Post 1.84 beta history
 

Version 1.85:
1. Fixed - AI players were giving away technology too easily.
2. Fixed - There was a limit of 5 neutral players in a game. Now the amount of
neutral players is based on the values in the Settings file.
3. Added - 4 more neutral races.
4. Fixed - AI was not taking into account bonus resources for scrapping.
5. Fixed - Changed Population Transport minister so that it takes population
to lowest populated planet regardless of distance and also taking
into account if a pop transport is already heading to the planet.
6. Fixed - Problem with AI checking its existing ship's orders.
7. Fixed - The race setup screen no longer errors if an empire ship picture is
not present.
8. Fixed - "Change Bad Event Chance - System" ability was not working right.
9. Fixed - "Change Bad Intelligence Chance - System" ability was not working right.
10. Fixed - Planets would not recalculate their sight values when a new facility was
built (this would make planets with cloaking abilities not light up cloak
button).
11. Fixed - A cloaked planet would still show its name for the option "Show Planet Names".
12. Fixed - Rebelling planets would double their population.
13. Fixed - Simultaneous different machine multiplayer games now require that a game
master password be provided.
14. Fixed - In the Select Package screen, clicking in the package list would not reduce
the resources by the x10000 or x100000 amount selected.
15. Fixed - Integer Overflow if a finite resource planet had too large a value.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Superb !!! That should fix most AI problems in Proportions mod http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif I may return to work on AIs again http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

Now if we can just get the 'number of engines' thing fixed to be consistent and get the AI to actually USE "Max Engines" so that you don't need to have one design for every size class in QNP mods...

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

"Move Hundred" in Transfer Cargo window would be nice too. Is Aaron already conscious about this? I don't want to disturb him if he already knows this.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

what about being able to send more than one message, ie being able to give a gift and receve one in the same turn.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

any chance we can have satelite "formations"?
yeah, probably just post this in SE:V thread...

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

*near whimper*
hotkeys?

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

2. Fixed - There was a limit of 5 neutral players in a game. Now the amount of
neutral players is based on the values in the Settings file.

Fricking awsome, ya baby ay!!!!!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

7. Fixed - The race setup screen no longer errors if an empire ship picture is
not present.
8. Fixed - "Change Bad Event Chance - System" ability was not working right.
9. Fixed - "Change Bad Intelligence Chance - System" ability was not working right.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif And a follow up thank you Aaron and the beta testers! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ November 29, 2003, 04:31: Message edited by: Atrocities ]

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

5. Fixed - Changed Population Transport minister so that it takes population
to lowest populated planet regardless of distance and also taking
into account if a pop transport is already heading to the planet.


this is my fav one.
I always let the ministers handel these things.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

This is great stuff! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

Excellent news!
This will be a great patch and a big improvement of the AI http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif
Thank you so much MM.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

So where is the Version history for 1.86? Surely it must have come out by now. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

Yes, must have info, need info, will die without it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

Looking real good so far, though. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

No 1.86 yet.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

Is this available, or is this thread just for beta testers? I was just wondering when and where I can download this from.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

"The year is 1987, and NASA launches the Last of America's deep space probes. In a freak mishap, Ranger 3 and its pilot, Capt. William 'Buck' Rogers, are blown out of their trajectory into an orbit which freezes his life support systems...and returns Buck Rogers to Earth five hundred years later...."

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I have the old movie comic book laying around someplace. I ordered it when I was in the fourth or fifth grade.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

So, this will be the part of the offical SEIV history after patch 1.86 ? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

It would be nice to have the AI end wars easier http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ December 01, 2003, 17:11: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

Oh yeah, I got that patch-anticipation feeling all over again. I'd almost forgotten what it felt like...

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Speaking of Buck Rogers, guess what's on Sci-Fi tomorrow starting at 11 eastern? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I see that "Planet of the Slave Girls" will air first. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

where are you guys getting those lists?

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

Beta testers get such lists when a new beta patch comes out.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

So there isn't any non-disclosure agreement swearing them to secrecy?

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

oh, well if there's going to be a 1.86, lets get satelite formations in there! We can't go on to SEV before we've solved the satelite clump problem! hehe http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Sort of... there was before the game was released. I do not know the details, but I do know that they gave the go ahead to post the Version history files for beta Version. Nothing wrong with that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Considering that Shrapnel staff will sometimes post beta patch lists..no point. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

Posting these updates has been a long standing tradition of this forum. A most enjoyed, and welcome tradition at that.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

If the patch is not finalized yet, I have a couple of requests:

1) Make it so that ships can ram fighters and satellites in strategic combat, as they can in tactical.

2) Fix the bug in the simulator that gives a stack of fighters only the amount of supplies that a single fighter has.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I agree. Nothing wrong whatsoever. Another reason for me to love MM. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">And a fine tradition it is! Keep it up! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

I ask because many of the companies I buy games from, such as Paradox (I have Europa Universalis 2, Hearts of Iron, and soon Victoria), require their betatesters to sign NDAs which prohibit them from discussing the details of a patch until it is about to be released.

[ December 03, 2003, 06:06: Message edited by: Prince Xizor ]

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">personally, i'd rather have it transport to the planet with the lowest pop and the highest maximum pop.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

Beta testers had to sign NDAs. But, they were (partially?) released from them at some point.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

It would be great if the population minister (PM) also considered the atmosphere of the planet and population when moving races around. If the PM started to do this, I would definitely use him. As it is now, the PM will eventually move wrong-breathing population to planets and thus make them domed. I think adding right-breathing population and removing wrong-breathing population is much more important than building up population numbers. Bonuses for undoming a planet effectively make it 5 times bigger for facilities and cargo. With a couple of other-breathing races in your empire, you can significantly increase your effective empire size without colonizing any additional planets.

The Colonization Minister (CM) should use this idea too. The CM should pick a target planet for colonization, then pick up right-breathing population from a convenient place (not necessarily the planet that constructed the colonizer) then colonize the planet. If the CM did this, I would definitely use him too. Keep in mind that if this method was used by the ministers, it would also improve the AI which is always a good thing.

Lastly, the PM should recognize the "magic numbers" for population as defined in settings.txt. He should try to the max extent to maintain populations of 100, 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, etc. on each planet so as to maximize population bonuses. He should know that a planet population of 1900 is no more beneficial than 1000, but those extra 900 people could better be used to raise other planets to a level of 100 or 500. Aside from undoming planets, this is the whole reason to move population around. Also a planet at max population level can't generate more population and it should be used as an available source of population.

As it stands I use no ministers because of their inherent flaws. IMHO, the PM and the CM would do the most to cut down on some of the micromanagement required in this game and recognizing planet atmosphere types is crucial to improving them. Though I wouldn't turn on the CM until mid-late game because choice of the right planets to colonize in the early-mid timeframe is too important.

Slick.

[ December 03, 2003, 14:50: Message edited by: Slick ]

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

good point slick...

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You can ameliorate this by adding in 1% bonus levels as opposed to just the 10% that are there now. I made a "Smoothed Pop Settings" minimod that did this quite some time ago and emailed it to MM, but I guess he didn't like it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

or maybe MM is going for a sort of minimum approach to the files to minimize confusion for new players. if people want something more complicated, they can mod it in.

or at least, that's my guess.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

Bah. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

*bump
and some news:

Version 1.86:
1. Added - "AI Tag ##" abilities for use in getting AIs to use specific components.
2. Fixed - Improved Empire placement using the "Evenly distributed through the quadrant" option.
3. Fixed - AI would purchase ships even if it had no resources available.
4. Fixed - Cloaked unit Groups would not show a dotted circle around them.
5. Added - Empire style directory label to the Empire setup window.
6. Fixed - AI would still try to launch units when its maximum units in space had been reached.
7. Fixed - The name of the current item under construction should show how many as well.
8. Fixed - Drones were not inflicting special damage types.
9. Fixed - Decreased seeker damage factor required to move to next target.
10. Fixed - You could build designs which had mounts of higher technology than your empire.
11. Fixed - AI would build all of the same colonizer type in a given turn.
12. Added - Mousewheel support to lists.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

mousey wheels
wheeeeeeee
oh ya, us betas get this info. Usually richard goes ahead and does it. So I guess its ok

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">*drools*

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yay! My suggestion made it in! Mac will like this one. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Now we just need the vehicle size and target type fields to accept comma separated lists, and Adamant will be ready to rock and roll! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

[ December 04, 2003, 04:13: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">huh?

Fyron: humbug.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

5. Added - Empire style directory label to the Empire setup window.

zuh?

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The game should display the name of the race folder next to the shipset images when you are scrolling through them. This should come in very handy for PBW for people that haven't memorized the namaes of all their shipsets. Now, why he said "empire style" is beyond me...

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">How about making all lists (construction, ships, colonies, planets) remember their places, instead of just the events list?

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">May be it was an artifact in the intermediate 1.85 patch, beta-testers find it and now it is back to normal ? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">On their warheads - sure, a drone could fire a nullspace projector or an ionic disperser, but you couldn't create a working nullspace or anti-ionic drone warhead! Hmmm... drones with the Allegiance Subverter's damage type... Borg assimilation probes, anyone? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Great list of changes BTW! I'm actually starting to dread the coming of Christmas because the sooner it comes, the less time there is to add and fix stuff! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">On their warheads - sure, a drone could fire a nullspace projector or an ionic disperser, but you couldn't create a working nullspace or anti-ionic drone warhead! Hmmm... drones with the Allegiance Subverter's damage type... Borg assimilation probes, anyone? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Great list of changes BTW! I'm actually starting to dread the coming of Christmas because the sooner it comes, the less time there is to add and fix stuff! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Thank you for this explanation Ed.
The Borg assimilation drones were exactely one of the examples I use frequently, but as you said not with a warhead but a weapon component.

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">No. Special damage types have never worked with drone warheads. I have wanted to be able to build 'plague drones' for years and it is only now possible. Now I can infect entire systems in a single attack... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif And just think of the other possibilities! Tachyon warheads to make weapon-neutralizing drones for starbase assault! (Drones go in and kill the weapons before your ships have to go in...) Or neutrino warheads to neutralize shield generators! Ionic warheads carried by super-fast drones to disable ships' engines and let your slower ships catch them! "Smart bomb" drone warheads to let you knock out space ports or resupply depots without even having to send in ships! Quad damage to shields and null-space are some other cool damage types for a drone warhead, but I can't think of any 'special' tactics they would allow. Just standard combat uses like ordinary explosive warhead.

[ December 04, 2003, 23:15: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">No. Special damage types have never worked with drone warheads. I have wanted to be able to build 'plague drones' for years and it is only now possible. Now I can infect entire systems in a single attack... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif And just think of the other possibilities! Tachyon warheads to make weapon-neutralizing drones for starbase assault! (Drones go in and kill the weapons before your ships have to go in...) Or neutrino warheads to neutralize shield generators! Ionic warheads carried by super-fast drones to disable ships' engines and let your slower ships catch them! "Smart bomb" drone warheads to let you knock out space ports or resupply depots without even having to send in ships! Quad damage to shields and null-space are some other cool damage types for a drone warhead, but I cna't think of any 'special' tactics they would allow. Just standad combat uses like ordinary explosive warhead. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">But why do you need warheads for such designs ??
You can achive the same with weapons on drones.
Mod short-range, high damage, 30-turn reload Versions of all those special weapons that can be used on drones only. Problem solved http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Post 1.84 beta history
 

I think I found a bug (or, at least, I view it as a design flaw):

I am running a PBEM game. I log in Last night as the GM and process the turn. Haflway through the processing, up pops a modal window that says "Cannot mothball ships that are carrying cargo" This goes on four times (one for each cargo-carrying ship that was ordered to mothball)

Ok, I understand that, and I just hit OK until it stopped giving me the error and in the end it looks like the turn processed fine.

However, this would cause PBW games to hang, no? And shouldn't this warning just be put into the players event log rather than pop out at the GM processing level?

Thanks,

Alarik