Updating the Wiki

[Diazo]

I just checked with a scout starship-IV. The counterspies don't even shoot at it, so those ships are truly immune. Updated the wiki to reflect this.

Wait, it did not even shoot at the Scout Starship Mk IV? That is not the behavior I would expect.

Wait, is the counter-spy considered a Sniper type shot? That is the only thing I see that would explain why it's not shooting at the Scout Starship anyway.

D.

[amethyst]

I would expect that behaviour; compare ion cannons not shooting at ships immune to insta-kill.

[Diazo]

Okay, I am misremembering something about the Spirecraft Ion Blaster conversation?

How I recall the logic went was that the Ion Blaster is supposed to be a viable damage dealer, even against ships that are immune to insta-kill, so the Ion Blaster targeting logic would allow it to fire on ships that it could not insta-kill so it would deal damage at normal.

This was then ported over to all units with the Insta-Kill abiliity.

I am just remembering the conversation and that was never implemented in game or is something else going on here?

D.

[TechSY730]

Okay, I am misremembering something about the Spirecraft Ion Blaster conversation?

How I recall the logic went was that the Ion Blaster is supposed to be a viable damage dealer, even against ships that are immune to insta-kill, so the Ion Blaster targeting logic would allow it to fire on ships that it could not insta-kill so it would deal damage at normal.

This was then ported over to all units with the Insta-Kill abiliity.

I am just remembering the conversation and that was never implemented in game or is something else going on here?

D.

No. This is not right.

The spirecraft ion blaster was refactored to do decent damage against things that are higher-mark than it, but is still not insta-kill immune.

Here is the logic behind Ion blast shots, both the Spirecraft and the Stationary versions:
If the ship's mark is <= mark of the ion shooter, AND that ship is not insta kill immune, then that shot will insta kill the receiving ship.
If the ship's mark is > mark of the ion shooter, AND that ship is not insta kill immune, then that shot will deal the base damage of the attack and generally be like a normal shot
If the ship is immune to insta kill, of any mark, then the ion shooter cannot shoot at the ship in any way, not even for the non-insta kill base damage.

Currently, all ion craft are obeying this logic properly.

Now, whether this logic should be changed may be up for debate.

[Diazo]

Ah, works different then I thought.

I am okay with that logic and am not going to push for a change, it is just not how I thought it worked.

D.

edit: Tweaked the Ion Cannon and Counter-Spy descriptions on the wiki.

[Bognor]

Ooh, we're all having a busy day on the wiki!  Just wish I wasn't so busy IRL right now so I could help more.  Thanks all for the responses and edits :-) 

[PokerChen]

Can we confirm that the ion-cannons and ion-blasters always do 4-shots per salvo on every cap setting? IIRC they shoot slower on low-caps (double cooldown) to compensate for the lower number of ships. P.S. I also started a talk-page to clarify this.

[Diazo]

Ugh. My search skills fail me.

I know they came up in a thread a while back but what are the modifiers on repairing units.

Is it half cost and four times as fast? (As compared to their costs to build)

Anyone remember for sure, or is able to find the thread about it?

D.

[Hearteater]

Pretty sure repair is 1/10th.  But sadly the large project threshold ignores that.

[PokerChen]

Capturing and Reclamation page is up - I copied the scale-factors from the Parasite page, and obtained some information from the old Parasite page. Actually, that needs to be re-freshed according to new mechanics in 5.031...

I'll go back to edit them now. Feel free to check spelling and accuracy.

[Diazo]

Capturing and Reclamation page is up - I copied the scale-factors from the Parasite page, and obtained some information from the old Parasite page. Actually, that needs to be re-freshed according to new mechanics in 5.031...

I'll go back to edit them now. Feel free to check spelling and accuracy.

Thank you for that Zhamad.

As far as I can tell the page looks correct, but I've never extensively used the parasite mechanic.

I did add a few clarifications: that not all capturable structures have the AIP penalty on death removed when captured, only some structures do and noted the fact that reclamation in general only works on fleet ships.

As for the Constructors page, I took a stab at figuring out the repair modifiers and was stumped on my first attempt. Because I could easily spawn on with cheats I was testing using a broken golem, as far as I know there are no special repair modifiers for those correct?

D.

[PokerChen]

I don't *think* broken golems have any special modifiers, per se. If the repair mechanic remains as it was since the 4.0 Unity release, then it's meant to be 1/4 cost and 1/2 time scaled with engineers. However, in my games, I've usually felt that repair costs for those golems were somewhat lower than that. Perhaps all repair is at 10% of build cost.

Search in the wiki release notes hasn't shown anything beyond 4.00. Also, the completed Regen Golem has another 90% reduction in repair costs.

= = =

I think I've got it. The missing information is that the repair rate also decreases the total repair cost of the item you are repairing. I'll copy the procedure here for replication:

0) Use cheats, sand-box AI is best.
1) Starting planet should hopefully be 6/6, or 5/7~7/5 in m+c distribution. Spawn 30 ZPGs (3xenergize) to remove the home command station contribution, the rest is insignificant.
2) Unlock and build full caps of every engineer, unlock the MRS for Repair rate 1 comparison. Switch on only one group at a time.
3) Configure 999,999 m+c

4) Save now is best, no-need to keep typing m+c cheats.

===
The spot tests of the various golems and repairer combinations are as follows:

39 Eng I (x6 rate) + cursed => ~300K m+c over ~ 30 sec.
26 Eng II (x9 rate) + cursed => ~200K m+c over ~ 35 sec.
15 Eng III (x12 rate) + Cursed => ~150K m+cover ~ 40 sec.
9 MRS (x1 rate) + Cursed -> full 1M usage at ~65%, after several minutes.

26 Eng II (x9 rate) + Botnet => ~800K m+c over ~ 35 sec.

26 Eng II (x9 rate) + 15 Eng III (x12 rate) + cursed => ~175K, not timed (faster).

We will now carry out "magnitude-maths". Wrecks begin at 25% health, and repairs are 25% build costs:

Cursed Golems are 10M -> Nominal repair price is 1.875 M. This matches MRS usage of 40% ~ 1M. Also equal to (Eng repair rate)*(final cost). Botnets are 40M which is conveniently 4x cursed golem costs. Combinations of different engineers seem to work as a function of (repair rate)*(Eng numbers), so that cost contributions are roughly evenly split between full caps of II and III.

As for repair times. Build time is 720 minutes. Repair times are half that.
Repair time (min) with full Eng-III = 360 / 15 / 12 -> 2 minute for a full repair. Doesn't match with ~40 seconds, but it seems to be another constant factor - perhaps repair times are about 1/6 of build time?

= = =
Conclusion: Repaire rate is both rate increase and efficiency increase, i.e. the old threads are correct. You definitely don't want MRSs to repair your golems!

[Diazo]

Hmmm.

I'll see if I can replicate that when I get home tonight, that is quite different then how I thought it worked.

D.

[Bognor]

Oh wow... I've been using a mob of Engie Is to repair my golems, figuring the superior move speed and range of Engie IIs made them better for free roaming.  Golem repair has been the major drain on my economy.  If zharmad's right, then just switching my Engies' roles would boost my economy considerably.  Seems odd that something so significant would be undocumented.

[PokerChen]

Oh wow... I've been using a mob of Engie Is to repair my golems, figuring the superior move speed and range of Engie IIs made them better for free roaming.  Golem repair has been the major drain on my economy.  If zharmad's right, then just switching my Engies' roles would boost my economy considerably.  Seems odd that something so significant would be undocumented.

I'm not all that surprised though about the lack of documentation though - this seems to be a Unity release change, along with complete rewrite of most of the basic mechanics. I reckon there were quite a few things that slipped through the wiki.