[quote]If there is no adjacent roid, either you're on Devil's Den or you're fucked[/quote] yep. [quote]10. This is where it gets map specific. It's very hard to say where to go from here. If the adjacent planets are lavas or ices, then build two econ labs to get the tech to colonize them. 11. If you think you will be rushed, or someone will get to you before you can get to that third planet, build the three military labs to get illums. Disciples are garbage against a human
SplitPeaSoup
[quote]Teela Brown[/quote] ringworld (larry niven) What about Shylock? Harry Seldon?
Build a huge fleet, then build jump inhibitors. I find this is the best defense. Do not build hangers. Instead, build a few turrets around the jump inhibitors (1 or 2). These punish your opponent for wasting his time destroying one before you decimate his fleet anyway with your awesome superior firepower.
[quote]I believe that would be "adaptation", not "evolution". It's still the same bacterium, just optimized to it's current environment. It didn't say, turn into a multi-cellular organism... I may be mistaken, though; evolutionary biology is not really my thing. Oh, and PZ Myers gets regular beatings by WWW Link this guy...[/quote] 1) You are mistaken. 2) You clearly did not read [link="https://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/309057"]this[/link]. 3) An adaptation [found i
[quote]honestly, we don't care that u r posting, just stop hijacking peoples threads with insults to other people for no good reason including multiple posts in a row. on topic, i'm curious to hear what innociv thinks of RA 1.04. i used it today in a ffa where i was getting severely nerfed by the compu (stuck in 4-5 planets the whole game), i did not find it to be an 'i win' button, even with 8+ gates.[/quote] I think you hit the nail on the head. This is what I want. I think o
[quote]Yea.. sorry it wouldn't let me edit.[/quote] Was this in response to me? No, yours made more sense than most... I was busy writing that when you posted.
[link="https://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/309057"]Seriously. You should have to read this before you think to post.[/link]
Evolution can be defined as a change in alleic frequencies within a population over time. Thus, considering a small population of 100 sins players, we have two alleles, A and a . The allele A codes for a phenotype, something you can observe, and so does allele a. Since humans, like sins players, are diploid, meaning they have 2 of each chromosome, humans can have two alleles for a particular tra
[quote]Think, it's not done enough, including among scientists.[/quote] Scarily, I think he actually heard something about evolution. [quote]Ok, you're a moth. You're a white moth living in a birch forest. What do you figure your odds of being seen by a bird are? Now your forest gets painted black by a rock band obsessed with painting things black, think they've gone up a wee bit? Evolutionists say ooh! proof! They changed colors! Common sense says eh? what if they just got et?
[quote]Plus, in order for evolution to NOT occur, you need a population with identical genetics, no crossing over, entirely random mating, and absolutely no environmental pressures. IT HAS TO BE OCCURING! For those of you who understand the mechanics of evolution then you know why this is true. Evolution is not a vague mechanism, it is real, defined, and logical.[/quote] Actually, a population with identical genetics and no mutation would disallow evolution. Random mating and environmen
[quote]How about please stop trying to completely dictate how everyone uses your thread? That's not how this discussion forum works. EVEN THE DEVS DON'T DO IT.As for "clearly mocking", I'll point out post #19 in this thread as an example of irony.-- Retro[/quote] The irony lies in that you do not realize I meant no sarcasm.
I am a biology student. I do not see why Intelligent Design should not be taught in schools. It is a wonderful theory when explained correctly. The theory of intelligent design states that everything around you is the way it is because some cosmic power wanted it to be that way. We cetainly cannot disprove it, and leaving a lot of religous assumptions out of the picture, the theory gains some credence. I have studied evolution, and I can tell you that evolution and the
Build some light frigates maybe?
[quote]Wow, how long did that take you?It took him about 3 seconds.[/quote] , which is how long is takes you to "get it done". see how all the lies in this world are interconnected? Look, the point is that if you are attacking someone, you really need to take out his planets or he comes back. It is lame that there are not better ways to do that in this game. But as it is you need either a cap ship or a seige frigate. I know seige frigates are very limited, but they serve a purp
Please stop posting nonsense. The purpose of this thread is to agree or disagree with that scouts should be able to patrol.
I see that your argument was that your illuminators just killed everything super fast anyway, so why bother? The answer is that they disable enemy heavy cruisers and heal your own. They are not really meant to be paired with huge illuminator fleets.
Build them where your planets get attacked.
Seige frigates should all have the embargo ability. I mean, it makes sense, right?
[quote]scouts early game are yber, you cant belive how many players i have fuckked up with scout swamr, who rushed to lrm'sThat makes a certain amount of perverted sense. LRMs are one of the few things scouts can actually make a dent in, after all.[/quote] What else can they dent?
[quote]I bet ten upgraded (AOE) sentinels could wipe out those bombers in 3 volleys.[/quote] I don't play Vasari, so I do not know what you mean. I will look into this. Although, I generally only build flaks to take out fighters.
... on the other hand, you can expect 60 fighter squadrons to take out multiple bomber squadrons in a single run. An interesting point is that the flak will fare much better against the fighters.
[quote]Uhm... or have like 5-6 Flak and laugh at the bombers?[/quote] Why do people believe this? I bet Regicide started it. Do not shout, "NERF!" unless you are sure these strategies do not work. I wager your economy is just bad. That is probably why you keep losing. The ships are pretty well balanced. A flak will neuteralize maybe a single bomber squadron, but not before that squadron does a lot of damage. 80 bombers will destroy 6 flak in maybe 2 runs... Also, you
Seige frigates are great for putting pressure on the enemy. Send one and a couple support ships to maybe 3 planets at once. The enemy fleet will have to suffer losses while fighting you. Also, they are great for cleaning up enemies who you have beaten down. Why should I build all seige caps when I could build ones that live longer or serve a purpose more useful to me?
[quote]You also forgot that due to the mitigation system, 5% more health is not really 5% more health. In a typical ship fight, a ship must take a certain amount of damage (450 instant) to achieve max mitigation. Only after that initial hit, does the ship take minimal damage. While I don't have the exact math, that means a ship with 600 health can actually be around twice as tough as a ship with 400 health. When you're dealing with low health ships (especially the disciple), that little bit of e
[quote]Actually, bomber DpS/supply ratio vs target armour (in this case very heavy) is the worst DpS/supply ratio vs. target armour. of any combat unit in the game, by a fairly heavy margin. Using bombers at all is pretty much just not a good idea. You're more or less always better off building LRMs or more HCs. Bombers are occasionally cool for guerrilla hits on enemy infrastructure (since all orbital platforms are 'very-heavy' targets and the cruisers can just hang out on the edge of the grav