thank you, Mzuz. i was reluctant to re-argue this point. if he can't even grasp the difference between "there," "their," and "they're," i suspect the subtler points of ethics (such as the difference between sentience and conscience) might elude him entirely. Maybe his style of writing is a subtle dig at an overly-staid and rules-bound society? Like someone who disdains proper capitalization, for instance.<
Well, I have played game where if they did have an orbital fleet manager I would probably be toast. These are games when I'm seriously behind in military tech but have to conduct an offensive anyway. It's painful enough tackling one Yor ship with 100 missile attack. Going after 6 at once I would just be tossing my fleets away. I'd say that if you would rather attack a full fleet of AI ships than individually, then you are going to win regardless of whether they are fleeted or not.
Is there a consenus that defence works not as specified, that it is better than stated in the manual? Well, there's no doubt in my mind that it's not working as advertised. I think that anyone who saw the same test case would be convinced as well.
I think I may have to try and test this on a lower difficulty level or with a faster rate of research. Don't bother. Off-type defences are broken (see my above post). If you want, I can email you a save game that makes this absolutely clear. Edit: Also, the starbases only get one attack, just like in DL. It's like Stardock is trying to make them useless but failed due to off-type defences <img src="http://images.stardock.com/gc2/T_DL/s
But it is almost impossible to get past medium espionage level with more than one AI. I've found it fairly easy to get to advanced espionage level with multiple opponents. However, I do it in serial fashion. Drop all of your spies on one AI. Playing as the Krynn, that would be 15-30, depending on the stage of the game. When I dropped 30 spies on the Drengin, I got to advanced espionage level in about 5 weeks. Playing as other ra
I'm also experiencing this at some point in several games. It seems as though things are going fine until at some point the memory use just explodes. In my current game, this happened fairly early in the game. Turning down the graphics doesn't resolve the problem. Looking at it in detail, it doesn't seem to be a consistent slowdown in the graphics. Animations run fine for a second, then stop for half a second, then fine for another half second, brief pause, and so on. It's not at all li
Goldie, it looks as though your proposed system is more complicated than I had realized. It may be good, but I think it's a little too much book-keeping to fit in the theme of GC2 combat.
I don't know how it is, but I think it should be: That could also work. Currently, off-type defences don't seem to be fully depleted, so in your first example it seems to go to 132/11/11 instead of 132/0/11 after the first attack.
The 1hp thing is awkward and needs changing. Amen.
so, what do you say? It may work as you describe. It's still a bug because it has the effect of making defences almost as powerful against off-type as on-type attacks. Or at least, Brad doesn't expect it to work that way, so it's a bug.
I i'm beginning to think this is a real bug and not all in our heads Oh it is absolutely real. If the system were working in any reasonable way, the beam defence ship could expect to win fewer than one in a million of those fights. Instead, it won 8 out of 9.
The devs have repeatedly stated that the AI can't tell the human from another AI player. I wonder what those AI deals look like. I wonder how the AI can make deals *at all*. I mean, if techA and techB are equally valued, it doesn't seem to want to part with techA for less than techB + 1000 BC. If the AI won't accept an unfair deal as the buyer, then it would never buy from an AI. If it *will* accept an unfa
I agree with abolishing the 1-hitpoint rule. I reported the healing bug a few weeks ago but it looks like it's still kicking around.
It is surely true if you have no luck. But I recall having read somewhere that a 0-100 roll will translate into a 25 - 100 roll if you have 25% in luck Weapons roll individually, so having luck would make a 0-10 roll into 2-10. I'm not sure if luck affects defenses, but if it did it wouldn't affect defences that much, except to make the 'trickle through' damage impossible.
The question is then...WHY did defense need buffed so profoundly...a size reduction AND a rating increase? Why did it need buffed at all? I wrote a whole bunch here, but then my browser had a problem, so I lost it. The short version is that the value of defense in the DA system is *very* dependent on ship size and fleet composition. So it makes it very hard to balance. People were finding that unless you coud reach the 'sup
Well, I may not put the "wrong" defense on a ship, but in theory you could go down only 1 path of defense, making it better and smaller, and probably be ok most of the time? Yes. If you have a ship with very high defence against, say, beams, the only things that are likely to hurt it are: 1. Fleets with more than twice it's shield rating in beam attack 2. Ships that individually have a high prop
One problem I've run up against is trying to kick start a new colony without buying the first factory. I have a total of 170mp across 4 planets and unless I set my total spending and social spend very high ( far too high for the empire as a whole ) then the new colony gets no social spend and the factory build time is never. Is there a strategy for this situaton or is the economy model far from ideal. First,
The obvious fix seems to be to degrade the square root value and then figure out how much of the theoretical value should be left after the hit... basically, off-type weapons will degrade defenses faster. The thing to watch for, though, is that players can't just stick a single off-type weapon on a ship to degrade the defense while the rest of the guns do the actual damage. The damage from the on-type weapons from ALL ships in the fleet would need to be appli
Looking at the comments in this thread, I decided to do a test of whether off-type defences are actually working properly. Based on the results of the test, I can say definitively that they are not. I created a scenario where a huge ship with a mass-driver attack of 199 attacks a huge ship with 14 beam attack and a beam defence of 345. Since the second ship's defence against mass-drivers is only 18, the mass-driver ship should completely walk-over the beam defence ship, with a reasonabl
Off-type Defences are broken. I created a scenario where a huge ship with 199 mass-driver attack and 84 hitpoints attacks a ship with 14 beam attack, 345 beam-defence and 92 hitpoints. floor(sqrt(345)) = 18. A ship with 199 attack can expect to do about 100 damage per round, or around 82 damage through the shields. The mass-driver ship should mostly kill the defender in one round, requiring at most two rounds to finish it off. In contrast, the beam ship could only expect to do
Well, I read the whole thread, and from what I saw, there's another point missing. Maybe it's not this way anymore, I just bought the Gold edition this week, so I haven't really played much. yet, great game though. However, in the manual, it says that for defense, you have to roll the value. It seems like everyone so far has been assuming that you always get full value for the defense. The reason we often ass
Looking back, most of my experiences of Drengin domination were in DL. In DA, they can do well, but it does seem that they have too high an opinion of their strength and are increasingly burdened by a bunch of useless corvettes.
If there is a problem with off-type defenses not degrading properly, it's not happening consistently. In my last game my ~200 beam defence huge ships were getting damaged quite handily by Drengin missile frigates.
Since everything depends on economy in the long run, is it possible to play without inital bonus in economy? I think the economic bonuses are very useful, and I generally pick then now that I'm playing higher difficulty levels, but I played lots of games of DL without economic bonuses and I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be too hard to win at painful. My current game is masochistic huge without tech trading, so they have some pretty serious built-in
In most games I've played, if the Terrans have a reasonable start, they are a serious threat. The Terrans and the Drengin seem to be the strongest from my point of view.
