Home World Forum: The Academy » Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Academy » Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Mon, 07 December 2009 11:00

Lieutenant

Messages: 610
Registered: March 2003
Location: Seattle, WA USA

Given the example, and I can think of many instances where such a fleet structure would be useful in itself in addition to the mine dodge byproduct, I think that this needs to be one of the standard allowed exploits. And I say this as a player who often plays SD.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Thu, 14 January 2010 06:57

Commander

Messages: 1316
Registered: August 2003
Location: Hiding from Meklar

vonKreedon wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 03:00

Given the example, and I can think of many instances where such a fleet structure would be useful in itself in addition to the mine dodge byproduct, I think that this needs to be one of the standard allowed exploits. And I say this as a player who often plays SD.

That's my thought, it's a bit to easy to do it for completely innocent reasons.

That said... It does make minesweeping massively cheaper, at no additional cost in fleet numbers, and an almost trivial additional cost in chaff. I think this would make fighting a SD much much easier (1 chaff + 1 DD to go in and sweep an exploding field, instead of 5 DD)

If it's in the game description, it's easy enough to avoid... And accidental violations are easily dealt with (just have them scrap the ship that should've died, although the field is still swept by then.)

[Updated on: Thu, 14 January 2010 06:59]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Fri, 15 January 2010 02:53

Commander

Messages: 1219
Registered: April 2003
Location: Slovenia, Europe

Hi!

Dogthinkers wrote on Thu, 14 January 2010 12:57

I think this would make fighting a SD much much easier (1 chaff + 1 DD to go in and sweep an exploding field, instead of 5 DD)

Umm, I always thought that fighting a SD is problematic not so much because of additional cost, but because of significantly more additional MM. Splitting and merging sweepers and chaff doesn't exactly decrease the amount of it. Wink

Wink

BR, Iztok

[Updated on: Fri, 15 January 2010 04:15]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Late game minesweeper

Fri, 12 February 2010 08:05

Crewman 1st Class

Messages: 29
Registered: May 2009
Location: England

Bystander wrote on Thu, 07 May 2009 03:30

And some other people have complained that minefields in general make the game too slow and defensive. So maybe chaff sweeping is equivalent to the "en passant" rule added to chess after hundreds of years to loosen up the game.

Have there been any games with no minefields? Would make SD a bit pointless but could be interesting none the less Smile

Smile

(not just because i'm quite partial to WM Very Happy

Very Happy

)

Amanda

'Ninety percent of most magic merely consists of knowing one extra fact.'

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Wed, 17 March 2010 20:32

Lieutenant
Helped track down one or more Stars bugs

Helped track down one or more Stars bugs

Messages: 630
Registered: January 2009
Location: new york -5

This is what is listed in the exploitable/bugs thread.

Mine Damage Dodge
If you have two different ships in one fleet, the first one in your design pool will take 4/5 of the damage, and the second one will take 1/5. {quote LEit}
You can (ab)use this to for example give your DD sweepers a longer life span. Pairing one (shielded) DD with a chaff (with the chaff in a design slot somewhere above the DD) makes sure the DD will survive a hit from a standard minefield with minimum damage (1/5). To achieve this otherwise you would need to use 5 of such DDs in one fleet.

Here is the circumstances. I'm in a game where it has been specified what cheats are allowed and people have been told to check out the must know thread a few times to know whats ok and whats not. So there is one player using frigates with Gatling guns and armor as the first ship and the 2nd ship is a DD with armor.

Only chaff and split fleet dodge were allowed. Later in the years we allowed sfx merging after gating loophole which this player also admitted to using before it was allowed. Maybe he refuses to read the Must know section I dunno.

I would like to know from the experienced players if they agree with me that the pair of ships he is using is breaking the rules. Also what is the penalty? A 1 turn ban? All ships of those two designs get deleted? Something else?
Warning?

[Updated on: Thu, 18 March 2010 01:41]

......
Ranked games: 8-1
Recently won the game Knife Fight.
Looking for a practice duel.
.......

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Thu, 18 March 2010 05:59

Commander

Messages: 1344
Registered: November 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

gible@gible.net

slimdrag00n wrote on Thu, 18 March 2010 13:32

using frigates with Gatling guns and armor as the first ship and the 2nd ship is a DD with armor.

Only chaff and split fleet dodge were allowed. Later in the years we allowed sfx merging after gating loophole which this player also admitted to using before it was allowed. Maybe he refuses to read the Must know section I dunno.

I would like to know from the experienced players if they agree with me that the pair of ships he is using is breaking the rules. Also what is the penalty? A 1 turn ban? All ships of those two designs get deleted? Something else?
Warning?

Firstly, IMO the "standard disclaimer" of only split fleet & chaff needs to be changed as there are too many bugs like sfx merging that should equally be allowed because they simply occur too often naturally.

Secondly, logically he read the Must know section, or its equivalent elsewhere or he'd not know to use the bug.

Thirdly, that seems to be a very odd pair of hips to be exploiting the mine-damage dodge - gatlings are not exactly cheap and armoring the ship that's being sacrificed seems counter-intuitive to me.

Finally, as a host I tend to fairly harsh with rule breakers, imposing scrapping & turn bans of increasing length. Of course I also tend to be fairly explicit about what the rules are too (of necessity - my games usually aren't normal).

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Thu, 18 March 2010 06:31

Master Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 98
Registered: November 2009
Location: Belarus GMT+2

The important point is that the first ship has armor 405 and the second around 380. If this fleet hits the minefield, the first ship will take 400 damage and the second 100 (both use non-ramscoop engines).

So this case is not about sacrificing the first ship to save the second but to allow both ships to survive the hit. Obviously the player uses the knowledge of damage allocation.

The question is whether this knowledge is allowed to be used.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Thu, 18 March 2010 08:48

Commander

Duel Club Champion 2005

Duel Club Champion 2005

Duel club champion 2004

Duel Club Champion 2004

Messages: 2343
Registered: November 2002
Location: Belgium GMT +1

paul_ik wrote on Thu, 18 March 2010 11:31

The important point is that the first ship has armor 405 and the second around 380. If this fleet hits the minefield, the first ship will take 400 damage and the second 100 (both use non-ramscoop engines).

So this case is not about sacrificing the first ship to save the second but to allow both ships to survive the hit. Obviously the player uses the knowledge of damage allocation.

The question is whether this knowledge is allowed to be used.

IOW he is still taking the full 500dp damage, but instead of spreading it over 5 equal ships "as usual" he's spreading it over 2 designs.

I wouldn't call that a cheat. The Mine Damage Dodge is when the chaff takes 4/5 of the damage but since it only has 20 or 45 dp armor the rest of the damage magically disappears ...

It's neither an abuse of the knowledge of damage allocation, if it was than using fleets of 5 ships "as usual" would be the same kind of abuse.

mch

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Thu, 18 March 2010 14:50

Lieutenant
Helped track down one or more Stars bugs

Helped track down one or more Stars bugs

Messages: 630
Registered: January 2009
Location: new york -5

Seems like a loop hole of some kind to me using armor to make it look like not weak chaff but its still doing the same damage distribution. Which is the point of the exploit.

The Standard cheat disclaimer is what people post to be allowed in the game. I always gathered that chaff, split fleet dodge, and merging to sfx after gating was the standard thing and everything else on the list was not allowed unless specified just like when people say chaff, split fleet dodge and merging to a sfx after gating is allowed.

From what I gather Instead of using for example five DD's he is using a frigate and a destroyer. Thats still only two different ships instead of 5 in one stack. It still seems like to me having the armored frigate first will take most damage and thus making only the DD take some damage minimizing the damage to prolong its life.

Im no number cruncher but as paul_ik says in the post above he is in fact making the frigate lasting an extra turn which I believe would allow an extra turn of sweeping with the DD.

So you guys are saying I could use a left over DD and pair it up with a CC or a dd with a BB to sweep to exploit the damage distributions. Also why stop there, a Frigate with a yak lazer paired with a dd because its not paired with simple chaff. No one puts yaks on chaff.

Micha;
"It's neither an abuse of the knowledge of damage allocation, if it was than using fleets of 5 ships "as usual" would be the same kind of abuse."

I am not seeing how that is the same thing when using 5 ships in same stack you don't have another ship first in the fleet to take damage so that the 5 ships take less.

Wait so what your saying is its not the way it actually distributes the difference in damage, that's the exploit it is just any normal scout or frigate without armor that has not enough armor in the first place to take full amount of damage. But you are allowed to use any ship so long as it has enough armor.I think that would be 125 armor? Though it doesn't specify this in the must know section which is even more confusing.

I sure hope to understand this more because I have not found enough information or description on the Mine Damage Dodge exploit and it seems I have different views than other players on the concept.

......
Ranked games: 8-1
Recently won the game Knife Fight.
Looking for a practice duel.
.......

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Thu, 18 March 2010 16:48

Commander

Duel Club Champion 2005

Duel Club Champion 2005

Duel club champion 2004

Duel Club Champion 2004

Messages: 2343
Registered: November 2002
Location: Belgium GMT +1

slimdrag00n wrote on Thu, 18 March 2010 19:50

Micha;
"It's neither an abuse of the knowledge of damage allocation, if it was than using fleets of 5 ships "as usual" would be the same kind of abuse."

I am not seeing how that is the same thing when using 5 ships in same stack you don't have another ship first in the fleet to take damage so that the 5 ships take less.

I'll try to explain what I mean by "same kind of abuse".
Knowledge of damagae allocation = "damage done to each ship is 100dp (non ramscoop), min damage done to fleet is 500dp".
-> The person using the armoured FF and the DD in one fleet knows this and is handling this by letting the FF take 400dp and the DD take 100dp damage.
-> The person using 5 DDs knows this and is handling this by merging 5 (not 4, not 6) ships with one engine (DDs in other words) and let each DD take 100dp damage.
So if you call the first "abuse of knowledge" I say the second is the same!

Quote:

Wait so what your saying is its not the way it actually distributes the difference in damage, that's the exploit it is just any normal scout or frigate without armor that has not enough armor in the first place to take full amount of damage. But you are allowed to use any ship so long as it has enough armor.I think that would be 125 armor? Though it doesn't specify this in the must know section which is even more confusing.

Correct. The exploit is *not* using two different ship types, the exploit is using a ship in the first slot that (as you say) "has not enough armor in the fist place to take the full amount of damage". Because what you are doing by merging with a scout chaff is taking 20dp damage and letting 380dp disappear!
You are probably right that the phrase in the Must Know isn't clear enough.

In the case you mentioned the FF takes 400dp and needs to be repaired afterwards, just as the 5 DDs each taking 100dp need to be repaired. Using chaff you of course lose the chaff but you save resources because you don't have to send in 5 DDs but only one, and you can have 5 sweeping fleets instead ...

mch

[Updated on: Thu, 18 March 2010 16:49]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Thu, 18 March 2010 17:34

Lieutenant
Helped track down one or more Stars bugs

Helped track down one or more Stars bugs

Messages: 630
Registered: January 2009
Location: new york -5

Thanks for clearing it up for me Micha. I appreciate that.

......
Ranked games: 8-1
Recently won the game Knife Fight.
Looking for a practice duel.
.......

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Thu, 18 March 2010 21:16

Lieutenant

Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003
Location: MN, USA

Micha wrote on Thu, 18 March 2010 15:48

I'll try to explain what I mean by "same kind of abuse".
mch

Yea, but if you are doing it this way, where damage does not disappear, I see very little benefit for the added MM of keeping track. At least, in the normal case. You could do the same thing with 1 design, that is better engineered for smashing into minefields.

Oh, to be sure I do it on occasion in special circumstances, but for normal sweeping? No way. I can't see the value.

Am I missing something here?

-Matt

Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Fri, 19 March 2010 03:03

Commander

Duel Club Champion 2005

Duel Club Champion 2005

Duel club champion 2004

Duel Club Champion 2004

Messages: 2343
Registered: November 2002
Location: Belgium GMT +1

mlaub wrote on Fri, 19 March 2010 02:16

Micha wrote on Thu, 18 March 2010 15:48

I'll try to explain what I mean by "same kind of abuse".
mch

Yea, but if you are doing it this way, where damage does not disappear, I see very little benefit for the added MM of keeping track. At least, in the normal case. You could do the same thing with 1 design, that is better engineered for smashing into minefields.

Oh, to be sure I do it on occasion in special circumstances, but for normal sweeping? No way. I can't see the value.

Am I missing something here?t

I was not commenting on the value of the two different methods, I was not comparing to see which is "best".

paul_ik said: "Obviously the player uses the knowledge of damage allocation. The question is whether this knowledge is allowed to be used."

I was merely trying to point out that the normal use of 5 DDs is also using the knowledge of damage allocation, and if that is allowed (no abuse) than the other method (armoured FF + DD) should also be allowed.

mch

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Fri, 19 March 2010 03:41

Officer Cadet 4th Year

Messages: 280
Registered: October 2006
Location: EPBA

IMO, the player did it intentionally. He knew it is forbidden to use it. And despite of it, he did it.

I do not want to assess if this is a cheat or not. It is clear however that it is listed in "Known bugs" section at HWF. And in the game announcement it was stated that it is forbidden to use bugs described there. It is obvious to me, that the behavior of the player is against the GAME RULES.

iojho

"Every person speculates on creating a new need in another, so as to drive him to fresh sacrifice, to place him in a new dependence and to seduce him into a new mode of enjoyment and therefore economic ruin."

Karl Marx,1844

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Fri, 19 March 2010 05:04

Commander

Duel Club Champion 2005

Duel Club Champion 2005

Duel club champion 2004

Duel Club Champion 2004

Messages: 2343
Registered: November 2002
Location: Belgium GMT +1

iojho wrote on Fri, 19 March 2010 08:41

IMO, the player did it intentionally. He knew it is forbidden to use it. And despite of it, he did it.

I do not want to assess if this is a cheat or not. It is clear however that it is listed in "Known bugs" section at HWF. And in the game announcement it was stated that it is forbidden to use bugs described there. It is obvious to me, that the behavior of the player is against the GAME RULES.

Yeah, he probably did it intentionally, just as one would intentionally crash 5 DDs into a field instead of 1, but what he did was not forbidden. The exploit that is described in the Bug section is using a chaff to soak up +300dp and make that disappear. That is what is forbidden by the host. He is using an armored FF that takes the full 4/5 damage, that means he's not (ab)using the exploit, merely using a different approach to distribute damage over his sweeping fleet.

What is listed in the Bug section could be phrased more accurately but the essence is there and with a link to the thread in the Academy. With an armoured FF that can take 4/5 of the dp the bug/feature/chea/... is not used.

mch

[Updated on: Fri, 19 March 2010 05:05]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Fri, 19 March 2010 05:43

Master Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 98
Registered: November 2009
Location: Belarus GMT+2

I agree, this makes sense: any fleet composition which takes the full load of damage is allowed. I think this should be clearly stated somewhere so that players can understand on what rules they agree before the game when they use term "standard cheat disclaimer". Currently Mine damage dodge description in must know section just describes an example of abuse.

However another problem arises - first ship being not able to survive the hit. We say chaff is not allowed. Then what is allowed? If player uses ship with 399 armor and it is killed during the hit, should we punish that player for cheating 1 point of damage? Smile

Smile

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Fri, 19 March 2010 09:02

Commander

Duel Club Champion 2005

Duel Club Champion 2005

Duel club champion 2004

Duel Club Champion 2004

Messages: 2343
Registered: November 2002
Location: Belgium GMT +1

paul_ik wrote on Fri, 19 March 2010 10:43

I agree, this makes sense: any fleet composition which takes the full load of damage is allowed. I think this should be clearly stated somewhere so that players can understand on what rules they agree before the game when they use term "standard cheat disclaimer". Currently Mine damage dodge description in must know section just describes an example of abuse.

However another problem arises - first ship being not able to survive the hit. We say chaff is not allowed. Then what is allowed? If player uses ship with 399 armor and it is killed during the hit, should we punish that player for cheating 1 point of damage? Smile

Smile

I added some more detail to the description ... English is not my first language however so I sometimes have problems finding the right wording ...

As for when not allowed, the idea should be clear and borderline situations should be handled per game by the host.

mch

[Updated on: Fri, 19 March 2010 09:02]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Tue, 30 March 2010 18:06

Officer Cadet 1st Year

Messages: 205
Registered: July 2004

bigcanuknaz wrote on Sun, 06 December 2009 15:40

I found a situation where it would be (I think) impossible to tell whether the action was exploiting this feature, or normal tactical play:

In OpenWarX, one of my teammates is a HE, and our team is playing against a SD. I have wanted to (and have seen other similar combinations) to suggest a single "kami" (HE mini colonizer hull with settlers delight engine, nothing else), paired with an early DD. Tactically, the advantage of this pairing is to provide fuel for the DD. As a side effect, if it hits a mine, only the kami is destroyed, and as we all know, kamis cost next to nothing.

So, is this completely forbidden. How about 2 DDs and a kami? How do you draw the line? Just a blanket statement by the host that "Mine Dodge Bug Forbidden" may not sufficiently define what is allowed and what is not allowed.

I would suggest that the Known Bugs list be split into 2 sections. Bugs normally forbidden and Bugs/Features normally allowed. I will follow up with this part of the discussion in the following thread:

http://starsautohost.org/sahforum/index.php?t=msg&th=440 4&start=0&rid=554&S=e80d6deddf9448612d1d7e574df9 7d9a

for this thread, we should discuss:

Can and should the "mine dodge bug" normally be allowed or disallowed?

naz

edit: paragraphing

I have quoted my earlier post (back to a previous page now).

I can see where some games may want this restricted. But:

1. The normal cheats disclaimer should allow it given the complexities of restricting it.
2. If restricted, it needs to be very carefully spelled out what is allowed and what is not.

I again reference the very valid combination of a kami (bare HE mini colonizer) and an early minesweeping destroyer. It is used to get fuel from the kami. Is this allowed or not.

Ahah!!! Brainstorm!

I guess this could be disallowed simply (to enforce, but difficult to explain for newbs how to do, and difficult for player who use a lot of fleets early before chaff), by requiring kami, and chaff type ships to be the *last* in the ship list. So when you 1st make a chaff or kami, you make dummy designs until you get to the last slots, then design your chaff, kami, and maybe chaff placeholder (if you intend say to switch from scout to FF chaff), and then delete the dummy designs. Could be hard to do for a player who uses up all 16 designs for very low number specialist designs early, before he builds chaff.

naz

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Wed, 31 March 2010 02:25

Commander

Messages: 1219
Registered: April 2003
Location: Slovenia, Europe

Hi!

bigcanuknaz wrote on Wed, 31 March 2010 00:06

1. The normal cheats disclaimer should allow it given the complexities of restricting it.
2. If restricted, it needs to be very carefully spelled out what is allowed and what is not.

Maybe an easier option, but OFC the game'd need a non-playing host:
2. In a non-clear case host can do what he pleases. Just try him! Twisted Evil

Twisted Evil

IMO that's better than spelling out walls of text for each game, and then trying to find loopholes in that wall. IMO we don't need also the legal battles here. Wink

Wink

BR, Iztok

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Tue, 08 April 2014 10:13

Lt. Commander

Messages: 957
Registered: August 2012

For hosts who use the message pane scraper (StarsPlayerTool)
The following is a useful search for possible offense:

grep -i were\ destroyed */${GAME}.msg* | grep mine\ field | grep -v none

Note that this picks out all cases where a fleet is partially destroyed by either hitting a minefield or being detonated upon. There are many cases where this will be normal and expected.
It will not pick up the SD detonating minefield immunity issue, or any other minefield related bug...

Report message to a moderator

detection of mine dodge

Sat, 12 April 2014 06:23

Commander

Messages: 1068
Registered: August 2005
Location: Berlin

XAPBob wrote on Tue, 08 April 2014 16:13

For hosts who use the message pane scraper (StarsPlayerTool)

Are you refering to this tool called Stars! Message Reader?
# http://wiki.starsautohost.org/wiki/Utilities/Index#Stars.21_ Message_Reader

If not, could you, please, post an URL to the tool?

[Updated on: Sat, 12 April 2014 06:25]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Mine Damage Dodge - bug or feature? (split from: Late game minesweeper)

Sat, 12 April 2014 07:38

Lt. Commander

Messages: 957
Registered: August 2012

No - that reads interplayer messages if I understand it correctly.

xyligun (sp?) released SPT recently... SAH thread

Just realised, I ought to check the events.txt file to ensure completeness of the above seatch...

[Updated on: Sat, 12 April 2014 07:39]

Report message to a moderator

Pages (3): [ « ‹ 1 2 3]

Previous Topic:	Transferring fleets
Next Topic:	Dodging Invasion

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

Current Time: Mon Dec 02 05:36:06 GMT-5 2024