Bug or Feature: Multiple Ship Training Facilities

[Nodachi]

It all boils down to what's fair, in the end -- taking advantage of that oversight is definitely unfair, in my opinion.

How is it unfair if everyone can do it?

[PvK]

My opinion is that it doesn't make sense that the only way to stack training facility abilities is to colonize a planet and moon at the same location. It's rather difficult for me to rationalize how that would make any sense. So, I'd say it's a bug. Either that, or it's a bug not to be able to do it on a single planet.

PvK

[DirectorTsaarx]

Originally posted by The High Gryphin:
Reguarding "Sporting"
At the beging of the game we are on equal foottings with the designers of the AI.
If we want the added defensive bonus the way the AI is given it, then that is the time to take it. In doing so we make the same tradeoffs that the designer of the AI had to make.
During the game, the AI is unlikely to take advantage of a Training Faciity if it does build one.
At that point it becomes, FMPS, (For My Play Style), unsporting to use them.
That said, I must conceed there are many things a human can not avoid doing that the AI can not / will not do.

Well, given that at least one of the FREE cultures provides offensive and defensive bonuses, there isn't much of a tradeoff at game setup to gaining those bonuses. I don't use those cultures, nor do I "buy" gains in those fields mainly to avoid having that (rather major) advantage over the AI's that don't use those gains either. However, I'm not willing to completely cripple my playing by not using a training facility to give my warships an equal footing with an AI opponent that DOES have the combat bonus advantages.

And I agree about it being difficult to avoid doing things the AI has trouble with; after all, I don't (and most other players probably don't) generally limit my research and/or intelligence production to 100,000 points, or create mining colonies on planets with low mineral resource values, or put resource bonus facilities on planets that can only hold a maximum of 2-3 facilities.

Of course, I also only play SE4 for 4-6 hours a week (on average; some weeks I don't play at all, and others I manage to play a couple hours a day). So I'm a little more willing to take advantage of the AI than other people, simply because I want to maximize my enjoyment during my limited gaming time.

Having said that, I still try to allow the AI to keep up by giving the AI at least medium bonus, expanding my colonies MUCH more slowly, and spending most of my time and resources on infrastructure rather than combat.

Another point (a bit more on topic): against the AI, I'd probably avoid the tactic of building multiple ship training facilities in the same sector. Forcing my ships & fleets to spend up to 7 turns in training before engaging the enemy preserves a LITTLE challenge, since it gives the enemy that much more time to build/send fleets into my systems...

And a final observation/question - do planets get an offensive bonus? I had a couple of legendary (40-50% experience) ships in an elite (25-30% experience) fleet that got completely mauled by some weapon platforms (the weapon platform mounts with extended range really help the AI defend planets). Ships that rarely got hit by spaceships were being hit by more than half of the planet's weapons.

[Rollo]

Originally posted by DirectorTsaarx:
...And a final observation/question - do planets get an offensive bonus? I had a couple of legendary (40-50% experience) ships in an elite (25-30% experience) fleet that got completely mauled by some weapon platforms (the weapon platform mounts with extended range really help the AI defend planets). Ships that rarely got hit by spaceships were being hit by more than half of the planet's weapons.

Yes, WPs get a bonus to hit. 40/60/80 for large/heavy/massive mounts.

Rollo

[DirectorTsaarx]

Originally posted by Rollo:
Yes, WPs get a bonus to hit. 40/60/80 for large/heavy/massive mounts.

Rollo

Thanks - I probably should have looked that up in the data files rather than asking... guess I'm just feeling lazy...

[Pax]

Originally posted by Spuzzum:
It all boils down to what's fair, in the end -- taking advantage of that oversight is definitely unfair, in my opinion. Shard cannons and shield depleters don't convey an unfair advantage, since you spent all of the work to research them and everything, so you have every right to stick them on the same ship.

What you originally asserted was to the effect of, "since the game does not explicitly allow it, it should be considered implicitly forbidden" ... which is a whole 'nother bag ofmonkeys than the above.

As for earning teh 'right' to use it: well, you have to (a) find a two-moon world, (b) build three colonisers ships of the proper type, (c) spend minerals to build the requisite facilities (to get maximum benefit you must conver the atmosphere, which means not only minerals for the facility, but tons of research too!). Then you likely have to invest significant resources into defending the sector, and the system it is in ... because, if you defend the sector but leave the system open to stellar manipulation, you are begging to have a new nebula or black hole created ...

Putting multiple training facilities in a single location, on the other hand, requires no real in-game resources -- it's a trick masterminded by a player. You didn't earn that ability to build multiple things in the same sector; you discovered it out-of-character, then manipulated it to your whims.

See above for rebuttal of in-game resources issue.

The combination of shield disruptors and shard cannons is also from an "out of character" observation, so that objection isn't one I'll even bother rebutting (no offense meant).

I can't say that I speak for Aaron, but isn't this common sense? The whole ploy is a lot like Microsoft, in a way -- if they find a convenient little loophole that allows them to defeat their competitors, it might be legal, but they're still a tyrant.

The thing is, this isn't a loophole. Maybe it is unintentional behavior. However, maybe it is entirely intentional ... ! After all, short of atmosphere conVersion, moons aren't worth all that much, really.

In any case, being a newbie around here, I doubt anyone will take me very seriously, so I'll withdraw from this argument before I start getting pithy and annoyed. ;-P

No more a newbie than I am. I've been here less than a week, myself!

[Gryphin]

Folks,
I would like to withdraw the word
"Sporting".
I now feel that is too strong a word.
What I guess this comes down to is:
How we each play against the AI.