18-07-2004 08:37									#1
	Destroying Missiles Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Yes, I'm a newbie, but how do you destroy missiles before they hit you? Is it possible to dodge them? My 360 degree laser point defense doesn't seem to do much.

	18-07-2004 08:48									#2
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Wel lit depends on the stage of the game and my tech. Very early if I am using missiles ships, I just fire and retreat all but the dither ships.

Later I tend to just absorb the damage. I may have PD's if I have room left over. If so I will use mass drivers first, then phasors.

To tell you the truth I never really tracked it all that close as it is seldom a factor. Either I can defeat the ship or planet or I cannot.

I may be able to retreat a damaged ship now and then and if they do not have dauntless the missiles are gone.

So a battleship with reinforced hulls and my best armor and shields is usually enough.

Last edited by vmxa1 on 18-07-2004 at 09:07

	18-07-2004 08:54									#3
	Put an end to popups!

There are several things to take into account:

#1: The speed of the missile vs your targeting system

Missiles are harder to hit if they are faster either due to "fast" upgrade or "more advanced" (nuclear -> merculite -> pulson -> zeon)

eg:

nuclear
merculite
nuclear +fast
merculite +fast
etc

(fast adds 8 speed)

Once your targeting system gets a hit, it then computes how much dmg it will manage to make.

2# So we have the dmg your beam is inflicting vs the missile's ARMOR which comprises of the standard armor (eg titanium, tritanium etc ) + "heavily armored" option.

A titanium+heavily armored needs a dmg of 2 before it's destroyed for example.


Laser point defense is practically useless mainly because it only does 1-2 dmg. So if it DOES hit and does its maximum of "2" (and the autos are hard to hit cos they lose 20% each) it could only destroy very basic unarmored missiles...

And that happens for every missile and every beam it tries to hit them...

Early on, the best PD weapons are fusion (+co+env) and you have to have ATLEAST:

+25 computer
+50 from battle scanners
+15 from academy (your crews start as regular)
+25 from continuous on the fusion beams


Hope that helps

	18-07-2004 14:38									#4
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I guess in some points Brutal is wrong.

Here are my numbers that i read in several faqs....and I tested them in hotseat some months ago:

missile hitpoints:
n 4
m 8
p 12
z 16

hv arm doubles them BUT: armor technology doesnt increase them!!!

missile speed:
8+2*drive level (+4 if fast)

a fast ion drive missile has the speed 20.

beam defence of missile:
missile speed*5

a fast ion drive missile has 100 BD.

Brutal is right, that fusion co env is the most popular choice.

Mass Driver can be cool if you have nice computer (for example creative) and therefore no problems with Beam Offense.

	18-07-2004 18:44									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

grrr.... how can you armor a missile, anyways -simmers-

all right, thanks. is it possible/practical to protect your larger ships from missiles with frigates armed w/ fx mass drivers?

	18-07-2004 20:04									#6
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

You need the heavily armored mod, requires 1 tech level above the tech of the rocket. I think that the armoring is bugged and that higher armor types have no effect, I'm not so sure about this though.

I like pd af mass drivers for point defense myself.

	18-07-2004 23:15									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

(if you make it this far)
phasors - pd, co, af
and/ OR
phasors - co,af
and/OR
gauss cannon -af

moleculartronic targeting computer.

its a waste to use regular beams instead of pd's to take out missiles, but if somehow you don't have good armor/shields, it won't be a waste.

also useful, 3-4 pulsars on a ship will clear any missiles in range.
the problem with that is it is range limited, and you need the missile salvo(s) in a 6 tile range.
lightning field

(anti missile rockets aren't work squat unless you pack alot of them, and with the space used by the rockets, you might as well have armed the ship with pd beams.)


if you want to dodge missiles, multi-wave jammer or wide area jammer's help.
get a legenday officer that is a fighter pilot.
displacement device.

but most people (i believe) would just take the missile hits, unless the enemy is firing 50+ zeon's with all the modifications. (mirv, eccm, fast, armored, emissions guidance)

on a tangent, fully loaded plasma torpedo's are a nightmare.

	18-07-2004 23:19									#8
	Remove this text

To some degree it is a matter of your tech. Do I even have Mass drivers this game, do I have fusion beams? The only one I am always sure to get at some point is phasors.

By then, I am not much concerned about missiles anyway.

	19-07-2004 00:29									#9
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Siron, u r right about the numbers -> I extrapolated from "fighters". They take the best armor you currently have.

And yeah the fast is +4 not +8

(u r also right to point out the speed equation - I am inexcusable)

	19-07-2004 00:38									#10
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Psilon dependant : we tend to refer to lwoer techs, as in multiplayer games, the game rarely reaches a point where u have access to the higher techs

As for the benefits of the fusions vs mass drivers:

fusions have continuous modification which makes quite a bit of difference early on, on whether u hit the missile or not

In addition, due to the "popularity" of various techs, the sizer of the fusion beams gets refined to quite a small size allowing you to fit much more than the automated mass drivers.

PD Mass drivers (in my view) are only an option IF:

You have atleast +75 targeting system (+50 from battle scanner + 15 space academy) to give u a +140.

That way, the "automation behind them gets a much better chance to hit as well, making them more effective than fusions (because the problem with mass drivers is that early on they can't hit sh*t )

(if I recall right, they lose -20 accuracy for each fire, so if the first blast is +140, the second uses a +120 and the third a +100)

	19-07-2004 05:04									#11
	Got spare money?

I think that all 3 of them just lose 20% from the normal, atleast thats what it sounds like to me.

	19-07-2004 18:35									#12
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

"I think that the armoring is bugged and that higher armor types have no effect..."

I dont think that this a bug. I think it was an attempt to balance the game after the manual was published.

	20-07-2004 04:23									#13
	Increase Your PM Length

Theres one kind of fun thing I do early in games. I'm not claiming this is optimal, but its kind of neat.

I make ships that have nothing but lots of anti missile rockets. I place them slightly forward of the other ships. They manually target incoming missiles that are aimed at my other ships.

Because they have no weapons they seem to be very low priority targets for the AI, so they can sit forward shooting down missiles pretty safely.

After a couple of battles I realized it was pretty similar to the whole AEGIS thing.

Probably not super efficient, but its fun and almost nullifies missiles, which early on can be a threat. I like using fleets of varied, highly specialized ships.

	14-09-2004 13:21									#14
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Early on, against Nuclear Missles, I find that Lasers are by far the best thing to use once you have battle scanners.

You have your lasers setup with Armor Piercing, Continuous, Auto-Fire, and Point Defense (I typically tack on no Disipation too).

Continuous + Auto-Fire is a net gain of +5% to hit, but each laser now fires 3 times.

Once you have Battle Scanners you can get all of those modifications and lasers are pretty small. They are also typically the best weapon to use early on, simply because the AI rarely has Heavy Armor (so you ignore their armor with such lasers as your main weapons as well). I've had great success early on with these weapons. Basically, early missles are a joke.

Later on it is best to get good armor and some point defense weapons, as well as a Jammer and/or the Lightning Field. It depends on how many ships you are fielding in a fleet and how badly those missiles are hurting. Especially on Impossible, I have found the AI can get a little ahead of me with missile technology, so I need to be able to avoid getting hit (by taking them out or dodging them). Typically it is easier to deal with defense against enemy beam weapons, in my experience, than missile weapons, so you can afford to spend a little extra against missiles.

Anything that can do auto-fire and continuous is pretty nice against missiles, though depending on how many they are fielding you might need to have a few ships help take out enemy missiles. Sometimes it is most efficient to take them out and do a little damage at a time so that you don't lose any ships.

-Drachasor

	20-09-2004 10:35									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I thought there was a bug that AP has no advantage on ARM because missile hit points are "pooled" and not separated into armor, structure, and systems.

	21-09-2004 02:11									#16
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Straybow I thought there was a bug that AP has no advantage on ARM because missile hit points are "pooled" and not separated into armor, structure, and systems.

Hmm, maybe so. I use that anyway because it is so powerful in the beginning against enemy ships and starbases. It is possible it doesn't help me against missles, but auto-fire, continuous, and no range dispersion is very powerful against nukes; later on it becomes less and less useful of course (as does fusion, in my experience and I eventually replace it with continuous, pd, auto-fire phasors).

I actually find myself a bit hard-pressed to deal with mid-range missles with my mid-range ship (mid-range techwise). I don't have phasors, lasers aren't that good anymore, and fusion is just ok...relative to what will come and has gone, I don't find env. pd fusion beams to be that wonderful, but it is probably the best you can do for a while. (I don't find it that wonderful because though it is very nice for the ship defending itself, it sorta bad for fellow ships trying to help out).

-Drachasor

	24-09-2004 13:02									#17
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

to Drachasor
"Early on, against Nuclear Missles, I find that Lasers are by far the best thing to use once you have battle scanners."

I strongly disagree. Autophasor is FAR better then autolaser but last one is not "far" better then mirved nukes/mercs. Actually it is far from being "far" better. I hope someone will understand my wicked english

"You have your lasers setup with Armor Piercing, Continuous, Auto-Fire, and Point Defense (I typically tack on no Disipation too)."

Good choices!

"Continuous + Auto-Fire is a net gain of +5% to hit, but each laser now fires 3 times."

Yes it fires 3 times and each time with 1/3 of damage can be done. So u risk 3 times more then single fusion beam which is +20 better due to no af mode.

"Once you have Battle Scanners you can get all of those modifications and lasers are pretty small. They are also typically the best weapon to use early on, simply because the AI rarely has Heavy Armor (so you ignore their armor with such lasers as your main weapons as well). I've had great success early on with these weapons. Basically, early missles are a joke."

I assume that most popular is basic computer if ur not creative, so saying "Basically, early missles are a joke" can be a big joke too. Maybe u think about non arm/fast/mirv missles? But if u think of full ion powered mirv/fast/arm nuke which moves 20 sq. each turn with a defence of 100 then maybe u should rethink that saying again.

"Anything that can do auto-fire and continuous is pretty nice against missiles, though depending on how many they are fielding you might need to have a few ships help take out enemy missiles. Sometimes it is most efficient to take them out and do a little damage at a time so that you don't lose any ships."

Anything can be nice with a good computer, but with basic one autofire beams sucks badly vs fast missles. Env fusion is good due to high beam attack : 90 attack of ship plus 25 from cont mode gives 115 which allows to hit 100 defence missles very good. AF has 95 and 3 separate beams, so probability to hit and do serious damage is much worse then fusion.

PK

	02-10-2004 01:55									#18
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Note: ENV does quadruple damage against missiles, and has a larger potential to kill. For example, you can use a normal mounted plasma cannon to kill missiles. each cannon can kill 4 missiles. Strange, isn't it? AFAIK, only two weapons have envelop, and that is fusion and plasma (neither of which do I research). So comparing AF-continous to ENV continus means that the ENV has a +20 more to hit, and does 33% more damage (4 hits instead of 3). However, I'd like to note that only the fusion can be PD.

Autofire is nice too. I don't know how it does calculations, but you get 3 shots that each can do full damage. Only three weapons can do autofire and continous, and that is laser, ion, and phasor.

When it comes to mid game, I am assuming that you can, or could have, research graviton beams and neutron blasters. I have found that continous normal mounted graviton beams do ok against missiles.

Here is a method I have used to kill missiles. Get a destroyer with only augmented engines. Find out which ship they targeted with their missiles. Move/rotate until the missiles get bunched up. Move the extra fast destroyer as close as possible to the group of missiles, and self destruct. This is also great against large groups of fighters. Sure its costly, but it really depends on what your race is good at. Mid game I usually have enough ships to gun down missiles with normal mounted weapons. Since I usually pick -attack, it is early game that usually has me getting hit with missiles.

edit: A note on beam weapons (for those that don't know), when adding modifications (except PD and Heavy), you only add a certain percent of the BASE cost. So the % difference between a continous and a continous NR laser is 1.5/1.25 = 1.20, or 20% more to add that NR. This means that adding continous onto a enveloping Fusion is cheaper percent wise than adding continous to plasma, because plasma has its base cost increased from enveloping.