Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

I don't see any major faults in weapon/armou balance right now but would still love to see the restriction on the components numbers removed. If some fool wants to build ship with 20+ armour pieces, let him see the error of his way http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Your right Oleg. After reading everybodys comments, I now understand http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif

[ May 14, 2004, 12:47: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

AIC Players.

Have you ever assembled a Christmas present when the directions suggest that you do not tighten all the fasteners until the assembly is near complete; well this is the current feel that AIC Version 4.11 has - at this time.

I purpose that we add very little too the next Version and tighten as many fasteners as possible and just release the product se4 v1.91 ready - then add new tested ideas after this…

LAST CALL FOR WANTS and DESIRES:
PvK armor will remain as is, throughout AIC - with NO limits on Structural Armor or Racial Armor.
Mine fields at 60 and Sat fields at 50; ok here or is there any input?
Some discrete positive economic changes to include a wider margin towards the AIC Maintenance Characteristics.
Colonizer Tech cost lowered to 300000 from 400000, and Fast Colonizers reduced to 60000.

[ May 20, 2004, 23:49: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

50 looks to small for satelites IMHO. Severe to-hit penalties makes satelites usefull only as missile platforms. Any half-decent AI fleet can go through 50 sat. with vert small loses. But 100 was probably too much, I agree. May be 70 ? But I would rather get better to-hit values for satelites and limit of 50. That will make them more robust against fighters.

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Great ! (oleg call me a fool http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif ).

Something else: religious talisman + the best sensor provides somewhat above 100+ % to hit chance. Isn't it the same as an "always hit" talisman, or am I wrong?

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Great ! (oleg call me a fool http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif ).

Something else: religious talisman + the best sensor provides somewhat above 100+ % to hit chance. Isn't it the same as an "always hit" talisman, or am I wrong? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It is not the same. SE calculates the difference between to hit plus and minus bonuses and use it for calculating the chance to hit target. Even if you have for example +200 to hit but target has -200 defence bonus, it will result in 50/50 chance to hit. If I'm not mistaken here.

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

I am categorically against lowing the colonizing cost !! This advance gives a huge boost to the empire development and MUST cost a fortune. I understand why people wants to low it though. In non-conected game you can get really unlucky but, hey, life is not fair ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
Even then, computer complex II on the home world let you research 400000 tech in just 25 turns - nothing for non-conected start !

If you still decide to do this, please adjust AI research fules - move colonizer tech up the ladder so AI will research it earlier now, in line with human player priorities.

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You will make the next FQM Version with maps that only have 3 or 4 Asteroides per system.

Thanks Fyron http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">No, as the current Version has them with the 2 asteroids per system.

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Great ! (oleg call me a fool http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif ).

[/b]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">JLS, most of us liked the idea of Hull Armor limited just to the amount of hulls and having the internal Structure armor and race armors unlimited.

Anyway, great MOD and this point is trivial http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I agree with Oleg 50 SATS is too little. Why did you increase the mines up to 60 from the Tamper Bay Gamers suggested 50?

Maintenance Characteristics are fine.

Lower Colonizer tech cost since the AI no longer give the tech away. No biggie they will still trade but it is at a high price. 400k Cost is still good.

JLS, you forgot the increased System Hospital reproduction rate, are you still going to raise that and how about another 5% is that to much, Oleg what do you think?

Somebody mentioned Ancient Ruins not doing something, is just FQM or all the map types?

[ May 22, 2004, 16:40: Message edited by: QBrigid ]