Red Rover, Red Rover, Send My Next Victim Right Over

[Magik]

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

Even though the VCR's have improved, I'm still not a fan of the
circling ships. When a ship is hit by a large weapon it starts to spin
around the map. This allows for a good tactic with some long range
weapons (PTT) and more short range (PPC, LTLA) so that you can hit a
single enemy within a large fleet and have them come circling over to
you then nuke them with short range weapons. Wash, rinse, spin,
repeat. Not very realistic (even for a fantasy game) and not very
strategically balanced for all races.

Magik

 

[nameless]

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

David wrote:
> Another problem is that while the fighters home in on ships fast,
other
> fighters set to anti-fighter don't home in on their targets.
> This leaves ships using wings for fighter protection (EE) very
vunerable.

In the few tests I did run with fighter vs. fighter combat (current
host), the wings set to anti-fighter did home in on the enemy fighter
wing (which was also set to anti fighter).

And then do not expect to have slow wings, which are set to
antifighter, home in on a much faster enemy fighter wing which mission
is not set to anti-fighter.
Also for anti-fighter mission many wings are good - 1 wing set to
anti-fighter will do about nothing. And then we have to think what
happens when the opposing sides also deploys fighter with anti-fighter
mission.

 

[David]

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

Another problem is that while the fighters home in on ships fast, other
fighters set to anti-fighter don't home in on their targets.
This leaves ships using wings for fighter protection (EE) very vunerable.

"Magik" <rickglover@paulhastings.com> wrote in message
news:1114033105.688608.53510@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Even though the VCR's have improved, I'm still not a fan of the
> circling ships. When a ship is hit by a large weapon it starts to spin
> around the map. This allows for a good tactic with some long range
> weapons (PTT) and more short range (PPC, LTLA) so that you can hit a
> single enemy within a large fleet and have them come circling over to
> you then nuke them with short range weapons. Wash, rinse, spin,
> repeat. Not very realistic (even for a fantasy game) and not very
> strategically balanced for all races.
>
> Magik
>

 

[nameless]

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

Gabor Törö wrote:
> The reason?

Well multiple reasons.
Like:
a) wings when starting at nearly the same point in the vcr might take
the same enemy wing as target.
b) Enemy wings set also to antifighter moving to the enemy, and thereby
having higher chances to be the next target by your anti-fighter wings.
c) wrong secondary attack settings (like in some cases quick strike )
enabled or right ones not enabled.
d) slow wing trying to chase a fast wing.
e) your anti-fighter wings are outnumbered by the enemy wings (maybe
you want to tell me how in that case your wings will be able to protect
anything)
f) Attack, Evasive and other ratings do count. Resulting in very good
hit probabilities for some fighters and in very bad ones for others.
g) As EE trying to kill enemy wings only with your wings - you should
also have ships with Sand Casters to help your wings.
h) For some reasons many of your wings somehow getting during the vcr
into the same area and then targeting the enemy wings that are near.
i) Wings flying to far away from the ship to engage the enemy wing
before your ship gets shot at (some wings still only need 1-2 ticks to
finish of enemy ships).

To name a few.

> "Nameless" <unknown_ai@web.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1114099788.104286.273450@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > David wrote:
> > > Another problem is that while the fighters home in on ships fast,
> > other
> > > fighters set to anti-fighter don't home in on their targets.
> > > This leaves ships using wings for fighter protection (EE) very
> > vunerable.
> >
> > In the few tests I did run with fighter vs. fighter combat (current
> > host), the wings set to anti-fighter did home in on the enemy
fighter
> > wing (which was also set to anti fighter).
> >
> > And then do not expect to have slow wings, which are set to
> > antifighter, home in on a much faster enemy fighter wing which
mission
> > is not set to anti-fighter.
> > Also for anti-fighter mission many wings are good - 1 wing set to
> > anti-fighter will do about nothing. And then we have to think what
> > happens when the opposing sides also deploys fighter with
anti-fighter
> > mission.
> >

 

[nameless]

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

Gabor Törö wrote:
> And what's with:
>
> And wings randomly try to obey their given orders. So given orders
are significantly observable first with sufficient high
> numbers of wings.
>
> GFM GToeroe
>

A good joke nothing more.

 

[Guest]

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

The reason?

"Nameless" <unknown_ai@web.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:1114099788.104286.273450@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> David wrote:
> > Another problem is that while the fighters home in on ships fast,
> other
> > fighters set to anti-fighter don't home in on their targets.
> > This leaves ships using wings for fighter protection (EE) very
> vunerable.
>
> In the few tests I did run with fighter vs. fighter combat (current
> host), the wings set to anti-fighter did home in on the enemy fighter
> wing (which was also set to anti fighter).
>
> And then do not expect to have slow wings, which are set to
> antifighter, home in on a much faster enemy fighter wing which mission
> is not set to anti-fighter.
> Also for anti-fighter mission many wings are good - 1 wing set to
> anti-fighter will do about nothing. And then we have to think what
> happens when the opposing sides also deploys fighter with anti-fighter
> mission.
>

 

[Magik]

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

I was just on the receiving end of the Red Rover tactic. Thanks
Hawkeye! He knows what my attack vector is (4) and set his to be a
couple vectors into the spin that ships go into. So he efficientlly
killed off an equally powered fleet taking less casualties. Well done!

If anyone would like to see the VCR, contact me through Drewhead's.

Magik

 

[Guest]

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

And what's with:

And wings randomly try to obey their given orders. So given orders are significantly observable first with sufficient high
numbers of wings.

GFM GToeroe

"Nameless" <unknown_ai@web.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:1114112142.309198.75880@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Gabor Törö wrote:
> The reason?

Well multiple reasons.
Like:
a) wings when starting at nearly the same point in the vcr might take
the same enemy wing as target.
b) Enemy wings set also to antifighter moving to the enemy, and thereby
having higher chances to be the next target by your anti-fighter wings.
c) wrong secondary attack settings (like in some cases quick strike )
enabled or right ones not enabled.
d) slow wing trying to chase a fast wing.
e) your anti-fighter wings are outnumbered by the enemy wings (maybe
you want to tell me how in that case your wings will be able to protect
anything)
f) Attack, Evasive and other ratings do count. Resulting in very good
hit probabilities for some fighters and in very bad ones for others.
g) As EE trying to kill enemy wings only with your wings - you should
also have ships with Sand Casters to help your wings.
h) For some reasons many of your wings somehow getting during the vcr
into the same area and then targeting the enemy wings that are near.
i) Wings flying to far away from the ship to engage the enemy wing
before your ship gets shot at (some wings still only need 1-2 ticks to
finish of enemy ships).

To name a few.

> "Nameless" <unknown_ai@web.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1114099788.104286.273450@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > David wrote:
> > > Another problem is that while the fighters home in on ships fast,
> > other
> > > fighters set to anti-fighter don't home in on their targets.
> > > This leaves ships using wings for fighter protection (EE) very
> > vunerable.
> >
> > In the few tests I did run with fighter vs. fighter combat (current
> > host), the wings set to anti-fighter did home in on the enemy
fighter
> > wing (which was also set to anti fighter).
> >
> > And then do not expect to have slow wings, which are set to
> > antifighter, home in on a much faster enemy fighter wing which
mission
> > is not set to anti-fighter.
> > Also for anti-fighter mission many wings are good - 1 wing set to
> > anti-fighter will do about nothing. And then we have to think what
> > happens when the opposing sides also deploys fighter with
anti-fighter
> > mission.
> >

 

[nameless]

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

Gabor Törö wrote:
> Meant seriously?
>

Yes. And I already did put up the reason for it.
You see ie. I can clone fighter-only-vcrs.

 

[nameless]

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

Gabor Törö wrote:
> Invidious coeval.
>
> Why it is a joke?
>
> GFM GToeroe

Well because I said so.
And then mainly because of the word random incontext with the current
fighter combat.

And then you can even see the differences of a few attack orders with
just one wing present - of course depending on what you want to see.
Of course not all are working well and then I have not tested all of
the fighter orders extensivly.

 

[nameless]

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

Gabor Törö wrote:
> "Nameless" <unknown_ai@web.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1114179732.881978.11570@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> Why it is a joke?
> >
> >> GFM GToeroe
>
> >Well because I said so.
>
> >And then mainly because of the word random incontext with the
current
> >fighter combat.
>
> There are neither valid arguments nor documented vcr observations
which strictly exclude the exitence of the use of the rnd
> function in fighter combat code.
>

You do not get it, the actual reason for it I had already stated within
the first few days after the release of host 193 - and if I remember
correctly as a reply to one of redherrings posts (in the thread
critical too many bot fighters from nest). And these results strongly
suggested that your post is a joke because of the word random. Maybe
you are able to find the passage in one of my posts.
I think the post is from the 16th.

> >And then you can even see the differences of a few attack orders
with
> >just one wing present - of course depending on what you want to see.
>
> No one has ever stated that it is impossible that a single wing can
show >actions which fits to given attack orders.

Have I denied that?

> >Of course not all are working well and then I have not tested all of
> >the fighter orders extensivly.
>
> But you have tested combat with many wings and there you had to see
something.

Well I mainly see something because in contrast to other people I tend
to not only look at the results but do watch the actual vcr and look at
the combat reports. And also look later on at the surviving objects.

 

[Guest]

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

Meant seriously?

"Nameless" <unknown_ai@web.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:1114123489.205996.294640@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

Gabor Törö wrote:
> And what's with:
>
> And wings randomly try to obey their given orders. So given orders
are significantly observable first with sufficient high
> numbers of wings.
>
> GFM GToeroe
>

A good joke nothing more.

 

[Guest]

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

Invidious coeval.

Why it is a joke?

GFM GToeroe


"Nameless" <unknown_ai@web.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:1114160921.022865.257270@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Gabor Törö wrote:
> Meant seriously?
>

Yes. And I already did put up the reason for it.
You see ie. I can clone fighter-only-vcrs.

 

[Guest]

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

"Nameless" <unknown_ai@web.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:1114179732.881978.11570@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

>> Why it is a joke?
>
>> GFM GToeroe

>Well because I said so.

>And then mainly because of the word random incontext with the current
>fighter combat.

There are neither valid arguments nor documented vcr observations which strictly exclude the exitence of the use of the rnd
function in fighter combat code.

>And then you can even see the differences of a few attack orders with
>just one wing present - of course depending on what you want to see.

No one has ever stated that it is impossible that a single wing can show actions which fits to given attack orders.

>Of course not all are working well and then I have not tested all of
>the fighter orders extensivly.

But you have tested combat with many wings and there you had to see something.

GFM GToeroe

 

[Guest]

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

Actually, it was pure coincidence. I am changing my vector from turn to turn
and was really assuming, you would do the same

Ralph Hoenig aka Hawkeye

"Magik" <rickglover@paulhastings.com> schrieb
>I was just on the receiving end of the Red Rover tactic. Thanks
> Hawkeye! He knows what my attack vector is (4) and set his to be a
> couple vectors into the spin that ships go into. So he efficientlly
> killed off an equally powered fleet taking less casualties. Well done!
>
> If anyone would like to see the VCR, contact me through Drewhead's.
>
> Magik
>