Combat Logic

Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

I need some players to take a look at the new combat code and make
comments about the new system.

Fighter wings have a more agressive behavior.

The older ship logic has been restored.

I no longer have access to the vgaplanet.com web site using FTP so I
placed it up on my wifes iDisk account:

You can download it from this link:

http://homepage.mac.com/ti2gr/.Public/host190.exe

Tim
52 answers Last reply
More about combat logic
  1. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Honestly it is a joke (and no that is not because of the date of the
    new host).
    IE. Combat is still aborted too early - sometimes wings do seem to
    disappear from the middle of the vcr, without being shutdown.
    Beam and missle range of wings seem to be screwed up.
    To name a few things.

    And then it is good that you do not or can not upload that host onto
    your side.
    I would not recommend to do so neither with this or any other new host,
    which tests out the new combat code, untill it did get aproofed by the
    community.

    And then you should also try to update your help files concerning
    combat.

    cocomax wrote:
    > I need some players to take a look at the new combat code and make
    > comments about the new system.
    >
    > Fighter wings have a more agressive behavior.
    >
    > The older ship logic has been restored.
    >
    > I no longer have access to the vgaplanet.com web site using FTP so I
    > placed it up on my wifes iDisk account:
    >
    > You can download it from this link:
    >
    > http://homepage.mac.com/ti2gr/.Public/host190.exe
    >
    > Tim
  2. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    What's the problem with the web site ?
    I hope it is a temporary one (?)

    Lordfire


    "cocomax" <cocomax@aol.com> wrote in message
    news:1112894060.602975.309350@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    >I need some players to take a look at the new combat code and make
    > comments about the new system.
    >
    > Fighter wings have a more agressive behavior.
    >
    > The older ship logic has been restored.
    >
    > I no longer have access to the vgaplanet.com web site using FTP so I
    > placed it up on my wifes iDisk account:
    >
    > You can download it from this link:
    >
    > http://homepage.mac.com/ti2gr/.Public/host190.exe
    >
    > Tim
    >
  3. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Ok so some things may not b as u like, but is the combat better then
    current or is it that u wish we continue using current combat logic
    with no fixes...

    Is the new logic better then current and also any sort of voteing would
    not b true to the actual way combat was meant to b..ie.. those would
    vote on specific quirks that they like and disaprove of logic mods
    which disadvantage their desired race???..ie maybe fighter weapon
    range...and any sort of limitations on fighter combat time in the VCR.

    I would like my ships to actually stop acting like high speed circuit
    races myself...seems long distance weaponed ships are having a field
    day at present.

    Cheers.
    Lee.


    Nameless wrote:
    > Honestly it is a joke (and no that is not because of the date of the
    > new host).
    > IE. Combat is still aborted too early - sometimes wings do seem to
    > disappear from the middle of the vcr, without being shutdown.
    > Beam and missle range of wings seem to be screwed up.
    > To name a few things.
    >
    > And then it is good that you do not or can not upload that host onto
    > your side.
    > I would not recommend to do so neither with this or any other new
    host,
    > which tests out the new combat code, untill it did get aproofed by
    the
    > community.
    >
    > And then you should also try to update your help files concerning
    > combat.
    >
    > cocomax wrote:
    > > I need some players to take a look at the new combat code and make
    > > comments about the new system.
    > >
    > > Fighter wings have a more agressive behavior.
    > >
    > > The older ship logic has been restored.
    > >
    > > I no longer have access to the vgaplanet.com web site using FTP so
    I
    > > placed it up on my wifes iDisk account:
    > >
    > > You can download it from this link:
    > >
    > > http://homepage.mac.com/ti2gr/.Public/host190.exe
    > >
    > > Tim
  4. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    The new host revision 190 removes the ships circling together in a
    fixed ring.

    The avoid base checks are gone, ships now track targets like they used
    to in older hosts.

    If your ship is set to NOT attack the planet below, the base can not
    fire ion cannons at you.

    If your fighter wing is not set for ground attack the AAA guns can not
    fire at you, even if you are right over the planet.

    Fighters aggressingly jump right on top of their targets and blast away
    like crazy.

    Tim
  5. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    I just tested a combat Ships vs. FWs which was won big for the ships
    before the change is now barely won -> Fighters got much stronger! This
    is due to the fact that they really jump on top of the ships, giving
    them no chance to fire at the fighters while they are approaching.

    I agree that the FWs need to be more focused on their targets, but why
    do they have to jump?! Can't they approach normally? Before they were
    flying aroud in circles, seemingly more or less firing on ships which
    just happened to cross their path. If they now have a target I would
    say that is enough, they don't need to get the first volley for free!

    One would also have to look at the AF ETs, especially the AF-Computer
    may loose some of his power, as the first shot only is on long range -
    and fighters are jumping on the ships now. This removes the advantage
    to reduce their numbers before the FWs get their first shot out.

    >From the first quick peek I would say the FW part is better, but the
    jumping needs to be removed!
  6. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Oh there are more features in this new combat code.
    In one test I did set up, the 100 enemy Lokis were not able to shoot
    down a single type 3 Cent fighter in a mixed wing (2 wings: 5000 type-1
    and 100 type-3), only about 900 type-1s (together) - seems a little bit
    strange, especially considering that there were 5 vcrs.
    The visible combat area is only a part of the combat area.
    And comparing the little Loki vs Wing scenario with an older one from
    2003,
    the one from 2003 was still preferable - oh not because the Lokis did
    perform better at that time, but because the wings were at that time
    able to kill all enemy Lokis within one turn, they still have the
    firepower (the firepower is better now), they are just leaving the
    combat too early.


    cocomax wrote:
    > The new host revision 190 removes the ships circling together in a
    > fixed ring.
    >
    > The avoid base checks are gone, ships now track targets like they
    used
    > to in older hosts.
    >
    > If your ship is set to NOT attack the planet below, the base can not
    > fire ion cannons at you.
    >
    > If your fighter wing is not set for ground attack the AAA guns can
    not
    > fire at you, even if you are right over the planet.
    >
    > Fighters aggressingly jump right on top of their targets and blast
    away
    > like crazy.
    >
    > Tim
  7. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Additionally the base now gets damaged from orbital bombardement (at
    least from fighters) even in case the base shield is avtive and not
    destroyed during the whole turn - at least according to log message.
    The base shield does not get a log message when destroyed.
  8. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Nameless wrote:
    > Additionally the base now gets damaged from orbital bombardement (at
    > least from fighters) even in case the base shield is avtive and not
    > destroyed during the whole turn - at least according to log message.
    > The base shield does not get a log message when destroyed.

    Especially funny considering, that all MMLs and Turbo Laser of the Loki
    did hit the wing! I have not yet looked at the mixed wing beam weapon
    stat.
    And both fighter types do have an evasive rating of at least 60.
    Somehow I have the feeling that this intended (or unintended) as an
    improved screening of the valuable fighter types.
  9. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    I just received my RST and one of the battles I (Lizards) were going to
    win against the Rebels. A 1500 tick battle and half way through none
    of my ships would not fire against the enemy. Granted this maybe
    correct because of personel losess, not enough power, or no ORD. Until
    the report or some means of telling the players why there not firing,
    the players will always feel cheated and declare a bug. More
    information is needed as to why some ships react the way the do.

    *** Starting ***
    4 Rushes
    1 Guardian

    16 Reptiles

    *** Midpoint ***
    3 Rushes
    2 wings

    15 Reptile

    *** End ***
    3 Rushes
    2 wings

    0 Reptiles

    Porthos
  10. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    You sure that the host 190 was used - a test host not accesible through
    Tims side. If not please comment on this in another thread, as it would
    only be confusing.

    nuffersp@yahoo.com wrote:
    > I just received my RST and one of the battles I (Lizards) were going
    to
    > win against the Rebels. A 1500 tick battle and half way through none
    > of my ships would not fire against the enemy. Granted this maybe
    > correct because of personel losess, not enough power, or no ORD.
    Until
    > the report or some means of telling the players why there not firing,
    > the players will always feel cheated and declare a bug. More
    > information is needed as to why some ships react the way the do.
    >
    > *** Starting ***
    > 4 Rushes
    > 1 Guardian
    >
    > 16 Reptiles
    >
    > *** Midpoint ***
    > 3 Rushes
    > 2 wings
    >
    > 15 Reptile
    >
    > *** End ***
    > 3 Rushes
    > 2 wings
    >
    > 0 Reptiles
    >
    > Porthos
  11. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Nameless wrote:
    > Nameless wrote:
    > > Additionally the base now gets damaged from orbital bombardement
    (at
    > > least from fighters) even in case the base shield is avtive and not
    > > destroyed during the whole turn - at least according to log
    message.
    > > The base shield does not get a log message when destroyed.
    >
    > Especially funny considering, that all MMLs and Turbo Laser of the
    Loki
    > did hit the wing! I have not yet looked at the mixed wing beam weapon
    > stat.
    > And both fighter types do have an evasive rating of at least 60.
    > Somehow I have the feeling that this intended (or unintended) as an
    > improved screening of the valuable fighter types.

    And then the part about the Point Defense systems is not a screening
    effect.
    In a battle between 1 k Ahir (2 wings a 1 k) against 80 Lokis (as in
    the instances before no exotic techs enabled), the loss was only
    56 lost Ahirs (in 5 vcrs) and all point defense weapons fired did hit.
    And for once all enemy ships were destroyed, eventhough ie. the first
    vcr did end around tic 470 and only a few Lokis were shoot down.
  12. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Oh well even 200 Lokis and all ets, which are helpful against fighters
    being enabled (all shield boosts, anti fighter,all attack and all
    evasive rating boosts etc.). And still the Fed will loose (78 ships did
    survive) - the ahirs (again 2 wings a 1 k Ahirs) lost in all 5 vcrs
    about 320 fighters!
    In the first of the 5 vcrs only 17 fighters were shoot down.
    And the Lokis were not all starting in one big lump.
    Do we now have a monster fighter!?
    Well I guess for the next test I will reduce the number of wings to 1.
  13. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Correction:
    Only were 100 Lokis and the attack enemy ship option was not enabled
    and the position of the Lokis was random (also in the Loki vs Cent
    Fighters the position in the test before was also with random position
    and attack enemy ships not enabled for the Lokis). The behaviour of the
    Lokis does improve when attack enemy ships is enabled and they all
    start in one place - in that case 100 Lokis will win against the Ahirs.

    If for the Lokis attack enemy ships is not enabled and position is
    random - it does not make a real difference if one or two enemy Ahir
    wings are present.
    (In the instance of 1 Ahir fighter wing (this time 2 k fighter) against
    this time really 200 Lokis - the first vcr did end with all Ahirs
    surviving and 3-4 Lokis been shoot down. Combat ended around tic 250.)

    Still the autohit of the lowest present fighter type is not good.

    Also really strange is that the fighter settings (of Cent fighters) do
    not seem
    to influence the length of the vcr, in contrast to the attack enemy
    ship settings of the Lokis - if the Lokis had attack enemy ships on
    combat did last 500 and something tics otherwise often only around 200
    and something.


    Nameless wrote:
    > Oh well even 200 Lokis and all ets, which are helpful against
    fighters
    > being enabled (all shield boosts, anti fighter,all attack and all
    > evasive rating boosts etc.). And still the Fed will loose (78 ships
    did
    > survive) - the ahirs (again 2 wings a 1 k Ahirs) lost in all 5 vcrs
    > about 320 fighters!
    > In the first of the 5 vcrs only 17 fighters were shoot down.
    > And the Lokis were not all starting in one big lump.
    > Do we now have a monster fighter!?
    > Well I guess for the next test I will reduce the number of wings to
    1.
  14. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    birds eye view of what Im observing now with the logic after opening my
    rst file

    the fighters are still circling around if there are only enemy fighter
    wings ( but its not like before where they just do a conga line ) some
    will head for a ship , shoot and then circle again.. some dont.

    At least the Bot type 1 fighters can shoot at the colonial fighters
    wings again :)

    However the fighters still appear to be skipping around the map and
    some of them are outside the circle grid

    the range, damage of the Ion Cannons and the AA guns on a base have
    become impressive.. im glad that if you dont set attack base on the
    base wont shoot you even if your on top of it..

    cocomax wrote:
    > The new host revision 190 removes the ships circling together in a
    > fixed ring.
    >
    > The avoid base checks are gone, ships now track targets like they
    used
    > to in older hosts.
    >
    > If your ship is set to NOT attack the planet below, the base can not
    > fire ion cannons at you.
    >
    > If your fighter wing is not set for ground attack the AAA guns can
    not
    > fire at you, even if you are right over the planet.
    >
    > Fighters aggressingly jump right on top of their targets and blast
    away
    > like crazy.
    >
    > Tim
  15. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    The fighter weapons have not been changed, what was added was logic
    that causes the fighters to:

    1. Lock onto a target ship and fly to it at best possible speed

    2. Slow down as the target is reached.

    3. Match speed with target and FIRE FIRE FIRE from as close as possible
    until target is dead or fighter wing is dead.

    Under this new system fighter wings can OVERWELM a ship, if we go
    with this system PD weapons might have to be upgraded, slightly.

    -----

    The OLD fighter logic that people complained about for years as being
    flawed was as follows.


    1. Lock onto a target ship and fly to it at best possible speed

    2. Fighter fires at target as it passes

    3. If fighter is low on energy wait until battery is recharged before
    going to step 1.

    Under the old system the fighter wings did lots of circling and
    circling. . .
  16. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Which fighter type do you see skipping around the map, they SHOULD NOT
    be doing that, somthing is still wrong with the movement updates for
    fighters.

    I need to dig into that and find the cause.

    Tim
  17. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    The big question is:

    Under the new fighter logic are fighters overpowered or where they
    always unpowered due to thier poor logic and this fix corrects the
    issue.

    Are fighters expensive enough compared to the amount of damage that
    they do?

    Tim
  18. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    mixed wings and single type wings.. so all of them do.

    would you like me to mail you the rst so you can have a look at the VCR?
  19. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Well, I think this is good step as fighters were acting very oddly in
    battles. But same time wings will now be quite lethal. Big
    fighter-hordes are common in this game, so what can you do against them
    if they are stored within carriers and you got only regular ships to
    use? Or he simple does have too much fighters, + now they are deadlier
    than ever. 10 PD slots in your massive battleship is not enough - you
    are already dead.

    I don't know if it is possible, but it would be great if you could get
    more slots from exotic tech:) But... is it even possible to add into
    game. Like pay 100,000 + 10,000 / turn and get +5 slots:) And that
    could be restricted to certain mass, so you could not use million small
    ships to kill fighters totally, but instead add protection to your most
    important ships.

    Just my 2,6 cents.


    cocomax wrote:
    > The big question is:
    >
    > Under the new fighter logic are fighters overpowered or where they
    > always unpowered due to thier poor logic and this fix corrects the
    > issue.
    >
    > Are fighters expensive enough compared to the amount of damage that
    > they do?
    >
    > Tim
  20. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    One way of pumping up PD systems is to increase fire rate and recharge
    rate of the systems.

    The fire rate and recharge rate of large ships could be increased, for
    example ships with a mass of over 800 get 2X fire rate and ships with
    1200 and over mass get 3X PD fire rate, if the player has bought the PD
    exotic tech bonus.


    Another thing that can be done is limit the number of fighters a race
    can own based on the population. Sure fighters are "cheap", but it is
    difficult to train enough pilots to field millions of them. . ..

    Tim
  21. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    I think the new fighter movement behavior is a masive improvement.

    We Borg will adapt. Maybe we'll start placing some fighters on some
    Biocides and include them in our Borg stacks of Doom. ;)

    Perhaps new Quick Strike should be start slowing down near extreme
    range of your fighters weapons, fire a round at that point, and cross
    the other ship in one pass at a good pace, slow enough to get a few
    rounds in, but fast enough that it's not spending much time within Sand
    Castor range.

    I like the new need for a fleet to start with the same attack vector as
    protection against fighter wings.

    On the pumping up PD systems, many of these already fire at one round
    per combat tick. And also it might be undiserable for PD rate to
    increase vs incoming ship weapons fire which a flat increased charge
    rate for massive ships would do.

    We Borg would love it with our cubes, but I don't think the swarming
    races would like it.

    The bigest cheap fighter race is the Robots. I see no reason why they
    should have trouble programming pilots, particlarly given their low
    standards as evidenced by the accuracy rating of their fighters. The
    object next to whatever the Cylon pilots are aiming at has a higher
    chance of being hit than the one being aimed at!

    Similarly, the EE seems to have rather low standards for piloting i'ts
    fighters as well.
  22. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Fighter wings use 1 RP per wing. . .

    What if that changed to 1 RP per 100 fighters in a wing. A 1000 fighter
    wing costs you 10 RP.

    I could also decrease the speed of all the fighters in the VCR so that
    there is more closing time, so that PD systems have more time to hit
    them before fighters get to point blank range. . .

    Tim
  23. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Fighter wings use 1 RP per wing. . .

    What if that changed to 1 RP per 100 fighters in a wing. A 1000 fighter
    wing costs you 10 RP.

    I could also decrease the speed of all the fighters in the VCR so that
    there is more closing time, so that PD systems have more time to hit
    them before fighters get to point blank range. . .

    Tim
  24. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    cocomax wrote:
    > Fighter wings use 1 RP per wing. . .
    >
    > What if that changed to 1 RP per 100 fighters in a wing. A 1000
    fighter
    > wing costs you 10 RP.
    >

    Well that is a possiblity, but in that case you also should change
    something about the rp allocation, for long running games, it will
    otherwise hit the EE and Cents
    (I will not mention the Dracs, since they are broke and it would not
    change anything - no chance or no chance) indeed very hard.

    > I could also decrease the speed of all the fighters in the VCR so
    that
    > there is more closing time, so that PD systems have more time to hit
    > them before fighters get to point blank range. . .

    Well decrease the speed in general a little bit. And then maybe just
    have the pds,
    if they have the energy (are loaded) and a enemy wing is in range just
    have it shoot at the wing, regardless whether it is the target or not
    (and the pd can fire).
  25. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Hmm, there should be a difference between quick strike and close to
    point blank.
    The first logic should more or less be used if close to point blank is
    active the second if quick strike is active. But then what will be done
    if none of the above mentioned are enabled - just attack enemies?
    Eventhough we would still also need to discuss the recharge part in the
    old logic (or what low on energy means).

    cocomax wrote:
    > The fighter weapons have not been changed, what was added was logic
    > that causes the fighters to:
    >
    > 1. Lock onto a target ship and fly to it at best possible speed
    >
    > 2. Slow down as the target is reached.
    >
    > 3. Match speed with target and FIRE FIRE FIRE from as close as
    possible
    > until target is dead or fighter wing is dead.
    >
    > Under this new system fighter wings can OVERWELM a ship, if we go
    > with this system PD weapons might have to be upgraded, slightly.
    >

    They could already under the old hosts (from 2003) if the fighter wing
    was large enough to bring enough weapons to bear on the ship within one
    tick.
    One problem I still see that they are still starting to recharge
    (circling) after they take out one ship of a battlegroup and one at
    nearly the same x,y position is still there.

    And I gather that after going through 1 to 3 the wng will first
    recharge and then go after the next enemy object (ship).

    > -----
    >
    > The OLD fighter logic that people complained about for years as being
    > flawed was as follows.
    >
    >
    > 1. Lock onto a target ship and fly to it at best possible speed
    >
    > 2. Fighter fires at target as it passes
    >
    > 3. If fighter is low on energy wait until battery is recharged before
    > going to step 1.
    >

    > Under the old system the fighter wings did lots of circling and
    > circling. . .

    Oh they still circle a lot. It has improved that they are now sometimes
    flying circle with the center of the vcr not being the center of the
    circle.
  26. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    cocomax wrote:
    > Which fighter type do you see skipping around the map, they SHOULD
    NOT
    > be doing that, somthing is still wrong with the movement updates for
    > fighters.
    >
    > I need to dig into that and find the cause.
    >
    > Tim

    Part of the skipping has to do, with the speed of the vcr display being
    too fast.
    - Sometimes the ships and fighters seem to shoot at points where no
    wing (or ship) is displayed and more importantly blowing the empty
    displayed space up.
    So reduce the display speed - and let it be calibrated by a slide bar.
  27. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    cocomax wrote:
    > The big question is:
    >
    > Under the new fighter logic are fighters overpowered or where they
    > always unpowered due to thier poor logic and this fix corrects the
    > issue.
    >

    The fighters have a big diversity in strength. One of the best fighters
    according to the pure attribute values is the Ahir.
    I will not yet decide if the fighter combat power is now overpowered or
    not.
    In any case the screening and always hitting the lower type fighters is
    overpowered.

    > Are fighters expensive enough compared to the amount of damage that
    > they do?

    Under the current settings a mixed Ahir/Sabik (type-3 and 1 mix) can be
    really
    cheap and do much more damage than it could under most of the older
    hosts.
    Have not yet tested extensively fighter vs fighter combat, but without
    enemy fighters present (for once neglating the Sand Casters and the to
    them tied ets (Sandcaster Immunity and the Improved Sandcasters)), they
    will be much more cost efficent than any combination of ships can be.
    And there fire power will be greater than that of any other wing which
    did cost a comparable amount of money.

    You just need enough type-3s to do enough damage and then fill the rest
    of the wing up with type-1s. If you do it right you will loose in the
    battle only type-1 fighter (18mc per fighter) and not a single type-3
    (500 mc).
  28. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    cocomax wrote:
    > One way of pumping up PD systems is to increase fire rate and
    recharge
    > rate of the systems.
    >
    That is one possible thing. But try to have the pds also miss the
    target or if
    it is just not reported in the vcr report add it so that it gets
    reported.

    > The fire rate and recharge rate of large ships could be increased,
    for
    > example ships with a mass of over 800 get 2X fire rate and ships with
    > 1200 and over mass get 3X PD fire rate, if the player has bought the
    PD
    > exotic tech bonus.
    >

    Do not see a reason for that. If players can afford to build big nasty
    battleships they ought to also build ships which can defend against
    fighters good (or Carriers to bring their own fighters along).
    Of course we would then need to have battlegroups (even if they have
    different speed , but the correct attack orders are given) stay
    together in a group within vcr (if the ships are not badly damaged).


    Of course if in that case (a higher fire rate etc for higher mass
    ships) a higher percentage of fighters could per tic fire on the target
    (after all bigger mass usually means bigger ship) it would be
    different.

    >
    > Another thing that can be done is limit the number of fighters a race
    > can own based on the population. Sure fighters are "cheap", but it
    is
    > difficult to train enough pilots to field millions of them. . ..
    >
    > Tim

    Problem with tying the amount of fighters to the population is that ie.
    the EE and the Cents are fighter races. So we would either need
    different limits for different races or races like the EE and Cents
    will be hit hard by it.
  29. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Thanks Tim,

    will check it out.


    Take care,

    Mike


    cocomax wrote:
    > The fighter weapons have not been changed, what was added was logic
    > that causes the fighters to:
    >
    > 1. Lock onto a target ship and fly to it at best possible speed
    >
    > 2. Slow down as the target is reached.
    >
    > 3. Match speed with target and FIRE FIRE FIRE from as close as
    possible
    > until target is dead or fighter wing is dead.
    >
    > Under this new system fighter wings can OVERWELM a ship, if we go
    > with this system PD weapons might have to be upgraded, slightly.
    >
    > -----
    >
    > The OLD fighter logic that people complained about for years as being
    > flawed was as follows.
    >
    >
    > 1. Lock onto a target ship and fly to it at best possible speed
    >
    > 2. Fighter fires at target as it passes
    >
    > 3. If fighter is low on energy wait until battery is recharged before
    > going to step 1.
    >
    > Under the old system the fighter wings did lots of circling and
    > circling. . .
  30. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    The first change would be a good one because it elimates the incentive
    of micromanagement of fighter wings in late game by fighter races.
    (Consolodating same # of fighters into larger wings to free up RP
    slots)

    The big thing on a fighter speed slow down is that be careful to ensure
    the slowest fighter flying at max speed is still faster than the
    fastest ship.
  31. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Quoting the docs, which can be taken as intent:

    >A quick strike will have the fighters make one pass on the enemy
    target and run at full speed away from the battle area.
    >
    >Anti fighter has the wing attack enemy fighters first if possible, the
    wing will attack other targets if no fighters are in the area.
    >
    >Ground strike allows the wing to target ground bases, even ground
    bases that are not firing at the wing.
    >
    >Close to Point Blank orders the wing to get as close as possible to
    the enemy before firing the weapons.
    >
    >Deadly first will have the wing attack the enemies that have the most
    weapons first.
    >
    >Soft first will have the wing attack enemy pods and freighters first.
    >
    >Do not launch orders the wing to stay on its ground base or in its
    fighter bay on its home ship. If wing is on a ship that is
    >destroyed the wing will be destroyed as well.

    I think that "anti-fighter" on should be what you do against enemy
    fighters. Especally if you have more than one ship along.

    This also seems to describe how close to point blank should differ from
    normal, in both case the fighters start slowing down at the same time,
    only with close to point blank the wings hold its fire until they see
    the "whites in their eyes"

    Similarly, old fighter behavior is similar to how quick strike should
    work. Just ensure the wing slows down enough (if needed) to actually
    fire a few vollyies, unlike before when it might not have the chance to
    fire a single volley since it was moving so fast.
  32. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    I was checkin this out. It appears that the fighters were flyin clear
    off the VCR, and comin back. They would circle the screen, at one
    point after several hundred ticks they did agressivly attack but broke
    off thereafter and milled around some more. I was usin bot T1 fighters
    versus a resolute with flake cannons as PD. The VCR was about 1380
    ticks long, not much was spent fighting.

    cocomax wrote:
    > Which fighter type do you see skipping around the map, they SHOULD
    NOT
    > be doing that, somthing is still wrong with the movement updates for
    > fighters.
    >
    > I need to dig into that and find the cause.
    >
    > Tim
  33. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Its a cool idea Tim.

    But how about ship sizes 700+ maybe for 2x bonus, throw the automa and
    sagitarius a bone. Also 5x rate for mass over 2000. Only a few have
    ships this big, huge ships should just be awesome.

    Possibly, if its easy to do,allow 1.5x, 2x and 3x for these respectivly
    without the ET. Give these big and expensive bad boys a break. Then
    let them blow the cash for the big upgrade.
  34. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    I'd rather see a mass-based resistance to fighter weapons than a
    mass-based increase to PD fire rate.

    Scytale
  35. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    agreed
    and I think that already exists, it's just that in the case of a large
    ship, an indivudal shot from an individal fighter within the wing is
    already only doing the min damage. (1/10th of 1%.) The shear number of
    fighters though overwhelm the target.
    Speed up considerly against certain hulls that have soft spots > 0
  36. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Why don't you simply make a crew person dissappear from the planet when
    a fighter is built.

    Different races could use different people.

    Borg and Robots would have a colonist dissappear for each fighter.
    Most other races would have a crew member dissappear.
    Some races might need a troop or HG.

    You could also say that different fighters needed different numbers of
    crew.
    Type 1 fighters need 1 crew
    Type 2 fighters need 2 crew
    Type 3 fighters need 3 crew.

    If there aren't the crew available when the fighter is built then it
    isn't built. (Which would be a lot easier to manage than having a
    storage space for unused fighters).
  37. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    I really love this solution.
    It still holds true: Dependancy on population can only make this game
    better.

    However .. there need to be special considerations for races with very
    strong fighters and very weak fighter.

    The argumentation could go:
    Very strong fighter are more difficult to control and thus less sufficiently
    skilled pilots are available.
    And the other way round.
    (This could also be a way to reintroduce the piloting abilities of races, if
    desired).


    There is one problem with fighters and big battleships ever since VGAP first
    was compiled:

    Battleships cannot keep up with fighters in late gamem because a wing always
    costs 1 RP, but the same power in battleships can cost as many RP as you
    want.
    Add that to fuel consumption of battleships, logistics (one wing is easier
    to play with).
    The extreme weakness of battleships against fighters has lead to logistic
    nightmares of 200+ lokis in games, just to fight fighters with a race that
    has no good anti fighter fighter. This can not be wanted!

    IMO the easiest solution still is to add one figure to the data structure of
    ships: Effectiveness against fighters.
    This stat is multiplied with the number of fighters destroyed per hit of a
    PD.
    The idea of increasing fire rate, depending on mass, is the poor version of
    that, but would sure be better than nothing.

    The whole jumping thing needs a few additional considerations about:
    - PD range (what for??)
    - fighter beam/missile range: only for fighter vs fighter?
    - Anti fighter ET : 3x PD range: what for?

    (Although fighters fire missiles at other fighters the effect of this seems
    to be neglectable.)


    Hope this helps a bit.

    Lordfire


    >
    > Another thing that can be done is limit the number of fighters a race
    > can own based on the population. Sure fighters are "cheap", but it is
    > difficult to train enough pilots to field millions of them. . ..
    >
    > Tim
    >
  38. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Slowly the possibilities to design this game are limited by how far it has
    developed.
    Problem is:
    Such a rule is to inflexible to cover Robot fighters and and i.e. Rebel
    fighters.
    It is the same like using colonists to supply these fighters with pilots:
    Robots get a real disadvantage and Rebels a real advantage.

    The only way to introduce this thing is to make the power of the effect race
    dependent.

    Like:
    Robots need 100 colonists and 1 rp for 100 fighters.
    Rebels need 100k colonists and 10 rp for 100 fighters.

    On a side note: This should not lead to having less then 20k objects in the
    game. (Don't know if it would with the current RP system.)
    After all RP are an artificial construct to limit the number of objects in
    the game in a fair way.

    Lordfire


    "cocomax" <cocomax@aol.com> wrote in message
    news:1112981248.756753.36000@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    > Fighter wings use 1 RP per wing. . .
    >
    > What if that changed to 1 RP per 100 fighters in a wing. A 1000 fighter
    > wing costs you 10 RP.
    >
    > I could also decrease the speed of all the fighters in the VCR so that
    > there is more closing time, so that PD systems have more time to hit
    > them before fighters get to point blank range. . .
    >
    > Tim
    >
  39. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    I did a little bit brainstorming.
    Perhaps this finds some attention:

    If fighter have set an escort target all they do in vcr is to stay on top of
    that escort target and protect it from enemy fighters.

    Means:
    You have a gorbie and one of the wings of the gorbie is set to escort it.
    When entering VCR this wing sitson top of the gorbie.

    When enemy fighters attack the gorbie each protecting fighter will make one
    attacking fighter attack itself, instead of the gorbie.

    Thus:

    500 protecting fighter, 600 attacking:
    only 100 fighters attack the gorbie, 500 attack the escorting fighters.

    A few combat ticks further:
    only 200 escorting fighters are left, 550 attacking fighters.
    350 fighter attack the gorbie, 200 attack the excorting wing
    etc
    ..
    ..


    This would eliminate the problem of protecting battleships from fighters in
    vgap in a very natural way. In addition it gives a small boost to cheap
    fighters. I don't think that's too bad.

    What do you think?

    "cocomax" <cocomax@aol.com> wrote in message
    news:1112981248.756753.36000@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    > Fighter wings use 1 RP per wing. . .
    >
    > What if that changed to 1 RP per 100 fighters in a wing. A 1000 fighter
    > wing costs you 10 RP.
    >
    > I could also decrease the speed of all the fighters in the VCR so that
    > there is more closing time, so that PD systems have more time to hit
    > them before fighters get to point blank range. . .
    >
    > Tim
    >
  40. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    What I would like to see for wings (and adapted for ships)

    FLY MANEUVERS & TARGETTING

    that they remind a main target due to their mission and try to gang up this first. On the attack routes to the main target the
    can fire at other targets in range. But they do everything to get on the shortest way to their target.

    - attack enemies

    i) when on they can trigger a combat if there are hostile objects like pods,bases, ship or wings. When off they do not trigger a
    combat. If the friendly code of a wing matches the UFC of the enemy then even if attack is on this wing does not trigger a
    combat. Of course if another object is triggering combat they enter the vcr.
    ii) if attack is on then wings in the vcr will attack targets on their own. if attack is off they tend to defend themselves i.e.
    they form a cloud or they escort the ships which enter the vcr as fleet leaders.

    So attack enemies in vcr decides wether wings are aggressively searching for enemy targets or if they tends to escorts the fleet
    leaders. Let's denote them offensive and defensive wings.

    - attack dangerous

    An offensive wing is intercepting the target which is regarded as the most dangerous and tries to fire at this ship. On the way
    to the target the wing is firing at all target in range but the focus stays on the most dangerous. Many wings tends to form a
    cloud and attack the most dangerous together until the target is destroyed. That means not that they stay there all the time.
    They only don't change their main target until it is destroyed.

    A defensive wing continues in escorting the fleet leader and fire at the most dangerous target in the surrounding of the leader

    - attack closest

    Offensive wings tend to diffuse into the whole combat area and fire at the closest targets and switch to fire at other targets
    when the distance is smaller.

    Defensive wings attack the closest target in the surrounding of the leader

    - strike through

    Offensive wings immediated try to escape to the closest corner of the combat area until their power battery is almost empty and
    return into combat if the battery is almost full. Wings with missiles escape if no missile can be shot and ord is still there and
    return if missiles can be shot again.

    Defensive wings do the same but they only stay very close to the leader until they are recharged again.

    - close to point blank

    Offensive wings stay at their target all the time
    Defensive also but only so long as their leader is in range.

    - attack ground bases

    Offensive wings have the enemy base as their main target so long as the base is destroyed.
    Defensive wings follow the leader. If the leader approaches the eney base they begin to fire at the base first.
    If there is no enemy base then wings always try to be in the middle of the combat area.

    - attack fighters

    Wings go for enemy wings first

    - attack soft

    Wings go for pods first


    If no leader is set then the most dangerous ship is regarded as the leader. If several ships are the most danegous then they
    choose the leader randomly which is the same in the case of two or more leaders if theare equally dangerous.


    Same principles could be used for ships. For example a fleet of Lokis entering a vcr should form a cloud and stay together. If LW
    hits punch Lokis out of the group they should try to return to the leader.


    FIRE AND HIT DYNAMICS

    First the screening only should be possible via a larger number of the types which should do the screening job and the stats
    itself. When wings&PD fire at wings the targeted type should be randomly.
    A system which is based on the documented stats in a manner that the documents have a meaning would be fine. I.e. then printed
    value for fighter missile range and LW range should be of the same unit.

    I would like to see that the ability to form over kill wings is tuned down, i.e. a max number of fighters in a wing, for example
    1000 like it is for homeguards.

    Maybe there is no need to resovle any single fighter shot. Some time for other calculations can be saved if one calculates the
    all over effect of a salvo of a type in a wing at ones:

    drain/damage= FighterDrain/DamageMod * f( Min[Battery/Energy for one shot;FighterCount] , FighterHitOdds, RND) where f is chosen
    as suited enough to provide

    Min [battery/Energy for one shot;FighterCount] * FighterDrain/DamageMod * FighterHitOdds as mean (RND is the usual random number)
    and simulates the inverse of the cumulative binominal distribution

    which would be needed exactly. HitOdds depends on fighter stats, ships evasive mods range, etc. in the usual manner.

    Both sets of equations for the motion of ships and fighters should be of the same form and filled with different parameters. Give
    fighters a small mass. If the underlying motion follows some modified form of Newton's law F=m*a with several helping equations
    then moving behavior should be not problem. Maybe you introduced some latent friction to avoid everything moving arround madly
    fast. Friction could be made dependent of mass, actual velocity and max combat velocity.

    Maybe to time resolution sometimes is to large when object tend to "overshooting" in their motion (often unwanted and mad effects
    occur when numerical solved differential equations are treated not carefully enough) and sometimes is to small when anything is
    moving very slow although only a few objects are present.
    Maybe you introduce further ticks between the combat tick and introduce a dynamic time resolution due to the currently fastest
    objects in the vcr.

    Well, late enough must go home...hope it helps at all.

    GFM GToeroe


    "cocomax" <cocomax@aol.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:1112894060.602975.309350@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    > I need some players to take a look at the new combat code and make
    > comments about the new system.
    >
    > Fighter wings have a more agressive behavior.
    >
    > The older ship logic has been restored.
    >
    > I no longer have access to the vgaplanet.com web site using FTP so I
    > placed it up on my wifes iDisk account:
    >
    > You can download it from this link:
    >
    > http://homepage.mac.com/ti2gr/.Public/host190.exe
    >
    > Tim
    >
  41. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    ron_nac@yahoo.com schrieb:
    > Its a cool idea Tim.
    >
    > But how about ship sizes 700+ maybe for 2x bonus, throw the automa and
    > sagitarius a bone. Also 5x rate for mass over 2000. Only a few have
    > ships this big, huge ships should just be awesome.
    >
    > Possibly, if its easy to do,allow 1.5x, 2x and 3x for these respectivly
    > without the ET. Give these big and expensive bad boys a break. Then
    > let them blow the cash for the big upgrade.

    But its a wrong idea in my opinion. What you can see on your own if you
    take a look at the ship list in raceview.

    Reason:
    It brings a new balance between the races.
    Some have only 0 or 1 ship with 700 Kt hull mass only count ships no
    starbases with 0 speed), like the Feds, Lizie, RCS, Stormer, Pirat,
    Crystal and maybe more.
    And it would help other races which have many ships with a great hull
    mass more and some of the races are designed in my opinion to have
    problems against fighter. Some races it helps maybe the Borg, EE, Robo,
    Rebel and the Peep (IMHO they have by design no good AF-ship but many
    ships with a high mass).

    Bye-Bye JoSch.
  42. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Fighters have always been stronger than ships, once one was able to buy
    the SC immunity - and the opoonent wasn't able to buy the Anti-Fighter
    ETs. The question is if all fighters got a benefit or onl ythe fast
    ones? I woul dmake changes on the PDs as that i surely better than
    changing many race packs, which then could harm their economy and just
    open another construction yard!
  43. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Gabor Törö schrieb:
    > What I would like to see for wings (and adapted for ships)
    >
    > FLY MANEUVERS & TARGETTING
    >
    > that they remind a main target due to their mission and try to gang up this first. On the attack routes to the main target the
    > can fire at other targets in range. But they do everything to get on the shortest way to their target.
    >
    > - attack enemies
    >
    > i) when on they can trigger a combat if there are hostile objects like pods,bases, ship or wings. When off they do not trigger a
    > combat. If the friendly code of a wing matches the UFC of the enemy then even if attack is on this wing does not trigger a
    > combat. Of course if another object is triggering combat they enter the vcr.
    > ii) if attack is on then wings in the vcr will attack targets on their own. if attack is off they tend to defend themselves i.e.
    > they form a cloud or they escort the ships which enter the vcr as fleet leaders.
    >
    > So attack enemies in vcr decides wether wings are aggressively searching for enemy targets or if they tends to escorts the fleet
    > leaders. Let's denote them offensive and defensive wings.
    >
    > - attack dangerous
    >
    > An offensive wing is intercepting the target which is regarded as the most dangerous and tries to fire at this ship. On the way
    > to the target the wing is firing at all target in range but the focus stays on the most dangerous. Many wings tends to form a
    > cloud and attack the most dangerous together until the target is destroyed. That means not that they stay there all the time.
    > They only don't change their main target until it is destroyed.
    >
    > A defensive wing continues in escorting the fleet leader and fire at the most dangerous target in the surrounding of the leader
    >
    > - attack closest
    >
    > Offensive wings tend to diffuse into the whole combat area and fire at the closest targets and switch to fire at other targets
    > when the distance is smaller.
    >
    > Defensive wings attack the closest target in the surrounding of the leader
    >
    > - strike through
    >
    > Offensive wings immediated try to escape to the closest corner of the combat area until their power battery is almost empty and
    > return into combat if the battery is almost full. Wings with missiles escape if no missile can be shot and ord is still there and
    > return if missiles can be shot again.
    >
    > Defensive wings do the same but they only stay very close to the leader until they are recharged again.
    >
    > - close to point blank
    >
    > Offensive wings stay at their target all the time
    > Defensive also but only so long as their leader is in range.
    >
    > - attack ground bases
    >
    > Offensive wings have the enemy base as their main target so long as the base is destroyed.
    > Defensive wings follow the leader. If the leader approaches the eney base they begin to fire at the base first.
    > If there is no enemy base then wings always try to be in the middle of the combat area.
    >
    > - attack fighters
    >
    > Wings go for enemy wings first
    >
    > - attack soft
    >
    > Wings go for pods first
    >
    >
    > If no leader is set then the most dangerous ship is regarded as the leader. If several ships are the most danegous then they
    > choose the leader randomly which is the same in the case of two or more leaders if theare equally dangerous.
    >
    >
    > Same principles could be used for ships. For example a fleet of Lokis entering a vcr should form a cloud and stay together. If LW
    > hits punch Lokis out of the group they should try to return to the leader.
    >
    >
    > FIRE AND HIT DYNAMICS
    >
    > First the screening only should be possible via a larger number of the types which should do the screening job and the stats
    > itself. When wings&PD fire at wings the targeted type should be randomly.
    > A system which is based on the documented stats in a manner that the documents have a meaning would be fine. I.e. then printed
    > value for fighter missile range and LW range should be of the same unit.
    >
    > I would like to see that the ability to form over kill wings is tuned down, i.e. a max number of fighters in a wing, for example
    > 1000 like it is for homeguards.
    >
    > Maybe there is no need to resovle any single fighter shot. Some time for other calculations can be saved if one calculates the
    > all over effect of a salvo of a type in a wing at ones:
    >
    > drain/damage= FighterDrain/DamageMod * f( Min[Battery/Energy for one shot;FighterCount] , FighterHitOdds, RND) where f is chosen
    > as suited enough to provide
    >
    > Min [battery/Energy for one shot;FighterCount] * FighterDrain/DamageMod * FighterHitOdds as mean (RND is the usual random number)
    > and simulates the inverse of the cumulative binominal distribution
    >
    > which would be needed exactly. HitOdds depends on fighter stats, ships evasive mods range, etc. in the usual manner.
    >
    > Both sets of equations for the motion of ships and fighters should be of the same form and filled with different parameters. Give
    > fighters a small mass. If the underlying motion follows some modified form of Newton's law F=m*a with several helping equations
    > then moving behavior should be not problem. Maybe you introduced some latent friction to avoid everything moving arround madly
    > fast. Friction could be made dependent of mass, actual velocity and max combat velocity.
    >
    > Maybe to time resolution sometimes is to large when object tend to "overshooting" in their motion (often unwanted and mad effects
    > occur when numerical solved differential equations are treated not carefully enough) and sometimes is to small when anything is
    > moving very slow although only a few objects are present.
    > Maybe you introduce further ticks between the combat tick and introduce a dynamic time resolution due to the currently fastest
    > objects in the vcr.
    >
    > Well, late enough must go home...hope it helps at all.
    >
    > GFM GToeroe

    The first part "FLY MANEUVERS & TARGETTING" seems me good. Must only be
    cleared what shall happen if more then one of the switches is active.
    Example an agressive wing have attack ground bases, attack fighter and
    attack dangerous ON. What do the wing attack first and what at last ?

    About the second part "FIRE AND HIT DYNAMICS" I can say nothing. Not
    sure if I understand all special the formula you use.

    Bye-Bye JoSch.
  44. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Tim, please be aware that this host is already in use!
  45. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Well I do not agree about everything written in your post.
    But the detail level is much better than the detail level of Tims help
    file
    and points out a few things that have to be mentioned in the help
    files.
    And then even this detail level is not enough.

    And then why do you not define dangerous?
    Or better what ships/wings are in this or that situation the most
    dangerous?
  46. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    In regards to how many crew to use per fighter, a fighter-craft
    requires more than just a pilot. There is a team of mechanics and an
    ordnance team to reload missiles, recharge laser batteries, etc. IMO
    these teams should only exist at air attack bases and on carriers.
    Both should require crew to run. Without these the fighters should not
    be able to take aggressive action in combat. They may still be able to
    fly around (and be fodder), but not fire at anything.

    Magik
  47. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    "Nameless" <unknown_ai@web.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:1113151137.679560.16860@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...


    > And then even this detail level is not enough.
    Well, it's not my job to do so...

    >
    > And then why do you not define dangerous?
    > Or better what ships/wings are in this or that situation the most
    > dangerous?

    Because it depends on the situation and goal:

    Even for different wings it can be different:

    For example:

    Do I have SC immunity? If not then for big wings ships with SC are the most dangerous but even then the decicion is hard because
    you want to protect an expensive ship in your fleet. Then wings have to go for the targets which could harm this ship at most and
    so on.

    And at the time I wrote it I had no explicite meaning of "most damgerous".

    GFM GToeroe
  48. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    Gabor Törö wrote:
    > "Nameless" <unknown_ai@web.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    news:1113151137.679560.16860@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
    >
    >
    > > And then even this detail level is not enough.
    > Well, it's not my job to do so...

    Well if everybody would have that opinion...
    And then you are a beta tester, or are you not?


    > >
    > > And then why do you not define dangerous?
    > > Or better what ships/wings are in this or that situation the most
    > > dangerous?
    >
    > Because it depends on the situation and goal:
    >

    Of course it does. And then maybe you should try to come up with a
    better measure of dangerous (of course strictly spoken it is not your
    job), than the one stated in the help files - most weapons.
    Whatever that means and which types of weapons are taken into account
    and if all weapons are equal... And then is it ie. affected by the
    Antifighter mission...


    > And at the time I wrote it I had no explicite meaning of "most
    damgerous".

    And I still do not have for the word "most damgerous"...
  49. Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

    But the maintenance guys don't die when the fighter dies. Also, you
    could argue that at the level of technology in VGAP, the maintenance of
    fighters would be done by robots anyhow.

    Regarding the new pilot level. I could go either way. One of the
    issues at the moment is that as far as training goes crew being
    upgraded to troops doesn't make a lot of sense. But I'm happy for it
    to be that way to keep the game simple and avoid micromanagement.
    Another training centre??? Too much work. Another person type of
    pilot. Could work well.

    Overall.
    The problem here is that we are trying to fit tactical control of a
    battle into a turn based game. Other games that try this like Total
    War, either let you have total control over the tactical battle, or
    turn the battle into a black box (Civilisation).

    VGAP4 is trying a third option of allowing you to set some parameters
    for fighting the battle, but no control over the battle itself. As a
    programmer I can appreciate how this is virtually impossible. What we
    simply need is something that has some complexity but that isn't too
    complex and where the paper-sissors-rock rule applies.
Ask a new question

Read More

Games Logic Video Games