![]() |
Re: newest beta patch?
Quote:
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?
Quote:
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? Quote:
Mark |
Re: newest beta patch?
Quote:
[ October 14, 2002, 14:20: Message edited by: Mylon ] |
Re: newest beta patch?
Quote:
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. Quote:
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. Quote:
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?
Quote:
Geoschmo |
Re: newest beta patch?
Quote:
"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." |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:28 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.