Optimal weight for special is 9, computers 9 also

Weapons and shields is 8

Np - Im not trying to detract from your work.  I had to use an approximation because I couldnt resolve the formula exactly  .. but you obviously have resolved the equation .. so Im certainly not saying anything negative about what youve done.  Im extremely impressed - I couldnt resolve that equation exactly.

However - the approximation seems to yeild a better result, which is interesting - I think its probably a rounding issue.

I was hoping you would be able to tell me the exact values for the shield and comp combo's I have, because I dont know the exact answer  - but I think your able to calculate it.

This isnt a fight - if you want to be the smartest - go ahead be my guest.

Personally I was just happy to come across someone who could actually resolve these kind of formual's in the game - not many people can do this stuff - so kudo's to you .. its not easy, but dont think your the only person who can do calculus.

My calculus is rusty because I left univeristy 15 years ago - but its not entirely forgotten.

My shield and comp sizes are reversed - shields should be 8, comps 9 - made a typo when I entered it - the final ship size is correct.

Build it.  Your numbers arent bad, but I think your being effected by rounding .. so your behind my stats.

Just build both ships - theres no argument.

Nice work MeGuaRen.

I was a bit shocked when I checked your design against the auto ship builder I designed (in excel) and found yours was 1.3% better.  So I checked it out more closely and realised you made an error with the accuracy - your final accuracy is 90%, not 93% - after making that change I found my builder produces a better result.

Your computer array of 20, 17x2 and 16x8 yields 35% accuracy.  Add weapon accuracy of 55% and thats 90%.

My auto design looks like this;

Shield 36% (1) - Size 8
Shields 32% (21) - Size 8
Computer 20% (1) - Size 9
Computers 16% (10) - Size 9
Weapon Acc 55% - Size 8 - Energy 8,421,336,221, Attack 2,492,844,825
Special - Size 9 - Energy 17,273,836,685, HP 5,182,149,707
Powercore - Size 68,181,656

Attack = 2,492,844,825
Hit Points = 5,182,149,707
Absorb = 67%
Accuracy = 90%
Hull size = 68,181,948

Anyhow - looks like your pretty d**n close .. not sure why your off though - sounds like you know what your doing.  Dont tell everyone how to do this stuff though .. shhhh ..

EDIT# Switched the shield and comp sizes to the correct values, I had them reversed.

One thing I didnt consider though was selling and moving a base.  Youd need to get 100% of your money back for the armour and attack youd spent or no-one would do it - at the moment bases need to get moved frequently.

Maybe an option needs to be implemented to allow bases to be moved rather than disassembled - that would fix the issue.

Seems I messed up with the HP and Attack cost - Ill adjust it .. ho hum .. first calc error Ive ever made .. NOT!

EDIT# Ok adjusted it.  Attack and HP cost around 50 credits for 20 hp or attack for a big ship.  Ive adjusted it so they cost the same.  For ships you can decrease the cost with resupply, for bases you can decrease costs using tech - so they should be comparable.

## Note I posted this topic under the thread started by Chrys regarding base improvements - I reposted here because these ideas are far more inline wih our current understanding of the game##

Its interesting to revisit this topic a few months later.  My understanding has changed a fair amount over that time.

The cloaking and anti cloaking for bases actually works quite well, however that technology makes the use of all of the other station defenses obsolete.

The main issue with using the tech tree to improve bases is that there is no easy way to balance technology based HP and Attack values against economic based Attack and HP.  THat is, ships and bases work on two different systems, and how do you know what the economy of a player is at a certain tech level - it may vary widely.  So at the moment ships will always be able to destroy bases easily.

There is ONE way however to balance these two mismatched systems, which is to use a hybrid system.

Missiles and fighters on stations are already a hybrid system, and this should be extended to HP, Attack, and Absorb and Accuracy values.

With fighters and missiles they have a CREDIT cost.  THis is an essential way to balance tech against economy.  THe issue with fighters and missiles at the moment though is that they are 100% expendable, which makes them too expensive - also at the moment regardless if you kill the attacking ship(s) your station is going to get destroyed.  So its unlikely players are going to use those systems.

Here is a hybrid style system for bases that will balance economies versus technologies, when I say hybrid I mean its part technology and partially economic based.

For base HP your base gets its starting HP (100 billion?).  Then you may PURCHASE additional hit points (armour plating) for your station at a cost of 20 HP for 50 credits.  Station Armour tech can then either be left exactly how it is, or you can change it to be +2HP per 50 credits - effectively its the same anyhow.

For attack you get the standard base attack value (20 billion I think), but you can purhase an additional 20 attack per 50 credits.  The structural integrity scanner increases attack by 15% - again you can just leave it as it is, or say its +3 attack per 50 credits for each increase.

For absorb and accuracy, the technology based idea is ok.  This is because these are not linear open ended values, they have hard caps - it makes them easier to manage from a tech point of view.  Still, the cost to increase shields and accuracy would need to be revised - along with the base values - at the moment the base values are too low, and/or the cost to increase is too high.

For fighters and missiles, these could be left just how they are - which means no-one is likely to use them, because they would be able to purchase attack for their station now anyhow.  So an alternative for these is to have them work differently from the station attack - giving them a utility function that players might wish to employ.

My suggestion for fighters and missiles is this.  Fighters and missiles would automatically attack unfriendly targets entering the system.  They would remain as one use items, making them fairly expensive to employ.  IF your base uses fighters and missiles, then the enemy may counter attack on your station regardless of your cloaking, however their first two fleets will be engaged by misslies (fleet position 1) and fighters (fleet position 2) and possibly system fleets (position 3) if you have them - your base would be in the last fleet position for example if you only had fighters, no missiles or system fleets, then your base would be in fleet position 2).  This would make it tougher for the enemy to destroy your base, particularly when you can pump cash into its hit points.  Maybe this might make it too difficult to destroy bases - so some testing would be needed - if its over powered then your base could be put in fleet position 1.

So you would then have an option to use them to control your space and cause havoc on fleets entering your systems.

If this method is employed you would certainly need to warn players entering the system before they warped in.  Id suggest that a scouting report would be produced. 

For example; "WARNING - You are about to warp into hostile territory, controlled by (ID#) "PlayerName".  Long range scanners indicate a fleet of xxx,xxx,xxx,xxx AAF fighters, and xxx,xxx,xxx,xxx missile batteries are deployed in this star system.  It is also patrolled by a domestic fleet of xxx,xxx,xxx,xxx fleet power.  Do you wish to proceed?"

One additional constraint would be to allow automatic defenses only if the owner of the station, or an alliance member was parked at that base - this would do two things, flag that an enemy fleet was stationed there, and also reduce the number of bases that would auto fire.  The rationalization for that could be that you need a commander there to issue the order to attack.

Due to the advances in understanding, and the fairly different approach of this suggestion I re-posted as a separate thread to the one that Chrys started long ago.

Made a new topic for this thread - feel free to copy and paste anything still relevent into the new thread.

The issue with this thread is that our understanding of the game has (or should have ) improved since the original posts were made - so I think in most cases they are obsolete.

If you think theres useful stuff in this thread thats still current, please transfer to the new thread.

I voted already, but seeing the poll is new you might want to add "Fix Nebula Mechanic" as an option and reset the votes.

Theres a lot of people VERY passionate about the neb mechanic - myself included.

Heres my short list of things I REALLY want to get implemented (in order);

Mouse over items
Unload All button for bases
Warp Items
Mining Items
Filtering Missions
Activating/Selling Items
List Pages

Id like to see the interface upgrades implemented - far more than ANY expansion.  Also, Id like to see the nebula mechanic revised to prevent self nebbing.

The expansions and add ons are nice - but really I dont care what else is done while some things are in the game currently that just plain suck.

Fix the current problems before adding more expansions etc that may ultimately add more problems.

The amount of work to improve the interface and fix the neb mechanic is small - but it will improve the enjoyment of the game so much more than another add on or expansion.

The enemy fleet doesnt get "an additional shot" basically its attack power is divided between more targets.  WIth up to 20% of its attack being redirected as the defender choses.

If anything these abilities are a bit over powered.

Heres an example;

Your fleet set up is as follows;

Swarmers (Armour Commander) - Defensive perimeter (reduce dmg vs this fleet by up to 20%)
Swarmers (Artilliary Commander) - Concentrated Fire (attack enemy position 1 with extra fire power)
Big HP Boat (Armour Commander) - Defensive Support (reduce dmg vs your 2nd swarmers by up to 20%)
Big HP Boat (Armour Commander) - Interception (take up to 20% of enemy fleet ones firepower)

In this example, up to 40% of your opponents attack power from their position one fleet is redirected - minimising your swarmer losses.  Your second swarmer rank has damage vs them reduced by up to 20%, and your position one swarmer attack value is boosted up to 20%.

They are pretty good abilities, Im not sure if your just having a joke or not - each ability reduces the attack power of a specific enemy fleet by up to 20% - the attack power is actually redirected though, rather than being ignored. 

I can definitely say I woud have a use for this guy - distributing some of my enemies fire power how I want is a nifty ability.

Emi, as youve presented it commanders will have two sets of modifiers, one set of permanent modifiers and one set of activated special abilities (Im assuming when you log off you can chose a default action for your commander).

As far as permanent bonuses are concerned, theres only really three combat abilities to chose from, attack, hit points and marines. 

The problem with accuracy and absorb is that they are absolutes, they have a discreet range between 0 and 100% - well 0 and 80% for absorb, adjusting them is always going to be messy and may result in unexpected issues ..

So attack, hit points and marines are all nice linear open ended values, good to apply modifiers to.

Id suggest commanders increase 3% in bonuses per 2 levels, this gives you a wide range of commander permanent bonuses.

Artilliary Commander  +3% Attack
Armour Commander +3% Hit Points
Marine Commander +3% Marines

Then you get a bunch of subsets;

Infantry Commander +1% attack, +2% marines
Tank Commander +1% attack, +2% hit points
Assualt Commander +1% marines, +2% attack
Mechanized Commander +1% marines, +2% hit points
Wing Commander +1% hit points, +2% attack
Stormtrooper Commander +1% hit points, +2% marines
Special Forces Commander +1% attack, +1% marines, +1% hit points

Special abilities that affect enemy ships can be ok, just need to make sure they arent over the top.

Marine Commander Abilities (any Commander with 1% or more marines bonus);

Lvl 5 - Evac Wounded: Reduce your marine casulties by 1% per commander level.
Lvl 10 - Extreme Prejudice: Increase the casulties of enemy marines by 1% per commander lvl.
Lvl 20 - Take Prisoners:  Capture 1% per commander level of the remaining enemy marines, this happens after combat is resolved.


Artilliary Commander abilities;

Lvl 5 - Concentrated Fire:  This fleet attacks position one of the enemy fleet with 1% per commander level of its attack power.  The remaining attack power is directed at the opposing fleet in this position.
Lvl 10 - First Fire:  Your ship fires first on the enemy ship(s) with 1% per commander level of your attack power.  Destroyed ships are removed.  Then a second round of combat ensues, where the remaining enemy return fire, and you return fire with your remaining attack power.
Lvl 20 - Scattering Fire:  Your fleet fires on all enemy fleets with 1% per commander level of its attack power.  Only one fleet in an armada may use scattering fire.


Armour Commander abilities;

Lvl 5 - Interception:  The enemy fleet in positon one fires on this fleet with 1% per commander level of its attack power, the remaining attack power is directed at the correct target.
Lvl 10 - Defensive Perimeter: The opposing enemy fleet divides 1% per commander level of its attack power evenly across your other fleets, the remainder is directed at this fleet.
Lvl 20 - Defensive Support:  The enemy fleet immediately above this fleet applies 1% per commander level of its attack power to this fleet, but that attack power is then halved, its remaining attack power is directed at the correct target.

Anyhow - some ideas.

Well - your kind of stealing my ideas here, as Im in process of writing a game and my commanders are fairly central to it   But I think Ill probably use a Medieval genre to start .. so I can share a bit I guess.

This is a good concept, the detail presented wont work, but its only a first pass .. so dont feel bad Emi, man if I had a dollar for everytime Tz has shot down my ideas before they were half formed

However, a rose isnt just a thorny stick - so yeah, theres issues here, mainly in the detail - but I generally like the concept.

Theres also a bunch of stuff in the concept that I think may be a problem, and I dont think any amount of tinkering with the details will resolve the issues.

1.  You cant really allow zero's, so modifiers should be multiplication not addition and subtracion.  You work with code, so you know theres a d**n good reason why you want to avoid zeros in code - also from a game mechanics point of view - zero's are ALWAYS bad. Also 100% is a 1, and that can be a problem in some cases as well - cant see anything specific - but its better to avoid 100%

2. Modifiers need to be within a reasonable limit.  Id suggest you dont want to allow commander mods to get as high as 100%.  Id suggest +/-10 to 20% is more than enough.  A commander who can give +20% is a pretty handy item for sure.

3. I dont really see any reason to have a penalty from the commanders.  A lot of adjustments can probably be designed out the ships they are on easily - making it a waste of time.  You want to make the commanders a useful commodity - and penalties just confuse the issue, possibly making some commanders less than worthless.  Balancing is also difficult if you introduce penalties.

4. XP - lets not re-visit the clicking / grinding pls.  Commander xp accumulated over time is far more satisfactory - that way the longer you can keep your commander alive the more use he will be.  Also players will all be in the same boat, new and old - no-one gets an advantage.

5.  The special abilities I like a lot - but balancing different abilities against each other is going to be very difficult.  I think its worth the trouble though - but you may not find everything out by play testing it for a month - when its live youll probably have to go in and adjust it again - obviously players dont usually like that - but if you want interesting abilities then your unlikely to sort it all out quickly - theres likely to be some way to exploit something that takes a long while to figure out.

THis is all the general stuff I think - Ill make a separate post to suggest some details.

I dont understand why chance of capture isnt based on the marines onboard?  Surely chance of capture would be affected by the numbers of attacking and defending marines?

Can we get some version of this on SOWARS pls?  More profit from attacking means more attacking - so its a very good thing for SOWARS.