Author Topic: Parasites.  (Read 5773 times)

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #15 on: February 01, 2011, 11:35:02 am »
If Parasite DPS is being dropped by a certain amount, their reclamation damage bonus should be increased by an amount greater than the drop in raw DPS.
I was thinking something like that, yea.  Probably what I'd do is cut the dps to 1/6 what it is now, and do the 8x/4x/2x/1x thing by mark.  I'd like to avoid these becoming totally useless in the "just kill the target" role, because I want all fleet ships to be capable of doing something like damage.  The nanoswarms are the closest thing to an exception to that, dunno how they are dps wise.

Quote
For nanoswarms, would it be possible to give them a ranged attack?  As in the ship is a capsule that degrades, but gets the nanoswarms close, and then bursts and the nanoswarms go shooting off through space at ships within something like 3000 range.  Since raw damage isn't as necessary to nanoswarms as it is to autobombs, it would help with getting some target dispersion to get more ships reclaimable.
About a month ago I retuned the autobomb/nanoswarm to spread out their targeting behavior much more so distinct blobs of enemies will generally all get hit if the nanoswarms are in sufficient numbers and making their own targeting decisions.  They already have the grenade-type area affect, so they'll achieve fairly decent coverage of a blob too, if there are enough nanoswarms.  Perhaps I could make the nanoswarm's explosion radius a bit bigger, if that's the problem.

Quote
The other problem with nanoswarms is coordinating them with fleets - they have such low HP that even using a regen chamber isn't exactly helpful, so you're kind of stuck with using the "neinzul machine gun" method, which just tends to waste a lot of nanoswarms.
Yea, I only ever use the mushroom-machine-gun technique, honestly.  But you could load them up in a transport if you wanted, or keep them in low-power until you want to send forth the doomshrooms.
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games? Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Red Spot

  • Sr. Member Mark III
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #16 on: February 01, 2011, 12:09:15 pm »
Keith, can you remember that save I posted in Mantis where I have a wave of eye-bots inbound?
3 Leech starships, part of a 500 unit fleet, reclaims about 10% of that wave. With fragile ships that seems to be a more or less stable percentage.
Not sure if it needs some loving to overcome the mark-limitation they have, but I would say Leech starships are balanced just fine, just my 2 cents though :)

Offline Zeba

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Grumpy Olde Man
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #17 on: February 01, 2011, 12:52:41 pm »
Quote from: keith.lamothe
Thinking about these, the mk-level thing, and other issues that have been brought up, I'm considering something like this:
- Reduce all parasite ship-type base-damage values to 1/8th current value (and make sure they all can punch through most sane forms of armor, at least).
- When shooting at ships of the same mk or lower, they get 8x-for-reclamation-purposes-only.  So same parasiting-power as before.
- When shooting at ships 1 mk higher, they only get 4x-for-reclamation-purposes.
- When shooting at ships 2 mks higher, 2x.
- When shooting at ships 3 mks higher, 1x.

Thoughts?
Sounds like a plan.

Question. Since this will inevitably mean getting back on the experimental beta patch routine will the ingame patcher recognize a second copy of ai war and only patch it if I make a copy to keep my 5.0 install clean till another official patch hits?

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #18 on: February 01, 2011, 12:56:01 pm »
Question. Since this will inevitably mean getting back on the experimental beta patch routine will the ingame patcher recognize a second copy of ai war and only patch it if I make a copy to keep my 5.0 install clean till another official patch hits?
When you run the game exe, and run the auto-updater within that game, the auto-updater will only touch the directory (and corresponding sub-directories) containing exe that you actually ran.  Make sense?

So as long as you don't accidentally tell it to update your 5.0 copy, it won't.
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games? Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Zeba

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Grumpy Olde Man
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #19 on: February 01, 2011, 12:58:03 pm »
Sweet.  ;D

Offline Ozymandiaz

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 813
  • King of kings
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #20 on: February 02, 2011, 04:13:15 am »
Sweet.  ;D

Indeed:) I still got 3.120 official, 4.XXX official and 5.000 official directories. And one beta oen ^^
We are the architects of our own existence

Offline RogueThunder

  • Jr. Member Mark III
  • **
  • Posts: 97
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #21 on: February 02, 2011, 07:26:32 pm »
Huh.

I've had no issues getting more than reasonable yeilds out of Parasites themselves.

Nanoswarms, too, under the right circumstances... Though really they're support-missiles. xD


The one ship that would absolutely not do well with the change proposed earlier in this thread is Spire Teleport leaches. They're not a ship that works well with others... That's already their problem. Changing parasties to not really being damage based would... Leave them pretty much useless. It is however a change I could otherwise mesh with.
So. I suppose if they were otherwise reworked its another matter. They definitely have bigger preexisting issues that have been delved into some elsewhere.

Mk IV and V parasites that said, n such however I AM too displeased with... I understand being able to parasite core ships was problematic... But...  The only real use for Mk IV and V I have found, is being able to split my parasite swarm in 2, one being focused-able to kill Mk IV ships. The other good for Mk I-II fleets. Both being able to handle Mk III some degree.


Oh. And Keith. Nanoswarms cause so much disruption to an enimey fleet, that their damage is irrelevant. They make other ships winsauce in their presence with the bonus of random ships to add to your fleet. Tho not too much winsauce thanks to their builditme. Only so fast you can spit em out mobily.
It's a secret. Xellos, The Mysterious Priest

Offline Kjara

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 822
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #22 on: February 03, 2011, 10:11:15 pm »
For a possible solution to making mk V's a bit more useful(and higher marks more useful in general), any thoughts on having it scale up a bit when you are firing at things at a lower level than you? 

Quote from: keith.lamothe
Thinking about these, the mk-level thing, and other issues that have been brought up, I'm considering something like this:
- Reduce all parasite ship-type base-damage values to 1/8th current value (and make sure they all can punch through most sane forms of armor, at least).
- When shooting at ships of the same mk or lower, they get 8x-for-reclamation-purposes-only.  So same parasiting-power as before.
- When shooting at ships 1 mk higher, they only get 4x-for-reclamation-purposes.
- When shooting at ships 2 mks higher, 2x.
- When shooting at ships 3 mks higher, 1x.

Thoughts?

Perhaps add:
When shooting at ships 1mk lower, they get 12x
When shooting at ships 2mk lower or more, they get 16x

Thus mk V's would be significantly better at stealing mk III and mk IV ships.

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #23 on: February 03, 2011, 10:25:14 pm »
For a possible solution to making mk V's a bit more useful(and higher marks more useful in general), any thoughts on having it scale up a bit when you are firing at things at a lower level than you? 

He beat you to it.

Check out the release notes at http://arcengames.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=AI_War_-_Current_Post-5.000_Beta

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #24 on: February 03, 2011, 11:11:06 pm »
Yea, there's now a significant amount of extra benefit to the higher mark parasites in those extra multipliers vs lower marks.

I may smooth out the multipliers a bit.  The reason for the powers-of-two is that I can do that via the << operator, which is way faster than * (and these are all positive integers).  But I could achieve x = x * 12 by x = (x << 4) - (x << 2), which is slower but still not as slow as an actual mul instruction.
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games? Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Kjara

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 822
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #25 on: February 04, 2011, 01:46:32 am »
Or by (x << 3) + (x << 2), though sub and add are prob the same cost.  Could get finer grain than just 8,12,16 if wanted through a combo of add and sub prob though (10 12 14 16 perhaps)?  would be add, add or sub, sub, none to have only 2 shifts and one arth per.

Offline Nalgas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 680
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #26 on: February 04, 2011, 10:23:58 am »
It's kind of sad how refreshing it is to see people talking about something as simple as using bitshifts to save CPU cycles.  I think that's a sign I've been spending too much time lately dealing with PHP (which makes me feel dirty) and Python (which I rather like but is much higher level than worrying about stuff like that).

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #27 on: February 04, 2011, 10:31:55 am »
Well, even here it's probably not necessary because the "shot hitting target" event is relatively infrequent.  In stuff like per-frame ship-movement logic we'd actually need to avoid mul/div to save performance (one day I made this crazy lookup-table-based replacement for the previous trig-based facing-rotation calculations...).  Here... I'm just being pedantic ;)  But it's a frequent enough calculation that it will have some small effect.
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games? Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline BobTheJanitor

  • Master Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,689
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #28 on: February 04, 2011, 10:53:50 am »
Does this mean that it will be possible to shoot mark V ships with a reclamation unit now, even for minimal damage, or is that still going to be a big zero?

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: Parasites.
« Reply #29 on: February 04, 2011, 11:31:18 am »
Does this mean that it will be possible to shoot mark V ships with a reclamation unit now, even for minimal damage, or is that still going to be a big zero?

Do you mean that reclaimers will be able to damage them, or whethe reclaimers will be able to reclaim them?

Also, these multipliers are for keepin track of damage done by reclaimers for the purpose of marking units as reclaim on death only. These multipliers will do nothing for actual HP damage.