Unused weapons causing me to lose battles

[oleg]

Interesting. I never payed too much attention to this issue before. Is it possible that there is an upper limit to the number of targets, say 10.
Then even if there are 16 WP, you still target only 10 ?

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by Slick:
Could this be fixed by editing the appropriate strategy to increase the % damaged to a high number like 200%? Then the planet will launch enough destruction for 200% of the target. Just a thought.

Slick

This setting can only be raised to 100%. Tried that and it had no effect. I am not suprised though cause it seems to be doing a fine job of destoying the ships that it does shoot at. It's just that it won't fire all it's weapons that it can fire after it destoys a ships and still has wepons left.

I should say my tests have been with direct fire weapons and not missle sand I am seeing the same things as skigrinder is with the missles. It's like some of the waepons plats just won't fire any of their weapons.

It's also not the range thing. I tested that and confirmed it. Even when the ships are close enough that all the plats should be in rage some of them don't fire.

Geoschmo

[skigrinder]

Thank you all for the effort in trying to figure this out.

It sounds like the problem happens even with direct fire weapons.

This is disappointing as I have spent considerable energy constructing planetary defense WP's to deal with large fleet attacks.

Geoschmo, have you tried your direct fire tests with the Talisman?

Thanx,
skigrinder

FWIW: I'm using SEIV Gold 1.78 with the latest TDM mod release.

[Arkcon]

Originally posted by skigrinder:

This is disappointing as I have spent considerable energy constructing planetary defense WP's to deal with large fleet attacks.

Oh dear, I didn't know it was that important to you. I have some real bad news for you. Do a forum search for "AI innovative tactics" -- it is clear that the AI preferentially attacks planets whose defences it can beat. And can see them without having been there before.

Anyways, a human would just research planetary weapons, and use intel to destroy your weapon platforms.

These little orbiting rocks, snowballs, and gasbags are not homes for people -- they are sources of resources for your grand conquest of space. Research, Intel, Spaceyards and resourse storage are likewse all means to an end.

IMHO you can never defend a planet perfectly. And you will lose the game if you spend time trying. Weapon platforms, mines, sats, fighters, bases, orbiting and patroling ships are all good ideas. But find the sources of the attacks and take them out.

[oleg]

Originally posted by Arkcon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by skigrinder:

This is disappointing as I have spent considerable energy constructing planetary defense WP's to deal with large fleet attacks.

Oh dear, I didn't know it was that important to you. I have some real bad news for you. Do a forum search for "AI innovative tactics" -- it is clear that the AI preferentially attacks planets whose defences it can beat. And can see them without having been there before.

Anyways, a human would just research planetary weapons, and use intel to destroy your weapon platforms.

These little orbiting rocks, snowballs, and gasbags are not homes for people -- they are sources of resources for your grand conquest of space. Research, Intel, Spaceyards and resourse storage are likewse all means to an end.

IMHO you can never defend a planet perfectly. And you will lose the game if you spend time trying. Weapon platforms, mines, sats, fighters, bases, orbiting and patroling ships are all good ideas. But find the sources of the attacks and take them out.

---

It is all very much different in Proportions. defending your developed planets is very important and much more fun than in normal SE !

[geoschmo]

You make valid points Arkcon, at least as far as stock SEIV goes. But if you do take the time and spend the resources building weapons platfoms, it would be nice if they would fire all the weapons they have available to them.

[skigrinder]

Thanx for the comments Arkcon.

I agree with what you say and believe it makes the AI worth playing against.
I especially like 'team mode' where you don't have to spend time on treaties and alliances that are unpredictable. My race accepts that it lives in a harsh, aggressive universe.

In order to successfully defend my population (and resource developments), I must invest heavily in WP's for each planet.

At least one of the TDM AI races (Space Vikings) prefers to skip boundary systems and head straight for the interior. This can be quite unnerving with lots of big fleets around my homeworld planets.

My theory is that one heavily defended (and shielded) planet should be able to knock out a very large fleet (100+) of very large ships.

I've modified the systemtypes.txt file to create more moons per planet (this needs to be done anyway to make things more realistic - i.e. Jupiter with 10 moons). The moons are filled with Cargo Facilities, Massive Planetary Shields, and Weapons Platforms to aid in the defense effort.

I've also created a (WP only) missile weapon component - Planetary Defense Missile Spread - to balance the playing field and make planetary defense possible.
These missiles have maximum range, quick reload, and big punch.
Again, the theory is that a large, heavily populated planet with lots of resources should be able to fire thousands of missiles and overwhelm very large fleets of attacking ships.

It has taken several games, but I've gotten the balance to the point where it's possible to take on six or eight of the TDM AI races in good back and forth battles and games that Last for several weeks.

I reduce the AI Intelligence capabilities (and increase my own) to correspondingly balance that aspect of the game. Again, I've worked out the balance to the point where Intel is a very interesting part of the conflict.

Anyway, that's my philosophy for a more realistic universe.

The only trouble is, I have available WP's that aren't firing in combat.

Please let me know if you can think of a way to fix this.

Thanx,
skigrinder