KarlBar99

Be glad your not using earphone's, it's deafening in those.

EDIT: nvm, tired brain is a bit fried i see the issue. Definitely not the info warfare immunity tech or you wouldn't be seeing their defence and resistance drop. Does seem like there's a calculation bug behind the scene's, probably a case of it not handling powers below 0.1 on the defender side properly and 0.1 becomes a ten times multiplier of something.

[quote] KarlBar99, although I cannot deduct the used formulas from your explanation I still don't see why a defender power that was reduced to 0.1 will lead to 0% invasion success when attacker power is 7.2 ... [/quote] Let me highlight the code pieces for you: [quote] ConventionalWarfare CONVENTIONAL_WARFARE_TITLE</Title&

How about taking a look at what Info Warfare Actually Does OP: Relevant Code: [quote] ConventionalWarfare CONVENTIONAL_WARFARE_TITLE CONVENTIONAL_WARFARE_DESCRIPTION TechTree <

Oh so true :).

Your best bet is to mod the default constructor dynamic blueprint so it has less extraneous modules on it. Then the whole auto upgrade becomes super useful because you can auto order constructors with multiple constructor modules on them. Which is just awesome.

Hmm possible, i know i didn't look at blueprints till a while after i started modding, before 1.11 but either at the end of the 1.1 or after the 1.1 beta. It's hard to be sure which. If they did add it last minute to 1.1 then i guess that makes sense.

@Petri: Given deathwynd downloaded my files and confirmed that they worked without crashes for him it's clearly not a reference error. But still handy info for anyone else who comes along :).

@Naselus: I noticed it working correctly after i started modding, and i didn't do that till after i opted in to the 1.1 beta patch. It's possible the break happened somewhere in the beta of course.

Hmm, got a question. I know the AI evaluates the value, fortitude and treat stats of it's warships, but is there any code detailing exactly how it prioritises these? I'm in the process of putting together a ship component re-balance mod. But don't want to break the AI. So could do with some more info on how the AI evaluates such things. I've found a few entries at the start of the AI defs file that might be related but i'm wondering if anyone's found anything else i mi

@RaumWaetcher: Again i saw that too pre-brekage with best defence. it seemed to factor in effects like what the opposition was fielding as weaponry.

Given bestdefence worked fine for a while i'd say it's more the code behind the scenes that's got jiggered. When they made the change initially it did mix types. Seemed to go on the basis of the best type of whichever defence value was smaller.

Thanx for the hint :).

Production represents A) how many people you have to work. and B) how productive they are. The wheel indicates what industries they're assigned to. [quote] You say it's like that in the future like it's a fact. Why would we need a toilet factory to make a toilet with 3d printing+? We are in the future after all, and this design is better for the game. Most likely with robotics and 3d-printing it's a matter of

It's in the files. You can look it up.

I like the AI calling more but can we please set them up to either not gift specialisations, or only do so after you've researched one in the relevant category. Getting locked out by gifts is really annoying.

@Naselus: I'm not sure that I specifically agree or disagree with you regarding manufacturing and production. However, I generally dislike the multiplicative nature of the current system. Primarily because such a system makes it very difficult to implement small scale modifiers. Because of all the other multipliers is that apply a small change in one could result in a large change in the end sum result. However, honesty compels me to admit that reducing individual number com

That works till it colonises a planet at a later stage of the game.

Yeah that trait doesn't mean they regenerate x% if their health per turn, it means they regenerate X% more than the base 3 per turn.

Per my spreadsheet thread the number one issue right now is that weapons and defences increases at unexpectedly low rates maintenance wise, so maintenance is a piece of cake to pay. And military ship maintenance is by far and away our biggest economic drain.

Check out my spreadsheets thread. Ships as a general rule don't increase in manufacturing or maintenance anywhere near as fast as you'd expect atm and that leads to a LOT of issues with overly cheap ships and minimalistic money issues allowing you to push production and research output up in unfortunate amounts. That said there's a huge issue with so much stuff being a combo of production point, maxmanufacturing and either one of social or military productio

Well thats the thing back in 1.1 i saw AI ships with mixed defences and they weren't my custom designs. Best defence actually worked, it had some kind of basic check where it saw which defence type was lowest and applied the best defence of the lowest defence type on the ship. But now it just goes with best module.

Cheers Naselus :). Like i said because best defence only broke more recently i assumed it had been like that from day one and it was a backround code change that broke things.

Ok i figured out the scrolling thingy eventually. After you finish entering your to be displayed text, tap enter twice and hit the full stop key. Anything on a new line is treated as a new paragraph, (which seems to enable scrolling), and the spacing is determined by the number of lines of gap, but the bottom half of the last line is allways cut off. This way the only thing on that line is an extraneous full stop which is covered up. Still debating if i'm going to r

Which enumeration file is it hidden in then because way back during 1.1 opt-in i tried setting specific defences and it just wouldn't have with the copy paste definitions from the components def's and i couldn't fine an enumeration. Also didn;t the whole thing break with the 1.11 patch?. I'm pretty sure everything ws honky dory in my games in 1.1 that's why i assumed the edit took place then, (i never accessed the BP file pre-1.1 opt-in).