thegory1

Next time I get playing. will do!

Started a new game, large map, 8 civs. Freeze occurance is random. Can be on galaxy map. Can be on colony management screen. Can be early combat. Does not appear in later stages of any distinct game "phase" - does not happen near end of combat, does not happen when I've been sitting on the same turn a while. [quote]Memory usage was around 70% total (~1.6 GB Civ3), CPU at 30%, no peaks,[/quote] My system memory during one freeze was 45% (about 2.8gb GC3) with CPU utilizatio

I too get this, but I'm running 8GB of memory on an i5 (2500k) and GTX670. In my case, GalCiv3 seems to be chewing up every spare bit of system memory available (By comparison, only other game that does this seems to be GTAV) and it causes the hard-drive to fire up and chug away. Only things running apart from Windows processes are Steam, GeForce Experience, Curse Client and my Audio software (good old realtek). No on-access AV etc (I play on hardmode.)

[e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e] Good stuff!

Well with the accuracy changes (35%) they're only going to remove 1 per second (roughly 1 hit per 3 fighters per round). I've been experimenting with increased hitpoints and defense values to prolong combat to test if elongated combat makes a difference in weapon effectiveness, but that video was an unfair test, that was simply aesthetics :)

[quote who="Arumba" reply="40" id="3554076"] I tried modding weapon cooldowns and it didn't seem to work, I copied over the GalCiv3GlobalDefs file into my Weapon Rebalancing\data\Game directory and it doesn't seem to work. How did you make it work thegory1?[/quote] It'll crash existing saves, looks like you need a new game to make it work. I made a video :) [video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Trdu8U2UlFw&feature=youtu.be[/video]

And here's some ROF adjustments I'm testing out: Missiles start harder and decrease over time, while kinetics are weakest early and strongest in close. Rates of fire are changed from 8 base missile, 5 beam and 4 kinetic to 9 base missile, 4 beam and 1 second kinetic (It looks cool too). Now I need to fiddle with defenses.

Greetings guys, At Larsenexs' request I've also a few questions - I crunched some numbers using admittedly dodgy metrics in this thread and found that kinetic weapons just were not worth it in any way, especially in 1.0 with bugged ship mods. Could you talk us through some of the mechanics in weaponry and the design philosophy behind each weapon and your perception of their place in combat, es

Will do!

[quote who="Sansloi37" reply="34" id="3553971"] I haven't figured out how to do this, but I have played around with changing weapon modifiers based on the firing hull. Things like increasing accuracy for kinetics on tiny hulls, increasing range for huge hulls, etc. Also played with giving all tiny and small ships a certain amount of Jamming to simulate evasion/difficulty of hitting a small object - this would kinda work for your first example; you could apply a negative damage modifi

I've already been looking into accuracy penalties across ship classes, nothing so far

I'm 99% sure it tracks partial damage since there are multiplicative bonuses in the game. Just home from work and my XML appears to be working fine with 1.01 which is some good news. There are 2 key points that do worry me about fire rates - Defense attrition. Is it total damage based, or total times it's been damaged? Need to find out if increased firing rate with similar damage over time output causes differing affects to defense Modifyin

When I get a chance to get it on the 1.01 XML file, absolutely. And to ensure double check values on changes just in case there are any stealth changes. I would ***LOVE*** to figure out a way to modify base fire rate, but I haven't yet. I would love to see Kinetics doing negligible damage but firing like rotary cannons.

So my values for Singularity match the new patch exactly . Interesting, eh? I was clearly on to something. Otherwise they're still a little underpowered IMO. Will have to get a crack at it tonight, had a crippling headache last night and didn't get near my PC

Can anyone confirm new values for kinetic masses from Railgun upwards?

I'm at work too but I'd love to see the numbers. I suspect that's at best a 15-20% normalised value increase

Ideally I would like to re-adjust defence cost/mass to balance out against weapons, with armor being small & cheap, shields being average sized and kind of cheap, and PD being the largest and most expensive (Because lets face it, PD is basically miniaturized weapons systems).

[quote] Am I severely hamstringing myself by not following the numbers[/quote] Not if you're playing smart. Using kinetics at the moment is incredibly space inefficient, but if your opponents have stacked shields & PD, it's still a good choice. They do improve the further up the tree you go, too, at least. [quote] As a casual player, on normal difficulty. Does this break the game?[/quote] </s

[quote]Forgive me if I've misunderstood, but the amount of damage a weapon can do as a ship closes on a stationary target from max range seems like a rather strange yardstick to base changes to weapon balance on? Such an approach will heavily favour long range weapons over short range ones - your value for missiles is how much damage they deal in 32 seconds, while your value for kinetics is how much damage they do in 20 seconds. I'd suggest it might be fairer to

Ah yes I see where you're coming from. In all honesty, the bonuses shouldn't change much. If anything, their damage would certainly go up but the corresponding accuracy penalty would counter it. Interesting.

[quote] This chart takes into account the rate of fire correct? Paul had mentioned that kinetics are going to make 3 hits per every one of a missile (end game).[/quote] At the moment, it seems to be 2 hits for kinetic vs missile, it seems the rate of fire stats I can find are 4 units for kinetic, 5 for beam and 8 for missile. Has this changed or can anyone point to the relevant XML? Edit: Found a relevant quote [quote]<a href="ht

It does, as far as I can tell (See normalised damage column) [quote] What we need to do is take another look at this AFTER 1.1 lands. Paul and others found the range increaser for kinetics is NOT working and will be fixed. Maybe the damage will catch up if the kinetics can fire at the same range as missiles. This would be optimum. [/quote] By my numbers, even at 1100 range base like missiles they'd still be 20% damage off the pace and still 33% dearer per

Preface: This post has grown somewhat organically as I went through XML files over the past hour or 2. It moves from a balance discussion to something close to a modding discussion but there is no mod here. If it tests well and there is any demand I could put it up into the mod forum. Found what I would call an oddity in weapons stats (base before mods, could very well be different after). This takes only base weapons, ignoring specials. that's an oversight of course b

Ah but it's not really a buff. There's a trade off. Load missiles on, stand back and hope they go down because if they don't, you're not getting out of there any time soon due to slow turns. Maybe momentum would be a good idea too, though that seems pretty covered. Less thrusters = shallower turns, further increasing turn times. If someone loads up on slow missile boats, shove a thruster in there and load up on PD because you're gonna take him down ea

It seems to be like this shouldn't be overly hard to fix. In fact a combination of 2 changes may indeed improve the combat model immensely. Best of all, I actually modelled the below system for a JS/PHP based web game I created years ago with simple AI and similar to GC2/GC3 weapon types. I can confirm it definitely works! I also had a "flank" ship type in who would drive up the sides and take out enemy flanking ships then drive straight at their capitals. Nudge nudge, Stardock. Beca