Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Kwok
Quote:
|
Yet they have the tech lead since the first few turns, simply they have 11% better planets
|
The Abbidon use the Advanced Storage Techniques trait, which gives them 20% more facility space. Fyron\'s generally balanced out the distribution of facility space amongst planet types. |
Generally speaking, it pretty much ****** it up - and I ran test games and counted the planets, and found the following not only theoretically, but actually true:
While ice/rock dwellers have "Oyxgen", "None", "Methane", "Hydrogen" and "Carb.Diox." as atmospheres to chose from (and each one has a 20% probability of occurence), there are no gas giants of "none" atmosphere type, giving each other type a 25% of occurence.
Therefore, for the first 2 race types 20% of planets are breathable, while for gas giant dwellers 25% of planets are breathable.
This gives them a -theoretical- planet size advantage of 11%, or even 28% with "Advanced Storage Techniques".
This could have been accounted for by making gas giant smaller on average, but that would not only be counter-intuitive, it doesn't not seem to be the case anyway. Though I must admit that planet sizes seem highly random, and counting 961 planets does not result in sufficiently "obvious" results.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Kwok
Quote:
|
Sorry to disappoint you here, but it doesn't [use Cargo Transports / Colony Ships to transport population]
|
It surely does, but the prerequisite is that the ships have to be idle (ie excess Colony Ships) or if there is a zero population planet (hijack Cargo Transport). |
I didn't say the AI isn't able to, but I said I never found it actually
doing so, most likely simpy because it never let's the ships in question go idle ...
small missile weapons
The numbers on the Small Rocket Pods and Small Anti-Matter Missiles are off; while all other small weapons (ok, those I checked ..) are 10% size, 20% damage of their bigger counterparts, this is not true for the missiles. SAMM has double size, and damage numbers are way too high, especially compared to special weapons like bombs and kamikaze warheads, which are thoroughly outclassed and useless therefore.
Furthermore, SRPs are classed as "direct fire", what is a bug obviously carried over from Vanilla ...
weapon mounts
Is is possible for a weapon mount to
- add a negative "to-hit" modifier, while keeping a positive "to-hit-at-range" modifier, to simulate the biggers guns being harder to aim at small targets, but the bigger shell/beam being more "steady" ?
- take away a target type from the list; no more shooting of extra heavy main guns at flimsy fighters?
fighter balance
I found fighters seriously lacking, unless one uses the ridiculously overpowered SRPs ... and that with the 100% boosted damage in BM
But this doesn't seem so much a damage thing but a survivability thing: even small fighters (max def bonus) with up-to-date ECM are easily shot down at max range by main guns it seems - and against those all shields and armors you can slap on a fighter are quite useless.
Therefore, a big def bonus seem to be in order, combined with an att bonus on PD, which in turns makes the seeker needing rebalancing as well ...
Could understand if you're not that happy with this proposition
edit: PS: Tried to fix those small weapons issues myself, but I'm running into trouble with that damage-over-range thingy ... . If I get it working, I'll post the lines from components.txt here.