Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Academy » AR viral bombing in combination with regular bombs (topic split)
AR viral bombing in combination with regular bombs (topic split) |
Tue, 16 January 2007 08:11 |
|
mazda | | Lieutenant | Messages: 655
Registered: April 2003 Location: Reading, UK | |
|
gible wrote on Sat, 13 January 2007 03:36 | AR viral bombing happens between fleet battles and meeting the MT.
If you are also using 'regular' bombs on the same planet then the viral bombing does not occur
The presense and activity of other players bombers does not have this affect.
|
So if the bombers don't clear it then it won't get colonised ?
That's probably worth knowing, for an AR.
{mod edit: split from this post in the thread "Stars! Order of Events"}
[Updated on: Fri, 19 January 2007 04:56] by Moderator
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: AR viral bombing in combination with regular bombs |
Tue, 16 January 2007 21:11 |
|
|
mazda wrote on Wed, 17 January 2007 00:11 |
gible wrote on Sat, 13 January 2007 03:36 | AR viral bombing happens between fleet battles and meeting the MT.
If you are also using 'regular' bombs on the same planet then the viral bombing does not occur
The presense and activity of other players bombers does not have this affect.
|
So if the bombers don't clear it then it won't get colonised ?
That's probably worth knowing, for an AR.
|
The really significant part here, is that AR races can't use combinations of conventional bombers and coloniser-bombers to clear worlds quickly. If they want the colonisers to bomb, the conventional bombers actually have to leave orbit
[Updated on: Fri, 19 January 2007 05:04] by Moderator
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: Stars! Order of Events |
Wed, 17 January 2007 16:47 |
|
Iconian | | Officer Cadet 2nd Year | Messages: 233
Registered: January 2006 Location: Nevada, USA | |
|
Unless you're a really low growth AR you probably wouldn't worry about losing colonists transported in an LF, so you could just build the LF with some mini bombers. Of course, if you're low growth you might be able to afford the more expensive colonizers and split them up whenever they move. Especially since they can't use the installations, I think it would generally be better for an AR to stay away from the colonizers for anything but colonizing, particularly once they have decent bombs.
Kotk: I know that for a lot of Stars! players English is their second language, so this is just a little constructive criticism. Quote: | Why so lot about that viral bombing?
|
and
Quote: | the minibombers also dont die too lot when overgating
|
"Lot" should actually be "much," so it would be "Why so much about that viral bombing" and "the minibombers also don't die too much when overgating." I already know from all the posts I've seen from you that you're quite intelligent, so this is mainly just to help you improve a little bit in terms of English.
Also, this discussion got me thinking about smart bombs and viral bombing, so I started a new thread on that here.
[Updated on: Wed, 17 January 2007 17:04]
Yeah, bread too.
Don't Let the Stars! Fade AwayReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Stars! Order of Events |
Wed, 17 January 2007 18:56 |
|
|
Iconian wrote on Thu, 18 January 2007 08:47 | Also, this discussion got me thinking about smart bombs and viral bombing, so I started a new thread on that here.
|
Yeah, good move. Discussion of why you might use coloniser bombers should probably be split off into that topic... Here we should try to keep ourselves to how it fits into the OOE and any quirks that result from that.
[Updated on: Wed, 17 January 2007 18:56] Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: Stars! Order of Events |
Thu, 18 January 2007 05:00 |
|
|
Kotk wrote on Thu, 18 January 2007 01:51 |
For me English is unfortunatelly 4th language i learned to understand, thanks for all help, ... i continue trying.
|
I salute you.
I've made some half-hearted attempts on my own to pick up Japanese but since I'm not using it very often at all and don't know anyone to converse with it just doesn't stick. Someday I'll need to take classes.
It amazes me that so many people on the Internet fail at using their first language.
[Updated on: Thu, 18 January 2007 05:03] Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: AR viral bombing in combination with regular bombs |
Thu, 18 January 2007 16:53 |
|
iztok | | Commander | Messages: 1210
Registered: April 2003 Location: Slovenia, Europe | |
|
Hi!
Kotk wrote on Thu, 18 January 2007 18:52 | BTW, i double tested.
...
1) Something is wrong with gibles report that the colony ship bombing is somehow blocked by ordinary bombers.
|
That info was new to me, so I too tested it. The funny thing is I CONFIRMED his findings, on two different computers.
On both comp's I opened BattleSim, loaded AR race #1, produced 10 minbombers with HaB, 240 colonizers and 10 FFs, mergerd ships and attacked a neighbour, that had 100 neutron defenses. In all cases where my bombers were in orbit, they destroyed 11700 pop. If there were only colonizers, they killed 10000 pop. With bombers and colonizers there were 11700 killed.
IMO it is a problem with game versions. I actually can't tell what exact game version I'm running: 2.7jRC3 or RC4, so this might be the issue.
BR, Iztok
[Updated on: Fri, 19 January 2007 05:04] by Moderator
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: AR viral bombing in combination with regular bombs |
Thu, 18 January 2007 18:24 |
|
|
If it is a game version issue, then it certainly occurs at least in the case where the host is JRC4 and client is JRC3...
I suppose another possibility is that the type or quantity of bombs more may be relevant... That would seem highly unlikely to me, but it's a possibility to be checked later if nothing else makes sense.
[Updated on: Fri, 19 January 2007 05:03] by Moderator
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | | |
Re: AR viral bombing in combination with regular bombs |
Fri, 19 January 2007 05:10 |
|
Kotk | | Commander | Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003 | |
|
Micha wrote on Fri, 19 January 2007 12:08 | Maybe also the specific regular bomb matters? Kotk tested with Black cat, Iztok tested with HaB ...
|
Maybe the problem is yep in the math that was done when getting expectations?
20 HAB-s give:
60% kill, 0 minimum kill, 40 facilities
100 OCM-s give:
0% kill, 200 000 minimum kill, 0 facilities
So as merged they should work as:
60% kill, 200 000 minimum kill, 40 facilities
Always the bombing occurs with whatever is bigger, minimum kill or percentage kill.
So if 60% of bombed planets pop is bigger than 200 000 then the minimum kill of colony ships does not apply and vice versa?
I used few black cats so %kill was smaller than minimum kill and since black cats have minimum kill of their own i observed that it added to minimum kill of OCM-s.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: AR viral bombing in combination with regular bombs |
Fri, 19 January 2007 11:03 |
|
|
The only possibility I can see would be the HaB (or the multi contained munition). I ran the initial tests for this and tested with mini-bombers (M80's I believe). IF HAB's or multi-contained-munitions bomb with the colonizers then it must be because they are MT parts and treated differently. However, I doubt this is the case. I suspect that the colonizers do not bomb if there are any 'real' bombs in orbit.
Ptolemy
Though we often ask how and why, we must also do to get the answers to the questions.Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: AR viral bombing in combination with regular bombs |
Sun, 21 January 2007 01:05 |
|
|
iztok wrote on Sat, 20 January 2007 06:34 |
Seems you're right! I tested that by sending just one minibomber with 240 colonizers and the result was 10000 dead and 2 instalations destroyed.
|
Can you run this again with 0 defences?
I'd have expected 240 * 2000 + 1 * 300 = 480300 killed.
...mostly I want to see the extra 300 minimum kills to confirm they add together.
[Updated on: Sun, 21 January 2007 01:29] Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: AR viral bombing in combination with regular bombs |
Mon, 22 January 2007 00:43 |
|
Iconian | | Officer Cadet 2nd Year | Messages: 233
Registered: January 2006 Location: Nevada, USA | |
|
Quote: | For me English is unfortunatelly 4th language i learned to understand, thanks for all help, ... i continue trying.
|
Wow . . . that makes me feel a little behind the times. I've not even learned a second language yet! That's something I've always wanted to do.
Quote: | I've made some half-hearted attempts on my own to pick up Japanese but since I'm not using it very often at all and don't know anyone to converse with it just doesn't stick. Someday I'll need to take classes.
|
My brother is trying to learn Japanese, or at least he was. You could going to a forum or something where everyone writes in Japanese. That might at least help you learn to write in Japanese . . . if you have a microphone you could even try speaking it.
Quote: | It amazes me that so many people on the Internet fail at using their first language.
|
Good writing isn't that important to many people. Our (American, anyway) culture is one that has been largely bred to dislike school and education in general, since it's "hard," "boring," etc. That's why I like to find games like Stars! and places like the Autohost. People here are a lot smarter than your average netizen, and they certainly like numbers more--on average.
Quote: | Iconian wrote on Wed, 17 January 2007 22:47
Quote: | I know that for a lot of Stars! players English is their second language, so this is just a little constructive criticism.
|
Constructive and welcome if you find errors in anything I write here. As part of my work is technical translation between english, danish and german (no technical translatino to german, though), I would welcome any comments on errors on my part.
|
I can kind of understand where you're coming from. One my jobs is writing financial definitions, and good spelling, grammar, etc, are important. All I can say is that you might want to capitalize "English," "Danish," and "German" (proper nouns), and double-checking can help you vanquish the occasional typo (translatino--->translation). A forum post isn't as important as a contract or translation work, etc. though.
I'm also open to creative criticism, if anyone sees something I've messed up on . . . though sometimes I'm really not too worried and let some things get through without much notice. I try not to take posting too seriously.
Quote: | Always the bombing occurs with whatever is bigger, minimum kill or percentage kill.
|
That's important to remember if you have smarts and minimum kill bombs, so that you can move them around when they're not needed anymore--if you use smarts at all.
Quote: | Can you run this again with 0 defences?
I'd have expected 240 * 2000 + 1 * 300 = 480300 killed.
...mostly I want to see the extra 300 minimum kills to confirm they add together.
|
I think the number of kills would actually be 240*2000 + 1* the minibomber's percentage kill. So, with a minibomber with a single Black Cat grouped with 240 viral bombers against 1,000,000 w/out defenses, I think you'd get 240*2000 + 1,000,000*.009 kills, or 489,000 kills total.
...
Yeah, bread too.
Don't Let the Stars! Fade AwayReport message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: AR viral bombing in combination with regular bombs |
Tue, 23 January 2007 03:36 |
|
|
sweet...next thought... to test your proposed bombing procedure...
need a testbed where deaths from %kills is more than the deaths from colonisers but less than the min kill from colonisers AND bombs
...your procedure would suggest that the %kills will apply, which is still less than the combined "minimum kills"
...or I could get off me lazy bum and do it myself lol
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: AR viral bombing in combination with regular bombs |
Tue, 23 January 2007 04:38 |
|
|
heh if you were to implement it once yes...however Stars! is known to be an absolute nightmare of spaghetti code and patches upon patches...and all designed to use as little resources as possible
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: AR viral bombing in combination with regular bombs |
Tue, 23 January 2007 05:01 |
|
|
The original source code in C+ probably doesn't look all that bad. Keep in mind that the code as people are able to see it now is what has been deciphered and taken apart in assembler. The older C+ optimizing compiler did an excellent job of compiling to exe's to a minimal size by creating reusable assembler code snippets and calling them as many times as possible. I still have my Microsoft C 5.1 optimizing compiler and one of the options was to optimize for size.
Funny thing is though, the tests others are reporting contradict the tests I did where the viral bombers did not bomb.
Ptolemy
Though we often ask how and why, we must also do to get the answers to the questions.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Jun 10 07:52:40 EDT 2024
|