newest beta patch? [Archive] - .com.unity Forums

Davidious

October 11th, 2002, 01:22 AM

anyone know where to find the "newest beta patch"?

in the topic:

"Urgent (Tesco Read) - Time Distortion Burst Bug found in 1.78"

people posting on Oct 1st claim that this problem is fixed with the newest beta patch, but I can't seem to find it to download it. it's not available on the download page or anywhere else I can find.

can anyone help?

(sorry if this is a dumb question but I can't find the freaking thing anywhere)

Gandalph

October 11th, 2002, 01:26 AM

The operative word here is "beta". It won't get released until it has been tested.

Davidious

October 11th, 2002, 01:31 AM

lol, ok then any idea when this new patch is going to be tested and released?

Mephisto

October 11th, 2002, 12:31 PM

Originally posted by soxx:
lol, ok then any idea when this new patch is going to be tested and released?We are testing it at the moment but no release date yet.

Version 1.80:
1. Fixed - Integer Overflow when a unit with no shields was hit by normal
weapons.
2. Changed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will only work against ships
regardless of the target type.
3. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will fail against a ship with
a Master Computer (regardless if that component is damaged or
not).
4. Fixed - You can now give resource gifts in excess of 200,000.
5. Added - "x10000" and "x100000" to the Select Package window for resources.
6. Fixed - Fighters were unable to "Fire On And Destroy" ships.
7. Fixed - Organic Armor was pre-regenerating itself before damage occurred
in combat.

Version 1.79:
1. Fixed - "X Damage to Shields" damage types were not working correctly.
2. Fixed - Shield Depeleters will now work properly against units.
3. Fixed - The result of a Communication interception intelligence project
will be displayed with arrows in the log window.
4. Fixed - Ships would clear their order if trying to move to sector 0,0.
5. Fixed - Ships with regnerating armor will regnerate all of their armor
at the end of combat.
6. Fixed - During a Deconstruct & Analyze, you would sometimes receive duplicate
techs if a component and the vehicle size were new to you.

Unknown_Enemy

October 11th, 2002, 03:29 PM

5. Added - "x10000" and "x100000" to the Select Package window for resources http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

7. Fixed - Organic Armor was pre-regenerating itself before damage occurred
in combat. Argh !! So long for the formely best armor of the game...

Grandpa Kim

October 11th, 2002, 03:40 PM

What an excellent little patch set! I think every single one of these flaws has been bugging me at least subconciously. Great work! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Mylon

October 11th, 2002, 04:25 PM

Stone Mill

October 11th, 2002, 04:30 PM

Argh !! So long for the formely best armor of the game... Wow. That is a massive change. Seems like this would take a redesign of Organic Armor to have this take effect. Is there any more specific details about the way it works compared to the way it will work when fixed?

dogscoff

October 11th, 2002, 04:37 PM

I really appreciate the bug fixes and all, but I'm wondering if we'll see any new features before SE V. Technically things like the production queue and upgrade system aren't bugs, but they could use some improvement.
These are great bug fixes, some of them have been hanging around since the very first incarnation of SE4.

However, the emphasis on bug fixes and lack of new features (and potential introduction of new bugs) implies to me that MM is wrapping up SE4 in favour of work on the 3D combat thing and SE5.

I could be wrong about this, but that's how it looks to me.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Still, 3D combat thing and SE5

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Rollo

October 11th, 2002, 04:58 PM

Atraikius

October 11th, 2002, 05:23 PM

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Argh !! So long for the formely best armor of the game...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wow. That is a massive change. Seems like this would take a redesign of Organic Armor to have this take effect. Is there any more specific details about the way it works compared to the way it will work when fixed? That goes along with:

5. Fixed - Ships with regnerating armor will regnerate all of their armor
at the end of combat.
The idea is that Organic Armor should regenerate imidiately after a battle is over, not only regenerating during combat.

dogscoff

October 11th, 2002, 05:39 PM

[quote]
>Damn! So much for the Computer Virus and AS combo.

Yeah, I think that is not a good change.
{/quote]

I disagree. If a ship is designed with a master computer, then there is no crew and no bridge. Once the MC is gone there's no-one to convert and no way to fly the damn thing.
Maybe you should be allowed to put boarding parties aboard and then fly it home under reduced speed/ functionality, but using the AS makes no sense at all.

Now, if the ship had an MC *and* crew quarters/ bridge, and you destroyed the MC, I'd have no problem with the use of an Allegiance Subverter.

Maybe an "allegiance subverter virus" weapon should be added which does to MCs what the AS does to a crew...

Ragnarok

October 11th, 2002, 06:21 PM

Maybe you could have a MC that will avoid the subVersion... But then even if you have a MC there still be the requirment of 1 crew and 1 lifesupport. That way if MC gets destroyed the ship can then be taking with the AS. Would this be a good idea?

Arkcon

October 11th, 2002, 06:26 PM

Originally posted by dogscoff:
[quote]
>If a ship is designed with a master computer, then there is no crew and no bridge. Once the MC is gone there's no-one to convert and no way to fly the damn thing.
Maybe you should be allowed to put boarding parties aboard and then fly it home under reduced speed/ functionality, but using the AS makes no sense at all.

OK, the urge for realisim rears it's ugly head.

For the record, I found it irritating when my MC ships were (rarely) taken by AI psychic races that got lucky with the direct fire weapons.

However, if the MC is destroyed and not taken over by AS or a boarding party, how does the original empire get it home?

The original way was, grudgeingly, more balanced

Nodachi

October 11th, 2002, 06:34 PM

I disagree. If a ship is designed with a master computer, then there is no crew and no bridge. Once the MC is gone there's no-one to convert and no way to fly the damn thing.
Maybe you should be allowed to put boarding parties aboard and then fly it home under reduced speed/ functionality, but using the AS makes no sense at all.

I would agree with you except for one point, a ship that has had it's MC destroyed can still fight. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif Where's the logic in that? If MM would change that then the AS not working would be fine.

TerranC

October 11th, 2002, 06:35 PM

Originally posted by Arkcon:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by dogscoff:
[quote]
>If a ship is designed with a master computer, then there is no crew and no bridge. Once the MC is gone there's no-one to convert and no way to fly the damn thing.
Maybe you should be allowed to put boarding parties aboard and then fly it home under reduced speed/ functionality, but using the AS makes no sense at all.

OK, the urge for realisim rears it's ugly head.

For the record, I found it irritating when my MC ships were (rarely) taken by AI psychic races that got lucky with the direct fire weapons.

However, if the MC is destroyed and not taken over by AS or a boarding party, how does the original empire get it home?

The original way was, grudgeingly, more balanced<hr /></blockquote>Ships without MCs still get 1 movement.
Of course, you can still send the UBERFAST (Quantum engines, Solar sail, Quantum reactor, Propulsion Experts) repair frigate...

Suicide Junkie

October 11th, 2002, 06:50 PM

I think he's referring to the fact that there are no crew, and no computer, so how does the ship decide to fire its engines and go somewhere.

I suggest thinking of it as a distributed computer, rather than one mainframe.

All of the subprocessors located near the other components could survive, and collectively make decisions at a greatly reduced speed.

Nodachi

October 11th, 2002, 07:07 PM

From the data files;

AS: Artificially intelligent neural-net computer that can control an entire starship without need of a crew and gain experience from its actions.

Virus: Computer virus which is beamed to an enemy ship and then destroys any Master Computers.

If the MC controls the entire ship then once it is destroyed that ship should be dead in the water, not able to move and more importantly, not able to attack.

Arkcon

October 11th, 2002, 07:10 PM

Originally posted by Suicide Junkie:
I think he's referring to the fact that there are no crew, and no computer, so how does the ship decide to fire its engines and go somewhere.

I suggest thinking of it as a distributed computer, rather than one mainframe.

All of the subprocessors located near the other components could survive, and collectively make decisions at a greatly reduced speed.Valid point. So, while we're forced to submit to realisim ... when this ship with a bLasted master computer arrives home for repair ... all of it's experience is lost, right? No, not the way it works.

October 11th, 2002, 08:47 PM

Originally posted by Nodachi:
3. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will fail against a ship with
a Master Computer (regardless if that component is damaged or
not).

Damn! So much for the Computer Virus and AS combo. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

Now this is extremely bad IMO and I most probably will not install this patch and therefore no patches at all in the future!!
I already said this when MM changed the "engine only damage" ability, but this time it is even worse: If you make such important hard coded changes two years after the game release when so many user's mod have been created, you will ruin some of the mods. This time it affects my Borg mod which is rendered completely useless after this change!
This is really really bad news for me. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

Suicide Junkie

October 11th, 2002, 08:51 PM

Using the AS as a Borg weapon?

Why not just have Boarding Parties with the Organic Armor Regen ability?

That way, your borg still have to deplete the enemy shields (required to beam over), and they can keep capturing over and over.

geoschmo

October 11th, 2002, 08:53 PM

Q, couldn't you give your Borg standard boarding parties instead of AS. And wouldn't this kind of make more sense anyway for the Borg?

The change is a big one, but it was made because of many many requests. From the way AS is supposed to work, it really doesn't make sense that it sould be able to capture a ship that has no crew simply by destroying the master computer.

Geoschmo

EDIT: SJ, even better with the organic regen. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 11, 2002, 19:54: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

October 11th, 2002, 09:14 PM

I don't argue if it is realistic or not. The problem for me is simply that a lot of work would be useless after this patch. And I think two years after the initial game release there should be no such irreversible changes. The most important feature of SE IV is it's ability to be modified. So if some people would like it to be changed, make it an option but not a hard coded irreversible change!!!!
I don't have the time and definitely not the wish to change all the AI research and design files for that new patch and therefore I just will not install it. But this means of course that I will be interested no more in the future development of SE IV, which makes me very very very unhappy.

[ October 11, 2002, 20:16: Message edited by: Q ]

Captain Kwok

October 11th, 2002, 11:49 PM

I think it's a good change for the AS and makes perfect sense. That's one thing that always bothered me before, in that it could take over a ship without any crew.

SJ - I like the regenerating boarding parties for the Borg...I think I'll assimilate for use in the TNG mod.

AJC

October 12th, 2002, 01:06 AM

install two copies....keep one of them back and patch the other to keep up with the current release..

[ October 12, 2002, 00:07: Message edited by: AJC ]

Nodachi

October 12th, 2002, 01:42 AM

3. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will fail against a ship with
a Master Computer (regardless if that component is damaged or
not).

Damn! So much for the Computer Virus and AS combo. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

LGM

October 12th, 2002, 06:11 AM

I am glad to hear that Organic armor will no longer acrue repair points before they are damaged. I have suspected that they did this as organic armor seemed to go away faster at warp-point battles (no approach time to accrue regen points).

I also like taking the AS/Virus combination away as there was no real good counter to that combination, except making sure you always have first fire.

Now, if only the Talisman were toned down a bit. Automatic Hit at range 8 (Range 14 for Large Weapon Platforms and Massive Base Mouints) is rather hard to overcome.

Gandalph

October 12th, 2002, 07:06 AM

I can't believe some of the things I am reading in here.

I have to agree to some extent with Q. I spent alot of time putting together a mod for 1.67, which no one played incidently, that the 1.78 patch changed considerably and was frustrated at the amount of work necessary to put together a mod that gets changed with the next patch. IT IS ALOT OF WORK!

As to the people crying about "UBER" whatever, IMHO it is overcoming adversity and defying odds that makes this great game, well, great! I only play PBW now and when I lose, and you can bet that I do, I look at my strategies and the strategies of the opponent who took me out to see how I can learn.

With that said, I do think the change to the AS is unwelcome and unwarranted.

EDIT - Well if that doesn't lower my rating, nothing will!

[ October 12, 2002, 06:07: Message edited by: Gandalph ]

Stone Mill

October 12th, 2002, 07:30 AM

I am playing in 2 games now where the primary reason I was instrumental in beating the Talisman was through the massive deployment of organic armor.

In the other it is the AS.

This patch reduces the edge of some "inconsistencies" (i.e. organic armor, AS), but in the wake of that move, the Talsiman and PPB become, in effect, even more powerful.

The massively glaring inconsisitency and unbalance of PPB remains unaddressed. That is the obvious gripe of a significant portion of SEIV game players.

How did "fixing" organic armor rank higher than levelling out PPBs?

This is a more than a patch... it does instigate an indirect upset to game balance.

dumbluck

October 12th, 2002, 08:30 AM

Originally posted by [K126]Mephisto:
2. Changed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will only work against ships regardless of the target type.What about Bases??? Shouldn't they be vulnerable, too? And maybe even fighters??? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

EDIT: Well, maybe not fighters. How would you board a fighter??? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

3. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will fail against a ship with a Master Computer (regardless if that component is damaged or not).I agree this needed done, but now there is now counter or disadvantage for using the MC (other than the high cost, which can be overcome...). Perhaps if the MC did NOT gain from experience? Then it would be a good counter for the AS, but would be inferior to vessels with a normal weapon load...

Or perhaps a MC equiped vessel would have a lower max experience level. For example, if you can train crews to do something (Ship/Fleet training facilities, default max 20%), surely you can program your MC with the same training. However, from 20% to 50% is just http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif experience learned in the field, and perhaps the MC wouldn't be able to expand it's own programming....

7. Fixed - Organic Armor was pre-regenerating itself before damage occurred in combat.

. . .

5. Fixed - Ships with regnerating armor will regnerate all of their armor at the end of combat. This I like. One question, though: Will a ship with no undamaged OA still repair it all after combat?

This also has one downside. In turn based games, my OA equiped ships enter combat against yours, kill a few ships, then combat ends and all damaged armor regens. Then my fleet expends another movement point to enter combat again. Your ships are still partially damaged (unless you have OA too! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ), whilst mine have had some free repair done in the space of a few days....

3. Fixed - The result of a Communication interception intelligence project will be displayed with arrows in the log window.http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif Huh?

6. Fixed - During a Deconstruct & Analyze, you would sometimes receive duplicate techs if a component and the vehicle size were new to you.This also is excellent, and needed to be done.

[ October 12, 2002, 07:31: Message edited by: dumbluck ]

Phoenix-D

October 12th, 2002, 08:57 AM

"2. Changed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will only work against ships regardless of the target type."

Um, this is just franky ridiclous. If you want the AS to only affect ships in SE4..only let it target ships. There is no reason to cripple modding like that.

Phoenix-D

October 12th, 2002, 10:07 AM

Well I am glad that I am not completely alone with my opinion!
My objection to the changes MM makes since the Last patch is a general one:
MM starts to remove things from SE which in my opinion is absurd:
In patch 1.78 he removed the ability of "damage engines only, skips shields", now he plans to remove the ability of the AS to work against ships/bases with destroyed master computer and the possibility to target units (something I never used).
I understand people who think that this might be more realistic or balanced, however don't you understand that this also reduces the complexity and variety of the game?
I strongly ask all people with some influence on MM: ask him to make such changes only as an option or in a way that can be modded back and not in an irreversible way.

Thank you for your understanding.

[ October 12, 2002, 09:08: Message edited by: Q ]

dumbluck

October 12th, 2002, 10:24 AM

I agree with Q. It is good that he is adressing issues, but bad that he is addressing them by reducing the moddable features....

Arkcon

October 12th, 2002, 03:04 PM

Originally posted by Q:
Well I am glad that I am not completely alone with my opinion!
My objection to the changes MM makes since the Last patch is a general one:
MM starts to remove things from SE which in my opinion is absurd I agree

don't you understand that this also reduces the complexity and variety of the game?
.I noticed this, and there appears to be no end to what people seem to need to make the game balanced to perfection. Somethings up here. And IMO people aren't being completely honest with me on this subject ...

So, I am in the middle of my first PBW game. There are psychic races and religious races around me. But combat hasn't broken out yet.

WHAT IS GOING ON IN OTHER PBW GAMES

ahem sorry for shouting there guys cough cough hurt myself

Are some people dominating the game with their special racial choices? Are talisman mounted null space and polaron beams unstoppable. Some people say no, some people have to endlessly mod the rules in the need for perfect balance, and the debate rages on an on in this forum. Always friendly, but endless in frequency. All we get are hints, someone wants to alter the phased shield arrival, someone wants a Desecrater-class weapon to take out the talisman. The AS cascade has to be stopped.

People aren't being square with me on why these are needed. Change the names and post anonomusly if you feel like it.

In my PBW game, I'm in second to Last place. I have very few planets, only my home system rock planets and maybe 5 or 6 breathables elsewhere. Everyone else has traded colonization techs, so they're everywhere. If I lose, it will be my fault, I'll try to do better next time.

[Soapbox mode]
If you get spanked by a newbie munckin, well, maybe new tactics on your part are what's needed. Not a hardcode change
[/Soapbox mode]

[ October 12, 2002, 18:31: Message edited by: Arkcon ]

Mephisto

October 12th, 2002, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by Arkcon:
People aren't being square with me on why these are needed. Change the names and post anonomusly if you feel like it.http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif Either I don't quite get what you really want to say or are you really thinking its a conspiracy against you? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

Regarding OA:
I think it�s a good change. There is really no sense in your ship armor growing before it is even in combat. You don�t have a cancer ship with unlimited growth.

Regarding the Intel project:
When you intercepted a message, the game would only display the first few lines as you couldn�t scroll the message like you can when sending normal Messages.

Regarding the AS:
I can see Q�s point. However IMHO, reduced to the question if tuning down the AS is a good thing, it is. Even the PPB has a �counter�, phased shields. It remains a strong weapon but it won�t skip shields. Against the AS there is no defense as even the MC cannot protect you. Combine this with a Talisman and no one can stop you. BTW, we are discussing tuning the Talisman, too (know I have opened up a can of worms, don�t I? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif ). The best idea in this regard IMHO is at the moment making the Talisman hit only every X turns, rendering it useless the other y turns until �recharged�. We�ll see what MM thinks of this.

Phoenix-D

October 12th, 2002, 06:36 PM

"Combine this with a Talisman and no one can stop you."

That's 3000 racial points and a LOT of research. Could very well use the overwhelming numbers strategy.

And I still see no reason to remove the ability for the AS to hit things other than ships no matter what you tell it to do.

Phoenix-D

Nodachi

October 12th, 2002, 06:36 PM

I agree that the change to the AS makes sense, I've been saying that all along. My gripe is that the counter to the AS is too powerful and doesn't make sense. A ship that has had it's MC (or even it's bridge) should not be capable of combat and this should be changed too. That's all I've been saying.

Fixing the talisman? I didn't know it was broke. We're talking about a racial trait that gets no weapons and only combat component is extremely expensive to research. Please, at least leave this change moddable.

Phoenix-D

October 12th, 2002, 07:00 PM

2. Changed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will only work against ships regardless of the target type2.

THIS is what annoys me, in case people think I'm defending the current setup. I LIKE the other change, though it should get a settings.txt entry so it can be changed back if wanted.

Phoenix-D

Grandpa Kim

October 12th, 2002, 07:02 PM

Originally posted by Arkcon
WHAT IS GOING ON IN OTHER PBW GAMES Well, in my games, I'm finding that the specialized techs you choose have nothing to do with victory. The skill of the player is paramount as well as his tenacity. Players who will not give up, often work marvels.

I have played in less than 10 games on PBW and have already been involved in a victory over a very powerful religious race, have had a huge empire and got creamed by a superior player, pulled myself up by my bootstraps to win another and am in one with a truly amazing player who's weakness I have yet to find-- and if I don't find it, I'm toast!

The techs involved are irrelevant, the skills of the players are everything. In fact, I find it hard to remember which special techs (if any) the other players have. It just doesn't seem to matter that much. Sure, I will customize my ship designs to counter those techs, but that is "if" and "when" and only if needed.

If you think you are losing to the talisman and the AS, you are actually losing to a superior player.

Kim

Taera

October 12th, 2002, 07:43 PM

Re: AS and Talisman.

I've thought about this lately and i think i know what is needed. The problem is that AS and Talisman are 100% weapons. AS has a base of almost 100% convert chance, and when mounted it is 100% at any range. Talisman is also 100% component. It eliminates the chances of players to miss.

AS must be either disallowed to be used with mounts or have the chance decreased that Large mount would not take them to about 100%, only Massive would. This way it would not be 100% sure convert. Also a smart counter to this weapon is simply destroying it, but the large tonnage means large damage resistance, which is doubled when mounted. Again, disallowing mounts to be applied on AS seems to be the answer for me.

Talisman should be given something like +200% or so bonus so it would be *almost* sure yet with the same 1% or more to miss.

TerranC

October 12th, 2002, 08:11 PM

Originally posted by Taera:
Re: AS and Talisman.

I've thought about this lately and i think i know what is needed. The problem is that AS and Talisman are 100% weapons. AS has a base of almost 100% convert chance, and when mounted it is 100% at any range. Talisman is also 100% component. It eliminates the chances of players to miss.

AS must be either disallowed to be used with mounts or have the chance decreased that Large mount would not take them to about 100%, only Massive would. This way it would not be 100% sure convert. Also a smart counter to this weapon is simply destroying it, but the large tonnage means large damage resistance, which is doubled when mounted. Again, disallowing mounts to be applied on AS seems to be the answer for me.

Talisman should be given something like +200% or so bonus so it would be *almost* sure yet with the same 1% or more to miss.Or, just stay out of it's range... that could work... I guess... since almost all weapons outrange it... just a suggestion... ya know...

[ October 12, 2002, 19:11: Message edited by: TerranC ]

Captain Kwok

October 12th, 2002, 08:21 PM

Here are some ideas I think would work well and not take away from the game: Allegiance Subverters should be able to convert only vehicles with life support components on them. The Talisman should have about 90-95% chance to hit, rather than 100% or as Mephisto suggested, have the Talisman recharge every other turn or so.

Mephisto

October 12th, 2002, 09:17 PM

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
That's 3000 racial points and a LOT of research. Could very well use the overwhelming numbers strategy.Well, you can easily get 3k of racial points. Just take away some of your repair ability and ground combat. Or, for the religious, take away your aggressiveness. You will gain lots and lots of points and you really don't need this skill as you hit the enemy anyway.
Overwhelming numbers are fine but you need at least a ratio of 2:1 and that�s hard against a religious player as you get very fine system wide facilities that increase your economy. I easily out produce and outgun every empire in my PBEM game and if I'm not VERY mistaken I really could take them on all.
Further, research cost is very relative. My Empire has around 100 planets and I produce 800k research points. You name the tech, I get it in no time. Seriously, if you really want, you can have the Talisman after round about 40 turns. Even if you only have DUC or PPB, you will smash the enemy as you hit with every weapon every time. Combine this with large weapon platforms (quite cheap to research) and your are in deep trouble to attack my worlds.
I'm not whining because I loose a game against a religious player but all my enemies are at the receiving end bad times!
In fact as was stated, the "all or nothing" concept behind the talisman and the AS are what is crippling the game balance. If you would hit with the AS 50% of the time, no change would be needed.
Regarding bases: The history.txt in unclear/wrong on this. You can still take over bases, just no units.

capnq

October 12th, 2002, 10:21 PM

People aren't being square with me on why these are needed. People have explained why they think &ltpick a component/facility/trait&gt needs to be changed, in excruciating detail, and people who disagree have made exhaustive counterarguments.

Ultimately, the "problem" is that there are so many possibilities that there's very little consensus on either the problems or the solutions.

[ October 13, 2002, 23:04: Message edited by: capnq ]

geoschmo

October 13th, 2002, 12:57 AM

Originally posted by Q:
I strongly ask all people with some influence on MM: ask him to make such changes only as an option or in a way that can be modded back and not in an irreversible way.Contray to popular myth, there are no people with any special connection to Malfador. Even among the beta team members, we have all the same discussions that occur in the general forum. We throw around ideas, and have debtes that sometimes degenerate into arguments. And in the end ANYONE can email Malfador if they have a suggestion or a complaint. Nobody's emails get any more notice than anyone elses.

Geoschmo

Master Belisarius

October 13th, 2002, 01:39 AM

I agree in part with Q.
Think MM is removing things from SE4, that some people considered "features" and others "bugs".
After 2 years, lots of people love or hate these features/bugs, and lots of mods where based on these features/bugs.
Without doubts, these changes will strongly modify the game balance (for good or for bad will depend of each one!), then, think that an optional setting should be included, instead change these things in a compulsive way.
IMHO, of course.

Phoenix-D

October 13th, 2002, 01:48 AM

"Well, you can easily get 3k of racial points. Just take away some of your repair ability and ground combat. Or, for the religious, take away your aggressiveness. You will gain lots and lots of points and you really don't need this skill as you hit the enemy anyway."

For that same 3000 points you could get Hardy Industrialists, 120 Construction, 120 mining, and a 12% maintaince reduction. This races produces at 5280 per turn on turn one; enough to pop out a colony ship per turn without emergency build.

The religious/pysic race, on the other hand, builds at 3899. Hitting emergancy build takes them to the same speed as the Hardy race, but of course only for 10 turns. The Time Shrine, maxed, gives a 15% bonus- LESS than the bonus the first race has to minerals without even having to research or build a thing. And it doesn't stack with the System Robotoid factory, so once the Hardy player has one of those the advantage goes away- the factory produces twice as much effect, BTW.

The religious race can build a high-tech BC in 5 turns. The hardy race can build the same BC in 4 turns, and maintain more of them.

EDIT: hard maintance 2224. Relgious maintance 4277. I'm not saying these might not need toning down, but they aren't unstoppable.

EDIT again:
"Even if you only have DUC or PPB, you will smash the enemy as you hit with every weapon every time."

Hitting 100% of the time won't compensate if your ships are inferior. PPB isn't an inferior weapon, actually IMO it's more unbalanced (relative to cost to get it vs benifits) than the Talisman.

[ October 13, 2002, 01:07: Message edited by: Phoenix-D ]

Fyron

October 13th, 2002, 02:20 AM

You want to know what the solution to the Religious/Psychic combo is? Play games with 0 racial points. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

geoschmo

October 13th, 2002, 02:28 AM

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
Hitting 100% of the time won't compensate if your ships are inferior. PPB isn't an inferior weapon, actually IMO it's more unbalanced (relative to cost to get it vs benifits) than the Talisman.Phoenix, I agree with everything else in your post except this point. Hitting 100% of the time will compensate for a LOT of dificencies in other areas. Which is a fact you would have learned first hand if you had stuck around a little longer in the Dimension X 2 game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

At one pont Mark was using Destroyers with DUC's and EASILY handling fleets twice the size of his fleets with Lioght Cruisers and suprior weapons and shield technology. And doing it against two other empires simultaneously. It's only been by intensive cooperation between several races, and a couple of strategic mistakes on his part that we were able to take advantage of that has finally brought his empire under check.

But the rest of what you said is right on. I believe it's only because of the ten planet start that Mark was able to get the Tailsman as fast as he did. In a simgle planet start it would have likely taken him so long to get that the advantage it gave him would not have been quite so pronounced.

Geoschmo

Phoenix-D

October 13th, 2002, 04:47 AM

I have a Talisman-equipped opponent in one of my games. The first few encounters- until he stopped my push with a minefield- went pretty badly for him.

EDIT: I'd need to dredge the numbers up, but he had APBs, DNs, and Armor III I had BCs with Meson V and phased shield II. That kind of deficancy wasn't healthly. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Phoenix-D

[ October 13, 2002, 03:49: Message edited by: Phoenix-D ]

October 13th, 2002, 07:32 AM

Originally posted by geoschmo:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Q:
I strongly ask all people with some influence on MM: ask him to make such changes only as an option or in a way that can be modded back and not in an irreversible way.Contray to popular myth, there are no people with any special connection to Malfador. Even among the beta team members, we have all the same discussions that occur in the general forum. We throw around ideas, and have debtes that sometimes degenerate into arguments. And in the end ANYONE can email Malfador if they have a suggestion or a complaint. Nobody's emails get any more notice than anyone elses.

Geoschmo<hr /></blockquote>Thank you for your reply. However I believe you underestimate the value of beeing a beta-tester. I can't imagine that the opinion of a beta-tester is disregarded by MM. For my e-mails I am not even sure if he reads them. (Edit: I take that back: he read my e-mail and replied to it! In the reply he says that the conVersion of a ship with destroyed master computer is a bug. Well, I am not sure about that but such an obvious "bug" that persisted for almost two years??)

One more question for those who want a counter for the allegience subverter: Have you ever thought to play games without computer combat?? This can be selected in the game setting without any modding or other changes! You would get almost the same as the proposed change in the next patch, unless the master computer is destroyed by chance by any ordinary weapon.

[ October 13, 2002, 07:32: Message edited by: Q ]

Taera

October 13th, 2002, 08:24 AM

Q - now thats a good point!

Mark the Merciful

October 14th, 2002, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by geoschmo:

At one pont Mark was using Destroyers with DUC's and EASILY handling fleets twice the size of his fleets with Lioght Cruisers and suprior weapons and shield technology. And doing it against two other empires simultaneously. It's only been by intensive cooperation between several races, and a couple of strategic mistakes on his part that we were able to take advantage of that has finally brought his empire under check.Geo, you accurately describe the first stage of the fighting between you, me and Tesco, but you're wrong in just attributing it to the Talisman. Half your problem was not just that my DUCs were hitting, but that your PPBs weren't. The Research I'd saved by not going straight to PPBs went into ECM, whereas none of your or his early ships seemed to have Combat Sensors. Had you had DUCs with Combat Sensors instead of PPBs without, I think the early fighting would have gone as the current battles do now that you're actually hitting (or in your case ramming) - that is, the Talisman giving me an edge, but not a completely decisive one.

I say this not as criticism of your play (because I know I've grossly simplified the research choices available to all of us), but to illustrate the general point that properly planning your counter to the Talisman makes a huge difference. You know the Religious player is going to emphasise his strengths by building hard-to-hit ships and staying out at long range. So if you see him as the early game threat, make sure you can *hit* his ships before you start researching all the cool weapons.

I'm genuinely curious, by-the-way, about what you think my strategic mistakes were. Or is it too early to be revealing that sort of information?

But the rest of what you said is right on. I believe it's only because of the ten planet start that Mark was able to get the Tailsman as fast as he did. In a simgle planet start it would have likely taken him so long to get that the advantage it gave him would not have been quite so pronounced.Definitely true. As it was, I only got the Talisman a turn or two before fighting first broke out, and had to carry out a frantic refitting program in order to have ships ready to fight. Normally, developing towards the Talisman would have to be a much longer term goal. You couldn't afford to commit to spending the hundreds of thousands of point necessary until you'd got several other key technologies first.

Mark

Mylon

October 14th, 2002, 03:19 PM

Originally posted by Q:
(Edit: I take that back: he read my e-mail and replied to it! In the reply he says that the conVersion of a ship with destroyed master computer is a bug. Well, I am not sure about that but such an obvious "bug" that persisted for almost two years??)At least he replied to your email. I sent him one about Dungeon Oddesey and the production/facility upgrade in Space Empires IV. Maybe the Dungeon Oddesey email was a tad too scornful...

[ October 14, 2002, 14:20: Message edited by: Mylon ]

geoschmo

October 14th, 2002, 04:52 PM

Originally posted by Mark the Merciful:
Geo, you accurately describe the first stage of the fighting between you, me and Tesco, but you're wrong in just attributing it to the Talisman. Half your problem was not just that my DUCs were hitting, but that your PPBs weren't. The Research I'd saved by not going straight to PPBs went into ECM, whereas none of your or his early ships seemed to have Combat Sensors. Had you had DUCs with Combat Sensors instead of PPBs without, I think the early fighting would have gone as the current battles do now that you're actually hitting (or in your case ramming) - that is, the Talisman giving me an edge, but not a completely decisive one.

I say this not as criticism of your play (because I know I've grossly simplified the research choices available to all of us), but to illustrate the general point that properly planning your counter to the Talisman makes a huge difference. You know the Religious player is going to emphasise his strengths by building hard-to-hit ships and staying out at long range. So if you see him as the early game threat, make sure you can *hit* his ships before you start researching all the cool weapons.Ah, but what you could not know is that while you were spending points researching the ECM, I was spending points researching military science.

We had a decisive battle at around turn 30. I went back and looked at the old game files cause I wanted to be sure. I had a fleet of 60-70 ships, over 40 of which were LC's. You had a fleet of 30-35 ships, all destoyers, except for about 8-10 LC's. Almost every ship in my fleet was veteren, trained to 20%, and the fleet was as well. SO that alone would have countered your ECM 2. So without the tailsman there would have been a slight advatage in your fleet having the smaller ships, but I had twice as many ships, and they were larger. Probably 4 or five times as many weapons total for the fleet. Your DUC's were a bit stronger than what I had at the time. but my ships had organic armor, so they could take a lot more punishment that your standard armor ships.

The result without the Tailsman would have been at worst significant losses on both sides, with me being ultimatly victorious. Instead you destroyed everyone of my ships and lost 5 or 6 of your own. THe Tailsman was clearly the pivital factor in that battle.

I'm genuinely curious, by-the-way, about what you think my strategic mistakes were. Or is it too early to be revealing that sort of information?Your first mistake was in not finishing me off when you had the chance. Your fleet wiped out several of my homewolrds, and then inexplicably, from my perspective left. Now to be fair I do not know what other pressing issues you had to deal with at the moment. You could have been facing a threat from another quarter, or perhaps your fleet was running low on fuel. I don't know. But you did not return immediaetly to finish me off.

Second, you allowed Tesco to negotiate that temporary cease fire. I was stunned that you would accept such an obvious ploy in the middle of a shooting war. But it allowed me to prepare for taking advantage of your third ciritcal error.

Which was not putting SDD's on your top of the line warhips. Retrofitting nearly my entire fleet to heavily armored organic boarding/ramming ships was a total desperation tactic on my part. It was the most cost effective thing I could think of at the moment to deal with the tailsman's. If you had employed SDD's, my ships would have had to be given orders to ram exclusivly. And while they would have been somewhat effective, the combination of your speed advantage and repulser beams would have limited their effectivness considerably. (That was a brilliant combination by the way in addition to the tailsman. Well done. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ) But not having SDD'd on your part meant that I could manage to capture a couple of your ships early in the battle, which caused a cascade effect. Because now the ships I just captured became the strongest ships in my fleet, so the rest of your ships concentrated their fire on them, leaving the rest of my boarding/rammers unmolested. You destroyed most of the ships I captured before the battles in which they were captured were over, but they greatly reduced the overall caualties of my fleet in total.

Definitely true. As it was, I only got the Talisman a turn or two before fighting first broke out, and had to carry out a frantic refitting program in order to have ships ready to fight. Normally, developing towards the Talisman would have to be a much longer term goal. You couldn't afford to commit to spending the hundreds of thousands of point necessary until you'd got several other key technologies first.

MarkYes, and I attempted to take you out before you developed the Tailsman, and might have been succesful too had I not made a critical mistake of my own and miscalculated the amount of minesweepers in my initial foray into yoru homesystem. Losing that fleet set me back long enough for you to retrofit your fleet and resulted in that disasterous battle (for me) around turn 30.

This has been one of the most mental games I have ever been involved in. Win or lose it's been a pleasure.

Geoschmo

Mephisto

October 15th, 2002, 04:08 PM

News from the current beta patch:

Version 1.81:
1. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will work on all target types,
again.
2. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will fail against a ship with
a Master Computer (regardless if that component is damaged or
not). It does not matter if there is a Bridge on the ship.
3. Fixed - AI will no longer launch "Anti-Planet" Drones in combat.
4. Added - Option to strategems to control how many drones are launched
per target in combat.
5. Changed - You can now give drones orders to Attack warp points. This
is essentially the same as telling them to warp through
and attack anything on the other side. Any survivors can then
be given new orders.

Phoenix-D

October 15th, 2002, 05:51 PM

"1. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will work on all target types,
again."

Much better.

"2. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will fail against a ship with
a Master Computer (regardless if that component is damaged or
not). It does not matter if there is a Bridge on the ship."

heh. I take it the other part didn't quite fix it.

"3. Fixed - AI will no longer launch "Anti-Planet" Drones in combat." Some help, some not.

"4. Added - Option to strategems to control how many drones are launched
per target in combat." Good.

"5. Changed - You can now give drones orders to Attack warp points. This
is essentially the same as telling them to warp through
and attack anything on the other side. Any survivors can then
be given new orders."

Whoohoo!

Phoenix-D

October 15th, 2002, 08:18 PM

"Version 1.81:
1. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will work on all target types,
again."

Very reasonable (of course only in my opinion).

"2. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will fail against a ship with
a Master Computer (regardless if that component is damaged or
not). It does not matter if there is a Bridge on the ship."

Of course I can't have all my wishes fulfilled. I will have to find a solution for myself (probably eliminating master computer and computer virus together from the game).

"3. Fixed - AI will no longer launch "Anti-Planet" Drones in combat.
4. Added - Option to strategems to control how many drones are launched
per target in combat.
5. Changed - You can now give drones orders to Attack warp points. This
is essentially the same as telling them to warp through
and attack anything on the other side. Any survivors can then
be given new orders."

Now these are the kind of changes I welcome!

[ October 15, 2002, 19:20: Message edited by: Q ]

geoschmo

October 15th, 2002, 08:35 PM

5. Changed - You can now give drones orders to Attack warp points. This is essentially the same as telling them to warp through and attack anything on the other side. Any survivors can then be given new orders.And since the new orders can be to attack another warp point, viola recon drones. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Only limited by their supply range, which can be greatly increased in mods.

Geoschmo

TerranC

October 15th, 2002, 08:45 PM

Originally posted by geoschmo:
And since the new orders can be to attack another warp point, viola recon drones. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Only limited by their supply range, which can be greatly increased in mods.

Geoschmo"Captain, we're approaching the warp point now."

"Sir, sensors are picking up something small and metallic, closing on us fast."

"On Screen"

"It looks like a drone sir."

"I recommend we raise shields sir."

"It doesn't even know us! I'm sure it's an automated welcoming beacon!"

"But sir, it has a antimatter warhead, and it has been engaged."

"I said It doesn't even know us! I'm sure it's an automated welcoming beacon!"

"*sigh* Whatever you say sir."

Sinapus

October 15th, 2002, 08:56 PM

Originally posted by geoschmo:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />
5. Changed - You can now give drones orders to Attack warp points. This is essentially the same as telling them to warp through and attack anything on the other side. Any survivors can then be given new orders.And since the new orders can be to attack another warp point, viola recon drones. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Only limited by their supply range, which can be greatly increased in mods.

Geoschmo<hr /></blockquote>Finally, SBMHAWK pods. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Suicide Junkie

October 15th, 2002, 10:06 PM

TerranC:
The only problem with that story is that ships engage in combat with drones, firing PD cannons, unit-targetting main guns, and raising shields.

Arkcon

October 15th, 2002, 10:15 PM

Originally posted by Q:
"Version 1.81:
1. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will work on all target types,
again."

Very reasonable (of course only in my opinion).

"2. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will fail against a ship with
a Master Computer (regardless if that component is damaged or
not). It does not matter if there is a Bridge on the ship."

Of course I can't have all my wishes fulfilled. I will have to find a solution for myself (probably eliminating master computer and computer virus together from the game).

"3. Fixed - AI will no longer launch "Anti-Planet" Drones in combat.
4. Added - Option to strategems to control how many drones are launched
per target in combat.
5. Changed - You can now give drones orders to Attack warp points. This
is essentially the same as telling them to warp through
and attack anything on the other side. Any survivors can then
be given new orders."

Now these are the kind of changes I welcome!I have to agree as well. I was seriously considering not updating to this latest patch, but all the changes together make this patch worthwhile http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Mark the Merciful

October 16th, 2002, 03:40 PM

Originally posted by geoschmo:
Ah, but what you could not know is that while you were spending points researching the ECM, I was spending points researching military science.

We had a decisive battle at around turn 30. I went back and looked at the old game files cause I wanted to be sure. I had a fleet of 60-70 ships, over 40 of which were LC's. You had a fleet of 30-35 ships, all destoyers, except for about 8-10 LC's. Almost every ship in my fleet was veteren, trained to 20%, and the fleet was as well. SO that alone would have countered your ECM 2. So without the tailsman there would have been a slight advatage in your fleet having the smaller ships, but I had twice as many ships, and they were larger. Probably 4 or five times as many weapons total for the fleet. Your DUC's were a bit stronger than what I had at the time. but my ships had organic armor, so they could take a lot more punishment that your standard armor ships.

The result without the Tailsman would have been at worst significant losses on both sides, with me being ultimatly victorious. Instead you destroyed everyone of my ships and lost 5 or 6 of your own. THe Tailsman was clearly the pivital factor in that battle.OMG, you keep all the old turn files! Exactly how big is your archive? Obviously, having looked, you'll know more about that battle then I do. But in general I have clear memories of the early battles being against ships without combat sensors. Of course, that includes the battles with the Meklar, Niridians, and SMR-10 as well as you, and you know, all aliens tend to look the same from in front of a fire-control console...

I think at the time of the battle you mentioned, I also had built the Ship and Fleet Training facilities. So I probably had a Veteran fleet to counter yours, though it's very unlikely that many of my ships were Veteran.

Obviously the Talisman is a huge edge, and I wouldn't want to deny that. But my experience of our more recent battles, and from the other game where I'm playing a Religious, is that while the Talisman lets me win battles against equal or bigger fleets, they are no longer the one-sided blowouts we were seeing initially.

Your first mistake was in not finishing me off when you had the chance. Your fleet wiped out several of my homewolrds, and then inexplicably, from my perspective left. Now to be fair I do not know what other pressing issues you had to deal with at the moment. You could have been facing a threat from another quarter, or perhaps your fleet was running low on fuel. I don't know. But you did not return immediaetly to finish me off.You blew that fleet up (or most of it), with a large number of organic armour rammers, and I'd had to redirect my resources to deal with Tesco's latest 100-ship armada. I did desperately want to come back and glass the rest of your planets http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif but having lost that fleet, I didn't have another to do the job with. Fighting four races on three seperate fronts leaves you with little chance to build up reserves for the next Big Push. My fleets spent a large part of their time dashing from system to system trying to deal with the next threat, and no Kif sailor gets shoreleave unless he's wearing a coffin.

Second, you allowed Tesco to negotiate that temporary cease fire. I was stunned that you would accept such an obvious ploy in the middle of a shooting war. But it allowed me to prepare for taking advantage of your third ciritcal error.One of the most interesting and difficult challenges of this sort of game is to get some idea of the other players' current state of minds. From your point of view, I may have been the unstoppable religious monster who was winning every battle he fought. From my point of view I was fighting four opponents, with pretty much the minimum of resources needed to avoid a complete collapse. The attrition rates were pretty favourable, but not favourable enough for me to actually build up any reserves, and the occassional defeat, mistake or bad guess would leave a gaping hole in my defenses. So I was desperate for a chance to rest and rebuild.

Which was not putting SDD's on your top of the line warhips. Retrofitting nearly my entire fleet to heavily armored organic boarding/ramming ships was a total desperation tactic on my part. It was the most cost effective thing I could think of at the moment to deal with the tailsman's. If you had employed SDD's, my ships would have had to be given orders to ram exclusivly. And while they would have been somewhat effective, the combination of your speed advantage and repulser beams would have limited their effectivness considerably. (That was a brilliant combination by the way in addition to the tailsman. Well done. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ) But not having SDD'd on your part meant that I could manage to capture a couple of your ships early in the battle, which caused a cascade effect. Because now the ships I just captured became the strongest ships in my fleet, so the rest of your ships concentrated their fire on them, leaving the rest of my boarding/rammers unmolested. You destroyed most of the ships I captured before the battles in which they were captured were over, but they greatly reduced the overall caualties of my fleet in total. Part of the problem was that I didn't (or don't) understand what Self-destruct devices do (Dim X 2.0 is my second PBW game). I was too scared to put them on my ships, seeing a scenario where one of your frigates with Boarding Parties could force one of my Battlecruisers to blow itself up. I've read very recently that boarding ships refuse to even attempt an attack when the enemy has SDDs, but it's a bit late now... Actually, even I had known, I would have a great deal of difficulty finding time to refit my exising fleet. It didn't tend to stand still (except on a warp point) for that length of time.

Actually the repulser beam trick seems less effective in practise then it sounds in theory. It won't push a ship through or past another ship, and it doesn't seem to work on any ship bigger then the firer (as far as I can tell - too lazy to test properly). So often, especially when facing an enemy in a large clump, the repulsers harldly do anything at all.
Another reason why your rammers/boarders did so well. I'd hoped the repulsers would keep them at arms length, but it didn't quite work...

Yes, and I attempted to take you out before you developed the Tailsman, and might have been succesful too had I not made a critical mistake of my own and miscalculated the amount of minesweepers in my initial foray into yoru homesystem. Losing that fleet set me back long enough for you to retrofit your fleet and resulted in that disasterous battle (for me) around turn 30.

This has been one of the most mental games I have ever been involved in. Win or lose it's been a pleasure.

GeoschmoAgree on that, as well. It's been fun, incredibly tense, and a real mental challenge. A couple of the other PBW games I've played in have had some quite long dull patches, as each player sat still doing the research and buildup thing. Almost none of that in Dim X 2.0

Mark

tesco samoa

October 16th, 2002, 04:08 PM

I did not know you two were talking in here about Dim 2x.

Fantastic game.

Where many battles were not done with ships but with dipolomcy and the mind.

Mark you have now made it 50 turns fighting the whole universe.

Again Great job.

I have lost hundreds of ships and that ALDAN system is like a yo-yo. Back and Forth. I guess it is my turn now right ??

Thank you for an enjoyable game. Win or lose it was good. And this is the furtherest I have gone in a PBW game... Yea i am a newbie as well there....

Slick

October 16th, 2002, 05:20 PM

Originally posted by Mark the Merciful:
I've read very recently that boarding ships refuse to even attempt an attack when the enemy has SDDs...
Obviously we are talking about simultaneous combat, but is this true?

Slick

geoschmo

October 16th, 2002, 05:56 PM

Originally posted by Slick:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Mark the Merciful:
I've read very recently that boarding ships refuse to even attempt an attack when the enemy has SDDs...
Obviously we are talking about simultaneous combat, but is this true?

Slick<hr /></blockquote>It is true at least for ships that have only boarding parties and no other weapons. At least is was in my game. They just kind of mill about and not attack. I have seen boarding ships that attacked and got blown up by SDD though. It may have been a boarding ship that had a standard weapon as well as BP that got it into range and the Boarding parties went ahead and tried to board. I will need to test that some more.

Geoschmo

Slick

October 16th, 2002, 06:09 PM

I wish I had time to test all the things I wanted. The other question is will a boarding ship attempt to board when it has no chance of succeeding? Like if the target had enough Security Stations to prevent capture 1 on 1. At first this may sound good, but I hope not because that would prevent several small boarding ships from attacking a larger target that could be overcome by numbers.

I am playing a SP game now that I am trying to perfect ship and planet capture. I am trying to capture every ship and planet without destroying them first (offensively). I will only destroy enemy ships on purpose if I am the defender. I am working out issues in tactical combat like ship design, formation, strategy, etc. for the ultimate goal of having it work well in strategic combat. I have read the various threads on the subject but tweaking a capture fleet is not easy. In simultaneous combat, it takes a careful balance to capture without destroying the target or getting yourself destroyed.

Sorry, I did not intend to hijack this thread. Please return to your normally scheduled programming.

Slick

[ October 16, 2002, 17:17: Message edited by: Slick ]

Suicide Junkie

October 16th, 2002, 06:14 PM

Actually, boarding is all or nothing, so if the defenders win one capture attempt, thy would win them all.

capnq

October 16th, 2002, 11:42 PM

OMG, you keep all the old turn files! Exactly how big is your archive? The PBW server keeps all the turn files until the game is deleted (I think; it might start deleting the earliest turns later in the game).

Slick

October 23rd, 2002, 05:29 PM

Can any of you insiders or beta testers give us a feel for the expected release of the new patch?

Fyron

October 23rd, 2002, 07:15 PM

Originally posted by geoschmo:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Slick:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Mark the Merciful:
I've read very recently that boarding ships refuse to even attempt an attack when the enemy has SDDs...
Obviously we are talking about simultaneous combat, but is this true?

Slick<hr /></blockquote>It is true at least for ships that have only boarding parties and no other weapons. At least is was in my game. They just kind of mill about and not attack. I have seen boarding ships that attacked and got blown up by SDD though. It may have been a boarding ship that had a standard weapon as well as BP that got it into range and the Boarding parties went ahead and tried to board. I will need to test that some more.

Geoschmo<hr /></blockquote>This can be used to your advantage though. Create small, (relatively) cheap boarding ships, and have them try to board the enemy's big, expensive ships with SSDs. The SSD will go off, and the enemy will lose a Battleship or so, and you'll lose a Destroyer. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Crimson

October 23rd, 2002, 09:21 PM

Good way to show your troops you care http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Captain : Troopers your been asigned the USS Dead Men 36, Make sure your wills are sign.