|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Alneyan,
As with MINE attacks in the game, Fighters vs. Mines would be ambiguous at best; in game play. However, if it could be effective that the Fighters versus the defenseless Mines in this ambiguous battle that was to save the Carrier, fleet and the day. This would be ok with you as a player, if I was to assure to the AI can handle this? [ September 07, 2003, 19:42: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Mottlee, your 285 turn >no warp- standard play game looks great.
The AI all seem fine and it appears you had one AI Race Spawned the Canarus Society this new Independent race surly would have show promise and contributed to this galaxy, if it not been so ruthlessly gobbled up by so treacherous of an Empire… Your race Character is truly interesting, not to mentioning very Productive you are currently in first place and you have 92 ships with Battleships Your opponent Eee; is in 4th with 118 Ships but only has cruisers Systems and Planets about even with you having the advantage in Position and with many well prepared defensive positions that would make General Robert E. Lee proud. Your diplomatic skills with the Bobroba have not gone unnoticed, very impressive; you have them wrapped around your finger, truly deserving the rank of Galactic Emperor as the profits have foretold. I noticed in the remote System of Candida you and the Eee have been sharing the fruits of the Earth together for some time, then this bloody war started, the War your senate conspired to ensnare those gas-breathing jellyfish and enslave them to a life cruelty on the federated gas mines. This caricature is not shared by your great nation alone, no: both the House of Mottlee and the house of BobRobi conspired to bring down the peaceful and trusting Eee… Yes this is true and all Worlds are aware of the atrocities against the Eee committed on Candida II, Sure it has been released by that the Contaminated food stored for this Eee colony that in fact has killed a sizable amount of it population was pure negligence of the Eee. No the truth is that it was BobRobi operatives and that this procedure was in fact delivered by a federation spy from the House of Mottlee, yes the Federation trained the backward and confused BobRobi the art of intelligence and yes it has been suspected you received technological data for compensation how else could you have learned the art of BobRobi: Base Construction, repair, sensors and their most guarded secret the process to refine a reflective alloy. One day the House of Mottlee and the House of Bobrobi will answer to these crimes on humanity. It also has not gone unnoticed that you have pre mined travel lanes and warp junctures this mining of crucial Eee access points is in direct violation of AIC treaty article 409. Also to mention the trap that was set for the Eees unsuspecting Carrier support Fleet on Candida I. Yes this pre calculated trap set by the House of mottlee consisting of Hundreds on mines dozens of satellites, yes the many Concealed federation fighter Squadrons lurking in the mine shafts of this so called peaceful mining Colony, just waiting to strike. Candida-I was beloved by so many for its picaresque beauty and now only to be discovered by Eee agents that is in fact not a mining Colony but a colony of WAR and Destruction, sure it is saved and thrives under the label of a mining colony. However, I ask you to look with in the dark alleys of the night you will see the secrets with in the secrets. Sure the federation purport that its Nature Shrine on Candida-I is the most wondered and visited place of the entire galaxy. It is only shadowed by a Death Shrine and in the darkest night with scores of Federation Citizens chanting and preying for the destruction of Eee. I also ask you, what of the 3 Intel Facilities did you thing this could be disguised as research settlements, you are indeed cunning. I ask one Last thing from the House of Mottlee, what would a mining colony be in need of a Combat Control Center if it was not federation intentions to ambush the unsuspecting Eee Carrier Support fleet on Candida-I. The Federation purports that it was the Eee that started this war, I say it was the Federation and as this bloody war goes on I will prove this. It is the least I can do for the Fleet and the Eee patriots that was butchered by the Federation as remnants of damaged and broken vessel return to the Eee Yards of Candida-V and report the treachery of the Federation and BobRobi for the blatant disregard for the pact of friendship we shared an so valued. We only hope and prey that this war will be contained to the Candida System and Peace Talks may resolve. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Mottlee, you are in a fine possition to overpower the Eee http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Go get um.... ----- Mottlee, may I release this AIC v3.02 save for the Comunitie? It is devvloping into a great game. [ September 08, 2003, 17:20: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
[ September 07, 2003, 20:04: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Fyron has a point. So much for the ol red eye theory, unless of coarse the pilots have special goggles that will pierce that hyper optic technology http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
This will be done how by MS ability on the Carrier Hull or the Fighter bay Component. With an Empty Carrier, it will be just a minesweeper. This may be a stretch http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif But honestly I really don’t have a problem with it [ September 07, 2003, 23:11: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Wow, QB you are always the diplomat, I didn’t think you had it in ya http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif You go girl, you go girl http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif [ September 07, 2003, 22:29: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
You probably should delete the medium Rebel, Warp Close and any Damage Facilities from Events 4. beta1 file to be on the save side http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
That’s it, when in doubt send the scout http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Now when you play that high chance game {What was that percentage 80% ?} anyway. The chance to have any event will increase true. But the rebel will always remain about 39 to 1 when a event is to be called. I must admit it does seem extraordinary that you continue to see a Rebellion Event on many or any AI Home World. [ September 07, 2003, 23:36: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Here is another test - more or less standard game setup, normal files, including new events.txt. The only change is 10 times higher chance of events in settings.txt just to save time. I also play with slightly changed components.txt but it should't really matter. I did't do anything with my race, simply press F12 and watch what happens to AI races. Now, check the Norak after while : 1062993637.zip Anyway, this is my Last post in this discussion. What' the point ? Bye all. |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Oleg, you will be missed. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
However, do you really feel QB was rude or was QB >just a little assertive possibly even frustrated? Indeed, I am surprised you would fold with out answering the questions before you >that are in fact only arisen by your statements. = = = Honestly Oleg. Please reread all your Posts and all the others with complete sincerity are attempting to answer (ALL) yes, every single question statement or remark you have posted. And you have been warranted replies, concern and answers to all that you have presented thru out. I must admit, you have not been very forthcoming with a written account on your findings to base your statements. This will leave many doubts when you are unwilling to commit to a question. I am frustrated by the lack of committed information by you ignoring few questions that over the past week has accumulated now to what now looks like a deposition, so sure, I also would find this menacing as well… Please remember, I have negotiated with you on all points thru out this thread http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif , and conceded many to you. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif With respect, I reorganized the v3.02 Events file as to show good faith. Now only to have you criticize new 4.beta Events file that is in testing; and this only exists as result of my appeasements. Actually Players that play and have played AIC v3.02, do not see any Homeworld go thru a rebellion and changed to another race as you claim. However, I agree also that if one was to EXAMINE the file with MEDIUM event that there is indeed a 1 in 40 possibility that a Rebellion could happen and this would be only checked 10% of the toral turns >as GLV somewhat pointed out. Nevertheless, this is not to say it would happen on a Home World, or even probable. And that in fact I am of agreement with you and GLV, that I was waiting to here from PTF to confirm GLV and your concerns with his tests, as it turns we are all in agreements that the Medium and low events should not be scalding in nature. ===== When I log in to the AI Players in past AIC v3.02 games for example the 450+ game the other day, and posted on the AI was all fine and 4 confirmed independent races were Spawned. In fact Mottlees 285 turn Save game that I posted, I again can attest and confirm that there is no AI Homeworld rebellions and that with absolute fact all AI Players Home Worlds Jubilate that all the AI Colonies are jubilant also to mention one Independent AI Race was spawned. I truly wish you would reconsider; I have become fond of you and really have enjoyed our discussions over the months http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif [ September 08, 2003, 17:43: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Agreed , minesweeping will remain as is for the Human Player … |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
This is not meant as a reflection on you or your integrity, Oleg… Maybe you should reinstall AIC v3.02 again; to be sure, all default files are fresh. For simplicity, and comfort and a few players just won’t download anything for fear of a virus… I along with many other players have tested the AIC v3.02 files many times from our Computer from jump the Last few weeks and we have not seen a Homeworld go into a rebellion as you claim. = = = = With respect to the 4.beta1 file, it is only released for testing and we all agree on the changes within low and medium Events. Is there still an issue or is this resolved and behind us http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif We are now testing the High and Catastrophic lay out and events occurrences and we really desire your help. The Beta Events file also has to be tailored down to spawn 1 to about 4 new races a 500 turns of the game and not much more then that. PTF is assisting with this, and with the data he has presented this still needs to be addressed and lowered at or even below existing v3.02 Events Oleg we are testing all events at Current 3.02 settings. Event Percent Chance Low: = 10/Medium: = 20/High: = 40 The settings v3.02 above are doubled with the one exception of HIGH to that of stock se4 and some Players have suggested that this also may become problematic in a high bonus game. Also, most agree that the Low should not be increase as was suggested and a few has a reduction to defailt :=5 should be strongly considered. Many Players have also indicted that :=30 should be the ceiling in high percent chance. What is your thought on this? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ================================================= REFERENCE STOCK SEIV settings Event Percent Chance Low := 5 Event Percent Chance Medium := 10 Event Percent Chance High := 25 -------------------- AIC v3.02 Event Percent Chance Low := 10 Event Percent Chance Medium := 20 Event Percent Chance High := 40 [ September 08, 2003, 19:53: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Agreed , minesweeping will remain as is for the Human Player …</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It is a bit late to answer, my post was ready yesterday but then my connection went down as usual. So, Fyron does make a good point, mines probably remain invisible, which would make targeting them a bit hard. As for the "right" thing to do with minesweeping, it would also depend on your aim about this aspect of the game. Are you trying to reduce the efficiency of minesweepers/improving the usefulness of mines? Or would you like to make them less dangerous for the player? |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
I was floating a proposal that some Human Player ships in AIC for Version 4.0, may be equiped to deal with Mines. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif I personally liked the CV idea, but so it goes http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif [ September 08, 2003, 18:59: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
JLS, Oleg posted a savegame as evidence of his statements. How more forthcoming can he be?
Also, if the same events are present in AIC, they will most certainly work the same as they do in stock SE4. If AI homeworlds can be hit by a rebellion event in stock, they certainly can in AIC. You can not change how the hard-coded nature of events work. [ September 08, 2003, 19:11: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
If you notice that file is already in rebellion... What is there for to test? It is a file that say look at this. As he as stated, he has altered the setting file and facilities. I really want to move on and have no more to say on Olegs test or past tests, I am too unsure of his benchmarks and setups. ==== Quote:
However it is agreed... That Low and Medium should not have scalding events that may hurt the home world... As we have been posting for most of the week. We are testing High and Cat now. [ September 08, 2003, 19:36: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
He changed the settings only in that events occur more frequently, which in no way alters the nature of the events themselves.
Events are random, not scripted, so it is difficult to get a savegame before an event occurs and prove that it occurs on the next turn. Quote:
[ September 08, 2003, 19:46: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Understood.
Fyron,If you could... Maybe you can answer the questions that QB is concerned with, this would be of very helpful, I am unsure of some of the answers, myself. Thanks JLS |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
I was floating a proposal that some Human Player ships in AIC for Version 4.0, may be equiped to deal with Mines. I personally liked the CV idea, but so it goes http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif What do you think, Mottlee? |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
I was floating a proposal that some Human Player ships in AIC for Version 4.0, may be equiped to deal with Mines. I personally liked the CV idea, but so it goes http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif What do you think, Mottlee?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Could work, like the ship hull for remote mining. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
JLS, check PM.
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Fyron as I have previously tried to explain if you raise the Event chance to 100% to test you will: Quote:
Lets say we tested 100 turn games… If the event was raised to 1000% in the ssettings file; Chance is, I would probably have a hit (HW Rebellion on home world in the First few - 100 turn games. (a few minutes) If I set the chance to 100% I may get a hit in 10 - 100 turn games. (few Hours) However, at a default high of 30% I may get a hit in 30 full and Complete games. With normal play, this is Insignificant and Irrelevant. If players were to want to have there game at MAX option (HIGH 30%) as desired in their game; then so be it, they will have a smorgasbords of events occurring, frequently. And why shouldn’t they, they wanted it that way http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif They set to max for that reason http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Under a normal default games at 10% the HW Hit may not occur until you’re what 90 to 900th game. This is why the Players do not want me to Change the Events too much, they Like the Low occurrences, and they like the Medium occurrences the way the old AIC Events file was… And as you can see this has been a very passionate subject http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif , and truly Oleg has made this an very interesting and productive week (for the most part) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif [ September 08, 2003, 22:34: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Oleg's goal was just to prove that the rebellion event can hit AI homeworlds, not that it hits them frequently.
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Fyron you do agree in part with what JLS posted, don’t you?
Fyron, even I can make any file corrupt, just by taking the HW safeguards off from the CC facility that JLS explained earlier or changing any other data including the event chance. By someone changing JLS settings or the Chance to 100% sure you alter the outcome of game. Sure I can present (SOMETHING) other then the full and complete truth and make it sound like it is a reoccurring bug. But without the fabrications, AIC does play fine like every one has been telling Oleg. However I would never change, alter, fabricate an Adamant or someother ModS data on your Facilities, Settings and Events file and then Post in Adamant or create a new thread to see look what I can do if I alter your data. Sure take off or reverse the Happiness modifiers from the AI Cultural facilities file and you will see on the file that all Homeworlds on that game are unhappy and you will be slandered Fyron. Since in a normal game that ANYONE can play ALL the Home Worlds are JUBILANT. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif After many players and JLS tell Oleg that under game conditions we as players do not see this. Do we state are you calling me a liar as he did. No. JLS has been polite with Oleg and has always tried to get him and the rest of us on track or at least a track. And then when are Oleg again post look what I can do if I change the file data. One Last time if AIC is played with default files you should not see a AI Homeworld have an rebellion. The odds are to extreme against it. If JLS decides to drop the Medium Event Rebellion then you will NEVER see the HW Rebel. I also like the new AI Independent race joining the game random and JLS has done a good job to assist this and in the past the AI Independent has always came from a Colony and not the AI HW in AIC. In game play this is the way it is no matter how much extremes Oleg needs to go when he changes the data to prove his point. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif JLS, maybe you should leave everything the way it was in the old 3.2 events because it does play great as is. And until Oleg at least anwers the question: With our files now in the order as you suggested, does not the Max Severity options work as you stated? Have Oleg prove to all of us that this works first, let him show respect, let him show some good faith. That the reordered file does prevent cat events when option set to low as he caims. [ September 09, 2003, 16:44: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Have you tested your reformated file and does the Pre New Game settings react accordinly. How about desired Event occurrences; are the Percentages unchanged? Please, tell us more === L20/M40/H60 Absolutely these figures sound great, and thanks they are in the next new test start… I tested the Rebellion suggestion you made and yes, that also will be moved up in Classification. As you suggested… Thanks again Oleg http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">JLS, whst was the result of your tests? What is suggested here is to high L20/M40/H60 and would be a step backward. I suggest Low 5 or 10%. Med. 20% and High 30 to 50.% 50 high only if you think players that want high option, wants to play with some extreme changes there game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
I shall follow Oleg's lead and drop out of this events discussion, as it is obviously going nowhere fast...
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
I really don’t want to talk about the events anymore either, but somehow it kept pooping back up http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Lets all not worry and be happy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Lets discus something else. JLS, what about the Carrier proposal, are you going with it? [ September 09, 2003, 17:52: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Why is mines can cloak, it they do not have that tech?
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Because they are mines, and are invisible. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif They do not actually use cloaking devices, so you do not have to research those to get them "cloaked."
[ September 09, 2003, 18:28: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
This is why they are invisible. What are they to small and can't be seen? |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
I don't know. They are mines. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Mines are not very useful if they can be seen, as then the enemy knows exactly where they are and how many there are.
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Please find some test results about high/catastrophic events on HW question:
http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin...;f=23;t=009929 I don't think fate shrine and lucky trait are buggy any more since the Last patch. It is just hard to test, because of the event distribution over races issue. One problem with this: riots and rebellions, events create new races during the game, which changes the event distribution again and again. To test this issue, you need an event file with all rebellion events removed. |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Thanks PTF.
It appears that High and Cat does not effect Home Worlds. I will tweak the 4.b1 Beta events file accordingly. I here you when you say “event distribution again and again”, mind boggling http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Again thank you http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif [ September 10, 2003, 00:32: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
GLV, I am not trying to keep anyone on track. As long as you all stay within forum rules, knock yourselves out.
Productivity and fun would be preferred, what else can I say http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Try setting it up like the AICVL then go from there. [ September 10, 2003, 01:45: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
AIC Players, please consider.
We have to choose! (1) As AIC is (now) Random Events are with both Good and Bad Things or (2) Random events that will only be bad and hurtful. (a) This means that if you use LUCKY trait or the Cursed Trait then it defeats LUCKY to have Good events.(Good will be removed) (b) However, if Lucky or Cursed is unlikely to be used then I will replace those Traits.(Keeping Good) (c) Some may like Lucky in multiplayer games, this will result in fewer events (good and bad), even possibly altogether. Also reducing the Trait cost to lower then existing 500, or/to the considered 200. Cursed would go. (Keeping good and a reduced LUCKY) = = = Another choice on the impact to the Events may be the Fate Shrine; with Good events, again this is defeated; theoretically. (d) If you put a lot of faith in the Fate shrine then GOOD events must go. (e) We can remove the {Change Bad Event Chance} and add other Abilities (Keeping good) (f) We can remove Ability altogether and leave Religious at 1500 as opposed to the considered increase to 2000.(Keeping Good) Keeping (GOOD) will include the removal of any {Change Bad Event Chance} Urban Center subscriptions as well. Also note: Please also consider but lets save the actual discussion on {chance percentages} to follow this Good & Bad event choice. If GOOD Events are removed then it will be likely that a reduction in chance of: Low WILL be returned to default se4 5% and that Medium MAY be reduced from 20% to 10% or 15% … High will however most likely be set at 30%. Your input is desired, Post here, and/or Email. Thanks John http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif REFERENCE Trait Costs with the probable ADD-ON for a future AIC Version: PVK's >Racial point balance mod< [ September 11, 2003, 02:37: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
I ask that the discussion on whether we keep Medium Rebellion to be used in AIC 4.0 Events now be closed. I valued and have consumed all that has been posted and this is truly much appreciated. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Your feelings on this issue and the Data collected by our parameter tests as well as PTFs continued tests with MB's se4 Tester will be weighed and a decision will be made for AIC 4.0. Please follow > PTFs Tests < Please Note: This is a test exercise and decorum is expected at that site http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Thank you, John http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif [ September 11, 2003, 02:34: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
What does the Fate Shrine do?
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
[ September 11, 2003, 17:18: Message edited by: QBrigid ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
* They reduce the chance of a sabotage in the system. (Well, not really *that* useful) * They reduce the chance of a bad event in this system. * They improve the happiness of the population in this system. If I understand correctly, your question JLS is whether to include good events or not. If you include good events, the Lucky trait will decrease the chance for these events to also happen right? Or the Lucky trait/Fates Shrines are only working against bad events? I will post my thoughts as soon as I am sure I understood you. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
* They reduce the chance of a bad event in this system. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I see nothing wrong with this, it means more good events will happen. Why would we want to change this, I don't understand? |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
* They reduce the chance of a bad event in this system. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I see nothing wrong with this, it means more good events will happen. Why would we want to change this, I don't understand?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Oops, I wrote bad while I am not sure if the Fate Shrine is working against bad events only or any event. My mistake. |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
What PTF is describing; basicly is a weird but interesting scenario as a byproduct of a rebellion of a Colony from a Sergetti system. That initial Rebel Sergetti Colony made agreements with the Sergetti and lived long enough to become powerful enough to build a Fleet to take out the mother Races Home World Planet defenses to control the system… Neat stuff; if you ask me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif I am pleased http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif [ September 12, 2003, 01:13: Message edited by: JLS ] |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:42 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.