Messages

1

AI War / Re: So, turret balance

« on: April 24, 2013, 05:19:24 PM »

I use a lot of turrets specifically for "anti-hull" purposes. 

Snipers are THE turret for dealing with polcrystal hulls.   Getting rid of Spider Sniper turrets would be a serious buff to the mad bomber AI. 

I would really like turrets balanced against Super Terminal forces.  How this is to be determined could use discussion, but right now, if you are able to set up a whipping boy, unlock 50K  knowledge worth of turrets/forts, you can run a Super Terminal for a very long time.
 

I should find some screenshots.    I'll continue this later.

2

AI War / Re: Knowledge Costs

« on: April 15, 2013, 12:51:22 PM »

So to jump in..  The knowledge costs on Turrets are fine and may need a bump up.  Especially if you have a Super Terminal.

In general, I ramp up AI progress to the 250-350 point, unlocking mostly turrets, forts, harvesters and fleet ships.    I'm kinda an anti-Diazo, rather than minimizing my AIP, I maximize my defenses.

I set up the Starships, 1/3 of my forts, my Mark 1 turrets and a good chunk of my fleet on my whipping boy.

Everything else is set up on the ST World - 4+ Forts, Mark 2 and 3 turrets etc.  Wait for CPA.  Post CPA, run Super Terminal for 2-4 hours.  Kill Superterminal at next CPA announcement. 

Conquer remainder of galaxy at 300 AIP - minimum threshold. 

When you have better technology than the AI, winning is fairly straightforward.   Now, this DOES NOT WORK at 9.X difficulty.
 

3

A Valley Without Wind 1 & 2 / NPC Movement

« on: April 06, 2013, 11:44:07 PM »

For some unknown reason in my current multi-player game some of the NPC's have decided they do not want to move.  Period. 

3 turns of waiting, selecting them first - nothing.

Is this a morale issue?  Do NPC's decide to not follow orders if morale is low?

4

AI War / Re: Omg, my nickname is in the credits :O

« on: October 28, 2012, 01:45:49 AM »

It could be worse. 

Your handle could be in the patch log five times and you could still not make the cut for the credits.

Or is that better?

5

AI War / Re: Some very good news for our OSX players on Steam...

« on: October 19, 2012, 03:28:55 PM »

The 75% off of all prior releases is also a nice weekend bonus.

6

AI War / Re: Energy Managament and Fortresses

« on: October 19, 2012, 12:42:58 PM »

Basically, the energy changes made brownouts a more likely, and more dangerous.

Which was one of my explicitly stated goals for the changes.  Ironically, I don't know that it actually happened, but I'm glad at least some people think so

From my experience, it did.    Energy is a strategic issue/challenge now.     In my current game, I'm paying 100 AIP to "secure" a ZPG so I have enough "extra capacity" so I can avoid not having shields when the Heroic AI's champions pop in to visit.   And since a ZPG is a target, I need a multi-planet buffer.

This strategy is a direct result of a number of losses. 

As a note, I was one of the people that would build out all of the starships available before taking planet 2.

7

AI War / Re: Some very good news for our OSX players on Steam...

« on: October 19, 2012, 08:53:28 AM »

Congrats on the release guys!

8

AI War / Re: AI War 6.0 Trailer (Also Featuring Ancient Shadows)

« on: October 18, 2012, 06:25:15 PM »

Rock Paper Shotgun has this on the front page. 

I'm looking forward to seeing this game show up on Steam. 

9

AI War / Re: Energy Managament and Fortresses

« on: October 18, 2012, 06:20:33 PM »

Now, the new energy system is giving me fits.  Not being able to build the third Mark 2 energy reactor on every planet makes a HUGE difference in your ability to adjust your fleet/turret/defense etc. base.    You also don't have a way to "shift" resources from energy production to "rebuild everything ASAP".   I do think forts are a significant part of that problem. My take and hold stage just got longer and harder.

I'm not sure why it would make it harder overall, as before you had to pay quite a bit of m+c every second to get 150k per planet, and now you get 150k per planet for zero ongoing m+c cost (neglecting the cost of building the collectors).

The converters are painful (though not much more painful, iirc, than the m+c costs you'd be facing to get from 150k to 225k per planet in the previous system) , and have to be scrapped rather than turned off, but you can shift back and forth if it's really important to you.

My personal glacial rate of adaption to change is the issue here.  From a game balance perspective and game design perspective, I like the change.  That doesn't mean I have managed to figure out how to optimize around it yet.

10

AI War / Re: Energy Managament and Fortresses

« on: October 18, 2012, 09:48:04 AM »

<snip>

Now, for a single homeworld start an 8 empire system is pretty big. I feel I should be able to support the forts at this point from a game balance perspective.
<snip>

I am continously amazed by Daizo's ability to win with minimal planet captures and ultra low AIP.

For my average 80 planet game, I want to take 15-25 planets.  Occasionally 30 if I can get a good run in with a Superterminal.  Now, most of this is on difficulties between 7.6 and 9.0 and before ancient shadows stuff got really rocking.

However, I am not certain that forts should be balanced around 10 planets for energy.

I feel like forts are an integral part of "carving out and defending" corners of the galaxy.    The 3 forts in system A prevent the waves from getting to systems B, C, D, & E.  In other words, Whipping Boy planet defenses.   (I use multiple forts placed adjacent to each other for cross healing purposes -my forts never fly solo and have anti-polycrystal support - if I have the resources.)  This enables me to put Econ stations in systems B, C, D, & E. (And then I get to ignore a section of the galaxy unless a counterattack guard post decides to be annoying.

Now, the new energy system is giving me fits.  Not being able to build the third Mark 2 energy reactor on every planet makes a HUGE difference in your ability to adjust your fleet/turret/defense etc. base.    You also don't have a way to "shift" resources from energy production to "rebuild everything ASAP".   I do think forts are a significant part of that problem. My take and hold stage just got longer and harder. 

11

AI War / Re: AI War for Liddle Peeple?

« on: October 16, 2012, 08:56:51 AM »

The issue for me is "attention span/interest"  I have tried to play AI War with the nephews (ages 7-14) but they are used to far more episodic content.

Keeping a running strategic plan going for more that 25 minutes has been a very big challenge.

12

After Action Reports / Re: I shall be Heroic! (and get a Heroic hurt. Ow.)

« on: October 12, 2012, 01:18:49 PM »

I booted up a vs. heroic 7.6 last night sans cloaking and my scout starships discovered the nearest ARS was 15 jumps away, but I wasn't having any issues with the Heroic AI's champion ships. 

X maps can be fickle. 

I'll try to poke another game this weekend.

13

AI War / Re: Rebuilder behavior

« on: October 04, 2012, 02:01:08 PM »

Ok, 5.089 is out and rebuilder behavior is rather different.

If rebuilders are still behaving in radically moronic ways for you 5.089+, please post a save and steps to reproduce.  That makes it a lot easier to try targeted changes

Thank you.   

14

AI War / Re: Are you sure: "Make human ships tractored by AI ships not trigger deepstrike/RE"

« on: October 04, 2012, 01:41:09 PM »

On the other hand, having lost games to raid engines + enemy golems.   When that happens it SUCKS.

15

AI War / Re: Are you sure: "Make human ships tractored by AI ships not trigger deepstrike/RE"

« on: October 04, 2012, 01:40:10 PM »

I would argue that the setting for this is located in the ship types selection in setup.

Eliminate tractoring ships in the list and this problem goes away. 

It's like not turning on astro-trains.