Messages

1

AI War / Re: Private alpha of Vengeance expansion has started

« on: Today at 02:33:28 PM »

I already sent you into the logs Keith, but when starting a game at 8/8 with shark and hunter at 10 / 10 with bouncer / chiv ai and reservists / chiv ai I immediately get unhandled errors. They start immediately upon starting the game and continue to occur intermittently.

2

AI War / Re: A two part question:

« on: Today at 11:06:31 AM »

AI logic still focuses on golems.When 7 impolsion guardians attack your golem...its not very useful at all.

3

AI War / Re: A two part question:

« on: Yesterday at 06:27:42 PM »

I mean reduce the superweapons by only 20x or 25x. The rest of the non-superweapons would still be reduced by 100x.

Reducing both by 100x would just leave things in almost the same relative place they are now, with superweapons only being "pretty good" instead of, you know, super.

I understand now TechSY730, and I agree.


It is very key these values be reduced 100 fold for the weakest things, so there is room for relative power. Superweapons being reduced as well isn't bad. If nothing else, it lets for more super-super weapons 

4

AI War / Re: A two part question:

« on: Yesterday at 04:39:02 PM »

Considering the amount of work this is going to take, I think it is better that the values be lowered by 100, even if superweapons also need to be reduced by a smaller amount.

Keep in mind this whole thing was brought about because we are running out of ceiling for numbers. The advantage of reducing values by 100 over 20 or 25 is it gives 4 to 5 times the wiggle room for relative power.

Since the amount of work of going to 100 compared to 20 or 25, in the big picture, is about the same, better to do that value even if golems need their power reduced as well.

5

Skyward Collapse / Re: Skyward Collapse Alpha 0.816

« on: May 16, 2013, 05:59:01 PM »

Dare I ask:


Can I finally wade into this as intended?

6

AI War / Re: A two part question:

« on: May 16, 2013, 05:41:08 PM »

I've been thinking that, TechSY730, but I wonder if that plan is in development.

I really think it is needed for the future of AI War, even more so then things like armor and such.


Even me, champion of the buffs to starships, admit that they are too strong relative to golems.

7

AI War / A two part question:

« on: May 16, 2013, 05:14:56 PM »

I ask this question because right now, spirecraft and golems don't feel strong enough relative to starships and fleetships, but starships and fleetships feel strong enough relative to each other.


When I play with just fleetships and starships, everything feels right. But golems and spirecraft feel weak. Way, way too weak.

So I ask, am I the only one? Or do others feel the same way, and if so, how would you address it?

Which, in your mind, would be more efficent:

1) For golems and spirecraft, given value inflation, have their "costs" reduced, in some way, whether it be via resource costs, exo costs, etc
2) For fleetships and starships their value, in terms of overall stats, be reduced by a certain factor so that they preserve a balance of power within each other, while spirecraft and golems maintain their current parameters


...

8

AI War / Re: AI War Beta 6.028-6.029 "So I Rewired It" Released!

« on: May 16, 2013, 09:12:36 AM »

Does my concern make sense Keith?

Perhaps if you made it so carriers scaled with caps, both in numbers and in stats, then this problem would work out?

9

AI War / Re: AI War Beta 6.028-6.029 "So I Rewired It" Released!

« on: May 15, 2013, 10:19:42 PM »

Now, of course, I mention it because it makes transports II very effective in high cap games, and useless in ultra low cap games.

If carrying capacity is all you care about with the new TIIs I don't know what I could really do

No, what I mean is that for each 10 ships you gain bonus damage...

which is 8x harder for ultra low cap games then high cap games.


When one cap of fighters is 24ish, and the other 198ish, which benefits more from having transports gain firepower from every 10 ships 

10

AI War / Re: AI War Beta 6.028-6.029 "So I Rewired It" Released!

« on: May 15, 2013, 10:03:27 PM »

This isn't new news, but transports don't alter their max number of ships with caps.

Now, of course, I mention it because it makes transports II very effective in high cap games, and useless in ultra low cap games.

11

Skyward Collapse / Re: Skyward Collapse Alpha 0.814

« on: May 15, 2013, 08:02:27 PM »

If sc does well, why not make additional woes based on the.civs. so loki would be involved in norse games, hades woes on the greeks. this would take simple work but.fairly time.consuming so i would think it a good example for expansion

12

AI War / Re: Would.you be interested...

« on: May 15, 2013, 01:43:07 PM »

I was thinking more like a station that has an extraordinary ability,maybe one for each tech tree. like the military one could for example could be a modular fort in strenth, a logical one that has a grav field simolar to the grav driller against enemiea...the economic one could reduce costs by a certain amount

13

AI War / Would.you be interested...

« on: May 15, 2013, 12:40:09 PM »

At yhe concept of a super command station, with.a.cap of one, that wasnt unlocked via Kbut another way?

14

After Action Reports / Everything and the sink

« on: May 15, 2013, 10:23:03 AM »

[Quick squiggles]


9/9 spire hammer / heroic

1/10 spirecraft, broken golems, botnet

10/10 dark spire, maruaders, enclaves, resistance

4/10 fallen spire

first choice is zbomards

15

AI War / Re: CPA Timing

« on: May 14, 2013, 05:28:39 PM »

If the strength of a cpa scales with time neatly, i think the variation is fine. ive had times where i wishesd a cpa came earlier and others when it came later, so for me in practice.it is fine.