Enjoy the new WePlayCiv theme!

Any feedback is welcome, just go to this topic: 

 

 

vyeh

Supporters
  • Content count

    3,908
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About vyeh

  • Rank
    Emperor
  1. Could I ask you to edit your post to correct the spelling? Edit: Thank you! In the interest of harmony, I will abide by your reasonable request.
  2. Fortunately. I certainly wasn't displeased. I was mentioning the case only to help Maniac understand issue, not to complain or criticize.
  3. My favorite example: (this notice was in the Maps thread in the Help subforum) (this comment was in Punishment Sphere thread in AC forum; it is OK, but there were several other posts) Eventually, 14 posts were moved or copied from the two threads to start a SG setup thread beginning with this post: and ending with this post: My other favorite example is: (this was posted in the Recreation Commons and started a 14-post discussion) I only found out about this because chuft had PM'd me saying there was a bug report in Recreation Commons. It would never have occurred to me to monitor Recreation Commons for bug reports. Please note that I am not arguing for either side. I am just answering Maniac's question with my opinion of '"wrong" posting behaviour.' It is only a personal opinion and not meant to be a judgment or an attempt to influence WPC moderation policy or an attempt to flame anybody.
  4. For the record' date=' it is not my library. I think it can become as important as the SMAC Academy and CGN (I am speaking officially) will do everything to support the Alpha Centauri Repository.
  5. Especially working on joint news items.:) I don't have permission to follow the link in the post below: Could someone explain the thumbs? Also: Could I ask for a custom user title reflecting my CGN/project status?
  6. Dale offered and I accepted the following support from WPC for scient's project: We have agreed that DrazharLn will work out the details of points (1) and (2). From WPC will support scient's project: And vice-versa, including you vyeh. Unfortunately, I am now walking in Dale's shoes and don't have much time. I learned a lot from WPC, especially from the discussion at Site on creating a new site. I can't resist the following comment. As a "lurker" (I look for bug reports for scient), I am 100% in support of the recent announcement on Thread-Jacking. I appreciate thread reorganization and prefixes! Dale, you have my permission to move this post to a more appropriate location.
  7. RMCD94' date=' BU seems to be trying to create a problem where there is none. We agree that we have different opinions. I stated that I wasn't interested in getting into an argument. You acknowledge that your view is an opinion and I am entitled to like artillery. Since BU stated that you aren't doing the "newb-bash," it is clear that he was referring to me. Obviously, it didn't occurred to you that you were the object of a "newb-bash." I have a great reputation at 'poly for helping new players. I think my interaction with you has been helpful. Even though artillery is not part of your playing style, I hope that I showed that artillery might work in someone else's style. I am afraid I will be abandoning this thread as I do not wish to deal with BU in the absence of a moderator (Darsnan has just stated that he has to take a step back from the community because of a job promotion). If you would like my advice (I ran the recent demogames at 'poly and I am a CMN [[b']C[/b]reator, Moderator, Narrator]), you can post a query to me at the Civilization Gaming Network SMAC/X - General/Help/Strategy. It is a dead forum, but it has the advantage that BU can't post there. These are the ways that I use artillery and I believe it helps me: (1) I use it to cut roads. On offense, it can prevent the enemy from rushing reinforcements to a base you are attacking or counterattacking when you only have a handful of very damaged survivors occupying the base. (2) I use it to destroy sensor arrays. This eliminates the sensor array bonus. (3) I use it to destroy mines and boreholes. This hampers a besieged base from building reinforcements. The ways that other people have used artillery: (4) They destroy farms and condensors. This can cause the base to starve and produce less energy. This might not be a good idea if you are planning to capture and hold the base, but it is great for guerrilla raids, where you are planning to sell off the improvements and raze the base. (5) They can defend a base against probe teams in conjunction with a resident probe defender. Because probe teams are so weak, an artillery strike against a probe team will reduce it to one hit point. There is no way that a probe team with 1 hit point, even if it is elite, will beat a green probe team with 100% healthy. (6) They can also help defend a base against conventional units. Weakening an attacker reduces the chance that the attacker will destroy a defending unit. In my opinion, artillery is most effective when used in combined operation. As with rovers, it is helpful to know the modifiers for artillery combat (p. 101 in my printed manual): Artillery units get a +25% bonus for each level of altitude [reference deleted] they are above the target. Land-based artillery gets a +50% bonus when attacking naval units. A unit in smooth or rolling terrain gets a +50% terrain gets a +50% defensive bonus against artillery attacks to represent manueverability as a defensive measure against artillery. The demogames I ran were at the transcend level with enhanced AI. When the game says the odds are 2-1, it does not mean that out of every three attacks, the attacker loses once. If the defender's hit points are reduced to 50% (the minimum in a base), the survivability of an attacking conventional unit increases by more than 2. In one demogame, we used artillery and air power effectively. We used artillery 2 squares away from the base (with a rotating air cover) to bombard the base repeatedly until all the defenders were reduced to 50% health. Then we used airpower to attack the defenders (at slightly over 1-1) until they were all destroyed. Then a land unit (a scout rover) occupied the base. From an economics viewpoint, two artillery units, three aircraft and a scout rover were a lot cheaper than the aircraft and scout rover that would have been required to take the base in the absence of artillery. Although artillery was very useful in the transcend level with enhanced AI to bring the odds below 1-1, I suspect that, even at lower difficulty levels, an artillery unit with the most advanced weaponry and a rover or tank chassis can be useful as part of an attacking army (along with probe teams, attackers and defenders). Without getting into history (which would probably be upsetting to one of the co-administrators with whom I am friendly), I am abandoning this thread. You can reach me at the CGN forum I linked if you want to continue this discussion (although I think I covered everything).
  8. If you mean each unit was 10% healthy (that is, 90% damaged), that shouldn't work because units that are in a base can only be damaged up to 50% by artillery. If you mean each unit was 10% damaged, that was probably because the units had good defense (supplemented by perimeter defense and base defense). Artillery combat only does one round. If the weapons strength on artillery is weak, then the probability is that there is no damage to the defender. Otherwise, there is only a single point of damage. Once again, it depends on the weapons strength of the naval unit versus the armor strength of the defender (as modified by being in the base). That is an opinion and, as you said, based on your playing experience. I am not interested in getting into an argument. Here is a good starting point.
  9. It's you. In ACDG5 (a demogame played at 'poly), artillery saved us from building (and losing) a lot of conventional units. (1) Artillery can be used repeatedly to reduce the defenders of the base to 50%. (2) Once the defender no longer has artillery, artillery can take hit points off conventional units without being attacked in turn (as long as it is 2 squares away from the enemy). (3) Most importantly, enemy units don't heal if they have just been attacked, even if there has been no damage. There are some other advantages of artillery: (4) Artillery can destroy terraforming (destroying roads can prevent reinforcements from arriving). (5) Artillery can save a lot of time hunting down spore launchers especially when there is a lot of fungus and you don't have mindworms. You could eliminate the artillery special ability in your alphax.txt file. In that case, the planet's artillery unit would not be pointless. It would probably be more of an aggravation without artillery to engage them. Note that naval combat units would still have artillery powers. And you can edit the spore launchers by removing their artillery special ability. Good analysis, but I think you have ignored the tactic of using artillery to destroy terraforming improvements. I disagree that artillery is weak. They are best used in situations where they can pound a target over several turns. If you think artillery isn't causing enough damage, you can edit the alphax.txt file, as Darsnan did in some of his recent scenarios. If you are interested in more discussion about the use of artillery, you might consider posting your question at 'poly. I believe there were several members there who did not move to WPC who have a lot more experience with these kind of tactical issues.
  10. I tried two cases with the scenario generator. If there is a pact, I got a screen asking whether I wanted to commence probe team operations. If I said no, the probe team entered the base (no infiltration). If there is no pact, I got a screen with a menu of probe team options and the chance to cancel (cancellation left the probe team outside the base without loss of any movement points). I don't understand why your probe team automatically infiltrated your ally's base (unless it is a TCP/IP bug). Since this is a TCP/IP issue, perhaps you should make a post in the MP forum (I assume you are interested in what happens in a multiplayer scenario rather than a single player scenario) to see if anyone has ever encountered this issue in a TCP/IP game or a PBEM game (I assume this is what you mean by a scenario game). Be sure to point to this thread. (As I understand it, Darsnan only removes spam and doesn't want to get involved in the potentially controversial issues involved with moving threads to a subforum.) When I was testing your question, I originally had two factions in a pact. I moved a probe team into the pactmate's base. No problem. Then I unpacted and untreatied them with the scenario editor. I created another probe team and attempted to move it into the former pactmate's base and I got the screen saying there would be a battle between the first and second probe teams even though they belonged to the same faction. The first probe team was defending the former pactmate's base! So it is possible to defend a pactmate's base with your probe team. I'd be interested if anyone has encountered your problem in a PBEM game. I haven't seen the issue raised. Perhaps Darsnan or mart has heard about this problem. I have posted a query about this problem in the TCP/IP troubles thread in the help subforum.
  11.  

    <p>Hi Vyeh, Hope your well m8:). Just wondered if you could help me with something?. I have just downloaded Ryan's mod. I have placed them into the proper directory, but when i play the tutorial Beginner it does not tell me what to do, like it does in the official Senarios in the game. How can i see the goals i have to accomplish.</p>

    <p>Thanks again M8 Ritchie:)</p>

     

  12. I posted a lot at the beginning of August as you know ... in the ForumCiv American forum!