|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Excellent Fyron
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Quote:
However, if you examine the AI Colonies, in most case the majority is Jubilant Quote:
Quote:
[ September 06, 2003, 20:49: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
For the Happiness facility ability (both of them), only the best, most positive value is used. They DO NOT stack in any way. If you have a facility with -10 and one with +1, the planet will get a +1 bonus to happiness each turn. The -10 is essentially ignored. This sucks, but it is how it works. Unlike most abilities, the planet and system happiness ones seem interconnected in that they do not function independantly. Only the best of all facility happiness bonuses to affect a planet will be in effect. A -1 planet happiness and +1 system happiness facility will net in +1 happiness bonus for the planet, not 0. At least, this is how it seemed to work when I tested it a long time ago. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Quote:
But I was just talking about the overall distribution of events (20% of all events for human race 1, and 20% for everyone of the 4 AIs). |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
I have just loaded an AIC Players old 463.7 turn v3.02 simu game up now... With a total of what apears to be 6 spawned AI Races, definetly 4 for sure. Other two dead.
Tolytan (basic eng race) in 1st with 76 planets - The Home world is Jubulant... ALL Colonies but 7 jubulant, those 7 are happy... Human Player is second Place... I will add oter notes as I look at the file more [ September 06, 2003, 21:18: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Also, I should point out that no matter how high I set the happiness penalty, I could never make a facility drop the planet's happiness level below Indifferent. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
If you like I can upload this to you. Quote:
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Environmental conditions have NO affect on happiness whatsoever. They never have (save maybe in an early beta, which I can not speak for, not being a beta tester http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ). The manual is misleading about this. Go make a map with some planets with 0 conditions (deadly), and colonize them. They dont get angry over it. Their happiness will slowly decrease over time due to natural per turn decreases, but that is all. Make some Optimal and some Mild planets as base cases.
[ September 06, 2003, 21:15: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Unless they build ANY facility with a positive happiness bonus, in which case the negative of those facilities is ignored.
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Type := Planet - Population Rebel Severity := Medium Effect Amount := 1 Message To := Owner Num Messages := 1 Message Title 1 := Rebellion Message 1 := MEDIUM EVENT The population of [%PlanetName] has rebelled against us and formed a new nation. Picture := PopulationAngry Time Till Completion := 0 Num Start Messages := 0 See why? EDIT: I have downloaded your 4.1b something eventfile. I am going to change the high/catastrophic events with the text changes above. That should do the trick. [ September 06, 2003, 21:23: Message edited by: PsychoTechFreak ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Type := Planet - Population Rebel Severity := Medium Effect Amount := 1 Message To := Owner Num Messages := 1 Message Title 1 := Rebellion Message 1 := MEDIUM EVENT The population of [%PlanetName] has rebelled against us and formed a new nation. Picture := PopulationAngry Time Till Completion := 0 Num Start Messages := 0 See why?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I like it, concider it done http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif [ September 06, 2003, 21:30: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Type := Planet - Population Rebel Severity := Medium Effect Amount := 1 Message To := Owner Num Messages := 1 Message Title 1 := Rebellion Message 1 := MEDIUM EVENT The population of [%PlanetName] has rebelled against us and formed a new nation. Picture := PopulationAngry Time Till Completion := 0 Num Start Messages := 0 See why?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I like it, concider it done http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">JLS, wait... EDIT: I have downloaded your 4.1b something eventfile. I am going to change the high/catastrophic events with the text changes above. That should do the trick. Is it ok with you? I mean, we just need the high/catastrophic titles, right? |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
[ September 06, 2003, 22:42: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
PTF, but why change text body from:
Type := Planet - Population Rebel Severity := Medium Effect Amount := 1 Message To := Owner Num Messages := 1 Message Title 1 := Uprising Message 1 := Insurrectionary forces have overthrown the local Government of [%PlanetName]. Picture := PlanetRevolts Time Till Completion := 2 Num Start Messages := 1 Start Message Title 1 := Insurrectionary forces Start Message 1 := New Flash....Uprising is in progress on [%PlanetName]. The local government is seeking Miltary aid. And not just add Medium or M to a text line? [ September 06, 2003, 22:41: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Optimal: 15 Good: 12 Mild: 10 Unpleasant: 8 Deadly: 5 |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
However, Fyron explains it best in next post... [ September 06, 2003, 22:14: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
However, it is prudent to at least test to see. There are many areas of se4 that is definitely handled exceedingly different by the engine; in respects to play mode then just the contrasting movement. [ September 06, 2003, 12:11: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
We are happy as far as the new Events file is performing so far, you have made a great contribution. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif What are your thoughts on the new file and how it is performing? [ September 06, 2003, 12:18: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Thanks for the file and your help with the mines, Mottlee http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
---------------- As a result from Mottlees continued help with balancing AIC Minesweeping over the Last few months, there will now be a reductions in the AI minesweeping abilities totaled to be about 30% over all with significant reductions applying to the early and early-mid game. Furthermore, Please note in AIC v4.0 > The Human Players will now have the ability to destroy mines with Fighter Carriers. In addition, for all Human Players: Minefields will have NO effect on any BaseShip, Heavy BaseShip or Heavy Carrier class vessel. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Scaled to the respective ships displacements; Dreadnoughts, Battleships, and Battle Cruisers will require MORE mines to damage or destroy Human Player Capital Ships http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif [ September 06, 2003, 13:01: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
If the AI was to enter your 100 minefield with a feet of 99 scouts, as it may be with base se4(ALL 99 AI SHIPS MAY BE LOST) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif It would be true with 40 escorts or 40 frigates (ALL AI SHIPS WILL BE LOST) The same would be true if the AI entered a 100 minefield with 15 destroyers (all destroyers will be lost) Furthermore if the AI was to enter your 100 mine field with numbers closer to the above chart, for example a fleet of 17 or 18 destroyers many of the AI destroyer will be damaged or destroyed. However, some will get thru. However, if fleet of 20 or 21 Destroyers was to enter a 100 minefield, then yes all will get thru with little to no damage. Picture it, as total armaments versus the mines if you will http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ------------------------------------------------- The same applies to a mixed fleet of 8 Destroyers and 4 Light Cruisers, as it may be with base se4 (ALL SHIPS WILL BE DESTROYED) and this would include all TROOPS on any AI assault ships http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif If the AI enters a 100 minefield with a fleet of 10 destroyers and 4 Light Cruisers some may get thru but most will be damaged or destroyed and this would include most TROOPS on any AI assault ships However an AI fleet of 12 destroyers and 5 Light Cruisers will get thru and will maintain the integrity of the troops and there assault ships http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif ================================================= In short and to recap: 1: Approximately any quantity or make up; at 70% or below the chart all (The AI ships will be lost forever) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif 2: Approximately any quantity or make up above 70% but less then 100% of the chart (The AI will take damage and destruction, but some AI ships MAY get thru) depending on the proximity to charts 100%. 3: Any quantity or make up above 100% of the chart, the AI will clear the Minefield with little to no damage. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif This will also apply for Human Players to some extent with AIC 4.0 at previous post. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif With AIC, the closer you reach Baseships and Heavy Carriers >mines are akin to throwing stones at today’s tanks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">So you are telling me there is no part damage in these #'s?...if I go into a 100 ct mine field w/25 battleships there will be no damage???? |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Not YOU, only players with "AI must take this first " race attribute - AI has an access to special ship hulls with buildin minesweeping ability http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Oh, sorry, you refer to possible changes in AIC 4.0 ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif I personally do not like it. Any human player who fails to use minesweepers on his ships can as well take AI racial trait http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif [ September 07, 2003, 10:24: Message edited by: oleg ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Of course I'll register profound events , like palnets rebellion in my games (with 4.1 file). |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Please answer this question Oleg are you saying that a Major AI Players Homeworld now becomes another race? I have NEVER seen this. The AI Players score will drop to nothing and when this happens the HomeWorld was destroyed or Captured. |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Oleg, can you please clear up these Points http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif , your credibility is at issue, you post inflammatory statements but you have yet made any account for them other then more- inflammatory statements.
You are coming across as though something is personal. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif For example: Please look at the intelligent and professional conversation JLS, Fyron, PTF and others had, they all asks a questions and and gave Answers. If some thing was not clear, they further explained THEMSELVES. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif With our files now in the order as you suggested, does not the Max Severity options work as you stated, this is our impression? Have you tested your reformatted file and does the Pre New Game settings react severity levels accordingly? How about desired Event occurrences; are the Percentages unchanged? Oleg, can you explain how the percentages work as it is applied to events in lets say game that Last for 500 turns, with AIC events file? Oleg can you tell me the chance is for a rebellion to be chosen based on AIC 4. event file? Oleg, you suggested raising "Event Percent Chance Low := 20" is it possible that when players want to play at low they really do not want to play at low? Also the one AI home world that had this rebellion in your one Neutral test. What was its over all demise? Oleg, in a test would it not be practical as PTF suggested in his analogy 1 Human 4 or 5 AI? Are you using all the default and unmodified files AIC? The way AI Campaigns Event File was always programmed: Is that the odds for ANY Planet or a System to be destroyed in AIC is by far diminished as opposed to Stock se4, and this is good, would you not agree Oleg? Furthermore, with all the proposed AI Rebellion remedies, it may lesson the total of new Independent Races spawned that enhances Human Player game Play, and this will not be a good thing - Oleg, would it? Oleg, I have one Last question, when the AI has all as you say "these dome and glom Rebellions" are you able to walk all over the AI in AIC? Because none of us has ever seen the AI in AIC lay down or its Home world switch to anouter race by an event . In AIC the AI have always been a real challenge. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif QBrigid [ September 07, 2003, 14:12: Message edited by: QBrigid ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Hmm, the fleet vs. ship minefield argument (that many single ships will die to a minefield, but a fleet will survive) only seems true to me if all of the ships have orders to move specifically into the minefield sector and/or they arrive at the same time. Otherwise, a single ship destroyed by a minefield will create a known minefield marker, which will cause all the other ships to automatically avoid the minefield, unless the race is set to deliberately fly into minefields.
So it is also possible that a fleet will get wiped out by a minefield, when a bunch of smaller ships would only lose one ship. It depends on the situation. In fact, if you don't have minesweepers, sending a single scout slightly ahead of a fleet can save your fleet from destruction. PvK |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
QB, Oleg’s Posts are not inflammatory by nature and I see no problem. However, it would be appropriate if he try to help us understand what he is seeing by addressing our concerns >as well.
My impression, in respect to Oleg's concern with the Rebellion Issue. Is that it could effect the AI Home World in the Medium Category if one was to look at the Events File; I tend to agree with him, as PTF and I was discussing in a earlier post. I will wait for PTF and the test findings, and this should be sufficient. We do want Human Player events for the more enjoyable game, but we do not want to burden the Human Player with to many events, also. Worry not QB, we will find the Balance http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif [ September 07, 2003, 16:52: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Originally posted by mottlee:
Quote:
Quote:
Fighter Carriers will destroy Mines BaseShips will have the ability to overpower a minefield. --- I also propose that Starting at Battle Cruiser thru Dreadnoughts; will be much more effective against mines. That will be in scale with there individual displacement. Although the best procedure for this, has not been decided yet. What are your thoughts? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif [ September 07, 2003, 16:41: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
I think you should leave them with requiring minesweepers to sweep mines. Just because a ship is big doesn't mean it can't be affected by mines.
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
However, in space is there an actual percussion in and around the outer hull. If I am not mistaken, space is a vacuum of approximately 32 inchs. Approximately the equivalent of 16 PSI (effect if contained in a bottle) also if I am not mistaken, considering a near miss with a mine or even outer hull attachment, is there really a displaced energy effect or will the energy take the path of least resistance. With attachment, would it propel the ship in a direction, then to actually destroy it? If there is a measure for the MINE for example: MAGNETIC, EMP, Shape Charged etc. To attach it self to a Spaceship or whatever our imagination can think of to make this mine more effective, as to maintain the illusion of a World War II - US Submarine entering Tokyo Bay or the need of a Mine Sweeper to Sweep a defined and practical Harbor location, as in naval warfare, then so be it. In addition, with the creativity and the imagination to create a MAGNETIC, EMP, Shape Charged etc mine. There is also the creativity and the imagination for the countermeasure. However, it is my opinion that actual minesweepers in the vastness of space or the destruction of ones Fleet probably will not be the sole methods to clear mines in the future. What would you say? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif [ September 07, 2003, 18:05: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Space mines are self guided (AI computer controlled) and don't usually miss. This is 25th century technology, afterall. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Also, "minesweepers" represent all of those alternate methods of "sweeping" mines. They just need a simple name. [ September 07, 2003, 17:54: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
[ September 07, 2003, 18:09: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
No. Drones are automated miniature ships (sort of). Mines are just flying warheads. Would it make any sense for 100 immobile mines to be able to all hit a ship or fleet in an entire SECTOR of space? Of course not. They have to be able to move around to hit their targets. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif And why would a people capable of travelling to other stars not think to strap some basic engines on their mines?
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
So what you are saying is, that the drone is a automated miniature ships, capable of damage from the effects of our existing Point Defence, but a mine theoretically is so small or too fast that existing on board weapons will have no effect. Ok, this does make sence. [ September 07, 2003, 18:36: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
You can shoot them if they get launched in combat, but that can only happen in tactical combat versuse human players. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
It is quite possible that PDCs could be used to target mines. Other ship weapons are too big to target them though IMO (much like targetting missiles, which are also quite small and fast). That, and mines have super cloaking, so normal weapons can't target them. They do have level 5 cloak afterall. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Some mods, such as Devnull, make it so that PDCs sweep mines instead of special Minesweepers (IIRC). Essentially, Drones are big enough to be targetable by ship weapons. They are the same size as Frigates and such, afterall. Mines, on the other hand, are small, probably a bit bigger than missiles. [ September 07, 2003, 18:40: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Hmm... you changed the post I was replying to. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Mines are also supposed to be hidden (prevents active level 5 scanning and so on), so they should be cloacked devices deployed in an area and programmed to target any incoming hostile ship. It would make more sense than having stationary mines which could not possibly hit a ship in space. (Or it would be so unlikely that you would need the Heart of Gold) On the other hand, drones are more autonomous devices, I would picture drones as being dirigible missiles.
As for the gameplay, I would not advice you to allow the automatic "destruction" of mines for the player (after a certain number of ships). Wouldn't it actually weaken the AI? Or rather, why would you want to give this ability to the player? (I didn't see the reason in your previous Posts, but since there are so much Posts in this thread, I might have overlook it) |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
We were typeing at the same time http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif [ September 07, 2003, 18:45: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Ok. If you want PDCs to be able to target mines, then PDCs should be given some sweeping ability (such as 1 for all levels, to allow specialized sweepers to still be useful), not the ship hulls. Otherwise, you are saying that PDC on a BS can target mines better than PDC on a number of DS or so, which to me makes 0 sense. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif I can understand that for AI considerations, giving their hulls some sweeping makes sense. But so would giving it to PDCs. They use PDCs on most ships, so they can still get plenty of sweeping capability that way.
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Quote:
Yes, it would have an effect on the AI or another Human Opponent. So, you feel that the Ability should not be given to the Human Players Ships. Ok. Alneyan, how about Carriers, with in theory many fighters that may take out mines, if they could achieve this effectively? [ September 07, 2003, 19:44: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
The problem wiht carriers and fighters is that the carriers hit the mines long before any fighters could be launched. Mines are invisible, afterall. Carriers certainly do not have their fighters out in space when they are travelling around, unless you actually launch them into space yourself. They can't because if the fighters were in space, they would not be able to use WPs, as fighters can not warp on their own.
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Perhaps make a "sweeping tech" that requires Mines 1. What it will do is give copies of the PDCs that have the sweeping ability. So, without it, you have PDC I-V without sweeping. With it, you get PDC I-V with sweeping. Otherwise, the impending uselessness of mines happens a lot earlier in the game, as it will be much cheaper to research. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif That, or just use the normal Mines tech as the tech grid, so Point Defense Weapons 1-5 give PDC I-V. Point Defense Weapons 1 + Mines 1 gives PDC I with sweeping. Point Defense Weapons 2 + Mines 2 gives PDC II with sweeping, and so on. This could get complicated though. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif It is up to you really, as it is your mod. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
[ September 07, 2003, 19:23: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
But in theory, how about if Carriers, with many fighters could take out mines effectively before any damage to the Carrier.
If this could be feasible. In your opinion, (cloaking is not a problem because the pilots have there eye right on the target, no sensors required) would this feel realistic to you? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif [ September 07, 2003, 19:24: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
But in theory Alneyan, how about if Carriers, with many fighters could take out mines effectively before any damage to the Carrier. Could this be feasible in your opinion, cloaking is not a problem because the pilots have there eye right on the target, no sensors required? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Hmm, I would differ with Fyron here, fighters could be launched in space during travels, at least a few of them to keep watch just in case. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif (Except if the goal is top speed of course) After that, all the fighters would be launched in a scramble to protect the ships from these ships. All the mines are not exactly close to each other, they should be spaced and when one spots enemy ships, they all close in their target(s), so the carriers could have time to launch the fighters. And of course, when you are in enemy territory, there should always be fighters launched. On the gameplay side of the things, it would have to be tested of course, but this idea seems to be reasonable. (If the carriers are not better hulls for warships, apart from the Light Carrier in the very beginning of the game, but this one is only a temporary asset) Fyron suggestion would also work, but as he said, it would become quite complicated. Fyron, let's say you have Mine III and PDC IV, the PDC available would be PDC III with Mine Sweeping and PDC IV without Mine Sweeping right? And would the efficiency of the Mine Sweeping ability increases or remains at one mine per turn? [ September 07, 2003, 19:24: Message edited by: Alneyan ] |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:35 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.