm pretty sure I noticed, but it's hard to tell) that the carriers I had were smallish (Light Cruiser sized) and armed with interceptors with a mix of laser to mass driver weaponry.

I figured that the fighters don't do enough damage to get through the building armor.

I've been meaning to try it with SCF's and better weapons. Still haven't gotten to it yet, tho.

[James1701]

I've tried some bombardments using various sized "pure" fleets (only DF, only IF or only CV) and while I didn't do exhaustive testing I've found that DF Fleets are the best at bombardments with IF close behind. Generally carriers are fairly weak for the most part though using duel pod phaser fighters or disrupter armed fighters really improve their performance in this role. Plasma armed fighters would probably do well in this role but I rarely use them as they are just too damn bulky.

[Strifeguard]

Originally posted by James1701
Plasma armed fighters would probably do well in this role but I rarely use them as they are just too damn bulky.
Agreed. I never considered the dual-pod implication.

As for size, the first time I witnessed this was actually during a friend's game, pre-patch some time after turn 500, 8 armadas, all leviathin carriers, all designs auto-build (we were still new at the game then), which I assumed means latest tech and a moderate SCF/Interceptor mix, heavier on the interceptors. Anyway, the force described above bombards a heavily developed colony, and only takes out about 92% (I can't remember what the exact percentage is, but it was *almost* all the way). The same turn, a single armada of LR ships (again auto-build, hey it was like our 3rd game ever) bombards a comparably developed world, glasses it in 1 shot.

After loading from an autosave, we tried switching the fleets, and having them bombard each other's planets. The result was the same, the LR TF was able to glass in 1 turn, while the CVs, despite very superior numbers, needed more time.

[Ron_Lugge]

Originally posted by Strifeguard
Since we're on the subject of bombardment, I thought I'd throw this out here:

Anyone else notice that ships equipped with DF weapons tend to be MUCH better at bombardment that ships equipped almost exclusively with fighters?

This never made sense to me. Shouldn't fighters be better at bombardment? After all, it seems like they'd be better at "pin-pointing" targets than shots fired from orbit. Then again, with complex scanners, why would they be better? I don't know, it's just bothered me.

Its because only SFC can be used for bombardment, not interceptors.

[Skymage]

Originally posted by Ron_Lugge
Its because only SFC can be used for bombardment, not interceptors.


Ummm......


I use my interceptor equipped carriers all the time to bombard and do excessively well....



SkyMage

[Ron_Lugge]

Originally posted by Skymage
Ummm......


I use my interceptor equipped carriers all the time to bombard and do excessively well....



SkyMage

Hm... I thikn I'll talk to visage, cause I could have SWORN he'd tested that..

Or maybe this was one of the things changed in the patch?

[Skymage]

Originally posted by Ron_Lugge
Hm... I thikn I'll talk to visage, cause I could have SWORN he'd tested that..

Or maybe this was one of the things changed in the patch?

Maybe it was changed...I dunno. All I know is it works. :up:


I'll take Visages' word though as he definately knows more about MOO3 than I.


SkyMage

[Ron_Lugge]

Originally posted by Skymage
Maybe it was changed...I dunno. All I know is it works. :up:


I'll take Visages' word though as he definately knows more about MOO3 than I.


SkyMage

I could be misremembering easily enough, so...

:mad:60:mad:second:mad:limit:mad: