| Author |
Nuetrons |
Sputter{TB}
Grand Admiral
Interstellar Cultural Confederation United
Joined: September 22, 2004
Posts: 109
From: Pennsylvania
|  Posted: 2005-11-03 22:18
LOL the icc bomber dread has 11 bomb slots and 2 fighter slots which means any def is useless since the planet has no chance what so ever and surviving against that bomber dread easily done the best ugto has is command dread same rank but a lot less bombs on command dread
_________________
Ph33r the Ruptors!
|
Captain Sternn
Grand Admiral
Joined: March 18, 2004
Posts: 225
| Posted: 2005-11-04 01:14
True that mirvs are far more insidious than nuetrons and would far more advocate their removal from DS, I agree there are more issues facing bombing on the whole including the bomber dread perhaps bombing on the whole needs to be looked at it has many problems.
In any case I tend to be at least somewhat cautious of someones motives if their planets damaged stat is more than their ship damaged stat...but thats me.
_________________
|
Forever™ the Nightmare
Cadet
Joined: January 31, 2004
Posts: 28
From: on your flank....
| Posted: 2005-11-04 02:19
all i hear is "wah!!!" and more "wah!!!" from ICC, UGTO, Kluth ... although i believe Kluth have the hardest time in the game at this point.... anyway... there should be rules set forth towards bombing and i believe i've got me an idea:
1. When bombing an enemy system to stone age , whether it be nuetrons or MIRVing , you must rebuild the entire system to a substainable level before moving on to the next system.
2. Total Annihilation of a planets population really isn't necessary. Unless, and i believe this whole heartedly... unless that planet has low pop, low structures, and low defense. that way the prestige gain isn't ludicruos.
3. Involve everyone to do their part according to rank to complete you're common goal. This is a Strategy game after all... at least play strategically...
when i can think of more i'll add it.. please feel free to scrutinize this because i know u will 
*smiles*!!
_________________
|
spatula
1st Rear Admiral
Joined: May 28, 2005
Posts: 41
From: 192.168.1.1
| Posted: 2005-11-04 21:18
i agree with nightmere bombing should be more strategic and thats why i think they should remove nuetrons not because im biased towards icc its that nuetrons ruin any strategy for capping planets, all u do is choose a planet and do a bomb run on it and if your bombs hit then you drop the inf and the planet is yours. with mirving unless you buit the planet back up the other team could easily recap it so if the prestige gain was lowered to about 1 point per building and 1/4 per infantry then bombing wouldn't be so lucrative and a lot less people would bomb and i would give kluth back their old advanage of having only people killer bomb. overall DS has become harder to see the differences between factions because for almost every weapon the other faction has a counter weapon making them sort of level out in the end, each faction needs more distinction, kluth being able to do sneak attacks and bomb pop of planets, ugto being able to unleash massive swarms of fighters on enemy ships and the fighters should also recharge 2x as fast as other factions to let them launch faster, and icc should have shields and be able to launch missles that track better than any other factions. this would make people pick the faction for what they are best because as it is icc and ugto have almost identical fleets besides for missle dread and agincourt and the bombers. and finaly so i can shut up for good no more dictors, they should be planetary only and if we have to keep them at least make them not be able to jump with dictor on and add a recharge time so that if you are 800 away from the dictor it cant just jump right next to u, at least it would have to turn off dictor and would have to wait 30 sec before it could turn it on again.
thats all i have to say so il shut up now.
_________________
[choke]"I find your lack of faith disturbing."[/choke]
|
YIIMM
Grand Admiral
Joined: June 16, 2005
Posts: 851
From: Barcino, Hispania Tarraconensis
| Posted: 2005-11-05 06:23
So you're saying there's no strategic element in capturing planets intact which require effort to be captured back, as opposed to wiping out planet which need no effort at all to cap?
What you may be forgetting is that neutron bombing, for the most part, is more dangerous than MIRVing. With MIRVs, assuming the bombs hit and all the inf is gone, there are usually no structures left to impede your dropping of troops, wheras any well-built planet that is neutroned can still attack both enemy inf that is dropped as well as the bomber.
A strategic action, by definition, is one that will give you a good plan to gain all enemy territory. I have absolutely no idea how you came to the conclusion that holding vast amounts of unbuilt and undefended territory is in any way strategic as opposed to having the opposite.
_________________
|
Smartin
Grand Admiral
Joined: August 04, 2005
Posts: 1107
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2005-11-05 11:28
Quote:
|
On 2005-11-04 21:18, ninja_guru {~Sum Umbra!~} wrote:
i agree with nightmere bombing should be more strategic and thats why i think they should remove nuetrons not because im biased towards icc its that nuetrons ruin any strategy for capping planets, all u do is choose a planet and do a bomb run on it and if your bombs hit then you drop the inf and the planet is yours. with mirving unless you buit the planet back up the other team could easily recap it so if the prestige gain was lowered to about 1 point per building and 1/4 per infantry then bombing wouldn't be so lucrative and a lot less people would bomb and i would give kluth back their old advanage of having only people killer bomb. overall DS has become harder to see the differences between factions because for almost every weapon the other faction has a counter weapon making them sort of level out in the end, each faction needs more distinction, kluth being able to do sneak attacks and bomb pop of planets, ugto being able to unleash massive swarms of fighters on enemy ships and the fighters should also recharge 2x as fast as other factions to let them launch faster, and icc should have shields and be able to launch missles that track better than any other factions. this would make people pick the faction for what they are best because as it is icc and ugto have almost identical fleets besides for missle dread and agincourt and the bombers. and finaly so i can shut up for good no more dictors, they should be planetary only and if we have to keep them at least make them not be able to jump with dictor on and add a recharge time so that if you are 800 away from the dictor it cant just jump right next to u, at least it would have to turn off dictor and would have to wait 30 sec before it could turn it on again.
thats all i have to say so il shut up now.
|
|
So you remove nuetrons....so now they ugto or kluth will bring 2 bombers and a ecm scout and level your planets. Nothing will change except you will be even more mad cause you have rebuild. I say we remove MRIVS from the game and force everyone to nuet.
_________________
DarkSpace Community Website
|
Borgie
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: August 15, 2005
Posts: 2256
From: close by
| Posted: 2005-11-05 23:50
Quote:
|
On 2005-11-03 19:31, ninja_guru {~Sum Umbra!~} wrote:
you forgot to mention that UGTO has command dread also and even though ICC have bomber dessie it isn't that great because it has only 2 ECM slots and no rear armor leaving it very unprotected against UGTO and K'luth defense bases.
|
|
its not?..lol i love leveling ugto defended planets its an easy wipe right there ... all i gotta do is follow in untill all my bombs are droped then pull out most of the gettin gout before dictor stops me from jumping
then again i go have 8500+ to bombing mostly on ugto planets with my bomber dessie
_________________
|
Forever™ the Nightmare
Cadet
Joined: January 31, 2004
Posts: 28
From: on your flank....
| Posted: 2005-11-06 00:41
Quote:
____________________________________________________________
A strategic action, by definition, is one that will give you a good plan to gain all enemy territory. I have absolutely no idea how you came to the conclusion that holding vast amounts of unbuilt and undefended territory is in any way strategic as opposed to having the opposite.
____________________________________________________________
I do believe i said to rebuild  and if a planet is bombed and captured so easily than it wasn't built well at all now was it? Therefore why keep it intact? Where is the strategic advantage in that? Oh and just a lil FYI:
the definition of Strategic Advantage:
A. First off let me break it down for you
I.stra·te·gic (adj.)
a. Important or essential in relation to a plan of action: a strategic withdrawal.
b. Essential to the effective conduct of war: strategic materials.
c. Highly important to an intended objective: The staff discussed strategic marketing factors.
(now read carefully this is the really important one...) 3. Intended to destroy the military potential of an enemy: strategic bombing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. ad·van·tage
1. A beneficial factor or combination of factors.
2. Benefit or profit; gain a better standing.
3. A relatively favorable position; superiority of means: A well built system gave us the advantage.
4. To put into good use effectively.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. now lets put them together:
Strategic + Advantage = Strategic Advantage
1. The overall relative power relationship of opponents that enables one nation or group of nations effectively to control the course of a military or political situation.
C. In other words... HI!!! I KNOW MY STUFF
_________________
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2005-11-06 04:27
Quote:
|
I do believe i said to rebuild and if a planet is bombed and captured so easily than it wasn't built well at all now was it? Therefore why keep it intact? Where is the strategic advantage in that?
|
|
There is a problem with this.
That being, when ICC Mirvs UGTO systems, they don't ever, ever build. They infact, rarely, if ever, capture the planets they bomb.
Infact, the planets UGTO cap in ICC space are mirved and never rebuilt...
Also...you said why keep it intact...
Well, netron bombing infact, is far more strategic and provides a much greater advatntage than Mirving.
How so? Neutron bombing gives you a fully intact planet - meaning which, you have a planet helping defend you from the get-go, this meaning that you dont have to spend time rebuilding, and you can go out and cap the entire system, making it equally as hard to capture for the enemy.
While with mirving gives you a desolate planet, meaning you have to spend 30 minutes to an hour rebuilding, openly leaving your planet to recapture and thus forcing you to withdraw if that happens, not only this, but it slows down your advance if you must rebuild.
But ICC never rebuilds! See, they just go through a system, nuke every structure, and infantry on every planet they can, and then they leave, some those in such a hurry for more prestige that they don't even capture the planet.
See...this 'stratigic advantage' might just be valid...if you guys kinda you know, held to it.
But it isn't about a 'strategic advantge' with Mirvs, infact, all Mirvs are there fore is so that you - that being those who use them - want to either greif the enemy pointlessly without intention of actually captureing their system (which fully undermines the concepts of the game anyways) or for the mere benefit of prestige.
Infact, it shouldent be neutrons that should be removed, but Mirvs.
-Ent
_________________
|
Sixkiller
Marshal
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: May 11, 2005
Posts: 1786
From: Netherlands
| Posted: 2005-11-06 06:13
Mirvs should actually only be used when there is a big fight going on around a planet and you cant manage to capture the planet and your being blown to pieces.
Thats the only moment that i can think of, where you have a reason to use mirvs above neutrons.
_________________
|
TheHunter
Marshal
Joined: July 05, 2005
Posts: 257
From: 3rd Star from the Left and keep going till Morning
| Posted: 2005-11-06 06:56
All im seeing is more and more ICC & UGTO posts about this thread now a kluth post.
Anyone with brains and in the know, knows that kluth do indeed have a murder time of bombing since we have no neutrons by default.
and sorry to say this but yes its better to take the time to use skill with neutrons then to simply mirv and move on ...
yes it takes more time to neutron but from this kluths own eyes in our systems both icc and ugto have been seen mirving systems but what i will say is this as for UGTO its been nubbins or skill less players that have been mirving systems as for ICC what we have seen in the past is old pilots as well as new use mirvs.
the fact that kluth dont have mirvs as in our factorys dont make them would point to the fact that this whole mirv/neutron thread is a fight that you 2 powers will have to solve on your own.
On a side note just after writing this i went into the metaverse and guess what CEC were mirving a system and the pilot im not gonna name the veteran was not being attacked, wether the pilot said he planned on rebuilding the plant is not in question but as i said to him how can you rebuild a mirved planet when we just put a single inf down and retake it mirving is for losers and those with no true patience to use there skills ... am i wrong please enlighten us all on this.
Thank you for reading this long winded kluth answer.
........
The Pilots Quote from CEC this is funny ,,, Mirvs should actually only be used when there is a big fight going on around a planet and you cant manage to capture the planet and your being blown to pieces.
Thats the only moment that i can think of, where you have a reason to use mirvs above neutrons.
truely if thats the only moment explain six your mirving actions to us all or should i just say that you all will bitch about mirving then you'll go out and do it yourselves ... thats the real joke here
[ This Message was edited by: Topbum Jr (Sco) on 2005-11-06 07:35 ]
_________________
|
Borgie
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: August 15, 2005
Posts: 2256
From: close by
| Posted: 2005-11-06 07:42
lol i still look at it like this why use nuetrons to take over a planet when you can just blow up everything and keep on going?
_________________
|
TheHunter
Marshal
Joined: July 05, 2005
Posts: 257
From: 3rd Star from the Left and keep going till Morning
| Posted: 2005-11-06 08:31
Quote:
|
On 2005-11-06 07:42, Fatal Borgie wrote:
lol i still look at it like this why use nuetrons to take over a planet when you can just blow up everything and keep on going?
|
|
and wheres the skill in that lol
_________________
|
Nim *
Chief Marshal
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: September 05, 2004
Posts: 295
| Posted: 2005-11-06 11:35
Quote:
|
On 2005-11-03 19:31, ninja_guru {~Sum Umbra!~} wrote:
you forgot to mention that UGTO has command dread also and even though ICC have bomber dessie it isn't that great because it has only 2 ECM slots and no rear armor leaving it very unprotected against UGTO and K'luth defense bases.
|
|
I'm not icc but I believe bomber dessie has 1 special slot and its way way better than ugto bomber cruser.
Oh and who ever said Jump cruser is crap is an idiot, its one of the best bombers in game. It can mount 4 ecm, has good firepower to defend itself and it has shield.
[ This Message was edited by: Nim {C?} on 2005-11-06 11:38 ]
_________________
|
Ants
Chief Marshal
Joined: February 11, 2005
Posts: 315
From: Canada
| Posted: 2005-11-06 12:08
Quote:
|
On 2005-11-03 20:35, Enterprise wrote:
First and foremost, let me say that this practice of neutron bombing is far better than what ICC do, which is to level our planets to the ground and often enough not even capture them.
|
|
your right i lvl every ugto and kluth planet tha WE "ICC" Built up with icc defences on it.... and second it is fun
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
