Jump to content


Verified Tanker [EU]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by GloatingSwine

  1. On 6/14/2016 at 9:27 AM, BlackAdder said:

    VSTAB doesn't reduce aim time, it reduces (aiming) circle, on turd tanks E100/IS3/IS7/WZ111... i use both to maximize gun handling. I feel like vents is worse on those kinds of tanks. 


    By reducing the maximum bloom, VSTAB reduces the amount of time it takes to reach peak accuracy when you take away the source of bloom.

    Using the ST-I as the example again, at full speed the dispersion factor is 10 (0.25*40kmh), when you stop it takes 3.3*LN(10) seconds to reach peak accuracy (about 7.59s).

    If you mount a vertical stabiliser the dispersion factor is 8 (0.25*0.8*40), when you stop it takes 3.3*LN(8) seconds to reach peak accuracy (about 6.86s)

    If you had a GLD instead the dispersion factor would be 10 and it would take 2.97*LN(10) to reach peak accuracy on stopping (about 6.83s).

  2. 23 hours ago, Gr1nch_1 said:

    Nope. It doesnt start shrinking it stops expanding. Difference.

    And yes GLD starts to work ONLY when you are perfectly still.

    Or do you think that when you, lets say lock your turret while still driving, aim 10% faster from full bloom to slightly smaller but still big bloom? And if so do you think its worth it? And what would then be the difference between that and Vstab?


    It will shrink back down.

    It's really easy to see that by driving in a straight line then traversing your hull, because hull traverse causes very fast spikes in bloom (because your tank reaches its full traverse rate quite fast).  Your accuracy will spike up and then return back down when you stop traversing the hull.

    Taking the ST-I as an example because the OP mentions it.  An ST-I moving at full forward speed in a straight line will incur a dispersion factor of 10.  If you then turn the turret at full speed your dispersion would increase to SQRT((10^2)+(5.25^2)) which is about 11.3.  If you stop turning the turret but keep driving the dispersion would return over time to 10.  (This will only take about .8 seconds even without GLD, so GLD doesn't really do much here.  If the ST-I traversed its turret faster then it would make a difference because the bloom from rotation would make more difference)

  3. I just paved over entire planets with power plants.


    Then I invaded a fallen empire.


    Now I have +1700 energy a turn with ~1000 fleet strength.

  4. 1 hour ago, OOPMan said:

    So far things have been pretty peaceful although I am in a pickle research-wise. I turned down Fusion Power as a pick a couple of times and now it's not coming up anymore which is making ship design painful as Fission plants don't provide enough juice for good Cruiser or Battleship designs. I'm hoping it's not a bug but given how long it's been since I saw Fusion power pop-up I suspect it is (Also, researching certain debris I keep getting +10% Fusion Power but this has happened a lot more than 10 times, so I'm pretty sure I broke my power picks. Oh well).


    It did that to me with tile blocker reasearch.  I had planets that are 50% covered in glacier and I hadn't seen a tile blocker removal tech in decades, and the Frontier Clinic which would boost me to 90% happiness on every planet is a super basic tech that it just refuses to give me.


    (Both the ones I needed showed up when I started writing this.  Complaining on the internet.  It fixes everything.)

  5. Currently running Happy Space Penguins.


    Materialist/Individualist/Pacifist, Moral Democracy.  Make pops happy enough and get +20% output per tile, which is easy to achieve with this build, plus you get access to the Research Institute and Galactic Stock Exchange for moar research and money.

    Use happiness producing edicts to keep pops happy even at war and keep up production.

    If I go robots as well and go for sentient AI, Synthetics get +20% to all tiles and can be happy for another 20%.

    Have just met the neighbours.  We are not going to get on.  (Evangelising Zealots).



    (I'm going to ignore worlds below size 10 for colonisation.  Can't have planetary capital, can't upgrade buildings far enough).


  6. Minerals are the limiting factor in the early game.  Explore your space, use frontier outposts to expand your reach and grab systems with good minerals until you can afford to drop colonies to grab more good minerals.

    You probably want to build a second science ship p. fast, maybe a third if you've acidentally a Warp civ (don't do Warp kids it has all of the disadvantages and basically no upsides*, do hyperlane or wormhole and send your starting fleet on a magical mystery tour, they'll spot planets that you can send your science vessels into to investigate for early colonies and find promising things like asteroid belts that like to have minerals, show you where the space wildlife is so you don't waste time with science vessels scampering away from it.) 



    * It's the slowest, the shortest range, has a long cooldown which makes the ship helpless for days, and takes up the most power on a ship.

  7. 1 hour ago, TouchFluffyTail said:

    I've taken multiple planets from no spaceport to a level 6 spaceport, my energy income never dropped once. I know people say they have an upkeep cost, but if that's how it's supposed to be they're bugged because none of mine do.

    If they're in sectors the direct cost will be disappearing into the sector budget, but you'll get less out of the sector.  It's still always worth putting solars on all the stations that the sectors have inevitably built.

    The 3 energy definitely shows up in your energy budget, just start a new game and you'll have -3 for station maintainance before you build anything.

  8. 1 hour ago, TouchFluffyTail said:

    Something I'm finding aggravating is that once a sector caps out on its resource storage, all that untaxed income is fucking gone. I'm currently losing 75 energy a month because of that, 75 energy that could have gone to reducing my -103 a month empire income.

    Go round all your sector planets, find out if the AI has built spaceports. If it has put solar panels on them to delete their upkeep.  

    Remove any space money from the sector that it doesn't need.

    Not a replacement for actually being able to reclaim the income, and yeah they should be capped and then overflow like puppets have done since back to HoI2, particularly given how expensive war gets late game.

  9. I'm not likely to play such a long game multi.


    I suspect my first go will be to try and stack all the science bonuses and play mad scientist with all the dangerous technologies.

  10. I think there's a tendency in gaming communities to regard "accessable" as a dirty word, which isn't always necessarily wrong because a lot of developers will say it when they mean "make game more like other more popular games", but the only other more popular RTS at all is Starcraft and as noted, that's about as accessable as a bank vault.


    I mean they could make the game "more accessable" by making it more like LoL because that's the biggest example of an RTS-like interface in popular gaming culture but they basically already did that with DoW2 anyway. (DoW2 is a single player MOBA, really.  Driven by hero units, waves of expendable mooks, largely based on dropping abilities at the right time, the whole nine yards)

  11. On 5/5/2016 at 6:00 AM, OOPMan said:

    It's the Dark Souls mentality of gaming at work. Because everything is made better by masochistic difficulty combined with unforgiving control systems, amirite?

    Dark Souls isn't even that inaccessable because combat is slow and based on planning not reflexes, it's just that the internet blows it out of proportion with all the "git gud" memes (okay and the way stats work is poorly explained).


    Starcraft 2 is, barring compstomping in campaign, far more inaccessable because of the required levels of micro and the fact that your base needs permanent attention because although there is a queue system for unit building you're bad if you use it, and the fact that if there's a single obvious thing to do your units won't do it by themselves.  (Whereas in DoW/CoH they will eg. seek cover for themselves and certain abilities are automatic not triggered)

    Like it took until Heart of the Swarm before you could set your drones to go and mine minerals immediately on building, which is what you want 99% of all drones ever to do and the AI would automatically go to an unoccupied patch when told "mine minerals" rather than going to the specific one ordered and then having to relocate (it used to be a significant advantage at high level play if you had enough micro skill to manually direct your drones to different patches in the first seconds of the game because you got your first unit out faster).  It also took until then for them to give you a non-pointless number of starting drones because it's so important to have the first minute of the game always be "watch minerals increase who can tap S fastest after it reaches 50".


    Dave Sirlin (former tournament Street Fighter player, now game designer) has an interesting discussion about SC2 here: http://www.sirlin.net/posts/sirlin-on-game-design-ep-13-starcraft-2


    The previous Dawn of War games were much more accessable than Starcraft has ever been, with less micro, more explicit guidance that map control is good (because you have to go and get strategic points), and once they'd smoothed out the hard counter nature with the first few expansions, more forgiving army construction (esp. Spess Mehreens and METAL BOXES Chaos who have amazingly solid basic troops).


    I mean they were imba as fuck and only got more so as time went on (especially new races, lol vanilla DC with infinite necrons and 3x broadsides in a squad), but they were accessable.

  12. On 5/3/2016 at 4:03 AM, Deus__Ex__Machina said:

    Another thing I did notice about Spidy was his Strength, I know he is supposed to have enhanced strength and all but in this movie he almost appears to be a mini superman. At several points in this movie you see Parker “show off” this super human strength from stopping a speeding car dead in its tracks to effortlessly winning a mini “arm wrestling” match with Bucky’s Metal arm.

    They made Spidey as strong as he's actually supposed to be, and used that strength pretty well (like with him casually catching a punch from Bucky, which all the more "normal" fighters had had real trouble with).

    I also liked the way his dialogue in the fight scenes really felt like he was mouthing off to cover for being nervous, which is exactly what he should be doing, especially when they've made him a relative newbie (though still in full control of his powers which is nice).



  13. You can probably edit a scenario file where they exist to give yourself control of them, but they're supposed to be infinitely OP and threaten to wipe out all organic life if they get established.

  14. I've been reading the dev diaries, and it's kinda a hybrid.  Once your empire gets beyond a certain size you start getting penalties just like being over your demense limit in CK, so you can define a "sector" of a group of systems which basically becomes the automated thing.  Except it's not quite that simple, because sectors can start to develop their own characteristics, eg. population units with similar ideologies or species can start to cluster in a sector, and can generate factions within your empire which affect the politics of it (especially if you're a democracy), and could possibly even cause sectors to push for independence, so they might not start out like a vassal but they could actually become one over time.



    Basically they did it because micromanaging a billion planets is and has always been a tedious chore in 4X games but it's good to have some level of micro for the player to be able to futz with to make them feel connected to their empire.


  15. 54 minutes ago, MetGreDKo said:

    I'm burnt out on HoI but then I've played them since the very first one.

    My only real issue with Stellaris from what I've seen is in how you can only control 5 systems and the rest must be relegated to AI control in what's essentially regions. You can build up systems and tell them not to change what you built up. You can also set focuses. So things aren't going to be too bad. I just prefer optional AI management as in these cases I'd disable them.

    I expect the number of systems you can personally control will be similar to the Demense system in Crusader Kings, so it won't be strictly a certain number but will be modified by other things like government type, specific leaders, and maybe techs.


    The "AI control" of other systems will probably also be Crusader Kings style, where they're actually vassal governors who have their own characters and so have to be dealt with slightly differently.


    It's not intended to be a Civ style 4x where you always have absolute authority over your empire, it's CK in space where things are much more fluid and less monolithic.

  16. On 4/13/2016 at 10:59 AM, Zinn said:

    PS. You don't want to get covered in this shit on the pic here. I think that shit triggered Bleed on me 3 times despite wearing the bleed resist ring :eww:


    1. Acquire torch.

    2. If covered in maggots equip torch in either hand.

    3. Cease bleeding.



    I haven't actually found a brick wall boss yet, and I'm p. far after spending wednesday and thursday on a 40 hour Dark Souls bender.  But then this is my fifth Souls game now and so I'm just used to seeing the design patterns.


    A lot of the bosses have been really cool designs mind.

  17. The T1 benefits from being a tank that many people don't really know where to shoot from the front, so even a bit of angling will protect you from most equal tiers (that aren't packing some kind of bullshit gun).


    It's got ferocious DPM as well.

  18. 7 minutes ago, 8_Hussars said:

    Fair enough, is there a source for more info that you can point to, or the equation? That seems a little counter intuitive to me (but look at how WG model radios).  Accuracy should be set by the limits of the mechanical system under perfect conditions, it should be possible for a gunner to perform worse but not better than it.

    It's listed on the wiki at wiki.wargaming.net


    To calculate the effective accuracy of a tank at a given gunner skill level, take the listed number on the stats and multiply it by 0.875/((0.00375*Skill)+0.5)


    The same formula is used for all degressive stats (better skill makes the number smaller).

  19. 3 hours ago, no_name_cro said:

    @Caomhanach Didn't I post reddit thread about how aim time works? I suggest you read it.

    Yes, but it's wrong.  They've calculated aimtime as a linear, it's not linear.


    Vertical Stabilisers do not reduce your aimtime by 20%, they reduce your dispersion by 20%, and dispersion is a logarithmic factor in the effective aimtime calculation.  Vertical Stabilisers have a variable effect between about 18% and 9% reduction in total aimtime depending on what the initial total dispersion was.


    Their calculations of dispersion are wrong as well.  Let's take the M60 because that's what they spend a lot of time talking about.  The M60 incurs 0.1 dispersion from hull movement, hull traverse, and turret movement.  To find out the total dispersion you encounter you multiply 0.1 by the speed at which you are doing each of those things*.  So an M60 travelling at full speed in a straight line not moving the turret encounters a dispersion of 4.8 (the aim circle will be 4.8x its smallest size).  You will notice that this is rather larger than the 1.68 mentioned in the reddit thread.


    To work out how fast you aim from that dispersion you use the formula I posted last time.  Take the natural log of the dispersion factor and multiply it by the aim time of the tank as modified by gunner skill.


    In the case of a naked M60 stopping from full speed to aim (again without moving the turret or turning) would take 1.57x the listed aimtime or around 2.7 seconds.


    With Vertical Stabilisers fitted the dispersion becomes 3.84, and so the time to full aim from that dispersion would be 1.34x the aimtime, or about 2.3 seconds.  This is not a 20% improvement, it is about a 15.5% improvement.


    If you took the naked M60 and had it moving at full speed and traversing the turret at full speed it would encounter a dispersion of 8.6 and would now take 3.7 seconds to reach full aim (80% more dispersion only creates 37% more aimtime, because aimtime isn't linear).  Fit vertical stabilisers and the dispersion goes to 6.88, which means the aimtime goes down to about 3.3 seconds (here vertical stabiliers are only giving a 10.5% reduction).


    This actually also means that there are situations where a GLD will aim faster than Vstabs (if the unmodified dispersion would be 10 or more, generally), but because it's logarithmic it never gets more than about 1% better and Vstabs are considerably better for small amounts of dispersion such as you'd encounter peeking corners and ridges and between shots, as well as providing their actual intended use of making you 20% more accurate on the move, so Vstabs are always the better choice overall.


    * This is why hull traverse dispersion "feels" worse even for the same value, because your tank will generally reach its maximum traverse rate quite quickly so the dispersion spikes up fast rather than gradually increasing as you accelerate.


    7 hours ago, Caomhanach said:

    So if the aimtime after firing is 2.79s with vert.stab, and intraclip reload is 2.73, why would we need both GLD and vents? Wouldn't just one do the trick for the aimtime to beat the reload?

    @GloatingSwine @no_name_cro

    It's about 2.73s with Vstab and Vents, but that ignores all the times you're going to have been moving the tank and stopping, since the Lorraine can pick up a lot of dispersion on the move it's still going to benefit from a GLD.  If I were going to equip a Lorraine now I'd probably go Optics/Vstab/GLD.


    59 minutes ago, 8_Hussars said:

    One minor niggle re:Tanknumbers.com and accuracy

    The posted accuracy of a gun is the best case scenario, serveral gameplay factors may result in a penalty to accuracy.  In other words it never gets better than the posted value.

    Tanknumbers.com states that "v.stab and crew skills reduce the maximum (worst) case accuracy, not the minimum."  However, contrary to that statement, the calculator shows an accuracy improvement below the minimum, by applying Vents and/or Food... leading users to make some erroneous conclusions with respect to accuracy.

    They're right on accuracy.  The tank's listed accuracy is modified by the gunner's skill using the normal formula and can become better than the paper value.  It's the effect of vstab they're wrong on because you can't put a single value on it, it varies depending on the initial dispersion.



  20. That explanation is wrong (and tanknumbers.com is wrong about the effect on aimtime of vstabs).

    The listed aimtime is the time taken for the reticle to close by 1/e of its current size.  The formula to calculate the actual aimtime from a given starting size is:

    AT * ln(Dispersion) * (0.875 / ((0.00375 * Gunner Skill) + 0.5))

    In the case of the Lorraine with a 110% gunner and no equipment the dispersion after firing is 4 (reticle grows by 4x its smallest size), so plug that into the formula and you get an aimtime after firing of 3.3s (time to return to maximum accuracy).

    Fit Vertical Stabilisers and the dispersion after firing becomes 3.2, put that in the formula and now the aimtime after firing is 2.79s.  (You will note that this is not 20%, it's about 16%, because vertical stabilisers affect a logarithmic not a linear value their effect changes depending on how large the dispersion actually is.  They have their strongest effect on smaller absolute dispersions)


    Driving a Lorraine at full speed with no equipment would incur a dispersion of 10.2 (0.17*60), and so aimtime after stopping would be 5.5s.  Fit vstabs and the dispersion goes down to 8.4 and the aimtime to 5.1s.  (this is now down to about a 9.4% improvement, but because it's logarithmic doesn't drop much from there even if you stack all the dispersions of hull, hull traverse, and turret).

  • Create New...