Changes to planetary invasions MUs vs MUs

Submit your questions here.

Moderator: Tregonsee

Changes to planetary invasions MUs vs MUs

Postby Soelien-Twa » Tue Aug 18, 2015 3:50 pm

Ok. In my bid to expand my empire I tend to pick on a lot of NPCs. Some of these are even caveman level (tech 2). This series of scenarios is a portrait of a bid to try to take one planet. Forget the financial cost on taking the planet as I will never return the cost for taking it. This was about calculating what has changed and what needs changing. In each of these scenarios you can assume a tech 40 fleet and tech 40 marines against tech 2 defenders. There were originally about 6500 MU and 5000 HMU defenders on a size 9 world. With this scenario all the HMUs have been killed.

Scenario 2: MUs against MUs

-Action 24-
Fleet 100 reports orbit achieved around XYZ31112
Planetary scan initiated for XYZ31112
Size 45,000 Km (9)
Status Pirate Haven
Atmosphere Argon, CO2, NO (4)
Hydrographics 50% (5)
Mining Pot. 5
Aggression level 43
Tec level 2
MU(s) 6485
Population unit(s) 4
Planet Owner FEERZA REPUBLIC
Mining Center No
4867 MU(s) report ready for invasion assault on XYZ31112
900 Invasion unit(s) lost on XYZ31112 in wave # 1
Battle Control reports heavy losses in the last wave.
866 Invasion unit(s) lost on XYZ31112 in wave # 2
MU commander requests immediate reinforcements!
934 Invasion unit(s) lost on XYZ31112 in wave # 3
Battle Control reports heavy losses in the last wave.
832 Invasion unit(s) lost on XYZ31112 in wave # 4
MU commander requests immediate reinforcements!
551 enemy MU unit(s) killed
Marine Commander reports abortion of mission,
total casualties reported as 3532 MUs!
-Action 25-
Fleet 100 reports orbit achieved around XYZ31112
Planetary scan initiated for XYZ31112
Size 45,000 Km (9)
Status Pirate Haven
Atmosphere Argon, CO2, NO (4)
Hydrographics 50% (5)
Mining Pot. 5
Aggression level 43
Tec level 2
MU(s) 5934
Population unit(s) 4
Planet Owner FEERZA REPUBLIC
Mining Center No

Your opinion was probably the same as mine. WTF! Now if you do not understand what I was doing here I will explain. If I wanted to take the planet with the minimum number of casualties previously I would just FTR strike it till the defending MUs were gone. This is not what I wanted to do. What I wanted to do is create the maximum number of GMUs as possible. Why you may ask. There existed an exploit that if I created a large number of GMUs, say 2000 for arguments sake I could then take my MUs off planet and have an ally perform a GMU vs MU attack on the world. My ally would take the planet and the 2000 GMUs would become MUs. Also because the ally is a spacefaring nation the planet automatically goes to tech 10. The ally then has (in this case) a size 9, tech 10 world with 2000MUs on it when the world should only be able to support 900. Also because of the disparity of tech the casualties of the tech 40 MUs were generally less than the number of GMUs created, thus if the ally used the same tactic on a different world we would both end up with a world and more MUs than we expended.

So what happened here. Previously the formula would have worked that I landed 900 MUs in the first wave with tech 40 support ship for a combat factor in the first wave of 900*40= 36,000. The defenders would have all their troops defending rather than be limited by planet size like I am. So their combat factors should have been 6485*2= 12970 + the population bonus. 4 Pop on a size 9 world works out to about 3.4%. So 12970 *1.034 = 13411. So why did I not rock their world. That is a question for Thom maybe. Did the exploit need to be fixed. Yes I think it did. What would I have done. Probably when the ally performed a GMU vs MU attack I would limit the GMUs turning to MUs by planet size and keep the remaining GMUs as GMUs so the ally would end up with 900 MUs and 1100GMUs on the planet. Definitely not an ideal situation and ths would probably end the exploit.
User avatar
Soelien-Twa
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:53 am
Location: Canada

Re: Changes to planetary invasions MUs vs MUs

Postby Thom » Wed Sep 09, 2015 11:58 am

Okay sorry to take so long figuring this one out. One of the things I added last game was military bases. Retooling every world took way too many actions or was way too expensive to do in given the number of actions we were limited to, which at the time was 40. Building a military base ship and installing it on a world gave you the defenses of your highest tec level planet without having to spend huge sums or actions on every world. Fine and works well. However in the last part of last game I built some spy routines, mostly as a result of going through all the spy routines that were already in the game but for some reason players were never made aware of them. Looks like they might have been a dead end but whatever. At the same time I also introduced diplomats. Both of these were finished and added to this game. An unintended consequence of this was a late addition to the diplomats where if you form a diplomatic tie with one then they will pay you for installations, one of them being military bases. And this is exactly the kind of end result you'd get if there was a military base on the planet close to the tec level of the invasion forces. Ran some tests and it produced close to the same result. No Question it has a military base on the world.

So unintended consequence of the additions is that scanning a planet does not reveal if the planet has a military base on it. I can see both sides of the argument for having the military base be part of the scanning data and also being hidden. But if the military base was revealed then odd situations like this would not be such a surprise but I can also see the other side were it should be kept secret.
Thom
 
Posts: 164
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 10:34 am

Re: Changes to planetary invasions MUs vs MUs

Postby Tregonsee » Wed Sep 09, 2015 2:27 pm

How about making a spy action to see if there is a military base there? Maybe just to see that there is one, not necessarily what tech level it is.

Or a general range of tech level.
User avatar
Tregonsee
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2014 10:02 pm


Return to Questions & Answers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron