Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

For topics that do not fit in another sub-forum.

Moderator: Oberlus

Message
Author
Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1850
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#151 Post by Ophiuchus »

Oberlus wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 11:29 am Also, I can't help it: you were the one delaying your promises (I have waited for 20 turns or so for that outpost ship...), and also very selfish about planets distribution. You got the best production of (probably) the whole galaxy thanks to me renouncing to that blue star-GG system in your favour.
Not that you could have forced access to it in the early game. On the other hand i gave you access to .. like seven planets including a large one only one hop from my homeworld. And you build shipyards there. With an asymmetrical situation - you being able to invade my planets and i am not able to invade your planets. Very confidence inspiring.

Also your home system has four(?) planets and an asteroid belt - not sure why you would need GGG. And being able to concentrate all your power on tech and hidden expansion gave you a much better growth (as was clear from the beginning).

What i got from our deal is peace and basically sensor coverage. That was not a great deal for me (in the sense that you benefitted more a lot). Also the last trade was - one laenfa coloniser for a system with better troops, a GG and an asteroid belt. I see you have a lot to complain about :lol:

Not sure what you refer to with the outpost, i had a colony ship for you in the works 2 ETA (this got delayed because of wobblys attack).
wobbly wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 2:05 pm Ophiuchus wrote: ↑Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:40 pm
So I hoped by gifting stuff to you oberlus all would unite in order to burn out the new superpower :twisted:

Except for the bit where you would of made it near impossible for the other players to catch up on the detection tech to see said superpower.
That Oberlus did all by himself. What the situation gives him is a massive production. Conceding does not change that a lot.
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1850
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#152 Post by Ophiuchus »

Magnate wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 10:03 pm P.P.S. Can arc disruptors still hit everything (fighters, ships and planets)? Or has that been changed? I know I complained about it in the last game I played but is it still the case? Given the RP cost I hope so!
Yes, it helps against planets. But AD2 is already a waste against fighters (actually i think AD1 is also a waste against fighters in most cases - just gives you a bit versatility).
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1850
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#153 Post by Ophiuchus »

Magnate wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:58 pm P.S. Can anyone confirm whether the piloting bug also applies to Reinforced Hull? Does it increase hull strength by 40, or still only by 5?
Reinforced hull has nothing to do with piloting - it increases structure, not damage.
Pretty sure i tested that, but simply start a game with structure scaling and tech cost 1 and research it to see the effect.
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

Magnate
Space Dragon
Posts: 411
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#154 Post by Magnate »

Ophiuchus wrote: Sat Aug 15, 2020 10:06 am
Magnate wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 10:03 pm P.P.S. Can arc disruptors still hit everything (fighters, ships and planets)? Or has that been changed? I know I complained about it in the last game I played but is it still the case? Given the RP cost I hope so!
Yes, it helps against planets. But AD2 is already a waste against fighters (actually i think AD1 is also a waste against fighters in most cases - just gives you a bit versatility).
Ooh no I think the versatility is everything - AD beats flak cannon every time.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3263
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#155 Post by Oberlus »

Ophiuchus wrote: Sat Aug 15, 2020 10:04 am Not that you could have forced access to it in the early game.
I could get that one with my second colo ship, I got sth else instead for your convenience.
On the other hand i gave you access to .. like seven planets including a large one only one hop from my homeworld. And you build shipyards there.
To build ships for you closer to your south front.
And I offered that big planet with Laenfa ti you in exchange of the blue star gg system, you didn't want it.
Also your home system has four(?) planets and an asteroid belt
Three planets, large, medium and small IIRC.
not sure why you would need GGG
PP?
And being able to concentrate all your power on tech and hidden expansion gave you a much better growth (as was clear from the beginning).
More PP, faster expansion.
What i got from our deal is peace and basically sensor coverage. That was not a great deal for me (in the sense that you benefitted more a lot).
We agree to disagree. I could get the planets without the alliance. The lack of extra PP from GGG maybe compensated with the earlier colonization of the large ocean next to your HW, but that's it.
Also the last trade was - one laenfa coloniser for a system with better troops, a GG and an asteroid belt. I see you have a lot to complain about :lol:
A system that is still uncolonized. And you get telepathic species.
:roll:
Not sure what you refer to with the outpost, i had a colony ship for you in the works 2 ETA (this got delayed because of wobblys attack).
The outpost was a previous deal that never got materialized. Maybe I forgot if you told me you changed your mind.

User avatar
Hyperant
Space Kraken
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 1:33 am

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#156 Post by Hyperant »

Happy Times


Ensign's Gazelle



With the disintegration of the Ophiuchus Realms, it has opened the doors to a mass commerce raiding operation against the Abyssal Commonwealth. While we are still unable to directly invade the Commomwealth, we can in the meanwhile launch raids on their convoys transporting vital military and civilian hardware.

Needless to say, our exploits have led to a significant number of merchant ships being raided, looted and sometimes even captured with their crew. Even their capital system has fallen under a secure blockade, and with no escorts or even signs of their navy, we will surely cripple their realm in due time.

The loot is piling up, the pirates are happy. What can go wrong?


Happy Arrrrrgh noises
Monarch of the following realms:
-Lumin Federation
-Gamma Republic
-Holy Commune
-Supreme League
-Frost Syndicate

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3263
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#157 Post by Oberlus »

Hyperant wrote: Sat Aug 15, 2020 5:36 pm What can go wrong?
You are preparing a great story. And you are doing it on purpose! At your feet, Sir.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1850
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#158 Post by Ophiuchus »

Oberlus wrote: Sat Aug 15, 2020 11:03 am
Ophiuchus wrote: Sat Aug 15, 2020 10:04 am Not that you could have forced access to it in the early game.
I could get that one with my second colo ship, I got sth else instead for your convenience.
That would have been quite a price if we didnt ally. Planet in GG system, and a good sensor species, also telepathics. Active scanners and lighthouse FTW.
Oberlus wrote: Sat Aug 15, 2020 11:03 amTo build ships for you closer to your south front.
And I offered that big planet with Laenfa ti you in exchange of the blue star gg system, you didn't want it.
You build exactly zero ships for me there. And the whole system would have been too much, i actually offered you one of the two planets in the GG system.

I think we have a very different idea about our positions. Your growth was a lot better than mine even without that production system (and that was what i thought in the beginning). Even if i had taken o01egs home world in the first wave you would outpower my empire.

You also do not recognize the difference in invasion power which i think is crucial.
Oberlus wrote: Sat Aug 15, 2020 11:03 am
Ophiuchus wrote: Sat Aug 15, 2020 10:04 amAlso the last trade was - one laenfa coloniser for a system with better troops, a GG and an asteroid belt. I see you have a lot to complain about :lol:
A system that is still uncolonized. And you get telepathic species.
Yes, that colony ship was still in the queue and got two turns delayed because of the fleets coming to my border. Else it would be six turns difference i guess.

You wrote you could have gotten the planets in my area even if we didnt go the peace route. I do not see how that would actually work. I would have prioritized detection tech, so almost none of your colonizers would have gotten through and you would be missing out on the early colonisation advantage.

For the arc disruptors i think asteroid line is the best match. Too bad we never went into war with the intended combo. Should have ditched the armor upgrade to safe RP probably.

Also for those who think the gifting makes a big difference - a well greased alliance would have just a little less power than Oberlus now with the whole gifted empire. Oberlus would have stealthed my front line planets for me and a few stealthed troop ships could have made some surprises.
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1850
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#159 Post by Ophiuchus »

Oberlus wrote: Sat Aug 15, 2020 6:26 pm
Hyperant wrote: Sat Aug 15, 2020 5:36 pm What can go wrong?
You are preparing a great story. And you are doing it on purpose! At your feet, Sir.
Too bad i cant watch the story unfold - certainly interesting times coming. Keep us posted, guys
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1850
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#160 Post by Ophiuchus »

Magnate wrote: Sat Aug 15, 2020 10:50 am
Ophiuchus wrote: Sat Aug 15, 2020 10:06 am
Magnate wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 10:03 pm P.P.S. Can arc disruptors still hit everything (fighters, ships and planets)? Or has that been changed? I know I complained about it in the last game I played but is it still the case? Given the RP cost I hope so!
Yes, it helps against planets. But AD2 is already a waste against fighters (actually i think AD1 is also a waste against fighters in most cases - just gives you a bit versatility).
Ooh no I think the versatility is everything - AD beats flak cannon every time.
I doubt "AD beats flak cannon every time.". If external slot cost is low i would rather take three MD4 and one flak instead of two AD2 (also interceptorHG+LB good option instead of flak depending on pilots/tech). Of course depending on enemy fleet and launch composition. For invasion of a shipyard-less planets or enemy without basic shield tech of course ADs are quite an asset. I really tried to use ADs (got to AD2) this game and they are nice especially if you mix them so deploying shields against you does not cripple you completely- but i think it would have been much better to go for mass drivers and fighters and use the RP elsewhere.
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1850
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#161 Post by Ophiuchus »

Can i get some preliminary feedback for four-bouts combat? Are some things unbalanced e.g. fighters/planetary defense?
Or some effects not being scaled?
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

wobbly
Dyson Forest
Posts: 205
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#162 Post by wobbly »

Ophiuchus wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 7:51 pm Also for those who think the gifting makes a big difference - a well greased alliance would have just a little less power than Oberlus now with the whole gifted empire. Oberlus would have stealthed my front line planets for me and a few stealthed troop ships could have made some surprises.
I strongly disagree. What you are trying to argue here makes little sense to me. For a start you are trying to tell me that there is little difference between a split & joint research pool. And that's just the start. In an alliance your ally is dangerous competition, able to see everything you do. I'm going to be blunt here, this smells of justification rather then logic & reasoning.

Re: Arc disrupters. At the time you left the game my 1st shielded ship was coming onto the board. Arc disrupters are quite expensive in RP/PP & can be countered when you know your enemy is using them. I think it's easier for someone using laser to pickup the shielding tech (which you need eventually anyway), then it is for someone with arc disrupters (an expensive side tech) to switch to lasers. I was actually surprised when they were added as a full 4 techs rather then a single tech. Are they meant to be a real competitor to direct fire? rather then an auxillary?

Re: Flaks vs Arc disrupters. Arc disrupter is better, flak cannon cheaper. If its just for anti-fighter I think I prefer to just use flaks. or fighters.

Re: 4 round combat. I haven't noticed anything unbalanced here. My only impression is that this makes fighters/point defense more important & interesting. Enjoying it so far. I assume it also matters against stealth ships? I haven't fought any yet, so can't comment.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1850
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#163 Post by Ophiuchus »

wobbly wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 5:10 am And that's just the start. In an alliance your ally is dangerous competition, able to see everything you do.
Yes, dangerous, keep yourself covered. Competition also, but so is the whole galaxy until the galaxy is not able to compete (until your ally becomes the main competitor).
I just wanted to say that you can share quite some stuff in non-obvious ways by specialising and sharing for mutual benefit (species exchange, different hull and weapon lines, troop tech, detection techs, stealth techs).
wobbly wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 5:10 am Re: Arc disrupters. At the time you left the game my 1st shielded ship was coming onto the board. Arc disrupters are quite expensive in RP/PP & can be countered when you know your enemy is using them. I think it's easier for someone using laser to pickup the shielding tech (which you need eventually anyway), then it is for someone with arc disrupters (an expensive side tech) to switch to lasers. I was actually surprised when they were added as a full 4 techs rather then a single tech. Are they meant to be a real competitor to direct fire? rather then an auxillary?
I had mixed in about thirty to fifty percent mass drivers into my fleet so your shields would not be so effective. As a counter I would have churned out fighters with eaxaw until i caught up in the direct weapon line. AD3 is too expensive in RP to upgrade. We will make that cheaper to research and/or split fighters from the direct weapon line.

Arc disruptors should be a viable alternative to direct fire for average pilots and quite efficient at that if your enemy is not deploying shields. AD1 is a good comsat killer and can be used as versatility joker (if you do not know the enemy fleet layout). The AD3 should be competitive to some level of plasma cannon and you can use upgrade your existing fleet, similar to fighters. And for a bad pilot species arc disruptors are quite efficient (until you get better pilots).
wobbly wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 5:10 am Re: 4 round combat. I haven't noticed anything unbalanced here. My only impression is that this makes fighters/point defense more important & interesting. Enjoying it so far. I assume it also matters against stealth ships? I haven't fought any yet, so can't comment.
Using more bouts is (a known and unintended) nerf for stealth ships. You are visible 75% percent of the bouts, not only 66%. Stealth ships will get some buff/good options in 0.5

If we introduce gradual stealth (aka weapon noisiness) it makes sense to apply some scaling to combat stealth. But I think we will rather concentrate on well defined four bouts with predefined combat ranged for 0.5
There will be interaction with ranges as you only unstealth when you strike - and for a well stealthed ship with only close range weapons that means extra stealthed bouts (assassin style) up to only 25% of the bouts vulnerable if your ship was not in combat the turn before.
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

wobbly
Dyson Forest
Posts: 205
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#164 Post by wobbly »

Ophiuchus wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 7:05 am I had mixed in about thirty to fifty percent mass drivers into my fleet so your shields would not be so effective. As a counter I would have churned out fighters with eaxaw until i caught up in the direct weapon line. AD3 is too expensive in RP to upgrade. We will make that cheaper to research and/or split fighters from the direct weapon line.
I don't think mass drivers are that great against shields either, being 50%? damage at full tech. I guess fighters are the natural counter to shields though like you say they are currently on the direct weapon line. Plus flak cannons are cheaper then a fighter bay+launcher.

Incidentally what was the approx. cost for the little chaffteroids you were using? I was never sure how the prices compared for matching them with bulky double laser/double zortium armour robotics.

Edit: Another thing I'm not convinced about is arc disrupter vs big armour (real or chaff). It's a wide damage distribution. If you damage a lot of ships & they go repair, you achieve not much. It really seems you need a lot of overkill to assure you are actually destroying ships.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3263
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Eleventh game on the multiplayer slow game server

#165 Post by Oberlus »

IMO, if you are going Arc Disruptors for whatever reason, you must also go fighters (bombers and heavy bombers most of the time), to counter for shields and to force enemy defend against both.
MD is crap mid game, not only because of the shields but also because of the better armor: the low ratio damage per external slot means you need more ships

Post Reply