Different kinds of questions

[Fyron]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Is it worth to put ecm, stealth armor and scattering armor to weapon platform when there is -200% defence bonus by planet?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dunno, I'll let someone else answer that one.

No, there is really no point. The best you can do is to get it to -200 + 60 + 15 + 15 = -110. That means that a normal ship with no sensors or training has a 100 chance to hit at range 11 (or 99%, cause there is always that 1% miss without talismans).

[Arkcon]

Originally posted by asmala:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Arkcon:
Shields are hitpoints on units. The shield depleter won't target sats. I checked, ... the phased polaron beam does bypass the hitpoints generated by normal shields on sats

What about normal shields on fighters?

---

I didn't check, the inherent defense bonus of fighters would muddy the results.

I built 2 stacks of 10 sats at different planets. One set was just one shields 3, the other was just one phased shields 2. They both generate the same amount of points, 150.

The opponent ship has one large mount phased polaron beam 1, and one large mount antiproton beam 4. At point blank range, both do 60 points of damage.

At point blank range, tactical combat, select just one or the other weapon, the polaron beam knocks out one normal sat per hit. The antiproton beam needs 4 hits to knock out one normal sat. Both beams require 4 hits to knock out a phased sat.

Here's a question... the APB misses a couple of times during my test runs, the polaron beam never does. I don't recall the polaron beam having a to hit bonus. Could it be hard coded? Or could it be some artifact of the way the beam works? Or maybe because it has more range, it gets a better to hit bonus at point blank range?

[ January 25, 2003, 15:29: Message edited by: Arkcon ]

[Baron Munchausen]

Originally posted by asmala:
I have couple of (newbie) questions.

1. Is it enough to have one weapon platform containing combat sensor and ecm (do they count as stack)?

2. Is it worth to put ecm, stealth armor and scattering armor to weapon platform when there is -200% defence bonus by planet?

3. Is multiplex tracking needed in weapon platforms (I recall someting that planets can automatically shoot 10 targets)?

4. Am I right that the weakest cargo is destroyed first (usually mines first, then troops, satellites, weapon platforms) thus it's not reasonable to put decoy weapon platforms containing only armor/shields.

5. What is the order how the mines are swept/exploded? Is it first-layed first-swept?

6. What is the order how satellites are destroyed? First-layed first-destroyed or weakest first?

7. Is shields in fighter/satellite count as hitpoints or as shield? So how shield depleter and phased-polaron beam works against them?

8. Is there any way to tell ships not to clear orders when go through damaging warp point? It's very annoying when there is black hole on the other side of the warp point and the warp point is two squares away from black hole... You can guess what happens, it's impossible to go through that system.

9. How the race trait happiness actually works? If I have 20% happiness bonus is my natural decrease -20 * 1,2 = -24?

OK, thats all what I have in mind this time

1. Yes, all unit stacks function as a single 'ship' so having one unit with combat sensors in the stack benefits all of them. It was my impression that ECM had no effect in planets at all. This is in addition to the -200 modifier to hit planets. They are huge, after all. How could you miss a planet? Except on purpose, of course. Going into orbit means 'throw yourself at the ground, and miss' as Douglas Adams said.

2. I answered this on #1. As far as I know defense modifiers aren't even checked for planets.

3. You recall correctly. Planets have a default multiplex of 10. Since the best component multiplex in the default game is 5 there's no point in adding it to weapons platforms. OR satellites. They also seem to have a default multiplex of 10.

Would modding some huge multipex (20 or so?) work for planets? I dunno.

4. Up to now, yes, the smallest items in cargo get hit first. In the forthcoming patch this will be changed so that Weapon Platforms are always hit first, and then damage will be distributed randomly in the remaining cargo when they are gone.

5. Apparently mines are destroyed in the order they were deployed, yes.

6. It used to be the same for satellites. But this was exploited by people putting down heavily shielded sats first, then weapons sats. So now it's randomized sort of like components in a ship. Smaller sats tend to get destroyed first but this is not absolute.

7. Shields on a unit just add to hit points, but as testing has shown, the PPB does skip the shields on units. (Very good! )

8. There is a game setting to not clear orders when encountering enemy ships but I don't know of any setting for getting damaged by 'terrain' features. I think you are stuck with this one.

9. I really don't know anything about the math behind population 'happiness' calculation. I never have any problems with it so I haven't studied it.

[ January 25, 2003, 20:52: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

[Captain Kwok]

I'm such a dork . All this time I've been adding ECM to my weapons platforms. At least combat sensors are useful on them right?

[Q]

"7. Shields on a unit just add to hit points, but as testing has shown, the PPB does skip the shields on units."

Are you sure about this Baron?
I see in combat simulation that PPB of attacking ships or fighters do not skip the shields of the targeted fighters.

[Baron Munchausen]

Look at the post by Arkon earlier in this same thread. He claims to have tested it. You could ask him what Version he was using, but I think he knows how to tell what is happening by looking at the damage done by the given weapon and counting how many hits it takes to destroy the target.

And yes Kwok, combat sensors will at least help your WPs to hit the attacking ships.

[Asmala]

Originally posted by Arkcon:

I built 2 stacks of 10 sats at different planets. One set was just one shields 3, the other was just one phased shields 2. They both generate the same amount of points, 150.

The opponent ship has one large mount phased polaron beam 1, and one large mount antiproton beam 4. At point blank range, both do 60 points of damage.

At point blank range, tactical combat, select just one or the other weapon, the polaron beam knocks out one normal sat per hit. The antiproton beam needs 4 hits to knock out one normal sat. Both beams require 4 hits to knock out a phased sat.

Here's a question... the APB misses a couple of times during my test runs, the polaron beam never does. I don't recall the polaron beam having a to hit bonus. Could it be hard coded? Or could it be some artifact of the way the beam works? Or maybe because it has more range, it gets a better to hit bonus at point blank range?

Thanks for your effort Arkcon. Perhaps this information should be added to FAQ?

[Fyron]

Arkon, each shot is randomly determined whether it hits or not. Run a lot more tests, and the frequency of hits will eventually even out.

[Q]

Yes I can confirm Arkon's observation with sats: there it is a difference between normal and phased shield. The first are ignored by PPB. However with fighters this seems not to be the case according to my observations (Version 1.78). But I would appreciate someone doing the test with fighters to confirm.

[ January 25, 2003, 21:31: Message edited by: Q ]

[Slick]

Deleted.

[ January 26, 2003, 02:41: Message edited by: Slick ]