I noticed odd behaviour by both my ships and the AI in a scenario with weapons ranges reduced 25%. I had set a long preferred range for my ships, and I infer the AI had one too - as it turned out, longer than the actual maximum range with the 25% reduction. This is either vexing or amusing depending on whose ships are sitting like lemons while being pounded with cruiser missiles. I infer the same thing would happen if all the long-range armament on a ship was destroyed in a normal scenario.
I suggest the following, in order of utility:
-
A ship will never regard the preferred range for an “Attack X” order as being more than the longest range of the ship’s currently operable weapons.
-
If a ship is not moving, can move, is not constrained by an order such as “Escort”, is being fired upon, and cannot fire at any enemy unit, the AI should move it towards the enemy. (I’m not sure this can happen if the fix in #1 is implemented).
-
Weapons ranges in orders should be adjusted for scenario-specific rules, and corrected for normal ranges in saved orders. For example, the Cruiser Missile Launcher has a maximum range of 1,200. If I am setting orders for a scenario with 25% range reduction, that would be shown as 900. If I set a preferred engagement range of 600 and save those orders, then place a new ship of that class in a normal scenario, the preferred range will be 800. Conversely if I save the orders for the ship class in a normal scenario setting a preferred range of (say) 1,000, if I place such a ship in a “25% reduction” scenario, the preferred range should be shown as 750.
If you look in “\Program Files\GratuitousSpaceBattlesBeta\data” you’ll see folders for the scenarios and their deployments. The scenario’s deployments have the orders written in there. When he made the spatial anomalies in the scenarios more severe, he probably forgot to adjust the orders for his deployments. Oops!