.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

Raging Tiger- Save $9.00
winSPMBT: Main Battle Tank- Save $6.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > Shrapnel Community > Space Empires: IV & V

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old December 5th, 2001, 01:10 AM

devnull devnull is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Redmond, WA, USA
Posts: 3
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
devnull is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Devnull Mod is back!

quote:
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.




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.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old December 5th, 2001, 01:16 AM

devnull devnull is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Redmond, WA, USA
Posts: 3
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
devnull is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Devnull Mod is back!

quote:
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



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 =)
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old December 5th, 2001, 01:30 AM
CombatSquirrel's Avatar

CombatSquirrel CombatSquirrel is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 99
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
CombatSquirrel is on a distinguished road
Default 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
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old December 5th, 2001, 10:25 AM
dogscoff's Avatar

dogscoff dogscoff is offline
General
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,245
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
dogscoff is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Devnull Mod is back!

Devnull! You're back! How are you?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2024, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.