|
|
|
|
|
August 19th, 2002, 03:44 PM
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: iola, ks, usa
Posts: 1,319
Thanks: 3
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Planetary weapons problem.
Ah-HA! Mine were solitary PN ships, without any normal weapon vessels in sight.
|
August 19th, 2002, 06:35 PM
|
|
Major
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
Posts: 1,048
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Planetary weapons problem.
I assume the PN ships were allowed to break formation? Otherwise, they'd stay at optimal range for the lead ship in the fleet...
__________________
L++ Se+++ GdY $++ Fr C+++ Csc Sf Ai AuO M+ MpTM S Ss RRSHP+ Pw- Fq->Fq+ Nd+++ Rp G++ Mm++ Bb---
|
August 19th, 2002, 06:42 PM
|
|
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,661
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Planetary weapons problem.
Geoschmo I can't reproduce your findings.
I fleeted ships with anti proton beams and ships with only planetary napalm as weapons. Strategy for all ships and the fleet standard optimal firing range/optimal weapons range. Whether I select "ships break formation" or not, the ships with the planetary napalm will attack the planet exactely the same as the ships with the anti proton beams.
Any idea what could be the difference?
|
August 19th, 2002, 06:49 PM
|
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,450
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Planetary weapons problem.
No Q, I am stumped. My game was in 1.67. Was your test in that or 1.78? I haven't tried it yet in 1.78 to see if I have the same problem.
Geoschmo
__________________
I used to be somebody but now I am somebody else
Who I'll be tomorrow is anybody's guess
|
August 19th, 2002, 06:52 PM
|
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,450
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Planetary weapons problem.
Quote:
Originally posted by DirectorTsaarx:
I assume the PN ships were allowed to break formation? Otherwise, they'd stay at optimal range for the lead ship in the fleet...
|
I don't think they had break formation orders, but I will have to check. But they had the same strategy as my DUC ships, so whichever way they should have done the same as the other ships. No, the didn't close to the range of the lead ship. They were just milling around at the edge of the combat map near their starting positions. They did not close with the other ships or run for the corners.
Geoschmo
__________________
I used to be somebody but now I am somebody else
Who I'll be tomorrow is anybody's guess
|
August 19th, 2002, 07:13 PM
|
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,450
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Planetary weapons problem.
Ok, I think I have figured out what is happening.
It's not a Napalm problem in general, it's a Napalm I problem specifically. The Napalm I only has a range of 1. Napalm 2 and above has a range of 2. When giving a ship with only Napalm I "optimal Range" strategy it does not close and attack. You have to give it the strategy of point blank.
I was thinking maybe it's not the Napalm at all but the range one so I tried the same test using a ripper beam I, another range one direct fir weapon, and it closes on the planet and fires just fine with optimal range as the strategy.
Perhaps it's the combination of planet only and range one direct fire that makes this happen. It appears to me to clearly be a bug though. I will email it to Malfador.
In the mean time if you have this problem set your Napalm ships strategy to "Point Blank" and they will attack.
Geoschmo
__________________
I used to be somebody but now I am somebody else
Who I'll be tomorrow is anybody's guess
|
August 19th, 2002, 07:23 PM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 132
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Planetary weapons problem.
Quote:
Perhaps it's the combination of planet only and range one direct fire that makes this happen. It appears to me to clearly be a bug though. I will email it to Malfador.
|
I thought it was intentional, so that they could 'hit all 4 squares' of the planet or something, else the weapon didnt really have the range -- Thought I read something like that.
Then again -- this makes no sense, given that this is a planetary weapon LOL and should not face this problem
__________________
-the Kaiser
You are now experiencing what we call... a Cylapse.
|
August 19th, 2002, 10:42 PM
|
|
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,661
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Planetary weapons problem.
Version 1.72:
2. Fixed - Fighters with weapon range of 2 or less were not attacking planets.
Geoschmo you made all your test in Version 1.67??
Then this might have an connection. Try it again with the new patch to see if the behaviour of your ships is still the same.
|
August 20th, 2002, 01:04 AM
|
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Dundas, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,498
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Planetary weapons problem.
My question is does this work in a ver 1.49 game? It sounds similar to the problem of ships not obeying their "don't hurt me orders". This worked fine in ver 1.49 but does not work in Gold.
|
August 20th, 2002, 01:14 AM
|
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,450
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Planetary weapons problem.
Dumbluck, I am curious. Were you sending in just your napalm escorts, or were you sending other ships as well. Cause in my simulations with just napalm ships they attack the planet as well. It's just when they are fleeted with other ships they seem to lose interest.
__________________
I used to be somebody but now I am somebody else
Who I'll be tomorrow is anybody's guess
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|