New Combat (Related) Features
This round sees the reintroduction of two main things:
EMP Resistance and Xan 'old school' Cloaking. Xan Cloaking In rounds 10-18, Xan cloaking made their ships immune to the fleet scan. They were visable everywhere else. This is no longer the case. Cloaked ships now appear as "0 ships": - On galaxy status (incoming or outgoing) - On your "x incoming hostiles" readout at the top of each page - On incoming fleets on your overview They do not appear at all: - On unit scans - On fleet scans They DO appear on military scans, and they do appear on YOUR fleets status on the overview page (it makes it easier for you sometimes). This is the list where the 4 fleets (your base fleet and 3 normal fleets) are listed, along with any targets, missions and so on. ASTROPODS AND STRUCTURE KILLERS ARE NOT CLOAKED. THEY CAN BE SEEN. Military scan This is very much related to Xan's cloaked technology - it's the only way to see their cloaked ships. The military scan is the last (7th) technology on the Technology tree. It's a 96 tick research. It outputs all fleets (base fleet, fleet 1, fleet 2, fleet 3). An example of one is here. It does NOT show fleet names, location, mission, ETA, and so forth. It purely shows the ships in each fleet. It always shows every ship in the game and how many are in each fleet. NOTE There used to be a lesser-known bug that you could tell which fleet (1,2,3) had which name due to the order they appeared on news scans. THIS IS NO LONGER THE CASE : they now appear in a random order. EMP Resistance EMP damage is now dealt very differently. Every ship that does EMP damage has one or more guns (every other ship just has one gun). These EMP ships fire their gun(s) at their respective target classes. Each shot then has a chance of being "resisted", depending on the EMP resistance of the target ship. A ship with 60% EMP resistance has a 60% chance of deflecting 1 EMP [ElectroMagnetic Pulse] at it. It has a 36% chance (60%*60%) of resisting 2 EMPs from Cathaar ships. Damage between different ships of the same class is dealt with the same as normal and steal damage. |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
Why that is shit and going to be VERY annoying, and i'm told its very easy to make better :( [20:50:37] <Phil^> amending the sql where statement to include the equ of " AND shipcount > 0 " |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
also ,
<Phil^> even if they retrieve it an entirely different way, then loop through the recordset to display them theres no excuse not to shove an if statement in there to weed out those which have 0 ships in all slots <Phil^> if they want an additional reason that jolt will like, then it will save on bandwidth for each scan page since its not transmitting useless information <Phil^> as if " it would make it better " isnt enough |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
I could change it :( but traditionally it's always been like that, and that's how everyone's been making the parser for it
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
if people are coding their parsers to work out the ship by the position it appears in rather then the name written beside it, they should have their keyboards taken away from them :(
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
And on another coding issue: How do you code randomness (see the NOTE on fleet launches) into retrieving results from mysql?
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
throwing "ORDER BY RAND()" into the sql should do it imo
Ofc with all computer random numbers created entirely from an algorithm its not true randomness but pseudorandom numbers which should be good enough |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
As for parsers being created for it, like Phil said, anyone who makes a format that strict should have their keyboards taken away from them. I actually had to write extra code to work out all the ships with 0 units and remove them from the result of the parse :( [edit] Forgot to say that i love the fact EMP resistance is back, it will make it alot easier to balance cathaar out! And Xan cloaking + military scans (apart from the layour :P) look nice aswell, well done imo! [/edit] |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
There was never all ships shown in the military scans.
Only the ships the planet could produse + stolen. |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
I think Chef's comic strip about me tinkering is about due now then. I'll try and get that sorted :-)
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
I have an alternative (which is how i thought you were going to do it anyway, else i would have voiced this earlier :( ). Have a Conventional Armour column (what Armour is now), which is used to compute losses due to killing and stealing. Then have an EMP Armour (you can call it resistance) column, which is used to calculate EMP just as it is now; eg the damage of EMP ships compared to EMP armour of target ships. That way, you could use the same calculation, same formulas, same explanation to new players, and it would just be warm and fluffy all round. Please. :( Quote:
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
xan being cloaked properly is overdue glad to see it back but it will be a dc nightmare most likely,
emp changes dont really bother me as there are changes made every rd to the stats and by and large we all adapt to them anyways |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
As for what ur suggesting, i agree its easier to understand and work out, but personally like the guns and %-resistance chance more (omg! "surprises" in battles \o/). |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Appoco! Fix0r! :( /me waves |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
Quote:
As for "working" race teamups (matching classes that make sense) will always happen, this EMP system doesn't change anything about that. Guns are still distributed by ships present (i hope/assume), hence expensive ships like the Terrans (few in numbers) won't draw alot of fire if there is a same value Xan fleet present (cheap -> large numbers, gets most shots fired at them). And big fleets always pose a thread to EMP. Due to the price difference and the 'make sense to waste fleet on' factor this won't be a problem. Exactly the same as it was before this round, apart EMP being better balanced due to ships actual ability to have high armour / low emp res without having to give EMP ships huge damage ratings. Quote:
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Seeing "Pegasus 0 0 0 0" on a milscan done on a Xan is pretty crap. It should either just display those ships that the planet has, like unitscans, or show just the ships a race is capable of having. The latter would make mils of Ziks pretty ugly, but most mils of Ziks are pretty ugly anyways. My two cents.
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
I still think that the new system does more harm to cath than good. Especially since it renders xp scoring for cath pretty hard.
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Agreed, Cath doesn't look like the race to pick this round, I wonder why there was a need to make it harder for them.
Introducing a 'stealing resistance' would have been more appropriate. This round Ziks will be a nightmare to play against once they've 'stolen' enough Xan ships... |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
i must agree with heartless and makhil, cath this round gonna be pound so badly with emp resistance.. before it would require a huge fleet of cath to simply stop xan fi or terran bs.. now even that many ship may not stop those ship.. worst is that since all race gona have ep resistance to some degree or another.. cathaar will probably be force to hit below their avrage value to have a potential target with success. i feel xan full cloaking will see a huge expention of players (i figure a minimum of 50%), while zik stealing xan ship will be a nightmare to dc anddefend against...
all in all.. who would want to play cathaar with so overwhelmed odd against them.. |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
EMP resistance can work both ways. It potentially means that Terrans are easier to stun than in the past when armour was used, but also that Xan might be harder to stun. Further, key ships might be vulnerable - or not - to EMP if you can fiddle with the resistance.
Provided cath remains cost effective, then i dont really see the problem. |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
If the Xan is a nightmare to defend against, its also the other way for attackers and Xan ships defending.
News/JG scans shows "0 Xan ship defending". Opens up a lot for fake def. Want to land? 90% recalls when there are enough def. |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
The winner of the year award goes to... It takes some planning and work to make fakes that work when military analysis shows all. Just zero on screen and unit scan showing units, but military scan not existing at all would cut it better. Then you'd just have a figure of zero xan def ships, and an unit scan. For all you care, it could be one pulsar, or fifty thousand arrowheads. I'd say, at that point, landing gets a lot dodgier. |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
This is why Xan have the lowest total of a/c and d/c, and Terran's damage is quite high. I'd be surprised if we didn't have quite a few Terrans, tbh, but the fact that Cathaar ignore Terran's armour and are actually more effective than previous rounds (they used to be able to EMP about 120% of their cost (ish) last round, now it's 140%) does make a difference to help keep Terran in check. Xan's strength is the fact you have no idea where their ships are. Zik are really quite a hard race to play this round, but with the races being if anything more different, they're potentially going to do well. |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Until we've played the beta (at least) then it'll be hard to say how the game will pan out. Especiallly since the stats haven't even been finalised
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
They're good for running a lot of combats, which allows for tweaking of things in the short-term...however, fleet compositions--where 'stats' need to be looked at in a more broad aspect--simply cannot be properly adjusted in a week-long, fast-tick environment.
"Proper" beta testing should realistically take at least a month, have slow ticks, and be run by 'cunning' players who will put the game through it's paces--finding loopholes and truly testing fleet compositions. (In my opinion, anyway) ;) |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
can someone explain to me how emp work.. as far as i see most ship got 70%+ emp resistance.. and since emp do no damage.. how can you figure out who many ships gonna be frozen?
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Possibly the best way of thinking of it is that every 1 EMP gun stuns (100-EMP resistance)% of a ship.
As an example, the Thief has an EMP reistance of 90. So 10% (0.1) Thieves get stunned (on average) every time they're shot at by an EMP gun. A Viper has 3 EMP guns, so 1 viper stuns 3*0.1 = 0.3 Thieves. You'd need 4 Vipers to have a "fair" chance of stunning 1 Thief. These are all estimates, and combat will involve a slightly random element. |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
these stats are ****ing awful i hope you know that
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Attack of the Green-Eyed Jerome!
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
what the hell am i jealous of?
i'm pissed off that these stats are so awful and yet i wasted a credit (not that i've ever paid for a credit :/) edit: why is there a random bit implemented into the emp.. surely it would've been wiser to do that for stealing edit2: or NOT AT ALL! |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
appoco.. i hope the black widow will be made stronger , as it would be alnmost useless vs the battleship they are suppose to stop.. (cause most bs have 90+ emp resistance)...
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
with regards to EMP, I can see this 2 ways, which (if either) would be correct?
Code:
Non-Random Method: 10 ships with 1 gun each could EMP 4 ships with 60 EMP resistance, however 10 ships with 2 guns each could EMP 7.4 ships with 60 EMP resistance. Would this be always rounded down to represent that the ship was not successfully frozen or always rounded up to represent that the ship is not fully operational? Or would half or more of the ship being frozen stop it and less than half be unsucessful? Code:
Random method: 10 ships with 1 gun each could EMP between 0 and 10 ships with 60 EMP resistance, 10 ships with 2 guns each could EMP between 0 and 20 ships with 60 EMP resistance. The average number for this should work out at 4 and 7.4 respectively. ----- Could this pelase be clarified as I am unsure which is intended to be used and I'm sure other people are! Althougth in some situations with either of these formulas the stats don't fit so both may be wrong! |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Whilst i'm not exactly sure of the combat formula, Dr Zaius, i do know that all values are rounded down in PA - thus, the not-completely-stunned ship will be operational, and thus unstunned.
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Whatever the "old method" of calculating EMP 'damage' was done, I feel would be correct (I believe the first option is closest...but my memory is shot to hell)
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Appocomaster explained the formula last night, basically you work with the first formula dr. Zaius mentioned:
Code:
Ships EMP'ed = Number of Ships * ( 1 - ( ( EMP Resistance / 100 ) ^ guns ) However, now comes randomness into play, and only appoco can explain how that random part looks like. That random part, however, only decides an additional amount of ships to be emp'ed. |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Why can the value only go up? Surely there is a (albeit very tiny) chance of every EMP missing?
Don't get me wrong... I can't remember the formula so I'm talking from a logical sense, you may be right... But can't the number of ships EMPed be lower than that value? |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
bring back the inability to build distorters untill news scan is researched. any xan with half a brain will whore distorters from the off leaving other races with no possible oppertunity to play effectively versus xan as they are basically blind
its like pitting Accrington Stanley versus Real Madrid |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
why don't the pa team realise that cath just do not work with this free stealing shit from r13 onwards and yet they do this for emp rather than stealing, is it not killing anyone else to witness such idiocy :/
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Judging by current race distribution on the universe page, I'd say the cathaar problem is currently solving itself.
|
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
I wanted to better understand how the EMP resistance was random after you posted the examples. So, I pitted Harpy -vs- Beetle.
The Harpy has 90% resistance or a Resistance Factor of .9. The Beetle has 6 guns with a Stunning Factor .6; .1 per gun (100%-90% =10%) or (1.0-.9 =.1) which is 6*.1 =.6 Harpy 1 Harpy against 6 guns has a Resistance of 53.14%. (.9*.9*.9*.9*.9*.9) or (.9^6) and inevitably 2 Harpies have a Resistance of 28.24% (.9^(6*2)) Beetle One Beetle has a stun factor of .6 and two Beetles have a stun factor of 1.2 (.6*2) From this a few questions were raised. (1) In battle are the ships EMP Resistance added together as a total or does each ship retain its own resistance? I would also like to add there is no relationship between Guns and EMP Resistance, it exceeds 100% combined, and thats where the randomness comes into play, which is overcomplicating the system, because those two items need a relationship that doesn't exist. |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Two Beetles stun 1.2 Harpies, and so on. (on average) Quote:
Guns and EMP resistance aren't connected on their own, but why do they need to be? I just changed the number of guns on Cathaar ships to be able to change the EMP Resistances to something acceptable. The EMP resistances on their own mean very little - you need to take into account the cost of both ships and the relevant guns / EMP resistance. The simpliest way of thinking about it is that, for EMP ship X targetting ship Y, EMP ship X freezes: guns of EMP ship X * (100 - EMP resistance of ship Y)/100 of ship Y. So, a Roach (4 guns) targetting a Drake (91% EMP resistance) gives: 4*(100-91)/100 = 4*.09 = 0.36 Drakes Note that a Roach costs 10k resources and a Drake costs 40k resources, so 4 Roaches freeze 1.48 Drakes (almost 60k resources). That's almost 50% again on the cost of the EMP ship. |
Re: New Combat (Related) Features
Thank you for the quick response appoco. I feel I understand it better now. I personally like this idea of Guns and Resistance, I think it could've been better implemented, but I also see that when we start having thousands of Cath ships the randomness won't be very random. Thanks again
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:53. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018