Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Combat Logic

Tags:
  • Games
  • Logic
  • Video Games
Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
April 7, 2005 2:14:20 PM

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

More about : combat logic

April 7, 2005 3:55:28 PM

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
Anonymous
April 7, 2005 11:29:52 PM

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
>
Related resources
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 1:36:36 AM

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
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 3:40:51 AM

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
April 8, 2005 5:04:33 AM

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!
April 8, 2005 6:23:53 AM

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
April 8, 2005 7:19:13 AM

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.
April 8, 2005 7:33:30 AM

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.
April 8, 2005 7:36:24 AM

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
April 8, 2005 7:46:46 AM

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
April 8, 2005 7:50:02 AM

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.
April 8, 2005 8:11:11 AM

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.
April 8, 2005 9:52:35 AM

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.
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 12:57:28 PM

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
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 12:58:47 PM

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. . .
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 1:01:45 PM

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
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 1:06:12 PM

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
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 1:14:13 PM

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?
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 1:23:27 PM

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
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 1:35:29 PM

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
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 2:08:29 PM

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.
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 2:27:28 PM

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
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 2:27:33 PM

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
April 8, 2005 2:38:05 PM

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).
April 8, 2005 2:47:45 PM

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.
April 8, 2005 2:51:22 PM

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.
April 8, 2005 2:59:17 PM

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).
April 8, 2005 3:08:51 PM

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.
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 3:56:52 PM

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. . .
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 4:36:01 PM

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.
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 4:56:04 PM

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.
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 5:29:01 PM

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
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 5:47:37 PM

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.
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 5:57:06 PM

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
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 6:38:11 PM

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
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 6:41:55 PM

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).
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 10:59:47 PM

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
>
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 12:24:04 AM

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
>
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 1:21:06 AM

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
>
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 4:15:04 AM

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
>
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 5:42:48 AM

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.
April 9, 2005 10:29:21 AM

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!
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 5:43:52 PM

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.
April 10, 2005 8:13:40 AM

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

Tim, please be aware that this host is already in use!
April 10, 2005 1:38:57 PM

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?
April 11, 2005 7:42:58 AM

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
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 1:38:01 PM

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
April 11, 2005 1:47:56 PM

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"...
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 10:29:02 PM

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.
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!