Re: newest beta patch?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Contray to popular myth, there are no people with any special connection to Malfador. Even among the beta team members, we have all the same discussions that occur in the general forum. We throw around ideas, and have debtes that sometimes degenerate into arguments. And in the end ANYONE can email Malfador if they have a suggestion or a complaint. Nobody's emails get any more notice than anyone elses.

Geoschmo</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thank you for your reply. However I believe you underestimate the value of beeing a beta-tester. I can't imagine that the opinion of a beta-tester is disregarded by MM. For my e-mails I am not even sure if he reads them. (Edit: I take that back: he read my e-mail and replied to it! In the reply he says that the conVersion of a ship with destroyed master computer is a bug. Well, I am not sure about that but such an obvious "bug" that persisted for almost two years??)

One more question for those who want a counter for the allegience subverter: Have you ever thought to play games without computer combat?? This can be selected in the game setting without any modding or other changes! You would get almost the same as the proposed change in the next patch, unless the master computer is destroyed by chance by any ordinary weapon.

[ October 13, 2002, 07:32: Message edited by: Q ]

Re: newest beta patch?
 

Q - now thats a good point!

Re: newest beta patch?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Geo, you accurately describe the first stage of the fighting between you, me and Tesco, but you're wrong in just attributing it to the Talisman. Half your problem was not just that my DUCs were hitting, but that your PPBs weren't. The Research I'd saved by not going straight to PPBs went into ECM, whereas none of your or his early ships seemed to have Combat Sensors. Had you had DUCs with Combat Sensors instead of PPBs without, I think the early fighting would have gone as the current battles do now that you're actually hitting (or in your case ramming) - that is, the Talisman giving me an edge, but not a completely decisive one.

I say this not as criticism of your play (because I know I've grossly simplified the research choices available to all of us), but to illustrate the general point that properly planning your counter to the Talisman makes a huge difference. You know the Religious player is going to emphasise his strengths by building hard-to-hit ships and staying out at long range. So if you see him as the early game threat, make sure you can *hit* his ships before you start researching all the cool weapons.

I'm genuinely curious, by-the-way, about what you think my strategic mistakes were. Or is it too early to be revealing that sort of information?

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Definitely true. As it was, I only got the Talisman a turn or two before fighting first broke out, and had to carry out a frantic refitting program in order to have ships ready to fight. Normally, developing towards the Talisman would have to be a much longer term goal. You couldn't afford to commit to spending the hundreds of thousands of point necessary until you'd got several other key technologies first.

Mark

Re: newest beta patch?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">At least he replied to your email. I sent him one about Dungeon Oddesey and the production/facility upgrade in Space Empires IV. Maybe the Dungeon Oddesey email was a tad too scornful...

[ October 14, 2002, 14:20: Message edited by: Mylon ]

Re: newest beta patch?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ah, but what you could not know is that while you were spending points researching the ECM, I was spending points researching military science.

We had a decisive battle at around turn 30. I went back and looked at the old game files cause I wanted to be sure. I had a fleet of 60-70 ships, over 40 of which were LC's. You had a fleet of 30-35 ships, all destoyers, except for about 8-10 LC's. Almost every ship in my fleet was veteren, trained to 20%, and the fleet was as well. SO that alone would have countered your ECM 2. So without the tailsman there would have been a slight advatage in your fleet having the smaller ships, but I had twice as many ships, and they were larger. Probably 4 or five times as many weapons total for the fleet. Your DUC's were a bit stronger than what I had at the time. but my ships had organic armor, so they could take a lot more punishment that your standard armor ships.

The result without the Tailsman would have been at worst significant losses on both sides, with me being ultimatly victorious. Instead you destroyed everyone of my ships and lost 5 or 6 of your own. THe Tailsman was clearly the pivital factor in that battle.



<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Your first mistake was in not finishing me off when you had the chance. Your fleet wiped out several of my homewolrds, and then inexplicably, from my perspective left. Now to be fair I do not know what other pressing issues you had to deal with at the moment. You could have been facing a threat from another quarter, or perhaps your fleet was running low on fuel. I don't know. But you did not return immediaetly to finish me off.

Second, you allowed Tesco to negotiate that temporary cease fire. I was stunned that you would accept such an obvious ploy in the middle of a shooting war. But it allowed me to prepare for taking advantage of your third ciritcal error.

Which was not putting SDD's on your top of the line warhips. Retrofitting nearly my entire fleet to heavily armored organic boarding/ramming ships was a total desperation tactic on my part. It was the most cost effective thing I could think of at the moment to deal with the tailsman's. If you had employed SDD's, my ships would have had to be given orders to ram exclusivly. And while they would have been somewhat effective, the combination of your speed advantage and repulser beams would have limited their effectivness considerably. (That was a brilliant combination by the way in addition to the tailsman. Well done. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ) But not having SDD'd on your part meant that I could manage to capture a couple of your ships early in the battle, which caused a cascade effect. Because now the ships I just captured became the strongest ships in my fleet, so the rest of your ships concentrated their fire on them, leaving the rest of my boarding/rammers unmolested. You destroyed most of the ships I captured before the battles in which they were captured were over, but they greatly reduced the overall caualties of my fleet in total.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes, and I attempted to take you out before you developed the Tailsman, and might have been succesful too had I not made a critical mistake of my own and miscalculated the amount of minesweepers in my initial foray into yoru homesystem. Losing that fleet set me back long enough for you to retrofit your fleet and resulted in that disasterous battle (for me) around turn 30.

This has been one of the most mental games I have ever been involved in. Win or lose it's been a pleasure.

Geoschmo

Re: newest beta patch?
 

News from the current beta patch:

Version 1.81:
1. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will work on all target types,
again.
2. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will fail against a ship with
a Master Computer (regardless if that component is damaged or
not). It does not matter if there is a Bridge on the ship.
3. Fixed - AI will no longer launch "Anti-Planet" Drones in combat.
4. Added - Option to strategems to control how many drones are launched
per target in combat.
5. Changed - You can now give drones orders to Attack warp points. This
is essentially the same as telling them to warp through
and attack anything on the other side. Any survivors can then
be given new orders.

Re: newest beta patch?
 

"1. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will work on all target types,
again."

Much better.

"2. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will fail against a ship with
a Master Computer (regardless if that component is damaged or
not). It does not matter if there is a Bridge on the ship."

heh. I take it the other part didn't quite fix it.

"3. Fixed - AI will no longer launch "Anti-Planet" Drones in combat." Some help, some not.

"4. Added - Option to strategems to control how many drones are launched
per target in combat." Good.


"5. Changed - You can now give drones orders to Attack warp points. This
is essentially the same as telling them to warp through
and attack anything on the other side. Any survivors can then
be given new orders."

Whoohoo!

Phoenix-D

Re: newest beta patch?
 

"Version 1.81:
1. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will work on all target types,
again."

Very reasonable (of course only in my opinion).

"2. Fixed - "Crew ConVersion" damage type will fail against a ship with
a Master Computer (regardless if that component is damaged or
not). It does not matter if there is a Bridge on the ship."

Of course I can't have all my wishes fulfilled. I will have to find a solution for myself (probably eliminating master computer and computer virus together from the game).

"3. Fixed - AI will no longer launch "Anti-Planet" Drones in combat.
4. Added - Option to strategems to control how many drones are launched
per target in combat.
5. Changed - You can now give drones orders to Attack warp points. This
is essentially the same as telling them to warp through
and attack anything on the other side. Any survivors can then
be given new orders."

Now these are the kind of changes I welcome!

[ October 15, 2002, 19:20: Message edited by: Q ]

Re: newest beta patch?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And since the new orders can be to attack another warp point, viola recon drones. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Only limited by their supply range, which can be greatly increased in mods.

Geoschmo

Re: newest beta patch?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">"Captain, we're approaching the warp point now."

"Sir, sensors are picking up something small and metallic, closing on us fast."

"On Screen"

"It looks like a drone sir."

"I recommend we raise shields sir."

"It doesn't even know us! I'm sure it's an automated welcoming beacon!"

"But sir, it has a antimatter warhead, and it has been engaged."

"I said It doesn't even know us! I'm sure it's an automated welcoming beacon!"

"*sigh* Whatever you say sir."

Re: newest beta patch?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And since the new orders can be to attack another warp point, viola recon drones. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Only limited by their supply range, which can be greatly increased in mods.

Geoschmo</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Finally, SBMHAWK pods. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: newest beta patch?
 

TerranC:
The only problem with that story is that ships engage in combat with drones, firing PD cannons, unit-targetting main guns, and raising shields.

Re: newest beta patch?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I have to agree as well. I was seriously considering not updating to this latest patch, but all the changes together make this patch worthwhile http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: newest beta patch?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">OMG, you keep all the old turn files! Exactly how big is your archive? Obviously, having looked, you'll know more about that battle then I do. But in general I have clear memories of the early battles being against ships without combat sensors. Of course, that includes the battles with the Meklar, Niridians, and SMR-10 as well as you, and you know, all aliens tend to look the same from in front of a fire-control console...

I think at the time of the battle you mentioned, I also had built the Ship and Fleet Training facilities. So I probably had a Veteran fleet to counter yours, though it's very unlikely that many of my ships were Veteran.

Obviously the Talisman is a huge edge, and I wouldn't want to deny that. But my experience of our more recent battles, and from the other game where I'm playing a Religious, is that while the Talisman lets me win battles against equal or bigger fleets, they are no longer the one-sided blowouts we were seeing initially.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You blew that fleet up (or most of it), with a large number of organic armour rammers, and I'd had to redirect my resources to deal with Tesco's latest 100-ship armada. I did desperately want to come back and glass the rest of your planets http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif but having lost that fleet, I didn't have another to do the job with. Fighting four races on three seperate fronts leaves you with little chance to build up reserves for the next Big Push. My fleets spent a large part of their time dashing from system to system trying to deal with the next threat, and no Kif sailor gets shoreleave unless he's wearing a coffin.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">One of the most interesting and difficult challenges of this sort of game is to get some idea of the other players' current state of minds. From your point of view, I may have been the unstoppable religious monster who was winning every battle he fought. From my point of view I was fighting four opponents, with pretty much the minimum of resources needed to avoid a complete collapse. The attrition rates were pretty favourable, but not favourable enough for me to actually build up any reserves, and the occassional defeat, mistake or bad guess would leave a gaping hole in my defenses. So I was desperate for a chance to rest and rebuild.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Part of the problem was that I didn't (or don't) understand what Self-destruct devices do (Dim X 2.0 is my second PBW game). I was too scared to put them on my ships, seeing a scenario where one of your frigates with Boarding Parties could force one of my Battlecruisers to blow itself up. I've read very recently that boarding ships refuse to even attempt an attack when the enemy has SDDs, but it's a bit late now... Actually, even I had known, I would have a great deal of difficulty finding time to refit my exising fleet. It didn't tend to stand still (except on a warp point) for that length of time.

Actually the repulser beam trick seems less effective in practise then it sounds in theory. It won't push a ship through or past another ship, and it doesn't seem to work on any ship bigger then the firer (as far as I can tell - too lazy to test properly). So often, especially when facing an enemy in a large clump, the repulsers harldly do anything at all.
Another reason why your rammers/boarders did so well. I'd hoped the repulsers would keep them at arms length, but it didn't quite work...

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Agree on that, as well. It's been fun, incredibly tense, and a real mental challenge. A couple of the other PBW games I've played in have had some quite long dull patches, as each player sat still doing the research and buildup thing. Almost none of that in Dim X 2.0

Mark

Re: newest beta patch?
 

I did not know you two were talking in here about Dim 2x.

Fantastic game.

Where many battles were not done with ships but with dipolomcy and the mind.

Mark you have now made it 50 turns fighting the whole universe.

Again Great job.

I have lost hundreds of ships and that ALDAN system is like a yo-yo. Back and Forth. I guess it is my turn now right ??

Thank you for an enjoyable game. Win or lose it was good. And this is the furtherest I have gone in a PBW game... Yea i am a newbie as well there....

Re: newest beta patch?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Obviously we are talking about simultaneous combat, but is this true?

Slick

Re: newest beta patch?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Obviously we are talking about simultaneous combat, but is this true?

Slick</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It is true at least for ships that have only boarding parties and no other weapons. At least is was in my game. They just kind of mill about and not attack. I have seen boarding ships that attacked and got blown up by SDD though. It may have been a boarding ship that had a standard weapon as well as BP that got it into range and the Boarding parties went ahead and tried to board. I will need to test that some more.

Geoschmo

Re: newest beta patch?
 

I wish I had time to test all the things I wanted. The other question is will a boarding ship attempt to board when it has no chance of succeeding? Like if the target had enough Security Stations to prevent capture 1 on 1. At first this may sound good, but I hope not because that would prevent several small boarding ships from attacking a larger target that could be overcome by numbers.

I am playing a SP game now that I am trying to perfect ship and planet capture. I am trying to capture every ship and planet without destroying them first (offensively). I will only destroy enemy ships on purpose if I am the defender. I am working out issues in tactical combat like ship design, formation, strategy, etc. for the ultimate goal of having it work well in strategic combat. I have read the various threads on the subject but tweaking a capture fleet is not easy. In simultaneous combat, it takes a careful balance to capture without destroying the target or getting yourself destroyed.

Sorry, I did not intend to hijack this thread. Please return to your normally scheduled programming.

Slick

[ October 16, 2002, 17:17: Message edited by: Slick ]

Re: newest beta patch?
 

Actually, boarding is all or nothing, so if the defenders win one capture attempt, thy would win them all.

Re: newest beta patch?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The PBW server keeps all the turn files until the game is deleted (I think; it might start deleting the earliest turns later in the game).

Re: newest beta patch?
 

Can any of you insiders or beta testers give us a feel for the expected release of the new patch?

Re: newest beta patch?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Obviously we are talking about simultaneous combat, but is this true?

Slick</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It is true at least for ships that have only boarding parties and no other weapons. At least is was in my game. They just kind of mill about and not attack. I have seen boarding ships that attacked and got blown up by SDD though. It may have been a boarding ship that had a standard weapon as well as BP that got it into range and the Boarding parties went ahead and tried to board. I will need to test that some more.

Geoschmo</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This can be used to your advantage though. Create small, (relatively) cheap boarding ships, and have them try to board the enemy's big, expensive ships with SSDs. The SSD will go off, and the enemy will lose a Battleship or so, and you'll lose a Destroyer. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: newest beta patch?
 

Good way to show your troops you care http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Captain : Troopers your been asigned the USS Dead Men 36, Make sure your wills are sign.