Proposed 'Quick Fix' for some Combat 'Anomalies'

Daynarr · #1 February 4th, 2001, 09:29 PM

quote:
If this change is made in a way that I couldn't undo it, I would stop playing the game.[/b]

You are out of line here BB. What if we all start saying that we don't want to play game anymore if MM doesn't do as we want. We are not a bunch of newbees that have no idea how the game works and should work, but people who are here for a long time and have contributed for the game during that time. You are, also, not the only old time gamer this site - lots of us have been with these kind of games long before SE series, of PC computers for that matter. To brush of somebody's suggestion like that really sounds like an insult to the rest of us.

Talenn · #2 February 4th, 2001, 09:31 PM

Barnacle Bill:

Well it was not my intention to completely remove the enjoyment of playing the game for some folks. I definately favor ALL changes like this to be 'customizable' by an option to have or have not.

But to me, your logic is just a bit out of whack. Having spaceships stop to fire feels totally wrong, but having them just sit there and NOT fire while the enemy closes, fires, and then leaves is fine? That makes no sense to me. I understand that you may not be interested in replacing one abstraction with another, but at least the one proposed removes certain exploits of the system as well as allows for fixed defenses to actually have a purpose.

In other words, if you are so against a change like this that you would rather reduce the game to just ONE type of weapon, I'm not sure what you want out of the game. It certainly isnt realism and it certainly isnt 'playability' (for lack of a better term).

Finally, if the tac combat is NOT an abstraction what could you could consider it to be? 'Realistic' in any way, shape, or form? I dont think so.

Anyways, I'm just baffled by the logic behind your complaint with it. No biggie though, it was just a suggestion and my world wont end by not seeing it implemented. In fact, that was the very reason I posted it here rather than Emailing it directly to MM. I wanted to get feedback.

Talenn

God Emperor · #3 February 5th, 2001, 01:01 AM

As an interim fix, I have modded my files to enable point defence at game start, have the AI design its ships so that they have 2 PD per 100 kT and reduced the space requirement for PD for computer players to 15kT.

The AI ships are slightly lighter punch wise but they can only be killed by massed missiles or fighters. They are still susceptible to "beam dancing" but overall they are much more challenging. If they get a slight tech edge on you, they are very challenging....

Tenryu · #4 February 5th, 2001, 04:15 AM

quote:
Originally posted by God Emperor:
As an interim fix, I have modded my files to enable point defence at game start, have the AI design its ships so that they have 2 PD per 100 kT and reduced the space requirement for PD for computer players to 15kT.....

Emperor,
What exactly did you do. I saw your post on the 1 per issue, not that I really understand, because I haven't yet messed with the AI files.

Advice on what to do to get my AI files adjusted as per your PD thing would be appreciated.
Thanks

God Emperor · #5 February 5th, 2001, 05:41 AM

Will upload them into the Mod Archive when I get home from work in about 7 hrs time.

What I have done is to edit the AI_DesignCreation files for the Attack Ship and Defence Ship on the point defence lines, and the Components file for point defence (Space Tonnage lowered from 20 down to 15).
This does lower the cost of PD for me too, but, I build my ships as though they cost 20 space (leave 5kT free per PD that I include). I didnt see much point doing a more complicated mod to make them cost 20 for me and 15 for the AI as a "house rule" seemed does the job fine and means that the mod will be more capatible with the next patch.
This mod doesnt actually improve the AI's tactics, it just designs the ships better for the AI's current tactics....

jowe01 · #6 February 5th, 2001, 10:50 AM

has anybody mailed MM about Talenns original proposition ? As far as I am concerned it is an excellent and easily implementable way to remove some of the weak spots in tactical combat.

Nitram Draw · #7 February 6th, 2001, 02:52 AM

No matter how tactical combat is changed I don't think you will ever make it "fair". One side or the other will always have an advantage, this is why we experiment with new ship designs.
The only thing that shoud be done, IMO, is to make changes that help make tactical combat more interesting and fun or correct an obvious error in the way it is handled.
The missle dance etc. does not seem to make much sense but firing out of your opponents range makes perfect sense.
Of the ideas suggested I like the loss of movement points for firing the best. It seems reasonable and maybe not to difficult to implement.