Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Bar » NAP Violation
Re: NAP Violation |
Sat, 14 May 2011 04:55 |
|
craebild | | Lieutenant | Messages: 568
Registered: December 2003 Location: Copenhagen, Denmark | |
|
neogrendal wrote on Sat, 14 May 2011 04:33 | In another game I inadvertently did the same thing again. I was trying to hide my production of Nubians by maxing my available fleets to 512. By doing so any new production was being merged into overcloakers I had in orbit… but that posed a problem. How do I make sure my Nubians were being merged into the overcloakers. So I had 400 units of split chaff in orbit of a planet that I thought no one was paying attention too. Unfortunately someone noticed and thought I was trying to use the exploit. The host contacted me and I explained what I was doing, he was convinced but I had to move the chaff around. I did managed to hide 200 Nubians before anyone knew I even had the technology to do it. All the more reason not to trust me right?
Regards,
NeoGrendal
|
I think I was the host in that game, at least I remember an event that fits that description. I took no punitive action because no unlawful benefit could have been gained, and it did not appear to have been a mismanaged attempt at gaining any unlawful benefit.
The fleets that had too high fleet numbers to be targeted were all single chaff, and no fleets were leaving orbit.
Attempting to hide production by bringing the total number of fleets to 512 fleets was not listed as a disallowed tactic/exploit/cheat, so that had to be considered a legitimate tactic.
I advised the player that the legitimate tactic of hiding production by bringing the total number of fleets to 512 fleets should be done without getting into target list overload by doing the necessary splits across several planets instead of at one planet.
The complaining player accepted my explanation that no unlawful benefit could have been gained and that it did not appear to have been a mismanaged attempt at gaining an unlawful benefit, so the complaining player accepted that no punitive action would be taken, and that the offending player would be careful not to make the same mistake again.
There were no other reports of target list overload in that game, so apparently the offending player did take care not to make the same mistake again.
I would also like to add a comment about chaff sweeping and target list overload. It is not only easy to avoid target list overload when chaff sweeping, it is often necessary to avoid target list overload (at least at the target planet) for chaff sweeping to be maximally effective.
It is not the warp speed set for the fleet that determines the probability of a mine hit, it is the minimum warp speed for the distance travelled to the waypoint of the fleet, so if a fleet only has 16 ly or less to travel to it's waypoint, then the probability of a mine hit is zero, even if the speed of the fleet is set to warp 9 in the orders.
This means that in order to be maximally effective, the chaff sweeping ships have to have a waypoint at least 65 ly from their current location, even if the target planet is less than 65 ly from their current location. To completely avoid the possibility of target list overload the chaff sweeping ships just have to be split into groups of no more than 100 ships, which will then be given a different waypoint for each group - Assuming that the chaff sweeping run requires more than 100 chaff sweepers, of course.
Med venlig hilsen / Best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Christian Ræbild / Christian Raebild
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Thu, 12 May 2011 02:56
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Thu, 12 May 2011 07:57
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: mlaub on Fri, 13 May 2011 13:18
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: mlaub on Fri, 13 May 2011 17:20
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Sat, 14 May 2011 13:50
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Sat, 14 May 2011 14:49
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Sat, 14 May 2011 16:10
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Sat, 14 May 2011 18:54
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Sat, 14 May 2011 08:10
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: Azrael on Thu, 12 May 2011 12:23
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Thu, 12 May 2011 18:44
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Thu, 12 May 2011 18:52
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Thu, 12 May 2011 19:09
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Thu, 12 May 2011 18:47
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Thu, 12 May 2011 18:50
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Thu, 12 May 2011 20:26
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Thu, 12 May 2011 21:19
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Thu, 12 May 2011 19:10
|
|
|
Re: NAP Violation
By: nmid on Thu, 12 May 2011 19:07
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue May 21 05:00:44 EDT 2024
|