.com.unity Forums

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)
-   Space Empires: IV & V (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   SE5 Demo Bug Reports & Annoyances/Requests (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=30319)

Phoenix-D September 29th, 2006 07:15 PM

Re: Design Flaw: Sucker missile ships
 
Well, it doesn't happen with the standard max range strategy, so it CAN be fixed.

EDIT: and yeah, that's a problem with any tactical AI. If you set it up like you said, you'd get the opposite problem- a ship armed with, say, Ripper Beams would stay at PDC range. Blag.

At least they don't friendly fire each other. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

dmm September 29th, 2006 07:15 PM

Max Range
 
Whatever software algorithm is used for "Max Range," it should work out to "as much as possible, stay as far away from danger as you can while still being able to attack the enemy." As a human being, it is not too hard to figure out what to do in every situation as it comes up. But it is hard to think of an algorithm that covers all reasonable cases. If you can figure out the algorithm used, you can usually find a horrible weakness. However, the current algorithm seems particularly bad and should be improved. It is too easily exploited.

dmm September 29th, 2006 07:21 PM

Re: Design Flaw: Sucker missile ships
 
Quote:

Phoenix-D said:
Well, it doesn't happen with the standard max range strategy, so it CAN be fixed.

See my earlier post explaining why I changed the standard max range strategy. In brief, it is monumentally stupid, making long-range weapons worthless for anything but 1-on-1 fights.

dmm September 29th, 2006 07:36 PM

Re: Design Flaw: Sucker missile ships
 
Quote:

Phoenix-D said:
If you set it up like you said, you'd get the opposite problem- a ship armed with, say, Ripper Beams would stay at PDC range. Blag.

But that's apples and oranges -- RBs are not a long-range weapon, so if your ship mainly had RBs you wouldn't set the strategy to MaxRange. However, if the ship was mainly intended to be a PDC ship and the RB was just to provide some last-ditch defense against close-in enemies, then you might choose MaxRange strategy, and then the behavior you describe would be exactly what you want.

dmm September 29th, 2006 07:41 PM

Bugging out
 
Sorry to cut off the discussion, but I gotta go. No more responses until at least Monday.

Did I mention that SEV is very fun and addictive?

StarJack September 29th, 2006 08:50 PM

Re: Access Violations
 
I had been setting system affinity to 1 CPU only and having frequent access violations. I stopped doing that and have played about 25 turns without an access violation now. So try everything I guess is my point. I don't have any suggestions or other reports that haven't already been made. I'm sure things will be improved, but I'm liking SEV overall and looking forward to the journey!

AAshbery76 September 30th, 2006 12:32 PM

Re: Access Violations
 
This might seem a small annoyance,but I can't put capital letters when naming ships,etc.

Wenin September 30th, 2006 01:13 PM

Re: Access Violations
 
When you want to rename a ship design, it should give you the existing name to edit.

Wenin September 30th, 2006 01:14 PM

Re: Access Violations
 
I am able to use capital letters all the time AAshbery. Sounds like a system issue you're having.

tmcc September 30th, 2006 01:33 PM

Re: Access Violations
 
I too have no problem with using capitals naming either ships or units.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:28 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.