Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

JLS we have discussed the unbalance issue of the subverters for the Psychics. You were against the removal then and to-hit did help balance some but if you still plan to be serious about MP* Multiplayers.
You have to face the subverter balance issue soon

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Great post Fyron, thanks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
I will need time to digest this, it is hard to fully understand.

Can you suggest a thread on leaky armor or even better add more here.

[ January 27, 2004, 21:26: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

What more would you like? Leaky armor is just a component without the Armor ability that has a high hit point per kiloton ratio, as well as preferably having more hit points per component than most other "internals" do. It works because the calculations that determine which component gets damaged by a shot are based on the hit points of components, and those with more hit points are more likely to be hit first, though not guaranteed.

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

It is the second paragraph in your original post that I dont fully understand.

Also if there is emissive armor as an ability then the armor is no longer leaky?

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

When a weapon hits a ship, it will first face the shield layer. If there are no shields, or no shield points, the damage goes to the components of the ship. If there are any components with Armor ability, they will be hit first. But, if the weapon was one with armor-skipping damage, such as Shard Cannons, then the damage will completely bypass the Armor layer and damage "internals," where internals are any components that do not have the Armor ability. Only the Armor ability makes a component act like "armor." If a ship has "leaky armor" components, they are not actually "armor" because they do not have the Armor ability. They are treated exactly like other internals. The reason that we use the term "leaky armor" is because having some beefed up components (lots of hit points) without the Armor ability makes them act similar to armor, except that some shots will not hit them but hit other internals instead. So instead of complete absorption by the Armor, you have partial absorption by the leaky armor. Armor-skipping damage has one role, to bypass the Armor layer, or in other words, those components with the Armor ability. However, testing has shown a few other side effects. The abilities of Shields From Damage and Emissive Armor do not get triggered by weapon shots with the armor-skipping damage type. Both of these abilities will function when any component gets hit, even if that component does not have that ability. This is why stock Armor and Emissive Armor work. Any shot from a regular weapon that hits any armor component will be emissed by so many damage points. The same occurs with Crystalline Armor, which has the shields from damage ability. If you assign either of these abilities to an internal component, then that ability will be triggered when any component on the ship is damaged, whether it is internal or armor is irrelevant. But, their effects do not get triggered from weapon damage of the armor-skipping type. So, if you mod in an internal component that has the Shields From Damage ability (such as leaky shields as in some mods), no shields will be added from the damage occured by an armor-skipping weapon (such as Shard Cannons).

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Nice explanation.

Now break up that monster, you grammar-savage.

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Well perhaps another armour type could be added to solve the problem ie a technology that gives a chemical coating to internal components that would be targetted by the problem providing them some additional protection from weapons or just selected components that could be coated for protection !

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Maybe I should make it one single sentence. With no caps. And no punctuation.

*Note that this was a joke directed at Loser for his suggestion that I am a grammar monster for having that post be one single paragraph. It was posted in a light-hearted manner, taking the grammar monster joke to the extreme, and was not in relation at all to anyone else, not about anyone else, or anything of that nature. Any such interpretation is reading information into the joke that simply does not exist. Loser and I have developed an "internet friendship," which breeds (limited) familiarity, and is what allowed him to feel fine making such a joke towards me in the first place, and allowed me to make this joke towards him. It was a joke. Not an insult, not harrassment, nothing of the sort. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Thank you.*

[ January 30, 2004, 15:59: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

I don't see much problem with armour and armour piercing weapons in AIC. Shard cannons are rather weak and costly to research. Time-shifters are even weaker and are wasteless against ships with internal armour - better use normal, hard hitting weapons !

As to racial armours, CA needs phased shields to work against PPB and many AIs use them. OA is usefull in small battles, but when AI send its Main Fleet, the targeted ships seldom live long enough to benefit from OA. The 1.84 "fix" that removed OA pre-generation really done OA in http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Maybe I should make it one single sentence. With no caps. And no punctuation. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">thank you fyron your views are explained fine
it was just some of the comments i did not understand </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">GLV please do not be disturbed by any possible comment or sarcasms http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
Some players do not realize that the internet is multi-national. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif
Your origins are not my business, however your English Grammar is more then enough to convey your expressions http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif