Messages

1

AI War / Re: AI War Beta 6.050 "Release Candidate 3" Released!

« on: June 16, 2013, 03:35:36 PM »

Full visibility gives you full scouting info for each planet. Thats why I got surprised that numbers are not on map.
You get full sidebar info on each planet not only buildings.

2

AI War / Re: AI War Beta 6.050 "Release Candidate 3" Released!

« on: June 16, 2013, 03:08:22 PM »

Few questions:
1. Why is full map visibility not giving enemy counts for planets? I need to send scouts to have numbers visible.
2. Having adv fabricators 4 hops from H/W is a rng luck?

Also.. Zenith Descendant/Exotic is Fun. And I didn't really play long only looked at his planets.

3

AI War / Re: Turret Controllers

« on: June 12, 2013, 02:40:55 PM »

I posted it here for clarity:
http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=11815

I'm looking forward to after 7.0 

4

AI War / Re: Turret Controllers

« on: June 12, 2013, 01:11:53 PM »

Lets try with something like this:

1. All turrets get per planet cap of around 1/4th (to be balanced) of what they have now.
2. Player gets ability to build turret controllers that allow more turrets of given type to be built on their planet. They would need to be turret specific (per each turret type) and maybe mark specific (thats not needed I think).
3. Each turret controller would have a global cap of 3 and would add additional 1/4th of turret cap on planet it's built.
4. Capturable turret controllers would give you 1/4th of core turret cap per planet. Player turret controllers would interfere with them and would cancel their added cap on planets they are built. This effect could also work per turret type or globally (any controller cancels core ones or only their type of controller).

This solution should have no impact on choke point strength compared to now (you build all turret controllers on choke point and you have full caps of everything).
It also balances capturable turret controllers - they would buff planets on which you don't use your own turret controllers. So they will help with distributed defense but won't allow you to significantly buff choke point due to interference.

5

AI War / Re: Turret Controllers

« on: June 12, 2013, 11:13:55 AM »

The idea of lowering turret caps and making them per-planet has certainly come up before, but the "lowering caps" part is simply intolerable to too many people here.

Thats why there was a twist to this idea presented that would allow you to build 1-2 turret controllers that would expand turrets cap on planet they are or directly buff turrets attack damage. It was kind of... missed tho.

6

AI War / Re: AI War Beta 6.044-60.45 "So That's What A Vines Map Looks Like" Released!

« on: June 10, 2013, 06:01:32 PM »

The untangler is full of awesome

I might try spokes now actually.. or a tree one

7

AI War / Re: Nominations for buff/nerf polls for Bonus Ship Types

« on: June 10, 2013, 10:14:39 AM »

To be honest I would rather vote for new campaign types and such. New ways to play with the massive amount of stuff we've got. After all, if we've already got tons of stuff and exactly a game mode to play with it on... you (effectively) double the amount of stuff that you can do with it by adding a second game mode.

I'm still hoping for time where Defense mode will morph in AIW The TD. It can be a game mode thats more different then current one with reuse of all the assets

8

AI War / Re: AI War Beta 6.043 "Controllers Out Of Control" Released!

« on: June 10, 2013, 10:09:09 AM »

My main problem with chokepoints is... that I find them a bit dull.
You get to chose that one and the only built up anything you can and thats it.
Then you start flying around doing stuff and laugh at AI trying to attack your fortress.

There are features that prevent that - beachheads and the warp me there stuff but they are not preventing you from having a major choke - they make only a slight disadvantage.

So I'm using chokepoints as needed and trying to stir some ideas here trying to make other approaches more viable.

9

AI War / Re: AI War Beta 6.043 "Controllers Out Of Control" Released!

« on: June 09, 2013, 05:58:35 PM »

I agree that new image is to bright.
And maybe not even only the glare - whole of it is brighter than previous one which reduces menu clarity a bit.

As for Core turret controllers... sad panda. They still force you to do with them what they are meant to support (Aka more distributed defense to buff said defense ). Not sure how new re-balance will affect that.. they might be able to defend themselves if you get enough of them - did energy costs remain from mk V?
Is there any plan for actual per planet turrets any time soon?

10

AI War / Re: **Spoiler-Heavy** Discussion of the Showdown Devices

« on: June 06, 2013, 05:03:52 PM »

From my point of view - if I need to go out of my way (rare cases where controller would be where I want to be discarded.. rng and stuff) to capture one of these and need to defend it - it's not worth it.
I will need to pay AIP for planet, some of my defensive tools with caps to defend it and for that I will gain some potentially nice turrets for which I will still need to pay and have energy. Unless the planet in question has 4/4 resources or something... I don't think it calculates favorably. Especially if it would need addition of warp command or gate raiding  so that planet can be protected from waves.

11

AI War / Re: **Spoiler-Heavy** Discussion of the Showdown Devices

« on: June 06, 2013, 12:17:02 PM »

But yea, if distributed defense doesn't work for you then most of the beneficial structures in the game are irrelevant, these (and the showdown devices) included.

This is main reason why I would prefer that capturables that are supposed to help in distributed defense are not themselves subject to it.

12

AI War / Re: **Spoiler-Heavy** Discussion of the Showdown Devices

« on: June 05, 2013, 05:17:26 PM »

I meant the ability to actually get the controller to some secure place.

If we can't protect them they will have similar issues as Adv Fabs. And this means that usefulnes varies on game settings/rng positioning etc..

Right, the point of them is to both make distributed defense more feasible (because they provide hefty per-planet firepower that doesn't detract from your main choke's available cap) and to make it more desirable (as that's how you keep the controllers).

It's possible that they need to give more turrets each, or as suggested elsewhere to give some of every core turret type, or something like that, but the point is to increase the viability (and desirability) of distributed defense.

It seems to be that they are double-edged sword. Instead of giving a cookie they give you a cookie but you can't eat it.
They force you to defend more locations to just have them. After that you need to pay costs and energy for their actual bonus. Are they worth enough to make defending their world feasible?

Even with distributed defense you want to choose where you defend usually. Showdown is meant to prevent that also so you have 4 planets to defend plus any planet you might have with controller or you need to resign from help of controllers.

I hope to be able to play a bit soon so I will see how this works in practice.

13

AI War / Re: **Spoiler-Heavy** Discussion of the Showdown Devices

« on: June 05, 2013, 12:08:21 PM »

I meant the ability to actually get the controller to some secure place.

If we can't protect them they will have similar issues as Adv Fabs. And this means that usefulnes varies on game settings/rng positioning etc..

As for double controllers - I misread one of previous posts.

14

AI War / Re: **Spoiler-Heavy** Discussion of the Showdown Devices

« on: June 05, 2013, 07:00:08 AM »

Could you make the turret controllers mobile so we can protect them better?
From what I can see system abuse is prevented by cost of the stuff you get.

Also does having 2 same type controllers give you double cap of that turret?

15

Skyward Collapse Technical Support / Re: Commands to kill gods not working - 1.007

« on: June 03, 2013, 04:30:15 PM »

2 small things:
1. Report the issue on mantis tracker.
2. Attach a save with the commandment bugging out (just placed would be best) - it will make it much more easier to debug.