Grid Sage Forums
- November 21, 2024, 09:35:55 AM
- Welcome, Guest
|
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
1
Fixed Bugs & Non-Bugs / Re: [Beta 8] Guided Weapon Range
« on: September 18, 2021, 09:54:46 PM »
OK, I wasn't sure it was the same bug. Can't you use the same code for displaying the AOE that you use for computing the weapon range? Perhaps as special case for guided weapon.
2
Fixed Bugs & Non-Bugs / Guided weapon range is shown incorrectly
« on: September 18, 2021, 09:20:35 PM »
I'm firing a guided weapon with one waypoint set. As I move the cursor, the AOE indicator disappears. I infer the weapon is now out-of-range as with any other weapon. I move the cursor back one tile. The AOE indicator reappears. The weapon is still out-of-range. This is an inconsistency in the UI.
3
Fixed Bugs & Non-Bugs / Zhirov bug *big spoilers*
« on: November 16, 2016, 09:06:15 PM »
*SPOILERS*
I attacked Zhirov, hoping to get access to the system feed, like for Data Miner. Doesn't work, nothing happens when you get to his terminal. Zhirov and his clowns warped away when I scared them. Then the whole complex exploded.
About 15 enhanced grunts warped in. They were friendly, because I smiled at them warmingly. Clearly, Zhirov should double-check his programming. They shouldn't be fooled by such a simple trick.
On another topic. If the only way to access the system feed is by attacking Data Miner, and if that is required for lore-related reasons, then the game encourages the player to be evil. There should be another way.
I attacked Zhirov, hoping to get access to the system feed, like for Data Miner. Doesn't work, nothing happens when you get to his terminal. Zhirov and his clowns warped away when I scared them. Then the whole complex exploded.
About 15 enhanced grunts warped in. They were friendly, because I smiled at them warmingly. Clearly, Zhirov should double-check his programming. They shouldn't be fooled by such a simple trick.
On another topic. If the only way to access the system feed is by attacking Data Miner, and if that is required for lore-related reasons, then the game encourages the player to be evil. There should be another way.
4
Strategies / Re: Alpha 11 combat strategy
« on: November 05, 2016, 10:30:17 AM »
Early on I use treads when I can, otherwise legs if I run out. Late game it's treads, flight, or legs.
5
Strategies / Alpha 11 combat strategy
« on: November 04, 2016, 04:10:50 PM »
This post discusses the combat strategy for Alpha 11. First I examine the causes of death, then I analyze the item availability rates and churn rates, which explain why some items are more valuable than others. Finally, I compare the merits of the main combat utilities and the weapon types. Per Kyzrati's request, I avoid discussing the specifics of the less useful utilities.
Causes of death
You can win a thousand fights but you can only lose one. Before we dive into technicalities, let's take a moment to look at the big picture.
Usually we can distinguish between two types of death. Death by stripping, and death by core attrition. The former happens when you run out of essential items - power, propulsion, weapons, matter. Then you're no longer combat-capable and you're forced to flee half-naked. The latter happens when all your slots are filled, your inventory is mostly full, but your core gets destroyed through sheer attrition. In other words, you fought for too long.
There is some tension in avoiding either type of death. If you equip more storage units, then you're less likely to be missing an essential part at a critical moment. However, equipping storage units reduces your mobility and your combat effectiveness. These are two of the key factors that prevent a death by attrition.
Deaths by attrition have many causes, but fundamentally it all boils down to taking too much damage for too long. For instance, this can happen when you cannot find the exit and yet you've explored most of the map. This can also happen because you're pinned down and unable to make forward progress. By the time you finish clearing an ARC dispatch, another one is already on its way. In either case, moving and killing fast are your best shot at survival.
The different phases of the game call for different builds. Materials and Factory favor high storage and high coverage. Research and Access favor mobility, killing power and combat avoidance. The dirty little secret of the late game is that the less you fight, the better off you'll be. It's worth considering dumping storage, going stealthy and/or sacrificing combat potential for exit-finding capabilities.
Item availability rates and churn rates
There are two primary sources of items: stockpiles (including haulers), and items dropped by destroyed robots. Stockpiles typically provide items of better quality, since their items are undamaged and are often prototypes. They are thus the preferred source for restocking.
However, stockpiles can only be tapped into when you're not actively fighting. When you are fighting, you must survive on the items in your inventory or those from the battlefield. This distinction has far-reaching consequences for the viability of using certain items. If your build relies on a certain item that is not commonly found on the battlefield, then you can easily get into trouble if you're forced to fight for an extended period of time.
This issue can be mitigated somewhat by having a large inventory. You consume resources in a burst while fighting, and then you restock from stockpiles when there's a lull in combat. However, inventory space is a very limited and precious resource. Hoarding one type of item is necessarily done at the expense of other vitally important items. The lost opportunity cost must be considered carefully here.
Furthermore, the time it takes to restock one type of item is governed entirely by its statistical distribution in and outside combat. Stockpiles are entirely random and there's no guarantee on how long it will take before you find what you seek -- perhaps never. Conversely, items that drop in combat are much more reliably available. For a combat-oriented build, fabricators are not reliable sources of items for a variety of reasons.
The upshot is that items that are not commonly available during combat may become liabilities when your build depends on them. This does not mean that those items are useless, but rather that they should be thought of as nice-to-have rather than must-have.
The counterpart of the item availability rate is the churn rate -- the rate at which you burn through an item type while fighting. The churn rate is dependent mainly on five factors.
An important metric here is the integrity/coverage ratio. A low ratio generally means that you'll be burning through that type of item quickly. That's a bad thing for several reasons. Replacing items in combat and restocking thereafter take valuable time. To compensate for the high churn rate, you'll have to hoard several spares in your inventory, and there is a lost opportunity cost to this. Finally, after fighting for an extended period you'll inevitably be left with a depleted inventory and a slot to fill, which is a dangerous situation to be in.
There are many items that have a low integrity/coverage ratio. Unless the coverage is very low (<= 5) and so the low integrity doesn't really matter, they are best avoided. Whatever benefit they provide is not worth it if they'll be gone after taking a few shots.
It is useful to consider the effect of the churn rate and the availability rate on the slots you choose to evolve. It's safe to evolve many propulsion slots since propulsion parts are ubiquitous and many have high integrity. Stacking propulsion parts for use as makeshift armor is one strategy that can work both for a stealth build and a combat build. Conversely, it's dangerous to overdo weapon slots, and to a lesser extent power slots, since those have significantly higher churn rates.
The churn rate makes some kinds of item more valuable than others. Cogmind sheds reactor, propulsion and weapon parts like a human sheds skin. In a combat-heavy scenario, a good gun might carry you through half a level. Thus finding a really good gun doesn't usually have a major impact in the long run. However, a good set of combat processors can last for half the game, with a bit of luck. If you can get anything fabbed, it's a good idea to prioritize building combat utilities.
Firepower
Your firepower is governed approximately by this equation:
firepower = # guns x gun damage x cycler speed-up x hit rate x core-analyzer/crit/armor multipliers
Notice that those factors contribute multiplicatively with each other. Thus the fastest way to increase firepower is to pick the next biggest increase in some category. I've organized the following table to make this easier to do. Each value reflects the relative increase in firepower compared to the previous state. Of course there are also other factors to consider, which I discuss after.
To compute the effect of targeting computers I assume that the base hit rate is 50%. Targeting computers are more useful against hard-to-hit targets, and less useful for bigger and closer robots. Core analyzers work best against robots with low core exposure, and against very small robots where half the weapon damage is sufficient to destroy the core. In the table, I assume that they're being used against big targets with a core exposure of 25%.
Math for the interested reader.
Kinetic weapons
Arguably the best type of gun. They make short work of grunts, programmers and behemoths, and they're mostly neutral against the rest, with the notable exception of hunters. Their main drawback is recoil and matter consumption. Having treads nullify most of the recoil penaltly. Since kinetic guns consume the least power and generate the least heat, they can be stacked without requiring a ton of heatsinks. They also tend to have more integrity than other types of guns.
All in all, they have lots of advantages for only one major penalty, matter consumption. This is usually not a big issue provided that Cogmind keeps a spare matter storage unit at all times in its inventory. If Cogmind has 2 weapon cyclers, then kinetic guns become even more valuable due to their moderate resource requirements.
Energy weapons
Energy weapons don't have much going for them nowadays. They're good against programmers, and mostly neutral toward the rest. Their heat injection property is no longer an asset. Generations of melted robots has resulted in all robots now being equipped with good heat dissipation capabilities. Their main selling point is that they don't consume matter, so they can be mixed with kinetic guns to reduce matter consumption, or to reduce the churn rates of other weapons.
Their main drawback is the prohibitive heat generation. The most common heat sink for a combat build is the advanced heat sink, with a dissipation of 19 per turn. With four weapons, that's a dissipation of 66 per volley. Some cannons generate more heat than that. Disposable heat sinks make that more viable, but realize that with 200 heat you get a penalty of 6% to both hit chance and dodge chance. Another drawback is the high power requirements.
EM weapons
These guns are very effective against everything but special robots and programmers. Their damage tends to be lower than other guns, but they make up for it with their corruption capabilities. Since a robot gets terminally corrupted at 100 corruption, late-game EM weapons such as HERF cannons are especially deadly. Another benefit of corruption is that it prevents the self-destruction of parts in the caves. This is based on the system corruption of the robot before it dies, so EM weapons should be placed first in a volley when used for that purpose. Furthermore, EM cannons don't punch through walls, so big EM guns don't accidentally compromise a defensive position except through occasional explosions.
For all their strengths, EM weapons also have a lot of drawbacks. EM weapons are most useful when stacked since it's the fastest way to corrupt robots. However, reconverting a full volley to/from EM wastes a lot of time and matter. Furthermore, firing a full volley of EM weapons puts tremendous pressure on heat dissipation and power generation, so the build has to be specialized for that purpose.
EM damage also fries power sources, heat sinks and processors, and causes explosions. Both these effects work against Cogmind. While the explosion can damage other robots, it often damages Cogmind itself and nearby walls.
Since EM weapons work best stacked, it helps to buffer EM guns until there are enough spares to make it worthwhile to switch to EM. Weapons of other types can be collected in the mean time. Ebb and flow.
EM works especially well against hunters, since they're quite susceptible to corruption but tough to kill in other ways. However, using EM against hunters typically fries their advanced targeting computers, and hunters are the primary source of those. So it's a dilemma whether to use EM against hunters. EM can also be used to take out an ARC before it deploys, with some luck.
Launchers
EM/EX launchers are both very effective. They're simply the best way to clear a group of 3 or more robots, e.g. on a deploying ARC. Programmers and sentries resist EX, but not enough to prevent explosives from being useful against them. Beware though that some special robots are very resistant to EX.
Launchers are precious because enemies don't drop them. Hoard them when you can! Furthermore, they don't leave much salvage behind and consume lots of matter, so carrying a spare matter storage unit is essential. Finally launchers tend to attract suicidal engineers who rush in the middle of combat like flies in a fire. This is bad because they often call for reinforcements before dying.
Disruption guns
Toys. Avoid.
Guns vs cannons
Cannons increase the raw damage output but typically suffer from poor resource efficiency, high recoil and low salvage potential. Non-EM cannons also punch holes in wall, which is a major disadvantage when it's not done on purpose. Cogmind kills best when the enemies are choked in a tunnel or in the entrance of a room. A blasted wall lets the whole batch in. This effect is lessened when Cogmind kills very efficiently, so cannons are more of an advantage for an already-strong Cogmind looking to become even more deadly.
Empirically, (improved) KE penetrators seem to work better than cannons in most situations. This isn't helped by the special energy cannons that are apparently universally terrible save for cold nova cannons.
Discussion
Equipping another weapon or weapon cycler increases the resource requirements over time by the percentage listed in the table. Conversely, the combat utilities increase Cogmind's resource efficiency, save for the power penalty. In other words, when Cogmind equips a targeting computer it will kill faster, thus saving matter while keeping heat generation constant. For that reason, targeting computers are more valuable than their damage percentage increase would suggest.
Weapon cyclers are extremely good. Their benefit extends beyond the firepower increase. They reduce the volley time so you can sometimes double-shoot before the enemy has time to fire again. They also reduces overkill for the same firepower.
Target analyzers are helpful against mundane robots, particularly when combined with flak guns and targeting computers. However a crit-heavy build doesn't help when enemies are immune to critical hits, which is when a high firepower is most needed.
An advanced armor analyzer provides a solid 90% chance to bypass armor. This is good when fighting sentries and big robots, but it doesn't help with mundane robots.
The optimal number of weapon slots is probably in the range [3-4]. It's a complex situation. The pros and cons of investing in more weapon slots are as follow.
Pros:
Cons:
Personally I'd go with 4 kinetic guns, 2 targeting computers, 2 weapon cyclers, and some heatsinks for a late-game build. This is enough firepower to slice through anything, and it works reliably and universally (swap weapons for hunters as needed). While it's possible to increase firepower further, it's probably best to focus on defensive parts (armor + propulsion) and storage beyond that point. Other combat utilities can be used to plug holes, but given the choice, it seems to me that utilities that are universally useful are better than those which aren't.
Final tip
Shit happens. Therefore, carry one or two flight units for emergencies. Speed 35 and low coverage are the characteristics you're looking for. When you're about to lose, equip any spare propulsion part you have, equip the flight units, dump everything that slows you down in increasing coverage order, and get the hell out of there. With the flight bonus, high speed and propulsion armor, you are rather resilient.
Enjoy the game!
Causes of death
You can win a thousand fights but you can only lose one. Before we dive into technicalities, let's take a moment to look at the big picture.
Usually we can distinguish between two types of death. Death by stripping, and death by core attrition. The former happens when you run out of essential items - power, propulsion, weapons, matter. Then you're no longer combat-capable and you're forced to flee half-naked. The latter happens when all your slots are filled, your inventory is mostly full, but your core gets destroyed through sheer attrition. In other words, you fought for too long.
There is some tension in avoiding either type of death. If you equip more storage units, then you're less likely to be missing an essential part at a critical moment. However, equipping storage units reduces your mobility and your combat effectiveness. These are two of the key factors that prevent a death by attrition.
Deaths by attrition have many causes, but fundamentally it all boils down to taking too much damage for too long. For instance, this can happen when you cannot find the exit and yet you've explored most of the map. This can also happen because you're pinned down and unable to make forward progress. By the time you finish clearing an ARC dispatch, another one is already on its way. In either case, moving and killing fast are your best shot at survival.
The different phases of the game call for different builds. Materials and Factory favor high storage and high coverage. Research and Access favor mobility, killing power and combat avoidance. The dirty little secret of the late game is that the less you fight, the better off you'll be. It's worth considering dumping storage, going stealthy and/or sacrificing combat potential for exit-finding capabilities.
Item availability rates and churn rates
There are two primary sources of items: stockpiles (including haulers), and items dropped by destroyed robots. Stockpiles typically provide items of better quality, since their items are undamaged and are often prototypes. They are thus the preferred source for restocking.
However, stockpiles can only be tapped into when you're not actively fighting. When you are fighting, you must survive on the items in your inventory or those from the battlefield. This distinction has far-reaching consequences for the viability of using certain items. If your build relies on a certain item that is not commonly found on the battlefield, then you can easily get into trouble if you're forced to fight for an extended period of time.
This issue can be mitigated somewhat by having a large inventory. You consume resources in a burst while fighting, and then you restock from stockpiles when there's a lull in combat. However, inventory space is a very limited and precious resource. Hoarding one type of item is necessarily done at the expense of other vitally important items. The lost opportunity cost must be considered carefully here.
Furthermore, the time it takes to restock one type of item is governed entirely by its statistical distribution in and outside combat. Stockpiles are entirely random and there's no guarantee on how long it will take before you find what you seek -- perhaps never. Conversely, items that drop in combat are much more reliably available. For a combat-oriented build, fabricators are not reliable sources of items for a variety of reasons.
The upshot is that items that are not commonly available during combat may become liabilities when your build depends on them. This does not mean that those items are useless, but rather that they should be thought of as nice-to-have rather than must-have.
The counterpart of the item availability rate is the churn rate -- the rate at which you burn through an item type while fighting. The churn rate is dependent mainly on five factors.
- The coverage of the item versus the coverage of the other items you have equipped.
- The integrity of the item.
- The number of items of that type that you have equipped.
- Your effectiveness at dishing out damage (a good offense is a good defense).
- Your effectiveness at defense (mobility, dodging, resistances, force fields).
An important metric here is the integrity/coverage ratio. A low ratio generally means that you'll be burning through that type of item quickly. That's a bad thing for several reasons. Replacing items in combat and restocking thereafter take valuable time. To compensate for the high churn rate, you'll have to hoard several spares in your inventory, and there is a lost opportunity cost to this. Finally, after fighting for an extended period you'll inevitably be left with a depleted inventory and a slot to fill, which is a dangerous situation to be in.
There are many items that have a low integrity/coverage ratio. Unless the coverage is very low (<= 5) and so the low integrity doesn't really matter, they are best avoided. Whatever benefit they provide is not worth it if they'll be gone after taking a few shots.
It is useful to consider the effect of the churn rate and the availability rate on the slots you choose to evolve. It's safe to evolve many propulsion slots since propulsion parts are ubiquitous and many have high integrity. Stacking propulsion parts for use as makeshift armor is one strategy that can work both for a stealth build and a combat build. Conversely, it's dangerous to overdo weapon slots, and to a lesser extent power slots, since those have significantly higher churn rates.
The churn rate makes some kinds of item more valuable than others. Cogmind sheds reactor, propulsion and weapon parts like a human sheds skin. In a combat-heavy scenario, a good gun might carry you through half a level. Thus finding a really good gun doesn't usually have a major impact in the long run. However, a good set of combat processors can last for half the game, with a bit of luck. If you can get anything fabbed, it's a good idea to prioritize building combat utilities.
Firepower
Your firepower is governed approximately by this equation:
firepower = # guns x gun damage x cycler speed-up x hit rate x core-analyzer/crit/armor multipliers
Notice that those factors contribute multiplicatively with each other. Thus the fastest way to increase firepower is to pick the next biggest increase in some category. I've organized the following table to make this easier to do. Each value reflects the relative increase in firepower compared to the previous state. Of course there are also other factors to consider, which I discuss after.
| Weapons (after 1) | +33%, +38%, +24%, +17% |
| Imp. weapon cyclers (-25) | +33%, +50% |
| Adv. targeting computers (+8) | +16%, +14%, +12% |
| Adv. core analyzers (+10) | +15% |
To compute the effect of targeting computers I assume that the base hit rate is 50%. Targeting computers are more useful against hard-to-hit targets, and less useful for bigger and closer robots. Core analyzers work best against robots with low core exposure, and against very small robots where half the weapon damage is sufficient to destroy the core. In the table, I assume that they're being used against big targets with a core exposure of 25%.
Math for the interested reader.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Kinetic weapons
Arguably the best type of gun. They make short work of grunts, programmers and behemoths, and they're mostly neutral against the rest, with the notable exception of hunters. Their main drawback is recoil and matter consumption. Having treads nullify most of the recoil penaltly. Since kinetic guns consume the least power and generate the least heat, they can be stacked without requiring a ton of heatsinks. They also tend to have more integrity than other types of guns.
All in all, they have lots of advantages for only one major penalty, matter consumption. This is usually not a big issue provided that Cogmind keeps a spare matter storage unit at all times in its inventory. If Cogmind has 2 weapon cyclers, then kinetic guns become even more valuable due to their moderate resource requirements.
Energy weapons
Energy weapons don't have much going for them nowadays. They're good against programmers, and mostly neutral toward the rest. Their heat injection property is no longer an asset. Generations of melted robots has resulted in all robots now being equipped with good heat dissipation capabilities. Their main selling point is that they don't consume matter, so they can be mixed with kinetic guns to reduce matter consumption, or to reduce the churn rates of other weapons.
Their main drawback is the prohibitive heat generation. The most common heat sink for a combat build is the advanced heat sink, with a dissipation of 19 per turn. With four weapons, that's a dissipation of 66 per volley. Some cannons generate more heat than that. Disposable heat sinks make that more viable, but realize that with 200 heat you get a penalty of 6% to both hit chance and dodge chance. Another drawback is the high power requirements.
EM weapons
These guns are very effective against everything but special robots and programmers. Their damage tends to be lower than other guns, but they make up for it with their corruption capabilities. Since a robot gets terminally corrupted at 100 corruption, late-game EM weapons such as HERF cannons are especially deadly. Another benefit of corruption is that it prevents the self-destruction of parts in the caves. This is based on the system corruption of the robot before it dies, so EM weapons should be placed first in a volley when used for that purpose. Furthermore, EM cannons don't punch through walls, so big EM guns don't accidentally compromise a defensive position except through occasional explosions.
For all their strengths, EM weapons also have a lot of drawbacks. EM weapons are most useful when stacked since it's the fastest way to corrupt robots. However, reconverting a full volley to/from EM wastes a lot of time and matter. Furthermore, firing a full volley of EM weapons puts tremendous pressure on heat dissipation and power generation, so the build has to be specialized for that purpose.
EM damage also fries power sources, heat sinks and processors, and causes explosions. Both these effects work against Cogmind. While the explosion can damage other robots, it often damages Cogmind itself and nearby walls.
Since EM weapons work best stacked, it helps to buffer EM guns until there are enough spares to make it worthwhile to switch to EM. Weapons of other types can be collected in the mean time. Ebb and flow.
EM works especially well against hunters, since they're quite susceptible to corruption but tough to kill in other ways. However, using EM against hunters typically fries their advanced targeting computers, and hunters are the primary source of those. So it's a dilemma whether to use EM against hunters. EM can also be used to take out an ARC before it deploys, with some luck.
Launchers
EM/EX launchers are both very effective. They're simply the best way to clear a group of 3 or more robots, e.g. on a deploying ARC. Programmers and sentries resist EX, but not enough to prevent explosives from being useful against them. Beware though that some special robots are very resistant to EX.
Launchers are precious because enemies don't drop them. Hoard them when you can! Furthermore, they don't leave much salvage behind and consume lots of matter, so carrying a spare matter storage unit is essential. Finally launchers tend to attract suicidal engineers who rush in the middle of combat like flies in a fire. This is bad because they often call for reinforcements before dying.
Disruption guns
Toys. Avoid.
Guns vs cannons
Cannons increase the raw damage output but typically suffer from poor resource efficiency, high recoil and low salvage potential. Non-EM cannons also punch holes in wall, which is a major disadvantage when it's not done on purpose. Cogmind kills best when the enemies are choked in a tunnel or in the entrance of a room. A blasted wall lets the whole batch in. This effect is lessened when Cogmind kills very efficiently, so cannons are more of an advantage for an already-strong Cogmind looking to become even more deadly.
Empirically, (improved) KE penetrators seem to work better than cannons in most situations. This isn't helped by the special energy cannons that are apparently universally terrible save for cold nova cannons.
Discussion
Equipping another weapon or weapon cycler increases the resource requirements over time by the percentage listed in the table. Conversely, the combat utilities increase Cogmind's resource efficiency, save for the power penalty. In other words, when Cogmind equips a targeting computer it will kill faster, thus saving matter while keeping heat generation constant. For that reason, targeting computers are more valuable than their damage percentage increase would suggest.
Weapon cyclers are extremely good. Their benefit extends beyond the firepower increase. They reduce the volley time so you can sometimes double-shoot before the enemy has time to fire again. They also reduces overkill for the same firepower.
Target analyzers are helpful against mundane robots, particularly when combined with flak guns and targeting computers. However a crit-heavy build doesn't help when enemies are immune to critical hits, which is when a high firepower is most needed.
An advanced armor analyzer provides a solid 90% chance to bypass armor. This is good when fighting sentries and big robots, but it doesn't help with mundane robots.
The optimal number of weapon slots is probably in the range [3-4]. It's a complex situation. The pros and cons of investing in more weapon slots are as follow.
Pros:
- This is the most reliable way to increase firepower. The availability of the combat utilities is quite random, but you can always find plenty of guns around. This is especially useful early on and after being stripped.
- Weapons have the best coverage after armor and decent integrity.
- For the first half of the game, it's the most effective way to increase damage and to increase coverage. The early utilities are weak, don't contribute to coverage, and there are very few slots, so investing in weapon slots is doubly effective.
Cons:
- Weapons are heavy.
- Additional weapons increase recoil, volley time, and waste due to overkill.
- Weapon churn can become a problem.
- The more weapons you need, the less picky you can be. Lesser guns don't increase your firepower as much.
Personally I'd go with 4 kinetic guns, 2 targeting computers, 2 weapon cyclers, and some heatsinks for a late-game build. This is enough firepower to slice through anything, and it works reliably and universally (swap weapons for hunters as needed). While it's possible to increase firepower further, it's probably best to focus on defensive parts (armor + propulsion) and storage beyond that point. Other combat utilities can be used to plug holes, but given the choice, it seems to me that utilities that are universally useful are better than those which aren't.
Final tip
Shit happens. Therefore, carry one or two flight units for emergencies. Speed 35 and low coverage are the characteristics you're looking for. When you're about to lose, equip any spare propulsion part you have, equip the flight units, dump everything that slows you down in increasing coverage order, and get the hell out of there. With the flight bonus, high speed and propulsion armor, you are rather resilient.
Enjoy the game!
6
Fixed Bugs & Non-Bugs / Re: Zhirov power boost gone
« on: November 03, 2016, 12:03:09 PM »
Good to know I'm not senile yet! Can anybody confirm what actually happened to me then? (I suspect Kyzrati will leave me in the dark here 
)
)
7
Fixed Bugs & Non-Bugs / Re: Zhirov power boost gone
« on: November 02, 2016, 06:42:25 AM »
I didn't expect that bug report to turn *that* way 
You guys are one step ahead of me here...
I'll probably hang on Discord a bit, given that I'm pretty much the only active user left around here besides Kyzrati.
You guys are one step ahead of me here...I'll probably hang on Discord a bit, given that I'm pretty much the only active user left around here besides Kyzrati.
8
Fixed Bugs & Non-Bugs / Re: Zhirov power boost gone
« on: November 01, 2016, 09:28:03 PM »
Note: I don't precisely recall equipping the artifact. I may actually have forgotten it. Zhirov has gotten routine 
9
Fixed Bugs & Non-Bugs / Zhirov power boost gone
« on: November 01, 2016, 09:21:31 PM »
I visited Zhirov in his cave, got the power-boosting artifact, visited Quarantine, then I got stripped and I noticed I no longer had the power boost (to be honest, I never verified if I had it in the first place). I know my core got reset, it that the problem?
10
Fixed Bugs & Non-Bugs / Dataminer Network hub entry out-of-date
« on: November 01, 2016, 06:29:53 PM »
The entry says destroying a hub reduces the detection by 5%.
11
General Discussion / Re: Alpha 11 Discussions [SPOILER VERSION]
« on: October 30, 2016, 11:07:43 AM »
Forgot to add, the big problem with that kind of build is that it's unbearable to play. Every time you shoot, you have to deactivate/reactivate 6 propulsions and 10 utilities.
12
General Discussion / Re: Alpha 11 Discussions [SPOILER VERSION]
« on: October 30, 2016, 11:03:53 AM »
I attempted to determine what makes the deadliest glass cannon combat build. I started as a stealth build, got myself 5 advanced hacking suites and a system shield, and got to work. I didn't manage to fab as much as I wanted, but I still got the gist of it. The fundamental of the build is two heavy flak cannons, plus a lot of target analyzers to pump up the crit rate, and some targetting computers to hit more. The flaks deliver 6 projectiles each, and the target analyzers bring the crit rate north of 50%. The odds of one of the 12 projectiles critting the core are high.
While it's not a sustainable build (you can't replace the flaks), it works rather well against normal robots. It fails completely against behemoths and special robots. I got stripped against Alpha 8, even though I had the last word. When Kyzrati says Behemoths and co are immune to crits, he means it. It wouldn't be so bad if only the core was immune to crits, but all their equipment is too.
I noticed experimentally that weapon cyclers perform even better than you'd think. Whether you pick the advanced version or the experimental version does not matter. You hit the 50% cap anyway. Rather amazingly, a second cycler has increasing returns. The firepower increases are respectively 33% and 100%. In practice it works even better because you can get 2 volleys out by the time the enemy gets one.
I'll try pumping core analyzers next. If you get >50% proccing odds, it should work pretty well against all enemies combined with big guns and weapon cyclers.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
While it's not a sustainable build (you can't replace the flaks), it works rather well against normal robots. It fails completely against behemoths and special robots. I got stripped against Alpha 8, even though I had the last word. When Kyzrati says Behemoths and co are immune to crits, he means it. It wouldn't be so bad if only the core was immune to crits, but all their equipment is too.
I noticed experimentally that weapon cyclers perform even better than you'd think. Whether you pick the advanced version or the experimental version does not matter. You hit the 50% cap anyway. Rather amazingly, a second cycler has increasing returns. The firepower increases are respectively 33% and 100%. In practice it works even better because you can get 2 volleys out by the time the enemy gets one.
I'll try pumping core analyzers next. If you get >50% proccing odds, it should work pretty well against all enemies combined with big guns and weapon cyclers.
13
Fixed Bugs & Non-Bugs / Part auto-sort UI bug
« on: October 30, 2016, 10:13:49 AM »
My UI got corrupted when I auto-sorted the parts. The animation stays that way even if I press auto-sort again, but swapping the offending parts manually corrects it.
14
Fixed Bugs & Non-Bugs / Re: 5/4 inventory
« on: October 29, 2016, 06:53:03 PM »
Sorry! I wasn't sure but I couldn't find the bug report.
15
Fixed Bugs & Non-Bugs / 5/4 inventory
« on: October 29, 2016, 10:55:01 AM »
Should be obvious how this happened.
16
Ideas / Re: Allow backwards manual commands?
« on: October 28, 2016, 09:06:02 AM »
I don't like the sound of damage overflow transfer. It would re-value propulsion armor since it's got the best integrity per slot after armor and much higher availability. It would also make non-melee combat more effective, so it doesn't really help to buff melee combat vs non-melee combat.
The main issue is that single weapons are underpowered because they won't generally hit the core (spears excepted). There already exists a mechanism to partially solve the problem: core analyzers. A buff and perhaps some restrictions would make melee and sniper-style combat more viable.
On another topic, I notice that the new utilities are devaluing weapon slots.
I propose to have a thread where people can pitch on about how combat (utilities) should be rebalanced.
The main issue is that single weapons are underpowered because they won't generally hit the core (spears excepted). There already exists a mechanism to partially solve the problem: core analyzers. A buff and perhaps some restrictions would make melee and sniper-style combat more viable.
On another topic, I notice that the new utilities are devaluing weapon slots.
I propose to have a thread where people can pitch on about how combat (utilities) should be rebalanced.
17
Ideas / Re: Allow backwards manual commands?
« on: October 27, 2016, 07:39:21 PM »
Glad to know it wasn't my imagination this time
With respect to the chances of hacking, they seem rather reasonable to me right now, except for level-2/3 fabs. Even with 2 advanced hacking suites, you don't have much chance to build a high-level part.
Currently, level-1 machines are pretty much always better than higher level machines, unless you're a hacking god. Then you either don't care or want the faster build times on fabs (but tracing is still a problem). That is especially true for terminals where level-1 indirect hacks are still better than level-3 direct hacks. Since you intend level 2-3 machines to be generally useless to everyone but a great hacker, I guess that means your design is working well
Generally hacking suites are much better than system shields. It sometimes causes problems when all you get are system shields from operators, but it's a minor issue.
I've been thinking about what could be done to make hacking viable for a combat build. Unfortunately it's not easy. I would favor reducing the coverage of hackware from 2 to 1, but it still doesn't solve the fundamental issue. Over time all your hackware is going to be shot off if they have a non-zero coverage value (flak cannons are especially nasty), and it usually doesn't take long. But if you reduce coverage to zero, it'll become overpowered.
I toyed with the idea of equipping nothing but hackware, and using improved utility shields to protect it. That's a rather extreme and limiting option, though. Equipping any high-coverage utilities like sensors, armors, storage units render the shield useless.
With that said, I'm off to try that melee build. It seems a rather bonker concept since melee is slow and you get only one attack. Even if you do 3 million damage per hit, most of the time you will still hit some non-core part and waste your attack with anything but a spear. Spear gives you +33% chance to hit the core, so I guess that's about 60% chance to hit the core. With microactuators and melee analysis suites there might be a way to make something work.
With respect to the chances of hacking, they seem rather reasonable to me right now, except for level-2/3 fabs. Even with 2 advanced hacking suites, you don't have much chance to build a high-level part.
Currently, level-1 machines are pretty much always better than higher level machines, unless you're a hacking god. Then you either don't care or want the faster build times on fabs (but tracing is still a problem). That is especially true for terminals where level-1 indirect hacks are still better than level-3 direct hacks. Since you intend level 2-3 machines to be generally useless to everyone but a great hacker, I guess that means your design is working well
Generally hacking suites are much better than system shields. It sometimes causes problems when all you get are system shields from operators, but it's a minor issue.
I've been thinking about what could be done to make hacking viable for a combat build. Unfortunately it's not easy. I would favor reducing the coverage of hackware from 2 to 1, but it still doesn't solve the fundamental issue. Over time all your hackware is going to be shot off if they have a non-zero coverage value (flak cannons are especially nasty), and it usually doesn't take long. But if you reduce coverage to zero, it'll become overpowered.
I toyed with the idea of equipping nothing but hackware, and using improved utility shields to protect it. That's a rather extreme and limiting option, though. Equipping any high-coverage utilities like sensors, armors, storage units render the shield useless.
With that said, I'm off to try that melee build. It seems a rather bonker concept since melee is slow and you get only one attack. Even if you do 3 million damage per hit, most of the time you will still hit some non-core part and waste your attack with anything but a spear. Spear gives you +33% chance to hit the core, so I guess that's about 60% chance to hit the core. With microactuators and melee analysis suites there might be a way to make something work.
18
Ideas / Re: Allow backwards manual commands?
« on: October 27, 2016, 05:50:27 PM »
(Unrelated, but since we're talking about hacks...)
Shouldn't force(jam) succeeds much more often than it does already? It seems like I have a higher chance of success of sealing a garrison using the direct seal command than by jamming it.
Shouldn't force(jam) succeeds much more often than it does already? It seems like I have a higher chance of success of sealing a garrison using the direct seal command than by jamming it.
19
Fixed Bugs & Non-Bugs / Re: Jumping grunt
« on: October 26, 2016, 07:15:10 PM »
I believe the unit scheduling is the most likely culprit. The grunt at the far end jumps over all the pests, and they leapfrog each other too, while consuming only the time for a single move.
20
Fixed Bugs & Non-Bugs / Jumping grunt
« on: October 26, 2016, 06:43:47 PM »
I got a pack of pests carrying a grunt far, far away from an outpost in the caves. I'm moving at speed 28 and it's gaining ground on me, and so are the pests. Attached save.
21
General Discussion / Re: Alpha 11 Discussions [SPOILER VERSION]
« on: October 25, 2016, 07:18:08 PM »
Well, my exploits didn't work out.
I tried building a killbox out of rock using a tunneler. It turns out these guys don't reinforce like they do in Materials. The tunnel crumbles on them.
Next I tried using engineers to build walls. But they can't be hacked, the schematic doesn't exist in the database and I haven't found a disruption gun that does less than 10 damage so that I could rewire one on my side.
Last I tried using the barrier walls of Access to seal myself into an enclosed place, with a neutral engineer repairing the weaker blue barrier behind me. I recall this repair happening a few alphas ago. Then I was hoping to crit through walls at the ARCs and programmers who couldn't me hit back. I'd still have to go out from time to time but an engineer could reseal after me every time. However no engineer came and I got sick of waiting.
I tried building a killbox out of rock using a tunneler. It turns out these guys don't reinforce like they do in Materials. The tunnel crumbles on them.
Next I tried using engineers to build walls. But they can't be hacked, the schematic doesn't exist in the database and I haven't found a disruption gun that does less than 10 damage so that I could rewire one on my side.
Last I tried using the barrier walls of Access to seal myself into an enclosed place, with a neutral engineer repairing the weaker blue barrier behind me. I recall this repair happening a few alphas ago. Then I was hoping to crit through walls at the ARCs and programmers who couldn't me hit back. I'd still have to go out from time to time but an engineer could reseal after me every time. However no engineer came and I got sick of waiting.
22
General Discussion / Re: Alpha 11 Discussions [SPOILER VERSION]
« on: October 25, 2016, 05:47:05 PM »Quote
For a long while I was having trouble resisting incorporating nice hackware I found into my combat build, but always felt it kept me from being a fully effective fighter, so I've been resisting the urge more recently to see if I fare better. So far I've found I pretty much can't hack anything at all, which is kind of annoying
I tried incorporating hackware into my combat builds. It just doesn't work. It'll get blasted off after a few fights, or get destroyed by a fighter. I suppose you can hoard it for when you find a level 1 terminal. If you have a god build like zxc's then it'll last longer, but then again having hackware directly reduces the combat potential of your build, so I don't think it's really viable. It works a lot better for a stealth build, where you just want to assimilate a programmer dispatch.
23
Fixed Bugs & Non-Bugs / Trojan(prioritize) causes incorrect delay
« on: October 23, 2016, 07:57:18 PM »
At a fabricator, if you first use trojan(prioritize), build something, then build something again, the second time the delay is initially shown as half the time as it should, then it resets to the full time on the next turn.
24
General Discussion / Re: Alpha 11 Discussions [SPOILER VERSION]
« on: October 21, 2016, 07:55:03 AM »Quote
That's bizarre. I'd like to see the morgue after you finish. I don't think that's ever happened to me.
Here you go.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Quote
I can also go for two more weapon slots perhaps, and fill one or two slots with weaker weapons (quantum rifles etc). That is probably better as makeshift armour than propulsion, and will be just as plentiful.
Good thinking.
Quote
Some cool tidbits: 2.5 hours spent in Access, peak influence of 9.7k, 98 assault squads dispatched (I think I defeated all but three), and 61% of the run spent at alert 5.
Yeah, you need to destroy about 700 robots to score high. My true combat games last longer than 2.5 hours!
In my next game, I'll try another stealth build. There are two potential exploits I want to try to enable unlimited farming at virtually no risk.
25
General Discussion / Re: Alpha 11 Discussions [SPOILER VERSION]
« on: October 20, 2016, 07:38:32 PM »
OK thanks. I'll monitor the situation in my next games. I had assumed the alert was zero. Ironically I could have purged it as much as I wanted with all the hackware I was carrying. I got all those garrisons sealed but I played badly and I got stripped due to the unexpected dispatches before I could convert to a combat build. Die and learn 