Histidine, could you add something like
@Override
public static int applyRaidStabiltyPenalty(MarketAPI target, java.lang.String desc, float re, float maxPenalty) {
if(!(Math.pow(10, market.getSize()) <= marineTokens * 20)) {
return applyRaidStabiltyPenalty(target, desc, re, maxPenalty);
}
return 0;
}
}
into Nex_MarketCMD ?
That doesn't quite work, since the marine tokens (they're the icons you assign to different objectives during raids) don't directly represent how many marines you actually have or used. There is a way to convert the token count to number of marines, although this might have weird effects here since it works off the defender strength rather than number of marines in player cargo (i.e. past a point bringing more marines won't affect the calculation).
EDIT: Well, if I wanted to make things maximally simple, I can just count the XP-modified marines in player cargo, since it's just a threshold check to see whether we can do any stability damage at all...
I'll think about whether I can implement something similar, or if it'd be better to do some other cap/diminishing returns to destabilization from raiding. I do like the idea of tying it to market size.
(Note that the vanilla stability penalty already works off absolute number of marine tokens deployed, but this doesn't make larger markets significantly harder to destabilize compared to small ones, presumably because of the thing described below)
One other thing I'll have to consider
Market defenses (the main player-facing number used for raid-related calculations) scale linearly with size, but nominal population is 10^size. Working off this population figure would make even medium-sized markets impossible to destabilize without bringing an absurd amount of marines, but maybe using size directly is too easy on the other hand. Could be 2^size or such, I'll see when I get around to doing it.
Hi Histidine!
A couple of days ago I had some thoughts about the endgame. I define the endgame as the phase when you conquer and wage war on your enemies. So I reached the conclusion that in the endgame phase the vengeance fleets/ambush fleets are very detrimental to the user experience. I know I can beat them but they keep coming and I have to fight the same battles again and again and again. They are not challenging, they are just boring and repetitive.
On the other hand, I believe the attrition that comes from fighting them might be a useful feature. So I'm not exactly against these fleets. I just don't want to fight the battles myself.
So is there a way to automate this process? Like with an auto-resolve? I know that this auto-resolve exists, but could you make it so, that the threshold for using them against vengeance/ambush fleets is a lot lower?
Thanks for your answer in advance.
We love your mod.
I dislike the autoresolve idea, for a bunch of reasons:
- If I'm going to have a big encounter just for it to then be autoresolved away, may as well remove the encounter to begin with and impose some other cost on the player
- If it's the pursuit-style autoresolve where player can't lose ships, that comes across as kinda nonsensical, especially if it's only for this encounter type
- If there's any real chance of losing ships, players will never use it
It'd probably be better to just modify the frequency directly; the new ambush-style vengeance fleets shouldn't spawn as frequently as the old pursuit-style fleets. (They're also already not going to be generated by dead factions, if that's been an issue)
I may also make the old vengeance fleets the default again.
Anyway, thanks for the praise
Author
Topic: [0.97a] Nexerelin v0.11.1b "Clausewitz Protocol" (update 2024-02-11) (Read 3039346 times)