Things in SEIV I never knew about.... [Archive]

PvK

January 31st, 2003, 09:38 PM

It often makes sense not to upgrade at each step, because it is expensive to rip out the old component and replace with a new one.

There are some components that aren't often worth upgrading, and some which I choose lower Versions of because they are cheaper.

One thing I recently learned was that there is a keyboard code for marking sectors as being enemy minefields. This can be used with the "don't enter minefields" setting to improve routing of traffic without repetetive micro-management. It can be very helpful when playing with something like Fryon's quadrant mod, which has lots of damaging sectors which will otherwise get ships lost or stuck.

PvK

Fyron

January 31st, 2003, 09:42 PM

One thing I recently learned was that there is a keyboard code for marking sectors as being enemy minefields. This can be used with the "don't enter minefields" setting to improve routing of traffic without repetetive micro-management. It can be very helpful when playing with something like Fryon's quadrant mod, which has lots of damaging sectors which will otherwise get ships lost or stuck.Ships already avoid the damaging sectors on their own. Minefield markers are redundant. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

The only components that you should upgrade immediately are Combat Sensors and ECM (and probably Stealth and Scattering Armors too). Being a level behind in them makes a huge, massive difference.

Grandpa Kim

February 1st, 2003, 04:25 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />One thing I recently learned was that there is a keyboard code for marking sectors as being enemy minefields. This can be used with the "don't enter minefields" setting to improve routing of traffic without repetetive micro-management. It can be very helpful when playing with something like Fryon's quadrant mod, which has lots of damaging sectors which will otherwise get ships lost or stuck.Ships already avoid the damaging sectors on their own. Minefield markers are redundant. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif <hr /></blockquote>Yes, but with enough of those nasty asteroid fields, your ships could waste a lot of move points going around them. The best solution is to set a "bypass" waypoint.

Grandpa Kim

February 1st, 2003, 04:29 AM

(Boosting my post total http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

Javaslinger, I've been playing this game since it came out and I'm still learning things. That's probably the most rewarding thing about this game.

As for micro management: One of the things I like about SEIV and other "strategic" games is the micromangement... but that's just me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

couslee

February 1st, 2003, 04:47 AM

Me too Grandpa Kim. Micormanagement is just fine. Thats why I prefer finite resources. "I like it, I love, I want more of it".

One of the cool things I found out about (from the board here), is being able to right click on a system in the galaxy map and have a freeform note pad available. You can use it it for things specific to the sydtem, or general info (IE when an empire fell, enegy ship true damage resisance, grocery list, ect).

Fyron

February 1st, 2003, 08:17 AM

Originally posted by Grandpa Kim:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />One thing I recently learned was that there is a keyboard code for marking sectors as being enemy minefields. This can be used with the "don't enter minefields" setting to improve routing of traffic without repetetive micro-management. It can be very helpful when playing with something like Fryon's quadrant mod, which has lots of damaging sectors which will otherwise get ships lost or stuck.Ships already avoid the damaging sectors on their own. Minefield markers are redundant. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif <hr /></blockquote>Yes, but with enough of those nasty asteroid fields, your ships could waste a lot of move points going around them. The best solution is to set a "bypass" waypoint.<hr /></blockquote>And that is why I cut back on the damaging ones in FQM several Versions ago. I hardly ever see situations where a lot of movement is wasted going around walls of damaging asteroids any more.

PvK

February 1st, 2003, 09:34 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />One thing I recently learned was that there is a keyboard code for marking sectors as being enemy minefields. This can be used with the "don't enter minefields" setting to improve routing of traffic without repetetive micro-management. It can be very helpful when playing with something like Fryon's quadrant mod, which has lots of damaging sectors which will otherwise get ships lost or stuck.Ships already avoid the damaging sectors on their own. Minefield markers are redundant. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
...<hr /></blockquote>They're not redundant if you cleverly place them in certain non-damaging sectors, in order to herd ships the way you want them to go. For instance, if their natural path would send them diagonally towards a damaging sector, ships will randomly move one way or the other around it, which can be bad. By placing a minefield marker or more on the side you don't want them to go, you can get them to go the way you want.

PvK

Taera

February 1st, 2003, 09:48 AM

careful with quotest in quotes....

geoschmo

February 8th, 2003, 06:46 PM

I really wish I had known about this one before. Just figured it out today.

Situation: Large game. Lot's and lot's of available planets to colonize. Many systems explored. Building colony ships at lot's of planets. Trying to figure an efficent method of assigning colony ships to their destinations. Planets screen not so good because you see every planet that you don't have colonized. Even ones that you know your allies have colonized. Even ones that are in systems claimed by others that you don't want to send ships to right now. Even ones that are available but kind of far away that you want to leave for later.

Solution: Go to Empire Status screen, click systems to avoid button. This brings up a map. On the map click all the systems you DON'T want to consider for colonization right now. Then go back to the Planets screen and hit the "No sys to avoid" button near the bottom. Now the only planets in the list are in the systems you have not marked as ones to avoid.

Geoschmo

Ruatha

February 8th, 2003, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by geoschmo:
I really wish I had known about this one before. Just figured it out today.

Situation: Large game. Lot's and lot's of available planets to colonize. Many systems explored. Building colony ships at lot's of planets. Trying to figure an efficent method of assigning colony ships to their destinations. Planets screen not so good because you see every planet that you don't have colonized. Even ones that you know your allies have colonized. Even ones that are in systems claimed by others that you don't want to send ships to right now. Even ones that are available but kind of far away that you want to leave for later.

Solution: Go to Empire Status screen, click systems to avoid button. This brings up a map. On the map click all the systems you DON'T want to consider for colonization right now. Then go back to the Planets screen and hit the "No sys to avoid" button near the bottom. Now the only planets in the list are in the systems you have not marked as ones to avoid.

GeoschmoFantastic, This one I knew!.
Am in 19 player 250 planets games, it's invaluable!

minipol

February 8th, 2003, 07:22 PM

Originally posted by couslee:
One of the cool things I found out about (from the board here), is being able to right click on a system in the galaxy map and have a freeform note pad available. You can use it it for things specific to the sydtem, or general info (IE when an empire fell, enegy ship true damage resisance, grocery list, ect).Wow, didn't know this. Now this might come in handy. Now if there would be a task list in SEV that can send reminders after a period of time, that would be even cooler :-)

Ragnarok

February 8th, 2003, 07:44 PM

I found out how to do this as well in a solo game I'm playing against the Monsters. It is really awesome to be able to do that and it saves a boatload of time. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Urendi Maleldil

February 8th, 2003, 08:16 PM

Way points are useful, also you can set a destination waypoint from the build que of a planbet or spaceyard. That way all ships built at that location automatically go to that waypoint.

The "repeat orders" button is extremely valuable. I often use it with a planet's "repeat build" order to program a mine or sat layer to continually build up mines or sats at a warp point. Just remember to have cargo on board the ship and use "remote launch" and then "load cargo".

capnq

February 8th, 2003, 10:09 PM

Something I only discovered relatively recently:

Select a ship, planet, etc. Right-clicking the flag in the report window brings up that empire's info.

Grandpa Kim

February 9th, 2003, 06:20 AM

I played for years not knowing this and finally had my nose rubbed in it when I started playing PBW.

Did you know you could place more than one warp point in a sector? And they don't have to be on the edge of the system either? Boy did I feel foolish when I saw what everyone else was doing. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif

Fyron

February 9th, 2003, 07:03 AM

Originally posted by capnq:
Something I only discovered relatively recently:

Select a ship, planet, etc. Right-clicking the flag in the report window brings up that empire's info.That kind of stuff is generally only discovered by accident. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Gryphin

February 9th, 2003, 07:44 AM

In short, when in doubt, Right Click, you knever know what you will find.

Gryphin

February 13th, 2003, 02:15 AM

Watch out for Divide points evenly:
Start of game
Research Choose Apply Points Evenly
Select The Following to Study
Propulsion 1000
Stellar harnessing 1000
Applyed Reasearch 200,000
It will apply the same number of Research Points to each item in the que even if this number is higher than what is needed to "learn" it.

Remove the selction from Divide points evenly and it will then apply the points left to right filling each item with the right amount of Research Points utill it runs out.

Slick

February 15th, 2003, 08:59 PM

Here's a neat trick that I just learned. Probably lots of people knew about it.

I was always frustrated when I set up a new planet and I wanted to give it orders to build a spaceyard then build some ships. If you do with the normal "Build Queue" window, the queue won't let you add ships/bases to the queue until after you have the spaceyard built. So under normal circumstances you have to come back to the planet queue after the spaceyard is built to add your ships/bases.

But there is a way around this. First find a planet with a spaceyard and an empty queue. You can make custom queues using the "Fill Queue" button for ships/bases or whatever. Once the custom queue is memorized, go back to your new planet and now you can add the spaceyard using the normal method and also add ships using the custom "Fill Queue" button. This method lets you add ships/bases to a queue without a spaceyard (yet). Helps lower some of the micromanagement.

You probably get an error of some kind if you try this without sequencing the spaceyard before the ships. I haven't tried that since it obviously won't work.

Slick.

FadingSuns

February 18th, 2003, 04:18 PM

I just found out something that is probably incredibly obvious, but I'm hoping that someone here will give me a hand with it. Up to this point I've been creating a new race with unique characteristics every time I play. For the first time the other day I choose a race from the TDM-Modpack and noticed that the colinized planets that appeared in the system window showed letters to indicate what facilities were currently built. After experimenting around, I also found that some races had all planets, colonized or not, showing the planet name in the main system window.
I've torn the manual apart looking for a hotkey that will turn these lables on or off and haven't found a thing. Like I said, this is probably and obvious one, but does anyone know how I can flag planets to show what facilities are built or at least show the planet's name?

Wardad

February 18th, 2003, 04:29 PM

try Empire Status => Empire Options

dogscoff

February 18th, 2003, 04:40 PM

They're not redundant if you cleverly place them in certain non-damaging sectors, in order to herd ships the way you want them to go. For instance, if their natural path would send them diagonally towards a damaging sector, ships will randomly move one way or the other around it, which can be bad. By placing a minefield marker or more on the side you don't want them to go, you can get them to go the way you want.
Brilliant idea! You could use this to make your ships automatically pass through resupply depots that they would otherwise fly straight past! What key is it to mark a minefield?

EDIT: Don't worry, I found it in the manual- Ctrl T.

[ February 18, 2003, 14:44: Message edited by: dogscoff ]

geoschmo

February 18th, 2003, 05:03 PM

Originally posted by dogscoff:
Brilliant idea! You could use this to make your ships automatically pass through resupply depots that they would otherwise fly straight past! What key is it to mark a minefield?

EDIT: Don't worry, I found it in the manual- Ctrl T.Oh, now that is slick D. Very slick! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

You can set up trade routes through systems. Block off paths between warp points directing the ships to pass over certain planets. Very nice.

Geoschmo

dogscoff

February 18th, 2003, 05:14 PM

You can set up trade routes through systems. Block off paths between warp points directing the ships to pass over certain planets. Very nice.
I've bugged Malfador for a hard code Version of this before now, but it looks like it's no longer necessary. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

geoschmo

February 18th, 2003, 05:26 PM

Ok, well it may not work perfectly actually, so we still may need somewhat of a hard code change. It looks like you can't get your ships to move more than a space or two out off of their ideal path by doing this. Although I am only looking at their blue route lines. I haven't tried actually running the turn to see what happens to the ship. It's still very nice escpecially if you can put a resupply depot on a planet near the center of the system.

Geoschmo

dogscoff

February 18th, 2003, 05:58 PM

Ok, well it may not work perfectly actually, so we still may need somewhat of a hard code change. It looks like you can't get your ships to move more than a space or two out off of their ideal path by doing this.
How about if you built a "tunnel" of fake minefields, so there is only one path available from the warp point to the resupply depot? It seems like overkill but if you ever wanted to reach other parts of the system you could manually override the aVersion to minefields.

geoschmo

February 18th, 2003, 06:05 PM

Originally posted by dogscoff:
How about if you built a "tunnel" of fake minefields, so there is only one path available from the warp point to the resupply depot? It seems like overkill but if you ever wanted to reach other parts of the system you could manually override the aVersion to minefields.That's exactly what I was trying to do. The blue route lines were stopping though once I got to a certain point off of the ideal path. However, it may actually take the path I am wanting it to, it just might not be able to display it with the route lines.

dogscoff

February 18th, 2003, 06:17 PM

I have a feeling it will work anyway. Still, even if this straightens out those situations where the resupply depot is just one square from the normal route, this will be a worthwhile discovery. Well done PvK!

Slick

February 18th, 2003, 06:30 PM

Originally posted by geoschmo:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by dogscoff:
How about if you built a "tunnel" of fake minefields, so there is only one path available from the warp point to the resupply depot? It seems like overkill but if you ever wanted to reach other parts of the system you could manually override the aVersion to minefields.That's exactly what I was trying to do. The blue route lines were stopping though once I got to a certain point off of the ideal path. However, it may actually take the path I am wanting it to, it just might not be able to display it with the route lines.<hr /></blockquote>I have been using this for a while and it is better to place the minefields such that you "herd" the ships rather than make a tunnel. Just put enough minefileds so that the AI will go where you want. Example, if your planet R has a resupply facility and there are warp points (W) on the top and bottom of the sytem, place a few minefield markers (M) like this:

________________W

______________MMMMRMMMM

____________________W

The AI will go thru the R instead of going around. No need to get more complex.

Slick.

dogscoff

February 18th, 2003, 06:36 PM

you've been using this for a while and you never told any of us about it? AAAGGHH!!

Slick

February 18th, 2003, 10:41 PM

Originally posted by dogscoff:
you've been using this for a while and you never told any of us about it? AAAGGHH!!I thought I saw it in another thread a while back right here. I thought everyone saw it.

Gryphin

February 18th, 2003, 10:48 PM

If you try to capture a planet and your troops fail, the fleet glasses the planet. oooops
I'm sure this was mentioned in another thread more than once but it never sunk in. Masacured an entire Homeworld. Ought to throw the entire fleet in the brig.

raynfala

February 20th, 2003, 04:42 PM

Regarding use of minefield markers to guide ships:

I tried using this Last night. I made a line of minefield markers that spanned across the system, leaving an opening only at the resupply planet. But ships that were passing through that region would just head straight to the "wall" of markers, and then cancel their orders.

What am I missing here?

--Raynfala

PS: SE-IV 1.84 w/ TDM v3.2

Slick

February 20th, 2003, 05:48 PM

Originally posted by raynfala:
Regarding use of minefield markers to guide ships:

I tried using this Last night. I made a line of minefield markers that spanned across the system, leaving an opening only at the resupply planet. But ships that were passing through that region would just head straight to the "wall" of markers, and then cancel their orders.

What am I missing here?

--Raynfala

PS: SE-IV 1.84 w/ TDM v3.2I have had this happen too. In some configurations of warp points relative to planets, it just is beyond the AI go do the pathing right. The only thing I can suggest is to consider placement of your resupply facilities relative to pathing thru the systems so that the amount of deviation required from the "straight line" is minimized. Wow, that sounded like a math class! This is another example of a good place to improve the AI.

Slick.

Slick

February 20th, 2003, 05:48 PM

Anyone know how to capture an enemy planet that has no population on it? I can't figure this one out.

Slick.

PsychoTechFreak

February 20th, 2003, 05:50 PM

Originally posted by raynfala:
Regarding use of minefield markers to guide ships:

I tried using this Last night. I made a line of minefield markers that spanned across the system, leaving an opening only at the resupply planet. But ships that were passing through that region would just head straight to the "wall" of markers, and then cancel their orders.

What am I missing here?

--Raynfala

PS: SE-IV 1.84 w/ TDM v3.2Just a guess, but under your empire options is an entry about when your ships cancel orders, like "enemy in system, minefield encountered etc."

EDIT: I guess I am wrong, but you made me trying this nice idea tonight...

[ February 20, 2003, 15:57: Message edited by: PsychoTechFreak ]

Ragnarok

February 20th, 2003, 06:46 PM

Originally posted by Slick:
Anyone know how to capture an enemy planet that has no population on it? I can't figure this one out.

Slick.Drop troops on it. I just did a test and dropping troops on a unpopulated enemy planet takes the planet and makes it your own. Just make sure you bring population of your own to put on it.

Slick

February 20th, 2003, 07:24 PM

Originally posted by Ragnarok:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Slick:
Anyone know how to capture an enemy planet that has no population on it? I can't figure this one out.

Slick.Drop troops on it. I just did a test and dropping troops on a unpopulated enemy planet takes the planet and makes it your own. Just make sure you bring population of your own to put on it.<hr /></blockquote>I can't get it to work in simultaneous games. The fleet won't attack and the troop ship won't drop troops. The orders stay in the order queue and the same will happen on following turns. Did you try this in turn based or simultaneous?

Slick.

Ragnarok

February 20th, 2003, 07:38 PM

Originally posted by Slick:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ragnarok:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Slick:
Anyone know how to capture an enemy planet that has no population on it? I can't figure this one out.

Slick.Drop troops on it. I just did a test and dropping troops on a unpopulated enemy planet takes the planet and makes it your own. Just make sure you bring population of your own to put on it.<hr /></blockquote>I can't get it to work in simultaneous games. The fleet won't attack and the troop ship won't drop troops. The orders stay in the order queue and the same will happen on following turns. Did you try this in turn based or simultaneous?

Slick.<hr /></blockquote>Ooo, didn't even think about doing it in Simultaneous. It was turn bases that I managed to do it. I'll test it in simultaneous later today.

Slick

February 21st, 2003, 05:25 PM

Originally posted by Ragnarok:
Ooo, didn't even think about doing it in Simultaneous. It was turn bases that I managed to do it. I'll test it in simultaneous later today.Well, Rags, you gonna tell me what happened or you gonna keep me in suspense. You're killing me here. I sure would like to find a trick for doing this in simultaneous games.

Then again, it might not be possible...

Slick.

geoschmo

February 21st, 2003, 05:57 PM

You can't capture a planet with no pop in simultaneous turns. This is a bug we reported to Malfador a while back but the fix didn't make it in the Last patch.

Geoschmo

Ragnarok

February 21st, 2003, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by geoschmo:
You can't capture a planet with no pop in simultaneous turns. This is a bug we reported to Malfador a while back but the fix didn't make it in the Last patch.

GeoschmoI was going to say that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif
No, I just got busy Last night and wasn't able to run the tests. But good thing I didn't cause it would've been waste of my time. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Slick

February 21st, 2003, 08:04 PM

Originally posted by Ragnarok:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by geoschmo:
You can't capture a planet with no pop in simultaneous turns. This is a bug we reported to Malfador a while back but the fix didn't make it in the Last patch.

GeoschmoI was going to say that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif
No, I just got busy Last night and wasn't able to run the tests. But good thing I didn't cause it would've been waste of my time. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif <hr /></blockquote>Thanks for the effort. I was thinking that I was missing something obvious.

Slick.

Ruatha

February 21st, 2003, 09:46 PM

If you build facilities i e mineral mines, research centers and then depopulate the planet. Will it still produce resources?

If so, that would be a BIG bug!!

geoschmo

February 21st, 2003, 09:53 PM

Originally posted by Ruatha:
If you build facilities i e mineral mines, research centers and then depopulate the planet. Will it still produce resources?

If so, that would be a BIG bug!!No, it does not.

Greybeard

February 21st, 2003, 09:57 PM

Originally posted by geoschmo:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ruatha:
If you build facilities i e mineral mines, research centers and then depopulate the planet. Will it still produce resources?

If so, that would be a BIG bug!!No, it does not.<hr /></blockquote>However, you only need "1" population for it to produce. For small planets and moons, relocate your population to larger planets to obtain bonuses that are not possible on the smaller planets...Greybeard

MegaTrain

March 15th, 2003, 01:25 AM

Rather than make a new one, I thought I'd revive this old thread.

Things I learned in my Last PBW game (Devnull Mod, but I don't think that matters for any of these):

1 You can open multiple warp points in one sector, even on top of a planet, star, or asteroid (or sphereworld, for that matter)

2 If you put two Space Yard component on a ship, you get a single queue that can build with twice the speed. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

3 Replicant Centers (organic) are COOL! A single Level III Replicant Center gives every planet in the system 40M extra pop per turn!! (VERY nice if you populate every planet in the system with native-breathing population!)

4 Religious Talisman is NASTY! 100% hit rate is HUGE. At the end of a 130 turn game, the ships with Talisman could take out my best ships about 3 to 1. (Good thing I had 5x as many ships http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif )

5 Plague Ships are NASTY, too. Especially L5, when I had basically ignored that research area.

6 Never let your Counter Intelligence projects finish!!

7 You can give your ships fairly complex sets of orders, including Stellar Manipulation. Like this:
Move to Fenves Coordinates (3,4)
Open Warp Point
Move to Fenves Coordinates (9,9)

You can EVEN open a warp point, and send an attack fleet through ON THE SAME TURN IN SIMULTANEOUS. You can't give a "Warp" order for a location without a warp point, but if you simply give the fleet a "move to" order to the far-away system, IT WORKS!!

You just give your Warp Opener the orders to open the point, and then give the fleet the orders to "Move to" the far away system. The fleet will move a couple of squares toward an existing warp point to start its (normally) long journey, then it will notice the new warp point, turn around, and go through!!! The only thing you can't determine in advance is where in that other system the warp point will appear.

Unfortunately, I discovered this one AFTER the game was over. Opening a warp point normally gives people a 1 turn warning to muster their troops.

Atrocities

March 15th, 2003, 01:46 AM

I like to turn off the galaxy map grid. It give the big (small map on the lower right hand side) a more space feel.

1. Click the EMPIRE STATUS icon. (Crown)
2. Click on EMPIRE OPTIONS.
3. Scroll down to GALAXY DISPLAY
4. Uncheck Show Grid Lines.

Ruatha

March 15th, 2003, 09:16 AM

Originally posted by MegaTrain:

2 If you put two Space Yard component on a ship, you get a single queue that can build with twice the speed. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

7 You can give your ships fairly complex sets of orders, including Stellar Manipulation. Like this:
Move to Fenves Coordinates (3,4)
Open Warp Point
Move to Fenves Coordinates (9,9)
Are these only true in Devnull mod?
I belive in standard game you can't increase build speed by having more than one space yard? right?
Also in standard I'm not sure about opening worm holes, that might work. But the bad thing is that I can't use move to, close worm hole... As it then says, There is no worm hole at this sector if I'm not positioned at a wormhole when I enter the orders.

dumbluck

March 15th, 2003, 09:58 AM

P&N PBW also has the ability to make multiple SY planets.

Fyron

March 15th, 2003, 11:17 AM

Originally posted by dumbluck:
P&N PBW also has the ability to make multiple SY planets.So does Adamant Mod. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

4 Religious Talisman is NASTY! 100% hit rate is HUGE. At the end of a 130 turn game, the ships with Talisman could take out my best ships about 3 to 1. (Good thing I had 5x as many ships )
This is a big part of the reason why the Talisman has always been horribly unbalancing. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Nothing should ever give 100% to hit rate.

[ March 15, 2003, 09:23: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

MegaTrain

March 15th, 2003, 08:23 PM

Originally posted by Ruatha:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MegaTrain:

2 If you put two Space Yard component on a ship, you get a single queue that can build with twice the speed. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

7 You can give your ships fairly complex sets of orders, including Stellar Manipulation. Like this:
Move to Fenves Coordinates (3,4)
Open Warp Point
Move to Fenves Coordinates (9,9)
Are these only true in Devnull mod?
I belive in standard game you can't increase build speed by having more than one space yard? right?
Also in standard I'm not sure about opening worm holes, that might work. But the bad thing is that I can't use move to, close worm hole... As it then says, There is no worm hole at this sector if I'm not positioned at a wormhole when I enter the orders.<hr /></blockquote>You're right about the space yards. In the standard game, it tells you "Only 1 component allowed per ship".

Regarding the ship orders for stellar manipulation, it depends on the component.

You can't give orders to CLOSE a warp point unless you are on a warp point (although it doesn't have to be the one you want to close)

You CAN give it the orders to open a warp point, create a planet, or create a star from anywhere, even if you aren't on an asteroid or in a system where you can create a star. Obviously, if by the time it tries to execute the orders, its not on an asteroid, it can't create the planet.

I'm currently testing all the other stellar manipulation components to see which ones allow you to set orders to execute other places.

For example, can you warp into a black hole system and collapse it in the same turn? Does it depend on whether the ship was damaged going through the warp point?

I'll report back here what I find.

Phoenix-D

March 16th, 2003, 12:39 AM

"This is a big part of the reason why the Talisman has always been horribly unbalancing. Nothing should ever give 100% to hit rate."

It can if it was other things backing it up. Like being really frigging expensive. It's already 50kt in size..how about 50kt, 4000/4000/4000 cost? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Phoenix-D

raynfala

March 18th, 2003, 06:07 PM

Sorry if this is old news, but I hadn't realized this before, and I just had an epiphany Last night, and felt I needed to share (and and and and... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif )!

Let's say you've managed to max out the Applied Research tech. Now let's say you have just colonized a planet with, oh... let's say... 20 facility slots. Now let's say you want the planet to be dedicated to research, so you order up 20 Research III facilities (let's ignore Computer Complexes and such).

Guess what? Assuming that your planetary construction rate is 2000/2000/2000, you're missing out on 100,000 extra research points at a cost of only 15,000 extra minerals. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Why? Research III facilities cost 2500 minerals to build; you'll build one every other turn. In contrast, Research II facilities cost 2000 minerals; you'll build one each and every turn. By building a new research facility each turn instead of every other turn, you'll be accumulating more research points sooner. The extra 100 points of research generated by a level III facility (compared to a level II facility) does not justify the extra turn necessary to build the level III facility directly. You're better off building level II facilities more quickly, and then upgrading afterwards. This is where the extra 15,000kT of minerals come in: an extra 25,000kT to upgrade the 20 facilities (half of the level III facilities' cost), minus the 10,000kT saved by building cheaper facilities up front.

If your empire production can support the extra expenditure, you should go for it!!!

I just verified this on a spreadsheet this morning. Eeek, a spreadsheet!!! Does that mean I'm helping SEIV turn into MOO3? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

--Raynfala

Slick

March 18th, 2003, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by raynfala:
Sorry if this is old news, but I hadn't realized this before, and I just had an epiphany Last night, and felt I needed to share (and and and and... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif )!

Let's say you've managed to max out the Applied Research tech. Now let's say you have just colonized a planet with, oh... let's say... 20 facility slots. Now let's say you want the planet to be dedicated to research, so you order up 20 Research III facilities (let's ignore Computer Complexes and such).

Guess what? Assuming that your planetary construction rate is 2000/2000/2000, you're missing out on 100,000 extra research points at a cost of only 15,000 extra minerals. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Why? Research III facilities cost 2500 minerals to build; you'll build one every other turn. In contrast, Research II facilities cost 2000 minerals; you'll build one each and every turn. By building a new research facility each turn instead of every other turn, you'll be accumulating more research points sooner. The extra 100 points of research generated by a level III facility (compared to a level II facility) does not justify the extra turn necessary to build the level III facility directly. You're better off building level II facilities more quickly, and then upgrading afterwards. This is where the extra 15,000kT of minerals come in: an extra 25,000kT to upgrade the 20 facilities (half of the level III facilities' cost), minus the 10,000kT saved by building cheaper facilities up front.

If your empire production can support the extra expenditure, you should go for it!!!

I just verified this on a spreadsheet this morning. Eeek, a spreadsheet!!! Does that mean I'm helping SEIV turn into MOO3? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

--RaynfalaYup. This applies to all "level II" facilities like Mineral Miners, Intelligence centers, etc.

The most efficient way to build them is level II's (until you can build level III's in 1 turn due to population and happiness bonuses), leaving 2 slots open on larger worlds. After you build your level II's, then look at the build times for the appropriate facility to multiply the planet's output, system output and to upgrade. Do them in order of cheapest first. For research, you would build the Central Computer Complex, then the System Computer complex, then upgrade to level III's in that order. Better yet, build the system computer on another planet in parallel.

Slick.

p.s. I had to do the spreadsheet thing myself a few months ago to prove it to myself as well. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

kalthalior

March 18th, 2003, 08:03 PM

"I like to turn off the galaxy map grid. It give the big (small map on the lower right hand side) a more space feel."

I do this as well, and on the system map, I like to do the reverse and turn ON the grid to help me determine for far I can travel.

DirectorTsaarx

March 19th, 2003, 09:03 PM

(Note: both quotes edited to conserve space)
Originally posted by Slick:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by raynfala:
Research III facilities cost 2500 minerals to build; you'll build one every other turn. In contrast, Research II facilities cost 2000 minerals; you'll build one each and every turn. By building a new research facility each turn instead of every other turn, you'll be accumulating more research points sooner. The extra 100 points of research generated by a level III facility (compared to a level II facility) does not justify the extra turn necessary to build the level III facility directly. You're better off building level II facilities more quickly, and then upgrading afterwards. This is where the extra 15,000kT of minerals come in: an extra 25,000kT to upgrade the 20 facilities (half of the level III facilities' cost), minus the 10,000kT saved by building cheaper facilities up front.

I just verified this on a spreadsheet this morning. Eeek, a spreadsheet!!! Does that mean I'm helping SEIV turn into MOO3? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

--RaynfalaYup. This applies to all "level II" facilities like Mineral Miners, Intelligence centers, etc.

p.s. I had to do the spreadsheet thing myself a few months ago to prove it to myself as well. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif <hr /></blockquote>Don't feel bad about this; back in December 2000/January 2001 there was a whole thread dedicated to figuring out the required formula, and whether there was a break-even point where it was better to accept the 2-turn build times of level 3 facilities vs. building level 2 facilities and upgrading later. It was a bit more complicated when comparing mineral miner facility builds, because then the upgrade cost reduced the benefit of the extra production. But it turned out as Slick mentioned - no matter how many facilities are involved, it's better to spend 1 turn building a level 2 facility and upgrade later than to spend 2 turns building a level 3 facility.

Too bad that thread is lost to the sands of old servers...

Slick

March 20th, 2003, 03:17 AM

Originally posted by DirectorTsaarx:

Too bad that thread is lost to the sands of old servers...Here's the thread that I think you are talking about:

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=007178#000000

Had a hard time finding the thread, but I knew it was one I started. I never did come back to post my results, but they are here.

By the way, the unfortunate thing about this fact is that once you have level III of any facility, (min, org, rad, research, intel), you best not be upgrading all your facilities with the construction queue. This will update the level II's in the queues to III's, and this is NOT what you want.

Slick.

[ March 20, 2003, 01:24: Message edited by: Slick ]

Atrocities

March 20th, 2003, 04:02 AM

Things I did not know about SEIV.

1. That it was so horribly addictive
2. That I would become so involved with it as to make 25 ship sets.
3. That the community would be the way that it is.
4. That is would be well supported
5. That it would still be my Top played game after two years.
6. That the game would be so enjoyable to learn and talk about.
7. That the game would be easily modible.
8. That there would be so many mods for the game.
9. That it would kick MOO3's arse.
10. That it continuely draws new players who can not believe that such a game has existed for over two years.

These things were welcome surprises.

DirectorTsaarx

March 20th, 2003, 05:48 PM

Originally posted by Slick:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DirectorTsaarx:

Too bad that thread is lost to the sands of old servers...Here's the thread that I think you are talking about:

(Link deleted because it's causing serious formatting problems)

Had a hard time finding the thread, but I knew it was one I started. I never did come back to post my results, but they are here.

By the way, the unfortunate thing about this fact is that once you have level III of any facility, (min, org, rad, research, intel), you best not be upgrading all your facilities with the construction queue. This will update the level II's in the queues to III's, and this is NOT what you want.

Slick.<hr /></blockquote>Well, actually, here is the thread I was referring to:

LINK to thread discussing upgrading vs. straight build (http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=001336)

It took me a while to figure out which thread I wanted because the original thread was a different topic...

[ March 20, 2003, 15:52: Message edited by: DirectorTsaarx ]

Ward

March 20th, 2003, 08:51 PM

Customize your strategies as soon as possible and add them to "..._AI_strategies.txt" so that you don't have to make them each time you start a new game. They can be significantly improved.

Although crew's experience doesn't affect missiles to-hit chances(always 100%) it affects it's to-defend chances so it's a good idea to train them.

Ships not armed with direct-fire weapon(there are exeptions such as PD's) do not gain experience from battles.

[ March 25, 2003, 12:47: Message edited by: Ward ]

Gryphin

March 24th, 2003, 02:41 AM

When building something it applys the maximum quantity of Min / Org / Rad that it can each turn. Thus on the 2nd and 3rd turn of construction of a smaller ship it will not require Rads or Orgs.
This is signifigant if it looks like you will run out of Rads the next turn.

Krsqk

March 27th, 2003, 07:37 PM

If a ship has no weapons with higher damage than the emissive rating of the enemy ships, it will not attack. Just found that out while working on some modding.

Master Belisarius

March 27th, 2003, 07:45 PM

Originally posted by Ward:
Ships not armed with direct-fire weapon do not gain experience from battles.Agree, except for the "Ramming Ships".
Yea, the ramming ships will gain experience when destroy other ships using their hulls...

Fyron

March 27th, 2003, 08:54 PM

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
"This is a big part of the reason why the Talisman has always been horribly unbalancing. Nothing should ever give 100% to hit rate."

It can if it was other things backing it up. Like being really frigging expensive. It's already 50kt in size..how about 50kt, 4000/4000/4000 cost? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Phoenix-DIt should still not be 100% guaranteed to hit. There should always be a chance of failure.

Originally posted by Gryphin:
When building something it applys the maximum quantity of Min / Org / Rad that it can each turn. Thus on the 2nd and 3rd turn of construction of a smaller ship it will not require Rads or Orgs.
This is signifigant if it looks like you will run out of Rads the next turn.This is why you stack the build orders so that only some SYs are using orgs and rads on a turn. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Originally posted by Master Belisarius:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ward:
Ships not armed with direct-fire weapon do not gain experience from battles.Agree, except for the "Ramming Ships".
Yea, the ramming ships will gain experience when destroy other ships using their hulls...<hr /></blockquote>The reason that missile ships do not gain experience is that the ships themselves do not do any damage or cause any deaths. The missile units are what do the damage when they hit the enemy ships. The game technically assigns an experience point to the missile (or it would if units could gain experience) for the kill. This is the same as carriers not gaining experience for the kills made by the fighters they launch. Ramming ships can gain experience because it is the ship itself that does the damage.

[ March 27, 2003, 18:59: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Slynky

March 27th, 2003, 09:53 PM

OK, another dumb question http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Am I to understand there is a way to put ships (for example) in a queue and have leftover "construction points" from the first ship in the queue to pass to the second ship? Example: Ship 1 takes 2 turns to build but on the second turn, the construction queue is really only adding on the Last (for instance) 20% of the ship. If there is another ship of the same size in the queue, will the remaining 80% construction points be applied on turn 2 to the second ship in the queue. So that after 3 full turns, you have 2 completed ships?

Fyron

March 27th, 2003, 10:26 PM

No. Construction rates represent the maximum number of resources of each type that can be put into building and object in each turn. They do not represent a pool of construction points. Any unused rate is lost.

Slynky

March 27th, 2003, 10:46 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
No. Construction rates represent the maximum number of resources of each type that can be put into building and object in each turn. They do not represent a pool of construction points. Any unused rate is lost.Well, though I bemoan the loss of "unsued" construction points, I'm glad to see I haven't been getting my butt whooped because I didn't know about the most advantageous way to get ships out of the queue http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif .

MegaTrain

March 28th, 2003, 12:09 AM

The most efficient way to make sure that your construction queues are going to be used to full capacity is to design your ships with the largest cost (typically minerals) just under a multiple of the build speed.

Lets say your spaceyards are building at 3000 per turn.
Good ship designs: 3000 (1 turn), 5900 (2 turns), 8950 (3 turns), etc
Bad ship designs: 3100 (2 turns), 6250 (3 turns), 9400 (4 turns).
I sometimes even designs variations of the same ship for different speed spaceyards.

Fyron

March 28th, 2003, 12:14 AM

Just remove a comp or two, then retrofit the ship after finished to add those comps back on.

Slynky

March 28th, 2003, 01:16 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Just remove a comp or two, then retrofit the ship after finished to add those comps back on.Well, designing ships to closely match SY rates makes sense. However, without looking up retro-fitting costs, doesn't that cost more in materials (retro-fitting) than had it been built straight out of the SY?

I realize if you have the resources to throw away, it's alright but...

Atrocities

March 28th, 2003, 01:39 AM

Retro is about economics. If you can aford it, do it. This is a viable alternative to races with weak production, but extra resources per turn.

Slynky

March 28th, 2003, 03:11 AM

Originally posted by Atrocities:
Retro is about economics. If you can aford it, do it. This is a viable alternative to races with weak production, but extra resources per turn.Well, that also makes sense. I guess that's another reason I get my *** kicked so often http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif .

Also, one of the reasons the game is so good!

dogscoff

March 28th, 2003, 12:34 PM

you can get unused construction points to carry over into the next build by ordering multile units (ie one fighter takes one turn to build, but ten fighters of the same design might only need 8 or 9 turns at the same yard. YMMV)

I didn't know about ramming and experience, thanks.

Ward

March 28th, 2003, 01:42 PM

Later in the game when you fight ships with shield depleters consider investing in Armor. It really pays off.

Yesterday, I did some experiments with hi-tech ships. I found out that ships with armor perform much better than those with shields, when facing enemy with shield depleters(this is logical, after all, but it didn't strike me before). I admit I didn't consider weapons that penetrate armor(this inludes almost exclusively crystaline tech tree, Null space weapons are too exppensive to be effective) and you will have to repair very often but this way your ships will survive longer and thus will have more experience. The point is that ships with shield depleters will have less damage potential against you. Another advantage is mineral cost. While a "standard" dreadnought with anti-proton beams costs about 27000 minerals, an armor-protected ship costs about 21000 minerals.
BTW: You can add one shield generator and one shield regenerator. Just in case there are some boarding fanatics. :-)

Ward

March 28th, 2003, 03:10 PM

Yes, that's true and that's why I proposed to give there shield regenerator. Anyway, if the enemy has the firepower to put down your shields in 1 turn(and on hi-tech ships he usually has) you are in trouble anyway. With armor you have at least something to protect you... And if you know that the enemy has those weapons, just retrofit one wepon to repulser beam and most problems are gone.

oleg

March 28th, 2003, 03:18 PM

Originally posted by Ward:
.. And if you know that the enemy has those weapons, just retrofit one wepon to repulser beam and most problems are gone.But only if you have bigger ships ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
That' not always an option.

Ward

March 28th, 2003, 03:29 PM

I was speaking about dreadnoughts. That's surely a BIG ship. O.K. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif There are Baseships, but those you can outmaneuver and save the space for weapons.

I did the experiment for 12 hours. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif I tried every logical combination and ship sizes BB-BS. For a long time I played with Shield- and Engine- and Weapon- damaging weapons(Including Null-space). Unfortunately it seems that the best weapon is Anti-proton beam alone. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif I don't like that result but it is what I have seen. (As I mentioned before I didn't count any special techs in.)

[ March 28, 2003, 13:30: Message edited by: Ward ]

raynfala

March 28th, 2003, 08:25 PM

Originally posted by Atrocities:
Retro is about economics. If you can aford it, do it. This is a viable alternative to races with weak production, but extra resources per turn.The downside to retrofitting is that you lose precious time waiting for those ships to be repaired. This is the potential drawback to Fyron's suggestion of building without a couple of components, and then retrofitting them in after completion. If your tinkering only gets your ship built one turn faster, then your efforts have been wasted; you're going to have to wait another turn for the retrofitted ship to be repaired. You could have some other ship with repair facilities escort it to the front lines. But does anybody really want to micromanage this much? (you in the back: sit down... we all see you waving your hand http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif )

In my current game, I've been doing a lot of retrofitting... mostly retrofitting of ships that I captured through Intel (yeah, yeah, I know...). At your retrofitting sites, it helps a lot to have ships/bases bristling with repair bays. Otherwise, your retrofitting takes way too long to be of use, and it hampers repairs on battleworn ships returning from the front lines.

If you retrofit a lot, invest in Repair tech. Repair-intensive bases should be sufficient to assist planet-based shipyards, but if you want to go mobile, you'll need some Ship Construction tech to efficiently cart around multiple repair bays.

Of course, when you go mobile, you can't retrofit "one-timer" components, such as Emergency Propulsion, planet building/destroying items, etc. You need a planet-based facility for that.

--Raynfala

Fyron

March 28th, 2003, 09:15 PM

raynfala:
You get more ships in a given time frame. It is not about the individual ship, but about overall production.

Also, the ships can save time training in the long run if they get built at a planet with training facilities.

Stone Mill

March 28th, 2003, 09:28 PM

Originally posted by Raynfala:

If your tinkering only gets your ship built one turn faster, then your efforts have been wasted; you're going to have to wait another turn for the retrofitted ship to be repaired. You could have some other ship with repair facilities escort it to the front lines. But does anybody really want to micromanage this much? (you in the back: sit down... we all see you waving your hand )
waves hand

This is absolutely essential, especially in a heated contest. You want to bring your latest designs to bear against a tough foe. Sitting in wait increases the effective strike time against your foe, and reduces the potential impact/advantage of imposing your new tech (i.e. by the time you get to combat your combat has caught up).

Always fly with repair ships and repair your retrofits on the fly. And don't waste time retrofitting engines, only upgrade critical components... unless you really have a lot of time and minerals on your hands.

Suicide Junkie

March 29th, 2003, 12:39 AM

If your tinkering only gets your ship built one turn faster, then your efforts have been wasted; you're going to have to wait another turn for the retrofitted ship to be repaired. Much as the others have said.
Using an example:
- Not using retrofits
Turn 2: One ship finished
Turn 4: Two ships finished
...
Turn 10: Five ships finished

- Using retrofits
Turn 1: One ship retrofitting
Turn 2: One ship finished, one ship retrofitting.
Turn 3: Two ships finished, one ship retrofitting.
...
Turn 10: Nine ships finished, one ship retrofitting.

You see the difference now? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif