intelligence projects chances of success - Page 4

Slick · #31 January 18th, 2003, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
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). It does indeed work if no points are being put into it in a turn.

Great job! I confirmed the same with similar testing. I will summarize the important parts of this discussion and add to the FAQ.

Slick.

couslee · #32 January 21st, 2003, 11:35 AM

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 ]

Arkcon · #33 January 21st, 2003, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by couslee:
I am going to try and steal some technology. ...

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.

tbontob · #34 January 21st, 2003, 06:15 PM

Hmmmmm

Here the Newbies would have the advantage for a change.

But not all newbies.

Myself, I sat at the feet of the hallowed veterans who pontificated on having to please the god of CI's.

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.

couslee · #35 January 21st, 2003, 07:04 PM

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.

Ragnarok · #36 January 21st, 2003, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by couslee:

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.

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.

couslee · #37 January 21st, 2003, 08:08 PM

/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

Arkcon · #38 January 21st, 2003, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by couslee:
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.

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.

couslee · #39 January 21st, 2003, 10:02 PM

Quote:

(1) A possible reason why the effort to hard code this is not implemented ... you could possibly advance in tech before it was complete.

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

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

(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 ]

Arkcon · #40 January 21st, 2003, 10:11 PM

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 ]