Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">We are now at a starting point, as you play change some values and let us know what you decide is a fair setting http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

So do you or do you not plan to continue annoying people with the mod's descriptions? It has nothing to do with "academics"...

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

We have not decided this yet; otherwise, it would have been released in v4.11 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I am sorry you find this annoying Fyron, the majority of players have no issues with the bullet description being descriptive as opposed too numbers. Nevertheless, true, this may be new and we need to see the final result, and as I said, it is not carved in stone http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 22, 2003, 20:22: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

The majority of players have not said anything on this issue...

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Oleg and QB, when playing no-warp in your opinion would you prefer to see the EEE around the 6 year mark or the 10 year mark ?

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Components File 4.11b

This tested out well, please let me know what you think.

Raised damage resistance on Missile Racks and Bombardment Missiles.

Missile Rack
Light Missile system designed to maximize rate of fire.
Weapon Seeker Dmg Res := 3, 4, 4, 4, 5

Bombardment Missiles
From Weapon Seeker Dmg Res := 45,55,60

_ _ _ _

Additional AI Player no-warp tweaks for FQM


((> AIC 4.11b Components update (52kb) <))

[ November 23, 2003, 00:34: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Just a small heads up

bombarbment missile 1 has wrong weight and damage resistance of 10 and 5 should be 100 and 100.

other than that looks good.

I wonder if perhaps light missile damage resistance isn't a bit low for its class ?
comments?

ggm

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Eee warping 7 - 9.9 years is good.

AI's Create Planet works good in FQM with the req of ship const=5 and SM 2 thru 4 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 23, 2003, 01:47: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

I think the current AI state is fine. Could be better of course, but what wan't http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Do not worry much about Missile rack damage resistance - single shot from PD of fighter stacks will wipe out the whole stack regardless of the changes. It is a moot point IMHO. Misslie pods is another thing. I would like bigger value for them. May be +15.

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">QB, Eee with three Planets and well prepared, warps in about 5-7 Years at AI bonus low http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

When the new weapons are finished, we will add the research and the new designs to some of the AI along with a few PD Escorts and more PD on the large slower ships. Along with a tweaked design file, for all http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
- - - -

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Fighter vs. Missile is not a bad thing for the Players with Planet defense and will ensure the Players will have to escort their Fleets with Carrier Interceptors in that strategy. However, the AI may not always have a carrier when it is abroad.

[ November 23, 2003, 10:01: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Oh oh...new AI designcreations? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

I do not like AI' planet creators. Right now it builds only medium-sized planets. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif I played non-conected FQM-sparse game for 300+ turns and AI converted all those nice asteroid belts with Huge and large asteroiuds into boring medium size planets http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Yes, I understand it was done to balance AI which would overwise have a big advantage but still... May be let AI have large planet builder but make it longer to research ??

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

As a start, the AI Planet Creators was released with the Large and Huge=OFF for fear the AI will mount to great of an early Planet lead over the Human Players. Sunday mourning a few more Players added input to FQM asteroids balance with no-warp and we decided to go with the large and huge appearance as presented in the AIC v4.11b for the time being.

In no-warp games the AI will need ship construction 5 along with stellar manipulation 3 Large and 4 for Huge Asteroid to planet.

= = = = = = = = = = =
Components File 4.11b

Raised damage resistance on Missile Racks and Bombardment Missiles.

Missile Rack
Light Missile system designed to maximize rate of fire.
Weapon Seeker Dmg Res := 3, 4, 4, 4, 5

Bombardment Missiles
From Weapon Seeker Dmg Res := 45,55,60
_ _ _ _

Additional AI Player no-warp tweaks for FQM


((> AIC 4.11b Components update (52kb) 11-22-2003 <))

[ November 25, 2003, 16:07: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Agreed Oleg, past AIC releases the AI Players did have early access to larger Planet Creators. With the amount of Asteroids in FQM, we divided the appearance, but I am all for increasing the AI ability in this area if the players feel ok about this http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">In one game against low-bonus AIs, Eee opened a warp point to my system at the year 5.3 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif
And catched me completely unprepared http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Wow http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif
Oleg do you recall how many Planets the Eee had in its Home System, it loves to build research Colonies http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Only two. But it does not need many since low bonus gives 2X research. It is of course quite rare to have Eee next system. But even if it is far away, such earlier WP opening slow down the game considarably and it is essential, IMHO, to have first ~100 turns to proceed as fast as possible in non-conected games (I have a low level of patience http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif )

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

I have an intersting no warp point 4.11 game going atm. an "event" opened a warp point in a colony system of mine and lo and behold but either the Phong or Jeanar (sp) have opened many wp. I do know the Phong are busy building planets.

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Why do you restrict remote miners to 3 per vehicle? Isn't it punishment enough already to get material from 1 ship per sector? *hmpf* , why did I research for battle station...

FQM, excellent ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Now I would like to somehow get USM integrated. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Was organic miners for ships left out intentionally?--just curious cause i can build the mineral and rad ones for ships.

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Simple. Copy Formations.txt and DefaultStrategies.txt from USM into your AIC folder, and it is integrated. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Thanks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

PTF, we need to look at this a bit more, the AI may not be able to keep up with our remote mining; if we can have the early jump http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

However you may find the Resource Station profitable, this is granted at Industry level 3.

[ December 16, 2003, 21:53: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes Imperial, organic mining components have been excluded from ships and bases. However, you have the Habitat Domes for satellites and the Resource Station has some intrinsic Organic collection

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

JLS is back! Check your email and PMs. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Oy! The Phong and Jraenar (sp) are certainly using both stellar manipulation and some devious ship design. Large transports being used as both ship repair AND "jeep" carriers.....waaaa!

and those (*&^% Phong love to throw 1000 troops into ground combat (per transport) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Wrong http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif It is medium AI transports with 100+ fighters and repair bays. I shudder to think what they do do me with large transports http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

AI in AIC has few cards in the sleeve !

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

I know that AIC is optimized for Finite Resources, but the AI degrades too much without Finite Resources?

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">No. It works even better. JLS tweaked AI facilities to produce some resourses even after planet was mined out. In normal game it is an extra source of resources for AI which is independend from planet value. It greatly improves AI in all game setupa since it no longer build mineral miners on 1% mineral planet http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

What about the (immense) minesweeping ability of AI ship hulls?
Defending minefields don't make sense against AI fleets anymore. And if I need a good minesweeper, should I just capture an AI transporter http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif ? Did you change anything to the ship designs, like removed minesweepers, don't use mine layers etc. ?

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

The AI in AI Campaign; always handled Mine Fields very well, the direction we have been seeking is to make the AI ships displacement size less as effective compared with past AIC releases and adding many more Mine Sweepers to most of the AI fleets. In this way we can limit the Psycho AI’s violent expansions in the early game with little to no effect in the Psychos mid and late game; as they will now be at a disadvantage building far less sweepers, but will build a a few more replacement war ships http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Furthermore, after several decades of game play minefields are just an annoyance for all the AIC AI's, and the only sure defensive wall; as it would against a good Human opponent (is a comprehensive combined warp point defense with Sats, Fleets, Fighter and Drone Carriers, Bases etcetera. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Yes, good point PTF. ALL future AI designs will have the AI minesweepers vulnerable to boarding attacks... You will have this in the next update http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ January 13, 2004, 11:16: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You will find that the AI in AIC plays a very strong Finite game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

The AI does have a planed degradation, but this should be expected around 600 turns, and then it will start to decline. However, many of the AI leaders will have enough resources to continue well beyond 1000 turns. In addition, the AI finite degradation is programmable in AI Campaign; so if you desire more or less in the way of game length, please let me know and we will make adjustments.

PTF and I found after 500 turns to be the best setting. However, this was March 2002 and there has been a lot of additions and changes since then. GLV is AI Campaigns strongest Finite Proponent, his latest opinion is that the AI is Solid in all Finite game variations except (ONLY SAME TYPE starts), but then again this start may yield little for the Human Players as well http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ January 13, 2004, 11:13: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Actually your AI plays GREAT in all types of games and AI Campaign is the only MOD that the AI does not self destruct in when playing finite http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes Imperial, organic mining components have been excluded from ships and bases. However, you have the Habitat Domes for satellites and the Resource Station has some intrinsic Organic collection </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That resource Station is great, I thought it was impossible to have multi resource type extraction at the same location (((SWEET)))

Profitable to http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Thanks GLV, the Resource Station is a fine tool, and may be very useful in Finite games and most FQM games. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif


- - - -


I will structure the AI minesweeping with the delay of there capability in the research files and reduce the High displacement hull types to have less mine defenses; in this way AI strays may be easily picked off and there pop supply lines may be mined with greater success.

However, I will not remove the ability all together from the hulls; as to prevent the Human Players launching an immediate 100 mines from a planet and thereby destroying the AI’s LARGE invasion fleet and its thousands of troops and hundreds of fighters that took the AI many months to muster.
If the savvy Human Players can defeat this strategy the AI also must have this guaranteed ability http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ January 21, 2004, 14:06: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

I think it is all right as long as mines are not completely useless against AI, I mean a 100 mines (if it is restricted to that number) swept by 2 large AI transporters could be kinda overpowered and annoying.

I have got another issue now, I am not sure how the AIC community thinks about it, let's discuss...

Personally, I do not like restrictions to players at all, especially for ship designs. I mean, it is ok if it is for roleplaying matters to restrict yourself not to build things like organic armor ram ships, massive remote mining battle stations and whatnot, but I think it could be better to do this on a voluntary basis.I always remove all restrictions to numbers of components (which is almost every component), otherwise I would never build a remote mining station with only 3 miners, or a resource station - as far as I have seen it even has got a restriction to one per unit, it is just a waste in space, so I never build any of them.

EDIT: I have stopped my Last game just because of the annoying restrictions. It has been something like: I need resources, so the research goes for miners III and then battle stations - and crap, restricted to 3 per unit. Next, I have to defend against a mighty neighbor, tried 100 minefields , useless: a 20 ship fleet just sweeps everything without even a damage although they do not carry any minesweepers (a look into the AI hull designs opened my eyes). Next idea: I could defend the WPs with organic ram ships, NOTHING, again RESTRICTIONS, RESTRICTIONS and RESTRICTIONS to RESTRICTIONS. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

[ January 21, 2004, 21:00: Message edited by: PsychoTechFreak ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

I always thought the whole mine system in SEIV is rather silly and I am perfectly happy this exploit does not work against AIC AIs at all. Good ridance, just MHO.

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

You know you can always create new ship classes in the mod section - a few mods exist with new ship types etc. However i would like to see more flexibility in the ship designs aspects. A improved AI would be need - my suggestions for smart mines (with limited movement), cloaking mines (cloaking capacity) and dumb mines of course standard run of the mill mines.

Any constructive suggestions for possible patch improvements to the mines structure for the v 1.85 eare welcome.

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I agree with Oleg, the AI in se4 never dealt with mines as far as I am concerned getting rid of mines all together is fine by me if no one likes your compromise JLS.

In multiplier or solitaire games, with se4 and most MODS against an inexperienced Player or any AI, I do not even need to worry about Weapon Platforms, troops or any Planet defense just Mines.

When the AI comes around I launch 100 Mines over the Planet and the entire AI fleet is Dead http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

This is one more reason why I like AIC. The AI still gets backed up and takes losses the first 100 turns or so and then he gets better and better at Mines by turn 200 most AI Fleets are untouchable with mines.

Also the Human Players gets to play with mine fields basically just like se4 wanted it and the AI is not at a total loss. So when Playing Multplayer with an AI and one Human Player can not take advantage of the AI in AIC and the other 2 Human are fighting it out.

Actually in multiplayer I would rather be next to a Human Player then any of the AIC VIOLENT RACES.

[ January 22, 2004, 15:40: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">When I play against Human Players I never relly on Minefeilds but PTF you think it is OK against the AI?

Lets look at the AIC Numbers.

IN AIC just 20 Scouts, Escorts, Frigates, or Destroyers in any Combination with each other would NOT break thru a minefield and ALL would be LOST by that AI including any troops or units.

A Fleet of 20 Destroyers would break thru with heavy damage but a fleet of only 19 Destroyers would all be LOST. The AI allways fleets an assortment of ships so it would be rare to see (if ever) just 20 destroyers in a fleet before Carriers are out and with the fleet in AIC.

Do you have any Idea how much the average AI has in destroyers by turn 100 PTF. In a no or just a Low bonus (about 20 if that) less to NONE in most NO bonus games and can you imagine the position that AI was in when it would lose 20 ship in any mod?

Only the Pshyco and berserk AI race in AIC will come back and try it again, and thats when I go for them, and if it is early enough that they do not have the count to stop me.

But hey, this is just me, when I started the game and I new I was near a Violent race and I knew I was going to have my hands full and that’s the kind of game I like. But if I started next to Ulkra or the Eee even Sallaga, then it would be an easier game unless I ticked the friendly AIC race off.
If you do not wan't an early hard fought game then restart the game if you are near a violent race. Other wise you will need more then 100 mines to stop the Violent AI's that will continue to try to smash thru.

If you where against me you would need more then a minefeild to hide behind http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ January 22, 2004, 15:44: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">How much mining would you want PTF, you know the AI cant keep up, do you want a BASE or a SHIP to robo-mine 10000 resources well thats more then trade with any player, heck that is more then most planets can produce.

RESTRICTIONS
JLS lets start the game at Cruisers I think scouts are to restrictive.

Reduce warhead size and have 20 of them so I can take out Baseships with one tiny scout, instead just damaging them as it is now with with my one Temporal Ram scout.

I like the Resource Station, it is a first. But really, why give them only this at the most per STATION?

1800 Minerals
1800 RADS
300 Orgainics
More depending on the Planets percentage.

Per turn from one BASE and this includes auto refuiling in most systems .

I think you should raise this to 3000 even 10000 for all resources per turn per base, what would this do to a se4 game?

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

[ January 22, 2004, 15:30: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">(1)~ If you start at Medium Tech Start you will be close to what you desire GLV, please remember the AI will also be at a Medium Tech Start (However AI is slightly limited at onset)

(2) Your point is made with the Cobalt Warheads on Ram Ships GLV, however there are currently (NO) load restrictions and the values are basicly the same as stock se4.
With the addition of an option not a restriction http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif


(3)~ I feel PTF is correct here, the intrinsic minerals, Rads and could be raised on the AIC Resource Station (a little) and this will play well with Fyrons FQM maps and should not have such a large impact on the General and AIC maps.

= = =

In general what I think would happen to se4 and any MOD with to much in the way of Robo-Minning.
Force other Human Players in a Multi-Player game to match a MINNING strategy; especially in a map with many asteroids and moons. With all this Micro-management required it may make a PBM game undesirable for many and a LAN game impossible to play in the latter game.
In a game with and against the AI, we know the AI can not build Robo-Miners as per se4 constraints and this will lead to the ability to yield large fleets and overpower the AI and change the balance of a Multiplayer game dramatically.

- - -
With a modest amount resource extraction to be decided by the Players, we would like to see the classic asteroid system with the classic maps, an advantage to have; but not a game winning advantage.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ January 22, 2004, 19:24: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well, if you think using technology is cheating against AI, it can be checked off by game setup (research area). Similar to trade exploits, I do never trade with AI. Mines could be changed to be less destructive also - something like 50 maybe. Or PDF cannons could get some minesweeping ability - like in devnull. I think, if minefields are useless against AI hulls anyway, why bother to research and build them? Why not restrict the according research area at all in this case?

Component restrictions are removed altogether even to engines - especially with QNP, I like to be free to design whatever I like. Organic races should be able to create organic ships, a dreadnought with 3 org. armor components is ...
just not my game.

[ January 22, 2004, 19:21: Message edited by: PsychoTechFreak ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Thats not true. I do not recall which mod it was, but I have seen robo miner ships and stations in at least one mod a few years back...

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Good point PTF,
Shutting off mines tech is the way to go in Solitaire, if one does not want Mines. However, in a Multiplayer game some players may not want it off.

- - -
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Devnul is a awesome mod and sure that is an option, but the se4 Classic Mine strategy is not there for Humans versus Human Players. In addition when Devnuls Point Defence at 5 Mines sweeped it is actually almost doubled that of the AIC fixed AI Destroyer Hull MS capabilities of only 3. Now if we load several Devnul Pds that has no LOAD restriction to the AI design they can outsweep almost any AIC AI Hull.

AIC still attempts to preserve the se4 classic Minefield feel with out totally exploiting the AI.

- - -
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Actually you can put 5 Organic armors on any ship not 3, but I see your point.

I placed the restrictions to see how the new 1.84 se update could be utilized. Many like the Armor restrictions since AIC sports many Armour Configurations, but to be Honest with you, I also do not like this restriction and it is gone from Ships and Bases http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

- - -
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">To be honest PTF, mine fields are also almost useless against many experienced Human se4 Players as well, would you not agree? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ January 22, 2004, 20:20: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Originally posted by Paul1980au:

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">What new ships designs would you suggest for AIC?

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You have an interesting concept here. The main problem as it is now, is that many concepts may not work with the AI.

For example Anti-Engine Mines.

The AI would be crippled not destroyed and stuck at that location (no more engines), yet costing large amounts of support resources and the AI is none the wiser http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Further example: In se4 the AI calls its designs to be built by :
Planet Per Item (PPI) and Must Have At Least… Please see reference.

In this example the AI has 5 Dreadnoughts even worse 2 Colony ships as well; disabled by anti-engine mines and unable to fulfill it missions. However the AI sees this and sure it wants them repaired, but it can not get it to return to a Repair Yard. However when the AI Construction File looks at the [Must Have At Least numbers] it has the 5 Dreadnoughts and 2 Colony ships and will not fulfill any Must Have At Least orders because the ships exist.

Please remember, this AI is paying resources for the 5 Dreadnoughts and in stock se4 where only the Best and/or Largest ships is built; this may halt a majority of that Ship Types Construction.
It will certainly slow or even Halt Colony Ship Production…

The AI Ship with disabled engines is a sad sight to see http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
A designer must consider the PPI also when designing there AI race , however, not to the point where it will break the bank in the late mid to end game
(A planet may have many slots in se4, however many also only have one slot for that AI Minning Facility to support those large Capital Ships) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif


<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">SJ is working on a MOD that may have an alternative to the way Mines are currently handled and I look forward to his work.


Other then that I would like to see the Minefeilds only be placed at Warp points as to represent an area that is funneled and congested so the mine hit will make sence (to me anyway), not in open space or a few in a planets vast orbit.


= = = = = = = = =
Reference

se4 Default_AI_Construction_Vehicles

Entry X Must Have At Least:
Must have this many of this type in existance, or being built.
If not, then build more.
This comes before Planet Per Item.

AI State := Infrastructure
Num Queue Entries := 39
Entry 1 Type := Defense Base
Entry 1 Planet Per Item := 100
Entry 1 Must Have At Least := 0
Entry 2 Type := Attack Ship
Entry 2 Planet Per Item := 20
Entry 2 Must Have At Least := 2
Entry 3 Type := Colonizer
Entry 3 Planet Per Item := 80
Entry 3 Must Have At Least := 1
Entry 4 Type := Weapon Platform
Entry 4 Planet Per Item := "
Entry 4 Must Have At Least := "

[ January 22, 2004, 21:25: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Agreed PTF, we will keep at it to make it better http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

- - -
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">100 mines in a sector is the default with AIC as it is in se4, a larger setting is possible.
However the AI has a daunting task constructing and placing 100 mines per field, can you imagine the AI needing to double that effort http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Yes the Human Player can load Mine Sweeper Components in total on Medium Transports, do you recommend this be restricted?

- - -
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Thank you for the presented issues, the best way to handle Restrictions would be a one by one basis.

Ram Ship Cobalt Warheads are not restricted in AIC and you also have the ability that is restricted in se4 lifted so in AIC you may load them in total on Transports, for a neat Horatio Nelson fire ship.

Organic Armour is at 5 max, this was all discussed many months ago about restricting armor. Moreover, I am also partial to lifting the armor restriction as well. However, other players were adament about this issue as it applies to haveing restrictions on armor.

The AI is not overly effected even by its current designs by any changes with armor restrictions; so sure we have total freedom here.
However, this may yield advantages to other race types. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
Many felt that the Organics have the armor avantage at 5, plus combine this with other PvK v4.11 armors. Then the advantage is followed by the Crysteline...

The removal of the Armor restrictions will only play into the Temporals and Cryseline favor; races with early armor skiping weapons and further distence Psychic and other race advantages http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

In jest "I have tons of armor on my ships and your investment is worthless to my weapons" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif
However their claims may be just nitpicking?

Remote Mining should be modest in nature.
However, what would you recommend for possible per turn ship/base gross robo-minning net numbers with a 100% planet value?

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ January 22, 2004, 23:19: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Agreed

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">As PTF points out, you will have the option to turn off the mine tech and this works for me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

- - -
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Agreed, this is a great defense early in AIC because the AI will need more then 18 destroyers or a few carriers to blow thru one hundred mines.

It is unlikely 50 scouts or escorts even 30 or 40 Frigate can get thru a 100 minefield early in your AIC game.

Either way, any number of AI ships will sure tune up your minefield http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Also to note: The AI has several standard minesweeper designs of its own and it know how to use them (at warp points) not as good over your planet...

However, once the AI fleets Fighter Carriers the chances are greatly increase the AI will penetrate a 100 Minefield http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

- - -
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Remember the Higher the AI Bonus the faster it will reach CV techs

- - -
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Absolutely, I also would prefer starting adjacent to a Human Player then a Medium to High Bonused (Psycho or Berserker) AIC AI major Player.
Even if we have OS* and MP* starting trait Options in play for that game.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ January 22, 2004, 23:54: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">100 minefeilds are perfect

Minesweepers on transport are fine I see no reason to restrict this.

I am all for the removal of armor restrictions but then again I am a Temporal Race and this will be to my advantage. Plus the guys I play LAN games against, would like the edge they have with Organics. Besides with Component add numbers you are using se4 v1.84 update to its fullest.

You also may want to take a look at Cobalt Warheads, this may lead to exploits and restrict them somewhat.

Remote mining is good where it is IMO and AIC is designed for a more manageable ship count, raising the mining abilities will upset this and dig into LAN games.

[ January 23, 2004, 20:58: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Re: AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">No restrictions to the number of components, IMO. If you think a component is overpowered, just change it to a bigger size or more expensive.
Devnull has got 500 mines per sector; it is always a matter of balancing minesweeping ability and size of minefields. I do not use it often, it is just a kind of Last resort sometimes in the early game.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You don't play finite resources, do you?