shadows

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

shadows

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> shadows

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

shadows - 8/20/2013 3:08:09 AM

Cruis.In

Posts: 202
Joined: 11/10/2012
Status: offline

Hey everyone, I've been wondering, has Shadows addressed the issues with ship building where you can pile anything onto any ship class with enough habs and life support? Has the AI caught on? How is the difficulty compared to Legends?

Post #: 1

RE: shadows - 8/20/2013 8:06:15 AM

Chris21wen

Posts: 6249
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Cottesmore, Rutland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cruis.In

Hey everyone, I've been wondering, has Shadows addressed the issues with ship building where you can pile anything onto any ship class with enough habs and life support? Has the AI caught on? How is the difficulty compared to Legends?

No, you can still do that provided you have enough space. The AI has a set of preferences when building ships. Ywe I beleive it is as Pirates can be a big pain,

(in reply to Cruis.In)

Post #: 2

RE: shadows - 8/20/2013 8:06:36 AM

Chris21wen

Posts: 6249
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Cottesmore, Rutland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cruis.In

Hey everyone, I've been wondering, has Shadows addressed the issues with ship building where you can pile anything onto any ship class with enough habs and life support? Has the AI caught on? How is the difficulty compared to Legends?

No, you can still do that provided you have enough space. The AI has a set of preferences when building ships. Yes, I beleive it is as Pirates can be a big pain,

(in reply to Chris21wen)

Post #: 3

RE: shadows - 8/20/2013 3:52:52 PM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cruis.In
Hey everyone, I've been wondering, has Shadows addressed the issues with ship building where you can pile anything onto any ship class with enough habs and life support? Has the AI caught on? How is the difficulty compared to Legends?

Shadows is much more difficult than Legends, if you want it to be.

Regarding ship building, you can build ships up to the limit of the largest construction size you have researched. Is that what you are talking about? The AI in Shadows is better in terms of its ship design and building capabilities and it will build very large Capital ships as its construction size allows.

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Cruis.In)

Post #: 4

RE: shadows - 8/21/2013 2:11:15 AM

Cruis.In

Posts: 202
Joined: 11/10/2012
Status: offline

hi Erik, I found Legends get easy because the AI fleets could never beat mine because their ships couldn't.

I designed my ships gun/shield heavy. Firepower + good defense, Ai never has/had a match.

I just play on extreme difficulty in sandbox mode.

I was hoping maybe, you couldn't do that with ships, that it would limited or the AI would catch on and do the same, so regardless you'd be on an even field. The only deciding factor being strategy.

(in reply to Cruis.In)

Post #: 5

RE: shadows - 8/21/2013 2:49:55 AM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

Hi Cruis.In,

It's still an AI, so it can't be as smart as a human player, but I would say that the ship design has improved quite a bit. That area was one of our focuses for Shadows and we implemented a new design system with new templates for all the different species to give them fairly optimized designs compared to Legends and earlier.

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Cruis.In)

Post #: 6

RE: shadows - 8/21/2013 2:57:23 AM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

My observations is: play a peace-loving, scientific democracy and stay 'in character.' The AI in Shadows will be lobbing you some surprises!

Good AI Erik!

_____________________________

The x-ray is her siren song. My ship cannot resist her long. Nearer to my deadly goal. Until the black hole. Gains control...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkIIlkyZ328&feature=autoplay&list=AL94UKMTqg-9CocLGbd6tpbuQRxyF4FGNr&playnext=3

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 7

RE: shadows - 8/21/2013 4:56:31 AM

Cruis.In

Posts: 202
Joined: 11/10/2012
Status: offline

Ok I'll let ya know. I usually don't start wars though, I end them!

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 8

RE: shadows - 8/23/2013 3:06:19 AM

Cruis.In

Posts: 202
Joined: 11/10/2012
Status: offline

aren't pirates more accurately described as Privateers? Since not all are bad.

Been playing a bit and I remembered my ship complaint in detail.

Basically if I research up construction size, it increases the size to like 1500 max. So then I basically take a destroyer and put 1500 worth of components on it, leaving no difference between a destroyer or capital ship.

I was saying or suggesting to combat this that hard limits are put in... I.E. each tier has a cap max, and instead of researching up construction size, you research destroyers, cruisers, cap ships etc...

then you give each class of ship a particular bonus so that smaller ships are not obsolete, example, smaller ships could have an innate bonus to maneuverability, where more shots miss them than big ships...

just some thoughts, having fun so far!

I just had a fleet of 15 ships decimated by a pirate cap ship, either my playing on extreme speeds them up and slows me down, or pirates are just ahead of me!

< Message edited by Cruis.In -- 8/23/2013 4:44:01 AM >

(in reply to Cruis.In)

Post #: 9

RE: shadows - 8/23/2013 1:29:25 PM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

Yes I think if you want to design all your ship classes to be at or near your maximum allowable ship size and/or virtually identical in configuration, the game allows you to do that.

But why would you do that?

The point of ship classes is not that they have a hard-coded limit on their size, but that they play different roles. If you design them to play different roles effectively then they will naturally tend to be graded in size. Tis, true, I have noticed that, once I've kitted out my escorts with what I deem to be a 'good' design to complement my frigates and destroyers, they difference in total size is only in the 10 to 20% ballpark, but I don't think that that is a problem with not having a hard limit on ship class size.

I think what the game could benefit from, and something an industrious modder could do I reckon, is for all (or at least many) ship components to be differentiated into sizes, such as: small, medium, large. Whatever functions the components serve would be quantitatively graded as would their actual mass/volume (or whatever it is the "size" variable is representing).

If the numbers were well balanced then it would naturally predispose the player to put small components on the small ships, mediums on the medium sizes ships and so on.

_____________________________

(in reply to Cruis.In)

Post #: 10

RE: shadows - 8/23/2013 2:19:59 PM

Icemania

Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid
Yes I think if you want to design all your ship classes to be at or near your maximum allowable ship size and/or virtually identical in configuration, the game allows you to do that.

But why would you do that?

Read Are escorts good for anything?

I agree with Cruis.In, smaller ships need bonuses, as they are currently strategically obsolete.

< Message edited by Icemania -- 8/23/2013 2:21:49 PM >

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 11

RE: shadows - 8/23/2013 3:34:16 PM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

I had a look at the thread . . .

I am certainly no expert on this game, and have not played it enough to confirm that the underlying math works the way it is implied to work. But with that said, I would postulate that there are some issues not being fully addressed here.

1. There is speed, and there is maneuverability. In my limited observation, a more maneuverable ship takes fewer hits. They may also take fewer hits if they are maneuvering at a range that is under a minimum threshold for a given weapon system. The "size" of a vessel seems to interact with the proportional change in turning speed, meaning: put 1 thruster on a 250 size ship it may effect a 5-degree/sec change in turning speed. Put the same thruster on a 350 size ship, it may effect a 2-degree/sec change in turning speed. Two vessels traveling at speed 25, one size 250 and turning at 20-degrees/sec the other one size 350 and turning at 13-degrees/sec: the smaller one should take fewer hits, both because it is smaller in silhouette, and changing its attitude more rapidly = harder to target. All things being equal going faster in a straight line is not likely to reduce hits as much as going faster in circles.

If the game does not work like this, that is a damn shame because certainly the way the components are setup, and the way the components interact with vehicle size, thrust, etc. all indicate that this is how the game is operating.

2. The other factor that presumably comes into play is quantity over power. Let us assume that for your budget you can buy 10 size 200 "escorts" or 5 size 300 "destroyers" (both ship types could be in the same class it doesn't really matter, but it is easier to refer to them this way). My observation is that, you can with the smaller hull of an escort achieve comparable firepower and defense rating (shield+armor) though the hull hitpoints are less. In effect, I am of the opinion that you can pack just as much punch per dollar into a squad of 10 "escorts" as you can 5 destroyers.

In addition to the issue noted above about size and maneuverability (ostensibly) influencing enemy targeting, the second point I'm making is that twice as many targets (especially ones moving rapidly in circles) are going to be at least twice as hard to destroy for many weapon systems as are 5 targets. This will not be true for all weapons systems, most notably area weapons, and perhaps other ones that have some 'homing' function.

I could be completely wrong here; I have not played the game enough to see if these principles hold true. But assuming the game is true to the obvious design elements it includes, then small maneuverable craft should have a role to play. I do tend to think this is the intent of the designers (even if it is not exactly working that way) for the simple reason that they have gone to the trouble of including even smaller craft (fighters) and specialized weapons for targeting them (point defense). This tells me that the game probably IS calculating chance to hit based on target size and angular velocity.

< Message edited by Anthropoid -- 8/23/2013 3:44:12 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Icemania)

Post #: 12

RE: shadows - 8/23/2013 5:35:09 PM

Icemania

Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline

Quite correct Anthropoid there is much the thread referenced does not discuss. I would be very happy for my assumptions to be proven false. I have only looked at this at a macro ship design level as follows.

Let's design ships where the acceleration, speed, manueverability and range is the same ... using some in-game size limits.

In my current game as an example with a size limit of 230 I can fit a firepower of 90 and shields of 645. With a purchase cost of 2,675 10 of these would cost 26,750.

However, with a size limit of 400 I can fit firepower of 210 and shields of 1505. With a purchase cost of 4,533 I can purchase 5 of these ... almost 6 ... but I'll use 5 to give the smaller ships a boost.

Notice that we do not have the same firepower or shields per dollar, the larger ships have more. The reason is some components are the same size in both ships e.g. hyperdrive, need almost the same number of fuel cells to maintain the same range etc. I only need to pay for 5 hyperdrives etc.

In-game when warping into destroy targets it is common for one or two ships to arrive very slightly ahead of the others. The enemy will often focus fire on those ships first, so with those small ships having less than half the shields, it is more likely a ship will be destroyed or repairs are required.

Let's say your 10 Size 230 ships attack my 5 Size 400 ships. Obviously we will both focus fire. However, as I have slightly more firepower (1050 v 900), and my ships have slightly more than double the shields, I'll be able to destroy one of your ships first, so the firepower advantage will increase to (1050 v 810) ... and it becomes clear that I will eventually win a hardfought battle.

Now consider a design with Size 160 and compare with Size 400 ... the difference increases further ... this differential is common from very early in the game. Since the AI tends to spam small ships even when it (slowly) gets larger construction sizes, while I build focused on larger ships, the differential increases steadily to the point of feeling essentially invulnerable (with the same technology / funds available). I invite you to compare designs for Size 160 versus Size 800+!

As you say there is the possible effect of the smaller silhouette. I have not tested this and welcome observations. If the game does not use this it would be a good way to give smaller ships a bonus in-game if it was significant enough to offset the above.

As to your first point on the effect of manueverability I tend to design my ships to a specification regardless of size so have not tested this. Perhaps small ships should receive a bonus here also.

< Message edited by Icemania -- 8/23/2013 5:50:51 PM >

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 13

RE: shadows - 8/23/2013 6:00:22 PM

mstWeal

Posts: 8
Joined: 5/25/2013
Status: offline

Regarding small ships I recognized something of interest when fighting the Shakturi. They had a lot of small escort ships. These did not do any harm to my ships at all BUT they distracted my ships. They had plenty of shields so it required my whole fleet's firepower to effectively one-shot them. With 20 or so of these little pesks flying around I assume that could really be a problem for the AI. Because had I not manually target-fired these small ships, the damage output of my fleet would have been more or less evenly distributed. In addition, the small ships tend to flee into every direction and without player intervention, this causes a fleet to spread out chasing those small ships. That isolates them from the rest of the fleet and other ships tend to have an easier time to focus them. It's pretty much like forming a big fish swarm to avoid get eaten by a predator. Furthermore it's bad bad because what you really want is focused firepower on a single target and for this you want to have your fleet clumped up in one place.

What I wanna say is: If you design escort class ships to be really fast and with really strong shields and no weapons whatsover, they could be very useful in space battles because they mess up enemy fleet behavior.

The tractor beams are VERY useful in this situation because you can drag the small ships into your fleet clump. If an enemy fleet does not have tractor beams in this scenario it's even more problematic for them.

< Message edited by mstWeal -- 8/23/2013 6:05:10 PM >

(in reply to Icemania)

Post #: 14

RE: shadows - 8/23/2013 9:42:27 PM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

Interesting. Will have to fiddle around and see if small and maneuverable actually seem to dodge those big shots.

_____________________________

(in reply to mstWeal)

Post #: 15

RE: shadows - 8/27/2013 4:20:06 AM

Cruis.In

Posts: 202
Joined: 11/10/2012
Status: offline

Ok, started a game on extreme difficulty, max pirates and empires.

It was quite a bit harder than Legends. For a lot of the game I was in the red cash flow, although my actual money stayed positive most of the time. But I never accumulated a lot at any one time. I had to build 'smart' fleets and do otherwise unorthodox things I didn't do in Legends. For example when at war with a particularly troubling race, who just hated me, even though I'd done nothing to antagonize them, in order to reduce their raids on my systems and to cripple their economy I designed a 'raider' escort. A fast lightly armed ship, and commissioned 10 of them.

I then guided them on hit and runs on their mining stations and other bases, never taking on their ships or their space ports/defensive bases. This was cool and helped a lot.

I was developing my economical means all the while. But during this war with this race, I realized unless I destroyed them they would never leave me alone, and this is where things got kind of desperate. I decided I would take over their home planet. I put all my home fleets into one and sent them to get space superiority which was easily achieved, and I waited as I built 4 custom troop carriers with 12 troop compartments each. While building the troops, because my maintenance was so high, I was too much in the red to build them, so I had to sell technology to stay afloat, which I sold to my allies.

I then carried about 1.4k worth of troops who beat their 1.2k I had some good bonuses. I took the planet, and that war was over, once it ended, my economy boomed. Because although I had developed it well it couldn't sustain constant war because of the unproductive nature of the colonies. I notice my tax adviser would lower taxes to keep colonies happy because war made them unhappy.

Once the colonies were able to be taxed, and war was not upon us, my economy finally started to take off, after many hours of game time.

Was quite a challenge staying afloat, defending my empire, and managing allies etc, but now I stand on 6 mil and 120k cash flow. Suffice to say I could defeat any empire from here on out, and therefore to actually do so would only actually be a waste of time and no fun.

Next I'll try playing as privateers.

This was in the normal age btw. Was a very fun game.

(in reply to Cruis.In)

Post #: 16

RE: shadows - 8/27/2013 10:53:18 AM

Icemania

Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline

Cruis.In, try adding:

1. Shadows Age
2. Ban Technology Selling
3. Change Biases file so more races hate you

Every now and again also add:

4. Harsh Homeworld and/or
5. All other Empires Tech Level 5 and Mature while you are Prewarp

This isn't as much fun but worth a try if you are searching for a challenge (you'll still win).

< Message edited by Icemania -- 8/27/2013 2:01:33 PM >

(in reply to Cruis.In)

Post #: 17