Devnull Mod Gold: updates and discussion [Archive]

Rollo

July 27th, 2002, 03:39 AM

I should add that Geo and myself are not to be credited for the change of the satellites. I agree that this is a cool change. It was done by HreDaak in his mod (Version 1.01) and incorporated into the Devnull Mod 1.0 by Devnullicus in Feb 2001. I think it is time to give credit, where credit is due. So here is a list of the authors that contributed to the Devnull Mod or are authors of other mods that Devnullicus incorporated into the Mod (in no special order): Devnullicus, HreDaak, VernMcC, Elwood Bluze, Derek, Mephisto, Talenn, Lucas, Daynarr, Deathstalker, Suicide Junkie, GodEmperor, Dracus, Q, SunDevil, Henk Brouwer, Andrey Taskaev, Nerfman, Andr�s Lescano, Damien Lescano, Dogscoff, Puke, Geoschmo, Rollo. Please correct me, if I missed anybody. The readme is rather long http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif .

That's what I really like about this mod: It has a long history and many people contibuted to it. Btw, Version 1.64 is in the works. Maybe it is going to be 1.70 (not compatible with 1.6x), not sure yet. Some teasers (apart from the not so thrilling many little bugfixes): new toys to play with, some change of the rules to benefit the AI, and more AI races (long overdue really http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif , since that was (*I think*) the main reason that Geo "hired" me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ).

Enough rambling...

Rollo

Binford

July 29th, 2002, 10:47 PM

Here's a link to the DevNull MOD forum on Sneaky Buffalo: http://www.sneakybuffalo.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=14428#14428

Rollo, is there a link to the complete list of features, changes, etc of DevNull over Standard 1.67 somewhere I can link to? I know the readme probably has it, but thought that might a large post if its elsewhere already?

Binford

Binford

July 29th, 2002, 10:58 PM

Oh, I would love to see the Giant and Titanic planet types added to DevNull from The Admiral's System Mod as well.

These are smaller than Ringworld's and Sphereworld's but bigger then HUGE.

Binford

Rollo

July 30th, 2002, 12:25 AM

Binford - I am not aware of any list of features that you could link to. You'd have to use the readme. Maybe you can shorten it a bit for a post. Some of the early changes are obsolete by now or have been changed again. A synopsis for the mod would be great. Any volunteers? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I'll check out the Admiral's System Mod. Sounds like a good idea, as long as the bigger-than-huge planet are kept (very) rare. Is anybody aware of any problems that are connected to adding new planet sizes?

Rollo

Deathstalker

July 30th, 2002, 01:44 AM

If you want to add/change/include anything from the latest Versions of my MountMod (or my other one the 'D-Mod') you are welcome to. (I'd love to see the engine mounts and new ship sizes added to Devnull http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif )

Fyron

July 30th, 2002, 08:44 AM

If you want the huge planets to be really rare, only include 1 entry for them in SectType.txt. The number of different entries for each object type, size, etc. in that file is what determines how many "any" sized planets become large, small, etc., how many "any" planets become Rock, Ice, or Gas, and so on.

Rollo

July 30th, 2002, 08:50 PM

Thanks Deathstalker, I am currently downloading your mod (Man, that is huge) and will see what I can use http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif . One thing I am trying to prevent, though, is opening another can of worms and add a lot of stuff that the AI won't use. I am more than 50% finished with updating right now and don't want to start all over again http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif . I assume that the Mount Mod is part of the D-Mod, right?

Thanks Fyron, I 'll see how it works out. If I have any more questions, I know where to find you http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif .

Rollo

Deathstalker

July 30th, 2002, 11:46 PM

Rollo, the MountMod and the D-Mod are seperate entities. D-Mod uses a 'skeleton' Version of the MountMod (as I added gatling guns etc to the techs for it instead of the mounts). Most of the stuff is human exclusive but the AI will use such things as the crystalline engines (or organic) and of course the mounts are arranged for full use by the AI (and it will be even better after the next patch when mounts can be done by tech level etc.)

The main problem I see is how the weapon numbers/family numbers and Facility family numbers correspond. Devnull and I probally share numbers and that would have to be changed manually. If you need any help/advice just ask, and if you only want to use parts of it (or none at all) that is ok too. I think the MountMod can be added with minimal changes to the DevnullMod.

Binford

July 31st, 2002, 10:12 PM

OK, I just spent a great deal of time going through the devnull mod readme trying to compile a list of features for the mod as oppsoed to all the changes incorporated into every Version/point release. Problem is the original Versions of the mod were based on other mods and they're not referenced there. I am compiling a list of what I can make out and then will post for updates/additions etc that I will have missed (note I didn't say "may have missed").

When this is complete hopefully it can be added to the Mod ZIP file as a separate readme that newbies can read to see how much they might be interested in it.

I like the mod a lot because it makes things that in the regular game actually useful, (for example: Mining asteroids). Maint costs on mining ships really aren't cost effective like prospectors and barges are.

I do wonder if mines aren't REALLY powered down too much by letting PD Cannons sweep them? Have never built a Mine Sweeper in devnull because of that.

Binford

Rollo

August 1st, 2002, 12:50 PM

Deathstalker - I'll have a look at the Mount Mod as well, then. Devnull Mod already uses an early Version/variation of the Mount Mod, IIRC. One of the problems that always comes up with mounts that change the tonnage is the AI designs. So I have to be careful not to change any of the mounts that the AI already uses, since I tweaked the AI to make designs with them. The engine mount is cool. Not sure if it works with DNM, though. Better engines already use less fuel (down to 5 per move). So if these would use the engine mount, one solar collector would have the effect close to a quantum reactor http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif .

Binford - That sounds good http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif . Thanks for doing this. I'd really like to have a look at it. Don't worry if you get every little change. There are just too many over the time. Also if all changes are in there, people might be just as confused as looking at the readme http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif . Maybe it is a good idea to focus on the main changes of the mod. Maybe make some categories and list 3-5 features in each of them. Anyway, inclusion in the mod zip is a great idea. So newbies can get an overview.

About mines, well yes, that is certainly debatable. It is however one of the features of the mod that is most likely to stay as it is. The way I view myself is just the current caretaker/editor/maintenance man of Devnull Mod (hmm, don't know if that is well put, but you probably get the idea). So, that is one of these 'spirit of the mod' things that I am not going to touch. Personally I like the way minesweeping works in DNM. Mines are less useful, the best part of it IMHO is that putting a few mines on your planets does not help you against the AI much. Still big mine fields are useful and you can put out mines quite fast, if you got the best warheads (note: in DNM the warheads get cheaper, so better warheads let's you churn out more mines). One thing that could be considered, though, is raising the mine limit per sector to 200, 300, or http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif 500. This way you could build big mine fields if you have the time. Still these could be swept with special mine sweepers. For example, a cruiser could have 20 PDC and be able to sweep 100 mines. Five of them could sweep the largest mine field possible.
Hmm, actually that's not a bad change. Would do you and everybody else think about that?

Rollo

Binford

August 1st, 2002, 06:11 PM

I think using PDS'c for mine sweeping is fine, it's just a little overkill. My suggestion would be to A) Lower the # of mines a PDC can sweep (maybe let it do 1,2,3 mines at PDC levels 1,3,5) and B) up the number of mines an actual Mine Sweeper module can sweep to make it useful. Like I said, Mine Sweeper modules in DNM aren't ever used. Why bother when you can just build PDC's?

My opinion is, when an item can do many things, it shouldn't be able to do them as well as something expressly designed for the task.

Binford

[ August 01, 2002, 17:11: Message edited by: Binford ]

Rollo

August 1st, 2002, 06:20 PM

Hmm, but there are no mine sweeping components other than the PDC in DNM. The standard mine sweeper components have been removed. So in that respect PDC are the components designed for the task.

Rollo

Binford

August 1st, 2002, 06:32 PM

Oh... That might explain why I've never built them in DNM, huh? LOL

Binford

Quikngruvn

August 2nd, 2002, 06:43 AM

...One thing that could be considered, though, is raising the mine limit per sector to 200, 300, or http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif 500. This way you could build big mine fields if you have the time. Still these could be swept with special mine sweepers. For example, a cruiser could have 20 PDC and be able to sweep 100 mines. Five of them could sweep the largest mine field possible.I like the idea of upping the unit limit per sector, but I wonder if that would weaken seekers, fighters, and drones. Five of your aforementioned PD cruisers would be able to spit out 100 point-defense per combat turn, effectively nullifying seekers etc. (Not completely, since the PD ships still have to stay close to the offensive ships, but still....) If the fleet did not need to prepare for the possibilty of 500 mines in a sector, it would (probably) not have not nearly so much PD in it, so seekers etc. may still be effective.

Is that as confusing as I think it is?

I almost forgot... mines also tend to suck up a lot of radioactives, which can cause a problem if you're not careful. I came this close to learning that the hard way in the DNM Learning game....

Quikngruvn

[ August 02, 2002, 05:46: Message edited by: Quikngruvn ]

Deathstalker

August 2nd, 2002, 11:12 AM

Another Mine Proposal: Normal PDC could sweep ONE mine per PDC. Research Mines and it would give you access to an advanced PDC that would up the level of sweeping (and replace normal PDC on ship designs). That way PDC V would sweep only 1 mine but AdvancedPDC V would sweep 5. (or whatever # the original Devnull PDC V sweep was). In other words, crossover techs.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Or I am just tired @5am and don't know what I am talking about. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Rollo

August 3rd, 2002, 01:59 AM

Is that as confusing as I think it is?Well Quikngruvn, at least it is a pretty confusing train of thought http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif , because you could build these PD-Sweeper-Cruisers no matter how high the mine limit is anyways. I understand what you are saying, but a good (or even perfect fleet) should bring enough PD to cancel all seekers anyways. You are looking at the high mine limit as a reminder to include enough PDC in your fleet and I'll give you that. However, try to look at this the other way around. Let's say a decent fleet needs at least a total of 20-30 PDC. Let's also say you have PD level between 3 and 5. So that fleet will just plow through all mines field of size 60 (or 150, depending on the numbers you choose). Now, is that as confusing as I think it is? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Secondly keep in mind that bringing an (over-)abundance of PDC does not do you any good against fighters/drones/sats. PDC can only target seekers and sweep mines. To hit the other units you need the anti fighter missile (AFM) which doesn't sweep mines.

I almost forgot... mines also tend to suck up a lot of radioactives, which can cause a problem if you're not careful...Yes, mines can be rather expensive. You can research higher levels of warheads and they will get cheaper.

Deathstalker, dunno, I kinda like it that you don't have to research mines to be able to sweep them, but your idea does have merit (and I do like crossover techs http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ). Are you saying that you would only need mines 1 to get the Adv. PDC V? Or would you need level 3? Although, there is a little nasty technical detail about adding more Versions of PDC with higher tech requirements. This can cause the design minister to place the Adv. PDC in the design instead of the AFM. Currently the AI adds PDC for 'mine sweeping' and AFM for 'point-defense' and that is good that way. (note: for abilities that have no value like armor and point-defense the minister chooses the component with the highest number of tech level requirements that is furthest down the component file). <- how's that for a running on sentence?
I am pretty sure I could counteract this by adding redundant tech requirements to the AFM, but it might end up a sticky mess and I am not sure that's worth it.

One other thing I just noticed with mines. Mine Layer components can lay 5 mines per turn for all three levels. How about lowering that to 3/4/5? So you would get an increase in your mine laying ability.

Hmm, the more I think about it the more I like it. Mine fields with a high limit that are easy to deploy, albeit costly, and easy to sweep. Opinions?

Rollo

edit: some typos

[ August 03, 2002, 01:09: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Deathstalker

August 3rd, 2002, 04:10 AM

"Deathstalker, dunno, I kinda like it that you don't have to research mines to be able to sweep them, but your idea does have merit (and I do like crossover techs ). Are you saying that you would only need mines 1 to get the Adv. PDC V? Or would you need level 3?"

My 'vision"

PDC I: 1 mine sweep
PDC II: 1 mine
PDC III: 1 mine
PDC IV : 1 mine
PDC V: 1 mine
PDC II+ Mines I: AdvancedPDC: 2mine sweep
PDC III+ MinesII: APDC: 3 mines
PDC IV+ Mines III: APDC: 4 mines
PDC V+ Mines III: APDC: 5 mines (??Too powerful??)

So even if you had PDC I and Mines III the best you could sweep is ONE mine per PDC cannon till you research more. This is my suggestion, comments?? (or revisions??)

Edit: And as far as AI use if you keep the APDC right below the PDC in order (in the components.txt) the AI should choose the best one researched (just like engines).

[ August 03, 2002, 03:12: Message edited by: Deathstalker ]

Rollo

August 5th, 2002, 12:35 PM

Deathstalker, sorry, but that idea doesn't grow on me for several reasons. Most importantly, as I mentioned earlier on this thread, because the way minesweeping works in DNM is kind of a taboo for me to change in order to preserve the spirit of the mod. That may seem like a lame excuse, but it is important for me.

And as far as AI use if you keep the APDC right below the PDC in order (in the components.txt) the AI should choose the best one researched (just like engines).Engines and point defense are treated differently by the AI, because the 'Standard Ship Movement' has a value and 'point-defense' does not. I am not concerned with PDC vs. APDC, but with conflicts between APDC and Anti-Fighter-Missiles (which will occur). Having three different Versions of point-defense is kind of messy. For the extra work involved, I see only little 'bang for the buck'. (yeah, I am lazy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif )

Do keep suggesting stuff, though http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif (that applies to everybody, of course). I am not against adding new stuff at all. Just changing something that was already modded in the original DNM, I am a little bit reluctant with. For example, we are still looking for some nifty, but not too powerful racial crossover techs for psychic/crystalline (and maybe temporal/religious).
Any ideas, anyone?

Rollo

Trajan

August 6th, 2002, 02:33 PM

Rollo,

I want to thank you for constantly improving DevNull. It is my mod of choice!

Cheers!
Trajan

Rollo

August 7th, 2002, 12:45 AM

Thank you for your kind words, Trajan http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif . It is good to know that people are enjoying the mod. The new Version is still in the works. Actually it could be ready soon, but I'd like to include at least two or three new AIs before posting (and that takes some time). There will be overhauls of the racial combo techs and I want some AIs that actually use them. Looks more likely now that it is going to be 1.70 (not compatible with earlier Versions) rather than 1.64.

Btw, I have checked out the Admiral's system mod. Wow, those giant and titanic worlds are really huge. It's like placing quasi-Ringworlds and Sphereworlds over the map. That puts a little bit too much emphasis on the luck factor IMHO. As said before, I like the idea of adding bigger planets, so I'll include a much toned done variant. I was thinking of one extra planet size with 30/6 facility slots. Nothing spectacular. I was also thinking of doubling the cargo space of domed colonies (that should help the AI). Opinions?

Rollo

philjat

August 7th, 2002, 03:53 PM

Hi
i am a newbie and certainly don't see the good path to the space true, but i don'tfind the place to donwload the devnull mod gold http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif
So my question is : where is the url to dl this mod ?
thanks

oleg

August 7th, 2002, 04:21 PM

Go to

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=50;t=000002

scroll down a little and you will find it.

Rollo

August 7th, 2002, 07:41 PM

I have made a sig with the link to DNM 1.63 now

testing...

philjat

August 8th, 2002, 09:40 PM

ok, it's super

thanks all

now i going to play with and try to go back under the sun http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

oleg

August 9th, 2002, 02:47 AM

Rollo, I think quite a few people won't mind if you put an upgrade Version as well - it does take some time to load 3M if one has just a modem connection !

Rollo

August 9th, 2002, 12:36 PM

Yeah oleg, tell me about it. I am one of those poor guys myself http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif .
Anyway, good idea. Here is a patch that will upgrade Version 1.51 (SE4Gold CD Version) or higher to the current Version 1.63:

DNMpatch 1.63 (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/newuploads/1028889010.zip)

Rollo

Rollo

August 9th, 2002, 12:42 PM

new sig test...
again....

[ August 09, 2002, 11:44: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Binford

August 10th, 2002, 10:29 PM

As soon as the new Gold Patch comes out and Rollo releases the new DNM Version, I am going to add another game to start using DevNullMod on the PBW server since I am having fun (and learned what mistakes I made designing my race) on the Learning Dev Null mod currently running on PBW (which Rollo is winning by a mile by the way).

I am thinking I may make a map using Fyron's Quadrant Mod for this game (no one will need that mod as the system will download that map to you when the game starts as I understand it).

Just a heads up so you can think of getting in. Hopefully we'll have enough this time to not have toi add any AI players (except maybe Space Monsters for fun)! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Binford

[ August 11, 2002, 20:57: Message edited by: Binford ]

Binford

August 15th, 2002, 05:58 AM

OK, Rollo - any ETA when you're releasing the next DNM update now that patch 2 is out?

Binford

Rollo

August 15th, 2002, 09:10 AM

Binford, I have no ETA on the new Version, yet. All I can say is that it will be at least one week. Version 1.63 of DNM should be compatible with the new patch, though.
Glad to hear that you are planning to make a new game using the next Version. As it is right now, using Fyron's Quadrant Mod might not be such a good idea, though. While maps created by FQM can be used with DNM 1.70 (beta), they will lack two features that will be new to DNM. One is extra huge planets, the other is a new ruins tech. However, I am going to include most (if not all) of FQM in the DNM. This way you'll able to use both Fyron's maps and the new features of DNM.
Please bear with me. As soon as I have FQM included and a new AI finished, I'll release the next Version.

Rollo

[ August 15, 2002, 08:11: Message edited by: Rollo ]

JJ Sonick

August 15th, 2002, 10:04 PM

Binford, how is your summary of Devnull's features coming? I've never tried the mod and am very curious about what major changes it implements. I'm sure it's good from the comments I've seen, but I want to make sure I know what its juiciest features are before I start a game with it, and it IS bewildering to try to parse all the revisions and counter-revisions listed in the readme. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Binford

August 15th, 2002, 10:39 PM

Originally posted by JJ Sonick:
Binford, how is your summary of Devnull's features coming? I've never tried the mod and am very curious about what major changes it implements. I'm sure it's good from the comments I've seen, but I want to make sure I know what its juiciest features are before I start a game with it, and it IS bewildering to try to parse all the revisions and counter-revisions listed in the readme. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Well, I havd all the ships, sats, mines, fighters done. Then I got a job finally after 6 months unemployed and haven't touched it this week. Might be a while.

HOWEVER, I did add another game of devnull starting up to the PBW site called, devnull2. Easiest way to learn it is to sign up for it! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Binford

JJ Sonick

August 15th, 2002, 11:25 PM

Congrats on the job! But I hope you find time to finish the devnull summary, too. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif I'll consider the PBW game as well...

Binford

August 17th, 2002, 09:36 PM

OK, here's my first shot at it. I know stuff is missing, so please everyone let me know anything you have to be added.

http://www.jeffleggett.com/DevNullMod.htm

I know there's nothing about the crossover tech, but haven't messed with it at all either. Can someone let me know what techs x-over, and what you get out of them when you do it.

This is not a first Version, just a first draft. All comments, criticism, suggestion s welcome at this point.

Further, I note there is no DNM Home Page. I volunteer my web space for hosting the DNM downlaods, and so forth. If Rollo agrees, I'll fashion a DNM page and we'll get it up ASAP.

Binford

JJ Sonick

August 18th, 2002, 06:15 PM

Thanks, Binford. Now I have a better idea of what's in the mod and am more excited about it. Keep up the good work. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Rollo

August 18th, 2002, 10:03 PM

Thanks Binford,
well done on the first draft. Comments are in the mail.
DNM home page is a great idea http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif . Go for it.

Still no ETA on 1.70. We had a big family party that had me ..uuhmm.. 'occupied' for a couple of days.

Rollo

[ August 18, 2002, 21:06: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Binford

August 18th, 2002, 11:34 PM

Thanks all. I have updated the Description again with Rollo's changes and re-posted it:

http://www.jeffleggett.com/DevNullMod.htm

This week I will work on getting up a DNM Home Page, with links to all the files and this update and whatever else I can think of.

Binford

Rollo

August 19th, 2002, 01:07 AM

Binford, two minor nitpicks.

1) Geo has updated the Amonkrie and Fazrah, not the Vikings
2) The United Flora have no updated AI in 1.63, but they will have a new AI in 1.70. So, might as well leave that in http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif .

PerpetualNewbie

August 20th, 2002, 05:37 AM

Sorry if this is the wrong place to post this:

I noticed that the Devnull Mod removes the abilities of the system shield to stop warp point manipulations in the system (actually I found this out the hard way, by researching like crazy to get the system shield and then not getting the ability...didn't believe it until I checked the facilities.txt file).

Was there a balance reason why this was removed? To me it seems like the only thing that allows a decent defense later on in the game.

Another newby question: I re-inserted the warp point abilities in the devnull facilities file...is this going to affect (or possibly crash) the game I've in progress?

Fyron

August 20th, 2002, 05:57 AM

Re-adding the ability won't adversely affect current games you are running (it will add the ability, but it won't crash anything).

Rollo

August 20th, 2002, 05:48 PM

PerpetualNewbie, thanks for the catch. This is absolutely the right place to post this.

I don't think that the abilities to stop warp point manipulations were taken away from the facilities. It is rather that they weren't added to them like in the standard game. IIRC these abilties were added in SE4 1.49. The DNM facility.txt is based on an older Version.
Anyway, I am rambling... I'll add the abilities to the system shield in the next Version. In the meantime you can just edit the facilities file yourself. As Fyron already said, that shouldn't cause any problems.

Rollo

Devin D.Bass

August 22nd, 2002, 05:43 AM

Does the current Version of devnull (ver1.63)take advantage of the new patch?
If so, can or how does the AI take advatage of the new mounts?

Toryin

August 22nd, 2002, 03:57 PM

The current Version of Devnull 1.63 doesn't take into account the new mounts from the latest patch. So no need to worry about the AI right now.

Rollo is however making a new Version that will take advantage of the new patch. Its just taking him a little while cause he has to edit all those pesky AI files. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

If you want to play a game using the Devnull mod, go ahead however, as 1.63 is compatible enough to play .

Cheers

Rollo

August 23rd, 2002, 01:45 AM

I am considering using shield mounts that will make shields more effective on smaller hulls and less effective on big hulls. Kind of a QNP-system for shield generators. Not sure, yet, if that will be part of the next Version or not (or used at all http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ). Any opinions whether that is a good idea or not?

Rollo

Spoo

August 23rd, 2002, 07:24 AM

I am considering using shield mounts that will make shields more effective on smaller hulls and less effective on big hulls I don't know if that makes much sense. Bigger ships should be able to take a beating. The advantage of big ships is they Last longer. Little ships should be able swarm in large numbers, but they should go "poof" when they get hit by the bigger ships. Perhaps shields should be cheaper on smaller ships. This would compliment the strategy of building large numbers of small, expendable ships.

It would seem odd to me to have smaller ships that are better shielded than their larger counterparts.

Toryin

August 23rd, 2002, 04:08 PM

I like that idea...

Smaller, Cheaper, less powerful shields for the smaller ships...
Larger, More Expensive, more powerful shields for the larger ships and bases...

Similar to shielding on fighters.

Either that or a higher regen rate on the larger ships.

TerranC

August 23rd, 2002, 05:11 PM

If possible, maybe institute a weapon that will balance the shields?

A weapon that does some kind of percentage based on ship hull, maybe?

IE:

Dreadnought 1000kt has 750 Shields
Escort 150kt has 300 shields

A weapon is fired at the two ships that deals damage half of the hull size.

Dreadnought takes 500, and left with 250 shields
Escort takes 150 and left with 150 shields

And the escort survives longer than the dreadnought.

... if it could be done...

Rollo

August 23rd, 2002, 11:17 PM

Spoo - the reasoning behind this is that the shield generator's strength would be diluted more on a bigger ship. I won't use the dreaded R-word, but it kinda makes sense to me. Bigger ships would still be able to take more pounding, simply because they can carry more generators. I just thought it would be cool to have smaller ship's shields more 'concentrated'. I haven't completely made up my mind about the actual numbers, but the plan is to balance the mounts and the shield components in such a way that a battleship with maxed out shields will not actually have weaker shields (still something close to 400), and the shields on a LC with medium tech shields would also be roughly the same as now. But if you stick a max tech shield on a LC or DS, it would have a greater shield strength (maybe 500 on a LC or CR, and 600 on a DS). Making shields cheaper on the smaller ships is a good idea and would go along with my plans.

Toryin - welcome to the forum btw http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif . The sizes of the shield components would always be the same, simply because it causes less headaches with existing AI designs. More powerful shields on the larger ships is not so good IMO. Bigger ships already have the better weapon mounts. What I like to do is giving the player a choice whether he likes to go for the better weapon mounts or stick to smaller hulls for some ships and use more effective shields.

Overall I do not want to make the changes and differnces too drastic and disadvantage the bigger hulls too much. That would just weaken the AI too much, since it usually uses the biggest hull available.

TerranC - that is a very cool idea. I am not aware of any method to change the weapon damage based on the target, though.

Rollo

Toryin

August 27th, 2002, 07:36 PM

Thanks Rollo, actually I've been lurking for quite awhile, just finally had a free day to post *shrug*. Anyways, it was more of a daydream then anything else. The problem would always be the AI and there's not much to fix that. My thought however was more about with the more effective shield mounts on the larger ships, you make it exponentialy expensive, so that its costs a whole heck of a lot more to use a "Captial Shield" then a regular shield.

Then again, in a human vs human game this would be real fun, but in a comp vs human, I'm sure the comp would die quickly to a human battelship.

Rollo

August 27th, 2002, 10:15 PM

Toryin, I see what you mean (I *think* http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif ). Anyway, the shield mounts have been canned for now. Maybe I'll put them in a next Version, maybe not. I'll need some more pondering on this, but want to get next Version out ASAP.

I have some more work to do on a new AI. And after that tidy up things. I estimate that the next Version will be out by the end of this week.

Rollo

Rollo

September 5th, 2002, 06:10 PM

Taa-Daaaa! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
Here is the new Version:

Devnull Mod Gold Version 1.70 (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/newuploads/1031240335.zip) (about 4.6 MB)

patch from Version 1.63 to 1.70 (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/newuploads/1031241390.zip) (about 1.9 MB)

Note: This Version is not compatible with older savegames.

summary of changes for Version 1.70:
* two new races added (United Flora, Sonne)
* overhaul and additions to the racial combo techs
* raised mine limit per sector to 500
* all ship/fleet training is now system wide
* new planet size (extra huge) and new ruins tech
* doubled cargo for domed colonies
* added Fyron's Quadrant Mod 1.13
* updated weapon sounds to Gold
* loads of little and not so little changes and fixes (check readme (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/newuploads/1031241775.txt))

Have fun, http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Rollo

Trajan

September 6th, 2002, 05:58 PM

Very nice work Rollo.

Thanks a ton! now my wife will have yet another reason to beat me about the head and shoulders for spending too much time on the computer.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Oh...one question...will the cpu ever choose the monster race as a random cpu opponent, or do I have to place them in the game manually?

Cheers!
Trajan

[ September 06, 2002, 16:59: Message edited by: Trajan ]

Rollo

September 7th, 2002, 03:02 AM

Trajan, I have set the personality number in the monsters_AI_settings.txt file to -1 to make it very unlikely that the Monsters are selected as a random opponent. I wanted the monsters to be an option for the game setup and not a regular race. So if you want to play with them, it is best to select them manually.

If you like them to be added by random more frequently, you can change the personality number to 1, 2, 3, or 4 in the above mentioned file.

If you don't like to play with them at all and don't want them added by random in any case, you can simply remove the monsters folder in the pictures/races directory.

Hope that helps,
Rollo

Rollo

September 9th, 2002, 02:09 AM

So did anybody (besides Trajan) check this out, yet?
Anybody got any errors or oddities?
Or does the 1.70 Version seem to be stable enough to be added to PBW?

Rollo

[ September 09, 2002, 01:14: Message edited by: Rollo ]

TerranC

September 9th, 2002, 03:45 AM

Wow, those imagemod pictures give that sci fi feeling http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Good job.

but one thing: did you only program Extra Huge planets to use imagemod?

Rollo

September 9th, 2002, 11:34 AM

Yes, only the new planets have the new pictures.

Rollo

Trajan

September 9th, 2002, 03:40 PM

I agree with TerranC that the new image for the huge planets are fantastic. Also, the merging of the Fyron's Mod is a great add-on. The new (to me) maps are making for some very interesting problems vs. the AI.

Cheers!
Trajan

Mylon

September 13th, 2002, 05:05 PM

Some suggestions for the mod, though some of them apply to Fyron's mod instead.

The main suggestion for Devnull mod is to reduce the maintenance of starbases. Units can be amassed like no tomorrow (woo fighters! I love how point defense weapons don't kill them anymore), which of course have no maintenance to worry about. Meanwhile bases can't move around to intercept baddies, shift uneven defenses, ect., and they have maintenance costs to boot.

Another suggestion would be to make fighters harder to hit (and likewise, increase the to-hit modifier of anti-fighter missiles). I see my ships charge into battle and easily wipe out a small contigent of fighters without batting an eye, and with huge mounted weapons no less. And they have 0 experience with only level 2 combat sensors, with my race having a +8 offensive characteristic.

I think the mounts should be re-ordered somewhat for the sake of the poor AI, with possibly more Versions thrown in (huge pulse mount weapons, for example). I'm also a little confused about some of the added ship types that act as "inbetween" ships yet are discovered at the same time as the larger ships. That is, they don't seem terribly useful unless perhaps they expanded the ship construction tree by making dreadnauts higher level.

For Fyron's Quadrant Mod:

Way too many planets in the standard midlife quadrant. I like the many moons and that makes things interesting (is it possible to have even more? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ), but I'd like to see less planets. One difficulty with moons is that it's hard to see which ones have breathable atmospheres on the map.

There are also a large number of asteroids, too. I _think_ the single-cell units of asteroids are meant to represent a belt rather than just a simple stationary clump, but having a ship equipped with a matter condensor and an engineering bay can quickly turn an asteroid belt into another 15 planets.

[ September 13, 2002, 16:17: Message edited by: Mylon ]

Mylon

September 13th, 2002, 05:24 PM

Is it possible to make maintenance reducing components? I was just considering the idea of a component that could make starbases more expensive to buid but cheaper to maintain. And it could be added as the second level of "engineering". I'd also like to see an Engineering Bay II that repairs 2 components per turn for those of us that take a penalty to repair.

Trajan

September 13th, 2002, 05:57 PM

In Devnull, bases can move tactically, though not stretegically. I wish that there was a way for them to be moved via a Tug unit, say at the rate of one move per turn.

The idea of more engineering components is not a bad idea. Have them apply to bases or ships but not both. Have the base Version reduce some cost to build or maintenance, and have the ship Version repair at higher levels.

I am just tossing out ideas here...

I love devnull, so keep up the good work.

Cheers!
Trajan

geoschmo

September 13th, 2002, 07:46 PM

Originally posted by Trajan:
In Devnull, bases can move tactically, though not stretegically. I wish that there was a way for them to be moved via a Tug unit, say at the rate of one move per turn.There is no way to have a base be moved on the strategic map by another ship. You could make bases temselves movable on the strategic map. We almost did it a while back but decided they lost their difference from ships though.

Mylon,

Yes, you can mod in a component that will reduce mainteance for a ship.

Geoschmo

Trajan

September 13th, 2002, 08:04 PM

could you mod a component that was destroyed if the base moved? That might simulate a disposable booster rocket being used. Just another thought.

Rollo

September 13th, 2002, 08:34 PM

good ideas

as geo already said, yes, bases can be made to move. we decided against it during the gold revision, but maybe a strategic movement of one maximum (only one type of engine and no solar sails allowed) wouldn't be too bad. (Hmm, of course bases would then move 2 in combat. Problem, y/n?)

The 'rocket booster' is exactly what the emergency propulsion does. I haven't tested it, but I assume that will work for bases. If you bring along a space yard, you could do this repeatedly. Maybe call that 'Space Tug Bay'.

Expanding the engineering tech is good. What else besides additional repair would fit in? I also like the mainteance reduction, but I am not sure if these will stack. 50% reduction from base + 10% reduction from component = 60% total?

Rollo

[ September 13, 2002, 19:35: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Trajan

September 13th, 2002, 08:46 PM

bases moving 2 in combat = minor problem.

using emergency propulsion to move bases. Hmm. Can you make it so that only a space yard can repair it? That way an engineering dept. cant be used to give a base unlimited movement. The player would have to use a spaceyard ship or base space yard to make it work every turn.

engineering lvl II = 1 repair and + 10% maintenence reduction. Lvl III = 2 repair + 10% maintenence reduction. Will the maint reduc stack though? I do not know. If the wife allows I may get some time to test the theory. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

is it possible to make a component that only repairs certain other components? That would allow for successive engineering components that eventually will repair any type of component. Maybe the first repairs only engines, then engins and weapons, then engines and shields...etc...

Just more storming of my brain.

CHeers!
Trajan

geoschmo

September 13th, 2002, 08:52 PM

If you add standard movement to bases simply take away the tactical movement. I am pretty sure you should be able to set it up so that you can have a standard engine or a tactical engine but not both.

If you are concerned about killer starbases roaming about wiping out fleets and planets, you could even make the engine that moves them in strategic have some horrendous combat penalties or whetever. Then you can move the base where you want it, and them retrofit it to remove the strategic engine and replace it with a tactical engine when it reaches it's post. If it got pounced on while being moved, oh well. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Of course you could load up the base wth missles and stuff that are not affected by combat penalties, and religious races would still be allright with their tailsman, so maybe I am thinking too much.

Yes the maint reduction comp would stack with the hull maint reduction. And it would stack with other maint reduction comps, so you want to make sure you limit the number per hull. And make sure the max maint reduction comp and the max hull maint reduction don't equal more than 100% or your ships starts producing resources out of the vacuum.

Geoschmo

geoschmo

September 13th, 2002, 08:53 PM

Problem with using emergency propulsion on bases IIRC is that emergency propulsion only will work up to your max standard movement. So if your standard movement is zero, the emergency propulsion won't move you.

Geoschmo

geoschmo

September 13th, 2002, 08:54 PM

Originally posted by Trajan:
using emergency propulsion to move bases. Hmm. Can you make it so that only a space yard can repair it? That way an engineering dept. cant be used to give a base unlimited movement. The player would have to use a spaceyard ship or base space yard to make it work every turn.
[snip]
is it possible to make a component that only repairs certain other components? That would allow for successive engineering components that eventually will repair any type of component. Maybe the first repairs only engines, then engins and weapons, then engines and shields...etc...
Neither of theses can be done currently. The first one wouldn't help anyway cause you can't use emergency propulsion on ships with no movement of their own.

Geoschmo

[ September 13, 2002, 19:56: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Mylon

September 13th, 2002, 09:45 PM

Okay, then how about adding in extra levels in engineering, such as

Level 1 Engineering bay component I (as is)
Level 2 Base Maintenance Reduction I (5% reduction, bases only)
Level 3 Engineering Bay component II (2 repair rate, for people that reduce their repair aptitude)
Level 4 Base Maintenance Reduction II (10% reduction)

If you want, maybe you can add in extra levels of engineering that produce cheaper Versions of life support/bridge or itself, or a third Engineering Bay that doubles as one life support in itself. Or an engineering bay that doubles as a power plant (generates x supplies per turn). Or dare I suggest 15-20% maintenance reduction? Technically a crystaline race with 20% maintenance reduction could have free starbases in vanilla SEIV, but that 20% sure costs a lot!

I'm not sure if it's in the devnull mod or not, but I would also suggest removing the quantum reactor. I actually liked the idea of supplies and catching a fleet out of fuel. But if you do remove them, power plants would be an interesting replacement.

I'm not too fond of the idea of moving bases, but if people want it I don't see too much harm in allowing them one point of movement per turn. If they would be limited by not being able to go through warp points then all the better. Oh dear, the huge fleet of 50 battlestations is on their way! We only have 5 years to build our defenses!

And does anyone have any comments on fighters? They seem to work well early in the game, but when they start getting smacked by combat sensored battleships, they seem fairly useless except as defense for the poor planets that don't have space yards or room to amass tons of weapon platforms.

Mylon

September 13th, 2002, 09:48 PM

I just thought of another idea: separate Versions of ship and base engineering bays. The base Version offers maintenance reduction, the ship Version doesn't. I don't like the idea of maintenance reduction for ships because I generally tend towards playing defensively. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ September 13, 2002, 20:49: Message edited by: Mylon ]

Rollo

September 14th, 2002, 12:51 AM

Emergency propulsion does work for bases and the movement points can be raised above the maximum standard movement. But only, if their standard movement is already greater than zero. The same is true for ships, btw. Meaning that if you have a ship that has all engines destroyed, the emergency propulsion will not work. Bug, y/n? I tend to say yes.

Trajan, the emergency propulsion already can only be repaired by space yards (fac. or comp.) and not repair bays/engineering components. That is the (hardcoded) way it works.

So, in order for the rocket boosters to work, the base must have the ability to move in the first place. Hrmpf.

What do you (all of you) reckon would be a good requirement to make the base engines available? (if they get put in): right from the start? very high tech? something in between? or maybe an ancient ruins tech?

Mylon, I like the idea of adding solar supply generation to the engineering component, but have to be careful not to cause any conflicts with the solar collectors. Maintenance reduction of 5% seems a little low. I think I like the 10-20% better http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif . Have to check that out, how it works with crystalline. Of course the components would be for bases (maintenance) and ships (repair) only. If bases get strategic movement, they will also be able to warp. No way to restrict that. Hehe, the image of 50 battlestations closing in with some turns to prepare the defense, is kinda cool, IMHO.

Comments on fighters? Yes, they are a lot more useful at first than in the stock game. If you don't have the anti-fighter-missile, you are pretty much toast. But of course battleships will still bLast quite a few of them away. Have you tried the maximum level (50kT) fighters, yet? With the heavy mounts and a couple of shields a small stack of them can be very dangerous even to capital ships.

Rollo

jimbob

September 14th, 2002, 12:58 AM

What do you (all of you) reckon would be a good requirement to make the base engines available? (if they get put in): right from the start? very high tech? something in between? or maybe an ancient ruins tech?It seems to me that the biggest problems to moving a whole base would be

1) total thrust must be rediculously high... so just needing a huge engine = higher kT. This requires a brute strength solution rather than a technical solution. So I'd say this should be available from the start.

2) rapid exceleration and manouverability would rip the base to shreds... so more than one mp per turn should require very advanced technology (inertial dampeners and the like).

That's what I think.

geoschmo

September 14th, 2002, 03:55 AM

Rollo,

I have a request from someone that want's the 1.70 setup as a Version on PBW. Were you going to be putting out a new Version soon or should I go ahead and set that one up.

Geoschmo

Mylon

September 14th, 2002, 06:40 AM

Well the power plant idea wasn't a solar panel idea. It would be something regardless of the number of suns in a sector. Like say a nuclear reactor on board that gave a constant +100 supplies per turn. You could theoretically remove bridge components entirely and give power plants the "bridge" flag so that they're required. Likewise, you could also have fusion reactors, singularity reactors, quantum reactors (not to be confused with the unlimited supply component!) to represent different levels of power generation. Solar generators would probably be a good addition as well, but I would think the solar panels would have to be modified in some way to prevent a proliferation of supplies and make sure that large ships with good reactors are still capable of running out. You could even experiment with removing resupply depots totally, but I think that would be a bit too drastic of a change to make without a _lot_ of extensive testing.

I also think the prospector hull is broken. It provides 80% maintenance reduction, and a crystalline race can easily turn that into a cash cow if >100% reduction = resource production.

Mylon

September 14th, 2002, 06:49 AM

Nevermind! I have a Crystalline restructuring plant (+20%) plus a prospector hull (ship design says 80%, ability tab says 90%. Typo somewhere?) and a racial trait of +5% to maintenance reduction. I'm paying approximately 1.6% of it's cost in maintenance versus the 17.4% I'm paying for other ships in other sectors, so I think it's pretty safe to give relatively large bonuses of maintenance reduction to bases, but I still defend the idea that maintenance reduction component shouldn't be allowed for ships.

Rollo

September 14th, 2002, 02:46 PM

Geoschmo, yes please do set up DNM 1.70 for PBW. I have gotten no bug reports so far and haven't found any myself. So it seems to be stable. There is no update planned for some time.

Mylon, there is no ability that will produce supplies regardless of the suns.
Maintenance reduction would not be available to ships, only for bases.
Not sure what you mean with the typo for the prospector hull. I checked it and found no error. The 80% is for the combat disadvantage, the 90% is for maintenance reduction.

Jimbob, thanks for your input.

One problem that I see with strategic movement for bases is the Propulsion Expert advantage. Maximum movement for bases would be one. Of course that means two for prop. exp. Big advantage? y/n. Especially when base movement is easy to come by. Maybe the ruins tech solution would be good? This way you can't really plan on getting and using it (plus I'd love to add more ruins stuff http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ). Or just can the idea altother? Hmm, more pondering needed... sorry for rambling.
I sure wish that the emergency propulsion worked for vehicles with zero movement. That looked like a very promising solution. Oh, well.

Rollo

Rollo

September 14th, 2002, 02:50 PM

Two things I forgot to mention:

1) There is a PBW game starting soon that will use the new 1.70 Version. There are still some slots left. Please come and join the fray http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif .
Game is called 'Devnull2', Binford is running it. Looks like we might be using monsters, too http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif .

2) Has anyone encountered the 'Sonne' race in a solo game, yet? If yes, how do they do?

Rollo

Mylon

September 14th, 2002, 04:03 PM

I'll join if there's time, and yes, I have encountered the Sonne race, and they scare the crap out of me! They've been at peace with _everyone_ and have quietly taken over about 70% of the quadrant! The current victory condition is Last man standing, so I have an odd feeling that I don't stand a chance. And I _think_ they singlehanded whiped out the monsters. I saw some of the monsters, but I never saw any of their planets, even though I've flown through their claimed sectors. My only hope is to build 3-4 ringworlds, beef them up like crazy, and hope that it'll be impossible for them to kill those planets while I slowly edge out my empire. I have an odd feeling that those 4-5 star systems will be _very_ handy when I get stellar manipulation 5. And even better is the _huge_ surplus of minerals my very treaty with them is giving me. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

No, I haven't tested them in combat, but I'm too scared to at the moment. Does anyone know if the AI do the evil empire thing to other AIs?

Mylon

September 14th, 2002, 04:11 PM

The "devnull2" game on PBW says it's using Version 1.63.

geoschmo

September 14th, 2002, 04:48 PM

Originally posted by Mylon:
The "devnull2" game on PBW says it's using Version 1.63.No it doesn't It say's 1.70. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Geo

geoschmo

September 15th, 2002, 01:14 AM

I tested all this a while back. IIRC the ship maintenance reductions for the hull and the components if any will add together before being calculated. So you could get a negative maintenace if you weren't careful.

But the total maint reduction for a ship would be calulated separatly from any maintreduction due to empire characteristics,culture, or system facilities. So if your ship had a comp that gave it a 90% maint reduction and a faciliity that gave all your ships in that system a 90 % maint reduction you wouldn't get 180%, it would do the first 90%, and then take another 90% off the remaining 10%. In effect the reduction in that system would be 99%.

Geoschmo

Mylon

September 15th, 2002, 04:12 PM

You must've changed it shortly after I posted. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

DirectorTsaarx

September 16th, 2002, 05:40 PM

Originally posted by Mylon:
<snip>
Does anyone know if the AI do the evil empire thing to other AIs?From settings.txt:

AI Uses Mega Evil Empire := True
AI Mega Evil Empire Threshold Score Thousands := 500
AI Human Mega Evil Empire Score Percent := 170
AI Computer Mega Evil Empire Score Percent := 250
That Last line implies that an AI can trigger MEE; but it has to be farther ahead of the 2nd place race than a human player would be (2.5 times score rather than 1.7 times score).

capnq

September 17th, 2002, 12:10 AM

I've seen the stock Praetorians and the TDM Ukra-Tal become MEE in different solo games.

Rollo

September 17th, 2002, 01:11 AM

Originally posted by DirectorTsaarx:
That Last line implies that an AI can trigger MEE; but it has to be farther ahead of the 2nd place race than a human player would be (2.5 times score rather than 1.7 times score).In DNM the value for 'AI Computer Mega Evil Empire Score Percent' is raised to 1000. So the AI has to have a score ten times higher than 2nd place to trigger MEE.

Rollo

Rollo

September 17th, 2002, 01:16 AM

Oh, and Mylon,
you might wanna stay friendly to the Sonne until the 'Quad dmg to shields' bug is fixed http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif .

edit: Forget smth else: Mylon, you cannot see the monsters' planets. They are cloaked. I am pretty sure they are still there. In order to destroy the monsters you'll have to blow up their suns.

Rollo

[ September 17, 2002, 00:19: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Mylon

September 17th, 2002, 02:56 AM

Woah... Cloaked planets. So... Umm... Does that mean colonizing planets in the same system as the monsters is useless, since they'd just go on to ravage all of the other systems assuming this one planet could build enough defenses to survive?

Mylon

September 17th, 2002, 05:12 AM

For some reason the forum link where the game is gives me an error and I can't find it any other way (even when using the text interface), so I jus' wanted to vote to be heard somewhere. For the Devnull2 game, I want monsters. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif I'm a little scared of those dragons with the 800 damage fire breath (quad damage bug), but oh well. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Binford

September 18th, 2002, 04:41 AM

Excuse my ignorance, but what is MEE exactly?

Also, the DevNull2 game is almost fuill for anyone who wants to join in now - Starting it Thursday or Friday.

Binford

Captain Kwok

September 18th, 2002, 06:03 AM

MEE = Mega Evil Empire

When the 1st place player's score is greater than the threshold (500k pts?) and is also 170% greater than the 2nd place, all the AIs drop to murdeous and declare war on you because "you are a threat to the other sentient races."

mottlee

September 19th, 2002, 07:49 PM

Bump

Taz-in-Space

October 1st, 2002, 06:00 AM

Rollo, is it possible for Space Monsters to be generated in a system WITHOUT a star? If so how can you kill them? How about if I mod in level 5 sensors to find them?

Rollo

October 1st, 2002, 09:12 AM

No, I don't think they can (or rather will) be placed in a system without a star. They are placed just like any other player. Of course you could change that. Just place them wherever you want on a custom map.
As for the sensors, sure mod anything you like http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif . Might be a good idea to change the AI files a bit then and build some WeaponPlatforms, Troops, Defense Bases, etc. (make designs and include them in the contruction list).

Rollo

Rollo

January 2nd, 2003, 01:37 PM

This thread needs a bump for two reasons:
1) There are some new players around that might not have heard of this mod.
2) There hasn't been an update for a while and I am considering putting some more work into this.

Are people still playing DNM? I haven't gotten a lot of feedback after the Last release. Which means: a) the Last Version is running stable with no bugs, or b) it is not getting played.

My primary goal for now is updating more of the AI and creating new AI that use the racial combo techs. My actual to do list is very short at the moment (only one minor item), but here are some things from the 'maybe' list. making bases able to move adressing weapon balance, making useless weapons useful (Hellbore and Incinerator beam come to mind) expand engineering tech using shield mounts -> shields are more effective on smaller ships, because the force field is denser in a smaller area adding more ruins tech (anything goes here) additional combo techs for psychic/crystalline and religious/temporal (both these combos could need a boost IMO)
I appreciate any feedback and ideas. Especially concerning the racial combo techs that were added/revised in the Last update. Also if somebody has the current contact of Don Phillips (aka Voidhawk), please let me know. I would like to add the Ixaris to the DNM as one of the combo races (probably crytalline/religious).
Rollo

Patowic

January 2nd, 2003, 07:39 PM

It seems to be stable for me, and it's pretty much the only mod I use now. I wouldn't mind seeing something like "rapid-launch fighter bay", something which holds less cargo than a normal fighter bay, but can launch two or three ships a turn. Or an external fighter mount, which gets damaged first (like armor) but essentially adds mass to the ship. e.g. a 15-kton ExtFighterMount (say, fighter tech 3 or 4) but holds 60kton of fighters, and can launch them all simultaneously.
Rather like the single fighters mounted on cargo ships for anti-sub use in WW2.

Great work on DNM! =)

Puke

January 2nd, 2003, 08:16 PM

i still play, there are still PBW games using it. I was thinking of starting a new PBW game with it soon.. Keep the legend alive, I say.

Rollo

January 3rd, 2003, 01:16 AM

Thanks for the feedback.

Good suggestion, Patowic. I like that, but I have have to think of a way so it doesn't interfere with the existing AI. Haven't given much thought how to do it, yet.

Originally posted by Puke:
i still play, there are still PBW games using it. I was thinking of starting a new PBW game with it soon.. Keep the legend alive, I say.Oh, most definitly. I wasn't going to give the impression of abandon the mod...

Pablo

January 3rd, 2003, 09:05 AM

Currently I'm in 2 DNM pbw games and a few at home. And a few at work. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
The mod seems to be stable for me. Just 1 thing - add a bit clearer explanation on PD cannons. I mean, write there that these guns cannot target fighters but seekers & mines only. It was a very painful discovery http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

Krsqk

January 3rd, 2003, 09:15 AM

They can't target fighters? I haven't run into enough fighter-using races, it seems. At least, I've distracted them from their fighter research. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif I'm currently using the mod to build my ultimate quadrant--mapped out warp points, fully improved planets, and fully populated sphereworlds on every star. About 10% of the way there. Of course, I'm keeping a (blockaded) enemy planet around, just as a reminder of what an "enemy" is. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Pablo

January 3rd, 2003, 09:32 AM

Krsqk meet the monsters http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif They will keep you busy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
Edit: but if you're already populating the sphareworlds maybe it's too late. You should meet them early in the game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ January 03, 2003, 07:34: Message edited by: Pablo ]

Krsqk

January 3rd, 2003, 10:01 AM

Oh, I had my one (very short) monster game. I started one or two systems away from them, or maybe both--it was a ten planet start ("Just to build up enough defenses," I said. "Should make sure none of those monster beasties get to me!" I said. Never mind that they can spawn 10 times as many of them. "Of course they won't start near me. You wouldn't do anything like that to meee, right?" *charming smile, followed by sounds of death and destruction*). No monsters in this game, though--I've already subdued and colonized the entire quadrant (including using/colonizing asteroids, clearing nebulae/black holes, and creating stars), and I'm working back through it to spiff up all of my planets.

[ January 03, 2003, 08:02: Message edited by: Krsqk ]

Pablo

January 3rd, 2003, 10:50 AM

what's the turn number then?

HEMAN

January 4th, 2003, 01:47 AM

Rollo wrote; Are people still playing DNM? I haven't gotten a lot of feedback after the Last release. Which means: a) the Last Version is running stable with no bugs, or b) it is not getting played.

Im playing this mode 2-3 hours everyday? iTS GREAT , For me its (a).I have a few suggestion,

1)Add more Weapons & Componets from the older DMODE?.Like Missile system re-designed (Small missiles, Armor skipping missiles, shield skipping missiles, Decoy missiles, etc)
Heavy Versions of weapons (rate of fire of 2, bigger range and damage.)Mercinary Commanders available for bases and ships.
Some weapons have better 'to hit' bonus (Torps!)

2)More Ruins http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif , Super atmosphere converter/Super-launch-bay/High level shipyard.

3)Related to monsters, i would like to see there homeworld, so i can bombard it.

4)Related to monsters,Its strange it appears that they create a wormhole in my solar system 3-4 wormholes, all the time, and my system becomes the center of the universe.
So whada ya think of these ideas??.

Puke

January 4th, 2003, 02:12 AM

now, i dont think this can be done, because i think we thought about thinking about it before (confused yet?), but heres the regergitated idea anyway:

can we make a tech that is only available through trade / shipcapture + analysis? (i dont think so.)

if so, you can make a monstor scanner that can detect monsters and their homeworld, but you can only research it after caputring a monster ship and analyzing it. or starting on high-tech, of course. but i dont think that can be done normally, because the tech (or its pre-reqs) would always show up in the tech tree, unless it was racial, and if it was racial, then it couldnt be gained through analysis / reverse-engineering.

what you COULD do though, is make it super-expensive, so it would take 100 million research units or something. then the only practical way to gain the tech, wouild be through analysis. unless you run into max-int problems, but i think research costs use long-int. so it should be okay.

Krsqk

January 4th, 2003, 07:15 AM

Originally posted by Pablo:
what's the turn number then?My current turn is 2473.1. My current problem is those pesky events which use my planets to start new empires. *grr* http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

[Edit--typo--year was off by ~3000 turns http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ]

[ January 04, 2003, 05:23: Message edited by: Krsqk ]

Miles

January 7th, 2003, 03:33 AM

Originally posted by Rollo:
This thread needs a bump for two reasons:
Are people still playing DNM? I haven't gotten a lot of feedback after the Last release. Which means: a) the Last Version is running stable with no bugs, or b) it is not getting played.
It is stable for me. I have played it a lot. It is my favorite mod. The only reason I am not playing it now, is the DYP (Double Your Pleasure) mod for Civ3 sucked me back into Civ3. Once I burn out on Civ3 I know I will be back to SE4Gold and DNM. Thanks for your work.

I play mostly single player. I was having a lot of fun using DNM to create a 'Terra Uber Alles' single player scenario. I call it: "Monsters vs the Galactic Patrol"

First I beefed up the Monsters: Got the Monsters colonizing The first planetary build item is a Weapon Platform that includs a lvl 5 cloak Gave the Monsters a fast atmosphere converter Gave the Monsters a 3000kt attack ship. Tweaked the build queues so the Monsters maintain smooth exponential growth. The Monsters spread like a plague. As they move forward, planets just disappear! After a while, their ships are everywhere.
Then, for myself, I created the Galactic Patrol (loosely based on EE Smith's GP.) This required a new racial trait (Patrol). I also added a new culture trait (QX). Then I added goodies at the end of most research chains that would kick in if the Patrol trait was present. For example, the end of the 'Null-Space Weapons' research will grant the 'GP Primary' with increased range and a reload rate of 2.

My target is a huge quadrant with lots of AI players including the Monsters and a single human playing the Galactic Patrol.

I am having a lot of fun balancing it. I am trying to make it so you win some of the time if you do not start too close to the Monsters.

It is currently on hold while I wait for: The next Gold patch. Updated DevNull Mod Burning out on the Civ3 DYP mod. Miles

DirectorTsaarx

January 7th, 2003, 05:04 PM

Originally posted by Puke:
now, i dont think this can be done, because i think we thought about thinking about it before (confused yet?), but heres the regergitated idea anyway:

can we make a tech that is only available through trade / shipcapture + analysis? (i dont think so.)

if so, you can make a monstor scanner that can detect monsters and their homeworld, but you can only research it after caputring a monster ship and analyzing it. or starting on high-tech, of course. but i dont think that can be done normally, because the tech (or its pre-reqs) would always show up in the tech tree, unless it was racial, and if it was racial, then it couldnt be gained through analysis / reverse-engineering.

what you COULD do though, is make it super-expensive, so it would take 100 million research units or something. then the only practical way to gain the tech, wouild be through analysis. unless you run into max-int problems, but i think research costs use long-int. so it should be okay.I think Suicide Junkie found a way to do something similar; it allows you to build racial-based components, but I don't think you can research on your own after the analysis. IIRC, it involved 3 techs (A, B and C):

Tech C provides the desired components, and has Tech B as a prerequisite (NO racial linkage).
Tech B provides Tech C, and has Tech A as a prerequisite (again, NO racial linkage).
Tech A provides Tech B, AND has a racial ability requirement.

Then, if you have the right racial ability, you can research (or start with, depending on setup) Tech A, which grants Tech B (and possibly other things, but those are irrelevant to the discussion at hand). Tech B can then be researched to find Tech C (and, again, possibly other things that are not relevant to this discussion). Finally, Tech C can be researched to generate the appropriate components.

However, if you do NOT have the right racial ability, you can't research Tech A, and therefore cannot get Tech B or Tech C (normally). But you CAN analyze a ship with Tech C components and gain tech levels in Tech C. But I don't think you can research Tech C on your own.

It's possible that I've missed something in the explanation; perhaps if Tech B provides both the components and Tech C, then you can get Tech C as a researchable area by analyzing captured components; and, of course, Tech C would still have to include copies (maybe inferior copies) of the desired components.

How's THAT for confusing? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Rollo

January 22nd, 2003, 07:36 PM

Thanks for your feedback everybody. Sorry for the late replies. Still working on the mod. And focus remains on the AI, but progress is very slow at the moment.

HEMAN,
1) actually checking out the D-Mod for more stuff is already in my to-do-list http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif . I do however have to be careful what to add in order not to destroy the balance and/or screw up the AI. I like the mercenary commanders a lot, hopefully I can find a way to implement them to some degree. Torps already have a to hit bonus in DNM and also armor-shield skipping torps added at the end of the research.
2) yes, more ruins. I'd also like that. A converter facility is a good idea. I think, however, that it should not be better than the standard facility and also more expensive. A lot of the ancient tech works that way. It either has a unique ability or it is not as effective as the component that can be researched.
3) I think Puke had a good idea about visible homeworlds. Check below...
4) I agree. The AI uses the open warp ship kinda wierd http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif . Nothing I can do about that really. If you find that too annoying, you can remove the open warp ship from the monster build queue.

Puke,
great idea! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif I think that is possible to do. How about adding a tech area of 'Monster Lore' or something like that. Whenever you analyse a monster you get one level of that. First levels would only include hints about the monsters and some background info. Once you get more levels, you get some useful components and ultimately the sensor to see their homeworld. (come to think of it, this would also be a good way to include some wacky tech without screwing up other AI. Also it would the make the monsters great prices for hunting down, since you can get certain tech by those means only).

Miles,
very interesting. Monsters vs. GP sounds fun http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif . I would very much like to check that out. Can you post the files? It never ocurred to me that planet cloaks work on weapon platforms.

DirectorTsaarx,
I think in your example it works like this. If you don't have the racial trait,
Tech A cannot be be gained by any means
Tech B can be gained through analysis, but cannot be researched
Tech C can be researched, once Tech B is known

So back to the idea of tech gained though capture/analyze monsters. If 'Monster Lore' was a type B tech, you would need to capture X monsters to get level X of that tech. Sounds like an interesting thing (if it works...).

Cheers,
Rollo

[ January 22, 2003, 17:43: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Rollo

January 23rd, 2003, 01:02 PM

okay, I checked this out Last night and it does work http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif .

Just for testing I added a Monster Lore tech area that can only be gained by analyzing captured monsters. It definately gives food for thought...
Of course that would mean that monsters (at least some of them) can be captured. Currently that is not so.
Hmm, maybe add another monster type that can be captured and have the AI only build one or two of them at a time (brainbug?). Then they would be valued prizes.
As I said, food for thought... I am happy with suggestions as I am not the most innovative guy around here http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif .

Rollo

Urendi Maleldil

January 23rd, 2003, 06:00 PM

Just take away the MC ability on some of the "smarter" monsters and reduce the boarding defense on some of the "weaker" ones. Most monsters would be "too dumb" to be subverted and some would have weak immune systems unable to cope with space marines.

dogscoff

January 23rd, 2003, 06:32 PM

Oh, if you're doing that, make a "monster trainer" component. It seems kinda silly to have a boarding party taking control of a monster.

Of course, the only sensible way to apply it (without re-writing all the capture techs) would be to make the monster trainer exactly the same as a boarding party except for the name and picture. You'd still be able to capture ships with monster trainers and monsters with boarding parties, but most of the time people would be going for just one or the other and so it wouldn't happen often. They could also willingly refrain from using them inappropriately if they wanted.

It would be good component for roleplay, basically. =-)

Miles

January 25th, 2003, 02:26 AM

Originally posted by Rollo:
very interesting. Monsters vs. GP sounds fun http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif . I would very much like to check that out. Can you post the files? It never ocurred to me that planet cloaks work on weapon platforms.
Erg. My hacks are quite ugly. Please give me a couple days to tidy it up and I will send it to you.

You realize that this stuff is quite unbalanced. I can really only see 3 types of gameplay/storytelling possible: Single Play: Terra Uber Alles - Computer takes one super race, human takes the other. Duke it out in the midst of a galaxy of midgets. Multi Play: Hang together - AI takes Monsters. Bunch-o-humans take normal races. Work together or die. Multi Play: Eddore vs Arista - AI takes Monsters. Bunch-O-humans take normal races. Moderator takes Galactic Patrol. Moderator acts as a traditional GM. Intervenes with ships/resources as needed to help game play/story-telling. Option 2 (Hang together) is very hard to balance, since it depends on the cleverness and co-operation of a number of humans.
Miles

Miles

January 25th, 2003, 02:34 AM

Originally posted by Rollo:

It never ocurred to me that planet cloaks work on weapon platforms.
It seemed to be the easiest way to guarentee that the AI always provided a new colony with a sector cloak. The AI seemed to have a bunch of problems with the level 5 sector cloak untill I modified the component so that it had both level 5 sector cloak & level 5 sensor abilities.

Miles

Taera

January 27th, 2003, 06:50 AM

Hello everyone, in the middle of updating Taera Hive Imperium Graphics. Taera gone gold! (you'll see).

It wont probably be published today, more likely tomorrow (i want to work on fleet, fleet alternate, racial portrait, infantry well) and untill then - this is the only mod that actually has this race, what do you people think about it? Anything i should change/alter/improve?

Binford

January 27th, 2003, 08:22 AM

Originally posted by Rollo:
Are people still playing DNM? I haven't gotten a lot of feedback after the Last release. Which means: a) the Last Version is running stable with no bugs, or b) it is not getting played.
Well, I play every time the DevNull2 game runs on PBW! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Very interesting game its turned into - I thoroughly look forward to every turn!

Should get even MORE interesing in the next few turns as the tension increases.

Any interest in starting up another DNM PBW game? DN2 is at turn 90 now, so we should see some resolution in the next 20-30 I think.

This time I think we'll start LOW tech with MEDIUM cost to slow down the mad weapons race some. And I am not sure at all about the MOnsters being in - I have enjoyed it myself, but I started far enough away to be able to handle them, 2-3 players got totally wiped out early... And I downgraded them a bit before adding them in the game)

I personally would love another DNM game, but only wanna play if we have 8 or more.

Binford

Dralasite

January 27th, 2003, 08:52 PM

I just started playing a devnull mod game, it its fantastic! Thanks for all the work that you've done. So far, I don't have any issues, but I'm just getting into the mid game stage.

Pablo

January 28th, 2003, 12:28 AM

Rollo, your thoughts on compatibility with patch3 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif
Or it's still too early to ask? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Rollo

January 28th, 2003, 12:55 AM

I see no problems with the new patch.
When working on the mod, I always use the newest beta Version. So it should be pretty up-to-date.

The AI will probably add some redundant Master Computers, but that is only for DN and bigger. I'll fix that in the next update.

Rollo

Binford

January 28th, 2003, 01:24 AM

Rollo! What are you doing posting here - go do your turn - you have resources in your gift box. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Binford

Rollo

January 28th, 2003, 02:00 AM

aye, I am doing so. right now...

Rollo

January 28th, 2003, 02:17 AM

done http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Devin D.Bass

January 28th, 2003, 05:24 AM

I just wanted to say that I ONLY play the Devnull Version of SEIV GOLD. It is a GREAT Mod, thanks Rollo for keeping it going. From reading the new additions to the patch it looks like you have a lot of room for new weapon types and special abilities!
I can't wait to your newest update.
To those who haven't played with this Mod download it right away and enjoy! It's the Best!

Taera

January 31st, 2003, 09:30 AM

Didnt get any comments. I finished with taera image update though, you can get it here:

1043998144.zip (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/newuploads/1043998144.zip)

have fun.
rollo, hows AI going?

Rollo

January 31st, 2003, 01:16 PM

Taera, thanks for the update. AI is coming along slowly. I am still working on the temporal AI and haven't started on the Taera, yet.

Rollo

Rollo

January 31st, 2003, 01:22 PM

Oh, and Devin, thanks for the praise http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif . I appreciate it.

For the next release I am planning to make Graviton Hellbores and Incinerator Beams more viable. I am thinking of using the new damage types (x2, 1/2 or 1/4 to shields).
I am still taking suggestions of what you feel would be appropriate and what would be most wanted.
Also, are there any other weapons that any of you feel that they are currently useless in the DNM?

Cheers,
Rollo

Rollo

February 1st, 2003, 04:06 PM

Okay, here is a proposal for IB and GHB. Let me know what you think.

Incinerator Beam, quarter damage to shields
50kt, ROF 2

I 100 100 100 100
II 125 125 125 125 125
III 150 150 150 150 150 150

Graviton Hellbore, double damage to shields, reserach cost raised to 10k
60kt, ROF 2

I 75 60 45 30
II 100 85 70 55 40
III 125 110 95 80 65 50
IV 150 135 120 105 90 75 60
V 175 160 145 130 115 100 85 70

Rollo

Taera

February 1st, 2003, 07:52 PM

umm rollo, IB doesnt make sense. Since it is a particle bombardament weapon (as most other beam weapons are) it should make at least full damage to shields. What you can do is give it incredible combat bonuses.

Taera

February 1st, 2003, 07:52 PM

i like GHB, its a realy understimated weapon.

Pablo

February 3rd, 2003, 07:54 PM

I never use GHB because of its rapid damage drop per distance. There are better weapons for long and/or short distances. Maybe someone is using this beam very efficiently but I just cannot find room for it on my ships. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

brainsucker1

February 3rd, 2003, 10:27 PM

I always viewed the GHB has a hideous weapon able to rip ships to shreds in a single bLast. Just the name Hellbore says enough. A doubling of damage done at all ranges and "ignore all shields" would seem more in order for a 60 ton, ROF 2 weapon that has an expensive research cost. This is a second generation weapon, like the High Energy Class Weapons, and should be quite a bit better that APB & DUC, etc.

I view the HEW the same way. It is a high research cost weapon that should be considerably better than normal beam weapons. Ripper is Ok as is. Incinerator Beam should be ROF1 with a tonnage of 50 and its current damage.

Of course I also think PPB should be a 40 ton weapon like other "specials" due to its special attack.

Taera

February 4th, 2003, 08:05 AM

Umm, no. Gravity weapons are a welcome tech tree as some players advance to Astrophysics 2 early on (to get sensors, null-space, whatsnot). This weapon indeed has a rapid damage drop, but when you make the ship well (on max-tech a battleship can be virtually invincible - absolutely destroys enemies in no more than 2 shots... and its design is easy to get in non max-tech game)

it is an understimated weapon. It is a weapon for planets and bases, but especially for those little nasty sats and/or bases and/or ships guarding WPs. Does low range mean anything to you? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Phoenix-D

February 4th, 2003, 08:24 AM

At close range you're better off with Ripper Beams- more damage. You can fit three 50-damage ripper beams on for every hellbore, giving a +5 damage advantage. The rippers don't drop damage, either, making them more suitable for weapon-platform and base mounting.

Phoenix-D

Pablo

February 4th, 2003, 09:20 AM

Yes, Rippers are best for close distances with RoF 1 and being not very heavy.

oleg

February 4th, 2003, 04:42 PM

In Proportions, Graviton Hellbore has an ability "skip all shields" that makes some sence (it violently shakes ship' hull). It still has relatively low damage/kt and is not overpowered by any means.

stecal

February 5th, 2003, 01:43 AM

When is a new Version of Dev Null Mod coming out? I am thinking of starting a PBW game since there seem to be so few DNM games currently available.

Miles

February 6th, 2003, 10:37 PM

Well, I finally got up the courage to post my attempt to create a mod based on DevNull. Here is a copy of the announcement:

Here is the current (6Feb2003) Version of the Monsters vs Galactic Patrol Mod:

1044560754.zip (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/newuploads/1044560754.zip)

This mod is based on DevNull v1.70.

There are 2 main changes:
 Monsters have been enhanced and given the ability to colonize. A Galactic Patrol race has been parially created. Both Galactic Patrol and Monster races are unbalanced and extremely overpowered. Empire files are provided for 2000 and 3000 point opponents.
It is playable in 3 different styles:
 Single Player Terra-Uber-Alles: Gameplay is "Two giants battling it out in a universe of pygmies. The player 'Adds existing' the Galactic Patrol. The human will control the GP. You should also add the Monsters and 'Edit' the Monsters to be: Controlled by Computer & Using Style from race. You can also add as many AI opponents as desired.
 Multi-Player Hang Together: A small number (3 to 4) of normal human players attempt to pull down the Monsters. Additional AI opponents should not be needed.
 Multi-player Eddore vs Arisa: The game host plays the GP. Other players use their favorite races. Add the Monsters and other AI's as desired. The game host intervenes as needed to balance game play and enhance story-telling. This mod is still being improved. Things I need to do include:
 Create 5000 point Empire files. Find some images for the GP race. Currently I use the Terran images. Create custom AI to utilize the GP advantages. Balance the gameplay. I hope for 'fun' + 'hard' + 'doable'. Smooth out the Monsters growth stages. I would be gratefull for any comments or suggestions for improvement. Just remember, I am still pretty clueless on how to mod the AI's.
GP players will find the unbalancing advantages at the end of the various research tree's.

Miles (miles@cc.usu.edu)

Rollo

February 7th, 2003, 01:14 AM

Thanks Miles http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ,
I'll download this and check it out as soon as I get a chance. Hope you don't mind, if I use any of your stuff in a future Version.

now in reply to the weapons:
Taera - I won't even start an argument whether or not the ability makes sense for IB. I have no idea how an IB (or shields for that matter) actually work. So any explaination one way or other is just treknobabble http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif .

I simply used that ability because it hasn't been used yet. The question for me is: Is that weapon viable now? Is is still to weak or too powerful now? I considered giving it more damage even, but realized that it would be too powerful compared to the Tachyon Cannon perhaps.

brainsucker, oleg - I didn't use 'Skip all shields' for GHB (although I did consider it), mainly because that abilty has been used already by the Chant Crystal (rel/cryst combo tech).
So I thought double damage to shields is good too. I think with the increased damage and the ability it might be worth using it. Or is it not?

Stecal, about the new Version I have no idea yet. Progress is slow at the moment. Also I will most likely be gone for one or two weeks in February. So my best guess for a new DNM Version is the middle of March. Go ahead and start a new game, I would say. As it stands now the new Version will be compatible with older games, so most likely you will be able to upgrade your game later.

Rollo

[ February 06, 2003, 23:17: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Rollo

February 7th, 2003, 01:16 AM

oops

[ February 06, 2003, 23:19: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Miles

February 7th, 2003, 02:38 AM

Originally posted by Rollo:
Thanks Miles http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ,
I'll download this and check it out as soon as I get a chance. Hope you don't mind, if I use any of your stuff in a future Version.

RolloFeel free. There is not all that much that is original. It is all mostly tweaks to existing stuff. I hope you enjoy it. Here are my notes on the changes:
********************************************

data/
components.txt:
GP Master Computer: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost
GP Bergenholm: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, +1 bonus movement,2x supply
Drone GP Bergenholm: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, +1 Bonus movement, 2x supply
GP Supply Storage: 1/2 size, 1/2 cost, 2x supply
GP Reactor: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, +1 bonus movement
GP Universal Colony: 1/10th cost, 3x cargo
Monster Rock Colony: 1/100th cost
Monster Ice Colony: 1/100th cost
Monster Gas Colony: 1/100th cost
GP Cargo Bay: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, 2x cargo
Fighters to Go: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, 2x launch, 3x storage
GP Mine Layer: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, 2x launch, 3x storage
GP Sat Bay: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, 2x launch, 3x storage
GP Drone Launcher: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, 2x launch, 3x storage
GP Targetting Sensors: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, 7 targets
GP Combat Sensors: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, 80% attack bonus
GP ECM: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, 80% defense bonus
Dureum Armor: 8/1 structure to size, Jammer, +30% defense, 70 emissive
GP Sub-ethereal Shields: 1/2 sz,1/10th cst,500 shld,25 regen,20 damage transfr
Ultimate GP Sensors: lvl 5 sensor, requires: AMilSci6,scanner3,sensor6,GravTech3
GP Space Yard: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, 2x construct, 2x repair
GP Repair Bay: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, 2x repair
GP Machine Shop: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, 3 repair, 2 bonus move
GP Point Defense: 1/2 size,1/10th cost,Swp 8 mines,85 damage,range 7,target Ftr/Sat/Seekers/drone
GP Weapon pattern: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, +2 range,1.5x damage. Changes noted below.
GP Shield twister: Require Shield10;Shields damage10,Quad damage to shields
GP DUC:
GP Anti-Proton Beam:
External Mt DuoDec Missile: 1/2 reload rate, 1.5x damage resistance
DuoDec Missile: 2 reload rate,1.5 damage resistance,1.5x speed
GP Plasma Missile: 1.5 damage resistance, 1.5 speed
GP Meson BLaster:
GP A-Mat Torp: 1/2 reload rate
GP QTorp:
GP STorp: 2x damage
GP SubEtheric Projector (PPB): Skips all shields
GP Primary (NSP): Reload 2, range +4
GP Fry-A-Matic (WMG): Reload 2
GP Grav Hellbore: Reload 1
GP Repulsor:
GP Tractor:
GP Teleporter:
GP Space Marines:
GP Duodec Mine Warhead:
GP Duodec Warhead:
Small GP QEngine: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, +1 Bonus move
GP Afterburners: 1/2 size, 1/10th cost, +1 Bonus move
Small GP Combat Sensors: 1/10th cost, 45% attack bonus
Small GP ECM: 1/10th cost, 45% defense bonus
Sm Emissive GP Armor: 15/1 struct/size, 1/5th cost
Small GP Phased Shield Gen: 1/5th cost, 4x shield, 6x sh regen
GP Fgt/Troop Weapon pattern: 1/5th cost, +1 range,3x damage. Changes noted.
Small GP APB:
Small GP DUC:
Small GP Meson BLaster:
Small GP SubEtheric Projector (PPB): Skips all shields
Small GP Fry-A-Matic:
Small GP A-Matter Torp
GP Suicide Squad
Small GP Rocket Pods: 1/2 reload rate
Small GP Grav Beam
Small GP Shield Twister: Quad damage to shields
GP Ground Cannon
Wild Bill: All purpose remote prospector
GP Matter Grav Sphere: Might make extra Huge planets
The Bug Gun: Weapon Component for Monster WP's.
Monster Beam III
Monster Bite II
Monster Cloak: Also lvl 5 sensor
Monster Yard II
Ice Breath II
Huge Monster Beam II
Huge Monster Beam III
Cultures.txt:
Added unbalanced, superhuman QX culture
Facility.txt:
GP City (Monolith3):1/10th cost,2x resources,research,intel,shield,storage
GP University: 1/10th cost, 5x research
GP Spy Center: 1/10th cost, 5x intel
GP Mineral Resource Storage: 1/10th cost, 2x storage
GP Organic Resource Storage: 1/10th cost, 2x storage
GP Radioactive Resource Storage: 1/10th cost, 2x storage
GP Cargo Facility: 1/10th cost, 5x cargo
GP Factory: 1/10th cost, 40% increase
System GP Factory: 1/10th cost, 40% increase
Central GP Computer Complex: 1/10th cost, 40% increase
GP Databank Complex III: 1/10th cost, 40% increase
System GP Computer Complex: 1/10th cost, 40% increase
System GP Databank: 1/10th cost, 40% increase
GP Resource Converter: 1/10th cost, 90% conVersion rate
GP Recycler: 1/10th cost, 95% recycle rate
GP Medical Lab: Breed! Breed like the wind!
GP Video Game Center: 10% system happiness improvement
GP Space Yard Facility: 1/10th cost, 2x build, 2x repair
Monster Habitat I: 200 cargo, +1 repair, 30K storage
Monster Habitat II: 300 cargo, +3 repair, 60K storage
Monster Habitat III: 2X resource gen, 400 cargo, +5 repair, 90K storage
Monster Terraformer: Terraform in 5 turns
RacialTraits.txt
Galactic Patrol: Cost = 0
TechArea.txt
GP Tech: Enabling technology for all GP benefits.
VehicleSize.txt
BattleMoon: 3000Kt,Requires: Ship11;Base4;Stellar5,+40att&def,8 engines
Pocket Battleship: Fighter size 100,8 engines,70 attack, 20 defense
HUGE Beast: 5000Kt
Monster Spore: 290Kt, colonizer hull, usual monster plusses, 11 move.
pictures\races\monsters\monsters_ai_construction_f acilities.txt
Simplify all but Homeworld queues down to: change atmosphere, Space Yard,
spaceport, supply generation, resource generation - minerals
pictures\races\monsters\monsters_ai_construction_u nits.txt
Make all types of worlds build weapon platforms.
pictures\races\monsters\monsters_ai_construction_V ehicles.txt
Add colonizers,Defense Base,eliminate drones,spread out ship production.
pictures\races\monsters\monsters_ai_designcreation .txt
Add colonizers, 5000Kt Attack Ship (D), Weapon platform,Cloaking Defense Base
pictures\races\monsters\monsters_ai_fleets.txt
Smaller fleets and more of them.
pictures\races\monsters\monsters_ai_general.txt
Change atmosphere to Oxygen,Happiness to Bloodthirsty
pictures\races\monsters\monsters_ai_research.txt
Add colonization techs
pictures\races\monsters\monsters_ai_settings.txt
defend 5 systems,move thru minefields,Personality Group=1

Start thinking of victory conditions for the various scenarios.

Tuning ideas:
Might need to add more requirements to GP City

Monsters only really spread to through-out the initial systems. Need more
aggression. Is this tied to number of defended systems?

Need pictures, AI for Galactic Patrol. Need more, smaller fleets for a starter.

weaken and rename dureum armor to 'wall screen' or 'force wall'. Move
dureum to end of armor research chain.

Need to use the Last 50Kt in the Monster Spore

********************************************

Miles

Binford

February 7th, 2003, 07:51 AM

<h1>devnull3 is up and added to PBW!</h1>

Please join! And read the forums there too!

Binford

[ February 07, 2003, 06:09: Message edited by: Binford ]

Binford

February 7th, 2003, 08:08 AM

A question - will regular game shipsets work under SNM? What happens to the ships not in the regular game?

Binford

Binford

February 7th, 2003, 08:29 AM

I'd like to get the DNM differences file I started this summer up to date:

http://www.jeffleggett.com/DevNullMod.htm

What am I missing?

Binford

Taz-in-Space

February 9th, 2003, 09:02 AM

A quick note to anybody that wants to play a HARD game vs the Space Monsters:

Try playing on the following map

<a href="http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/newuploads/1039752812.zip" target="_blank">1039752812.zip
</a>

Place the Space Monsters as the 13th player - this will give them one-way links to most of the map. It is equivalent to having them start 2-3 systems away from EVERYBODY.

If you think the Monsters are irritating on a normal map, then try the above! This should make an interesting PBW game also.

Pablo

February 13th, 2003, 01:51 PM

just an idea for the DNM update: I don't know if this has been added somewhere but a dream for many of us to come true is a satellite bay launching only 1 satellite per turn. What do you think? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Rollo

February 13th, 2003, 04:26 PM

well, that should be very ease to do and not influence the AI either, since they'll prolly use the component that launches the most sats (I hope).

so what comes to mind is a 20kT component that launches one sat per turn and has ecaxtly enough cargo space for one of them.
hmm, name?
Spy(oops, Monitoring) Satellite Bay?, Single Sat Launcher?, err... suggestions?

PsychoTechFreak

February 13th, 2003, 05:24 PM

Originally posted by Rollo:

hmm, name?
... suggestions?Sat (mono or single)Sewer/Funnel/Duct...
Or what is the correct term for the torpedo ducts (?) of a submarine?

Pablo

February 13th, 2003, 08:02 PM

dispatcher
shooter (well maybe this is more about killing sats not shooting them out)
dropper
planter
seeder
... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Dralasite

February 13th, 2003, 10:14 PM

I think its torpedo tubes, so a sattelite tube?

How about a sattelite pod? Or maybe that implies a one-use component.

Maybe a sattelite mini launcher?

dogscoff

February 14th, 2003, 11:43 AM

just out of interest... would it be possible to mod a component with a sat launching ability of 0, so it can retrieve sats but not launch them? Not sure why you'd want such a thing... might be useful if you could do it for fighters I suppose.

[ February 14, 2003, 09:44: Message edited by: dogscoff ]

Rollo

February 14th, 2003, 01:10 PM

dogscoff - no, that is not possible.
Launch/Recover uses two values. One for the number that can be Launched/Recovered per game turn and the other is per combat turn.
So, the number that can be launched or recovered is always the same.

dogscoff

February 15th, 2003, 02:06 AM

oh, shame. However in turn-based I find that a ship equipped with a single fighter bay (that can only lauch 4 fighters) can recover an infinite amount of fighters.

Taz-in-Space

February 16th, 2003, 07:24 AM

in turn-based I find that a ship equipped with a single fighter bay (that can only lauch 4 fighters) can recover an infinite amount of fighters. Hmmm, Mine only load until the NO VACANCY light goes on... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Rollo

February 16th, 2003, 12:37 PM

Originally posted by dogscoff:
oh, shame. However in turn-based I find that a ship equipped with a single fighter bay (that can only lauch 4 fighters) can recover an infinite amount of fighters.hmm, that's a bug then.

Binford

February 20th, 2003, 05:26 AM

Originally posted by Binford:
I'd like to get the DNM differences file I started this summer up to date:

http://www.jeffleggett.com/DevNullMod.htm

What am I missing?

BinfordHello? Did anyone see this? Some help appreciated....

Rollo

February 20th, 2003, 01:35 PM

Hey Binford,
here are some additions/corrections for the DNM description:

Devnull Mod Gold
Version 1.70
Date: September 9, 2002
SE IV Gold Version 1.84

originally by Devnullicus and others (HreDaak, VernMcC, Elwood Bluze, Derek, Mephisto, Talenn,
Lucas, Daynarr, Deathstalker, Suicide Junkie, GodEmperor, Dracus, Q, SunDevil, Henk Brouwer,
Andrey Taskaev, Nerfman, and probably more)
revision for SE4 Gold by Rollo & Geoschmo
currently maintained by Rollo

...
Mines
=====
add: The mines limit per sector has been raised to 500. Research of better warheads is useful, as warheads not only do more damage at higher tech, but more importantly they get cheaper. Thus mines can be be built faster.
Advanced mine layers can deploy more mines per tuns.

Drones
======
add: Drones have their own engine type which only costs about half of ship engines. This way drones are cheaper/faster to build.

Troops
======
corr: Troops are the same as SE4 with the exception of the bio engineered fanatic (rel/org combo tech). The bio-fanatic acts as a troop cockpit for normal troops or can also be used as only component using a 1kt drop pod/infantry vehicle size (that vehicle size is for the rel/org combo only).
corr: Weapon Platforms use special mounts that make them more effective than SE4.

Components
==========
add:
lower levels of PPB have been toned down. PPB V remains unchanged, but reserach is now 10k base cost
racial armor: Splinter Armor (cry), a 1kt armor. Reactive Armor (psy) with built-in flare against seekers/units(one shot per battle)

racial combo techs:
org/cry - Biocrystal Armor
org/temp - Hyper-Reflex Device
org/psy - Telepathic Armor, Biokinetic Shield Disperser
org/rel - Bio-Engineered Fanatic, Drop Pod
cry/temp - Harmonic Shielding
cry/psy - Psychic Stun Crystals
cry/rel - Chant Crystal
temp/psy - Accelerated Psychic Sensors
temp/rel - Spirit Crew Quarters
psy/rel - Wisdom Shrine

Races
=====
corr: Geoschmo has adapted the Amonkrie/Fazrah, not the Vikings. The DNM Vikings are also based on the TDM Version.
add: Sonne race has been added, using psy/temp combo tech. Shipset by Marc Angstadt, AI by Rollo

What else?
==========
add:
All training facilities are system wide. Psychic training facilities are more effective than normal ones.
new ruins tech: Artifical Stellar Moons, a constructed planet smaller then the Ringworld. Components can be fit into ships for creation.
Extra Huge planet sizes with pictures from the image mod.
Additional quardrants from Fyron's Quadrant Mod.
Cargo Space for domed colonies is doubled.
Raised bonus for Mineral Scanners, Radioactive Colliders and Eco Farms to 20/40/60, makes Robo Factory less of a no-brainer

That's all I can think of right now, there is probably more...

Cheers,
Rollo

Binford

February 22nd, 2003, 03:14 PM

UPdated:

http://www.jeffleggett.com/devnull.html

Comments?

Binford

March 7th, 2003, 06:45 AM

Have added a whole se4 section - comments welcome:

http://www.jeffleggett.com/se4main.html

Dralasite

March 13th, 2003, 12:36 AM

Just curious if a 1.71 Version is in the works, and if so, whats planned for it?

Arboris

March 14th, 2003, 12:24 AM

Binford,

I just would like to thank you for your comprehensive coverage of the Devnull mod on your website. It covinced me to give the mod a try and so far I am really enjoyng it.

Rollo,

I am also curious to the status of 1.71 of Devnull and when we might expect it?

BTW- Thank you for providing this mod for our enjoyment.

-Wulf

Five Angels

March 14th, 2003, 12:57 AM

The devnull mod has been my and my primary opponents fav mod for a long time-you will enjoy it

Binford

March 14th, 2003, 10:42 AM

Thanks!

I need a graphic that sums up the spirit of DNM for the DNM page. Any suggestions?

Dralasite

March 14th, 2003, 10:37 PM

The space monsters race pic. I know that doesn't sum up everything is this great mod, but its a very identifable part of it.

Rollo

March 21st, 2003, 01:16 AM

A new Version 1.71 is under development. Or maybe I should better say it was. RL and computer problems have put the current development on a hiatus. I am not sure yet, when I will get back to work on it. It mainly contains more AI updates, as well as some smaller tweaks and additions that were discussed on this thread.

There is no DNM logo that I know of, but I do think it is a neat idea. Maybe some of the board artists can make something http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif .
Using the Space Monster race pic is not so good IMO. It is copyrighted material. I was never comfortable with using that at all, but I had no better art at the time of release. If somebody wants to make a new race pic for the monsters (or any other monster pics for that matter), I would appreciate it.

cya,
Rollo

Taz-in-Space

March 21st, 2003, 04:19 AM

Rollo, sorry to hear that the next update is to be delayed. Devnull Mod is my favorite.
(I guess I just like Monsters! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif )

BTW who designed the Sonne? Just went head-to-head with them in my latest Devnull game. They are fast making me a believer in emmisive armor!

I may have to modify my thinking on this component - at least in THIS Mod.

And NO they haven't beaten me...Yet.

Rollo

March 21st, 2003, 04:13 PM

Taz, the Sonne pics, race description and speech are designed by Marc Angstadt. I saw that race on USY and just had to make an AI for that http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif .

Glad to hear that the plan is working and they are giving you some problems http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif . Yes, emissive armor can be effective in DNM. I thought it might be nifty to have a race advance that tech early.

Have fun,
Rollo

Binford

April 13th, 2003, 04:46 AM

I think we might have found a bug in DNM with the Religious Facilities. Both gharper and I have Nature Shrines in systems, but after a number of turns, none of our planets values have increased. As I read it and understand it, my Min, Org, and Rad's should increase 3% per turn for all planets in the system. Yes?

Binford

Krsqk

April 13th, 2003, 05:26 AM

IIRC, it's 3% per year, not per turn.

Suicide Junkie

April 13th, 2003, 06:17 AM

Thus, each time 24XX.1 rolls around, you will get your 3%. If your facility is going to finish very close to that date, I suggest Emergency building it.

Pablo

April 16th, 2003, 02:33 PM

I rarely use Monitor or Super Monitor that's why I noticed a typo only recently. Massive mount describes the increase of damage by 5 times when it actually is 7.
Just my 2 cents http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Slick

April 16th, 2003, 05:06 PM

Ok, after being on my "todo" list for a long time I am about to take the plunge and play my first Devnull Mod game, single player to learn. I sure wish I had more time to play all the various permutations of each mod...

I read the readme. Anything else I need to know or is it best to just dive in?

Slick.

Dralasite

April 16th, 2003, 06:13 PM

Just dive in, thats what I did http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

However, I did restart a few times. You know, those "I should have researched this a long time ago..." moments.

PsychoTechFreak

April 16th, 2003, 10:01 PM

Originally posted by Suicide Junkie:
Thus, each time 24XX.1 rolls around, you will get your 3%. If your facility is going to finish very close to that date, I suggest Emergency building it.That's for non-simultaneous, right? In simultaneous I have noticed the 3% each New Years (2xxx.0 ).

Rollo

April 16th, 2003, 11:01 PM

Thanks for the catch, Pablo.

As for learning the Devnull Mod, I agree diving right in. The mod basicly plays like standard SE4 with extra gimmicks. Note two changes of gameplay though:
1) Mine sweeper components have been removed., instead Point-Defense-Cannnons now also sweep mines.
2) PDC can only target seekers. If you want something that also hits units, you need Anti-Fighter-Missiles, which can hit fighters, sats, drones, and seekers.

Have fun, http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Rollo

PS: It might be fun to take two racial tech traits, to get some extra gimmicks (combo techs). And also maybe not use the monsters on the first try.

[ April 16, 2003, 22:03: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Slick

April 16th, 2003, 11:44 PM

I read the readme and the monster readme but it wasn't clear if you can play as the monsters. Or more properly it wasn't clear if the mod was intended to have humans play as monsters.

Slick.

Rollo

April 17th, 2003, 12:07 AM

well, you can play as monsters. That is to say it is possible. But not intended really. It is quite boring as your tech is vastly superior and your construction and intel is insane.

QuarianRex

April 17th, 2003, 07:21 AM

Originally posted by Rollo:
Using the Space Monster race pic is not so good IMO. It is copyrighted material. I was never comfortable with using that at all, but I had no better art at the time of release. If somebody wants to make a new race pic for the monsters (or any other monster pics for that matter), I would appreciate it.This may still be copyrighted material but it is far more threatening. I used this to replace my monster pics just after I first started playing Devnull. I just couldn't take MechaGodzilla seriously.

MonsterRacePics.zip (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/newuploads/1050556394.zip)

God, I love Giger.

Pablo

April 17th, 2003, 07:48 AM

Slick, go ahead ant try it out. Just have in mind the two things Rollo said and everything else you can deal with in the game. I wish Rollo told me that when I was first playing DNM. Just imagine a cloud of fighters coming close to you and your PD cannons do not even try to fire http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

One more thing - some AIs also use combo techs so don't get surprised when you meet a ship with organic armor, parasites and shrad cannons http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Dingocat85

April 17th, 2003, 08:37 AM

Hi, everybody...I figured this would be the best place to post this:
First: Is there anyplace where I can download DevNull Mod, NOT Gold? I tried running the Gold mod with normal SEIV, it doesn't work http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Second: If someone had the time, money, slaves, whatever you need to do so http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ...could somebody pleeease take the Current Version of Devnull Mod GOLD, and make an alternate Version so SEIV normal can run it? I get the feeling that if I get a copy of Non-Gold DevNull Mod, it'll be something that hasn't been updated in a long time http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

But even if nobody has the time to make an alternate Devnull, if someone could show me where the "old", Pre-Gold Devnull mod can be downloaded, that would be great http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Thanks,

Dingocat85

P.S: Does anybody know what http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif is supposed to mean? Looks like a person singing, if you ask me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Rollo

April 17th, 2003, 03:00 PM

Here is a link of the Last pre-Gold Version that I am aware of:

Devnull Mod 1.40 for SE4 Version 1.49 (pre-Gold) (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/ubbuploads/geoschmo/DevnullMod_1_40.zip)

This was the base that Geo and myself used to create the gold Version from.

Rollo

PS: I think that http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif is used to show embarrasment.

[ April 17, 2003, 14:01: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Rollo

April 17th, 2003, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by Pablo:
...I wish Rollo told me that when I was first playing DNM. Just imagine a cloud of fighters coming close to you and your PD cannons do not even try to fire http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif Well, at least I have learned in my advice giving skills http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif .

But wait a second... I don't recall that you asked for advice like Slick did. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif or did you?

Rollo

Rollo

April 17th, 2003, 03:14 PM

Originally posted by QuarianRex:
...I just couldn't take MechaGodzilla seriously....No, neither can I... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif .
nice pic. yeah, Giger is cool.

Rollo

Taz-in-Space

April 18th, 2003, 08:14 PM

... to me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif looks more like someone asleep and snoring. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Fyron

April 18th, 2003, 08:23 PM

Well if you hover the mouse cursor over it in the Instant Graemlins box when making a post, it tells you what the smiley is for...

Dingocat85

April 22nd, 2003, 11:38 PM

Idea Time! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

First, I have no idea if this has been implemented or not, since I don't have DevNull Gold, only regular http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif . Second, if it's impossible to alter a ship's movement during combat, then ignore this post entirely. Now, with all that aside:
------------------------------
Name: [for now] Hyperspace Converter I, II, III, IV

Available: With every third Propulsion tech level (i.e. when you get Ion Engines III, Jacketed-Photon Engines III, etc.)

Available for: Ships only, 1 per ship

Description: [for now] Massive device which utilizes hyperspatial particles to greatly increase a ship's long-range movement, but decrease maneuverability.

Effect: (per level)
>>>>> +1 bonus movement point
>>>>> -1 movement in combat
>>>>> -10% to defense

Size: Probably 30kT

Image: I was thinking the 'Gas Giant Colony component' image, sideways, color changed, the "wings" edited out, and the background made black.
------------------------------
I imagine making this wouldn't be too hard to make...I just don't have the resources to do so myself http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Plus, implementing this would actually give people an incentive to spend research points to go all the way to Quantum Engine III, and not stop at QE I...Why else would someone spend 600,000 research just to get 50 more storage out of an engine? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

That's my idea...hope someone runs with it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif
Regards,
Dingocat85

P.S.: Come to think of it...Does anyone think this post should be a separate thread entirely? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif

Dingocat85

April 27th, 2003, 10:28 AM

...anybody have any idea if this is doable, or not?

oleg

April 27th, 2003, 05:08 PM

Unfortunately, it will not work, Dinocat. I tried to make a "repulsion" system - Nova star, exploding and pushing ships away ... cool idea, right ?... but it does not work http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif . If only MM sacrifice some memory requirements and use real numbers throught http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

[ April 27, 2003, 16:09: Message edited by: oleg ]

Rollo

April 28th, 2003, 01:07 AM

I haven't tried this myself, but others did and reported that negative values for combat move don't work.

Plus, implementing this would actually give people an incentive to spend research points to go all the way to Quantum Engine III, and not stop at QE I...Why else would someone spend 600,000 research just to get 50 more storage out of an engine?In DNM Gold higher level engines use less fuel instead of giving additional supplies. For example, QE I uses 7 fuel per move, QE III uses only 5. If you want to make an update of DNM non-Gold, I suggest that you copy the engines from the gold Version. Btw, engines with supplies higher than supply storage I (500) can screw up the AI designs.

P.S.: Come to think of it...Does anyone think this post should be a separate thread entirely?Nope this is the perfect thread for making suggestions and discussing DNM. As for upgrading the DNM non-gold, I think another thread would be helpful, so things don't get mixed up.

Rollo

Taz-in-Space

April 29th, 2003, 05:26 AM

Hmmm, I may have just found an exotic bug in Devnull Mod. In a recent game I played I built a sphereworld and, pulling population from all over my empire, filled up much of it. After some more time, it filled up to 77 Billion and having built two more Sphere worlds, I wanted to transport some population to the new digs.

The Problem: I loaded some population to the transport fleet and then decided that maybe I should also transport some defense items as well.
So I offloaded, immediately, some population back to the planet to make room. Everything seemed to go alright when I noticed I only had 64 Billion left on the planet. The fleet could only hold about 6 Billion Max. So where did the extra 7 Billion go? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
I was using the extra space storage trait.

So is this bug a SE4 bug or a Devnull Bug? Did I exceed a numeric limit or something? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

Slick

April 29th, 2003, 05:24 PM

Well I am into my 2nd game and here are some of my observations. Pardon any redundancy in this post as I haven't read this entire thread yet.

- First, I like the mod very much and it shows that lots of hard work went into it!

- I like the idea of PDC sweeping mines because it makes the AI less susceptible to mines. I also like the split between seeker and fighter PD. Gotta remember to put the weapons on the ship in the order I want them to fire.

- I like the idea of staggered normal/phased shields in the research tree. However, it seems to me at least that phased shields are usually better (yea, I know that they have less shield points) so it is frustrating for me to upgrade a ship because it will upgrade Phased Shields to Normal shields. Recommend splitting the family numbers or whatever to prevent phased shields from upgrading to the normal shields. Also, since I don't really like normal shields, the effect is that phased shields just cost more research - maybe just make them cost more in a separate branch of the tree??

- There is a strange intel thing going on. My CI is being severely drained (to zero actually) with no Messages of attack. Must investigate this further.

- Monsters. Cool. I like them a lot. Haven't been up against any big ones yet. Can't wait.

- I like the idea of mine warheads getting cheaper. Makes researching that tree a little more attractive.

- I really like the idea of the universal colony module.

- I like the idea of more cargo space on planets. I have always thought that in the unmodded game, there wasn't enough room for a "reasonable" amount of defenses.

- I don't find myself using all the different ship sizes. It seems like there are so many. Maybe even unnecessary. Any tips on effectively using all the ship sizes?

- Haven't explored too many of the new mounts yet. Looks promising.

I will add more later as the game(s) progress. Great work to all who made this mod!

Slick.

Rollo

April 30th, 2003, 01:38 AM

Taz, that is a bug in SE4. Nothing that can changed in the data files, sorry.

[ April 29, 2003, 12:39: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Pablo

April 30th, 2003, 09:08 AM

As it happened to me while playing the DNM I will post it here. I tried to capture a planet with a full cargo of weapon platforms. I was successful but... the cargo space on the planet was several times smaller than the amount of troops I landed there. I mean, cargo space on the planet was (weapon platforms of course were destroyed before that) 1200 kt and I landed ~300 troops there. The troops remained in the planet's cargo http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Next turn the defending forces wiped them out so I could not test anything else. Just an observation. I think this is not DNM issue and I don't have anything against it, but that looked funny.

Dralasite

April 30th, 2003, 08:00 PM

- I don't find myself using all the different ship sizes. It seems like there are so many. Maybe even unnecessary. Any tips on effectively using all the ship sizes?
I'd like to hear this as well. I often do not use all the sizes/types as well. Here is what I mostly do, at least for early games:

Use the "normal" ship sizes like corvette, etc. to try to play with numbers so that I can get a closer match to a multiple of the production rates of my ship yards.

Fast transports, etc. I use extensively, as transports and scouts.

I havn't don't much asteroid mining, the one time I tried to use some of the prospecting ships my defenses weren't as good as I thought and I they all got slaughtered http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I do replace my colony ships with ark ships but by then I'm making warships vs. colonizers so the maint. savings doesn't seem all that helpful.

Dingocat85

May 2nd, 2003, 02:47 AM

Originally posted by Rollo:
I haven't tried this myself, but others did and reported that negative values for combat move don't work.Well, the description of the Converter does say that it 'decreases maneuverability'...so how about:
1) Only have three levels of Hyperspace Converters (get level 1 when you research Jacketed-Photon Engine III)

2) Hyp-Converter I reduces defense by 40%
>> Hyp-Converter II reduces defense by 60%
>> Hyp-Converter III reduces defense by 80%

3) Scratch the '-1 movement in combat' idea...if it doesn't work, no use using it.

So, is this doable?
(Or am I pressuring too much? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif )

Originally posted by oleg:
Unfortunately, it will not work, Dinocat. I tried to make a "repulsion" system - Nova star, exploding and pushing ships away ... cool idea, right ?... but it does not work http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif . If only MM sacrifice some memory requirements and use real numbers throught http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Exploding stars to move ships? That wasn't my idea, I'm not following you http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif
---------

Also, on a completely unrelated topic...why is Emergency Propulsion available for bases? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif I've tried using one on a base, but it gains no movement at all - imagine building 20 starbases with emergency propulsion on them, to build a sphereworld - then being unable to move any of them from the planet that built them http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

[ May 03, 2003, 21:25: Message edited by: Dingocat85 ]

mac5732

May 2nd, 2003, 06:52 AM

Excuse me, I know this is dumb question, but I have not played the mod yet, but in looking over the files, I only saw 1 monster folder, how many monster races are available in the game? How do you know which one you can pick if there is more then one, You must excuse this old ones ludicrus questions, but as stated, I have not played it yet but will be shortly.

just some ideas Mac

Taz-in-Space

May 3rd, 2003, 05:38 PM

Mac, there is only one Monster race in 3 flavors:
2000, 3000, & 5000 points.

Believe me that one race should give you plenty of problems - especially once the larger monsters show up. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

If they should happen to start within 2 systems of you; have your will made in advance! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

In addition to monsters, there are plenty of new components, facilities, etc to explore as well.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

mac5732

May 4th, 2003, 05:22 AM

tks Taz, appreciate it, have some trible wings on me.... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

mac

Binford

May 9th, 2003, 02:16 AM

Hmmmm... In devnull3 I just got Space Yards 2. The Space yard component for ships and bases seems to have a bug. The Level 2 of the component doesn't show up in the list when building or upgrading a base, but it does for a ship.

Very odd... Rollo?

Binford

Ed Kolis

May 9th, 2003, 02:42 AM

I think you have to research a certain level of Ship Construction or Base Construction to get the appropriate shipyard... so you can't get Base Yard III until you get Starbases, not sure what the levels for ship yards are...

OK, my turn for a question... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

How come the "larger" base PD mounts don't actually take up more space? They have more hitpoints... the Massive Base PD actually make nice non-hit-first armor, with their 80 HP http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Taz-in-Space

May 9th, 2003, 02:52 AM

Ed, there's even better Weapon platform armor...
I forget what it's called but it is black colored armor and under a PD mount enhancement can give you HUNDREDS of Kt of defensive armor!!!

Anybody else notice this?...

Binford

June 25th, 2003, 07:16 AM

WOw, no discussion in over a month?

Hey ROllo, how comes the latest patch?

Also, devnull3 *looks* to be entering late midgame so any interest in devnull4?

And TAZ, not sure if 1FSTCAT is using that armour, but he is sure using WP's to good effect against me.

Am I correct in thinking WP's give the bestMounts? They have better range than Spinal Mounts it seems.

Binford

[ June 25, 2003, 06:19: Message edited by: Binford ]

Taera

June 25th, 2003, 06:34 PM

i just wanted to point out - in DevNull whenever i setup a ship with small PDC (those 5kT ones) the strategy is reset to 'DONT GET HURT'. a known bug?

Fyron

June 26th, 2003, 09:53 PM

I suggest that the Ultimate Strategies Mod be incorporated into Devnull, as it only makes the game better. It has all of the TDM formations, plus more! And, it has lots of extra strategies too.

Taera

June 27th, 2003, 05:17 AM

too many strategies fyron, i got lost when i played P&N for the first time - i mean the amount of strategies and ship types there. I believe everyone should create their own, not use a humongous list. at least thats what i do http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

mac5732

July 3rd, 2003, 06:12 AM

in playing an SP game against the monsters, I notice there are no sound affects especially in tactical combat, all I get is a pinging noise, Are there combat sounds and how do I turn them on?

just some ideas Mac

Captain Kwok

July 3rd, 2003, 06:20 AM

Originally posted by mac5732:
in playing an SP game against the monsters, I notice there are no sound affects especially in tactical combat, all I get is a pinging noise, Are there combat sounds and how do I turn them on?

just some ideas MacThis might be happening for the following reason:

The mod might use custom sound .wavs that are in the '..mod/sounds' directory - in order for you to hear them in the game you would have to be using the classic sound effects - which I don't think much people use anymore. If you prefer the new effects as your default, just move the files in the mod to the '..mod/sounds/new' directory and all should be good. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Pablo

July 3rd, 2003, 03:15 PM

One more thing: When I create a stellar moon around a star I cannot create anymore planets from asteroid fields there as the message says there is no star. When I try to create a star in that system the message says that there is already a star and no more stars possible. Maybe only the text of the Messages should be changed or is this a bug?

Edit: Rollo, nice to see the update is coming http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ July 03, 2003, 14:17: Message edited by: Pablo ]

Atrocities

July 3rd, 2003, 03:32 PM

I was wondering how you set the mod up to star with destroyers? I think I know how you did it, but I would like to be sure.

Rollo

July 3rd, 2003, 05:59 PM

Pablo - that is the way contructed planets work in SE4. Same with Ringworlds and Sphereworlds. Unless I am missing something, that cannot be modded out.

Atrocities - I am not quite certain what you mean. Could you be a bit more specific?

Rollo

Toryin

July 3rd, 2003, 11:14 PM

So far, most of what I've incorporated into the devnull that I'm playing, is a lot of Deathstalkers MountMod 1.40, and several tweaks to the galaxy generation. Even so I ended up adjusting the numbers of the mount mods to make it more "playable".

For example, I removed Missile Miniaturization (put it into SRMs) and then balanced cost, versus suppiles, versus size, etc...

I also added in the various shield mods, LRMs, and Engine Mounts. With normal components for all the mods, AI interuption is minimal (except in the case of the gatling mount, which I no longer use).

In most cases the AI doesn't use any of the mods, cept the SRMs.

If anyone wants the info, I'll pass along more indepth observations.

Cheers

Rollo

July 4th, 2003, 01:50 AM

ooh, lots of questions. I have neglected this thread for a while, my apologies. I shall answer them in order:

Originally posted by Binford:
Hmmmm... In devnull3 I just got Space Yards 2. The Space yard component for ships and bases seems to have a bug. The Level 2 of the component doesn't show up in the list when building or upgrading a base, but it does for a ship.

Very odd... Rollo?

BinfordThe Space Yard II component for bases requires both: Base Construction 2 and Space Yards 2.

Originally posted by Ed Kolis:
...OK, my turn for a question... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

How come the "larger" base PD mounts don't actually take up more space? They have more hitpoints... the Massive Base PD actually make nice non-hit-first armor, with their 80 HP http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif I don't know 'how come', as I am not a weapon platforms engineer http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif . But I see no problem with giving weapon platforms more hitpoints.

Originally posted by Taz-in-Space:
Ed, there's even better Weapon platform armor...
I forget what it's called but it is black colored armor and under a PD mount enhancement can give you HUNDREDS of Kt of defensive armor!!!

Anybody else notice this?...Hmm, now that is a problem methinks. That would be the psychic reactive armor, right?. I didn't notice this before. I'll change that so it can be no longer put on platforms.

Originally posted by Binford:
WOw, no discussion in over a month?

Hey ROllo, how comes the latest patch?

Also, devnull3 *looks* to be entering late midgame so any interest in devnull4?

And TAZ, not sure if 1FSTCAT is using that armour, but he is sure using WP's to good effect against me.

Am I correct in thinking WP's give the bestMounts? They have better range than Spinal Mounts it seems.

BinfordA new Version in the works. I was working on a new AI, which is almost done. Also I am collecting feedback, suggestions, and bug reports. My to do list is growing and I think there will be enough changes soon to justify a new Version. I am not entirely sure yet, if it will be 1.71 (compatible with 1.70) or 1.80 (not compatible with earlier Versions).

Yes, depending on the kick off date for devnull4, I am interested to play.

Yes, weapon platforms are a lot stronger in DNM than the standard game. Both due to the good mounts and the extra hitpoints from PD. I am also considering to allow ablative armor on platforms.

Originally posted by Taera:
i just wanted to point out - in DevNull whenever i setup a ship with small PDC (those 5kT ones) the strategy is reset to 'DONT GET HURT'. a known bug?Hmm, odd. I have not noticed this before. I don't see how adding a commponent should effect the strategies. Maybe it is changed for a different reason, but I have a look into that.

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
I suggest that the Ultimate Strategies Mod be incorporated into Devnull, as it only makes the game better. It has all of the TDM formations, plus more! And, it has lots of extra strategies too.Updating formations is already on my list. Thanks for your offer to use your mod. I'll see what I can scavenge.

Originally posted by mac5732:
in playing an SP game against the monsters, I notice there are no sound affects especially in tactical combat, all I get is a pinging noise, Are there combat sounds and how do I turn them on?

just some ideas MacStrange... The mod does not have its own sound folder. So I assume that sound problems are not mod related. DNM does use two custom sounds, but those are added to the main sound folder. Perhaps that pinging sound is the correct one. Do the other weapon sounds work alright for you , mac?

Well, that's it for now.
Rollo

mac5732

July 4th, 2003, 04:35 AM

Rollo, the only combat sounds I get is the pinging noise, I don't even get any of the regular combat sounds, also in the Del mod folder is monsterchant and another chant, I dont' get them in the game either, these two work as when I open them in the file they give gozzilla's scream and the tommahawk chant, Confused?????
The Delv mod does have a sound folder but only the monsterchant and tommahawk chant are in there, don't even get the normal combat sounds

Kwok, I have TDM and it has all the combat sounds, I just can't seem to get them in Delvmod, I put the sounds like you said into the mod/sounds/new folder and it still didn't work, do I have to take each sound out of the new and actually put them individually under sounds outside of the new folder????

Mac

[ July 04, 2003, 04:16: Message edited by: mac5732 ]

Krsqk

July 4th, 2003, 06:12 AM

You should be able to get away with putting the sounds in the default \sounds\new folder. Maybe even the default \sounds folder, just to be thorough. You can delete the mod \sounds folder if you want, although I don't think it's necessary with the latest patch.

mac5732

July 7th, 2003, 06:48 AM

I found the problem, there is/was a sound folder inside the Mod. I transferred it to the SE4 sound folder, then deleted the folder out of the DelMod, and everything is now ok, at least so far, tks for those who helped out

just some ideas Mac

Binford

July 10th, 2003, 10:34 PM

OK folks, devnull3 is wrapping up, and I am wanting to go ahead and post the signup for devnull4! Hope all of you will play!

August marks almost a full year of ongoing PBW devnull games going. Let's keep it up...

I added devnull4 to PBW JUST NOW, please post suggestions for game settings.

Binford

[ July 10, 2003, 21:48: Message edited by: Binford ]

1FSTCAT

July 11th, 2003, 08:56 PM

I wanted to let everyone know that I greatly enjoyed my first game of Devnull 3. Binford was a major challenge, and the only other player I sparred with, quit, so I didn't get a real good feel for some of the new combat features.

As I have always felt, this game reinforced for me how unbalancing the Talisman is. I'm not sure what Binford had to do to get it, but it's INCREDIBLY difficult to fight against. Maybe instead of it providing an ABSOLUTE to-hit, it could just add a significant bonus to hit?

Fortunately, the Devnull Mod is more equally balanced, since a player can take advantage of some of the better mounts, which provide a significant bonus to-hit. That combined with a more accurate weapon can really help level the field.

I would be interested in joining the new game. Please make the galaxy smaller this time around, though, as managing 250-300 planets is just a royal pain for me.

1FSTCAT

July 11th, 2003, 09:53 PM

Just to summarize my suggestions for improvement of the Devnull mod:

More sensors: Players need the ability to research to higher levels of weapon accuracy. Perhaps sensors with 25% and 50% more to-hit bonuses?

More ECM: If you add sensors, you should add ECM.

Talisman should work more like an "uber-sensor", and without the "absolute" to-hit.

Perhaps adding or changing an energy weapon to provide an extremely long range. The long-range mount is nice, but it would be nice to pay more for something, instead of having the to-hit rate altered. Maybe a larger long-range mount could be offered, too?

Would it be possible to seperate the Multi-Targeting research from the ECM research? That would be nice.

I like the Heavy Bombardment Missle. Maybe there could be more levels of research beyond that, with "hardended" Heavy Bombardment Missles, that could take more damage. They're quite expensive to use, and fairly easy to defeat.

That's all for now. How does that sound?

mac5732

July 17th, 2003, 06:14 AM

In playing sp, I found that the Sonne needs a little tweaking, they are not very strong and could use a boost to get on par with the rest of the AI's, IMHO only. I tried several games and they did not fare very well. I like the race and think its a great enhancement to the game but could use a little boost and make them a little tougher.... MHO only

just some ideas Mac

Cirvol

July 25th, 2003, 09:24 PM

is the gold upto 1.7 now?

what about the devnull4 game? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif i just signed up

please fill me in?

mac5732

July 26th, 2003, 06:11 AM

SE4 gold is up to 1.84, Delv mod is at 1.70

just some ideas mac

Silent Sorrow

July 27th, 2003, 06:57 PM

[never mind]

[ July 27, 2003, 17:59: Message edited by: Silent Sorrow ]

Rollo

July 28th, 2003, 01:34 AM

Binford - Hey, good to see that Devnull4 PBW game attracted so many players. I won't be able to join, though. Can't handle a large game with short game turns at the moment.

1FSTCAT - Currently changing the tech tree is not an option, since it will mean rework of the AI (again). If you want better sensors, try taking psychic-temporal combo.
Adding a new mount for long range can be considered, though. What kind of ship class did you have in mind for using it?
Heavy Bombardment Missle is already on the list for review the weapons. Along with Grav Hellbores and Incinerator Beam. Expect some changes to it in the next Version (whenever that will be...) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif .

Mac - Can you be more specific about the Sonne AI? Where exactly are they lacking? Any suboptimal designs or tactics? In my tests when develop them they did pretty good. And I also got good feedback for them so far. Any hints are helpful, if I am to tweak them.

Cirvol - yep, 1.70 is the current released Version.

My apologies for things going slow. But it is summer afterall http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif .

Rollo

mac5732

July 30th, 2003, 05:46 AM

Rollo, following observations in friends 7 games and my on going lst SP game ( all were SP games)

Sonne

1. appears their ability to build ships is limited. the speed in which they build appears somewhat slower the the rest example. human/Ai players build DN in 6 turns, takes Sonne 12, gives human player advantage in numbers. Appears their build cycles are almost twice as long as the other AI's and human player

2. Ship design little weak, they use almost all psy weapons, could use some other big weapons to help out

3. research ability slower then rest. Human/other Ai's have BB's & Dn's, Sonne had CA's

4. Don't appear to build Super DN's, Monitors and super monitors (havn't seen them in the 8 games played so far

Cuppa

1. seem weaker then in 1.84 original, not as fiesty or as strong. appear weaker and weaker in ship production as well, they don't build their ships in the quantities of 1.84. nor are they as strong

Flora

1. weak in intel especialy defensive, easy to steal against

General

Don't see the Ai building Super DN's, monitors or super Monitors, so far very rare if at all, IE' in my Sp game, the Ai"s are using mostly BB's no Dn's etc, as their later on basic warship, gives human player huge advantage, In my game I can see most of the map, however I have only seen l super DN among the 6 races, all the ships/fleets made up of BB's as their big gun ship.

Would like to see AI's use different make ups on their ships, IE different types of BB's some with one kind of weapons, another BB with other types thrown in. (same with all ship designs)

Please these are only my observations, IT's a great mod and I love playing it especially with all the new stuff, this is not in any way shape or form knocking the mod, only observations so far and I could be wrong, (it wouldn't be the lst time http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ) please don't take my observations in any wrong way... Myself and Mac's trouble makers all really enjoy the game

just some ideas Mac

Cirvol

July 30th, 2003, 08:35 PM

whats considered to be 'unbalanced' currently in terms of racial special techs?

i notice that some 'extra special' stuff comes up when you combine 2 of the big ones...

like org + relig
or psy + tempo
etc etc

what is everyones opinion on the balance?

Rollo

July 30th, 2003, 10:57 PM

Thanks for you feedback Mac. I appreciate it.

I will look into the designs of the Sonne. 12 turns for a DN is a long time indeed, esp. since they should use Temporal SY. Perhaps they use too many expensive weapons. But also from the other observations, maybe they just had a bad start. That would explain why they underperform in so many issues.

Your observations about the AI is correct. I often have them use BB as ship-of-the-line for some time. Each of the AI goes through different stages and a new ship size often goes hand in hand with a change of weapons and/or combat tactics, but they should all build DN and Super-DN eventually. About Monitors and Supermonitors, I am not so sure. Could be that I didn't do designs for them, but it has been a while since I Last worked on them. My new (yet unrealesed) temporal AI does use them, though.

There is always a certain element of chance, whether a race is doing good or not. Depending on the planets the AI finds early in the game. This especially true for Devnull Mod, where the chance of the AI lacking a resource is higher compared to unmodded SE4. This is not meant as an excuse and I have already improved the AI on that issue. I take your feedback seriously and will look into that.

Last but not least I like to say that I attempted to make the AI really different from each other: different weapons, tactics, priorities, and use of units. Not all of these choices are maximized to efficiency and make the AI as strong as possible, but I feel they make the game richer. (Heck, when I did the Flora, I just thought I had a nifty and different concept. It wasn't my goal to make them a killer AI. Just try something new.)

Last item: I am curiuos. What bonus do you give the AI in your SP games usually?

Rollo

Rollo

July 30th, 2003, 11:09 PM

Originally posted by Cirvol:
whats considered to be 'unbalanced' currently in terms of racial special techs?

i notice that some 'extra special' stuff comes up when you combine 2 of the big ones...

like org + relig
or psy + tempo
etc etc

what is everyones opinion on the balance?Heh, I am not entirely sure myself here. I don't know if there has been enough playtesting for the combo techs. So far none has come forward and say: "Hey, this is too strong!"

Some of the combo techs are probably weaker or not so interesting as others. Personally I would be interested in a small PBW game where every player has to take at least two racial traits and get some feedback that way.

On overall balance I think DNM is a lot better balanced then SE4 standard. In fact when you look at the issues in the balance thread, most of them have been adressed in this mod.

Rollo

Devin Bass

July 31st, 2003, 07:36 PM

FYI Rollo,
I am currently playing the latest Devnull Mod and my Sonne are very tough! They are at the top of the food chain! I am only at Turn 155 and I regularly see fleets of 50-60 superdreadnaughts and accompanying Assault carriers. I have played several games and the Sonne are usually at the top or very near the top. They make killer ship designs too.
My game settings were large galaxy, high difficulty, mediumn AI bonus 13 players I also used Fryon's map generator.

Also, when is the next update coming? This mod is too good not to keep it going.

In the meantime, Thanks for all the hard work!

mac5732

August 1st, 2003, 04:44 AM

Rollo, tks for feedback, usually High Aggressive, Med Bonus, however, when lst learning a new mod I usually use Low Bonus in order to learn the new additions. Also depends on what if any handicap I give myself against the AI players.

Current Game I'm using 2 Monster Races http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif I'm a glutton for punishment... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Currrent Game, Sonne in 2nd Place, no Super DN's or Dn's yet, they are still building slow, they ar at level 9 in ship construction, Turn 2419.3 Your right about the BB's, but you may want to re-look the time table the AI's use before buildiing the bigger ships,,, you know us humans, we like to walk soft and carry big sticks, the bigger the better and all that http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif A human will build the big stuff as soon as he can, The AI then might be at a disadvantage if they have slower build data for the bigger ships... They have the Tech, just not building any right now...

but on the other hand, I don't mean to upset the play balance as AI's with bigger ships might unbalance the Monster ships.. Will have to play some more http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif However, friend of mine has played the game 8 times and has seen the same type of observations..

I haavn't seen any big 50-60 Sonne Fleets yet, but that might be because they are fighting the Monsters ??

Any way, love the game, look foreward to your newest race addition you mentioned...

PS. My friend lost the lst 5 games he played, the Monsters Schlocked him... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

also on some of the Ai's ships, I noticed 2 Master Computers, is this on purpose ?

just some ideas Mac

[ August 03, 2003, 03:41: Message edited by: mac5732 ]

Taera

August 1st, 2003, 07:04 AM

as i said, dnm is one very well balanced mod http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
i enjoy playing it, on pbw too.

Rollo

August 5th, 2003, 01:15 AM

Devin - thanks for the feedback. About the new update: I will not put a foot in my mouth (again) and give an ETA. All I say is that I am working on it (albeit slowly) and will be released when ready.

Mac - two monsters, huh? There is hope for you that they will fight each other http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif . Unless you selected AI vs. humans, ofc... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif
The 2 master computers is not intended. That is due to the latest SE4 patch and I didn't update all the AI for that, yet. It is already on 'the list'. Thanks for the heads up, though.

Rollo

[ August 04, 2003, 12:16: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Cirvol

August 7th, 2003, 04:35 PM

so whats the deal with devnull4? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

who among you are in it?
which racial techs did u choose?
do we need any other 'rules' to disallow uncool 'gamey' tactics?

mac5732

August 12th, 2003, 04:08 AM

Rollo, I noticed that the game doesn't seem to handle formations that well. It seems jumbled, I've been using double wall (SP play), and so far the formation doesn't work out, I always end up with a large group on a cornor other ships scattered. The Diamond shape looks to be ok, but the double wall, nope, is it only some formations that don't work right???

just some ideas mac

Binford

August 31st, 2003, 05:34 PM

Hi guys.. Sorry for the delay,

We will get devnull 4 rolling on 9/5. YOu this this week to join or get your empires in.

Binford

Rollo

October 1st, 2003, 04:50 PM

*bump*

I decided to start working on the Mod a bit more again. A couple of pages down, I suggested new values for Incinerator Beam and Graviton Hellbore.
I like to tweak these two weapons for the new Version. Your thoughts?

Originally posted by Rollo:
Incinerator Beam, quarter damage to shields
50kt, ROF 2

I 100 100 100 100
II 125 125 125 125 125
III 150 150 150 150 150 150

Graviton Hellbore, double damage to shields, reserach cost raised to 10k
60kt, ROF 2

I 75 60 45 30
II 100 85 70 55 40
III 125 110 95 80 65 50
IV 150 135 120 105 90 75 60
V 175 160 145 130 115 100 85 70

mac5732

October 3rd, 2003, 03:26 AM

Rollo, great, glad your back on the mod, the weapon upgrades sound good, make hellbore 2 turns istead of 3. also I'm past turn 200 in my sp play and found the following with the cuppa

They finally surrendered to me and I found that they still only had

Research I
Mineral Tech II
Rads II
Organic II
only Lt. CV's
ect

It appears that the Tech Tree needs to be tweaked somewhat. They should have been well past these by turn 200+. They still had 30+ planets when they surrendered. Just thought I'd pass on the info...

PS. The Sonne are up to 2437 ships in the game and own over 800+ planets. They are still in first place, I'm still 2nd... ) great game, so far close to 3000 planets in the game thanks to FQM.. I only have 457 planets 1400+ ships and still fighting the d... Flora ... ugh what tough b....... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

also don't forget to have the ai's build some monitors and super monitors......

just some ideas mac

Fyron

October 3rd, 2003, 04:34 AM

IMO you should not change the firing rates of stock weapons, as it completely changes their nature (much more so than double/half to shields and tweaked damage values). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Rollo

October 7th, 2003, 10:38 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
IMO you should not change the firing rates of stock weapons, as it completely changes their nature (much more so than double/half to shields and tweaked damage values). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif I don't understand. I wasn't going to change the firing rates. or is the http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif supposed to mean that is a joke? anyway, I don't get it.

Fyron

October 7th, 2003, 10:40 PM

I thought someone mentioned changing the firing rate of the graviton hellbore?

Rollo

October 7th, 2003, 10:41 PM

mac, glad to hear the Sonne are doing good, since I remember you had some doubts about them earlier.
Not sure what happened to the Cue Cappa. I agree that at this stage they were very poor developed. Perhaps they were resource screwed in the begining of the game and never got a foot off the ground. That can happen.

Rollo

October 7th, 2003, 10:44 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
I thought someone mentioned changing the firing rate of the graviton hellbore?ah, I see.
true, Mac did. But GHB are ROF 2 anyway in stock game, not 3.

mac5732

October 8th, 2003, 02:54 AM

The cuppa had over 100+ planets far into the game, but never progressed in the tech, I don't know what happened but they should have been further along then they were, at the time of surrender they had 30 planets and most were resource rich and plenty of expansion room on the planets....

yep, I did have concerns on the Sonne with my lst game, however, this one is very different for them, the cuppa are basically the same as in my lst game.

The lst game I played I didn't use an FQM, I think that makes the difference as it allows the AI players to increase strength and expansion as they have more worlds to colonize and or to build with the astroid systems which in turn makes them tougher, (don't forget to let them build monitors and super monitors )....

Just some ideas Mac

Rollo

January 24th, 2004, 02:26 AM

*bump

...for you know who http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Rollo

February 1st, 2004, 02:59 AM

junt wanting to let you know that I have been working on the mod a bit.

here is a list of the recent changes:

Version 1.71 (special thanks to David E. Gervais and dogscoff)
01.02.2004:
* added more positions to Sonne formation
* new AI for temporal races (Xiati, Sallega)
* updates to Cue Cappa/Abbidon AI
* raised retrofit costs (still cheaper then stock SE4) and raised Max Percent Difference
* corrected typo in description of normal mounts
* corrected typo in description of massive ship mounts
* renamed 'Space Yard - Ship' to 'Mobile Space Yard' to avoid confusion with 'Space Yard - Base'
* fixed typo with Temporal Space Yard Facilties, they now repair 10/12/15 components as per description
* Reactive Armor is only allowed on Ship\Base to prevent exploit with Weapon Platform PD mounts
* changed planets.bmp: facelift to asteroids (new pics by David E. Gervais)
* added new asteroid portraits (new pics by David E. Gervais)
* changed stats for Incinerator Beam (still needs playtesting)
* raised damage for Graviton Hellbore, gave double damage vs. shields, and +20% to hit
* raised tech cost for GHB to 10k
* added new picture for monster drone by dogscoff
* added Single Satellite Tube to make deployment of remote miners and spy sats easier in simultaneous games

oh, and here is a little teaser. (http://home.tiscali.de/rollo/images/intro_dnm02.jpg)

So, if you have bug report, suggestions, or balance issues, now is a good time.

[ February 01, 2004, 13:28: Message edited by: Rollo ]