intelligence projects chances of success
 

Seems that one is unable to perform an intelligence mission (sabotage, crew mutinery...) against an empire with intelligence level equal or a bit lower than yours. Nethertheless, that's what I saw in my Last game. your opinion ?

EB

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

It depends how many points they are putting in counter-intel as opposed to attacking. If they have a lot more points than you, but spend them all on attacks, you can get through.

Phoenix-D

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It means that, if you have more intel points than another empire, and if you concentrate all your intel actions against this empire, you will manage to suceed your attacks ?

Do counter intel works only where they are over, or each turn the project is active ?

EB

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

Intelligence projects take place when they are complete, not while completing them.
If your enemy has 100 000 saved intel points and gets 1000 each turn. and you spend 2000 points you will get:
100 000 -(1000-2000)*turns
and that gives you 100 turns to break even and on turn 101 success.
If he has 190 000 and his counter intel projects finishes at 200 000, and you happen to strike when he has passed 200 000 points with 2000 points when he places 1000 pints you succed imediatly.

(These numbers are hypothetical, note that you don't use these points on the enemy until your project is complete!)

[ January 15, 2003, 21:26: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

CI works by using the points stored in the CI projects. The level of the CI project multiplies the effectiveness of it (CI III with 100k points can block 300k points of attacks, plus the normal 20% bonus to CI projects, for 360k). You have to spend points in at least one CI project during a turn for any points in them to be used for defense.

CI blocks attacks by using up the points stored in the CI projects. A 50k attack lowers the points stored in a CI project by 50k (modified by level and such). If you have more points stored than the total cost of all intel projects against you in a given turn, you will defeat all of those projects.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

Welcome back trooper, havent heard from you in a while.

There is a bonus given to counter intelligence. If you exactly match them, or slightly exceed them in intel income, you will never beat 12 counter intel projects.

Build more intel facilities. Destroy some of theirs.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

I was "busy" playing CIV III (but it can't compare SE IV !), looking for a job or preparing my marriage.
But now I want to play back SE IV again...

IA races seem to put lot of intel points in CI projects, aren't they ?

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

Trooper, I'm glad you asked this. I did not understand it as well.
Um, the following statement seems to have a couple of conflicting refferances. Have you seen the "Addition Thread"? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
"looking for a job or preparing my marriage.
But now I want to play back SE IV again..."

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Were does this info come from? I have read this now in several threads but I have found that my agents seem to block Intel attacks even though my CI project is at the bottom of the stack and had 0 points added to it in the current and previous turns.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

I find all this CI stuff very confusing. My hope for SEV would be to do away with intelligence and CI projects altogether, and just give you a 'to chance' for intelligence missions and CI, based on the number and quality of your facilities, and possibly actual intelligence units manning your planets. It's much more informative to initiate an espionage attack and get an option window telling you what your percentage chance of success or failure is, than to conduct projects and hope you have enough stored points or whatever so that they will work. Also more realistic, IMO.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

I like intel projects. I like to decide if I will ruin a planet, kill population, or just spy on the empire's designs. I sure wish tech stealing was wor useful.

I realize the intel projects is a little hokey. I would like it if counter intel was automatic based on number of facilities or something.

One thing I never understood in any 4X game (and by that I mean SE3, SE4 and GalCiv/OS2 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif ), is how just building intel facilities gets you intelligence points.

Would US CIA be better if there were more CIA buildings nationwide? Not really, what works is sources in the field. IMHO, intel should be improved by building facilities near the empire you're spying on, not a megopolis near your home planet.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

It's abstracted. each facility represents a number of field operative. the planet the facility is built on represents their home town. that make it easier?

I also have had CI block an attack when it did NOT have any points going towards it. I intentionally put a project that was more than I was producing in a turn in front of my CI project, and CI still stopped the attack because of the accumulated amount. This makes more sence anyway than having to HAVE to complete any other projects in front in order for it to work. Test it out for yourself Fyron. you'll see. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif (will make you a happy camper 4 sure) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

now if I could just figure out how much CI I have accumulated then I would be estactic.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

One of the primary questions in this thread was not addressed, perhaps because few know the answer. Even after a player has broken through an opponent's CI, there is still a chance of success or failure. I have run enough intel missions that have failed for reasons outside of the CI of my target. For instance, I would guess that the chance of success on a Puppet Political Parties operation is considerably less than that for Covert Recon or Ship Bomb. What that chance is for any of these, THAT is something I would like to see. I would like to learn, on top of a success or failure, how does the game determine that the target learns of an attack, and then if they know who ran the operation on them?

You cannot say that intel only represents field operatives. Intelligence derives most of its strength not from field operatives (those who gather or report information) but from those people who can analyze a great deal of data, sift out the more likely truths from the less likely, the inaccuracies and the misinformation, and come up with an assessment of situations. As for the number of intel facilities, the CIA (to use that example) doesn't only exist at Langley. That is a administrative center, but there are many branch offices, in the US and around the world (some visible, some no doubt hidden). The more "facilities", the better to recruit, train, analyze, collect, disseminate...pretty much all the activities of an intelligence force for a government.

All this being said, the SEIV intel seems too much of a numbers game. Generally, the races that excel in intel also already possess excessive resource and research generation, so there are few instances where a race strictly dedicated to intel can Last. And an already powerful empire will just be that much better defended and threatening through the sheer size of its intel.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

Cheeze, the only project that has a chance to fail once it gets past the CI is the Puppet Political Parties (50% failure rate). All other projects have a 100% chance of success.

Did you guys have points going into a different CI project though? Cause I did say:

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If you are spending points in CI Project X, points in CI Project Y will be useable for defense. SE4 takes the points out of the Last CI project in the queue first, so this could easliy cause your confusion. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

I know that the workings of CI have always been difficult to understand sometimes. I don't think you have to spend points on any CI project to have it work - so long as it has stored points in it. I routinely place 2 CI projects which are filled with lots of points at the end of the intelligence queue and do not apply points evenly. I normally place enough intelligence attacks before them such that no points will make it to the CI projects. I do this to ensure that I don't accidentally complete a CI project. In no case have I ever seen an attack get thru until all CI points are used up. As an aside, I notice that the CI points are "used up" starting from the rightmost CI project and move left. This is useful if you have a CI2 and CI3 running at the same time (CI2 still had points in it when I got CI3) I just keep the CI2 project at the rightmost slot until it empties and then replace it with a CI3 because it is more effective. When my CI projects get "low", I will reorder the queue to recharge them.

I think there is also confusion on the chances of success. I too believe that all of the attacks are 100% unless blocked by CI except PPP, which is 50%. BUT an attack can fail even if it got thru the enemy CI if it had no available targets Example: you have been using Crew Insurrection relentlessly on an opponent and suddenly you have all your attacks fail because he has no ships left! I think a more correct way of saying it is that all (except PPP) will succeed at 100% if they overcome CI and they have a legitimate target.

The system is definitely not intuitive. I too would like to see the exact number of points in the CI projects. Also the all-or-nothing aspect does make it somewhat unrealistic.

Slick.

[ January 17, 2003, 07:55: Message edited by: Slick ]

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

These are not guesses on my part. This is how the system works, as gleaned from nearly 2 years of browsing on this forum. Everyone that I have ever seen post on this that knows how it works has posted the same things I have. I have seen this in action myself. Unless a major change was made in the latest patch that no one is aware of, how I described the CI system is how it works. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

I think I'm totally lost in intelligence concepts !

To be brief :

- the best strategy for CI is to always have an active CI project, without necessarly putting Intel points in it each turn

- The best strategy to succeed one's Intel attacks is to perform as many attacks as possible, in order to consume the enemy CI points storage ?

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

You need to spend points in at least 1 CI project each turn to get the points stored in all CI projects to function.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, if it completes it's points one turn before an enemy completes one of theirs, then its wasted

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That's true. Although, taking out enemy planets with intel facilities on them works much better

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">In the situation I was refering too I had one CI project that was at the bottom of the stack and thus having 0 points put into it. It had been that way for several turns and I got a message in game "Counter Intelligence - Our opperatives were able to stop a sabotage attack..."
I've got too assume maybe this was changed recently or else there is some other reason it could be stopped because I agree I have read what you describe in several threads.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes, not to beat a dead horse or be a jerk about it. But I am also certain I have gotten those Messages and seen the amount of CI in the rightmost project get lowered without having points being entered into any CI projects. This would indicate that CI is effective without actively adding points each turn. I have seen this in every game I have played because I normally set up my intel in a similar manner.

IF I do appeciate and value your experience. You have posted numerous answers to questions here and I highly respect your Posts. Possibly we have stumbled onto something that we are both finding to be true but conflicting due to the way we set up intel ??? I will do some testing and post the results.

One thing that I have not tested outright is if an incoming attack completely drains a given CI project, but you have other CI projects with enough points, does the attack get through or does the 2nd CI project pick up defending where the Last one left off...

Slick.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You can set them to restart. Many people don't do that, for outher reasons. If you are generating lots of intel points, they may be able to defeat a project that completes on turn later.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">In the situation I was refering too I had one CI project that was at the bottom of the stack and thus having 0 points put into it. It had been that way for several turns and I got a message in game "Counter Intelligence - Our opperatives were able to stop a sabotage attack..."
I've got too assume maybe this was changed recently or else there is some other reason it could be stopped because I agree I have read what you describe in several threads.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

Means you are absolutely vulnerable with 11 filled CI projects at the end of the queue and just one intel attack project in progress in slot 1. An extremely annoying process, as well as the CI projects delete themselves if they are completed.

Improvements, pleeeaaaase!

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

Points will be used from the next CI project just as if they are one project.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You may have hit the nail on the head. because I KNOW the CI protection works even if nothing is going to the project.
(from memory)
I was producing about 27k intel points.
I placed the 50k ship insurrection at the first slot. I said it would take 2 turns to complete.
After that, was my CI project with sufficient points accumulaed.
end turn
i get the message 3 different intel attacks were stopped. Much to my supprise as i was expecting that turn for them to go through based on the "must apply some" rule. I took the chance hopeing it would not be too bad.
(end memory fishing trip)
All things considering, Since I have the Phong attacking me almost every turn, I will double check, just in case I am mistaken, but i don't think i am. I just did an intel set-up to quick check it on my current game, and wouldn't you know it, they didn't attack this turn. figures.

[ January 18, 2003, 05:11: Message edited by: couslee ]

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

Ok, I just tested it, and there seems to have been a change to CI that no one was aware of in the Last patch (or at least I wasn't). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif It does indeed work if no points are being put into it in a turn.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

Well, for those that have played this game for a while, "WHAT A NICE SUPPRISE" for you.

I can just hear Fyron saying..... "ok u twits, your in trouble now!". lol

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

Why is such an important change not mentioned in the history.txt file????

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

I don't know, and that is what confused me. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

thats easy to explain. they gave you a nice easter egg. lmao. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Great job! I confirmed the same with similar testing. I will summarize the important parts of this discussion and add to the FAQ.

Slick.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

Provided the target race can NOT stop the attack.

I am going to try and steal some technology. Now I know that there is still a chance of failure beyond the CI measures. My question is,

Is the chance of failure greater if I choose a specific tech, as opposed to selecting "any tech" and taking whatever I might get?

Same question would apply to a specific ship VS any ship, ect...

[ January 21, 2003, 09:36: Message edited by: couslee ]

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Be prepared for disappointment. The attack requires lots of points, so it takes a long time. What do you get if their tech level is the same as yours -- nothing that's what.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

Hmmmmm

Here the Newbies would have the advantage for a change. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

But not all newbies. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Myself, I sat at the feet of the hallowed veterans who pontificated on having to please the god of CI's. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

And imbibed the esoteric knowledge of having to put make sacrifices to CI projects on every turn so that I could be assured that the CI god would give me its blessing. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

yes, I have already done the sacrificial intel project with hopes the Last one to go through would indeed go through. Already got that part figured out.

Indeed, when I set the game up I selected player can view all scores, and the target race in this situation is not using any intel, tho I will still slip a minor one in front of the tech steal, just in case it has some points from treaties.

before putting the steal tech in the queue, i did a tech report intel, and they are 2 advances ahead of me in one field.

Therefore, I am fairly sure the attack will surpass counter measure, and i am certain they have tech I can use. So, once those pre-reqs were in place I checked the board for an answer to the question. Didn't find it, so posted it.

Now, I know the actual percentage of chance is elusive. But, the question was just which has a greater chance of sucess: The "any ole tech" choice, or a selecting a specific(the one they have me beat on) line. or, does it not matter, the chance is the same.

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

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If I am not mistaken it will still be the same chances of success. I could be wrong though, as I am not a Intel expert.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

/rant on
WELL, thats was fracking stupid! as stated, I KNOW this race has tech I can use. I had this information BEFORE sending in the operatives. WHY would they try and steal tech from chemistry, when intel shows they have 2 levels above me in sensors.

Considering the COST of this intel attack, I hope this BS is addressed. A steal tech action that gets through CI measures, and is sucessfull beyond the chance of failure for the action, it should be sucessfull in an area that advanced tech is available. NOT some area the other race is behind in. This makes the attemt of tech stealing completly useless. I can discover the damn tech faster than it would take for a sucessfull intel attackt to get it. The cost of the attack and the chance of failure after that, are quite enough hurdles to overcome. Surpassing those two, should reward you (the player) with a @*^%#$@!# tech.

And as a side note, selecting "any tech" should have an even greater chance (talking about the second hurdle) than a specific area. the operative hackers just perusing the data files would find a new tech easier than having to look for a specific tech. it makes more sence, and it provides game enjoyment. the way this Last one went was BS IMNSHO.
/rant off

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">A possible reason why the effort to hard code this is not implemented ... you could possibly advance in tech before it was complete.

Some people would definitely prefer to improve the playability of the intel aspect of SE4.

Colour me curious, but indifferent -- if I want to play intel wars, I'll look for that game.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">(1) I am not sure what you mean by this. if your thinking I feel I should have recieved two advances, that is not my POV. A single level advance is fine, and they would still be one level ahead.

(2). no argument there. lol

(3) No offence intended, but that is a sorry excuse for poor programming. I do enjoy Intel/probe team/whatever actions, and that have been a part of 4x genre' for a long time. If they didn't want to spend the time on it, then they should not have put it in the game and or saved it for the expansion packs/next Versions. But, since they chose to put it in the game, they should not do the half-assed job with intel that they did. there are a lot of features in this game, and intel is one of those. The same comment could be said about the build queue not having carry-over of surplus construction, or the inability to choose a more specific number with building units (IE, if you want to build 7 police, it takes 3 turns. one at 5, 2 at 1) and one could argue that insterad of improving the game and addressing those issues that the CUSTOMERS have complained about, that they should look for the game "queue continuum".

I realise that SE4 is not for everyone. And if i find the game is beyond my liking to the extent i find no fun in it, I will move on to another game. However, i have enjoyed the game, but find certain aspects that piss me off. This being one of them. I hope these and all the other issues are addressed in the next pacth. I know some will make it in, some won't. but the only way they know what is aggravating to the customer, is if they tell them. And BBs are a normal place for people to rant about such things. I have the distinct impression MM/schrapnel cares about their customers a lot more than some game companies, and am sure they read these Boards. even if they don't, their beta testers do and can carry ideas and suggestions back to the company.

If they don't care and are only interested in the big-money-grip, that too will become apparent. and tho they got me for one game, does not mean they would do it twice. Furaxis is a prime example of that. I won't buy their games, because I have seen how they treat their customers.

I am still going to play, and I am still going to complain when I find things I dislike, and I am still going to praise the fun aspects and patch work that a company does. If you notice I don't post anymore, then I will have moved on. But that being a personal choice, and should have no impact on your own enjoyment of the game. If you like it better than a 5yr old likes PBJ snadwiches, then I am happy for you.

[ January 21, 2003, 20:09: Message edited by: couslee ]

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

couslee, consider the possibility that if intel was more powerful, then it would be too unbalancing. Whoever built the most facilities could do anything. As it stands now, more effort gives you a greater chance to succede, but the benefit of success is not enough to make or break you.

Example, Geo made this scenario called Awakening. Basically, the AI starts the game with tons of planets and tech, you start with 2 moons. Once the AI meets you, it starts bombing you with intel -- fortunately, all it gets is a few bombs off in some ships. If it was "smart", the scenario would be dull fast. If intel could achieve anything, you'd soon have nothing if you were'nt guick enough -- hence my name for this new game "Intel Wars"

There is something of a pattern emergeing in the way MM has implemented intel -- annoyances, not massive attacks.

[ January 21, 2003, 20:29: Message edited by: Arkcon ]

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

I agree if intel is overpowered that it can ruin a game by unbalancing it. That was not the jist of my rant. My complaint was after:
One: the cost of the intel attack was met, and this is not a cheap attempt.
Two: I was able to surpass any CI that the AI race had (or human, if PBW for that matter).
Three: I was lucky enough to not have the attempt fail anyway.
Having overcome those three hurdles, the attack should net some benefit for the player. otherwise, your left with the feeling of a double penalty. Now, that as opposed to the cost of the next tech level using reasearch is less than the cost of the intel attack. I feel that the intel is underbalanced. There is a happy medium. you find it in other games of the same genre' it is missing here. I doubt it would be that hard to code the intel to be more balanced than it is. I am not a programmer, but wouldn't a simple check by the game for advanced tech (in line) after the other stops are passed be a simple matter. it already look at the tech options, if the game had human eyes, it would see the greyed out tech. The game does not need human eyes to see that. and only seeing/reading available advances is not something that would have to be shown to the player either.
is that a little more clear?

Edit in:
there are already stops in place that eliminate "who ever builds the most wins". those being the multipliers for CI, and the chance of failure built into each attempt even after passing CI.

[ January 21, 2003, 20:53: Message edited by: couslee ]

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

I know that was the way it was in 1.67

Perhaps this change came with the conVersion to seiv gold.

But counter intel has worked that way for quite a while

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

As you've discovered, never tell your intel agents to steal 'any technology' - always tell them exactly what area to go for. The random element inherent in 'any technology' is huge (and annoying), as most of the time you'll already have the techs they steal.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

Lol Wanderer. excellent point, and well taken.

The reason I chose "any tech" was based on the possible assumption that it would have a greater chance of sucess with the "third hurdle".
I still think that could be programmed in as well, along with the sucessfull attack actually giving you something.
Sure, in my example, I would have loved to got the sensor advance, but any other advance would also have been fine. having a "sucessfull" attack net nothing is... poor.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

something else I noticed, I wonder what impact it has, if any.

if you have combat with another race, the tech levels for the ship you fought show up on the "tech" tab when looking at that race's info. When you have a successfull "tech report" intel attack, that information is not added to the tech tab for the race. Personally, I think it should, but whatever.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

I used intel to steal technology quite frequently in my current game and if the projects were successful always got quite valuable new technology (as stellar manipulation). And I used as you the "any" option! Perhaps I was just lucky.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If you click on your own race, the tech tab actually says 'technology used on our ships' not 'all the technology we know'. I guess the same applies to other races, even though it says 'known technology'. I agree with you that it would be good if was expanded to show all techs you know they've got.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Lucky *******! It's not done anything like that for me! Ever.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Sounds like it. during those games, did your race setting have any "cleverness" bounses? Not that I am even going to attempt the math, but perhaps a 5% cleverness bonus also gives a hidden 10% increase in chance to snoop sucessfully... as example.
hell, even a 1% increase in the chance of passing hurdle 3 would make a big difference.

I "beta played" this for a while, since I had the game saved. and made a new save after each turn. I kinda wanted to see how the chance of sucess was. only that first time, and about the eighth time did I get a useless tech. the other 8 tries (I did it for ten turns) i recived the message "nothing valuable" found, meaning it didn't pass hurdle 3. now if that attempt only has a 20% chance of sucess, then you certainly should get a good tech when sucessfull

I realise the 10 attempts is not enough of an event base for determining chance percentages.

maybe I was just that unlucky. naw, this should be fixed imo. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

Couslee, no my race has "average" cunning.
This is a strange difference I can't explain. The intel stealing of foreign technology was so effective in my game that I stopped doing it because I felt it too easy and unfair against the AI empires!
Are you absolutely sure that the target empire has technology that is useful for you (racial tech e.g. will not be useful). Probably a stupid question but I can't think of any other explanation.

Re: intelligence projects chances of success
 

Q, that is a good question. But not the case in my game. I did a sucessfull tech report before even trying to steal anything. I knew that if they didn't have any advanced tech, I would be wasing a lot of intel for nothing. The tech report came back showing they had level 3 in scaners. I only had researched to level 1. Scanners is not a racial tech, and unless sucessfull tech reports lie (I doubt that) then they certainly had an advance.

After my 10 turns or so beta playing of it. I gave it a shot using the specific target instead of "any tech" and stole sensors 3 on the first attempt (I had since researched level 2).

It is quite possible the problem lies in the "any tech" selection. During the beta-playing, I even preceeded the steal attemt with a tech report, tho not every time. And even when the tech report showed an area more advanced, the steal attempt still would fail. Now, I don't remember if that 8th or so attempt had a tech report first. I may have stopped bothering with them at that point after getting a number of sucessfull tech reports and the steal attempt stating "we did not find anything usefull". I believe that message is the same as "our attempt failed" that you see with other intel actions. Not once did the tech steal show "attempt failed", just "we didn't find anything usefull". Hurdle 3.