irwoodhouse

I'm a unix sysadmin specialising in alphaserver clustering, and at the time (1998/9) the only one the company had for several critical systems. The laptop was the company's way of guarenteeing that on-call staff had a computer with a modem at home. Using them in place of desktops as well reduced cost.

ElvisMiggell: "Somebody's had a lot of pc's" Somebody used to get a laptop instead of a desktop since overnight dial-in on-call was part of the job description. Those listed above were upgrades to the original (if you can call the HP an "upgrade", oversized beast). I told my new company I don't "do" on-call. Needless to say they didn't offer me a laptop... the_mask: If your trick can be replicated that would be most useful. It sounds somewhat better than the usual method of avoiding damage to the CD, which is to copy it and use the copy. Ian.

Ron: Try turning off the music. The music is played from data files on the CD, and with the music on the CD will almost always be spinning (and the sound channels always in use). This results in a uniform 100% CPU utilitisation. I've seen this on machines from P133 to Athlon 1200 - and the system response is still quick, so it's really I/O bound not CPU bound. I've used Win95, Win98 and WinNT, so I wouldn't have thought WinME should have a problem (it's more likely hardware related). You could also try a lower edition of DirectX (if possible for WinME). v8 problably has as many bug additions as feature improvements over v5 & v6. NT needs the unofficial DX5NT4 kit to work: http://www.peregate.com/anvil/dx5nt.html. Caveat Emptor. Rebellion works fine on laptops - I've personally played it on: Tecra 710 & 740 (toshiba), Omnibook 7150 (HP) and Latitude CP (dell). The only problem with laptops is heat - rectified by turning off the music as mentioned above. Ian.

Teukros mentioned that, in each sector, he uses three separate systems each with two construction yards. My preference is for one system with six CYs. When building 3 of a given item, each of us will complete the build at the same time. However, using six together means I will have the use of the first two earlier, whereas his will deploy at roughly the same time - and at the very end of the build. I'd also have the advantage for single-item builds, such as replacing a sabotaged shield. Obviously I have more to lose if that one system with all my CYs is taken - but I shield everything twice (including systems with just mines/refineries) and keep troops at hand. Have I missed an advantage by not separating my construction yards? Does anyone have a "third way" to suggest? Ian. p.s. "system" == "planet"

Oops, the first "Fighters" in paragraph 3 above doesn't mean TIE fighters, in case it's confusing

The size of a fighter squadron probably serves an equivalent function to hull strength/shield strength of capital ships, not a factor for firepower, i.e. "72" is just for player consumption. I don't think Rebellion event attempts to emulate the X-W/T-F/XvT tactical engine Fighters seem to use torpedoes only when the target's shields have gone. Has anybody tried using TIE bombers to attack rebel ships, or just fighters/interceptors (I admit I don't bother with bombers). ISD lack laser cannons (but so do calamari cruisers). Ian.

Sorry for a slow reply. I've been a busy boy TK421: True, the lancer requires research, but it's only stage 2. Teukros mentions day 250 in his most recent post, above. For comparison, in the game I'm currently playing, I have the Star Galleon (stage 4) on day 266. In any case, the point is that the empire have a ship which is almost identical to the corvette with regard to build speed and capacity, which is an alternative to the slow-to-build victory and imperial destroyers. the_mask: Two shield generators prevent planetary assault (invasion), not bombardment. However, two shields can make the Alliance's life difficult since their bombardment capacity is limited until they acquire the really big ships (compare the VSD). Troops too, make a difference. I aim to keep three army regiments on each planet for 15 extra bombardment points. Teukros: It's unwise to rely too much one either one type of unit or one strategy (I play warcraft - I and II - and starcraft quite a bit. When I make the mistake of relying on one thing, I'm usually trounced. Dig up a copy of the original warcraft and play head-to-head. You'll get a feel for doing maximum damage with minimum forces). A fleet of gunships could be interesting, but they have no turbolasers. A few decent capital ships with ion cannons could make quite a mess of them. I might perhaps be tempted to try a number of Nebulon-B frigates, as they have both turbolasers and laser cannons, but then they lack ion cannons. Also, no ship can have more than one target, so in the face of both large capital ships and fighters, I would have a problem. I think the general consensus in this thread is a distinct lack of mid-range Imperial ships, which can be a problem, since the big ones are obviously slow to build. However, I contend that the Empire has a production advantage at the beginning of the game (starting in the core, plenty of troops, easy to grab systems with pre-built mines/refineries), and is likely to get mass shipyards online before the Alliance. i.e., the Alliance couldn't build big ships anyway, lacking the shipyards, so those mid-range ships are essential. I'm genuinely interested in the strategy and balance issues mentioned. They're interesting because I rarely see them, as I play fairly methodically. For those who are interested, I've sketched some articles on strategy and balance (as I see them), available at http://www.irwoodhouse.uklinux.net/rebellion/index.html because I'm far, far too long-winded to put them here There's also a copy of my crib sheet I was quoting from, if you're interested. Let me know what you think on this forum. Ian.

To address is original issue of innumerable CVTs, two words: maintenance disruption. Sabotage/bombard/steal either mines OR refineries and force the enemy to scrap things. However, if you have given an Alliance player the chance to build up those sorts of fleets I think you've probably lost anyway, because you missed one of the major game strategies: get an early advantage and keep it. Alternative strategy: lancer frigates. Compare the stats (quoting from my crib sheet, frigate/corvette), lancers have: better shields (300/200) and better shield recharge (15/10), equal sublight speed & agility (6 & 3, resp.), better firepower (150/120), and cost the same to build (14). (on a side note: has somebody worked out whether better figures for: damage control, shield recharge & weapon recharge; are LOW, or HIGH?) Now, if you'd complained about corellian GUNSHIPs, that's a different matter, and I'm surprised the Alliance player hasn't switched to gunships - they're far superior to either corvettes or lancers. Incidentally, on Carracks; I've found them rather useful against corvettes, since they have turbolasers as well as laser cannons, and I tend to build them as personnel shuttles/anti-starfighter before assault transports are available, so I have plenty running around. Having (weak) tractor beams, they're also useful for snaring light rebel craft if the enemy wants to run, whilst your heavier, slower VSDs/ISDs trundle within striking range (assuming they don't *immediately* run, that is). Like everyone else, I've got opinions on how the two sides are balanced, but that's best left for another post. I shall shut up now.