Anyone feels that stacking should be banned on this map? Stack plasma seemed like the optimum strategy, since with this much resources to allow stacking will be nearly impossible to close in, and force a long range war.
That said, I will delete SAC-5-2 and see what happens.
I posted my SAC5-3 in response to 123stw’s SAC5-2 but it defeated RCIX’s SAC5-2 also. The most difficult part of 123stw’s SAC5-2 was not the Plasma spam, it was the fighters.
I first saw these Serenity Rocket Laser fighters in mrblitz’s SAC1-52. For some reason they are much tougher than I would expect. They blow away most other fighters I’ve tried against them.
Yeah I first seen them from SAC 1-52. Since then I have modified it so it consistently beat Mrblitz’s version by 40%. I have also used them for my tournament entry 1 and 2.
SAC-5 4 posted. Brainless howitzer spam. Tested deployment at the back too, but really guys, if you’re going to use long range stuff, don’t deploy at the front where other fleets can spawn right on top of you.
It’s the Serenity dual weapon fighters. I’ve tried many different Rebel,
Swarm and Fed fighter types against them and I haven’t found any that
will even come close in equal numbers here. So to be effective you have
to use Serenity dual weapon fighters too, which means using Tribe, which
means Utopia cruisers.
I’ve been thinking about why these fighters are so strong. With any
other race if you use dual weapons you get an increase in offense offset
by a decrease in survivability due to drastically reduced speed. With
the Tribe, however, that is offset by the large increase in hit points.
So you get all the benifits of higher firepower without the same loss of
defensive staying power.
I think this is a big game balance problem. Unless someone comes up with
a good counter it’s going to be all Utopia/Serenity all the time.
I don’t think Serenity fighters are overpowered. Well, at least not anymore than tribe itself is. I’ve been using simple rocket fighters the whole time and I seem to get better results with that. Maybe it’s just my playstyle
That’s a beautiful setup. You force an air confrontation by deploying an almost non-moving cruiser in the back, whereas before, you could ignore an air confrontation if you killed fast enough. Props.
I find it to be a perfectly valid strategy. Decoys and dummies cost credits, so they need to be killed like every other ship. If a fleet can’t kill the last ship without getting destroyed first, then it should lose. Why should people have a free pass to ignore aggressive fighters?
Ok, I’m sure I’m being stupid here but I don’t understand what you folks are talking about. What is an “air battle”? Aren’t all of our Gratuitous Battles in space? What does a stationary cruiser have to do with it? There is a terminology thing going on here that I’m not familiar with.
By “air battle”, they mean that you have to deal with the fighters.
If both fleets just rush at eachother, you can win by wiping out the other cruisers/frigates and ignore the fighters. If there’s a cruiser hanging back that you can’t get to right away, your fleet either flies all the way across the map taking fire from the enemy fighters, or you have to actively deal with the fighters some how before they paper cut your cruisers to death.
Yeah, it’s basically a stereotypical reference to WW II naval warfare. The units actually have real life equivalents. Cruisers are large warships. Frigate are smaller warships (which, ironically is a reference to a type of bird).
5-9 posted, one of the hardest SAC I’ve ever done. Now that the last fleet with any anti-missile has been pushed off the queue, I expect a good missile spam to dominate. BUT STW is banned from posting the next one, give someone else a chance
