We also had four winning runs immediately after the release, which is unprecedented.
Same seed, small sample: I contest the representativity of this data set and I attribute most of the result to stochastic variations :-)
Heh, who said anything about same seed? There were three different seeds among these four games (two of them were random--not playing the weekly seed). (And there was another combat run of my own on another seed which made it half way through -1 in excellent shape, but I didn't count it because it wasn't finished nor uploaded. Plus it's me so it doesn't quite count
)
I won't deny that the RNG plays a role, and a rather large one at that. Some runs will no doubt be easier, but in the end the idea is that, like any good roguelike, it should be possible to overcome more or less anything the game can throw at you have enough experience. I think the balance has gotten much closer to this than it started out as, but hasn't yet reached it, nor do we want it to just yet, since it's a rapidly moving target as long as more major content is added. Like we mentioned in that earlier thread on this topic, there will be many more developments to come that will affect the balance, as well as give you new options for how to tackle obstacles. More coming with every release! (Actually, there's a huge one added in Alpha 5 that no one's discovered yet, and also some interesting options in Alpha 6 that I don't believe have been explored yet. And to my knowledge only one player has discovered the new way to access the surface lift. This is good, though; I don't want everyone finding absolutely everything in every release, since then it'll be hard to keep up
)
In the end, I think the RNG will do its job of making the game fun (and usually challenging) without being unfair.
I'll accept that on average hackware may be easier to find (and that I just got unlucky thus far).
If you really want hackware, the best place to get it now is by hunting down Operators.
Fabricating it might be an option, too, but isn't as easy to do until you already have some.
Note that by this logic, wearing multiple processors actually put all of them more at risk. If I have a single terrain processor, and I find other hackware, it may be in my best interest to avoid wearing them to in order to maximize the coverage that protects my existing processor. Each additional processor is a coverage loss and puts me more at risk of suffering a catastrophic loss.
Sort of. You also deny yourself the benefits of that extra processor. If you're looking for a guaranteed 0% loss rate on processors, yeah that's not quite possible but even with multiple processors the risk is still quite low.
Say you have an average mid-sized combat build with 2 power sources (2*60=120), 3 legs (3*80=240), 3 guns (3*100=300), and 1 Lgt. Armor (1*150=150) plus the core (100). Then you add three Targeting Computers: That's a 6/916 = 0.655% hit chance, or an average of 1 in 152 shots that could hit
one (not each) of your computers (and not necessarily even destroy it). If we're talking scan processors it's now 1 in 304 shots. And this is all with a full quarter of your slots dedicated to processors, which is a pretty big portion.
I did these calculations before setting the values, and it's right where I want it in the "unlikely but not impossible" range. Unless of course Cogmind is having trouble keeping those processors covered, in which case it's Cogmind's fault
. Processors understandably make for a more fragile build, but even as a combat build in this situation, extreme offense can ensure you don't come under much fire to begin with.
Also, stay the hell away from Brawlers, against which standard coverage mechanics fly out the window and your processors will be rattling in fear.