hobknob Posted April 22, 2005 Report Share Posted April 22, 2005 While I don't have any solution that has not already been suggested by others I do have a couple of other questions that could be thrown into the mix. The Phoenix ships were primarily armed with Light Fusion Blasters that state in the description that they as SLOW firing weapons. One could assume that they would only fire on every third or fourth round thus decreasing the total fire power of the Pheonix fleet by about 95% on the non-firing rounds. This remaining firepower would then be split into 17 globs of about 1250 each. If you follow the theory that it takes more than 1 point of damage to destroy 1 point of integrity then you would not have enough damage left to destroy anything and you would only damage them. If you had three rounds of this type of fire then you you could have damaged 51 different ships. There is also the lifeform to take into consideration. I firmly believe that lifeform choices must have an effect on combat and that effect is likely limited to FC ratings, defensive ratings, and targeting/accuracy ratings. What else is there? I hardly think that having a good SC bonus is likely to bestow extra integrity, but who knows? I have also seen a situation where it looked like a fleet that did not warp was being treated as if it had warped. With few ships this is less apparent than it is with larger ships. I have also seen the effects of a single defenders fleet with a few ships warping into a defended are with multiple fleets and all of the fleets then being treated as if they had warped, ( at least on the one side). I would suspect that many of the BUG's are to be found in the code that detemines warp lag and such. More to digest while waiting for turns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTGPete Posted April 23, 2005 Report Share Posted April 23, 2005 Ah! I see. Very reasonable, indeed! I look forward now to Pete's final evaluation of the battle. D.I.E. There could be something funny with the ships involved in this particular engagement - if you see anything like that battle report again on this turn, send me a private messge and I'll examine this turn's results as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hobknob Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 Has there been any review of this combat yet? There were plenty of questions raised that seemed to demand some sort of explaination or at least another look. Since there are lots of wars and battles yet to take place it seems fairly important to get the issues resolved sooner rather than later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Miles Avatar Posted May 7, 2005 Report Share Posted May 7, 2005 Was wondering if nothing was found upon review. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locklyn Posted May 8, 2005 Report Share Posted May 8, 2005 I second the General and Hobknobs Query...especially in view of the discussions regarding whether or not Attack Fighters have been buggy Locklyn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Miles Avatar Posted May 11, 2005 Report Share Posted May 11, 2005 I suspect that there are a great many things we are not aware of with regards to combat. The fact that lifeform attributes play a factor didnt even dawn on me until it was mentioned. perhaps all these little quirks we have been seeing is due to this? Also whos to say that every shot hits? or every missile or fighter or drone not intercepted by CIDS actually finds a target? We dont even know (for certain) wether or not weapons can inflict critical hits that in turn cause even more damage. The battle report reporting doesnt get into this kind of detail. Im still hoping the Naval Combat Doc comes out before Summer is over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WKE235 Posted May 11, 2005 Report Share Posted May 11, 2005 ... Im still hoping the Naval Combat Doc comes out before Summer is over. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Please be more specific and state the year of the Summer you are referring to. Avoid the needless confusion now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Miles Avatar Posted May 12, 2005 Report Share Posted May 12, 2005 The Summer of 2005 of course! if its any other summer I fear that there may not be a whole lot of us left to read it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locklyn Posted May 12, 2005 Report Share Posted May 12, 2005 It's been awfully quiet from Pete and Russ on several important threads, hopefully Pete is hammering away at his keyboard composing a naval battle epos... Locklyn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ali-t-akua Posted May 12, 2005 Report Share Posted May 12, 2005 I agree. I hope all is well with Pete and Russ as they have been very quiet of late. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EternusIV Posted May 12, 2005 Report Share Posted May 12, 2005 I think you are on to something Ali---- The 'gaps' in screen ship destruction probably have to do with retargeting. Fact: Ships retarget each round Fact: Ships target according to a 'bad bell curve' to various deployment locations with a much higher probability they will target 'the front row' (ie screens) than the back rows What could have happened: Screens(Deploy Loc A) were targeted first for a few rounds and then there was a hiccup where fleets in the other Deply Locations were fired upon....before the firepowere 'returned' to screens. There still remains some interesting concerns about Fighters and the problem that Pete spotted I'm curious as to what the anomolies are Good luck in sorting it out and for sharing, D.I.E. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locklyn Posted May 16, 2005 Report Share Posted May 16, 2005 Any news on this DIE? /Locklyn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.I.E. Posted May 16, 2005 Author Report Share Posted May 16, 2005 Any news on this DIE? /Locklyn <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Nothing significant. I have heard nothing more from Pete on the nature of any hypothetical combat system problems, since his last reponse on this board thread. After Pete expressed his desire for me to carry the discussion on my combats off-board, I sent him the results of one other battle (turn before the current one) that looked very odd to me in some respects. But Pete has not answered. All part of the general pattern of silence that others have already noted. I have high hopes that Pete's lack of communication is a measure of how hard he is concentrating on addressing our issues of concern on the programming front. D.I.E. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locklyn Posted June 7, 2005 Report Share Posted June 7, 2005 DIE, Could you please PM me on the progress of this. /Locklyn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTGPete Posted June 8, 2005 Report Share Posted June 8, 2005 I have high hopes that Pete's lack of communication is a measure of how hard he is concentrating on addressing our issues of concern on the programming front. D.I.E. Yep - working on the new combat reporting engine along with bug fixes and general tuning to make sure everything lines up. Posting a topic now about the new space combat reporting engine The bug that showed a bunch of ships on one side dying all in a row and then finally ships on the other side dying should never appear again. Large numbers of screens should not cause any reporting problems again. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.