
Subj: Re: MOO : exploring planets

>It greatly irritates me that I have to establish "naval" superiority over
>a planet before invading it.  (otherwise it won't be "explored")  but once
>I've explored it once, then I can perform a "mob it with transports and
>who cares how many get toasted" attack.  Is there a way around this that
>doesn't involve getting into an alliance or getting the advanced space 
>scanner?  The reason is I want to try an interesting strategy: while playing
>the Bulrathi, don't research any tech but propulsion: just steal it all from
>neighboring races by taking their planets intact.
>Comments?

Well...if you try this strategy, you're going to have one major problem
that I can see at this moment.  By not establishing "naval" superiority,
your transports are going to get shot to pieces by any orbiting fleets
or missile bases.

If you do want to try this strategy anyway, you could conceivable get away
with it if you made a great many fast, long-range scouts that got into
orbit before any sort of defense was put up.  The problem with this is that
you'll get clobbered by the computers production advantage at the higher
levels.  I would suggest that you work on at least a split of propulsion
and computers, this way you could get the advanced space scanner.  I know
you said that you wanted to avoid this, but I don't see how this is possible
otherwise, unless you edit a save file.
==========
: Yes!  Please upload it somewhere.  I get bored in the beginning and
: mid-game.  I'd love to try out a good fight.  Either e-mail or upload
: it to a public FTP site.

OK. I'll upload this to wuarchive when I get home. The game starts off with a
fleet on the system Concordia, ready for use on the Guardian (Orion is on the
top of the screen, the system that's avoided by every race :-)). Alliance with
the Sakkras has just been broken: prepare for a crack assault on Parallon or
Saria (shoot the ship that moves first, not the largest fleet, or they'll
crush you!). Once you scare them off they won't attack anymore :-)

Here's the things that I think you should get (which at that point of the game
I didn't have):

	Neutron Stream Projector
	SubSpace Interdictor
	Ionic Pulsar
	Hyper Drive
	Oracle Interface
	ScatterPack X
	Inertial Nullifier

Things like Maulers, Plasma Cannon, Pulse Plasma Cannon will be built by
Meklars later on. You might want the Tri-Focus Plasma thingy for the "flea"
fleets, but I never use it.

You could keep killing the Guardian over and over till you get the stuff you
need, or trade/steal for them (Bulrathis will trade you some of the stuff
above for stupid insignificant equipment). Make sure you bring along the
transport with the attack fleet so you can colonize the planet as soon as you
beat the Guardian (unless you want the other races to colonize it and take the
DeathRay from you :-)) 

Get the scatterpack X so no one will want to mess your colonies which averages
350 base defense per system. 

I'll post the name of the file and location later on today...

==========
Subj: Re: MOO Space Monsters

> Wouldn't it be cool if you could obtain the weapons of the  
crystal/amoeba
> after you kill them?

Well, I did find an editor called edmoo, which allowed me to get the  
Amoebae ray and the Other weapon. It is on Wuarchive.wustl.edu (at least it  
was). If you find it get it.
==========

While we're on the topic, I discovered a few bugs regarding planetary reserves
recently... Get a rich or ultra rich world and max its population and industry.
Now set its production to as much industry as you can -- it will say 'RESERVE'
next to the bar.  Now transfer all your reserves to that planet and, viola, you
get them back doubled or tripled, plus the planet's production. More if you're
the Klackons.
A related semi-cheat: Use your reserves on a world with artifacts (or better
yet orion) and put all your rich and u-rich into building up your reserves. You
get the production from the u-riches tripled, then it goes into the reserve,
then as it comes out and is used for tech it is doubled (or quadrupled) again.
Plus, as before, racial bonuses if you are the Klackons or Psilons.

Interesting, huh? The main drawback is that it takes time to build up your
reserves this way, since they are not used all at once.. about 5y per cycle.
----------
yet. The manual isn't much help either so -

  i) What's the best way to build reserves? Through the Planets screen setting?
     This is has a parasitic effect on ALL your planetary economies, like
     the "internal security" slider right?

 ii) RE: The "add to reserves" slider in the Planets screen:
     Is this a straight off-the-top skim of your planetary production or is
     it halved as the excess industrial production is?
        i.e. Is the formula    
             Amount added to reserves (BC) = %of raw production (BC)
                                        OR  = (%of raw production (BC))/2

iii) When you spend reserves on a planet what happens? Does just the 
     industrial capacity (Ind) go up? What about ships or bases?
     Can you specify to which production line you want to money transferred
     to?

> i) What's the best way to build reserves? Through the Planets screen setting?

No.  The best way is to build Rich and Ultra-Rich planets up to MAX
factories.  Then further investment in IND will go to RESERV.  Because
the planet is Rich or Ultra-Rich, your expenditure on IND will get
multiplied by 2x or 3x, then get divided by 2 when it is put into the
reserve.  So you will get either 1x (Rich) or 1.5x (Ultra-Rich) of what
you spend on RESERV put into your reserves, instead of 0.5x which is the
normal amount if you adjust the tax bar on the Planets screen or buy
RESERV at non-Rich planets.

> This is has a parasitic effect on ALL your planetary economies, like
> the "internal security" slider right?

Right.  Another reason it's not a good idea is that it taxes your
fledgling planets (which need their production to grow) just as much as
the fully developed ones which can afford it more.

> ii) RE: The "add to reserves" slider in the Planets screen:
> Is this a straight off-the-top skim of your planetary production or is
> it halved as the excess industrial production is?

It is halved.

>iii) When you spend reserves on a planet what happens? Does just the 
> industrial capacity (Ind) go up? What about ships or bases?

The total production goes up.  You can see this just by looking at the
production reported for the planet before and after transferring the
reserves.  You can then allocate the increased production however you
want, by using the slider bars.  So effectively you can increase just
one category by readjusting the sliders so that all of the others are
back where they were.
==========

Subj: Master of Orion v1.3 questions

I have the MOOv1.3 patch for about a week, and found out that there are few
bugs.  Unless these are new features being introduced.

1.  When you have SubSpace interdictor, then your ships with subspace
teleporter cannot teleport even at your own planets.  Someone mentioned
this being a feature since v1.2.  I don't remember this in v1.2.  Could
some one confirm this being a feature, b/c it render subspace teleporter
useless for defense?  I have found that the CP ships w/ teleporter are
still able to whip my butt with their teleporter.  SO it is more likely
a bug, unless off course this is a feature to make the game harder.

2.  NEGATIVE money offering and NEGATIVE CP ships.  I thought this bug
was fixed in v1.2.

I really haven't seen many bugs fixed in v1.3 at all...  planets still 
blow up (population evaporates) when trying to terraform over 300... however
now we also have the addition that planets will blow up when factories go 
over 2500 (with meklars, this is simple). Sometimes when you tell the 
computer to start planetary shields on all your planets and you have a 
great number of these planets, not all will automatically report-and-reset
once the shields are completed. Found quite a few planets with 300+ missile-
bases that completed their shields long ago but never said anything. 

I think I also might have found a new(?) bug dealing with researching very
old techs. While playing the psilons(average/large/3) I was not researching
all the techs in order but instead the 'best' of what was available; I 
managed to skip over Battle Computers II (or was that ecm? computer tech thing).
When I was finishing off my last researchable techs, I came down at last to
researching Battle Computers II with a very healthy empire with a VERY 
healthy research capability. Turns out BCII (or whatever) required 600 rp's 
to research and I was producing in excess of 20k a year divided evenly 
between the 6 techs (20,000/6 = 3,333 per tech a year... 2,733 more than 
what was needed to research BCII... first time I had ever seen any tech with
a 99% chance of breakthrough ;-). Anyway, when I hit next-turn the game 
locked. After a little bit of trial and error I tried bumping my computer
research down to 1 notch thinking perhaps the crash was a result of 
massive research-overflow. Researching BCII gently seemed to do the trick
and I was able to move on in the game. 

: still able to whip my butt with their teleporter.  SO it is more likely
: a bug, unless off course this is a feature to make the game harder.

It's been like this since 1.0. It works like this. If the enemy fleet has
SubSpace Teleporters, than the Interdictors are on. That means that if you
have no teleporters, and attack them, they will leave the Interdictors off,
and visa versa.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO v1.3 Guardian upgrade

: 	I think you're right about the shield protecting the ships.  Also,
: I don't think that the all the pulsars work all the time.  I have tested
: a stack of about a 1000 fighters with pulsars on a group of about 3000 small
: fighters whose hit points are 70 (or so) each;  to my surprise, the pulsar
: does not wipe out all of the enemy ships; instead, it wipe out about 1/2 a
: and the rest has their hit points reduced down to about 15.  

I've been using huge amounts of small ships, too, usually. I felt like
experimenting yesterday, and made a new design that was equipped with
one (1) photon (?) torpedo while the other equipment was quite crappy. I
had been developing weapons _very_ much, thus the use of photons. The
ship cost around 100 units, and thus I could manufacture a big pile of
them in relatively short time. After I had more than 600 of them, I sent
the horde for Guardian. The ships got to fire just before Guardians
first 'bullets' hit them, and to my surprise the Guardian died after the
first hit. I'll test this later with worse eq, but it might well be that
a smaller stack of ships that have one extremely powerful missile could
make it better than thousands of smaller ones.

>    Doesn't the Guardian have Lightning shields anymore? I'm surprised
>the torp. made it through the anti-missile shield.
> 

   The Guardian still has a Lightning Shield, but no longer has
   damage control.  It does have (at impossible level) a shield
   level of 9 making the classic lots of little neutron pellet gun
   ships ineffective.  Plus it has 45 scatter pack X's with five shots
   which can really rack up the damage.

   My favorite way of taking it out so far is 3 stacks of medium ships
   with a combat speed 4, and a shield having weapon bigger than the
   neutron pellet gun.  When the Guardian shoots the scatter packs
   at a stack that stack retreats until the missiles are out of fuel.
   That's why you want more than one stack the other 2 stacks can 
   keep blasting the guardian.  

   I haven't figured out the exact number of ships needed for which
   weapons yet.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO: Interesting Ship Designs

: My favorite ship to build near the end of a game is a small with pulsar
: , neutronium bomb, best of all computer,shield..., inertial nullifier, or
: teleporter if they don't have interdictors.  A big stack of these puppies
: can take out three stacks of their ship and toast a planet before they
: even move.	

: Along with that I usually build a huge with high energy focus and 4 banks
: of stellar converters.  I like to park them in the middle of the battle
: and watch them take out ships from 6 spaces away.

Personally I like to build smalls with mauler devices. But to do that you have
to pretty much max your tech, especially level 99 weapon tech. Advanced * tech
really does do something - it raises your level, contributing to
miniaturization. Even adv. planetology will miniaturize your colony bases...
Of course if you have that much tech you can build a large with about 20 death
rays, 40 mauler devices, 40 plasma torps, and 50 scatter pack Xs. Those are
pretty nasty... :) Especially with class XV shields, ADC, and inertial
nullifiers.
==========

Going back to the realm of realism: I discovered an interesting missile tactic
the other day. Build a whole bunch of ships with missiles and not much else,
and a few beam-armed ships. As soon as you enter combat, fire all your
missiles, then have your missile boats retreat. If you don't have the beam
ships, combat will end and your missile hits will not be resolved; with them,
even though they will probably get wasted, your missile boats will be intact
and your missile shots will waste the enemies (assuming they don't have zyro
shields or anything like that.)
==========

Does anybody know how to avoid skipping soil enrichment? I keep getting
advanced soil enrichment w/o the first one, which causes bugs. (I realize this
is a little off-topic, but it would really help to actually be able to get
gaias, instead of just wishing I could.) Or how to avoid missing certain
techs, in general? I had a game once where I missed ALL the drive techs until
I finally got impulse... By that time I had been pretty severely weakened.
(Of course, two turns later I stole sublight from the Psilons.)
==========

> you can -- it will say 'RESERVE' next to the bar.  Now transfer all
> your reserves to that planet and, viola, you get them back doubled or
> tripled, plus the planet's production.

This is not a bug, it is a well-known strategy.  First of all, it
doesn't gain you anything at rich worlds, because the doubling for the
rich world cancels out with the halving for buying reserves.  Secondly,
you can't more than double the production of any planet with reserves,
so even at ultra-rich worlds there is a limit to how much you can gain.

It certainly is a good idea to spend your reserves at ultra-rich
planets, though.

> A related semi-cheat: Use your reserves on a world with artifacts (or
> better yet orion) and put all your rich and u-rich into building up
> your reserves. You get the production from the u-riches tripled, then
> it goes into the reserve, then as it comes out and is used for tech it
> is doubled (or quadrupled) again.

Yes, putting the output of rich and ultra-rich worlds into reserves and
then spending them at artifact planets and orion on research is another
well-known strategy.  It's still not a bug though.  And you still didn't
mention the halving when your industry is converted to reserves.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO v1.3 introduces new bugs, reintroduces old one

Here's a bug I found while playing impossible. I was on friendly terms
with the Alkari. I quickly colonized a planet, but I colonized it after
the Alkari's sent a colony ship to colonize it, too. However, once his
ship was in orbit, Alkari troops were sent to the colony, and I was
squashed! How annoying! No declaration of war, nothing!

Some other minor points are the (I believe) unsigned integers they use. In
two cases I have seen it go negative. The first is if your fleet
maintenance gets too large, i.e. 32768, then it goes negative. Same thing
when aliens offer you money to renege on an alliance, also over 32768.

Also, another thing I noticed is if you get advanced propulsion techs,
your older engines are actually larger than your newer ones, but I'm not
sure if you just get more power out of the older ones, and so they're
larger, but it just doesn't make sense.

I hope the next version comes out soon. I really hate this screen lockup
bug!

Subj: Re: Bugs in MOO 1.3 ???

It's not a bug at all. Look at the readme file which came with 1.3, the
function keys changed around a bit. 
==========

Subj: WANTED:  Master of Orion save files.


If you have an advanced or medium game saved, please consider
uuencoding and mailing a copy to me.

WHY?

I'm trying to rework the Master of Orion FAQ Strategy Guide FAQ
and want to play around with small vs large ships.  Using the
editor and your saved games, I can test out various fleet 
configurations against a variety of computer player fleets.  

It will be interesting to see how well high-tech smalls go up
against computer fleets, then see how well a smaller number of
huges face up against the same computer fleet, then perhaps a
mixed fleet battle.

Oh, perhaps upload them to wuarchive.wustl.edu in
pub/msdos_uploads/games/moo so that others can also experiment,
but make sure to rename them to something apart from the standard
SAVE_.GAM and put a .txt file detailing the status of the game.


- Jim

PS.  I'll be taking over the MOO FAQ from Dave, as he is losing 
net access.  Thanks Dave for all the great work!
==========

Subj: Re: MOO v1.3 Guardian upgrade

: 	I think you're right about the shield protecting the ships.  Also,
: I don't think that the all the pulsars work all the time.  I have tested
: a stack of about a 1000 fighters with pulsars on a group of about 3000 small
: fighters whose hit points are 70 (or so) each;  to my surprise, the pulsar
: does not wipe out all of the enemy ships; instead, it wipe out about 1/2 a
: and the rest has their hit points reduced down to about 15.  

I've been using huge amounts of small ships, too, usually. I felt like
experimenting yesterday, and made a new design that was equipped with
one (1) photon (?) torpedo while the other equipment ws quite crappy. I
had been developing weapons _very_ much, thus the use of photons. The
ship cost around 100 units, and thus I could manufacture a big pile of
them in relatively short time. After I had more than 600 of them, I sent
the horde for Guardian. The ships got to fire just before Guardians
first 'bullets' hit them, and to my surprise the Guardian died after the
first hit. I'll test this later with worse eq, but it might well be that
a smaller stack of ships that have one extremely powerful missile could
make it better than thousands of smaller ones.

Subj: Re: MOO v1.3 Guardian upgrade

)> experimenting yesterday, and made a new design that was equipped with
)> one (1) photon (?) torpedo while the other equipment ws quite crappy.
)    Doesn't the Guardian have Lightning shields anymore? I'm surprised
)the torp. made it through the anti-missile shield.

Lightning shields loose some small fraction of their effectiveness (1%?  
It's in the manual, not sure my memory is spot-on) depending on the
incoming tech level of the missile.

Anti-matter torps (probably what the original poster meant) are a high enough
tech level to have a reasonable chance of penetrating a lightning shield.  The
shield does help - some.  Enough anti-matter torps are still bad news.  From
what I recall, the shields should only let about 40% of the damage through for
this particular weapon (i.e.  60% effective) - but check the manual for the
exact figures (tech level of weapon and derating factor) if you want to be
positive.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO Cheat(s)

>	The what?  <I haven't paid much attention to cheats
>'til now, because I prefer winning 'fair', but... This sounds 
>interesting.

I haven't tested it in MOO 1.3, it definitely worked in v 1.2 (and
lower).

Spoiler:



Press the ALT-key and keep it depressed while entering the characters
GALAXY . You can now look at the whole galaxy and see everything. The
only drawback is that you don't get random discoveries when you find a
artifact-planet.

The main use of this cheat is therefore to check the position in the
beginning of the game, and the restore the save-game you did before
entering GALAXY. It's of course possible to do it every turn, or
playing without getting random discoveries when you find
artifact-planets.
==========

Subj: MoO: No absentee ballots

I found this rather interesting.

I was playing a  psilon/average/medium/3 game this past weekend.
A vote came up and I barely stayed in it with my 14 vs. their 27 votes.
Some turns later I acquired propulsion range 6 which allowed me access
to two new unclaimed terran planets.  I colonized one of them and sent
70 colonists on their way.

While they were in transit, another vote came up.  This time I only
had 13 votes to cast and I lost!  Apparently, the colonists in the
transports weren't counted.  I didn't accept the ruling.

I did manage to win, but it was a bloody battle.  Here's my latest
strategy:

I build bombers with the best possible bombs, good computer, fast engines.
No shields, armor, maneuverability, or anything else, but I install the
sub-space teleporter.  Then I attack their planets.  

On the first couple of turns on the combat map, I just stay put.  They
send all their ships after me.  After those first turns, their ships
are starting to close in.  I teleport to the planet and drop the
bombs.  Then I teleport back to the left, then back to the planet and
bomb.  I keep doing this until the population is zero and then retreat
and move on the next planet.

This strategy stops being effective once they attain warp 5 or 6, but
it's great fun in the beginning.  And it usually causes this news report: 

"The Bulrathi civilization has been completely eliminated by the Bulrathis."
==========

> During the early goings I've come to depend on the Neutron Pellet Gun
> to keep me protected while I'm developing Planetology and Propulsion.
> Occasionally, I don't get to develop the NPG tech and I've yet to find
> anything that is as effected at such a low tech level.  It's also nice
> that it's so small and can fit in a gnat.
> 
> If the NPG is unavailable, what is the next best choice for a first
> major weapon?

	1) Ion Cannon
	2) Hyper-V/X Rocket
	3) Mass Driver (pretty expensive)
	4) Planetary shield V (Skip the fleet)


	Basically, the NPG is a VERY important tech advance for anyone wanting
to go to war early in the game. If you don't get it, don't go to war if you can
help it!

	Other VITs (Very Important Techs) i.e. things you REALLY want to be
able to research early in the game.
	
	Duetrinium Fuel Cells
	Nuclear Engines !!!!
	Planetary shield 5
	Robotic Controls III

   > >	Duetrinium Fuel Cells
       Is this range 4? If so, yes, it's vital, but you can live without
   it (if you're lucky on planet placement) until you get range 5.

Not absolutely needed, range five comes through soon enough. If you have
two planets you can colonize (one with your original colony ship), you
can survive.

   > >	Nuclear Engines !!!!
       Yes - if you can't get it, trade for it, by all means.

Nice, but hardly VIT.

   > >	Planetary shield 5
       No! Nice, but hardly VIT - I've often played without it.

ABSOLUTELY necessary! (We seem to have rather different strategies... :-)
I usually play at Impossible (have won with every race except Darloks
and that is coming through), and you simply have to hunker down, build
missile bases and research techs. No way you can compete with the
computer players in the beginning.

   > >	Robotic Controls III
       Yes - if you can't get it, trade for it, by all means.

Yes. One of the most important techs.
==========

My usual strategy: at Impossible, Large, Five game, spread as fast as
possible in the beginning. After you meet the CPs, start building bases -
in the beginning, one base will protect the colony pretty well.
At Impossible, I have found that you will be at war for most of the
first half of the game.

I have won a game where I managed to keep just six worlds in the beginning
of the game and only one of them was anything special - rich, max size 10.
I was the Mrrshans.

I research the techs pretty evenly, but give priority to missiles, armor,
planetary shields, robotic controls and _especially_ ground combat stuff.
If necessary, I build some ships with 2-shot missile launchers to snipe
at the CP stacks, shamelessly moving them back to the planet from where
they just retreated.

Serious shipbuilding starts after I have either
	- some goodish energy weapon (preferably auto blaster)
	- high energy focus

A good bomb and a repair system are very helpful, but not necessary yet.
Usually if I have survived this far, the rest is just mopping up. The
CP's fleets are outmoded and it does not concentrate its forces, wasting
them in futile assaults against planets. Leave one scout to hold the fort
and the CP braves the fire of 20+ bases to kill it. Sad.

The problems with this strategy: 
1) Unlucky random events can _really_ hose you. There is nothing quite
as irritating as getting one of your two fully-developed worlds hit
by a meteor that you can do absolutely nothing about - no fleet.
2) CPs with biological weapons are a pain in the posterior. Shields
do not protect against bios and you probably cannot kill the ships
before they get next to the planet. Hope you can research the anti-
dotes in time...
3) If one race gets away with murder and gobbles up half of the known
galaxy you can do absolutely nothing about it. The CPs have to keep
each other in check for a longish time.
==========

Possible bug:
I was playing Bulrathis (Imp, Large, 5) and was seriously behind
in tech and losing badly against Klackons (no planetary shield V or X,
no Robotic Control III or IV), when I managed to exchange my
ECM Jammer I to Robotic Controls V from the Meklars. Later I
got High Energy Focus and Technology Nullifier from them with
some <10 tech stuff.

In the same game, I found that the Meklars had taken over the destroyed
Silicoid homeworld. I could have sworn I had checked the empty planet
not ten turns previously, and now there are 200+ pop and 2000+ factories
there. No bases, either. So, of course I took it.
The planet had been maxsize 120, now it was maxsize 300. Later on I
got Advanced Soil Enrichment and after I enriched the planet, the maxsize
dropped to 210 (the correct amount, I believe). The factories remained.
Weird.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO: Interesting Ship Designs

>)It usually depends on the situation.  If the CPs don't have sufficient
>)shields, then an autofire weapon is usually a better bet since it will
>)cause more damage.  In the case of the high end, a tri-focus plasma
>)can be nasty, but a pulse phasor will work better since you can place all
>)your guns in one stack and still shoot at multiple targets.

>Without sufficient shields, repeat-fire weapons are indeed nasty and pulsed
>phasors are one of the best, IMO.
>Against high shields (esp lvl 15) though, they are fairly useless.  This is both
>from calculation, and experience.
>
Actually, the pulse-phasor is the best autofire weapon in the game if my 
memory serves me correctly.

I will agree that against lvl 15 shields, they become less useful, but
then, if you have Oracle interface on a fighter along with HEF, they can
be nasty.   I think  you can fit as many tri-focus plasma cannons on a
fighter as you can pulse phasors at the top end, so these are also good,
the problem is that against a stack of 9 point fighters, you end up kill 
fewer since a tri-focus will only kill one fighter, and a pulse-phasor
can kill 3 for every two guns.  This means that a stack of tri-focus
fighters will be able to kill 2 for one if armed with two guns, and a
stack of pulse-phasor will kill 3 for one if armed with two guns.  Just
food for thought.  Of course, against mediums and larger, this no longer
holds.
==========

Subj: Re: MoO Final Battle query

>>>	I have a problem if you agree with the final vote. My ally throughout
>>>the whole game won the voting. I agreed with the verdict, after all it
>>>was my ally, and I was in no shape to challenge, and after my ally won,
>>>I was banished! Geeze, there was even harmony between our races. I found
>>>this to be silly.
>>
>>I agree that this is very silly.  You could at least be something like
>>Prime Minister. :)
>>
>>>> As far as I can tell, all "final" war does as follows:
>>>> 
>>>> 1)  All races are at war with you
>>>> 2)  All races share their current technology with each other
>>>> 3)  All trade is stopped
>>>> 4)  All diplomatic relations are severed
>>>> 5)  No infighting is done among the races
>>
>>Scratch #5 on my chart, I've seen the races fight amongst themselves, and 
>>someone reported that a race they were not currently fighting got wiped
>>out.  The rest of my list still seems to hold true.

>	Could this explain the slow response the computer has after
>final war has been declared?  It seems the computer never gets around
>to attacking you after final war has been declared.  Possibly someone
>will send a fleet with 32000 ship stacks latter in the game, but
>usually I can build up a bomber fleet to hamstring their production
>base.
>
Yes, this probably does explain the slow response.  I believe I said something
to the effect (in an earlier post) that it looks like the programmers just
copied the code for normal war into the final war code with the front end
changed to do what my first 4 items above say.

Subj: Re: MoO Final Battle query

  Sounds like what happened to me last game at average/medium/5.   I was
at final war about halfway through, and thought I'd put in a final will and 
testament right there.  First, you are correct about all of the above, 
except 2 and 5 need modification. 
  What happens w/ 2 is that at the beginning of the final war what seems to
happen is that they share their techs with each other, but anything after that
they are on their own to develop.  Many examples, i noticed in this last game
that the psilons didn't give their black hole tech. to anyone else, nor did the
Bulrathi share my tech that they stole from me when they took my planet.

  5 - what happened there is that they still compete for who gets new planets, but don't go to war w/ each other.
  
  I think final war needs work, at least at the average level.  First, i notice that they didn't really try to kill me, they only sent small fleets to my outer
planets which were easily repulsed.  They don't engage in much of common 
protection of other's planets, i.e. a meklar fleet usually doesn't help the psilons defend it's planet from attack.  Also tech needs work, something happened, 
i am not sure what, that slowed up their tech development in final war.  
They had 3/4 of the galaxy, i with 1/4, yet i was easily able to expand and
produce tech to surpass their levels (course, active stealing and planet
invasion sure narrowed the tech gap fast, but once i bridged that gap, i 
developed tech much faster than they (i was playing Alkari, the birdsmen).
  Maybe it's just the average level AI, I'll try hard next.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO: Q about Researching Techs

>next time.  Well, I discovered the Range 4 Cells, and was offered
>Range 6 and Range 7. I chose Range 6, thinking that I just had bad
>luck.  When I discovered the Range 6 Cells, I was just offered the
>Range 7 Cells! I understand that not all techs are available every
>game, but I'm curious about this sequence of events.  I seem to
>remember this happening in previous games, too.

>So, I'm wondering has anybody else has seen similar behavior?  Is it
>because I was choosing the cheapest tech?  Was it just bad luck?  Maybe
>you're only offered new techs if you research the most advanced tech
>in the list?  I usually have quite a list of weapons to choose from,
>and I usually go for the more advanced weapons.  Is this coincidence?
>Is there a correlation?  Anybody?  Bueller?
>
As far as I can tell, it looks to be just bad luck.  If I may ask, who
were you playing?  If you were playing the Psilons, then this is very
strange behavior.

From the tech level listing I have in my lap, you could have been offered
the following:

Range 5
Warp 2
Inertial Stabilizers
Warp 3

Considering that most races don't get many options, you should have just
gotten the Range 7 since this you needed a calculated tech level of 18 to
even be offered Warp 4.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO: Ship design

>	I was just thinking that a stack of 4000 to 5000 ships carrying
>energy pulsar or ionic pulsar and a sub-space teleporter should be 
>almost invincible.  As far as I can tell, the maximum hit point that
>a ship (except the Guardian, the amoeba, and crystal) can have is 3600;
>The tech description for the pulsar is that it does 1-5 or 1-10 points
>of damage to all surrounding ships +1 for each firing ships; so 4000 ships
>firing the pulsar does around 4000 points of damage to ALL surrounding
>ships (This would wipe out any stack of ships regardless of stack size
>and ship size).  The sub-space teleporter would get your stack within
>striking range and give you the first attack.  So 3 to 4 stacks of the
>ships described above should beat anything.  Right???

Nope, this isn't how the pulsars work.  The description is somewhat vague,
so you have to work with the pulsars to see what they are really doing.

Here's what happens:

You have a stack of 4000 ships with ionic pulsars.  This means you get 1-10
points of damage plus 4000 for the ships.  Given a total of 4001-4010 points,
you new proceed to divide this up amongst the defending ships.  If you 
are attacking a stack of fighters with shield class 13 shields and 8
hit points, you'll kill around 190 of the suckers.  Basically, the 
pulsars are useless.
==========

>	BTW, what does it means when a weapon is said to "hit all four
>shields"?

I presume you are talking about the stellar converter.  The "hits all
four shields" means that, presuming you hit, you will do 4 attacks of
10-35 points for a possible 40-140 points.  Since the explanation is
once again unclear, I'm not sure if each attack is calculated separately,
or if all attacks are calculated once.  What this does mean is that you
get penalized for the shield in each attack.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO: Interesting Ship Designs

>Nope.  Once you get maulers, bombs become next to useless.
>I'd rather have a ship that can kill _and_ bomb.  Adding
>a cloaking device, max movement, and inertial nullifier
>makes a very nice bomber!
>
  Yeah, but what if you have planetary shield 20?  Maulers won't do much against that.  Actually, I like small ships.  Screw those huge ones with 20 zillion whatever that are outdated the day they are produced.  I'd have 3 classes, usually.

1)  Little fighter w/ (in decreasing order of importance) max computer, max 
engine and maneuver, best gun that will fit (just one will do), then if you
have space, you concentrate on cloak/anti missile (or something higher, like
inertial nullifier), shield, and armor.

2)  Little missile w/ best computer and a good missile (doesn't have to be
the best, 2nd best will do (note you can usually only fit the 2 shot variety
on it, unfortunately), everything else is whatever you prefer.  These things
aim one shot at the computer's best stack, second shot at second best stack.
However, these are extremely tech. dependent.  Your missiles have to be able
to a) hit the other guy b) penetrate his shields.  You can launch 1000 missiles
and do 100 damage if they 'out-tech' you.

3)  (most agree to this)  Little bomber.  One guy w/ best defense he can afford,
best computer, most speed, and most imp. best bomb.  The idea is if you get
600 of these guys and 300 make it through, then you are doing good, but are 
wasteful because your bombers are taking too long to get to the planet to 
smash missile bases or are getting creamed by defenders.  (repulsers might
be good here if you have a cruel sense of humor)

I've noticed that there is no best weapon until you stop making new tech advances (i.e. advanced weapon tech).  You just have to be able to hit the other guy
better and cheaper than he can hit you.  Computers are vital.  So what your 
attack level is 10.  His beam defense is 15.  Won't do too much good.

OH, streaming attacks.  Tachyon beams are good until they are outdated.  Note they are only good for stacks of ships, be them med, small, or whatever.  Black
hole generators are deadly to the above three ships, don't know a good defense
against them (run?).  Pulsars are deadly against the above unless you have 
shield of 5.  Then they are in for a shock!

Actually, my favorite gun of all time is the Gauss gun.  Seems to be the best for the little fighter above.  (yes, I've tried them all).  Your little fighter can go in and kill 4 stacks in one shot, provided there are alot of you and a little of them.

Finally, small's are cheaper and can put more stuff on than a  huge.  You can
put say 120 smalls per one huge?  That's 120 guns (assuming one gun per ship), and they are easier to scrap if out-teched.  I'd rather scrap 1000 smalls than
10 huges, wouldn't you?
==========

Subj: Re: Useless MOO tech? - repulsor

> OK...  Is there ANY use at all for the repulsor beam???  I've had it used on me
> by the computer, and it seems like the most useless tech I've seen.  Just
> wondering...
> 
a. In version 1.0, repulsor is useless against high maneuver ships because the
approaching fleet could move again once repulsed - and re-attack the ship
equipped with repulsor.  In version 1.3 a repulsed fleet has its turn 
terminated, thereby immobilizing that fleet.  This renders short range weapons
useless against fleets equipped with repulsor.

b. Well, when you get this tech in a early middle part of the game it can be very 
useful! If you combine this Tech. with a range 2 beam weapon you can defeat a 
much larger force. This is especially great for the defense of planets, where 
you don't have to worry about enemy missiles and your own missiles help out a 
lot in a long battle. 

It does, however, have a short period of usefulness. It becomes less important 
if your opponents develop high energy focus or build lots of ships with 
powerful range 2 weapons. It still help with those stacks of 32000 small ships 
with a neutron pellet gun, though. :-) They never get to fire at you.

The repulser beam technology has really helped me in the in between part of 
the game where I am still pretty much in the expand and protect mode. a fleet 
of 10 large ships with a heavy neutron beam (or whatever), level 3 shield,  
and a repulser beam has defeated a much larger fleet because the only range 2 
weapon they have is a heavy laser. :-)

c. The computer uses it in very stupid ways.  The repulsor beam can be 
devastating if used the right way.  If the enemy has no range 2 weapons 
on its ships, they will never hit your ship if you have range 2 weapons 
and a repulsor beam.  Just hold still and pound on them, the computer 
does not adjust well to this, and you can destroy huge fleets this way
(especially when fighting with the Alkari).

You can also use it to keep bombers or bio weapons from reaching your bases.  
It is not the best weapon in the game, but it does have its uses.

d. > -- You're joking , right???? Repulsor Beams are one of the more useful
>weapons in the game -- particularly around the middle of the game.....
>They can be used very effectively to wipe out any ship/fleet of ships
>without ranged 2+ weapons (and the computer in my experience builds
>a lot of these). They can also keep enemies away from your planets
>a while longer, allowing your planetary defenses more time to wipe
>out fleets trying to destroy it.....

e. Like many things in the real world, the Repulsor Beams are only 
useful if you know how to use them.  I tried them once and found
that they didn't help me at all.  I never used them again.  But just
last weekend I was playing a game where I was behind considerably
and then developed Black Hole Generators.  I started sending out
my very favorite of all fleet arrangements -- three different ships
that are identical in design, but different in name so that they
don't stack on top of one another.  Each has a BHG, max warp, a
subspace teleporter, and nothing else.  They are expected to be
completely disposable kamikazes.  I send lots of these fleets of
three ships each to wipe out the enemy fleet, and it was working
well until he deployed repulsor beams.  Since the BHG only has a
range of 1, suddenly my glorious fleet was absolutely worthless.

Now that the computer has shown me how to use them effectively,
I might give them another try.

f. I have wondered about that too.  It seems repulsor beam requires at least
a large ship to carry it.  And it should be useful against ships with
lower initiative factor.  Against tiny ships with higher
initiative it's no good.

Am I right on this?  Tiny ship fly to 2 space range to a large ship with
repulsor beam.  Large ship gets to fire its 2 space beam, and it's too far
for the repulsor beam.  Tiny ship fly to 1 space range to a large ship.  Since
tiny ship has higher initiative, it gets to fire first.  Then the large ship
fires its 1 space beam, and repulsor beam.  Tiny ship is now at 2 space
range.  The process repeats itself.  It seems it's an even trading of fires.

What do other people who have used repulsor beams extensively think of them?
==========

Subj: MOO: Bombing Planets

In my last game, I sometimes had problems while bombing a planet.  I
would kill off all of the defenders, and then expect the bomb/cancel
option at the end of the turn.  I never got that option.  At the time,
I had several huge ships parked in orbit around the planet.  Also,
each ship had several Neutronium Bombs equipped.  I was forced to
move in some other ships that only had neutronium bombs on board.
It then let me bomb the planet.  The only thing that I could see that
might affect this is that each of the huge ships had the bombs in
bay #4, while the bombers had them in bay #1.  Any ideas?

a. Hmm.  Until you mentioned the neutronium bombs, I was tempted to say that
the planet's shields were sufficient to keep you from damaging anything.
(That happens to me often near the start of the game--I've got a couple of
fighters in orbit, and a couple NPGs can't possibly do the 50 points of
damage required to destroy a factory.  And if you can't do any damage, it
doesn't bother asking you if you want to attack.)  What version are you
playing?  Another obscure bug, p'raps?
==========

Subj: Re: Best Weapon (was Re: Useless MOO tech?)

My favorite weapon is Gauss Autocannon.  It does great damage and is
relatively small.  If you can get it fit into smalls 1000 of these is
unbeatable with teleporter (I love small ships, so not sure how this
will work on larger ships).

>So, what is the best(and most powerful) weapon in the game?

What is the best weapon?  It depends on what stage of the game you are in,
what tech level you got, what kind of toys your enemy got, your favorite
strategy and tactic, and so on.

In general, I found those weapons to be most useful for my own game style
(I usually use small/medium ships against enemy large/huge ships):

 - early stage: neutron pellet gun, mass driver
 - middle stage: auto blaster, gauss auto cannon
	(they are also good for killing the Guardian in v1.3)
 - later stage: disrupter, mauler, etc.

Subj: Re: What is the most useless weapon? (MOO)

>I've played lots of games with MOO version 1.2 and found that the most
>useless weapon to be....
>
>the Stasis Field Generator. I've developed it and never wanted to use
>it since basically the fleet that I use it on can not be fired at. Dumb
>since while that ship disable that particular fleet, all the rest of his
>friends can vaporize the ship that has the field generator and free his
>friend. 
>

A.  I do everything I can to get the Stasis Field for my ships.  It's great. 
When I have a bunch of different stacks attacking my planet, I can freeze
the biggest one and pick off the others.  My three all-time favorite
specials are Stasis Field, Black Hole Generator and SubSpace teleporter. 
Love 'em!

B.  Actually, I've had some good luck with it.  A stasis field takes
one of the opposing stacks out of play, cutting the combat odds a
bit -- something that can be very significant when you're opposing
the cp's Really Big Stacks with relatively few ships.  When I have
them I put them on colonies (when I'm building colonies) or whatever
ship class seems to have the space for it.  Putting them on colonies
gives these otherwise useless (in combat) ships something to do
when things drop in the pot.

==========

Subj: MOO strategies

All the reports of games here on the net seem to imply that games last long
enough to get all these neat-o technologies... In the games I've won or
lost (playing at average so far) everything has been over, that is to say
the outcome is pretty clear, by the time I've reached tech 20 or so.
Most of my games don't last much beyond 2400. 
Orion has NEVER been a factor in any of the games I've played. In fact
I've only ever bothered to take it once. The computer never has. 

So, what's going on?

Do games last longer the more difficult it gets? I've found that
things depend A LOT on your starting position. If one of the CP's
isn't boxed in they very quickly eat most of the galaxy, often
taking most of the best planets. This either ends up in a long losing
battle (because they out produce you 2:1) or, more often a quick victory
in the high council. How do you stop a CP from hosing the galaxy early on?
The only workable defense I've found is to do the same to him. You then
control the vast majority of the galaxy, have bought off the other CP's
and win the vote instead.
==========

Subj: MOO, interesting ship designs

In the 2nd quarter of the game I start to build huge ships with Auto Repair,
best shields, best armor, best drives, lesser maneuver, lesser ECM and battle
computer, a battle scanner -- AND a repulser beam and the best Heavy Beam
I have. With that combination I usually wipe away most enemy ships. But watch
out for enemy ships with heavy weapons, too!
It's harder with one missing technology -- like Planetary Shield X, Repulsor
Beam or Auto Repair. Then I have a diplomatic phase first.
In most cases I don't touch enemy planets with 20 bases or more at this time.

Later I build a lot of small ships with one good rocket each. That means
two points better then the shield of the enemy ships -- mostly stinger missiles.
Because of the space needed, that's available when I get the Pulson Missile 
tech or the Omega V Bomb tech. These ships usually have the best Battle 
Computer, maximum engines and maneuver and to fill up space a moderate
ECM-Jammer or shield. That ship costs about 22 BC and used in numbers of
300-2000 (about 1000 against the Guardian). This ships wipes away enemy ships
-- not in a single turn, but who cares? -- and sometimes enemy bases, too. 
Later in the game with maneuver 4 they can fire their missiles and destroy
ships/bases before they can move or fire themselves. Very nice is it, to
place a Zyro Shield in these hornets, later its space is about 10 in the small
ships.

In most cases I take good enemy planets with MANY bases with a dozen of 
ships I call "Anarchist". It usually carries about 40 bombs of the best type
Fusion is good, Omega is better. This ship have to move very fast to close up
to the planet -- maneuver 4 is recommended, but in most cases not available at
this point -- I hate Inertial Stabilizer. Some other ships attack too, because
sometimes the computer fires its missiles on them.

I would say the best way to win a game is to have a high Force Fields tech 
level. With a Planetary Shield X, Repulsor Beam and a good Beam Weapon I would
say the game is won early in the most cases. 
BUT normally at the levels Hard or Impossible it is not easy like that. You do
not get these techs, you have to be diplomatic. And you have to invent the 
other techs, too: Robotic Control, Improved Space Scanner, Armor, Industrial 
Tech, Reduced Waste or Waste Elimination, Suits, Terraforming, Hostile Bases, 
Cloning, Antidotes, Deflector Shields, Engines, Fuel, Beams, Missiles, 
Bombs and Hand Weapons -- you have to invent all these technologies.
==========

Subj: Moo negative ship #

    OK, last week end I played a game of huge/imposs/5 and the following
happened.
    I had the Klackons and managed to take over the left half of the
universe w/ 40 planets and had the darlok and remains of Alkari in the
middle w/ the psilon controlling the lower right w/ 16 planets.
    The Psilon had as much production more fleet than me and were way
ahead in all tech except computer and construction. (i stole all his cp
tech)
    What happened is that I saw a fleet of psilon several hundred of
each type by observing them I saw later that one of the stack of ship
turned negative then later it became 32000. Sometime later that 32000
stack turned to be several hundred but the other ship became negative
and later the one that were negative became 32000!!!!
     I mean I had more production than him by that time all my planet
were Gaia and I had 3 ultra rich and an artifact planet. He had only 15
16 and started to eat  up the humans which I feed with as much tech as
possible. I max out in spy, had more computer tech than him but could
==========

Subj: Re: MoO:  What to do without NPG?

Just as a dissenting vote, I rarely use the N.P.G. -
it's hardly a "make or break" weapon. If you don't have it,
you probably have the Hyper-X and/or Ion Cannon - either/both of
those will do you just fine.
==========

Subj: Re: Useless MOO tech?

>What do other people who have used repulsor beams extensively think of them?

	The repulsor beams work automatically -- they don't need to
be fired -- the small ships I believe, will never get to fire at you.....
==========

Subj: Re: What is the most useless weapon? (MOO)

>Yup.... I would love to go up against that guy who thought the statis
>field was useless.  My teleporting black hole statis ships ( I call them
>"Death Holes" in the game) would vaporize him before he knew what
>happened!
>

My huge ships with repulser beams, high energy focus and gauss autocannons 
would easily take out this ship design when I also have interdictors.

I also think stasis field is useless, and I win consistently on the impossible
level (just to brag a little :->).
==========

Subj: Re: MOO: Fun Ship Names!

: |> The Kramer
: |> 
: |> Smallest ship I can build with high powered beam weapon, teleporter
: |> and good computer. It just appears next to the enemy and blows him away.

: That will be toast trying to attack one of my planets. Interdictors,
: Zeon Missiles/Scatter X behind level XX shields, and huge ships carrying
: 300 pulse phasors and a HEF.

Ever seen what ISPs and NSPs can do to a planet? Ever had 500+ bases destroyed
equipped w/class XV deflectors, XX planetary shields, Zeons in ONE turn, by
just 100 large ships, equipped w/NSPs and Plasma/Hellfire torps and lightening
shield? By the time you acquire those defense items, the enemy would of had
the stuff I mentioned above :-)

|> shield? By the time you acquire those defense items, the enemy would of had
|> the stuff I mentioned above :-)


The planetary bases just act as backup for my fleet. I generally go with
Large ships, armed w/ large numbers of Pulse Phasors, HEF, and high speed.
100 opposing ships will be toasted in a single round by not-very-many of
my ships. In the endgame, they're also rather inexpensive considering capability,
so I can turn them out by the 100s.

Not really. Before the level XX shields, there were the level X (I never
seem to get XV for some reason. I steal it from the comp.) Before the Scatter
X and Zeons, there were Scatter V/VII and Hercular/Pulson bases. Etc, etc.

I believe in incremental base building, just leaving a planet with 1 tick on
defense and letting it work for 50 years.

Besides, the Kramer, as described, is essentially useless for attacking planets,
since the planet-capable beamers, i.e. Maulers and Death Rays, don't fit into
small hulls, and you didn't mention any bombs.

Given that, your fleet of n thousand Kramers will appear near one of my
planets, and engage in a duel with the 10m Huge ships that star-gated in
the turn before. At the same time, you'll be constantly attrited by the
missiles. I hope that you've also got a good bomber class...
==========

>tech past 11, never even *seen* neutronium anything, never *seen* the black-hole
>generator, or [...]

Well, I've only been playing it for a couple weeks, and only recently
moved up to impossible difficulty.

Anyway, I just won a game at impossible/4/large (v1.2) as the Darloks.
It was a long game, and by the end I had "Advanced Tech" 4 or 5 in all
areas.  Maybe my tech level was unusually high because I stole
everybody else's tech while developing a lot myself, but in general
all of my games tend to get to high tech levels as a matter of course.

It sounds like you play a different kind of game than I do?  I put a
lot of emphasis on tech, and don't build a lot of ships (I always have
the smallest fleet through most of them game).  I also try to use
diplomacy and not be at war with everybody.

Incidentally, this game had Bulrathi, Sakkra, Alkari, and Mrsshan.  I
never even met the Mrsshan, and the Alkari have always been wimps in
any game I've played against them (they're wimps, but they always want
to go to war with me).  Sakkra got a huge jump (as usual) and came
very close to winning in council, but I got past some close votes and
eventually made very good friends with the Bulrathi (needle pinned all
the way to the very far end of "friendly"!),  Even once I knew the
game was won, I had to play for another 50 years or so to win the
council vote.  In fact, I had to keep the Bulrathi strong enough to
support me, but not so strong that they would surpass the Sakkra and
mess things all up.  I beat down the Alkari so that their vote
wouldn't have any weight.

(I got to the maxxed out tech at least 50 years before the end, and
then cut way back on my tech research to build fleets for wiping out
the enemy planets... Otherwise, I would have been at higher Advanced
Tech levels by the end...).

So, anyway, besides wanting to brag about winning my first
Impossible/Darlok game, my point is that I often get to very high tech
levels -- certainly to the level X computers and shields.  Usually
once I get much past there the game is won, but I definitely get there.
==========

Now this would be an interesting thread (as opposed to how many maulers you
can get on a huge when you control the whole galaxy with tech 99 and one 
opponent w/one planet left :-)

I try to keep either 3 or 4 different designs being built and the other 2 or
3 slots for designs being phased out.  I always have a huge w/all the latest
gizmos being produced by the "besets" planets (i.e. rich/ultra rich, high 
production), a large by the secondary planets, and a small or medium by 
planets that are mostly dedicated to something else (i.e. tech) with a click
or two on ship production.  The 4th slot could be filled by a specialty ship
depending on my needs. (almost always a small or medium as you usually need 
these in a hurry).

The other two slots are "phase out" slots on non-producing designs, so when
I design a new huge or large and don't have to scrap a large number of 
ships. Usually you can "sense" when designs are becoming obsolete and cut 
back (and eventually cut out) designs to minimize "scrappage".  I also try
to always put best shields on whatever to increase the life expectancy (I had
a design the other night that never really went obsolete.  It was a large
w/best shields at time and ion stream projector.  I had scads of them and
didn't worry about loses too much, and used them to compliment the huges) ,
except for smalls and meds.  I kind of use them as disposable weapons.
Put the best or second best beam or missile and/or bomb on them, put in 
best engine (and manuv. if applicable to that design), a decent targeting
computer, then armor and shields lastly, as space will allow.

>the outcome is pretty clear, by the time I've reached tech 20 or so.

Absolutely.  Sometimes it lasts a bit longer, but I always play at impossible
(except one game at hard recently so I could relax and develop everything
under the sun to see how they compared against live targets ... and even
then I never got farther than megabolt because I got bored) and it *isn't*
that the game gets much longer at that level of difficulty.

>So, what's going on?

I think partially it has to do with level of aggressiveness.  I play VERY
aggressively, in that I try to grab planets quickly.  Despite what everyone
says about balance, I often pile factories onto my home planet as fast as
they'll come (stopping only to build two or three basic technologies, at
most) and spend what I think of as the midgame outcolonizing the computer.
Yes, with Psilons too.

This means giving up the tech edge for a while, and not building many
ships or bases to defend.  I *never* build bases until what I think of
as the end game, and even then it depends an awful lot on the techs on
both sides.  

So, while many posters are fortifying half a dozen planets and praying
no one wins an election before they can break out, I've already either
broken out or been crushed.

Being crushed isn't so bad, you can just start over, right?
(I know, I know, shades of Balance of Power...)
==========

>Do games last longer the more difficult it gets? I've found that
>things depend A LOT on your starting position. If one of the CP's
>isn't boxed in they very quickly eat most of the galaxy, often
>taking most of the best planets...
>The only workable defense I've found is to do the same to him. You then
>control the vast majority of the galaxy, have bought off the other CP's
>and win the vote instead.

Yep.

And on the subject of vital technologies, I'm amazed that nobody has
mentioned 3:1 cleanup.  Along with Improved Robotics, but usually earlier;
it saves all factories, built and about to be, one sixth of their output.
That's as big a leap as Improvement *8*, if you already have factories
in place.  If you wait a while before trying to industrialize, I can
see that cheaper factories have the advantage of helping with refits,
and besides you reach 5:1 cleanup fairly soon so 3:1 can become redundant
quickly once you have a research machine running ... I guess this choice
may be heavily early-strategy-dependent.

(And yes, some sort of range increase is the other tech vital to quick
expansion, with Nuclear engines being nice but actually skip able, since 
speeding up *colonist* movement is really almost as important as colony 
*ship* movement and won't happen at warp(2-1).)
==========

Subj: MOO: Repulsor Beams (was Re: Useless MOO tech?)

>Am I right on this?  Tiny ship fly to 2 space range to a large ship with
>repulsor beam.  Large ship gets to fire its 2 space beam, and it's too far
>for the repulsor beam.  Tiny ship fly to 1 space range to a large ship.  Since
>tiny ship has higher initiative, it gets to fire first.  Then the large ship
>fires its 1 space beam, and repulsor beam.  Tiny ship is now at 2 space
>range.  The process repeats itself.  It seems it's an even trading of fires.

No, what should happen (in auto mode) is something like this:

1. a stack of tiny ships move to one space range to a large ship (equipped
   with repulsor beam)
2. large ship activates repulsor beam to push back that stack, then fires
   all its range-2 weapons
3. Goto 1. Repeat until all tiny ships have gone bye-bye  ;-)

The repulsor beam can be activated multiple times within the same round, so
even two of three stacks of tiny ships can't do any better.  On the other
hand, I have also observed rare cases where the repulsor beam failed to
activate, allowing the tiny ship to take a shot at it. 
==========

Subj: Re: Useless MOO tech?

>What do other people who have used repulsor beams extensively think of them?
>

The one game where I needed repulsors (at the very end no less), they were
relatively useless.

The Psilons had 32000 Bio Terminator ships and 32000 particle beam mediums
(all with shield 15 and with 60+ hits).  The particle beamed ships are
cloaked.  So I make a ship with repulsors and range two weapons.

The particle beam ships pull up next to my repulsor armed ship, uncloak
and fire.  Result, my stack is vaporized and my planet is bio terminated.
Black hole generators don't knock off these stacks fast enough to help
and ionic pulsars do not do any good, damage is done but the stack is
still there.

Any thoughts other than to kick the Psilons economic base out from under
him.
-----
I use the repulsor beam a lot.  Some enemies develop strong weapons that attack
only from the adjacent space.  I have protected a planet against strong large
numbers of enemy ships by placing two ships with repulsor beams adjacent to my
planet.  The ships can't get to my planet to bomb it and can't approach my ships
because of the repulsor beam.  The enemy ships try to attack my planet and shipsfor 50 turns and then have to retreat.
--
Subj: Re: Useless MOO tech?

Is it possible to get by *without* repulsor beams?  I never go on the
offensive without them if I can help it...

Huge hull, best 2-space beam weapon, best damage control, repulsor beams,
best inertial gadget/battle scanner.

Only real vulnerability - huge fleets of missile carriers or planetary
bases.  Excellent defensive ship, as it keeps the bombers away from the
planet while the bases carve them up...

A.  I totally agree. Repulsor beam are a must when you know that the cp has
huge fleet of short range weapon/bomb/bio.  I was converted when once a
single huge ship of mine managed to destroy 15 cp huge while saving my
planet !

==========

Subj: Re: Best Moo weapon

No matter who I play, no matter what size galaxy, a Medium
ship armed with 1 Hyper-X/Mercury has _always_ been extremely
valuable.

>Any thoughts other than to kick the Psilons economic base out from under
>him.
>
 
Yes, put alot of missile bases on your planet, then create another ship type 
with a 5-pack of some low tech missile (hyper x maybe). Then in combat, 
fire your low-tech missile at the particle-beam ship when it gets close. 
The stupid computer will back up to avoid your hyper-x. In the mean time aim 
all your missile base missiles at this ship pounding him all the while he keeps
backing up to avoid the little hyper-x. 

While this is going on, send the bio terminators into a big black hole while they are being repulsed away from your planet.
==========

	That's a neat trick, you're building 500-5000 ships for the
price of one with death rays -- I'm real interested in how you'd do that.
More realistically, if you're at the stage of the game where you get
the death ray, you probably have most of the techs. Thus, assuming
you cram gauss autocannons on a medium ship-- (they probably
won't fit on a small -- but the math would be about the same) -- you'll
get roughly 40-50 ships to 1 huge. The huge is likely to have 
high energy focus, roughly 10 shields, 10 computer, 1500+ HPs, high-speed
and high maneuverability, and auto-repair (among other things). 
It's also likely to have the fire power of roughly 3 death rays. 
These are not likely to be all death-rays -- but supposing they are, 
in roughly 15 turns you're toast. Your ships are unlikely to do more
than a couple hundred in damage a turn, most of which will regenerate.
The odds you'll win are slim. More likely, the ship would have
1 death ray, 5-10 maulers, and some weaker weapon in multitude. If
this is the case, you're toast much quicker, and the odds you win even
slimmer.
==========

Subj: MoO ship designs?

I have had great success against the computer by using the Bulrathi
style of ship design:  huge ships packed with as many weapons as she
will hold.  I also include the best battle computers available, and the
best engines, but I never include shields or ecm.  The sheer size of the
ship is its defense, as it is at least 600 hp.

Also, I always obtain torpedoes as soon as possible, as they have enough
punch to eliminate the need for bombers.  I use this capability to
destroy enemy colonies, only taking over about 1/4 of the enemy colonies
as my own.  This will keep the count of settled systems down, and avoid
the first meeting of the Galactic Council.
==========

Subj: Bio weapons in MOO

There's been some threading about the most useless weapons in MOO, and
for my two bits I'd have to nominate the biological weapons.  It seems
to me that there is no advantage whatsoever in reducing a planet's
ecology to ruins.  If you're eventually going to take the planet, why
ruin it?  If you just want to devastate it, large masses of bombs do the
trick fine while leaving you the option of colonizing it later.

A.  It also leaves the option of others colonizing it, too.  If you've got a 
good position, and know you're going to win anyway, take the planets out 
of the game completely (like a nice razing run in Warlords II...)

B.  Two reasons.

	1)  If truly conducting strategic warfare, making the opponent's
	life miserable in an area you don't actually plan to occupy, 
	this is more devastating than "merely" wiping out the colony.

	2)  If you happen not to have overwhelming forces, it's worth
	noting that biological weapons sail right through planetary
	shields.  Think of them as an unpleasant variety of superbomb,
	that comes earlier, and in a different field of research from,
	the explosive equivalents.

C.  It's not the first time I see this come around
I used to think that way too :"bio-weapon , non-sense..."

But here is what I find out , 
When you trash a colony with those , 
you don't destroy its precious industry ...
So you have two choice here :
1-leave a minimal of population on the planet before your
  troops arrive and capture the planet and its industry
2-trash the colony and send a colony ship there , and you'll
  see that you have all the industry the previous race had
  
D.  >you don't destroy its precious industry ...

You can also do this with a straight military takeover, especially if you
have superior troop units, especially if you have some Cloning tech which
allows you to recover the losses quickly, and you don't even damage the
biosphere, which allows you to send more people over (higher max pop).

>2-trash the colony and send a colony ship there , and you'll
>  see that you have all the industry the previous race had

Yeah.  But won't you reduce the planets max pop to about 10 (I've had this
happen to me, never done it personally) ??

Granted you can re-terraform it and eventually get the max pop back up,
but is it really worth the effort??

I guess if the race you are attacking is killing you in ground combat advances
it might be feasible.  

>I suppose that you could use bio-bombs if you wanted to reduce the population
>without destroying the factories. That's the only thing I can think of. 

   Yes that is exactly what they are for, but you have to be careful
   or you will kill off the entire colony (which isn't really that bad
   since the factories will still be their when you land a colony ship).

   What I do is destroy almost all of the enemies offensive fire power
   while in combat then use the bio bombs.  Then click on the planets
   button to see how many I killed and keep doing that until most of
   the population is gone.  Then follow up with ground troops and get
   free tech and a planet with lots of factories, it should only take
   a few turns to max out the planet and build bases.

   I usually don't bother with this unless I'm behind in ground combat
   tech.

E.   I'd have to agree with your assessment that bio-bombing planets to 
make them useless to -everyone- is not one of my favorite tactics, but if you
just wanted to reduce a race in strength to where they'd be off your back a 
bit, and didn't think you could ever HOLD the planets involved, maybe...

> On a related note, does anyone happen to know what happens if you try to
> reduce a planet's pop size to 0 with bio weapons?	

	Yep.  The maximum population allowed for the planet (sans 
terraforming) goes down to 10, then no lower.  You -frequently- find a LOT 
of these 'bio-contaminated' planets lying around after an extended war 
between computer players.  :-)

F.  Well, I found a good use for Bio Weapons, I was playing
human/huge/4/impossible when Mechlon(sp?) colonized over 1/3 of the universe
and I was behind in population and production, I got the death ray, but
not enough production rate to crank up large numbers ships with death ray,
etc.  

So I made 3 huge with death ray and good shield and 100 small bomber with
best engine and computer each with a few death spores and went killed almost
all his planets with huge draw the fire and the biobomber will finish the
population one or two turns then retreat without killing many missile bases
but the colony was gone.  And things became really easy after that.  Small
bio bombers are cheap to make, but if they have antidote, it's almost
useless.

Oh, after the colony was killed, the max pop. becomes 10, but you can
terraform it later if you need it.

G.  Bio Weapons useless??? You gotta be kidding me. Here one use for it:
bomb the planet leaving very few colonist and send you troop over
(tricky) and guess what? tons of free tech!!! 
note: Have a colony ship ready above just in case you kill of all of
them. You still get to build that planet real fast since all the
factory are still there, hehehe.
    It's important to note that you use the bio weapon as a last
resource since your diplomatic rating take a serious beating but if
they are all at war or in final war they it's no problems..
    Last time I used it. I was behind in tech and started to loose. I
bio his planet took it with troop then before his superior fleet had
time to come I had send the max population plus spend reserve money in
it to build tons of missiles bases(rich planet). After doing that
several time I caught up in tech and was big enough to suck my way up
in the voting booth by 'spreading some on the earned tech' hehehe...
    At impossible, it's hard to keep up with the cp tech (especially
psilon) due to it enormous production advantage. So stealing it from
spy and invading enemy planet is a must for me.
==========

Subj: MOO --- Lightning Shield vs. Scatter Packs

I am getting ready to post an analysis of weaponry in MOO, along
with comparisons of efficiency, etc. (and a determination of what
is REALLY best against the guardian).

But I have a question I have been unable to find the answer to.
When a scatter pack missile is used against a lightning shield
(or zyro shield), its effectiveness is supposedly determined by
the tech level of the missile.  Is this tech level the tech
level of the scatter packs, or of the missiles that make up the
scatter packs?

For example, if Scatter Pack X missiles are used against a Lightning
Shield, is their tech level 44 (that of Scatter Pack X) or 18 (that of
Stinger Missiles, which make up the individual warheads of Scatter
Pack X)?

A.  I'm pretty sure it's the tech of the individual missiles.  I have a huge
game where my adversary developed lightning shields (damn!) and they were
way too effective for level 44 missiles.
==========

Subj: Re: Black Hole Generator

Is it just me or does this weapon seem to be little unbalanced?
I mean one of my medium ships with this device was able to half
any size stack of enemy ships with one shot, regardless of size
and hull points. Yes sure, the shield tech is supposed to make
a difference, but it seems minimal at best. I cut one stack
from 32,000 to 16,000 in one shot! Another stack of 20 really
huge ships was reduced to about 3. Do multiple black hole
generating ships in the same stack increase the damage (ala the
neutron stream projector?) or does one ship do the same damage
as 32,000? The generator also works great on planets too! Wish
my planets could have Black Hole bases instead of stupid
missile bases. 

In short, the combat system with it's "stacks" of ships
fighting each other gives the side with more TYPES of
ships more of a tactical advantage than the side with the 
actually has a greater NUMBER of ships, I think that the 
black hole generator is much too powerful, even at high 
tech levels.

Oh, does anyone know if good battle computers help at all with
the Black Hole Generator?
==========

Subj: Re: Best Weapon (BIG SHIP VS. SMALL SHIP)

>I won't tell you that 64 death rays on a huge ship is optimum (for most
>purposes, it isn't), but I will say that I looked into the argument, and
>am convinced death rays (energy cost 1500, damage 200-1000) are a better
>deal than maulers (energy cost 300, damage 20-100) for pure damage.

I think there's more to it than just the cost of the weapon.  You have
to examine what it will take to house these weapons.  I don't have the
figures in front of me, but if memory serves, the death ray is quite a
bit larger than a mauler.  I suspect that you need a huge ship to hold
a death ray (unless you have an extremely high weapon tech level), but
a mauler can fit in smaller ships.  So once you add in the cost of the
ships (and what-not) necessary to carry these weapons, the mauler
may be a better deal.

A.  Basically, a death ray is about 5x as big as a mauler and does about
10x as much damage at a sufficiently high tech level, as I mentioned
before.  (Bigness is about 5x for both size and energy consumption ->
energy space).

That's a small-ship vs big ship argument, though, rather than a
mauler vs death-ray argument.

BTW, I agree - a smaller ship with a single mauler has a definite
utility.  There's also a place for the large ship with a death ray, IMO
(it doesn't take much tech advance to fit it into a large).   This
is probably most useful if the enemy has a lot of huge or large ships IMO.

B.  What we really need (but not enough that I've bothered to do it) is
a relatively straightforward but data-intensive spreadsheet.  Make it
3D if you have a reasonably modern spreadsheet program, and create the
following pages:

	1) A set of global constants for a given comparison of weapons.
	Enemy shielding, defense and missile defense, size (for overkill).	 
	A list of weapons, and their statistics (size, tech level, power, cost).
	You should include current tech level (at least in weapons) as part
	of the scenario so you can adjust a cell containing "actual size"
	to make accurate comparisons between weapons.
 	Make them one row or probably column each, and extend below for 100
	cells listing the amount of damage that would actually be done by
	that weapon against that target given a roll of 1 to 100.

	At the bottom of these columns you could then have totals, deriving
	interesting numbers for damage done per unit cost/size/power.

	2) Ship design screen.
	Here you should have listed all the various tech levels and 
	characteristics for every system that can be put into a ship.
	This is especially important for accurately reflecting the 
	requirement to power the various weapons, but will also keep
	you honest on the cost of providing shields, computers e.t.c.

	3) Opponent's ship.

	4) Running tally, given X of your ships and Y of the opponent's
	of how many are likely to be left after each round of exchanged
	fire.

This will, among other things, let you work out EXACTLY the best design
for fighting the Guardian, with whatever your current technologies might be.

C.  >this is the case, you're toast much quicker, and the odds you win even
>slimmer.

I think you can build at least 100 with gauss for the price of 1 huge.
I tested it out last night, dragged a meaningless war to the very end.
I was able to build smalls with gauss autocannon, best computer/engine
at 14 BC.  While a huge with all the stuff you talked about at about
2500.  If we take no computer level stuff into consideration, each ship
w/ autocannon can do 20 points of damage on the average against level 10
shield.  So 100+ of these smalls can kill a huge if hit first, which
isn't too hard at that stage with high energy focus or teleporter and a
good engine.

>isn't too hard at that stage with high energy focus or teleporter and a
>good engine.
>

NO.  NO.  NO.  Now you are putting High Energy Focus and Gauss on a small??

I don't think so.  The huge will have HEF, Auto repair, some type of 
streaming weapon and possibly missiles.  If I have interdictors your smalls
are toast before they get close.

==========

Subj: Re: MoO: How to deal with BAD neighbor in the early stage.(Help)

A. : 	Give them tech(preferably useless stuff) till they are willing
: to sign a Nonaggression pact. At that point they won't attack any of your
: established colonies (add a few bases to each -- and they won't for sure...)
: On your brand new colonies, if you really want to protect them, generally
: all you need is a fighter ship which is more powerful than their
: scouts (and possibly more powerful than their colony ships). I would guess
: a large with a lot of heavy lasers, high computer, high speed, high armor,
: high shields (possibly battle scanner) would suffice.....

B. You're kidding right? Where are you going to get the "high" techs that early
in the game? BTW, battle scanner is a shield? Where have you been?

A.	You misread my intent on that.... It was something else to add --
not meant as a shield.... And any tech you get has some possibility of
being one they don't.....

B.  Avoid non-aggression pacts in the beginning. Why? If you have fighters
guarding prospective planets, you can't drive the colony ships of other races
away (the one you have non-aggression pact with). Never give them tech, even
useless ones because that will enable them to build more advanced techs
FASTER instead of wasting time on the useless techs. Set up trade agreements
with them to cool their jets and to enable you to build faster (it's a win-win
situation).

A1.	If you're wasting your BC's building ships strong enough to 
keep the enemy colony ships away from planets you want to colonize, why 
not just build a colony ship instead and colonize the planet right off the
bat....

B1.  Because colony ships costs a lot, not to mention that they take forever to
build in the BEGINNING, whereas you could build say 20 fighters in no time...
It's delay tactic, and works quite well.

A2.	Giving them useless tech doesn't seem to me to help them much --
if the difference between you or them winning is your giving them a tech
that cost you 2000 or less BC to develop, I really wonder.... I agree
with the trade agreements, however, and on impossible that is sometimes
the only way to go..... You won't be able to get Non-aggression pacts 
as a general rule though, using only trade. Trade, at the beginning
can be very costly to your development, too.....

B2. If they're developing them at the same time, then you just allowed them to
jump onto the next tech.

B.  In a huge-impossible-5 races game I usually just colonize 10-15 systems and
then do nothing but build factories and terraform to boost production and
population. I sign trade agreements like hell and after I got enough systems,
I would then go for the non-aggression pacts. There I start stealing tech and
framing other races (yes, I like Darloks :-)) till the entire galaxy is up in
arms busy fighting each other. I then capture the "hot spots" and gradually
have remote systems all over the galaxy in an effort to search out Orion.

A1.	I'm assuming you save the game a lot to avoid getting captured.
Although only a pseudo-cheat, I still find that rather unsatisfying....
Also stealing tech can be very expensive too.....

B1.  Not if you're a Darlok :-) It's very common to be able to steal 2-4 techs from
the races (1 per race of course) with the Darloks. Just boost the internal
security up a bit and it's close to impossible for them to snag tech off you.

A2.	I'm very curious how you keep everyone else happy with you
if you never give them tech??? Trade agreements don't do it (certainly not
with any amount of speed). Since you're backstabbing others, others are
framing you, you're not voting for some leaders, and other get
envious of you -- how do you keep computer players from declaring war on
you????? Giving tech is the only diplomatic way I know of to get others
to like you. The only other way I can think of is attacking their
enemies -- but in the beginning of any impossible game, that's unlikely to
be feasible.....

B2. Wrong. Trade agreements gets them happy: I renew them ever so often to keep
them happy. Because of the spy bonus you could almost frame another race for
every tech you steal (Darloks again). I'd usually avoid votes since for any
race to obtain 2/3 majority in the BEGINNING is a very hard thing to do. I
never give ANY ONE TECH, unless I need a race to have some technical edge when
I ask them to declare war on a bigger, more advanced race. In situations like
this I would still keep the critical techs to myself (i.e. Black Hole
Generator, Neutron Stream Projector, Hyper Drive, Inertial Nullifier, etc) and
give them just the techs they need. This never happens in the beginning, more
like half way and/or toward the end of the game...

Although this works better for the Darloks, I've been able to use Meklars and
win a few using the same tactic (except I would not be able to steal tech as
often or frame anyone). I just keep building and trading and ask the other
races to declare war on each other (and sweeten the deal w/BCs if necessary).
Works fine in impossible (I have yet to play the other settings :-)), version
1.3. I save the butt-kicking till I get the death ray :-)

C.  )avoid WAR in the early stage. THANKS.

I recall some games like that.  I've got a few comments:

1)  Don't spy on paranoid xenophobes, even if you don't try and steal
their technology.  It upsets them :-)  [Actually, don't think paranoid
is a term the game uses, but it fits.]

(This has been the cause of a number of my 'early wars'.  If you've been
spying on the enemy, you might want to reconsider - it could be the cause
of your diplomacy problems, even if you don't do anything but 'hide').

2)  Early on, a huge double hull without shields can be useful.  Stick
the best beam weapons you can on it (heavy lasers or possibly Neutron
Pellet guns if you have them), some bombs, a battle scanner, and not
much else.  (Shields and computers tend to be too expensive when you
start out).  The idea is you can have something a lot more spaceworthy
than a large hull for not that much more expense.

In version 1.2, I found that having this monster show up on scanners would
occasionally inspire the enemy to sue for peace!  It was only one game, but
it happened a couple of times - as soon as my huge ship got within scanner
range, the enemy would have second thoughts.

D.  	A trick I've found works *really* well at the very onset of
the game, is to build a small fleet of fighters and throw them into
orbit around every star within reach. That makes the other races leave
when they start exploring the area. I build my first colony as far
out as possible, then stretch my fighter screen to cover as big a
chunk as I (hope) I can hold.
==========
 
Subj: MoO: How do I get the big populations?

I'm a little confused as to how to create the largest possible population
on a planet.  I've seen several people talking about how they got up to
300, but the highest that I've ever seen was 280.  The thing that REALLY
puzzles me is that this was a Minimal planet that I stole from an enemy,
and my Terran planets were only maxxing at 240-260 with Gaias and Complete
Terraforming.

A.  A planet with base-size of 120 gives you a max-size of 300 (Gaia + 60,
Complete Terraforming +120). These planets do exist, and since Orion
has a base-size of 120 there is always at least one in the galaxy.

I have seen planets with a base-size of 125, and that planet would
have had a total size of 307 unless there had been a limit of 300.
Sometimes accidents can give you planets with really high base-size.
At least in v 1.2 (and older) you sometimes could terra-form the
planet to a lot higher values than that planet could have previously.
-----

Is there an order that I should do this in?

Assuming that all planetary techs were available to me, is it a mistake
to skip "Improved Terraforming +50" and "+60" and jump to "+70"?

A.  Probably not. It saved some BC-s but to be effective you have to be
able to put out enough BC's so the wait for the more advanced (and
more costly) improvement isn't to long.
-----

Soil Enrichment and Advanced Soil Enrichment increase the base population
by 25% and 50%.  So let's take an example...

My home world is a Terran planet with a max population of 100.  If I didn't
do ANY terraforming but took Soil and Gaia, would that mean that I would
have:
	A)   100 base pop +25% = 125, +50% = 187
or
	B)   100 base pop +25% = 125, +50% = 150

A.  Answer:  B.
-----

Also, is the base population including all the terraforming, or is it
what you started out with?  And assuming that you were offered all 
planetary techs, is it smarter to Gaia your planets AFTER you've 
completely terraformed them, or does it make a difference?

A.  Base-population is the original size of the planet before ALL
modifications (exception: Accidents may change it). The only reason to
do improvements in any special order is that Soil Enrichment and
Advanced Soil Enrichment increases the population growth. The max
population is independent of the order of improvements.
==========

(FLEET BUILDING STRATEGY)

>>I usually end up with just two classes:  small
>>missile boats with reasonable maneuverability and low shielding, and 
>>a large (or huge) ship with range 2 weapons, max. shield and repulsors.
>>The large ships are there to keep enemy ships from crossing the screen
>>and wiping out the missile-boats.  I usually only institute a bomber class
>>when about to take over another planet.

Interesting .. I follow a different strategy. Usually only building smalls 
or mediums VERY early in the game, I try to accrete enough planetary reserve 
to "pump" my planets which are building HUGE ships until they can reach 
satisfactory levels on their own. I usually run around with fleets of 15-20 
huges with the best tech and re-make a design after each SIGNIFICANT tech 
advance. i.e. HEF, Teleporter, Interdictor etc.

I have found that a few of these fella's do just as much damage to worlds as 
fleets of 1000's of small ships.

A.  I think we are talking about different stages of the game.  Once HEF, 
Nullifiers and BHG's are around, it pays to build ships that can carry them.
I refer to that point in the game where the Inertial Stabilizer and Repulsor
are the best thing you have going for you.  I can think of only a couple
games that I've lost when I had the HEF tech, so I don't worry about losing
if I can last that long.
The advantage of using missile boats is that they can serve in both an 
offensive and defensive role.  I tend to shuttle a pack between my border
planets to deliver a punch to enemy fleets.  It's cheap defense.
This assumes of course that you always have a good missile tech.

B.  I was following the "Fun ship names" thread.  It seems to me that what
kind of ships you have is totally dependent on your strategy.  I play
Psilon a lot and my strategy for the most part is pacific technologist
:-)  And I love small ships, so I would normally use two designs: small
ship with best beam weapon(preferably something that halves shield
strength), best engine, best computer and strap on a teleporter is it's
available; another one is small with the best bomb, best engine and
computer.  I name them TIE bomber and TIE fighter :-).  Sometimes I
would have a 3rd design: a medium ship w/ a battle scanner just to see
what the other guy has.

But when situation is not ideal, like when the other guys developed
subspace interdictor.  I'll build large/huge ships with a lot of
torpedoes and best armor/shield/lightning ship etc.  But thankfully I
can wipe most of them out before they get interdictor.  So far it's
working OK on impossible.  The fighters are still useful even though they can't use
teleporters.  I use them to attack planets with no base and very little
fleet orbiting.

==========

Subj: Re: Best MOO Weapon  (ION/NEUTRON STREAM PROJECTOR)

Funny that I haven't seen this mentioned: Neutron Stream Projector.
You can kill any one stack with 6 of these in just one turn. And yes, even
those 32000 stacks of 2400 hit points monsters.  Just design all 6 type of your
ships to carry this, with the highest possible initiative so that you'll move
first.  

Best thing about it, is that NSP has range 2, and you don't really need to
carry any weapons (I believe you still need to put at least one regular weapon
on board, otherwise, you don't get to move at all.)  Also, you only need around
40 of each to achieve maximum effect.

I have to confess that I haven't tried this in full.  I did test it out by
designing two ship types with NSP, and successfully kill a stack of 32000 small
10-hits missile boats using just 50 of each of my ships, and in just one turn
too.  (first strike takes the hit point down to 2, and second one finished it)

With all other weapons mentioned here, death rays, BHGs, autocannons, etc.,
you still need to roll the dice. With NSP, it's just cold mathematics.

>on board, otherwise, you don't get to move at all.)  Also, you only need around
>40 of each to achieve maximum effect.

Don't try this at home.  The computer did this once (It was Ion Stream, not
neutron stream, but the argument is the same), put in ion stream but no weapon.

I laughed at him.  Didn't even go after the stream ships until all others were
dead.  Why??  Ion/Neutron streams reduce your armor (total hit points to kill
you).  You can eventually take some out by reducing their armor to zero, but
it is a long process.  Include some streaming weapons with you Ion/Neutron 
stream and see how long those stacks of fighters last when they are reduced 
to 1 hit point each to kill.

BTW.  You can take out a planet eventually with Ion/Neutron stream.  Just
reduce its hit points to <0.

A.  Big ? I am playing version 1.3 and the CP *is* able to reduce your
planetary defense within 1 or 2 turns using NSP. This happened to
a planet with > 500 missile bases. Believe me I learned this the
hard way :-}.

B.  A devastating <g> strategy for reducing planets with shields (and not /too/ 
many missile bases, as one finds in typical mid-game situations) is a Huge 
with Ion Stream, Auto-Repair, best Armor, Shields and ECM available.  He 
thumps you, you zap him, you repair (he doesn't), his hitpoints eventually 
reduce to 0, and his defenses collapse -- send in the marines!

C..  >It takes much shorter time than you think (TO REDUCE PLANET HIT POINTS TO 0):
>
>     2             3             4              5               6
>(1/4) = 1/16, (1/4) = 1/64, (1/4) = 1/256, (1/4) = 1/1024  (1/4) = 4096
>
>So if you have 3 ship types designed with NSP, you can take out most medium
>stacks, and any small stacks, in just one turn.  You might want to change the
>word "eventually" to "instantly" :)

Not sure exactly what you are saying here.  I'm also not sure of the limiting
quantities or multi ship bonuses for NSP, but then again NSP comes late in the
game, so I'd rather talk about ISP.

# ISP is 20% armor reduction +1% per ship (not sure if enemy tech level, i.e. 
# shields or such is taken into affect) up to 50% max.  Since mostly ISP is
# outfitted on larges or huges, stacks of 30+ are rare (at least for me :-)

No, {N,I}SP does not depend on other tech on either side.

# 
# So, at 50% on a planet with 200 hit points, hit points remaining go:
# 
# 100 after first strike
# 50
# 25
# 13
# 7
# 4
# 2
# 1
# 0
# 
This is true if you only have one ship type with {N,I}SP, that's why I keep
stressing that for this technique to work well, you need more than one ship
type that carries {N,I}SP.  Besides, by the time the enemy bases can get 200
hit points on their bases, and you still can't fit ISP on a medium ship, then
I think you're losing the tech race.  Usually, on a hard/huge/5 game, I see at
most 100-150 hit points on the enemy bases when I reach the tech level of
things like hellfire torpedo.

==========

Subj: Re: MoO ship designs?

Here are my early designs.  Neutron pellet gun with small ship is an obvious
choice, but I would recommend research on ion cannon instead.  You get
ion cannon, and heavy ion cannon for the price of one tech.

Long Arm:
 Medium ship, speed 2, heavy laser, nuclear missile - don't use up the missiles

Buggy:
 Small ship, No shield, laser - inexpensive, but don't like gattling lasers

Bug Killer:
 Large ship, Many gattling lasers - deadly earlier on

Shield Bug:
 Small ship, Shield level 3, laser - good against bug killer

Claim Jumper:
 Reserve fuel tank, many lasers or gattling lasers - scare away colony ship

Mayflies:
 Max speed and ECM, bomb only - suicide bomber

Dream:
 Huge ship, most expansive everything, is never actually built, used as bank
==========

Subj: Re: MOO: Fun Ship Names!

)That will be toast trying to attack one of my planets. Interdictors,
)Zeon Missiles/Scatter X behind level XX shields, and huge ships carrying
)300 pulse phasors and a HEF.

Huge ships have a lot of utility for a long time - but they loose most of
it when the technology needed to put a death ray in a medium ship along
with a high-energy focus appears.  (Also desirable - and eventually possible 
- inertial compensator or nullifier and battle scanner.)

I've recently been playing a game that dragged on long enough for this
level of tech to develop - I was behind most of the game, but the Psilons
weren't able to make any headway in spite of their tech lead.  One
complicating factor was the lack of any powerful bombs on either side.

Eventually I did take Orion - (I played tag with the 85 scatter-pack XV's
in version 1.3 - you just can't afford to let those hit you, but fortunately
they are slow enough to be able to avoid) - and was able to hold it, which
was what turned the game around.

The real key is the initiative advantage, and perhaps range.  He who
fires first tends to win, unless there is a truly overwhelming numerical
advantage.  That's the problem with the huge ships with the pulse phasors -
the large size will lower their initiative.  And they are vulnerable to
just a few (maybe as many as six with double-neutronium hulls) death
beam hits.

So the 'death mite' (medium ship, death ray, inertial nullifier, high
energy focus, battle scanner) will get the jump on a huge ship - then
boom.  Large ships become sitting ducks at this point.

I'll have to try a small ship, mauler, nullifier, battle scanner - if it
all fits - that should be even faster.  (So far, the psilons have been
foolishly sticking with larger ships, so it isn't really important to
the game which is all over but the mopping up).

SubSpace teleporters haven't been a problem so far - if they were, I gather
that taking in a ship class with a subspace teleporter would turn on the
interdictors (both sides have them), so that it would nullify their
effect on both sides (?).
========== 

Subj: Re: MOO: attacking planets with many bases

>	Title sort of says it. I'm trying to crack a couple of
>planets that have next to no air cover, but about 20 bases on
>each. They're at the same tech level as me: HEF and so on. I
>assume they have anti-bio-toxins and whatnot. I've tried making
>fleets of cloaked ships with biobombs but they do nothing to
>the planet. Nukes don't scratch its shields. What are the
>commonly accepted techniques??

A.  I finally got the Black Hole thingy.  That screws up the planets, and just
about anything else it hits.  Unfortunately, the damned Psilons got a
weapon called the Heavy Mauler (or something like that).  The Psilons
completely wiped out 7 of my Dreadstar type ships (BHG, 2350hp,
15%Repairing and the missile protection field) with one shot and did over
9000 points of damage (20 bases) to my planet I was defending with another
shot!  Then the SOBs left.  Of course, they had like 1248 stacked ships with a
couple HM's on each.  

B.  One possibility, if you've got good spies: Sabotage. First, incite a
rebellion on the target planet. Once you've done that, sabotage the
missile bases; since the planet's in rebellion, it won't rebuild the
bases. Then move in.

C.  My favorite way is to use bombers with Sub-space Teleporters.  On your
first move you can teleport right next to the planet and drop a load
of bombs.  Even if you don't take out all of the bases, you're still in
no danger.  The planet will launch a pile of missiles that will appear
directly over the planet.  Now you teleport to the far left.  The
missiles will travel their max distance (let's say '5') toward you.
Now you teleport back to the right of the planet and drop another
bundle of bombs.  The missiles on the left will travel their max
distance back to the right but will max out over the planet, one
space too short.  The planet will launch another barrage of missiles.
Teleport back to the left, etc., etc...  Either you will ultimately
eliminate all bases (which will also eliminate all airborne missiles),
or you'll run out of bombs, in which case you should 'retreat' while
next to the planet.  Then on the next turn, return to the planet with
a fresh load of bombs (pretty realistic, huh?) and finish the job.

D.  Hmm. After a few months of MOO, I *finally* got into one of those protracted
games in a Huge/hard/5 as the Meklars. I was third in, basically, everything and
had to sit back until, seemingly all at once, I developed all of the Soil
Enrichments/Atmospheric Terraformings at once. Boom! Suddenly, we're a player
in the galactic game instead of someone hiding in the corner. It was in this
game that I discovered the ME (missile evasion) technique mentioned above. However, I found that you needed *2* different groups of bombers because. With only 1 group, you teleport (TP) next to the planet, bomb/BHG and missiles appear over the planet. You TP away, the first salvo follows you (to middle of screen) and
a *NEW* group forms right over the planet. If you go right back in, salvo #2
tags you. But with 2 groups, you both TP in and bomb/BHG, salvo #1 appears
oriented at one of your two stacks. You retreat *that* stack only and bomb with
group #2. Salvo #2 appears trained on group #2. Group #2 TP's out to far edge
and group #1 TP's back in. Salvo #1 turns around and follows, but only as far
as the planet, exactly where salvo#3 appears, trained on group #1. Repeating
this pattern with 2 bomber sets insures your never getting blown away.
==========
-- 
Subj: Re: MOO; when do they shoot?

>Sometimes, when I move my ship next to theirs, they get to shoot
>at me before I can. Sometimes, they don't.  Yes, I know they can
>only shoot at one target/turn, but that's not the issue here - suppose
>each side only has 1 ship type. I have A, they have B. Sometimes I get
>	[move A next to B], [B fires at A], [A can now fire at B]
>and sometimes I get
>	[move A next to B], [B doesn't fire] [A can now fire at B]
>why?

Its all a matter of initiative.  Whoever has the higher initiative shoots
first.  I'm not sure I remember the exact formula but I think it is:
Initiative=Battle_Computer_Version + Maneuverability + 2 (if you have
	     a Battle Computer in the ship)
==========
 
Subj: Re: MOO: Sabotage

>When you specify Sabotage on the Races screen, is there any way	
>to select which planet?	

Yes!
When the screen of sabotage comes up(you know what I am talking about
:-), click on the planet flag to change target planet.
==========

Subj: MOO: Space Rubble

Has anyone noticed that some missiles seem to get destroyed when going
through space rubble?  I didn't see this anywhere in the docs, and
it's usually pretty subtle, so I was wondering if anyone can confirm
this, and if so, to what extent?

This is version 1.3.

A.	I've run in to this also.  The computer AI was operating at its usual
level, so it's planet was firing at my stack of 500 NPG smalls instead of my 
15 large fusion bombers _despite the fact that it had level X planetary 
shields and the NPG's were useless_.  I started sending in packs of 50-100 of 
these with all my bomber fleets - worked like a charm.
	Back to the subject at hand, the computer was launching many missiles
at a time, so I moved back and inadvertently led the 25+ missiles through a
rubble square.  Only 4 or 5 came out the other side, so I started using the
NPGer's (which were fortunately much faster than the missiles) to distract and
destroy all the missiles.  Only got hit once when I accidentally clicked the
wrong mouse button.

	Is this new to v1.3 or just something they forgot to mention?
==========

Subj: Moo editor: saved-game file information

In the Masters of Orion save file format, planet entries occupy
the first portion of the file.  Each planet entry is 184 bytes long,
and begins with the planet's name.

In this discussion, assume that bytes are numbered from 0, starting with 
the first byte of the planet's name.  If you're editing a game file, and 
position yourself at the first byte of the name, you need to advance 40 
bytes to get to the planet quality, for example.

Most things are short ints--two bytes, LBF--and so unless otherwise noted,
the following is a list of the starting byte of a two-byte int.

bytes 0-11 contain the planet's name
      12 is x_location 
      14 is y_location
      16-25 are unknown
      26 is the base planet size
      28 is the fertilized/gaiafied planet size (1.25 or 1.50 times the base)
      30 is the terraformed (final) size: fertilized size+terraforming
      32 is the planet type:
		0d == terran            06 == barren
		0c == jungle            05 == tundra
		0b == ocean             04 == dead
		0a == arid              03 == inferno
		09 == steppe            02 == toxic
		08 == desert            01 == radiated
		07 == minimal           00 == none
      34-37 are unknown
      38 is the planet fertility, from 0==hostile to 2==gaia
      40 is the "planet quality":
		0 == ultra poor
		1 == poor
		2 == normal
		3 == artifacts
		4 == rich
		5 == ultra rich
		6 == "Orion"-class planet with 4x artifacts
      42-55 are unknown
      56 is the planet owner
      58 is the current population
      60 is the old population (pop change is calculated as a difference)
      62 is the number of factories 
      64 is the 'usable production' (after deducting planetary expenses)
      66 is the 'total production' 
      68-89 are unknown
      80 is the % of resources allocated to ship building (out of 100)
      82 is the % of resources allocated to defense (out of 100)
      84 is the % of resources allocated to industrialization
      86 is the % of resources allocated to ecology
      88 is the % of resources allocated to technology 
      90 is the ship being built
      92-93 are unknown; believed to be some sort of index
      94 is the number of missile bases
      96-99 are unknown
     100 is the stargate flag (0==no stargate, 1==stargate)
     102-103 are unknown
     104 is believed to be the planetary shield
     106-123 is unknown
     124 is the player's 'seen the planet' flag (change from 0->1 and you'll
	 have explored the planet)
     126-173 are unknown; first several sets of bytes are *thought*
         to be other player's 'seen' flags.
     174 is the level of robotic controls (or level+2 for Meklar); think
	 refitting
     175-183 are unknown

caveats to the covetous:
	- if you 'give' yourself a planet, don't forget to set the 'seen' flag.
	- if you swipe another player's planet that is building 'enemy
	  ship design number 6' (that's 0x05 for you non-C programmers)
	  and you don't have a 'design number 6' of your own, MoO will halt.

limitations:
	- where does the record indicate what kind of missiles the bases fire?
	

Player 0's planetary reserve is a long int (4 bytes) at 29716.  Don't
know if this is signed, not avaricious enough to find out.

Ship info is 68 bytes long.  Player 0's designs start around 50400.  
I've misplaced the exact bytenumber, and the offset between each 
races' ships (after six 68-byte records describing each of a race's 
ships, there's something like a hundred bytes of (unknown) 
information, and then the next race's ships.)

Assuming that byte 0 is the first byte of the ship's name,
byte  20 is the ship cost (this gets recalculated by the program)
      22-23 are unknown
      24 believed to be ship size, with 0/1/2/3 for small/medium/large/huge.  
	 icons seems to be stored somewhere else, because pictures don't change
      26 unknown; space left?
      28-34 weapon type
		05 == heavy laser
		06 == hyper V rockets (2 count)
		07 == hyper V rockets (5 count)
		08 == gatling laser
		09 == neutron pellet gun
		0a == hyper X rockets (2 count)
		0b == byper X rockets (5 count)
		0c == fusion bombs
		0d == ion cannon
		0e == heavy ion cannon
		0f == scatter pack V rockets (2 count)
		10 == scatter pack V rockets (5 count)
		11 == death spores
		12 == mass driver
		13 == Hercular missiles (2 count)
		14 == Hercular missiles (5 count)
		15 == neutron blaster
		16 == heavy blast cannon
		17 == anti-matter bomb
		18 == graviton beam
		19 == stinger missiles (2 count)
		1a == stinger missiles (5 count)
		1b == hard beam
		1c == fusion beam
		1d == heavy fusion beam
		1e == omega V bomb
		1f == anti-matter torpedo
		20 == megabolt cannon
		21 == phasor
		22 == heavy phasor
		23 == scatter pack VII missiles (2 count)
		24 == scatter pack VII missiles (5 count)
		25 == doom virus
                etc.
      36-42 weapon count for weapons in 28-34
      44 unknown, probably maneuverability or warp (0==warp 1, 1==warp 2)
      46 unknown
      48 unknown
      50-54 specials
		01 == reserve tanks
		02 == standard colony base
		03 == barren colony base
		04 == tundra colony base
		05 == dead colony base
		06 == inferno colony base
		07 == toxic colony base
		08 == radioactive colony base
		09 == battle scanner
		0a == anti-missiles
		0b == repulsor beam
		0c == warp dissipator
		0d == energy pulsar
		0e == inertia stabilizer
		0f == zyro shield
		10 == auto repair
		11 == stasis field
		12 == cloaking device
		13 == ion stream
		14 == high energy focus
		15 == ionic pulsar
		16 == black hole generator
		17 == combat teleporter
		18 == lightening shield
		19 == neutron stream
		1a == advanced damage control
		1b == technology nullifier
		1c == inertia nullifier
		1d == oracle interface
		1e == displacement device
	        etc.
      56 shield
      58 unknown
      60 computer level
      62 unknown; perhaps armor?
      64 unknown, probably either warp or maneuverability (0==1, 1==2, etc)
      66 hit points

caveat:
	- additional technology advances decrease the cost of things on
	  the ships you've designed, as well as on any new designs---and
	  so the computer recalculates ship cost each turn.  Changing
	  the 'cost' field in the saved game file won't buy you much.
	- serious abuses possible here; disarming all opponent's ships,
	  eradicating nearly all opponent hit points, and of course
	  building 'fighters of doom' (or even putting colony bases
	  on your scouts) can make the game much less fun very quickly.

limitations:
	- lots, I haven't played with this much (build one small fighter 
	  with warp 9 engines, serious weapons and all the specials you 
	  can fit, and you've made them all...)
	- would really like to know where fleet sizes, movements are stored.


Emperor names begin at position 57765.


global limitations:
	- where is technology stored, both what has been acquired, and
	  what is available to research?  For opposing players?
	  'Lobotomizing' players would be an excellent way to permanently
	  ban biological weapons, for example.
	- where is the index that says player 1 is the Mershan, player 2
	  is the Meklar?
	- where is diplomacy?  Trade level, treaty level, and of course
	  'relations' would be nice to locate.  
	- where are leader personalities?	
	- where are disasters?  (or, "how do I summon the space amoeba
	  to vanquish my foes, or entertain my fleet?")


Finally, a word as to what you can use all this information for...  
While it's all well and good to 'assist' your games through the power 
of what's been termed '_very_ advanced computer tech,' there's more 
possibility here than just perverting your game.  You should be able 
to create entertaining variations of the game, if you have (or write)
a sufficiently flexible tool.

I've been playing with or considering the following conditions:  
	- start by randomly giving everyone 1/n of the minimal and 
	  better worlds, each with two colonists.  diplomacy is 
	  important from the start, and there's less time 'wasted' 
	  getting to what I think of as the more interesting part of 
	  the game... where you can actually do things.  random 
	  starting positions theoretically should make battle lines 
	  more fluid.  Sakkra tend to dominate though.
	- the above, with everyone getting a missile base on each planet
	  at the start as well, discouraging immediate assaults.
	- create two galaxies by divvying up halve the planets into
	  the NW corner of the map, half into the SE corner, separated by
	  enough distance that they're not reachable until you have very
	  good range.  Put everyone in one quadrant.  Hopefully the game 
	  should evolve along like a 'small' galaxy into mid or late 
	  game, and then a whole other round of colonizing can begin.
          (Might not be so fun if you can't discover/trade for/steal 
          propulsion technology, though.)

Consider using the above save-file information to create some variations,
and not just save a game you would have lost.  Think of a 'scenario editor,'
if you will, and not just a 'save editor.'
==========

Subj: Re: MoO ship designs?

In my experience the best single ship design in the early-mid game is the 
"missile-boat" :   usually a medium hull with your best missile weapon (I 
usually prefer 5 shots over the 2 shot variety), best combat speed, best 
attack computer AND preferably some sort of beam weapon (usually the 
smallest).  Anything else (shields, jammers etc) you just do the best you can 
with the remaining space.  Early in the game you may not be able to fit all 
the above onboard, and may have to choose between having the beam weapon or a 
better computer.

In combat the idea is to move forward so that the opposing ships can't run out 
of your missile range, then fire off a salvo.  Sometimes you have to fire a 
salvo that he can back away from, then follow up to make sure the second or 
third salvo hits.  The idea off having the beam weapon is not really to use it 
as an offensive weapon (though if you can fit in an NPG it can be effective), 
but rather to enable your missile-boat to keep moving after having fired its 
missiles (and so enable you to move closer, fire, then retreat out of range 
again).  The good things about missile-boats are:
    * They are relatively cheap (medium hulls only), so they can be mass 
produced
    * They can generally avoid taking many losses, because they can
usually stay out of enemy beam range, or can run away before enemy missiles 
reach them (but combat initiative is important here)
    * They can wear a large enemy force down by firing a few salvos, 
retreating when the enemy gets too close, then coming back next turn (with 
v1.3 (and v1.2?) that is)
    * They are often (but not always) also useful against missile bases
....*.Plus, computer ship try to outrun the missiles by backing away. When On
planetary defense, I use these to keep the ships that have death spores,
or bombs away from the planet, as the planetary base womps on them with
missiles.

The disadvantages are:
    * Against a big enemy force they have to "hit and run" - not good if you 
are defending a planet (though they can allow you missile bases to get in 
extra shots by deliberately firing your missile-boats so that the enemy forces 
back away)
    * They lose a lot of effectiveness late in the game when zyro and/or 
lightning shields arrive
==========
Subj: Re: Useless MOO tech?

>Here are the situations in which I've had repulsor beams not work
>(v1.3):
>
>-when an enemy ship with cloak or teleporter comes up to my ship.
>They get 1 shot at me after they uncloak or teleport.
>
This is because a decloaking or teleporting ship has the initiative by
definition.  Apparently, repulsors automatically get initiative except in
this one case.

>-when I move my ship beside two stacks, and fire upon one stack.  The
>other stack does not get repulsed.
>
Seems that a repulsor can only fire once per move (no matter who's moving).
Hmm, empty spaces in the Force Field tech progression...how about "Gatling
Repulsor", which can push up to 4 stacks per move...?

>-random situations which I can't determine. (I think they're bugs).
>
One that I'm sure you're running into:  If the stack to be pushed has no
space to be pushed into that's 2 spaces away from the pushing ship, the
repulsor won't fire.  This is only a problem near asteroids and the edges of
the map.

>Note that if the majority of your fleet has repulsors, then the cp's
>will counter with missals or long range weapons.  Likewise I usually
>have the majority of my fleet use range 2 weapons; this makes the cp's
>far less likely to build repulsor equipped ships (unless they are at
>war with someone else).

Yes, the CPs will build new ships based on what will work against yours
(or whoever they happen to be fighting) better than their current ones do.
Moral:  vary your designs fairly often, and never fall into a pattern.  (At
least, not until the late stages of a very long game, when your smalls can
carry 10 maulers or whatever ridiculous design strikes your fancy....)
==========

Subj: Re: Best Moo weapon

)It takes much shorter time than you think.
)
)     2             3             4              5               6
)(1/4) = 1/16, (1/4) = 1/64, (1/4) = 1/256, (1/4) = 1/1024  (1/4) = 4096
)
)So if you have 3 ship types designed with NSP, you can take out most medium
)stacks, and any small stacks, in just one turn.  You might want to change the
)word "eventually" to "instantly" :)

Interesting idea.

Mediums and smalls can be taken out with a moderate size pulsar stack
in one turn, though.  What about repulsors?  I haven't confirmed this
personally, but one poster reports that cloaked ships can get within
range 1 of a ship with repulsors.

So, combine the NSP with the Ionic Pulsar and a cloak.  (Weapon?
what weapon? :-)).  Against larger stuff, stay out of range until the
NSP's have gotten the hit points really low.  2400 / 64 is less than
40, so one has some chance of blowing away a huge stack in only 3 attempts
(but one probably needs more than 40 ships per stack to do this).

Unfortunately, this leaves no room for an inertial nullifier or a 
battle scanner, meaning that initiative may be a problem.  A defense of
9 + 5 (cloaked) should help, that's still hittable with a top-notch
battle computer, the inertial nullifier would help a lot (+4) but
there is no room.  Oh well.
==========
-- 
Subj: Re: MOO; when do they shoot?

)Sometimes, when I move my ship next to theirs, they get to shoot
)at me before I can. Sometimes, they don't.  Yes, I know they can
)only shoot at one target/turn, but that's not the issue here - suppose
)each side only has 1 ship type. I have A, they have B. Sometimes I get
)	[move A next to B], [B fires at A], [A can now fire at B]
)and sometimes I get
)	[move A next to B], [B doesn't fire] [A can now fire at B]

A.  This is based off of initiative.

I was just reading that section of the manual and experimenting.
Your initiative depends on the sum of:

1) the 'maneuverability' of your ship
2) the attack computer level
3) a +3 bonus for a battle scanner
4) possible racial bonuses (Mrrshan).

Initiative of enemy ships should be able to be computed from information available
from a scan.

Before I go into that, I should add that I've seen bugs in v1.3 initiative.  I
had a *less maneuverable* ship go before a *more maneuverable* ship consistently.
Conditions were hyperthrust drive, inertial nullifier, battle scanner.  The highest
maneuverability class would move after one level lower!  I.e. maneuver 12 would
go before maneuver 13.

Also, I should add, even if you have the initiative, if you wait for them to move,
then move close, they will be able to shoot.  You have to move within range and shoot first to use your initiative advantage.

Back to computing initiative of enemy ships.....  The formula is:

Beam defense + size modifier + attack level -- with a +2 bonus for a battle computer.

BTW, maneuverability does not depend on ship size (in some other post, I indicated
I thought it did, I was wrong).

The size modifier above compensates for the fact that beam defense has a modifier
based on ship size in it, whereas maneuverability doesn't.

The size modifier above is -2 for small, -1 for medium, 0 for large, +1 for huge.  This
corrects beam defense back to maneuverability.

Since one gets a +1 attack bonus for a battle scanner, one only adds +2 to the initiative
computed as above to enemy ships that have this device.

Note that specials like inertial compensators/nullifiers increase the maneuverability
directly, but this shows up in the beam defense.

I'm not sure if this works for Mrrshans or not - probably it does, I think the scan
for the attack computer includes the racial bonus.  (It does/used to for Alkari, anyway).

I've seen enemy ships move before they should too, BTW - more bugs in initiative
like the one I mentioned before.

B.  This is a case of who has higher "initiative".  Initiative is determined
by your battle computer level (with a bonus for having a battle scanner),
and it does two things:

1)  Stacks move in order of initiative level, high to low.  Ties are resolved
randomly, I believe 50-50.
2)  If a stack moves into weapon range of an enemy stack, and the enemy stack
has both higher initiative and unfired beam/projectile weapons, the enemy
stack fires automatically.
==========

Subj: Re: [MOO] Shield-halving energy weapons

: 	I'm playing this game now where I got NSP and some sort of 
: streaming weapon.  I was planning on cutting down the hit points on 
: planetary bases and wipe them out with tachyon beams.  But it just so 
: happens that the cp's have level 10+ shields and level 15+ planetary 
: shields that renders my tachyon beams utterly useless.  I'm thinking of 
: installing some shield-halving energy weapon such as particle beams.  But 
: I'm not sure if the shield-halving is effective only when the particle 
: beams fire or leaves the shield at half strength for the other weapons.  
: And does each successive firing halve the shields again?  Thanx

They shield halving is done only for the weapons that have that ability.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO: Fun Ship Names! (SMALL VS BIG SHIPS, cont.)

I rechecked the initiative equations, and there is no difference in
initiative between ship sizes, unlike my earlier impression.

I'm still suspect that smaller is better in cost effectiveness for
fielding more weapons per unit cost.  In addition, they are harder
to hit.  I have yet to do a completely rigorous analysis of the
cost effectiveness, though.  (I am sure about the difficulty in
hitting).  I've seen posts on the net which remarks smalls and mediums
are better for weapons per cost, which matches my experience (haven't
confirmed this specifically yet).

A.  Attrition also has to be taken into account, a huge ship with good armor
and auto repair plus all the defensive toys (repulsors negate any range
one weapons), are very good at surviving. If out classed and can survive
one round then they can retreat without loss. More importantly the huge
can 'nibble' away the smaller ships.

The smaller ships do need the advantage in numbers, though.  But it is
fairly easy to have a significant advantage in numbers when one is matching
mediums against (say) larges.  When the mediums can on the average destroy
the large with one shot, and one designs the mediums so that they get the
first shot, building large ships is likely loosing proposition.  IMO.  It may
take 4 mediums to destroy a huge - but the 4 mediums are a lot cheaper.
Unless one can design the large to get the first shot, that is the 
key question I think.

Against intelligent opponents, though, weapons become deadly enough where
initiative is the key factor - it would be fair to compare large and medium
for weapons per unit cost given maximal initiative (highest level of
drives, inertial nullifier, battle scanner, highest level of computer).

BTW - if a death ray will fit on a medium, a BGH or whatever will
most likely fit too.

Pulsars are deadly to large stacks of smalls or mediums, though.  But
they can't get within range on the first move phase.  BHG's have
the same problem.  This means they have to take at least one volley,
possibly two (if they loose the initiative advantage, and they probably
will need to if they want a cloak) before they can fire their own weapons.

A.  Yes they can, teleportors.
Also steamer weapons plus high energy focus(adds 3 to range) and a high move (5)
means that on turn one the only row you can't hit is the back row so
all you do is WAIT.

B.  Re: med/large/huge  ongoing debate.
  Lets get some numbers here.  I wrote some down, but don't have them here.
  Something like best speed,manuever,armor,autoblasters ships:
    cost/hits/#blasters for med:large:huge ranged about 4.5-6.
    Maneuver(or init?) went down one for each size up.
  So in this case, there was not overwhelming advantage to one kind.
  I was using single Huge with autorepair/HEF/Ablasters/high shields,ecm
    to take out planets(20 bases) and defending ships pretty easily,
    until planetary shields X.

C.  same with me, I build the biggest ships I can (best tech of everything,
computer ECM, Armor (except for the xxx II armors, which I don't use)
and even maneuverability (sp.)
Then I give them repair and whatever it is that makes your weapons
shoot longer distances..
Then I add best beams and rockets (or just best beams, several types)
These beasts never get destroyed and kill just about everything on sight
(later on even the guardian... one ship only)
I always build 5 or so of the (3 different types, because of tech advances)
and then scrap the oldest ones) and send on to each fleet I want to attack.
Usually they destroy most of the fleet (whatever does not flee in time..)
==========

Subj: Re: Moo: High Tech Weapons (was Re: MOO: Fun Ship Names!)

>Do people use the star-gates much?  I used them in the first game that
>I played, but have since just relied on my speed.  Of course, I haven't
>had a game where I've been really spread out.  Usually, I have a clump
>of planets and try to expand that clump.

In huge galaxies, Stargates and improved/advanced space scanners are a
terrific force multiplier.  Not only can you collect all of your
production in a single star system in one turn, but you can use this
one fleet to defend widely scattered points.

For example:

"Sir, we've detected 3 enemy fleets inbound.  One on the coreward
frontier due in 4 years, another to rimward in 2 years, and the third
comming in from antispinward in 3 years."

"Order the 1st Battle squadron and all new production to assemble at
<foobar>.  Proceed to antispinward and coreward once the enemy fleets
have been crushed."

A.  I read somewhere that Stargate cost 300BC/turn in maintenance, sic!
So I don't use them except in final war when you have to transport ship
from one side of the galaxy to the other. Even then only have Stargate
on some strategic location.

B.  That is true, it's in the manual somewhere, but good luck finding where... :-)

Anyway, I find that a comprehensive Stargate network is well worth the trouble
in a Huge galaxy, especially if the computer has Thorium Cells (Unlimited Range),
meaning that every point in the empire is vulnerable. Stargates let me maintain
3 or 4 defense squadrons that blink around the empire, stopping fleets, killing
pirates, etc., while the rest of my ships are available for attack. In other
words, Stargates are a very effective force multiplier since they allow your
defense forces to be smaller and still have the same combat potential.

It also seems that the computer doesn't use Stargates effectively. If I attack
a computer-held planet with a Stargate, I've found that it is rare for the
computer to shift additional forces into the system to oppose me, even if said
forces are available at other stargated systems.
==========

Subj: Re: MoO: existing research points ... (was Re: How to deal with BAD neighbor in the early stage)

# Related question:  If you give them, or vice versa, and they are currently
# developing it, what happens to the research points already invested??  Are
# they lost, or go toward the next tech?????  This could be a very key question,
# as I often forget what I am researching :-)

I believe you lose all existing research points for that tech.  I remembered
noticing that one tech is already pretty far along, i.e. the bulb is almost
fully lit, and then I stole the same tech from someone else, and the next turn
I checked the tech screen, the bulb for that tech was no longer lit.
==========

# Semi-agree.  I usually "expand like hell", which is usually 10 - 15 systems.
# Races seem to hesitate (not stop totally) to invade a colonized world.  Unless
# it is rich or ultra rich, then try to defend it like hell, because they will
# come.  Also, if someone that is fairly far away from their "outposts" takes 
# a planet I kinda "skipped over", I'll invade it.  Figure they won't venture 
# far out to try to retake it, or sometimes you lose contact with them when
# the planet is gone.  Figure I can smooth things over when I re-establish 
# contact.

One method I like to use, especially when playing Human, is to colonize about
10 and then get into alliances with neighboring races. Then I concentrate on
developing the colonizing tech, especially inferno, so that I can take all those
rich and ultra-rich planets deep inside enemy territory which they can not yet
use.  Because they cannot use these, they'll leave you alone for the moment,
and by the time they became interested, I can usually hold them back.
Later in the game, these planets also serve as great staging points for
invasion.  Needless to say, this doesn't work when Silies are in the game.
==========

Subj: Re: Another MoO bug?

>: >Does this happen to anyone?  In the ship design screen, some of my old
>: >weapons disappear from the weapon list.  In fact, all the top of the
>: >list disappear.  So by the time I get disruptors, everything from
>: >nuclear bombs to merculite missiles is gone!  Now is that normal?

	Have you looked for the (admittedly almost invisible) scroll bars on
the right side of the weapons list window?  There should be two arrows 
pointing up and down there.  The arrows don't appear until you have enough 
weapons to more than fill the window.  Also, the game highlights only the
arrows which you can use at any one time - if you're at the bottom of the 
list, for instance, the down arrow will be darkened.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO:  When is the best time to take Orion?

>	 At what time in the game is it most worthwhile to capture Orion?  Are 
>there any techs that are especially effective against the Guardian?  When I
>play I never know if it is worth the resources to build up a large enough
>fleet to defeat the Guardian.

A.  It depends mainly on your weapon-tech level.  In version 1.0 to 1.2, the
Guardian (at "average") can be taken out by a stack of 1000 small ships 
with neutron pellet guns.  You can therefore attempt to capture Orion
quite early in the game.

In version 1.3, however, the above stack will get slaughtered in no time
by the Guardian's 45 Scatter Pack X missiles.  The key now is to give more
powerful beam weapons, plus good missile-defense and high maneuverability
to your ships.

From my personal experience, I found it necessary to wait until I got either
autoblaster or gauss-autocannon.  Typically, I need a stack of 400 medium
ships with autoblaster (300 with gauss-autocannon), maneuverability 5 or
above, plus the best combat computer and ECM jammer I can fit.  The only 
thing I can skip is shield, since it does nothing against missiles, and the
Guardian's beam weapons are too powerful anyway. 

This is the one "improvement" in version 1.3 which I don't like, since by 
the time I can capture Orion, I already know whether I am winning or losing
the game.

B.  On v1.3 of Master of Orion, I have been ignoring Orion, as it doesn't seem
worth it strategically.  It can still be fun if you want to though, here
are some tips on weapons and technique.

The Guardian has high shields (6-9?) and lots of ScatterpackX (35-55?),
I forget the details, but it has been posted.  Also some deathrays,
Stellar Converters etc., take in a high init ship with a Battle Scanner
to see what you are facing.
  Using many kinds of ships is helpful, as G can only shoot at 2 at a time.
  Get speed of 3 or better, so you have a chance of outrunning the missals.
  Sometimes missile ships are good for decoys.  I you have several fleet slots
    available, you might try sending in one of several different designs
    and see which gets shot first, to experiment with the cheapest decoys.
    If you don't have speed to outrun, maybe you can get G to shoot
    a "bazillion" missals at your stack of 3 decoys.
  Best computer of course.  Attack level equal to Beam defense will
    only get you 50% hit probability, so take this into account.
  If you are going to get hit with missals, use a big enough ship and armor
    and shields? to survive 'one more' missile, but better to fly around.
  Three stacks of mediums with >=4 mobility, and Hard beams are good.
    One stack runs from missals, the others keep firing.
  You can do some calculations after writing down G specs.  Assume it can
    kill one ship for every weapon it can fire (or figure it closer),
    then build enough ships to kill G's number of hitpoints before it
    kills your stacks.  Flying around the Scatterpacks really helps.

I took out the ave/hard guardian with a few hundred mediums hardbeams,
some larges and 1000 fleas.  It started missals at the fleas, etc.,
then the mediums took it out in 2 shots.  Fleas never saw battle.
Kind of overkill on my part.
==========

Other interesting general strategies against Computer Players.
  If cp ships have missals (and beams?) they often wont fire missals
if you are right next to them.  Even though my Huge would be toast for
multiple hits of 75 missals, they didn't fire when I moved right next
to them, so I could eat them away one by one.
  Repulsor beams make 1space weapons near useless.
  Then I got HEF and made repulsors nearly useless.
  Autoblasters/HEF/high shields/ECM work great against planets until
    shield level X or so. (Should have worked even then but didn't?)
==========

  When I was building my huges  I tried to schedule them to be completed all at once, 15 turns or so.
  Then the turn before they were completed, I updated the design with
  additional weapons that could be put in due to incremental tech increase
  during the building turn.  If you scrap the bottom/newest fleet design,
  for the current design, you don't have to change ship built on all those
  planets.  If you scrap a different one, and forget to change ship build
  you might end up with 2000 fighters or scouts or something. Oops.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO: idea for moov1.4 anyone?

>Must have for moov1.4:

>  ability to fire selectively fire your weapon in combat
>  ditto for specials
>  bug fixes on negative ship# and negative money offering in moov1.3
>  bug fixes for subspace interdictor.  This must be a bug, since computer
>ships can still use their teleporter at their home planet with interdictors,
>while players cannot.
----------
I would like to be able to see how many more research points are required
before a tech is "discovered."  Maybe you can already do this, I'm not sure.

A.  it would be difficult to do this.  discovering a tech requires 
a minimum base-research investment (which could be tracked) which then
leads to an increasing "probability" that the breakthrough of discovery
will be made.  probability of discovery increases each turn/year.
the probability portion of discovery isn't particularly deterministic...

----------
I'd like to click and see how many missals my stacks have remaining during
a battle (I hate trying to count).

A.  You already can do this. Simply click the cursor on one of your own ships, and
you get a screen similar to the view provided by the scanner. If you look at
the weapons list, there is a number next to each expendable weapon (missiles,
bombs, bios). This is the number remaining of that weapon.

You can also see the same info on the enemy ships IF you have a battle scanner,
or the battle is at one of your planets w/ at least one base (bases have 
scanners).
----------
 >WISH list:
>  Multi-MoO
>  better AI for computer player, not just higher production bonus for computer
>players at harder levels
>  aggressive computer play level control:  anyone notice that computer players
>AI is rather weak at end game.  While a computer fleet has enough power to 
>destroy a player's world(s), most of the time it doesn't do so, but choose
>to run away.  Most human player would have gone in to REVENGE RAMPAGE and
>taken out computer worlds one by one at any cost (suicide mission, etc.).
 
Agreed.  The one time I went into the final war mode, the other races
sabotaged me to death instead of slaughtering my fleets.  
----------
> My suggestion : 
> The possibility to send transport ship even if the planet isn't colonized.
> If the planet is empty, they die. If not, it will take less time to get a good
> planet.

   Absolutely.  There have been a number of times when I have sent out a colony
ship to a world I knew (due to scouts) was colonizable.  I would have liked to
have had the transport ships trailing by one turn, so that they could land right
after the colony got put up.  Obviously, if someone chases your colony ship away,
the transports are dusted, but that's the chance you take.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO: Repulsor Beams (was Re: Useless MOO tech?)

: Can repulsors be fired multiple times in a turn?  If that's the case, then you
: can use a high speed repulsor ship to push enemy bombers away from the planet.
: Also, you can repulse multiple ships to cause them to lose their turn.
: 
: Can I turn off repulsor for me to fire my 1 space weapon?
: 
Repulsors will work against multiple targets so long as they can be moved, so stay
away from edges, rubble, planet and clumps of other ships.

To get to use range one weapons you have to use the wait button.

Some of my more successful ships have been
Huge+Repulsor+Auto Repair+High Energy Focus+1/3 range 2 weapons+2/3 range 1 weapons
(Also highest Shields/Armor/ECM/Engines/Comp)

These are very difficult to take out early on, large stacks of missile ships
are about the only danger.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO: attacking planets with many bases

Hi: I just found this in the last weekend. I play average/five/huge/5, and
Kla. become a strongest race ( occupied 40 star system once ). Most of
their star system equipped with XX shield and around 30 Scatt Pack X.
I lost about 1000 bomber ( equipped with anti-matter bomber and light shield ),
to try to eliminate one of their star and get NOTHING. :-( 

And you see what! I find out star system miss. defense is about 10 but its
beam defense is ONLY 1 !!. So, I change my strategy. I make 2 kind of ship,
one is medium and the other is large, equipped with teleport ( TP ); The
medium one ( bomber-4 ) I add light shield and Mauler device, and the large
one ( Big-Head ) I add Tech. Nullifier. My bomber squad is one hundred bomber
with 3 or 4 big head. And IT WORK!!! The big head put Tech. Null. to break
star system's computer first, then those bomber go and eliminate star base by
their beam weapon. I found out I might lost 50 bomber-4 to eliminate a star
system with about 30 Scatt Pack X and XX planetary shield. After I found this,
I take about 12-15 star system from Kla. and become a high leader :-).

I hope this help!

PS. I always protect my own planet with highest shield and about 100 miss. base.
I never see any computer player defense their own star  by this way. but I
think my approach still work for XX shield and 100 base. ( cost me about 
150 bomber-4 )
==========

Subj: Slow MoO - You Too?

about midway into yesterday's game (medium, simple, 3 opponents - hey, I'm just a beginner) things started to get VERY SLOW. Mouse clicks were taking several seconds and auto-combat just barely crept along (and eventually hung - but that's another matter - or is it?).

Anybody else experience this? Anybody have a cure for the slows? [And please don't tell me to buy a 486 - if I could, I already would ;^) ]

A.  I discovered that in some slow response situations moving the 
mouse back and forth gets the game to carry on with the next 
operation.

Examples:

Click on next year and it takes a long time for the star map
to come up. If you move the mouse during the delay the starmap 
seems to come up more quickly.

When the display of ships built in a given year comes up and 
you click with the mouse to continue it takes a long time to 
go on to the next screen. Move the mouse and the next operation begins more quickly.

My guess at what is happening...

The program is written so that at some places it is waiting for
input in a certain order. Lets say keypress / mouse button press
followed by cursor tracking. In some situations it waits for mouse
movement and only continues after a time-out. By moving the mouse
you by-pass the timeout and the game can continue. Alternatively,
it might never continue on it's own. but sooner or later you
wiggle the mouse and that breaks it loose.
==========

Subj: MOO: Amoeba Stream/Crystal Ray

Why is it that we cannot acquire the tech for these weapons? The race that
defeats it/them should get the tech!!!!

Anyway, I was bored one day and decided to play with the savegames: I changed
the mauler device I had on my 70 ship stack of dreadnoughts to Amoeba Streams:
20 Amoeba Streams (per ship) took out an entire stack of 32000 fighters, WITH
ONE SHOT (not even finished with the 1st turn yet..). Definitely much more
effective than the Black Hole Generator :-)

Amoeba Stream is the ultimate streaming weapon, think of it as Tachyon Beam on
steroids!!! It has a 3 space range (hits ships 3 spaces from me w/out High
Energy Focus) and I have yet to measure it's power, although I've been able to
knock out 2 dreadnoughts (2400hps) with two ships each armed with one/two
Amoeba stream and class XI BC..

Think the Stellar Converter is awesome? It's nothing compared to the Crystal
Ray! Same range as the Amoeba Stream (I think), best used on dreadnoughts,
though it also knocks out a fair share of fighter/medium stacks.

If you guys decide to have some fun w/these weapons, just remember that THEY
COST AN HEFTY SUM TO MAINTAIN! If you did like me and change 20 maulers to
Amoeba Streams for every ship in your fleet, prepare to watch your ship
maintenance costs go negative! :-) It was so bad to the point that I had
0/xxxx production for all my planets :-)

The Amoeba/Crystal could easily defeat the Guardian, if they just had an
inertial stabilizer! Imagine Space Crystals/Amoebas with inertial nullifiers!
Ouch!

Actually, I had already tested the Amoeba Stream and Crystal Ray on the
Guardian: the Amoeba Stream had less effect on the Guardian than the Crystal
Ray. I had 20 meds armed with 2 Amoeba and 2 Crystal Rays and I did 
little damage with the Amoeba Stream while the crystal ray killed the
guardian.. Luck of the roll I guess :-)

Yes, I know, this is cheating, but I was really, really bored :-)
==========

Subj: Stargates

>>Do people use the star-gates much? 

They're also great for moving population around. If you launch a lot
of troopers from one of your border planets, you can (on the same
turn) move population from your interior (fertile? gaia?) worlds to
that border planet, keeping it at max population.
==========

Subj: Re: [MOO] Shield-halving energy weapons

Shield halving weapons only means the specific weapons designated penetrate
shields better.

However, you must remember that beam weapons and torpedoes are at 1/2
effectiveness when attacking planets (it is in the manual somewhere or other).
So particle beams won't cut it against those 25 level shields, because
the particle beam will get cut in half, starting at 20hp.  So even though
the shields get cut in half, they'll still be too weak.

The good news is that 4 shots with a 40+ stack of Neutron Streams will
destroy all the missile bases on the planet - you don't need to penetrate
the shields.  (You probably want more than 1 stack attacking).  It
goes like this, assuming a maximal 200hp missile base.  You need 40+
streamers to get maximal 75% armor reduction per shot.

200hp
50hp
12hp
3hp
0hp

With two stacks attacking, this will go pretty fast - you can probably get
the jump on the missile bases in initiative, so all  you have to do is
close within range 2 on the first round.  If this isn't quite possible you
may need 3 stacks - one to serve as a decoy.
==========
 
Subj: Using SubSpace Communications in Colonist Transport

-   On a by-the-by, did anyone notice that, although the transports can't return
-if they get to an uncolonized planet, sub-space communicators allow you to 
-redirect them.  

a.  It may be a design flaw, but it's a *blast* when you use it. I remember playing
one game where I had sent off 100+ transports to invade an enemy world, but then
they sent a massive fleet there to protect it. So, I redirected to another enemy
world and they protected it, too. I must've gone through 4 or 5 course changes before
finally getting the transports to crash *someone's* world. :-)

b.  This is sort of possible if you have hyperspace comm.  Send transports
for one planet to another, making sure that they WON'T reach in one
turn, then the next turn, redirect those colonists to where you REALLY
want them to go...  This is useful, but only in special
circumstances...
==========

Subj: Tracking Research Investment

 >> it would be difficult to do this.  discovering a tech requires 
 >> a minimum base-research investment (which could be tracked) which then
 >> leads to an increasing "probability" that the breakthrough of discovery
 >> will be made.  probability of discovery increases each turn/year.
 >> the probability portion of discovery isn't particularly deterministic...
  
So just show us both 1) how many points required for base level
                and  2) how many points invested so far.

A button to set current investment equal to 15% of total invested so far
would be even more ideal.
Remember that techBC=techBC+invest+min(invest,0.15*techBC),
according to the manual.  Has anybody checked this with the savegame file?
Seems like techBC is the only place to get interest on BC.
----------

Does anyone else cut their tech spending on one area to very small as soon
as it reaches 5-10%?  I figure, why spend the money when you can get
it in a few turns by chance, plus it lets your investment work for you.
  Has anyone analyzed if this conserves BC, or is it better to keep
investing in high % techs?
==========

Subj: Re: MOO Help on Hard Level

>	I am a little upset here.  the game is a piece of cake on the 
>medium level and is impossible on the next higher level.  Usually I start 
>out in some corner with only one direction to expand in.  I tend to run 
>into a race that was fortunate enough to start out in the middle and he 
>barricades my expansion.  What can I do about this?  I have devoted all my 
>efforts to expansion, leaving me close to defenseless, even then the 
>computer always manages to out expand me.  Any advice would be appreciated.
>
Except for the Darlocks, you want to start at a corner because:

1) it lengthens the time before first contact.  Once contact has been
established with other races, then you waste effort on defensive
fleets, etc.

2) you only need to defend the planets at your front.  1/2 to 1/3 of
you planets can be totally defenseless with no shields or missiles.
This also lets you concentrate your fleets into a smaller area which
means you can get away with fewer ships.

On your first tries at a harder level, play the Klackons.  My
favorite races are the Psilons & Meklars.  The Psilons get most of the
neat stuff to play with and the Meklars seem to be the only race that
gets the Oracle Interface consistently.  These three races are the
prime choice because MOO is about the tech race.  To win consistently,
you need to possess superior tech.  To get superior tech you need to
make research points.  The Psilons get the research bonus, and the
Klackons and Meklars get the production bonuses.  Superior tech feeds
back on itself, for example:  reduce industrial waste 80% increases
the amount of BCs available for research.

A good strategy that works with the strengths of the above races is to
initially colonize enough planets (about 16 on huge) so that you can
get at least 1/3 of the total galactic population.  The cp's don't
seem to spend a lot of effort maximizing their pop, so spend all your
research effort into increasing the population & production of your
colonies.  As stated above, this lets you put more BCs into research
which will soon allow you to match the cp's production bonus.  Once
you do this, you can then put BCs into the "attack" techs and you'll
get breakthroughs every 1-3 turns.  You will then be able to put out
a superior fleet which can take on far greater numbers.

I don't like to steal tech or get them by invading because it takes
forever for the cp's to get stuff, I don't like to wait.  The longest
game I've played was with the Darloks where I played them like they
are supposed to be played i.e. they should steal everything.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO: Bombs and Computers

>Do battle computers have any effect on the effectiveness of bombs??  

Yes.  That was suppose to be in one of the update patches to force you to 
use at least some kind of BC on a bomber
==========

Subj: Re: MOO: Can colonize planets w/ out appropriate tech

> I colonized two Dead planets and a earthlike (Desert) environment with three of
>these Inferno Colony containing ships.

a.  Yes, it's true, and it's not a bug.  If you think about it, it makes sense.
Each successive hostile environment is nastier than the one before; i.e.
barren = no water, tundra = no topsoil (or something), dead = no oxygen,
and so forth.  Surely, if a colony's bio-dome can keep millions of people
alive when the only gas outside is chlorine (toxic world), it can deal with a
relatively minor problem like no liquid water (barren), hmm?

Which means that, given a choice of multiple controlled environments, you
should always take the most advanced (unless you need it *now*, in which case
you take the cheapest).  The less advanced ones also make dandy tech gifts
for alien leaders, if you can afford to increase an opponent's overall
planetology level--if someone has Radiated, Barren won't do him a whole lot
of good, and you'll get the positive diplomatic push anyway, as has been
well documented.

b.  This is definitely a feature; see p. 67 of the manual. Note that

(1). An Inferno base (e.g.) costs more, and is larger, than a Dead base.
   So if you're building a ship specifically to colonize a dead world,
   it's worthwhile to just put a dead base on the ship, if you can.

(2). If you decide to skip over lesser techs and go straight to (e.g.)
   "Controlled Radiation Environment", all the other races will most
   likely fill up the barren, tundra, etc. worlds before you get it.
==========

Subj: Re: MOO: Destroying Comets

>I don't know how to destroy a comet in MOO. I cannot scan it nor
>any missile bases or fleets on the planet helps. (The other races can! :-( )
>How can my fleet fly to the comet and destroy it.

a.  Just move ships into the system with the comet. You won't see any combat,
but your fleet will automatically attack each turn. Every so often, the
GNN guy will tell you how much of the comet is left.

I'm not sure whether or not missile bases get used.

b.  Actually, I was playing MOO last night and the comet posed quite a problem
for me. I recall that in versions 1.2 and lower, you never actually saw
the comet.

In v1.3, you see on-screen combat with the comet, the comet has 10000 hit
points (like the Guardian) and 10 crystal rays (?) a lightning shield, and
a black hole generator.

In addition, it would intelligently choose planets where my bases were
underbuilt (i.e. it would have an advantage).
==========

Subj: Re: MOO SubSpace question

>Quick question:  Do your own SubSpace interdictors keep friendly teleporters
>from working?  Teleporters have saved my butt more than once against enemies
>without interdictors, but I've never gotten both the teleporters and
>interdictors in the same game.

No, teleport indicators not prevents your own ships on your own planet.
It is also possible to get teleporters and indicators in the same game.
==========

Subj: Most Effective "Special" 

>(The ship design:  Large, max armor and computer, black hole, repulsor,
                                                               ^^^^^^^^
a.  Advanced Damage Control is IMHO much more effective then repulsors.

b.  Advanced Damage Control is of course very good, but it's even better
to use both (if you have). What's best in the last slot of a
huge/large ship is harder to determine, and depends on what kind of
ships you enemy uses. Two stacks of repulsor armed ships can be invaluable to defend a colony, since as long as they are alive there is no way to use bombs
and bio-weapons.

c.  I think it is safe to say that there probably is no single optimum 
combination of specials to put in a ship.  The best combination depends 
on the choices of your enemy.  As well, it depends on your production base.
If you have the capability to produce 5 Huge ships each turn, then you 
probably treat the ships as throw-aways and max-out their attacking ability.
If you can't produce them fast enough to deal with enemy fleets then you'll
have to toss in the Damage Control, Displacement device, jammers etc.
==========

Subj: MOO: Bug/Feature (possible spoiler)

I had a ship with Warp dissipaters, Repulsors, some RNG 2 weapons and a RNG 1
weapon.

Having fired at a ship at range 2 I then WAIT, when the ship is highlighted
again I find I can fire the warp dissipaters again and again and ...

I wonder if this would work if you had missiles that you did not fire.
Does it work with other specials (Black Hole Generator would be nasty).
==========

Subj: MoO: Planetary Reserve Strategy

Is anybody else using the planetary reserve constantly? Haven't found
anything in the FAQ about it.

I usually have one or more planets that are far away from the enemy
spending all their production into the planetary reserve. Then I transfer
the money on the planets screen into those planets that I need to have
more production.

Advantages: Faster than building and relocating ships. Use the increased
production to build ships on the front. You can also build shields/bases
or pop faster where you need it. Also its the fastest way to get rid of
disasters like the plague.

Disadvantage: You can only double the production of a planet with the
planetary reserve. So its no use as long as you don't have any factories
and pop there.

>Useful trick: (Is it a bug? Is it a feature?) You can "invest" your
>reserves on super-rich worlds, making a profit. If (e.g.) a super-rich
>world is spending all its production on "reserves", and you double its
>production with reserves, you'll make a 50% profit. Suppose the world
>has a production of 100, and you spend 100 BC on the planet:
>
>100 BC tripled = 300 BC (super-rich worlds triple production of
>                         "industry", i.e. reserves)
>300 BC / 2 = 150 BC     (Only half of what you spend on reserves goes
>                         into the treasury; the rest is lost)
>
>And so you make a 50% profit. (If your world is spending BC on
>something else, e.g. bases, the return will be less). This only works
>with *super*-rich worlds (on rich worlds, the rich-doubling is
>balanced by the 50% loss in making reserves). But it makes it
>worthwhile to keep your super-rich worlds always maxed out on
>production.

a.  Although I'm sure you do it, and it's strongly implied by "maxed out on
production," you've left out the important final step.  The above example
shows no "profit," since industrial output of Ultra Rich worlds is tripled
to begin with.  The point is to triple it *again*, by using the planetary
reserve to boost production on Ultra Rich worlds even as they pipe their
output into the Planetary Reserve.  Even after the dreaded 50% Tax, there's
a profit to be made by "recycling" your Planetary Reserve.

So, if you have a 100 BC Ultra Rich world, you get 300 BC of production from it.
If you suck 100 BC out of Planetary Reserve every turn to double that planet's
production, it produces 600 BC, only 200 of which are needed to "pay back"
the Planetary Reserv.  That leaves 100BC "profit" which can be freely spent
on defense bases, ships, or 50BC worth of Planetary Reserve to be spent
somewhere else.  (You do NOT have to pump ALL the production from Super Rich
worlds into the Reserve to have a stable setup which reaps the maximum benefit
from this "bug", just one third of it!)

b.  What nobody seems to realize is that it is pointless to actually have
the ultra rich world pay taxes.  You make the same profit from any world,
because for every 100bc spend you get 50BC in the reserve and therefore
50BC production  on the ultra rich world.  So it really doesn't matter
who pays the taxes as long as you pump it to the ultra rich world
(which is beneficial, but certainly not a bug).

example: you have one ultra rich and two normal worlds, each 100bc net
so if you do nothing you get 500 BC production.

scenario one:  the two normal worlds ideally bring 100bc in the
reserve, where it is then spend on the ultra rich world.  
Net effect = 600bc production.

scenario two: the ultra rich world uses 200bc of the increased 
production to put into the reserves which gives 100bc to be pumped back. 
The net effect is 400bc production on the ultra rich world plus 200 
from the normal worlds.  So in either case you get 600bc, which is
still more than if you don't do anything.  

scenario three: You can also see that 
if you have the ultra rich world pay more taxes you actually
loose money (e.g.  all of the maximum of 600bc, giving 300bc in the 
reserves which have to be distributed over all three worlds. Giving
200bc production on the two normal worlds and no production
on the ultra rich world  = 400bc net).

Therefore having your rich or ultra rich worlds pay taxes is 
pointless and normally you loose money.  Putting money from
the planetary reserves on those worlds is a good thing though.

But all this is certainly not a bug, but simply a feature that
ultra rich world can use their money better.

c.  In addition to this, is if you have Orion.  If you have Orion maxxed out
in tech research, (and why wouldn't you?) you can make an awesome "profit" in
terms of research by transferring reserves.  

d.  >	Another interesting planetary reserve strategy works well for
>artifact and other worlds where you are spending the majority of your
>BC on research.  Doubling the production on these planets gets you
>an incredible amount of RP's, for an extended period of time.

Well, yes, but between the 50% tax and the fact that it never matters where
you do research (unlike ship production), there isn't much point to using
the reserves on artifact worlds for "doubled" research because you can get
the same amount of research with that money on any other planet.  Unless
you're in the quirky situation of not wanting to build ships at your rich
or ultra rich planets, in which case you can convert their doubled or
tripled output into research at an artifact planet at a profit over having
the engineers try to come up with stuff at home.
==========

Subj: Weapons List Scrolling

>Did you notice the scroll arrows at the side....

a.  Assuming he did, the very old techs do in fact get removed from the
list.  I think it does this due to a design limit on the # of items in
a list.  It should not be because the weapon gets outdated.  Even very
late in a game with tech > 50, you still get new planets with no or
class V shields where nuclear bombs are still effective.  As well, the
cp's (and myself as well) can build ships with very low shields i.e. < 4
because shields take up a lot of space.  In fact, when particle
weapons are being extensively used (ie. mass drivers, hard beams,
etc.), shields become suboptimal to put in a ship; the space is better
used for higher maneuverability, more weapons, etc.  Therefore, heavy
lasers and npgs can be still useful especially considering the low cost.

b.  This can be very annoying!  In my last game, some of the advanced
bomb tech were skipped.  The best I had was either fusion bombs(5-20) or
anti-matter bombs(10-40), I can't remember.  Anyhow, I had a ship
designed that used some of the bombs along with other weapons.  I tried
to create a more up-to-date version of the ship and guess what?  No
bombs!  By this time I had the Death Ray, so I used it.  Later I got
the mauler device and used it.  Finally, I stole Neutronium Bombs and
the game was finished much more quickly.

==========

Subj: Black Hole Generator Mechanics

If I have say 10 ships with Black Hole Generator, and assume that I can hit 50% (Black hole can hit 25% to 100%)
then how many turn would I need to kill 1000 ships?

       would it be
                1        2         3       4           (Turns)
             1000/2    500/2    250/2    125/2  ...... etc.

        or
               
                  1
             1000/((2)^10) = 0.977   ?
==========

Subj: Re: MoO: idea for moov1.4 anyone?

    I think a neat thing to add to MOO would be to make the council have
more power during the game rather than just decide when the game is
basically over.  For example, make the council more like the UN.  Alkari
forces break a treaty and invade the human home world.  
    An emergency session of the council is called by the Humans, and
they propose a resolution condemning the action.  If passed by a 2/3
vote, all races will dislike the Alkari's a bit.
    You could also have the council decide on dues, and spend the money
on research benefiting everyone, or on peacekeeping forces that go to
the defense of any attacked planet.
    Another thing I would like to see in MOO is the occupation of enemy
planets, rather than the wiping out of the indigenous population.  For
example, in WWII, when Germany invaded Poland, they didn't kill off all
the Poles and send in settlers to make it a friendly country - they
chose the cheaper route and maintained soldiers to keep order and force
the factories to produce for Germany.  On the other hand, in some of the
places the USSR took by force, they first occupied, then sent in
masses of Russian immigrants to get more of a hold on the region.  In
MOO, when you take over a planet, you could fight the military forces,
but there would still be civilians left over.  After successfully
invading a planet, you could choose to kill off the civilians (in which
case everything would be like it is now,) or you could keep the
population on.  What you would then have would be two populations - one
of your race and one of the old race.  I suppose that on planets that
are constantly being taken back and forth, there could be populations
from many races on the planet.  Enemy races on your planet would of
course not be as productive as your own people because you've got to
expend resources to keep them in line, but after taking over a planet,
it would initially be cheaper, not to mention allowing you to take all
of a given enemies planets without committing genocide.  Then, later on,
when you have enough of your own people at a "liberated" planet, you can
kill off the others.
    Both of these ideas are probably too far off the current version to
be implemented in patches, but one can always hope for a newer, better
MOO (with network support, of course.)
==========

Subj: Re: Slow MoO - You Too?

>I ran into this also - after a few hour of playing. I simply saved
>my game, quit, reboot and type Orion again. kind of an elaborate 
>work around, but the time is saved compared to waiting for the 
>damn buttons to come back up after you click them. 
>

I've noticed that simply exiting to the main menu (you're game will
automatically be saved on the way out as the current game) and 
then Continuing will fix things.  Seems to flush the memory manager, or
whatever it is that is suddenly causing a drastic decrease in performance.
==========

Subj: MoO: Why did they give up so easily?

I played a game last night, Psilons/large/3/hard.  I was rather boxed
into a corner right from the start by the Silicoids and the Sakkras.
I was only able to secure 6 planets, but I managed to fend off the
first wave of attacks by both races.  None of the attacks were very
intense.

Then came that long wait while you desperately struggle to build
techs ("Oh please don't attack me before I can build the planetary
shields...").  The Sakkras could have wiped me up with a sponge if
they'd made the effort.  I could see their stacks of 32000 mediums
parked only 3 parsecs away from my weakling planets.  They were
WAY ahead of me in all techs.  I didn't dare to try to steal from
them because I couldn't have handled the retaliation.

Then I finally developed sub-space teleporters.  I designed a 
medium bomber with the teleporter and a handful of fusion bombs
(best I had).  All my planets were producing these, and in a few
turns, I had about 150 of them.  I sent this fleet to one of the
neighboring planets to see how they'd do.

When I got to the combat map, I was faced with a stack of 32000
mediums, 3 stacks of several hundred larges, and a stack of 30
huges.  I waited for one turn to see what kind of mobility they
had...  And they ALL retreated!!

I teleported right next to the planet and took out all the missile
bases in one drop.  When I was asked if I wanted to bomb the planet,
I said 'yes' and the colony was destroyed.  I sent the fleet to
the next planet and found a similar fleet (but not the same one)
waiting for me there.  And the same thing happened.

By now, I had another fleet of bombers waiting for orders so I
sent them off to do the same thing.

Not only did the defending ships not try to attack my bombers, but
the Sakkras never even tried to retaliate by attacking my planets.
They basically just sat back and let me obliterate them.

Why did the Sakkras do nothing to stop me?

a.  What shields did you have? If your shields are better than the maximum
damage they can do, they had to retreat! This usually happens when you
have class IV shields and the enemy has gatling lasers.
==========

Subj: MOO: weird bug

Yesterday, I was playing MoO (as usual :-)). huge/hard/5/humans.
I had taken Orion quite some time ago when the space crystal appeared, 
right next to Orion. I sent my main fleet there to deal with it. When the
crystal actually attacked, it said Guardian attacks humans, and it was the
guardian, which I previously destroyed, of course. I took him out in one 
well placed shot and I thought all was well, but oh no. The news cast said
that the space crystal had destroyed all life on Orion, and the space 
crystal was still on the map. When it left Orion, I sent transports there
to re-colonize it. A news cast appeared with a symbol I've never seen before
and the word Orion. The symbol looked something like two hands holding a 
sphere. The actual news cast was blank. A few turns later, my fleet destroyed
the space crystal at another planet.
My theory is that MoO can't handle space monsters over Orion. Anyone else
seen this?
==========

Subj: Game Strategy (You Against the Universe)

Play against the Psilons and/or get yourself into a final war when you
have about 1/4 to 1/3 of the galaxy.  Don't go for any of this
diplomatic crap, that's for sissies and is not a real win.  The only
way to win is get the 2/3 vote yourself or to terminate every other
race (my choice).  If you do this, then "hard" IS really hard.

My last game Meklar/5/Hard/Large was a good one in that the Psilons
were my main competition.  They were 20 levels higher in tech, had
more planets, had 3x the fleet size, and were about equal in
production.  I was constantly being attacked (he was a Pacifist Tech,
hah hah) on half my planets and the only way I survived was that I had
the biotoxin antidote and then I got the repulsor beam.  He had class
6 to 13 shields so I could not hit him and I waited for the 50 turn
limit to expire and "win" the battle.

In this game, I was on the verge of destruction for almost the entire
length of the game (until I captured two of his lightly defended
planets and got his tech).  This is the key to having fun, if you find
that you feel that you are going to win, then on the next council vote
you should vote for the other guy and not accept the ruling.  You'll
get final war and some good bloodshed will follow.
====================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================

{PAGE|82}


