Slow down exploration speed in AICampaign/PROPORTIONS - Page 2

dogscoff · #11 March 4th, 2003, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Foundations mod was a bit more like that, because you started out

I didn't realise Foundations actually existed. I thought it was some kind of ultra-comlplicated uber-mod that would be the end result of years of steady development on Proportions.

Quote:

Also, a major element speeding expansion beyond the design's intent is the ability to build colony ships using space yard ships, so you can build the colonizers at the frontier.

I thought you were planning to remove this exploit by reducing the org output of mobile spaceyards or something.

[ March 04, 2003, 11:05: Message edited by: dogscoff ]

JLS · #12 March 4th, 2003, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by PvK:
[QB]You could also reduce the supply capacity of all engines.

Pete,
Will this put the Ship in a possible supply problem and cause it not to sentry in some cases even one move away? Would it then be a must now to install at least one Supply Storage Bay to avoid sentry problems even after a refuel, by a supply ship?

There may be criticism that 2 engines carry the same amount of [Supply Storage] as one Supply storage bay, and what engineer would do this, but I look at the engine supply; indicative to the math required to have a ship move a desired distance to the designers intent. One could also change the sentence to read something other then 'Descr := Can store 250 units of supply' to lets say the (Pulse from a Ion Engine ????

????? I don�t know, you�re the writer

I just fix refrigerators for a living

[ March 04, 2003, 17:01: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg · #13 March 4th, 2003, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JLS:
Oleg, I may be misunderstanding? But all the AI is already programmed for AI State: Not Connected since well before Proportions 2.53 and are good to go in all AI files that are packaged (I believe) with Proportions 2.53.

I mean that I did not test my AIs for not connected state.

I checked your AIs scripts and envy how good it is set ! I will do some work and post updated files ASAP.

JLS · #14 March 4th, 2003, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by oleg:

quote:
Originally posted by JLS:
Oleg, I may be misunderstanding? But all the AI is already programmed for AI State: Not Connected since well before Proportions 2.53 and are good to go in all AI files that are packaged (I believe) with Proportions 2.53.

I mean that I did not test my AIs for not connected state. I checked your AIs scripts and envy how good it is set ! I will do some work and post updated files ASAP.

Actually I think yours are good to go as well in AI Not connected!!!!!
And your AIs in other areas accomplish things in a better way then Abbi's and CC.
Please, don't you misunderstand me

What I was saying, it seemed like it was implied that Proportion 2.53 was't good to go in all AI files that are packaged. I beleive they are.

[ March 04, 2003, 15:06: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg · #15 March 4th, 2003, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JLS:

quote:
Originally posted by oleg:

quote:
Originally posted by JLS:
Oleg, I may be misunderstanding? But all the AI is already programmed for AI State: Not Connected since well before Proportions 2.53 and are good to go in all AI files that are packaged (I believe) with Proportions 2.53.

I mean that I did not test my AIs for not connected state. I checked your AIs scripts and envy how good it is set ! I will do some work and post updated files ASAP.
Actually I think yours are good to go as well in AI Not connected!!!!!
And your AIs in other areas accomplish things in a better way then Abbi's and CC.
Please, don't you misunderstand me

What I was saying, it seemed like it was implied that Proportion 2.53 was't good to go in all AI files that are packaged. I beleive they are.

But I REALlY did not try them in Non Connected for more than few turns ! Somehow I did't think many people will use this setting. My mistake.

JLS · #16 March 4th, 2003, 06:01 PM

What I like best for the AI that you accomplished. Oleg, is your Support Ship Design.

Good stuff.

I and a lot of other Moders have followed your example, since!!!

PsychoTechFreak · #17 March 4th, 2003, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:
Efficient Engines, I think I would probably just remove them.

I should better not remove anything, just change values, right? Otherwise, I guess the AI ship designs might get in trouble.

Spaceyard components with reduced org output, great idea. Gimme more like this...

I guess one reason for PvK has not done this yet could be the running games on PBW? I mean... you know what I mean.

JLS · #18 March 4th, 2003, 06:12 PM

Yah, I was going with the premise you wanted to mod out the AI (some what). From earlier or was it the first post in this thread.

[ March 04, 2003, 16:21: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg · #19 March 4th, 2003, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JLS:
What I like best for the AI that you accomplished. Oleg, is your Support Ship Design.

Good stuff.

I and a lot of other Moders have followed your example, since!!!

Actually, I steal the concept from Master Belizarious' Aquelian/Pyrochette AI.

Support ship design and "offensive sweepers". He should be credited with this !

JLS · #20 March 4th, 2003, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by oleg:

quote:
Originally posted by JLS:
What I like best for the AI that you accomplished. Oleg, is your Support Ship Design.

Good stuff.

I and a lot of other Moders have followed your example, since!!!

Actually, I steal the concept from Master Belizarious' Aquelian/Pyrochette AI. Support ship design and "offensive sweepers". He should be credited with this !

Well, I learnt from you

Thats what counts to, me!
Meaning no offense to Master Belizarious.

[ March 04, 2003, 17:14: Message edited by: JLS ]