Mount Mod for v1.78

[Q]

Originally posted by AJC:
There is just no defense against the computer virus /Allegiance subverter combination.

I would disagree on this. Use fighters, drones and fast ships with missiles and a maximum weapons range strategy. Your enemy with computer virus/allegiance subverter ships will have a hard time.

[dumbluck]

See THIS THREAD for the "How to beat the Talisman" discussion...

[ August 28, 2002, 10:25: Message edited by: dumbluck ]

[AJC]

IMO-Fighters are a joke. The game has fighters as an afterthought. Its really about Big ships. I haven’t run into a situation yet against fighters that was threatening, unless I didn’t have enough defensive ships/units to defend with when attacked.

Drones are somewhat threatening, but easy to deal with.

As for Computer Virus/ Allegiance Subverter combination- I am not saying make a fleet with nothing but those weapons, that would be a recipe for losing.

A fleet has a better chance to survive with some variability in the tasks the ships perform.

However - From my own experience, 10-15 of these ships in a large fleet can devastate the opponent. I have seen it. In my Last Hseat game - I had a fleet of 55 ships that all moved 7 in combat. There was about 10 CompV/AllegianceSub ships in the fleet. Allot of the Opponents ships were taken over in the first 3 turns. Those that were not, got walloped by the rest of the normal ships in my fleet.

PVK-
so are you thinking that the mounts should be far less in the damage? Maybe keep them the same as the unmodded mounts but give size reduction advantages and other improvements beyond damage ?

One of the problems I ran into with making the mounts more expensive was that the AI cannot afford to build the ships.

When I started the mounts were allot more expensive and I found that the AI ceased to produce ships at the level needed to be competitive..

tech levels - I spread them out upon request - however it sounds like I went too far. Looks like making them difficult to research was the way to go in the first place. That way they don’t interfere with the early techs and overwhelm lower techs too early. I should have left them as I originally planned and made them become available as you move into the higher techs on the tree. Sounds like I should revert them back.

[PvK]

Originally posted by AJC:
...
PVK-
so are you thinking that the mounts should be far less in the damage? Maybe keep them the same as the unmodded mounts but give size reduction advantages and other improvements beyond damage ?

One of the problems I ran into with making the mounts more expensive was that the AI cannot afford to build the ships.
...

I wasn't specifically thinking of reducing the damage, but of making the mounts less of a net positive thing. It seemed like there were several mounts which in one way or another were a major multiplier to ability, without a major multiplier to cost or size or any other disadvantage, and were along a standard research path. It seemed like this would mean going to a certain point in the typical research path would suddenly provide a major ability multiplier. Since it's already on a typical research path, this would encourage players even more to go up the usual path, and doesn't involve much choice or trade-off, except of course which mount abilities to try to get to first. In some cases it seemed like the costs of the mounts were very low compared to their abilities.

Of course, the unmodded SE4 mounts are like that too (advantage outstripping disadvantage), which is one of the major reasons why small warships become nearly obsolete in unmodded SE4.

And, the AI should only use mounts which are worth the cost. If you want the AI to use a mount, then it should provide an advantage. But it doesn't have to be without cost. Being worth the cost is one thing, but having almost no cost is another.

PvK

[AJC]

Can you take one of the mounts in the mod and provide an example of what your thinking?

As far as I know there is no way to control what mounts the AI uses, unless the mounts are created for very specific weapons. any insight into this ?

In the mod I tried to avoid specific mounts to make the mounts list more user friendly. This is because It drove me nuts looking at the huge list of mounts in the mount mod being used in the Adamant 003 game on PBW.

Out of curiosity - did you actually get a chance to run a game using the mount mod or just looked at the mounts and what they do?

[PvK]

I haven't had time to try playing a game with these mounts yet. I just read through the file.

I know what you mean about wanting to limit the number of mounts that appear on the pick list. That's another reason in favor of addind new tech areas just for mounts, so players only see mounts that they asked for through research. That, also, is one way to control which mounts the AI uses (if you mod the AI's) : if mounts have specific tech area requirements that don't overlap with other research paths, then you can have the AI research file specify which mounts they will research, and therefore, which mounts they will use. Of course, this means moddng the AI files, which may be beyond the scope of what you want to do in a mount mod.

The other way to control which mods the AI uses is to order them in the component enhancement file. The AI always choses the valid mount that appears lowest in that file. That can be used to give the AI default preferences, and as you know, by adding "ordinary" mounts below ones the AI shouldn't use, you can keep the AI from using mounts that are best for human designs only. (You do this with your "Normal Component" mount).

In reviewing your mounts again, I'm noticing that actually they seem more balanced than I remember thinking they were on my first reading of them.

However, here's a specific example of the sort of thing I meant:

Long Name := Pulsed Gatling Mount
Short Name := Pgat Mount
Description := 20% of cost of normal, 10% size, 20% damage, +20% to hit. 50kt min. Used to imitate a 'gatling' effect.
Code := PGat
Cost Percent := 20
Tonnage Percent := 10
Tonnage Structure Percent := 10
Damage Percent := 20
Supply Percent := 10
Range Modifier := 0
Weapon To Hit Modifier := 20
Vehicle Size Minimum := 50
Weapon Type Requirement := Direct Fire
Vehicle Type := Ship/Base/Satellite/Weapon Platform
Number of Tech Req := 1
Tech Area Req 1 := Smaller Weapons
Tech Level Req 1 := 3

In this case, Smaller Weapons is a fairly cheap tech that I (at least - can't speak for others) usually reasearch relatively early on. In this case, when I hit level 3, I would notice that with this mount I can suddenly cram twice as much firepower in the same space, halve my supply use per damage, and get a +20 to-hit mod, on all weapons.

In this case, I'd suggest adding an research-expensive tech area for Gatling Mounts to cover this and the earlier Gatling mounts you've put under Smaller Weapons. I'd also give them a range mod of -1 or -2, and change the supply mod of this one from 10 to 40-100 (gatling weapons, to follow the real-Earth analogy, consume [and waste] massive quantities of ammo).

PvK

[Deathstalker]

"In reviewing your mounts again, I'm noticing that actually they seem more balanced than I remember thinking they were on my first reading of them.

However, here's a specific example of the sort of thing I meant:

Long Name := Pulsed Gatling Mount
Short Name := Pgat Mount
Description := 20% of cost of normal, 10% size, 20% damage, +20% to hit. 50kt min. Used to imitate a 'gatling' effect.
Code := PGat
Cost Percent := 20
Tonnage Percent := 10
Tonnage Structure Percent := 10
Damage Percent := 20
Supply Percent := 10
Range Modifier := 0
Weapon To Hit Modifier := 20
Vehicle Size Minimum := 50
Weapon Type Requirement := Direct Fire
Vehicle Type := Ship/Base/Satellite/Weapon Platform
Number of Tech Req := 1
Tech Area Req 1 := Smaller Weapons
Tech Level Req 1 := 3

In this case, Smaller Weapons is a fairly cheap tech that I (at least - can't speak for others) usually reasearch relatively early on. In this case, when I hit level 3, I would notice that with this mount I can suddenly cram twice as much firepower in the same space, halve my supply use per damage, and get a +20 to-hit mod, on all weapons.

In this case, I'd suggest adding an research-expensive tech area for Gatling Mounts to cover this and the earlier Gatling mounts you've put under Smaller Weapons. I'd also give them a range mod of -1 or -2, and change the supply mod of this one from 10 to 40-100 (gatling weapons, to follow the real-Earth analogy, consume [and waste] massive quantities of ammo)."

Actually PvK that is a mount from my mod (Deathstalker's Mount Mod) not AJC's Mount Mod. But your concerns are noted and welcomed. I am still balancing some of the mounts and I agree with your 'massive ammo used' and the range restrictions. Will probally add them with the next Version. I have not added 'New' technologies mainly for the reason that I wanted my Mount Mod to be added to any basic se4 game, its mainly there to provide many new options without having to massively rescript the tech area and AI's that have to use the new tech.

AJC, good to see that I have some 'competition'

I rather like some of your mounts (esp the computer mount, nicely done btw).

Rather curious as to what you think of my Mount Mod. Any suggestions?? (comments/critisims)?