New user, new(?) questions |
Hi, I've been lurking a bit, but I figured I'd join and ask some questions etc. that have bothered my mind. Any answers would be appreciated. (All are based on stock game)
Bolt weapons
1) On some games, I've noticed bolt weapons to have clearly better accuracy then they should against targets that stand still, or are on direct approach vector (head straight towards).
The shots deviate, as if they were supposed to miss, but still hit the target. Are bolt weapons supposed to have some sort of "second chance to hit", with anything colliding with the bolt taking a hit? It seems to work like that.
2) As a trial, I edited a long range bolt weapon that had a really high rate of fire. (reload time 0.1 second, just wanted to see how it looks like). The bolt seems to have 3 possible "headings": one straight to the target(which on a fast moving targets causes the bolt to curve), one below, one above. The gun created a three "lines, one heading to the target, one above it and one below. I know it would probably be of little use, but would there be a possibility to get the missed shots on bolts to scatter? (randomly offset the x and y aimpoint) This would create a bigger deviation, and could also be used to present area of effect damage by some modders (I understand AoE damage is not planned for now). I assume the "bolt shot" object contains it's target information, so randomization would only be needed when the shot is fired, and depending on how the heading is set, this might be quite easy edit. Can this be done by the modder in the gun properties (I didn't find anything indicating it could be done, but might have missed it)
Seeker weapons
1) Seeker weapons seem to ignore the "% damage targeted" rule of targets. If you have a strategy where the first targeting priority is damage related it reduces the overkill on bolts and beams, but all seekers seem to still be fired on same target, so the seeker damage capacity is not taken into consideration(I guess because it can be shot down so is unreliable). This can lead to serious overkill with seekers. Can seeker damage be easily counted to the damage? I'd like the idea of using fleets of missile ships that split their fire and not fire all seekers on one target, and then overkill it by factor of 10. Other option would be letting seekers re-target if the original target is destroyed.
Beam weapons
Beams seem to also have the same hit-miss above-miss below effect as bolts. Could beam misses also be scattered? I guess that would happen automatically, if bolts get the target change. It's a small thing, so not very high on priority, but could be nice spice up.
Enemy designs
Would it be possible to add a filther to design view of "enemy designs" (and units) which would be based on time (since the design has a note on when it was made)? For example, filther "before date" and "after date" would be good to find the latest enemy cruiser from a group of 30 almost identical names, when you want to check what they have. Even arranging them date wise would be nice. Is there a way to do this currently, and if not is it possible to add such feature?
Own designs
I've noticed a obsolete problem with the treaties: I have a treaty about design sharing with empire A, who has same treaty with empire B, who has the same treaty with me.
When my design gets obsolete, one or both of my allies send me designs of "new enemy ships" they have seen, my obsolete ones. So I et neports evey now and then telling me the designs of my old ships. I'm not sure if all three empires are required for this to happen, or if it also happens between you and one empire.
PD weapons. (collection of PD related things)
Order "hold fire" also stops PD weapons from firing, while "auto targeting" opens fire on all weapons(manual combat mainly). If you wish to not use the "main weapons" (like on planet attack, or ship capture), but still want to keep PD firing on any seekers they launch, you have to some how trick the main weapons (target them to another target that is far outside range or something similar). WOuld it be possible to enable some sort of command for "PD fire only"?
PD weapons seem to targeting seems to work pretty well on later versions, one problem i have found is that if the ship has multiple PD weapons, only one will target each seeker. This is good, until the one firing at seeker misses. Then the seeker hits into the ship/planet before PD will reload (unless using PD blaster), while other PD weapons stand there waiting. Would it be possible to do the following: If PD is firing a seeker, after it has fired the targeting is cleared (so it will no longer target that seeker). The targeting is cleared at the start of reload time. This means the seeker is not targeted by any PD weapon, and if there are any other PD weapons free, one of them will lock on and fire at the seeker as if it was coming into range normally. I think this would improve the functionality of PD, and would not require much coding. (the relock on is already existing in a form of original lock on, all that is needed is the target clearing. for PD that has fired and missed).
PD missiles suffer from the seeker overkill problem: All PD missiles are fired on same target, so it will not be very effective form of PD.
That's most of my game questions (for now)
For modding, I'd like to know these things:
Is there some manuals of the commands and functions? I tried to lok around, but didn't see anything. (I have the European version of the game)
Is it possible to make a facility that would increase the scrapping efficiency of one type of unit only? Like only increase Drone scrapping efficiency? If it is possible, how?
And last, have you ever considered holding a AI competition?
Each player would make a AI empire, then they would be set to a game(random conditions) fighting against each others. Maybe few runs with different set ups, and winners would get a prize (and the winner empires could be put up for download. This could improve AI, and make AI:s very different.
Well, that's all for now. Thanks in advance for any answers.
Re: New user, new(?) questions
I know ttd% works with seekers. And hits & misses can't be judged by the graphics displayed. The weapon can show a miss and still hit & vice versa.
I'd be interested in AI competitions, but I wouldn't be very good at it.
I thought 1.44 fixed the reports you get about your own designs, but maybe not in that situation. Used to be you could be in a treaty with a single AI and get these reports sometimes, so it has improved.
The filter you suggest is a good idea. I think I've seen it before, but I'm not sure. You might look through the "pending features" section, and bring it up if it hasn't been mentioned.
http://www.spaceempires5.com/en-US/project/issues/SE5?categories=feature
Your PD problem is unique. Everyone else has the problem of all PD's targeting the same seeker/fighter/etc. Just like your PD missile problem. Most of us would love to trade problems with you there.
There are a couple of pdf files on the disk. They tell all sorts of info for modding. I've never done any of it. The SEV wiki's where I think you might start.
http://wiki.spaceempires.net/index.php/Space_Empires_V
It is kind of hard to find things here. People (including myself at least twice) post in the wrong place, so it's not as organized as it could be.
Re: New user, new(?) questions
There might be a few too many questions to crunch through in one thread, making it too intimidating and causing people to pass over it.
Ship Scrap Value Modifier
Unit Scrap Value Modifier
Neither seem to provide any mechanism for specifying specific hull types.
There needs to be a good number of AIs available before it becomes practical though. Also, random game conditions aren't very good; each AI should get an equal starting position to remove random variables from the equation. Otherwise, there is always doubt as to whether or not one AI is really better than another. Multiple trials help, but you should still try to control variables.
Re: New user, new(?) questions
Note that what you *see* in combat and what actually happens is not necessarily the same thing. A missile may appear to pass through a target's Point Defense and explode, but without actually doing any damage, etc.
As far as I know, the speed and direction of the target doesn't have any impact at all on the chance to hit it with bolt-weapons. What matters is the attack rating of the attacker, the defense rating of the defender, the distance to the target and the die-roll.
That said, I have encountered bugs where a bunch of enemy ships couldn't hit me for 5 minutes straight, even though I should have been dead within 10 seconds, because I was moving my ship around strangely. Thus a single frigate took out 5+ nearly identical ones. Definitely isn't supposed to be like that though, and I couldn't reproduce it.
Re: New user, new(?) questions
As a matter of fact, Mesons are about twice as accurate in BM, but you're talking stock.
I'm having a little trouble following this due to your use of the term 'bolt'. Mesons = bolts, if I understand correctly. Earlier I was thinking you meant DUCs.
I've never played max-tech, and don't plan to do so. But that doesn't matter too much.
I am curious, since APBs inflict more damage per shot and that should help them kill quicker, in spite of the Mesons' higher rate-of-fire.
I'm also a little intrigued about the undocumented defensive benefits when shots come from the side. Such a system would be reasonable for moving ships, at least. If it exists, I wouldn't object to it (unless it's too extreme); but it would need to be acknowledged.
Re: New user, new(?) questions
I couldn't reproduce your problem exactly( perhaps you can share a savegame so we'll at least get identical designs ? ), but there's a few things you might not have considered.
First, remember that fighters also get +52% attack bonus( I'm assuming we're both talking about stock game, since nothing else's been mentioned ), even without any components. The smallest fighter type( highest defense bonus ) with the best ECM equipped gets a total of 143% defense bonus. Since the other fighters will have a minimum of 52% atack bonus, this puts the defense down to 91%, giving us a 9% chance to hit at point-blank range( Range 0-10 ).
Then remember that the Anti-Proton Beam has got longer range than the Meson Blaster( twice as long ); thus there's the possibility that the AntiProton Beam is taking more shots at longer range, i.e. 1% chance to-hit shots, while the Meson Blaster with shorter maximum range will more often take advantage of the 9% chance to hit at 0-10 range.
Re: New user, new(?) questions
Re: New user, new(?) questions
Sorry, must've overlooked the ship part.
Alright then, I created two ships with nothing but required components and a weapon. One with APB and one with Meson Blaster. I then created a fighter design with shield depleters and 140% defense rating, so we should be down to 1% to-hit chance for the ships.
In the first test, strategic combat at 32x, the APB ship's combat lasted for 6.30 minutes before ending, the ship took out 1 out of 5 fighters. The MB ship's combat lasted for 8'ish minutes, it took out 2 out of 5 fighters.
Second time APB ship took out no fighters before combat ended. Neither did the Meson Blaster ship.
Third time, using 8x tactical combat, APB ship took out 1 fighter out of 5, MB ship took out 2.
Fourth time APB ship took out 1, MB took out 0.
Fifth time both of them took out 1 each.
So this doesn't appear to be a problem over here. You are using unmodified stock, right? From previous experience I have seen that changing around with fire rates and such can bring out some odd effects in the combat engine.
Re: New user, new(?) questions
Version 1.20? O_O Better get the latest patch, 1.44.

Re: New user, new(?) questions
What do you mean by "bolt" weapons, anyway?




Re: New user, new(?) questions
I can't answer any of the game modding type questions as I'm a bit of a noob here.
But on the question of AI competitions - that sounds cool - I liked the idea of Core Wars (it's a long time back, try Google)...