joeball123

[quote who="Taslios" reply="12" id="3640291"] I think you miss the point entirely. If the Federal Gov suddenly came down and said that the ONLY THING ALLOWED on TV is Dancing with the Stars and EVERY person MUST now participate in this now GLOBAL dancing with the stars competition... [/quote] If that were a logical, or even a vaguely plausible, explanation for what the wheel does, sure, but that Frogboy claimed that that's what the wheel setting represents doesn't ma

[quote who="erischild" reply="9" id="3640131"] I will speak up and say that the coercion mechanic is a well designed game mechanic. I hate it intensely and avoid it obsessively in-game and that is why it is there. [/quote] A mechanic like Coercion should not be there to provide an obstacle to the player, it should be there to provide a trade-off between specialized and generalized resource allocation. However, as implemented, they may as well have just removed the wheel and

[quote who="Horemvore" reply="1" id="3640070"] You can counter Coercion with high Morale. Eco SB's do a fine job of this with the modifer from Intimidation Center. [/quote] Last I checked, Coercion applied a penalty to raw production that stacked multiplicatively with the various bonuses to raw production from economic starbases, improvements, and high approval. A 50% penalty that stacks multiplicatively with everything else is enormously more powerful than any

[quote who="tilyas89" reply="3" id="3639644"] As far as I know, gifted ai doesn't get extra resources. And yes I understand that they can be quantity over quality but when you have around 20 decent early game ships and a good economy/research i can't understand how that happens [/quote] Take a look at GalCiv3AIDefs. At the "Gifted" setting, the computer player should be getting a 33% bonus to raw production and a 20% discount on manufacturing costs, among other bonus

I haven't actually tried messing around with these, but I'm fairly certain that the following seven constants defined in GalCiv3GlobalDefs control how the ideology tree costs scale. IdeologyTraitBaseCost CulturalAlignmentBiasSamePyramidGrowthExponent CulturalAlignmentBiasSamePyramidGrowthExponentialMult CulturalAlignmentBiasSamePyramidGrowthMultiplier CulturalAlignmentBiasOtherPyramidGrowthExponent CulturalAlignmentBiasO

There are a few values in GalCiv3GlobalDefs.XML that you can try tweaking: InfluenceRadiusRoot, which determines the nominal radius of the influence bubble around an influence generating object, with the nominal radius being (total influence generated)^(1 / InfluenceRadiusRoot). Making this value larger will reduce the size of influence bubbles. InfluenceMinToClaim affects rounding on the radius of the influence bubble, so it probably won't affect anything that yo

[quote who="Tetrasodium" reply="28" id="3637937"] over time it will probably average at around that given a large enough sample, but... not really. If you the chance to hit is independent with a 50/50 chance, each time... first shot 50/50 second shot 50/50 third shot 50/50 fourth shot 50/50 The odds in getting miss miss miss miss are the same as getting hit miss hit miss hit miss hit miss or hit hit hit hit in an independent event li

[quote who="Tetrasodium" reply="24" id="3637809"] Quoting joeball123, reply 12 Consider a weapon which can fire once per time period T has a 50% chance of hitting the target per shot, and a weapon which fires twice as fast with the same chance of hitting on any given shot. Over any given time interval T, the weapon which f

[quote who="zuPloed" reply="22" id="3637791"] The decision of damage vs AS is trivial in 99% of cases (maximize expected dps). Sure at the point where adding one weapon and adding AS, you will have different kill time distributions, but that simply means that you get a higher spread in results for more weapons. The expectation value remains the same. [/quote] Let us say you have two options which both produce the same expected to kill a given target, one of which has a hi

[quote who="zuPloed" reply="20" id="3637559"] Conclusion: It therefore should not be considered an action you take once you recognize you have to counter evasion. Therefor it is not a counter. [/quote] I have an experiment for you to perform. Assume you have an incomplete design which, with the parts currently on it, can destroy a given target in some number of shots (say, 10) and fires at some given rate (e.g. 1 shot per second). You can complete this design by increas

[quote who="a0152570" reply="3" id="3637588"] As Taslios pointed out; Tourism is a factor of your influence and culture but i have yet to figure out how its calculated [/quote] Last I looked into it, it appeared as though base tourism was a function of average planetary population throughout the galaxy, and was independent of influence and 'culture.' [quote who="Horemvore" reply="7" id="3637612"] There is a hardcap of 250cr per trade route(this should be

[quote who="zuPloed" reply="18" id="3637498"] It also clearly illustrates, that increasing attack speed is phenomenologicly not different in terms of expexted dps thenincreasing damage by the same amount. +X% AS or D both give +X% to DPS_E. ACC is the one that is different, because increasing ACC by +X% does not necessarily translate to +X% for DPS_E. if ACC-EV was 5% and you do +10% ACC you get +200% DPS_E. If ACC-EV was 90% before and you do +10% you get +11.1% DPS_E. If you do +25% in

[quote who="Seleuceia" reply="14" id="3637465"] The only thing higher attackspeed at equal damage per second does, is reducing the uncertainty of the outcome. But the expected damage is the same. consider your second example, where weapon 1 fires once for 2 damage per T with a 50% hit chance and weapon two fires twice for 1 damage and a 50% hit chance. This results in: [/quote] Did I say that the theoretical DPS of the two weapons was the same? No, I did not. Does the game r

[quote who="zuPloed" reply="11" id="3637431"] Besides being quite a bit better then what their tooltip suggests, no, they are not a counter mechanic to evasion [/quote] Let us say that in a period of time T you can fire a number of shots N which each have a probability p of hitting the target. You can compute an expected number of shots E(p, N) which will hit the target over the period of time T. If we modify the weapon in such a way that the probability of any one shot hitt

[quote who="zuPloed" reply="7" id="3637375"] Forgot about that, I usually take -10% mass which is a great pick, too, due to the way -% stacks. If we talk about traits, there is the +0.2/+0.1 accuracy boosting trait, too, ofc. However as a blind counter this is not a good choice ofc. [/quote] Unless you turn off tech trading, you can usually pick up both the -10% component mass and the +0.1 accuracy techs. If you decide you need it, you can usually get it. But yes, I

[quote who="Horemvore" reply="4" id="3637353"] Just throwing this out there, a well placed Shrinker can net 70-100% Bonus [/quote] Under ideal conditions, it's possible to get at least +110% hull capacity out of a single Hyperion Shrinker. The Krynn tech tree has a building which gives +4 levels to adjacent military improvements, and you can get another 9 levels between an Antimatter Power Plant, a Planetary Defense Dome, and an Elerium Defense Shield, after which I thin

[quote who="Thecw" reply="2" id="3637280"] It is a mathematical given that a negative percentage has a stronger influence than a positive percentage. [/quote] This is incorrect, or more specifically is only true for certain methods of stacking. A percentile penalty applied to the base value of an attribute is cancelled out entirely by a percentile bonus of equal magnitude which also applies to the base value of an attribute, and there is no reason why a percentile modifier c

[quote who="exelsis" reply="4" id="3636899"] Anything docked in either gets a strategic repair bonus. For starbases it's somewhere around x7 multiplier on the base rate, which again isn't much because the normal repair rate is incredibly slow for anything larger than small ships. [/quote] Looking in the XML files, I can't see anything that looks like a x7 multiplier on strategic repair rate for being docked at a starbase or shipyard. Base repair rate appears to

[quote]so my first question is does this 1.0 range multiplier in GalCiv3AIDefs overwrite my -.4 range multiplier in MapSizeDefs or are they multiplied together for 1.2? [/quote] For everything in the game that I've looked into, the computation is ([base value] + [sum of the flat modifiers]) * (1 + [sum of the multiplicative modifiers]) I don't see any reason to expect that the ship range bonuses in GalCiv3AIDefs and MapSiz

When tracking total capacity usage, the game does not round the capacity requirements of each component to an integer when determining whether or not components will fit; if you have 9 components which each take up 5.6 capacity, they will consume 50.4 capacity on the ship. The ship design screen will round the value off to an integer when it tells you how much capacity you've used up, but it will not use the rounded value when determining whether or not additional components will fit, whi

[quote who="gssg" reply="2" id="3634787"] it's a new occurrence for me [/quote] It may be a new occurrence for you, but it's also entirely possible that you just haven't come across discrepancies significant enough that casual inspection would show the divergence between what the viewer displayed and what the actual simulation's results are, especially since the battle viewer counts fighter HP while the strategic level fleet summary does not and so permanent

For whatever it's worth, back around when the game was released I tried adding a new ship role by defining an entry for it in BattleBehaviorDefs and adding the role to ShipRoleTypes.xsd. This did not cause the game any issues that I noticed (I could start the game, start playing, and mess around in the ship designer) or, as far as I can remember, produce any warnings when starting the game, but the role also did not appear as an option for selection in the ship design screen. I also did n

[quote who="Go4Celerity" reply="2" id="3633529"] As far as I know tourism income is a flat bonus of 3.7 bc per planet before modifiers. [/quote] Tourism is very definitely not a constant 3.7 bc per planet before modifiers; a custom faction with the Wealthy ability (unlocks tourism from the beginning) and no tourism modifiers had a tourism income of about 1.8 bc per planet on the homeworld and first colony on the second turn, which dropped down to about 1 bc during the coloni

[quote who="The Sisko" reply="5" id="3628767"] The problem is they gave the player the ability to cheat the system, which I've grown to increasingly believe was a mistake. [/quote] I don't really agree. Removing the player's ability to set the roles of ships regardless of what the computer thinks the role should be only fixes the most extreme abuses; it does not fix the underlying problem in the system. The underlying problem that the system has is that there are

[quote]I've been watching a few 'lets play' vids and everyone seems to be building double constructors by stripping the base constructor of everything and adding another constructor module. But when I try to do this it doesn't fit. The mass allowance is 90 and the constructors are 49 so I cant get 2 on even with the tech that makes components less mass. [/quote] Note that many of the "let's play" videos were most likely made prior to 1.7, and 1.7 changed