[X3LU] Mayhem 3.21b

[Joubarbe]

Mayhem 3.4d released

It fixes 3.4c... Tell me if it's all good.

[vince8290]

Mayhem 3.4c released

• 3.4c: Company Traders were being built endlessly, leading to exponential lags after some time. After updating, all company Traders will be removed in your game, and they will slowly going to be rebuilt over time. A new 9972 t-file has been added to adjust the number of Traders per Trading station (default to 5).
• 3.4c: Performance could be affected by Traders that were not being able to find any trade opportunities. Now, when this is the case, the Trader wait at least 5 minutes instead of continuously looking for a job.

If your game was laggy, those lags should disappear instantly after updating. If it's not the case, please insult me harshly on this thread.

You're such a hero !
Thanks Joubarbe

[4square425]

Edit: make sure that you set Split to friendly immediatly and also SEND it to the entire property

Is there a different menu to do that besides the Console and Global Commands? I changed the Split to Friend in both, plus chose "Transmit to all reachable properties". My fighters still went after a Split Cartographer even after I got to Rank 3 reputation from a lucky pirate kill in their space. The Split also aren't currently allied with anyone.

Essentially, while I can keep my ships out of Split territory before I regain some rep, I need to do something about Split non-military ships (especially Cartographers) entering my sectors and being shot down.

https://i.imgur.com/8iR4NiD.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/WILkV1X.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/CsqtGHy.jpg

[Hector0x]

No, the Global commands and transmitting them are the two steps i had in mind.
And your Busters are still going after the Split cartographer? That seems wrong.

You are using the patrol command, right? Seems like you have to restart it on all patrols for the friend/foe settings to get updated. Thats a bummer.

I have switched over towards using less fleets by utilizing the new sector monitoring feature in fleet settings. Maybe try that.
Seems like i should finally tag my Hunter Group video as outdated. Never liked how it turned out anyway. It's convoluted with info about pirates and confusing and outdated fleet settings.

[4square425]

It's likely a fleet thing then, as the fighters from a carrier are also going after cartographers. I'll try resetting the patrol command after sending the global one.

[alexalsp]

Good evening Joubarbe. Explain, if possible, please.
What files are responsible for creating the names of the sectors of the galaxy and voicing them?
I can not understand. I make translation in files: sector_names_stream1.txt, sector_names_stream.txt.
I substitute the time of the sector names from the Russian stream file.
As a result, after generating the galaxy, I jump into a sector but the name of another sector is announced.

@alex: I don't know, should work IIRC.

This is sad. I tried many options but none helped. Thanks for the answer.

[Morkom]

Hi, Joubarbe.

As a suggestion - can you, please, keep a link and/or date of latest hotfix somewhere on the first posts? Maybe something simple, like "New Hotfix: 05/10/2020. Fixed that and that". It`s that I got into your mod a week ago, only checked if there is version news update on first page, and found out that my 2 FPS on 10x SETA on 8x8 galaxy was not a feature, but a bug, by accident. Got on last pages of this thread, looking for some tips, and Joubarbe already fixed something that I had no idea about, lol.

Anyway, thanks in advance.

[alexalsp]

Hi, Joubarbe.

As a suggestion - can you, please, keep a link and/or date of latest hotfix somewhere on the first posts? Maybe something simple, like "New Hotfix: 05/10/2020. Fixed that and that". It`s that I got into your mod a week ago, only checked if there is version news update on first page, and found out that my 2 FPS on 10x SETA on 8x8 galaxy was not a feature, but a bug, by accident. Got on last pages of this thread, looking for some tips, and Joubarbe already fixed something that I had no idea about, lol.

Anyway, thanks in advance.

viewtopic.php?p=4540103#p4540103

[4square425]

Is there any link between reputation and a faction becoming hostile after a Truce has been called and is over?

I have the Split at 5 and for a time 6 reputation and they're still attacking my satellites and traders. Sometimes they are Task Forces, which I know will attack "friends", but also Rear Guard and Battlegroup ships. In addition, I've had a couple of Task Forces enter one of my sectors, half of the Task Force goes hostile and attacks freighters, while the others don't do anything.

[Hector0x]

Is there any link between reputation and a faction becoming hostile after a Truce has been called and is over?

I have the Split at 5 and for a time 6 reputation and they're still attacking my satellites and traders. Sometimes they are Task Forces, which I know will attack "friends", but also Rear Guard and Battlegroup ships. In addition, I've had a couple of Task Forces enter one of my sectors, half of the Task Force goes hostile and attacks freighters, while the others don't do anything.

How long was the time between the truce and the attacks? (minutes, hours, days?)
Did you monitor which missions those squadrons were on (galaxy assets screen in debug)?

Rearguard:
- sounds like they are not updating their friend/foe settings on reputation change (bug?)
- could be possible that these squadrons got the attack order when you were still at war with Split. Sometimes they need hours to reach their destination

Task Force:
- what you describe sounds exactly like the reprisal system.
- how much Split stuff did you destroy? Task Forces want to kill an equal amount of your stuff in return.
- i think it only affects existing task forces. But killing the old ones in self defense piles up new reprisal desire again.
- it should be changed so that reprisal is "forgiven" when a truce with the player happens

Battlegroup:
- where did they attack and what? (suppose it was only while defending one of their sectors, then it's probably the same problem as with rearguards)
- they shouldn't come into your sectors and only hunt individual assets. They always try to annihilate other sectors.
- if they launched a new invasion while your reputation was positive, then it'd be a bug
- a recent change made the truce possible even while other invasions against you are still running. Maybe those other invasions aren't cancelled properly and they arrive long after the reputation has changed.

[4square425]

It's been about 10 hours of game time since the war concluded so some of the claims and orders might still be active. As the the Task Forces, I likely have to resign myself to a forever proxy war since I destroyed at least 20 Split capital ships including 6 M2s. I ended up losing about 9 M7s and a few hundred fighters, but the difference between those is immense. I'll probably actively start another war before freighter losses make up that difference. I'll just have to be more active in telling things to retreat into stations when a Task Force comes into one of my sectors.

I get the reprisal system, but what if there was an option in the Diplomacy menu with the Favor system to temporarily end the Task Forces hunting for you or if the value is tracked, reduce how much the former enemy is trying to attack you with. It could be titled "Reparations." I feel very helpless with Task Forces since I can't fight back or else precipitate a new war very rapidly. TS freighters are also too slow to outrun most of the ships in a Task Force anyway.

[Hector0x]

it's interesting. Let us know how it goes.

I got two such truces up until now. Ok, i believe didn't destroy as much assets as you. But in my case the hostilities generally stopped after both wars. Maybe 1 Task Force came to destroy a satellite. Can't quite remember, but definitely nothing major.
Maybe my experience was coincidence and they were mostly just occupied at different frontlines. I also limit my trade with these two factions. None of their sectors are in worker range of any of my outposts which have traders (i don't want to help their economy). So i didn't test if they attack any freighters of mine.

[5511phil]

Mayhem 3.4d released

It fixes 3.4c... Tell me if it's all good.

Thankyou I was having the same issue but seems all good now

Great mod, love it!

[4square425]

Does anyone have opinions of missiles in Mayhem 3? I have a few Silicon Mines, plus whatever my miners obtain, however, I'm not certain what sort of missiles to produce. Right now, I just have one factory looping chaff. I'm also uncertain about the worth of the three chaff systems, is the level 3 chaff worth the crystals? With all the missiles enemies pack in this version, I wonder how good a level 2 chaff system would do for blue crystals.

[Edna]

In Mayhem 3, missiles are more of an optional goodie you can produce easily from excess Silicon Wafers from mining. That's quite neat, but it's really just that, in my opinion. In comparison to vanilla and LU, Missile Frigates are less omnipotent due to lower missile capacities (I might be totally wrong here, but I recall M7Ms in LU being able to clear a whole sector of M3s and M6s without caring about running out of ammo that fast), which especially shows in Hammers. Flail Barrage Missiles are still excellent to take care of fighters and they work against corvettes and frigates, too.

In Mayhem 3, AI ships spam missiles if they have them, so Chaffs are a good investment, and capital ships should definitely get the best Chaff upgrade. Also, AI ships don't use lasers against missiles anymore, but come with a default amount of Chaffs in the cargo bay. Fighters usually can fend off at least one missile before running dry. It sort of makes certain missile types - those that swarm - more reliable while heavy warheads should only get used against dry targets or stations, but then again, if you have the power to attack stations, wasting costly warheads on them isn't really economic.

In terms of economy, setting up a missile production is expensive and only something for those who either have many mining ships or enough station slots to set up a C-Ration chain for Silicon Mines. Given that the C-Ration chain is the most limited one due to the amount of station slots required, the amount of factories required to produce reliable quantities and the fact that the only way to get Waste is limited by Outposts and their population (iirc one boi produces six Waste units per cycle), it's something that does not pay off as much as additional ships and lasers would. However, if you are bordering the break-even-point of income and outcome, boosting your fleet's DPS by equipping them with missiles is surely a good idea.

[Betelgeuse97]

Does anyone have opinions of missiles in Mayhem 3? I have a few Silicon Mines, plus whatever my miners obtain, however, I'm not certain what sort of missiles to produce. Right now, I just have one factory looping chaff. I'm also uncertain about the worth of the three chaff systems, is the level 3 chaff worth the crystals? With all the missiles enemies pack in this version, I wonder how good a level 2 chaff system would do for blue crystals.

As Edna said, M7M missiles are viable, but they're best used as support instead. Since missiles are limited, your few silicon mines are most likely enough to fully sustain only 2 M7Ms or 1 ~100 M3 fleet, provided that the missile you arm your M3s with is something light and decent damaging such as poltergeist.

Hammers/shadows are great against M6s (2 hammer volleys from an M7M will kill an undamaged P, taking chaff into account), but they should not be used against fighters unlike in vanilla/LU since they're slower and less agile than flails. Damage wise, shadows outclass hammers slightly. For anti-fighter, ghouls are better than flails for burst damage (ghouls hit about 2x as hard) but flails shoot about 2x faster and deal less overkill damage when your M7M is supporting your fleet.

Level 2 chaff is good enough for its cost. 3 is a bit stretching it imo, but it's good to have on your M1/M2.

Off-topic 1: Boron and Paranid M7s are underpowered. They don't have any anti-fighter M7 weapons since CFA, PALC, and FAA are locked to Argon, Split, and Teladi (race specific guns), and there's no universal M7 anti-fighter gun. The only universal M7 guns that all M7s can use are PPC and IBL. That leaves only the weaker M6-class weapons (namely CIG, M/A, GRC, PSG for Paranid, and IPG for Boron). Could Paranid ships be given back their TBC that was taken away with Mayhem 3? (TBCs are now locked to M2s only (not even M7s at all), and similar guns like the FBC and PALC are available for M7s to use.)

If the above isn't feasible, what about buffing the M/A launcher (there's no reason to use it over other weapons given M/A's poor DPS) so that it's on par or at least slightly weaker than CFA/FFA/PALC but restricted to M7+ only?

Off-topic 2 (bug report): I found an oversight with transferring control of sectors. If you build an outpost in a sector and transfer control, your outpost stays, but the AI cannot fully use it. They can use it for workers, but they cannot build any ships from it. I think this is because the player uses the player version of an "Outpost" while other factions use "(Faction) Outpost." It should be that a player's outpost turns into an NPC version (from "Outpost" to "Teladi Outpost" for example if transferring control to Teladi). Alternatively, the player outpost can simply be destroyed by transferring control while leaving factories intact. Right now the only workaround for this is to build a factory and then transfer control so that a "useless" station doesn't take up a station slot.

Save and galaxy: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/ ... ZGOfduljn6

Details:
- My save there has a player outpost in Holy Vision, named "Holy Vision Outpost." In the same sector is a "Teladi Outpost" that does everything the normal NPC outpost does, but the player outpost owned by the Teladi doesn't build anything.
- Reproduce as follows:
1. Get an unknown sector. My save has PLENTY of them in the eastern half of the universe map.
2. Place an outpost to take control of the sector.
3. Enter that sector yourself and transfer control to a faction (in my case, I'm +7 with Split and Teladi, so either works).
4. The player outpost will stay. Notice that only food and waste will generate, not EC and ship equipment.
5. Wait a little bit and a faction outpost will spawn in.
6. At this point, the only ways to fix this issue are to either destroy it somehow or just let it sit and have your traders use it for extra scrap and food. Interestingly, the NPC-controlled player outpost allows you to dock at it directly unlike the faction outpost.

Edit: Added off-topic 2.

[dunderhead327]

I disagree to some extent. The Boron and Paranid M7s aren't underpowered, it's more that everyone else's are overpowered. As I said before I think that the IBL and PPC should be Capital class weapons, locked to M1/M2. They are the two biggest lasers in the game, with ROFs of 3.3 and 2.7 respectively.

Also, the Argon M1s and M7s should be able to use the FBC, as the Terrans' can. It's a lot smaller than either of the above, yet is the only laser which Argon M2s can use, but their M7s can't.

As far as I can see, there are no lasers which Split capital ships can mount, but their M7s can't, and the FBC is the only one like that for the Argons. Changing the IBL, PPC, and FBC would bring them more into line with the other races.

I would suggest that it makes sense that the anti-fighter weapons of one class are the main armament of the next smaller class, and that every ship should be able to mount all the weapons that smaller ships of its race can. After all, in WW2 battleships fired their main guns at incoming aircraft, but more in hope than expectation - their best chance was that a torpedo bomber would be caught in the splash of a 16" shell hitting the water. Their main flak weapons were smaller guns, down to calibres that contemporary aircraft used (20mm, .50 cal). The real problem is more that M6s and above cannot mount fighter weapons in the AAA role.

EDIT: Correction re M1s. They are fleet carriers, so their primary weapon system is their M3 wing. They should not have access to Capital class weapons, which should be reserved for M2 battleships. M1s should still be limited to M7 guns.

[Betelgeuse97]

I disagree to some extent. The Boron and Paranid M7s aren't underpowered, it's more that everyone else's are overpowered. As I said before I think that the IBL and PPC should be Capital class weapons, locked to M1/M2. They are the two biggest lasers in the game, with ROFs of 3.3 and 2.7 respectively.

Also, the Argon M1s and M7s should be able to use the FBC, as the Terrans' can. It's a lot smaller than either of the above, yet is the only laser which Argon M2s can use, but their M7s can't.

As far as I can see, there are no lasers which Split capital ships can mount, but their M7s can't, and the FBC is the only one like that for the Argons. Changing the IBL, PPC, and FBC would bring them more into line with the other races.

I would suggest that it makes sense that the anti-fighter weapons of one class are the main armament of the next smaller class, and that every ship should be able to mount all the weapons that smaller ships of its race can. After all, in WW2 battleships fired their main guns at incoming aircraft, but more in hope than expectation - their best chance was that a torpedo bomber would be caught in the splash of a 16" shell hitting the water. Their main flak weapons were smaller guns, down to calibres that contemporary aircraft used (20mm, .50 cal). The real problem is more that M6s and above cannot mount fighter weapons in the AAA role.

EDIT: Correction re M1s. They are fleet carriers, so their primary weapon system is their M3 wing. They should not have access to Capital class weapons, which should be reserved for M2 battleships. M1s should still be limited to M7 guns.

Some corrections: IBL RoF is 3 per minute and PPC RoF is 2 per minute.

M7s have that problem that they typically have turrets with 2 guns each and rely on the main guns for damage, but there's some corner cases where they have turrets only and more guns per turret. For typical M7, if they mount IBL/PPC on the main, they're going to have to turn to get the shot and even then it can miss if used against a fighter or M6. If they mount those on the turrets, then it's the same issue and even worse that they're more likely going to hit a fighter if that's the only target. In either case, that will eat up their energy sooner and then they become a flying piece of scrap. An M7 runs out of juice sooner than the M1/M2 does to balance out its ability to use M7+ guns and its low cost as a capital ship. For these reasons, M7s don't seem to be overpowered. M1s suffer from the same problem if they mount M2 guns such as PSP and PPC, and either way M1s aren't going to have enough firepower to use M2-class guns effectively.

M6+ have an M3-class weapon in terms of firepower in the form of the GRC, a weapon on par with the M3's EMPC, so bigger ships still have that option of using fighter-class weapons.

EDIT: Forgot some wording. Also added M1s.

[Edna]

I don't think M1s are really in a position where they should receive nerfs.

[Betelgeuse97]

I have some questions with terraforming in phase 2 and 3. I noticed that a sector with 2+ planets can have the same bonuses from both. For example, a sector has 2 planets and terraforming both will give +30% and +40% research. Do benefits stack with each other?

Another question: how much does the increased repair rate do? Also, if it stacks, what will the repair rate be? (Default repair rate is 10k hull per minute.)

I also see some bonuses that can't even be used due to permanent war. It doesn't make sense that terraforming a planet will give you rep and/or favor points to a faction that you're in permanent war with. Could this be changed so that these are rerolled to something else if the game checks that you're in permanent war with that faction upon successfully terraforming that planet?