Devnull Mod is back!
 

The Devnull Mod is one of the early SEIV mods and developed quite a few fans, myself included. Unfortunatley we haven't heard much from Devnellicus lately, so I looked him up and got permission to re-release his mod and update it in time for the new CD. It's going to take some work, but hopefully I won't have to do it all myself. (hint, hint http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif )

I have posted Version 1.40 in the data mods section. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/For...ML/000018.html

All I have done with Version 1.40 is modify it so it's useable with Version 1.49, and Matryx's mod picker. I don't think it's quite ready to put on the CD yet though. The first priority is going to be playtesting and getting the AI up to speed on using the new techs that Devnull added with Version 1.31

Any suggestion's would be welcome.

Geoschmo

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>This mod is the brainchild of Devnellicus, and the result of many long hours of work by him and many others. Unfortunatly, real life has intruded upon Devnellicus to the point where he can no longer keep up with the work involved in revising this mod for current Versions of SEIV.

With his permission, I have taken up the task of updating it for the current Version, with the hope that it will be ready in time to be included with the new SEIV CD that Sharapnel is planning on releasing.

Changes will be kept to a minimum, and I will rely on the help of the original contributors as much as possible. It is not my intention to reinvent the Devnull Mod, only to update it to playability with the current Versions, and to perhaps make some minor changes that take advantage of new features in SEIV that would have been done had they been available before.

According to Devnellicus' notes for Version 1.31, there were significant changes to components in that Version and changes were not made in the Ai files to account for this. I have not yet made any such changes either. Because of this the Ai may not perform particularly well under Devnull Version 1.40.

Priority will be given to making the changes neccesary to optimize the AI for use with the current Version of Devnull Mod. Any assistance in this regard would be appreciated, escpecially by those individuals that were original contributors. All are welcome to assist however.

Geoschmo<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

Excellent! Having Devnullmod back is almost as good as having Devnullicus back! Well done Geo. For anyone not familiar with it, I highly recommend Devnullmod as an extremely well balanced and interesting mod, with a fantastic tech tree.

Oh, and it's worth mentioning that the Space Vikings shipset was specifically designed for Devnullmod, with images for all the extra hull sizes. (which were inspired by Dave's mod, which in turn were derived from a thread on the eGroups board, back in the dark days of SE4 pre-history, trivia fans) Anyway, I'd be extremely pleased if the "new" Devnullmod were to call on these otherwise unused images. take a look at the "non-standard hull sizes" thread currently being discussed.

------------------
SE4 Code:
L GdY $ Fr- C- Sd T!+ Sf-- Tcp-- A% M&gt;M+ MpD! RV Pw Fq+ Nd- Rp+ G-
/SE4 Code
Go to my meagre SEIV pages to generate your own code.

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

Dogscoff,

If you want I can include the Space Vikings in the mod. It can't hurt to add some unique races for variety, and if it is optimized for Devnull, so much the better.

There are a couple already in it that I need to get a hold of the authors and see if they want them left in.

Geo

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

Geoschmo,
would you agree to change the mod to make it compatible with the "Standard" we're trying to make.
Take a look at the Non standard hulls thread.

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Alternatly, you can use Matryx's Mod Picker utility to switch between Versions. This is the prefered method. It eliminates the need for dealing with the path.txt files at all.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Cheers for pimping my Mod Selector Geo http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

Also, thanks for reviving my favourite mod of them all.
Pirates and Nomads comes a close second, but DevNull was my all-time favourite.

------------------
The Unofficial Space Empires 4 Mod Utility V2.0
------------------
Download as a .ZIP &lt;HERE&gt;
Download as a .RAR &lt;HERE&gt;
Download as a .ACE &lt;HERE&gt;
Check a Screenshot of it&lt;HERE&gt;

Check an Alpha Shot of my Mod Editor (Unreleased) &lt;HERE&gt;

[This message has been edited by Matryx (edited 18 November 2001).]

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

As the author of Dave's Mod (sometimes known as Derek's mod), which originally included all the different ship sizes and such, you all are more than welcome to change pictures, titles, etc... to fit with the ship size standard as talked about on that thread.

In addition, anyone is more than welcome to pick and choose whatever parts of any my mods that you want to use, and modify them however you want. This includes any part of my mods that made their way into Devnull's mod. I'd prefer you gave me an him some credit, but if you don't, I won't stay up nights crying http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif The main reason behind the modding I did was to increase the enjoyment of the game for me and others.

One other thing, if you hadn't noticed: I took inspriation for a large number of the changes from David Weber's Starfire series of novels, which came from the Starfire wargame. If anyone is interested, there are many, many more things that can be taken from both the novels and the game and adapted to SE4.

Derek

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Derek:
One other thing, if you hadn't noticed: I took inspriation for a large number of the changes from David Weber's Starfire series of novels, which came from the Starfire wargame. If anyone is interested, there are many, many more things that can be taken from both the novels and the game and adapted to SE4.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's funny. Malfador credits Starfire as big part of the inspiration for the Space Empires series. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Geo

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by geoschmo:
That's funny. Malfador credits Starfire as big part of the inspiration for the Space Empires series. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Geo<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know.....however, there is a whole lot more to Starfire than what MM includes in SE4.

Derek

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

Support has been added to PBW to play games using v1.49 + Devnull Mod 1.40.

You can also download the mod ver 1.40 from the PBW file library if you prefer instead of the shrappnel mod section.

Geoschmo

[This message has been edited by geoschmo (edited 19 November 2001).]

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

I am still pretty new to SE4, so I have never tried Devnull Mod. I think it is a great idea to bring it back http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif.

Geoschmo, I will make a Viking AI for Devnull Mod as soon as I can. Once I have finished that and got more comfortable with this Mod, I volunteer to help adapting any remaining AIs, if you want that help.

At first glance, here is couple of comments and suggestions:

- filler tech is not needed anymore, since the research works correctly now. OTOH it doesn't hurt either.

- please consider putting ripper beams, incinerator beams and WMGs in different weapon families. This way the AI can call for a certain weapon and rippers do not get upgraded unless wanted. (actually, I will also suggest that to Aaron for the stock Version. I could never understand why rippers would be changed to WMGs. Can anyone think of any weapons that are more different than these two?)

- torpedos need to be more useful, IMHO. Either more damage or getting a "to hit" bonus and some more range. Compared to the APB, which have the same research cost they are a lot weaker. I know you want to keep changes at a minimum and I agree with that. A few balance issues can't hurt to be discussed, though (at least IMHO).

Rollo

edit:typo



[This message has been edited by Rollo (edited 21 November 2001).]

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

I am getting some interesting results from the design creation minister. If the design calls for extra supplies, engines will be added instead. I have 15-engines-hyperfast-scouts flying around now http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon10.gif. Of course they are illegal, but since the minister created them they will be built and used by the AI.

Rollo

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rollo:
I am getting some interesting results from the design creation minister. If the design calls for extra supplies, engines will be added instead. I have 15-engines-hyperfast-scouts flying around now http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon10.gif. Of course they are illegal, but since the minister created them they will be built and used by the AI.

Rollo <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Are you talking about all the Devnull races, or just your vikings? I am going to have to do some tweaking with all the ai's if I can figure it out. I am a total rook when it comes to the AI files, so hopefully I don't break something else when I fix a problem. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Geo

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

I was talking about the Vikings. However, this is not race specific. Other races build things like 7 engine colonizers as well. I *think* this has to do with the order of the components in the data/components.txt file. I am pretty sure either S_J or Phoenix-D will have a better answer (and solution) to that.

Rollo

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

If the engines provide more supply storage than the supply components, they'll put engines in instead.

EDIT: yup. The high level Devnull engines give more supply than any supply component, especially with the bug listed below.

Also, I found a bug in the supply components. Supply storage I, for example, SAYS it gives 500 supply, but it's actually set to give 250..and ion engine I gives 500, so it'll be used instead of the supply storage component. It's the same for all the storage components- they give much less than they say they do, and so the engines provide more supply.

Phoenix-D

[This message has been edited by Phoenix-D (edited 21 November 2001).]

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

Cool, I'll have to fix that. I hope I haven't bitten off more than I can chew here. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Geo

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

Good idea on the update! I've actually been carrying ideas from this mod from Version to Version since way back in Derek's initial mod, using it as a 'base' model to incorporate other mods into. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

One of the things I'd advocate changing back would be some of the small weapon (i.e., fighter) damages...it seems like they're just minor annoyances as opposed to a real threat with the decreased damage potential. Or is this just me?

zen

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

YEA!!!!!!! I Love this mod! I wish I was able to help on it but I'm Compuiter Illerit


------------------
mottlee@gte.net
"Kill em all let God sort em out"

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
If the engines provide more supply storage than the supply components, they'll put engines in instead.

EDIT: yup. The high level Devnull engines give more supply than any supply component, especially with the bug listed below.

Also, I found a bug in the supply components. Supply storage I, for example, SAYS it gives 500 supply, but it's actually set to give 250..and ion engine I gives 500, so it'll be used instead of the supply storage component. It's the same for all the storage components- they give much less than they say they do, and so the engines provide more supply.

Phoenix-D

[This message has been edited by Phoenix-D (edited 21 November 2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ah, I see. Thanks, Phoenix-D.

I guess that means that the supply storage has to be put back to 500 supplies. From what I gather in the readme the size and supplies has been halved. So instead of 500/20 it was changed to 250/10. By comparing to the unmodded Version I noticed that the mineral cost has not been halved, though. Don't know if that was intended (thus doubling the cost of extra supplies) or just forgotten to change like the description.

In order to avoid conflicts with the supply storage at a later time, the advanced engines should probably not carry more supplies, but stay with 500 supplies. To get a similar effect of extended range with better engines the "supplies used" could be lowered.

Please let me propose the following:

current system: all engines use 10 supplies

Ion Engine I/II/III supplies: 500/550/600 range: 50/55/60
Contra Terrene Engine I/II/III supplies: 600/650/700 range: 60/65/70
Jacketed Photon Engine I/II/III supplies: 700/750/800 range: 70/75/80
Quantum Engine I/II/III supplies: 800/850/900 range: 80/85/90

proposed system: all engines carry 500 supplies

Ion Engine I/II/III supplies used: 10/9/8 range: 50/55/62
Contra Terrene Engine I/II/III supplies used: 9/8/7 range: 55/62/71
Jacketed Photon Engine I/II/III supplies used: 8/7/6 range: 62/71/83
Quantum Engine I/II/III supplies used: 7/6/5 range: 71/83/100

This would leave the resulting range pretty close as it used to be. Versions I and II of each engine type have slightly inferior range, while Versions III have slightly better range. Note: when the engines use less fuel, extra supplies and solar collectors will be more useful as they used to be. That is not a bad thing IMHO, especially when it comes to the AI getting a better range to its fleets.

What do you think Geoschmo? It would leave the spirit of the mod more or less unchanged, while getting rid of the design problems.

Rollo

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

Rollo, I think that is an elegant solution to the problem. I expect Devnellicus would have done it that way originally if he had thought of it and been aware of the problem with the ship designs. The end result is the higher tech engines have a longer range, which is what the purpose was to begin with.

Thanks, and keep the suggestions coming.

Geo

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

Okay, great.
As a matter of fact I have already tried if the changes would work and they do http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif.
Unless you have already changed something else in the components.txt file, here is the fix. It is the original file with only the changes that I suggested below. Maybe that can save you some time.

I will continue with my little test game tomorrow and let you know, if I notice something else.

Rollo

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

Thanks.

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

A few things I remember about the changes you've been discussing:

Devnull's original intent when reducing the size of supply storage was simple: He thought it illogicakl that a 10kt engine stores 500 supplies but a 20kt supply storage component only stores the same amount. I don't know how (if at all) that afects your files.

Secondly, the fighter damage: This may have been introduced to counter the patch 1.35 fighter stacking bug. (remember that one?)Obviously that no longer apllies. Playtesting may be required to rebalance fighter damage.

------------------
SE4 Code:
L GdY $ Fr- C- Sd T!+ Sf-- Tcp-- A% M&gt;M+ MpD! RV Pw Fq+ Nd- Rp+ G-
/SE4 Code
Go to my meagre SEIV pages to generate your own code.

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dogscoff:
A few things I remember about the changes you've been discussing:

Devnull's original intent when reducing the size of supply storage was simple: He thought it illogicakl that a 10kt engine stores 500 supplies but a 20kt supply storage component only stores the same amount. I don't know how (if at all) that afects your files.

Secondly, the fighter damage: This may have been introduced to counter the patch 1.35 fighter stacking bug. (remember that one?)Obviously that no longer apllies. Playtesting may be required to rebalance fighter damage.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I agree on the fighter thing. That thought had occured to me also that fixing the fighter stack bug made some of those changes uneccesary. It's a simple enough matter to just change the damage amounts back to what they were originally, but the problem comes in with balancing that against other changes made in different areas. I have to proceed carefully there.

On the first point, he didn't change the size of the supply storage component as far as I can see. He maade the higher tech engines store more on there own. If the problem was that the engine shouldn't store more that a supply component twice it's size, I wonder why he made the supply storage of the engines higher. The seems to make the problem worse IMHO, even assuming he didn't know about the bug with the design minister using engines as supply components.

Any thoughts?

Geoschmo

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

Hmm. I could have sworn supply storage in Devnull was only 10kt. It was very handy for filling in thos 10kt gaps on small ships. Ah well.

The 500supply in 20kt engine vs 500kt in 20kt storage is a good point though. You could solve both problems at once by reducing supply storage to 5kt / 250supply.


------------------
SE4 Code:
L GdY $ Fr- C- Sd T!+ Sf-- Tcp-- A% M&gt;M+ MpD! RV Pw Fq+ Nd- Rp+ G-
/SE4 Code
Go to my meagre SEIV pages to generate your own code.

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

Supply storage was 10kT for 250 supplies, prior to the changes I suggested yesterday. However, in order for the design minister to function correctly the lowest supply storage must have at least as many supplies as the highest engine.

As to why 20kT of storage can only hold as many supplies as a 10kT engine... uuuhm... let's just say that the larger part of the engine (including fuel tanks) it put outside the ship, the 10kT account for the controls and fuselage (or whatever) inside the ship http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif.

I have a couple of more things that I found, I'll post them later (if I just wasn't such a slow writer).

Rollo

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

Hi,
here are a couple of things:<UL TYPE=SQUARE>
<LI> the .emps of the Devnull races do not work. The .emp that I am using for the Vikings (the same one as for the standard game) does work. I assume there were some changes with racial traits in older Versions of Devnull Mod which have been changed back to "normal" in this Version.

<LI> I agree that the fighter weapons have to be balanced. Also, don't forget that some races (organic, psychic) could use the smaller weapons for troops. Some of them are better than troop weapons in the unmodded game.

<LI> There is another issue with ship/base/unit designs, this time concerning point-defense: It is no problem to get normal PDC added since you can use the minesweeping ability. When the design calls for point-defense the PDC is added at the beginning, when anti-fighter-missiles I and mini-PD is available the AFM gets added (good). When higher levels of point-defense are researched the AFM gets replaced with mini-PD II (not good, IMHO). This has to do with order in the components file, roman numerals or whatever (S_J, Phoenix-D: Help!). Here is what I would find desirable in regard to AI designs: arrange the components in a way that either ASM or mini-PD always gets added when calling for point-defense (doesn't matter which one really). After that works we could add another useless ability to the other one (star unstable or some such). This way an AI design could ask for each component specifically. For example: if you want PDC, you use mine sweeping; for AFM, you use point-defense; and for mini-PD, you use star-unstable (or whatever).

<LI> PD eyecandy: when anti-fighter-missiles are launched, nothing is displayed in the game (at least I didn't see anything). This probably has to do with the AFM being a direct fire weapon, but calling for a seeker display. Weapon display "torp" with numbers 10 or 20 looks pretty nice, IMHO (already tried that, it works).

<LI> Satellite mounts: Personally I would prefer, if the pulsed and large satellite mounts would be reversed in order. This way the AI uses the pulsed mount, which is better IMHO, because of better range and higher "to hit" bonus. Sure it does less damage, but because of the smaller size another weapon could be stuffed in (or some other goodie). If we can reach a consensus on this, fine. If not, just as well.

Here are the mounts' data. Please discuss.

Long Name := Pulsed Satellite Mount
Short Name := Pulse Mount
Description := Weapon fires short bursts giving +50% to hit, +25% damage and +3 range, but costing +50%. Requires a satellite of at least 120kT. Can only be used on Direct Fire weapons.
Code := P
Cost Percent := 150
Tonnage Percent := 100
Tonnage Structure Percent := 100
Damage Percent := 125
Supply Percent := 150
Range Modifier := 3
Weapon To Hit Modifier := 50
Vehicle Size Minimum := 120
Weapon Type Requirement := Direct Fire
Vehicle Type := Satellite

Long Name := Large Satellite Mount
Short Name := Large Mount
Description := Larger sized weapon mount which increases damage from the weapon by 2 times. Increases the range of the weapon by 2. Requires a satellite size of at least 120kT. Can only be used on Direct Fire weapons.
Code := L
Cost Percent := 125
Tonnage Percent := 125
Tonnage Structure Percent := 200
Damage Percent := 200
Supply Percent := 200
Range Modifier := 2
Weapon To Hit Modifier := 20
Vehicle Size Minimum := 120
Weapon Type Requirement := Direct Fire
Vehicle Type := Satellite

<LI> I have suggested this before and I'll do it again: It would be much nicer, if the high-energy weapons would use different weapon numbers. Devnullicus has done this for the various missiles, so let's do it for RB, IB, and WMG as well. Maybe I am alone on this one, but I do think that a Ripper Beam with range 9 and doing 350 damage is a cool thing on a Starbase that the AI should be able to use. The way it is right know, I would always run the risk that the rippers will be replaced by the crappy Incinerator Beam I. Also it would be nice to have ships use RB and WMG at the same time. Just think of a Roman Legionnaire charging in, first throwing his Pilum/javelin (WMG) and then drawing his short sword (RB) for melee. Again, maybe I am alone on this one, but I think it would be cool http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon6.gif.[/list]
Okay, 'nuff said... http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

Rollo

edit:typos
edit: more typos
[This message has been edited by Rollo (edited 22 November 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Rollo (edited 22 November 2001).]

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

" When the design calls for point-defense the PDC is added at the beginning, when anti-ship-missiles I and mini-PD is available the ASM gets added (good). When higher levels of point-defense are researched the ASM gets replaced with mini-PD II (not good, IMHO). This has to do with order in the components file, roman numerals or whatever (S_J, Phoenix-D: Help!)."

The AI will use whatever shows up when you press "see only latest". If they BOTH show up, it will pick whichever does more damage.

Suggestion: add a useless ability to each.

Phoenix-D

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
The AI will use whatever shows up when you press "see only latest". If they BOTH show up, it will pick whichever does more damage.

Suggestion: add a useless ability to each.

Phoenix-D<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks, do you have any idea what determines what shows up when "see only latest"? Is it order in components.txt, roman numeral, whatever...

Adding a useless abilty to both could be the easiest way. I guess that trick can be used for other components that share the same ability as well (e.g. armor). Although it would complicate things, it is a nice way for an AI modder to use a specific component and optimize the designs. I guess some kind of index would have to be done that shows which useless ability causes what component to be added.
I would volunteer to do that, if we are going to make use of that. The question is: Is that really needed? How good to we want the AI to be able to use all the components that come with this mod? It is some extra work.

Geoschmo, what do you think? What does everybody else think?

Rollo

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

It's order in the file, IF the components of the same family are all in a row.

Say you had, in this order:
Armor I
Armor III
Armor V
Ion Engine I
Armor II
Armor IV

Armor in one family, engine in another. With all the armor researched, you'd see:
Armor V
Ion Engine I
Armor IV

when you pressed show latest.

Phoenix-D

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

Thanks again, Phoenix-D http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif.

Okay, all three PD Versions (PDC, mini-PD, and AFM) have different family numbers and they all show up.
What I still don't get is which one is chosen by the minister. If it was highest damage like you said, then AFM I (50 dmg) would not be replaced by mini-PD II (15 dmg), but it is.
So I thought the minister would use the higher roman numeral over damage (mini-PD II replacing AFM I), but this opens the question why normal PDC is not added in the first place, since it has an even higher roman numeral (PDC IV is available when mini-PD II is).
Very confusing.... http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...s/confused.gif

Rollo *unable to find a pattern*

edit:

Wow, it gets even more confusing. Mini-PD II is replacing AFM I ONLY on designs that carry normal PDC as well (using the mine sweeping). Designs that carried AFM I as the only point-defense weapon will keep them. After fighters are researched (and AFM II and III become available) the mini-PD II gets replaced again with AFM III. I *think* I am beginning to see a pattern, but right now I see two solutions: A) not worry about it anymore, B) give both the mini-PD and the AFM useless abilities.

edit again: why do keep writing ASM for anti-fighter-missiles? It should be AFM. Anyway, I have corrected that (in this and previous Posts)

[This message has been edited by Rollo (edited 22 November 2001).]

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by dogscoff:
A few things I remember about the changes you've been discussing:

Devnull's original intent when reducing the size of supply storage was simple: He thought it illogicakl that a 10kt engine stores 500 supplies but a 20kt supply storage component only stores the same amount. I don't know how (if at all) that afects your files.

Secondly, the fighter damage: This may have been introduced to counter the patch 1.35 fighter stacking bug. (remember that one?)Obviously that no longer apllies. Playtesting may be required to rebalance fighter damage.

<hr></blockquote>

Hi there, long time no talk. I'm amazed at how much interest this has, to resurrect what I thought was a long-dead mod =)

Anyway, as to my intentions for these changes when put in:

1) I did not know about the supply minister bug where it would choose engines instead of supplies. I vaguely remember finding that happening in playtesting, but not knowing why or how to fix it. Glad someone has found a fix for it. As to why I made them 10kT, it was because they filled gaps in ship designs much better and were generally far more useful that way than at 20kT. I even considered making them 5kT. I also considered leaving the amount of supplies held at 10kT the same as at 20Kt (thus actually doubling the supplies stored for the weight), but didn't think that balanced as well.

Now the big issue, fighter damage. No, the reductions were not because of the 1.35 fighter-stacking bug, which I knew would be fixed soon (and it was by the time the mod came out, I think). The reductions were part of a wholesale balance modification to small weaponry. After extensive playtesting with small weaponry on troops and fighters, I came to the conclusion that fighters were just plain too powerful for their cost. A stack of 10 or so of the largest fighter hulls at old small-weapon damage could easily take out most large ships in one shot, even when the large ship had a fair amount of PD. This was not at all balanced, IMHO. So, I experimented a lot with new damage for small weapons and it seemed that cutting them all by a factor of 10 made combats between fighters and large ships reasonable. Both sides with equivalent costs had about equal chances.

Yes, this may have been skewed by the fighter-stacking bug, but I tried hard to discount those effects in my testing. It's been a long time so I don't remember exactly what I did, but I do remember being fairly satisfied with the new balance, though I also wanted to get a good amount of playtesting from others to see if I should maybe raise the damage back up somewhat.

Anyway, as of the time I tested, I was pretty happy with fighter game balance. If new patches have made fighters and small weapons useless due to the low damages, then by all means, raise them to make them worthwhile. However, my intention in lowering the damages was general game balance.

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by geoschmo:
Rollo, I think that is an elegant solution to the problem. I expect Devnellicus would have done it that way originally if he had thought of it and been aware of the problem with the ship designs. The end result is the higher tech engines have a longer range, which is what the purpose was to begin with.

Thanks, and keep the suggestions coming.

Geo<hr></blockquote>

Yup, that was the original intent. Higher tech engines seemed almost pointless for the amount of research they took and I wanted to give them some advantage worth spending the research on. Longer range seemed a good way to do that.

P.S. It's devnUllicus, not devnellicus =) However, since I no longer can get that name (the forum deleted my account, but won't let me re-register with that name), I'm using my old name of devnull anyway =)

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

As I recall, there were a few bugs still in my 1.31 Devnull mod that I had to fix. I remember the engine supply storage, but I think that the fighter engines also had an error in reporting the proper supply amount.

CombatSquirrel

Re: Devnull Mod is back!
 

Devnull! You're back! How are you?