![]() |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
JLS the beta release for AIC 4.50 is great I played it all week end.
Some of the AI is a little agresive is this what you wanted? The plate armor for the out side hull is perfect and dosnt use very much internal space http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif MORE WEAPONS http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif . I like the Internal Structural Supports (leaky Armor) And with no armor load restrictions http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif The AI builds even more ships with even larger task forces (45+ ships in 3 Fleets with others ranging from 2 to 40 in the late game) Tere planet fighers may be a little to hard to crack should you tone this down? They build more Colonies faster now it is getting very tough to keep at medium AI bonus http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Are you going to implement the AI Spereworld SM ships still? Keep up the good work. Did you get my Email |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
I will recheck the AI fighter totals; however, we still want the adversary to Commit all in the conquest of the HW. Agreed, I have leaned into the Medium AI setting a tad, we should look into this. When at low or med AI Bonus we do want to keep the competitive results near v4.0 Yes in regards to Olegs and Geo's recomendation. I scraped the AI Players Sphere world Construction ship. Primarily the AI Construction Ship will scour the universe to create the Huge World and not have any attentions to Colonize it, allowing another (Human) Player to reap from the builders efforts� Perhaps when I complete the Enterprise TV Series � AIC add-on to represent the Expanse Spheres http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif [ May 02, 2004, 23:30: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
4.11 to 4.50? Why such a big jump in Version numbers?
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Maybe SE5 will lead to a Version 5 as the fist for the new game
|
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Basically when a minor change or add-on in beta or even my own (lets see the result test) is performed. I will post a letter for example 4.11 to 4.11abc etc and then log that change, when/if that little packet is together I then roll the digits to for example 4.111 or 4.12 When there are major changes or conceptual additions and that usually did not involve any systemic changes (did not void existing games), the Version number then may be reclassified with just the rolling of an new digit for example 4.20 etc. When changes led to a systemic proportion (any installs will void save games), then I will consider this a new generation hybrid and will run with or from for example 4.xx to 5.00 (when released). In other words, when every little change is made then that change is logged. If it is decided that the change was invalid then the whole line bar is voided and the working AIC copy is rolled back to the desired past Version. In just a few examples: AIC 4.11 Armor was revised to represent the Exterior Hull Plating more accurately and Structural Armor alone has been revised and then tweaked numerous times ETC. the Alpha and/or Numeric Version characters do move along with every change http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Thursday when I Emailed some players the AIC beta so we will see where we are at, that Version went from 4.48a to 4.50 as to mark the first released beta towards the next Public AIC release http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif - - - - - Quote:
Then se4 Gold was released. With its major changes and conceptual additions to the programming (Possibly not enough in mm�s opinion to designate se5) Then came se4 gold�s upgrades or patch�s with Version designations also not released to the public consecutively. "","",1.78,1.84,1.91 Moreover, please review se4 history text file and the notations are for all changes by a number and I am sure the se4 programmers have a more complicated a system then what is documented. This may just be a method to track every specific change internally. = = = However, your suggestion does sound like a viable Marketing idea for Space Empire =V= http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif [ May 03, 2004, 14:48: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Reply by JLS Oleg, this may be a compromise. An additional StarLiner Hull with reduced costs triggered by a subtech for those that want a competitive balance in multiplayer versus the Players that choose OS* to the players that may not desire OS* options that will also be available in solitare play. The next Version will have increased Reproduction benefits for the generic System Bio Hospitals with added compensatory numbers on Gestation Vats for the Organic Race Players Concerns. Also to mention that this new SL tech trigger as well as the Immigration Techs both will be cancelable from the new game Techs Allowed menu for multiplayer agreement concerns. Would this satisfy most players? And what would be the desired resource costs for the optional Star liner? [ May 05, 2004, 02:01: Message edited by: JLS ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
OS* = Auto Starliners is provided by AIC for people that do not want the troubles of optomal expantion projects that deal with the micro movements of 40 to 60 Starliners http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif I also play like you without the AIC OS* option and micro manage our population. But it is http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif that others have the option not having to when they play AI Campaign. Quote:
[ May 05, 2004, 18:43: Message edited by: QBrigid ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
As I posted earlier, I never like the reduction in Reproduction with the Bio Med Facility or the Gestation Vats. [ May 05, 2004, 19:08: Message edited by: QBrigid ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
What are you going to do about total mine fields. PTF suggested 500/field. That would be to much are you going to keep them at 100? What of the robo mining values. What some has suggested is (((way))) to high. You should keep them at the present values. Do not foget the FQM Ancient Ruins thing Oleg mentioned. Are you going to reduce the Astroids in FQM? The WP Computers. Do they really need so many levels? [ May 05, 2004, 19:19: Message edited by: QBrigid ] |
Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
Quote:
I so looked forward to following Eees coattails and colonizing AI constructed Sphere worlds as I now enjoy the advantages of Eees warp openings and Astroid convertions http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:48 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.