"Very Difficult Choice" Mod, irc channel: irc.quakenet.org/vdc

[Catalyst_Kh]

Look picks sheet in VDC_mod_42c.xls.

But better reinstall the mod, because more errors can pop up anytime. Start from scratch - apply 1.40b23 patch to clean original 1.31 version, and after that unpack VDC_mod_42c.zip to game folder, rewriting existing files.

[Mustard]

Look picks sheet in VDC_mod_42c.xls.

But better reinstall the mod, because more errors can pop up anytime. Start from scratch - apply 1.40b23 patch to clean original 1.31 version, and after that unpack VDC_mod_42c.zip to game folder, rewriting existing files.

Only have the gog version, which I applied it too clean, i'll just fix what was damaged instead

[Catalyst_Kh]

Gog version is perfectly clean for this terms, unless it is not 1.31 (it could be patched to 1.31 then). But i just googled and found that there is v1.40b24 patch (not b23) with gog version, maybe there is an issue with that (just guessing).

[shpeka]

IIRC I am using GOG version of MOO2 and it patched successfully to VDC. Naturally, you have to edit your DOSBox config file in order to start the game.

(Or create your own .bat file)

[Overlord2]

Depends on the missile, pulsons and zeons have higher hp and require 8-10 pulsars - that is one BB capacity, but vs low missiles it will need much less. So low missiles are a little under disadvantage indeed. Probably should do something about it. In MP games pulsars are very difficult choice, since missing stabilizer hits in many aspects, so pulsars wasn't an issue so far.

I will nerf pusars with the next update, not because they are too powerful vs missiles and fighters, but because they are powerful vs ships. Looks like I missed that shield reduction is applied after damage multiplier, what makes them too strong vs ships on early stages of the game. Also I was mislead by Gontzol's guide, where he says damage tends to minimum, while maximum happens very rarely.

[Mustard]

Depends on the missile, pulsons and zeons have higher hp and require 8-10 pulsars - that is one BB capacity, but vs low missiles it will need much less. So low missiles are a little under disadvantage indeed. Probably should do something about it. In MP games pulsars are very difficult choice, since missing stabilizer hits in many aspects, so pulsars wasn't an issue so far.

I will nerf pusars with the next update, not because they are too powerful vs missiles and fighters, but because they are powerful vs ships. Looks like I missed that shield reduction is applied after damage multiplier, what makes them too strong vs ships on early stages of the game. Also I was mislead by Gontzol's guide, where he says damage tends to minimum, while maximum happens very rarely.

I often find the AI fills a ship with pulsars and augmented engines then rams my ships and uses pulsars for obsurd damage. But then sometimes they just stand still...

[angra]

About bugs in VDC. I think you should mention that old race picks cost is used for calculating additional picks for AI races on hard and impossible difficulties. For example relatively weak Meklons can get powerful unification on impossible difficulty because it costs 6 picks in original MOO2.

Why is the cost for powerful Achilles Targeting Unit so despicably low?

[Overlord2]

About bugs in VDC. I think you should mention that old race picks cost is used for calculating additional picks for AI races on hard and impossible difficulties. For example relatively weak Meklons can get powerful unification on impossible difficulty because it costs 6 picks in original MOO2.

Probably you are right, though can be it just adds certain picks not based on the costs, but based on certain algorythm, e.g. if you decrease cost of uni it will still add it, but won't add additional picks which will fit with less cost. Well, I don't think it's too bad, otherwise AI won't be a challenge

Why is the cost for powerful Achilles Targeting Unit so despicably low?

Please elaborate what exactly you mean here - space costs or RPS costs. I don't find Achiless Targeting Unit strong at all, since most of the ships don't get heavy armor.

[Mustard]

Why is the cost for powerful Achilles Targeting Unit so despicably low?

Please elaborate what exactly you mean here - space costs or RPS costs. I don't find Achiless Targeting Unit strong at all, since most of the ships don't get heavy armor.

Achiless targetting unit is definately strong, but honestly, your better off just getting better weapons, the upgrade from Neutron blasters or graviton beams too plasma cannons is just so huge compared too adding targetting units to your ship that it just isn't relevant

[angra]

Well, I don't think it's too bad, otherwise AI won't be a challenge

I do not think it is bad either but i think it should be mentioned in bugs section.

Please elaborate what exactly you mean here - space costs or RPS costs. I don't find Achiless Targeting Unit strong at all, since most of the ships don't get heavy armor.

Is it a joke? One of most powerful special is not strong for you? Yes, with your mod it is a bit weaker cause of disbalance of "reinforced hull"/"heavy armor". But it still triples internal damage - ships just explode without losing their ridiculous structure points. Also it ignores armor piercing immunity of xentronium armor and allow you neglect from 1/4 to 1/2 of total ship hp.
RPS cost is ok but space cost is too low.

[Mustard]

Please elaborate what exactly you mean here - space costs or RPS costs. I don't find Achiless Targeting Unit strong at all, since most of the ships don't get heavy armor.

Is it a joke? One of most powerful special is not strong for you? Yes, with your mod it is a bit weaker cause of disbalance of "reinforced hull"/"heavy armor". But it still triples internal damage - ships just explode without losing their ridiculous structure points. Also it ignores armor piercing immunity of xentronium armor and allow you neglect from 1/4 to 1/2 of total ship hp.
RPS cost is ok but space cost is too low.

Yeah it doesn't do that, its definately pretty good, but it doesn't triple your damage:

Achilles Targeting Unit: Triples the chance of striking an enemy's weapon and shield systems and completely bypasses the target's armor.

The special your thinking of is:

Structural Analyzer: Links to ship's weapons array to more accurately choose target's weak armor points. All damage that penetrates the target's shields is doubled.

[Overlord2]

Well, I don't think it's too bad, otherwise AI won't be a challenge

I do not think it is bad either but i think it should be mentioned in bugs section.

Before mentioning it, one should specify what is the bug exactly. If the engine puts the picks regardless of the pick's cost it isn't a bug, while if it puts based on the cost then it is. For the moment I don't know how is the procedure working, so cannot tell if it is a bug or not.

Please elaborate what exactly you mean here - space costs or RPS costs. I don't find Achiless Targeting Unit strong at all, since most of the ships don't get heavy armor.

Is it a joke? One of most powerful special is not strong for you? Yes, with your mod it is a bit weaker cause of disbalance of "reinforced hull"/"heavy armor". But it still triples internal damage - ships just explode without losing their ridiculous structure points. Also it ignores armor piercing immunity of xentronium armor and allow you neglect from 1/4 to 1/2 of total ship hp.
RPS cost is ok but space cost is too low.

It tripples not internal damage, but chances to hit internals, which is a different thing. Chances to hit internals are very low anyway.
As for the armor, nobody misses reinforced hull, so what you get rid off is 1/3 hp of the structure, i.e. damage multiplier will be 1.33 in this case, compared to Structural Analyzer 1.6 atm and High Energy Focus 1.33 for heavy, 1.5 for normal and 2.0 for pd beams not higher indeed. If you compare space consumption it takes same as structural analyzer with one level of miniaturization, so it is fair choice. After all Achiless is a very difficult choice, since Molecular Computer is in many cases better choice. You have to go up to Quantum Computer in order to fully enjoy Achiless, which is a very rare case, since in MP games you don't have much time for it.

[Catalyst_Kh]

Irakly, please share your thoughts about several aspects, i tried to figure out myself, but didn't found any fair reasons.

Would it be hard to reprogram Low-G World pick to have only 15-20% penalty for normal gravity? Current 25% is weakening too much, even with -11 pick cost. Like you changed 50% science penalty to 30% with Feudal due to same considerations. What do you think about that?

And then High-G Worlds have the same problem, seems it costs too much for what it gives. May be it would be more reasonable to lower the pick's cost to 2 or 3? Because now I can't see any race, who can benefit from spending 4 picks on High-G, instead of more useful 4 picks investment.

And about Omniscient pick, it became 3 times cheaper, than in 1.31&1.40 version, is it really justified? Many races can just drop 100% pop growth to 80% to release 2 picks for Omniscient, or sacrifice only Large HW to have it. Both variations have very tiny affect on race's growth speed, but gives so big strategical advantage so cheaply. Do you think it is balanced like that? Seems like 3 picks for Omniscient should be more challenging, what do you think?

[angra]

Before mentioning it, one should specify what is the bug exactly. If the engine puts the picks regardless of the pick's cost it isn't a bug, while if it puts based on the cost then it is. For the moment I don't know how is the procedure working, so cannot tell if it is a bug or not.

When you play at hard/impossible difficulty AI players get +3/+6 additional pick points. They buy additional traits for this points. Also at least on impossible they can pickup negative traits like repulsive to get even more pick points. It works nice with default traits cost. In VDC traits cost are changed both for positive and negative ones. But engine still use old cost for additional traits for AI players on hard/impossible. So if you addup costs for all changed traits for particular AI player you will not recieve expected +3/+6 points.

It tripples not internal damage, but chances to hit internals, which is a different thing. Chances to hit internals are very low anyway.

I know but statistically it is almost same. Though for one separate fight trippling chances is more important than trippling damage.

As for the armor, nobody misses reinforced hull, so what you get rid off is 1/3 hp of the structure, i.e. damage multiplier will be 1.33 in this case, compared to Structural Analyzer 1.6 atm and High Energy Focus 1.33 for heavy, 1.5 for normal and 2.0 for pd beams not higher indeed.

There are still internal damage part and ships with heavy armor.

Just made a quick test: refitted late game doom star stripping either structural analyzer or ATU and attacked fleet without heavy armor. Results vary a bit cause of RNG but looks like ship without ATU has same strength as ship without SA. It is less than I expected but more than 1.33 vs 1.6. Maybe I'll do more tests later.

[Overlord2]

When you play at hard/impossible difficulty AI players get +3/+6 additional pick points. They buy additional traits for this points. Also at least on impossible they can pickup negative traits like repulsive to get even more pick points. It works nice with default traits cost. In VDC traits cost are changed both for positive and negative ones. But engine still use old cost for additional traits for AI players on hard/impossible. So if you addup costs for all changed traits for particular AI player you will not recieve expected +3/+6 points.

Above I said that I am not sure whether it uses costs or adds certain picks no matter the cost. If you can prove it uses costs then I'd agree it is a bug. Otherwise it is not. I cease conversation on this issue.

Edit: I carried out test, which proves my point. Zeroed all pick cost and zeroed all race picks. After launching game I see it adds same picks to the same races, which means there is built-in algorythm to give out those picks. You may say it is imbalanced, cause the picks are strong, but you cannot say it's a bug. Here's the test save and test racestuf:
http://www.mediafire.com/?bii2e88r2bvpblr

It tripples not internal damage, but chances to hit internals, which is a different thing. Chances to hit internals are very low anyway.

I know but statistically it is almost same. Though for one separate fight trippling chances is more important than trippling damage.

Let me rephrase "statistically trippled damage": without Achiless - very low damage; with Achiless - still low damage. If it blew up every second or every third ship then things would be different, but that's not the case.

Just made a quick test: refitted late game doom star stripping either structural analyzer or ATU and attacked fleet without heavy armor. Results vary a bit cause of RNG but looks like ship without ATU has same strength as ship without SA. It is less than I expected but more than 1.33 vs 1.6.

Sure it will be a little more than 1.33, after all that increased probability to hit internals isn't equal to zero. For the moment I don't possess data on exact probabilities, but according to my practice it isn't something extraordinary. As far as I remember I've read somewhere about figure 3% base probability to hit internals. Not sure it was reffering to all weapons, maybe some specific weapons, i.e. AP mod of Gauss Cannon. With ATU it would be 9% then.