Comments on Combined Mods with Additional Enhancements

[Chris Haltiner]

In order to make for a more challenging single player game I have combined the TDM-ModPack 3.30 and Fyron's Quadrant Mod Standard 1.18. I have also made the following enhancements:

- Level cost for tech areas doubled.
- Facility mineral costs doubled.
- To-hit modifiers added to weapon descriptions.
- Point - Defense Cannons to-hit reduced and uses progressive to-hit scale.
- Graviton Hellbore damage increased by 20%.
- Shard Cannon damage slightly increased (a few points).
- Telekinetic Projector damage decreases slightly over distance.
- Anti - Matter Torpedo radioactives cost tripled.
- Quantum Torpedo radioactives cost tripled.
- Quantum Torpedo to-hit +10 added.
- Wave - Motion Gun construction resource costs doubled.
- Wave - Motion Gun II range increased by 1.
- Wave - Motion Gun III range increased by 2.
- Wave - Motion Gun supply amount used doubled.
- Most mineral costs in VehicleSize.txt increased by various margins. Examples:
Escort 450
Frigate 700
Destroyer 1200
Light Cruiser 1800
Cruiser 3000
Battle Cruiser 4200
Battleship 6400
Dreadnought 10000
Baseship 20000
Other ship's mineral costs have been doubled. Bases, satellites, fighters, drones, and mines are basically unchanged.
- All units in VehicleSize.txt have resource construction cost which equals 10% of mineral cost.

Based on other player's experiences, will the combination of the above make for a challenging game or will the AI be incapable of dealing with the increased costs? Most of these changes are designed to slow me down more than the AI.

I may also change Fyron's SystemTypes.txt to have systems with both fewer and greater planets and possibly less asteroids overall.

I plan on playing with high research costs even with the doubled research cost above. (I enjoy a slow tech evolving game starting with minial techs.)

Comments?

-Chris

[Suicide Junkie]

Wave Motion gun should have about 10-12 range considering the SE3 conVersion ratios.

Anti - Matter Torpedo radioactives cost tripled.
Torpedoes are already quite poor weapons. I reccommend adding a 15-25% accuracy bonus to make them worth using in some situations. (When you otherwise have <30% accuracy or so)

Making the large hulls so much more expensive will hurt the AIs.
They tend to go with the biggest hull available, though some TDM AIs go with battlecruisers and Battleships even in the end game.

[Fyron]

In order to make for a more challenging single player game I have combined the TDM-ModPack 3.30 and Fyron's Quadrant Mod Standard 1.18

Any particular reason why you went with Standard instead of Deluxe?

I may also change Fyron's SystemTypes.txt to have systems with both fewer and greater planets and possibly less asteroids overall.

They run from 1 to 12 "planets" (ie: the actual planets, not moons) already. You can nearly accomplish this just by tweaking the system distribution in SystemTypes.txt. You will of course have to add new systems to get ones with even more planets. I think there are plenty of planets already though.

Making the large hulls so much more expensive will hurt the AIs.
They tend to go with the biggest hull available, though some TDM AIs go with battlecruisers and Battleships even in the end game.

This is accomplished just by using the Max Tonnage settings in the AI construction/design files (I forget which).

[ July 07, 2003, 06:15: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[narf poit chez BOOM]

welcome to the Boards.

[Chris Haltiner]

Any particular reason why you went with Standard instead of Deluxe?

I didn't want to fool around with the images enhancement required by FQM Deluxe. However, if the Deluxe warrants the extra work then I'll look into it.

Making the large hulls so much more expensive will hurt the AIs. They tend to go with the biggest hull available, though some TDM AIs go with battlecruisers and Battleships even in the end game.

I assume you mean the AI will be inhibited since it will want to build bigger hulls but not be able to field as many ships due to higher construction and maintenance costs. Or, will the AI be perpetually running a deficit economy since the AI engine and text rules don't compensate for such an increase?

I think there are plenty of planets already though.

My biggest concern about FQM is the "excessive" number of asteroid belts within most of the systems. Since an asteroid belt in reality, and in the game, could represent the remants of a crushed planet, then having dozens of asteroid belts in a system seems excessive. Also, since I heavily research the stellar manipulation tree, I would have super systems consisting of dozens of planets... could be a good thing, but it would allow me to dominate much too easily.

Yes, I have considered not even allowing the stellar manipulation and planet utilization trees to make for a harder game. At the very least, I would not allow atmospheric coVersion...

Torpedoes are already quite poor weapons. I reccommend adding a 15-25% accuracy bonus to make them worth using in some situations.

I have been dismayed by the meager capabilities of the torpedo weapons. (This is my Star Trek bias.) I may consider 'upping' them a little more.

-Chris

[Fyron]

I didn't want to fool around with the images enhancement required by FQM Deluxe. However, if the Deluxe warrants the extra work then I'll look into it.

All you have to do is install the image mod and then use the SectType.txt file in FQM Deluxe (and possibly the PlanetSize.txt file for definitions of several new planet sizes), and you will get all of the new images working without a hitch. I personally think it is worth it, as then you get possibly 2-3 times as many different planet images, and so there is a bit less repetition and the maps look nicer.

My biggest concern about FQM is the "excessive" number of asteroid belts within most of the systems.

In FQM, there is just one "belt" in the system. Each sector of asteroids is not a belt, just part of the big belt. Having the asteroids go in a ring around the star is more realistic than just a "belt" in a random sector. Also, I lowered the max value of asteroid belts to 200 instead of 300, so there are not as many extra resources. Remote Mining can become much more productive with the large number of asteroids too, as there is much more to mine.

One solution could be to make all the asteroids Tiny, so you can only get Tiny planets form them, and it is not quite as excessive. Hmm... I think I might have to do that in the next Version of FQM (at least for the systems with rings of asteroids).

[Fyron]

One solution could be to make all the asteroids Tiny, so you can only get Tiny planets form them, and it is not quite as excessive. Hmm... I think I might have to do that in the next Version of FQM (at least for the systems with rings of asteroids).

Ok, scratch that idea. Calling for specific sized asteroids in SystemTypes.txt makes null asteroids (no pic, no type, no size, buggy).

[Loser]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Having the asteroids go in a ring around the star is more realistic than just a "belt" in a random sector.

I had always thought each sector represented it's own orbit or orbital group, that the two-dimensional system grid represented not the two-dimensional plane of a stellar system but various, different, and necessarily undefined aspects of the paths of moving bodies within that system. I believe something like this is the only way to look at that sector grid and apply the word 'realistic' to it.

This is far more reasonable, really, than any 'realistic' alternative. Despite the number-crunching power each of us represent (we play this game, after all) I doubt more than a score of individuals on this board are capable of plotting a useful orbit in a measly three-body system. I'd venture one of that twenty may think of plotting that orbit as an enjoyable pastime, maybe.

This seems to be supported by the way a one-sector asteroid-object brazenly is labeled a 'belt'. Storms, I'd suspect, would also spread themselves out along an orbital path, rather than holding together, body-like.

FQM is one of my Favorites. I just think the application the word 'realistic' to this portion of this is subject to dispute.

[Fyron]

Ok... it just looks cooler.

[Raging Deadstar]

Personally i like the asteroid belts. If you dislike them go and select the Balanced Large Ideal or Balanced Midlife. i'm pretty sure they don't have the asteroid belts.

I just like the idea of systems having 20+ planets in them. Maybe they should be rarer, or perhaps limited to homeworld systems (i doubt it's possible) But i for one like the mod the way it is!