Quote:
Originally Posted by Motti
Well, from battle reports I tend to recall that whichever structure you have the most of gets most structures destroyed.
|
I don't think it works that way - although I'm sure someone could provide a definitive answer to how SKs prioritise their targets. However, if they did target the most numerous structures it would make them even more effective - given that each successive building (of each type) is more expensive than the previous one. I'd much rather lose my 5th factory than my 60th Finance Centre.
Having said that, I've never liked SKs for many of the reasons stated above - not least of which was eksero's throwaway line that he uses them because he enjoys it. We abolished PDS many, many rounds back because they couldn't run away from overwhelming attacks and they at least had the chance to fire at their attackers first. Modern constructions just die and, as has been said, take a long time (and a lot of resources) to replace.
To those who say that losing ships is worse, of course I agree - but losing your fleet is (usually) the result of carelessness.
To those who say that SKs are easy to destroy - that's true unless they're combined with a partner's attack fleet composed of "real" ships in the same class.
To those who say "this is a war game", I also agree - I already consider the use of SKs as an act of war. Perhaps we should restrict the use of SKs to targets with whom your alliance is at war (in game). This would at least prevent the randoms from being bombed back to the stone age. Alternatively, we could adopt Mzyxptlk's idea and have a penalty on the roid cap if SKs are present although I'd take it a step further and make the attackers choose either roids or structures.
Just my tuppenceworth.
