AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent

[Alneyan]

From what I have seen, great job JLS! I have the feeling I will love the first option, as I tend to be quite lazy from time to time.

For now, I have only one query: how Maintenance is supposed to be working? It seems like the Maintenance characteristic doesn't do much. Here are a couple of examples:

* 100: costs nothing, upkeep 10%
* 105: costs 500 points, upkeep 9,5%
* 115: costs 2900 points, upkeep 8,5%
* 130: costs 5900 points, upkeep 7,0%
Culture neutral for every test, and the test was done with a ship needing 1000 mineral. The results for the upkeeps are accurate with a margin of 0,1% , although I could redo them with a more expensive ship. The results were checked by the organic and rad costs and the upkeep for these two resources.

So, a point in Maintenance reduces the upkeep by 0,1%, while Maintenance costs 300 points after 108. Isn't this cost a bit too much? Or am I missing something really obvious JLS?

Yes, I do need to live up to my status of Most Annoying Black Hole.

[oleg]

Yes, it is indeed seems to be more profitable to invest in production. What ship type did you use ?
I wonder if low maintenace hulls (like small transports) or expensive (like colony ships) make any difference ?

[Alneyan]

There are circumstances under which maintenance is slightly more useful though, but even then, the difference isn't really important. And likewise, I believe that increasing resource production is more important when you don't have much ships and you are building a lot of ships and/or facilities. (In the early game for instance)

However, thanks very much Oleg, you made me realize I picked a "maintenance reduced" ship Now redoing my calculations. Sorry for my silliness. *Grumbles*

EDIT: Actually, almost all ships are using a "Reduced maintenance" ability according to the vehiclesize file, but not all show that ability in their descriptions. Thus partially explaining my mistake. (Only partially since I could have checked that is)

[ October 24, 2003, 15:23: Message edited by: Alneyan ]

[JLS]

What you say in regards to maintenance for AIC has merit, AI Campaign holds this value at a premium as we discussed in an earlier post. The importance of the Engineering Section and Maintenance Facilities play an important and timely role through out your game.
Oleg is correct as your ships increase in cost so will your maintenance expenses. We will always consider do I really need to have CT or Jacketed engines on the workhorse’s such as Transports, Freighters etc. You will be surprised the planning needed to maintain a balanced budget.

If you also notice, Resource Producing Facilities have been increased a little, and yes increased resource gathering characteristics will yield the immediate profit, but there is a much broader effect on this value throughout your AIC game in regards to Mining, Farming, and Refining Characteristics not only in Finite but also the Standard starts as well

[ October 24, 2003, 15:47: Message edited by: JLS ]

[JLS]

Originally posted by oleg:
[b]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JLS:


NEW~Races that you wish not to start your next random game; Place in the [Pictures folder/Race removed from play folder].

BAD idea - SEIV MUST have at least 20 races in pictures folder. If it has less than 20, weird things can happen !

---

It has worked totally fine, you move the Races you do not want to play to the not wanted folder, but you are correct; plus your race there must be at least:
3 Races in a Low AI Player game
7 Races in a medium AI Player game
12 Races in a High AI Player game

Other wise you may have a duplicate AI player, but if you have 13 Races at all times in your Race directory you will never have a Problem since that is what the default high Player Settings are set at (12).

Neutrals always should maintain 6, otherwise you may have a duplacate in a Med possably a High Player game

Thanks Oleg, I will add that 13 minimum Races are needed in your Primary [Pictures/Race Folder]

REFERENCE

Minimum Computer Player Low Setting := 1
Maximum Computer Player Low Setting := 3
Minimum Computer Player Medium Setting := 4
Maximum Computer Player Medium Setting := 7
Minimum Computer Player High Setting := 8
Maximum Computer Player High Setting := 12

Minimum Neutral Player Low Setting := 1
Maximum Neutral Player Low Setting := 3
Minimum Neutral Player Medium Setting := 2
Maximum Neutral Player Medium Setting := 10
Minimum Neutral Player High Setting := 3
Maximum Neutral Player High Setting := 6

[ October 24, 2003, 15:50: Message edited by: JLS ]

[Alneyan]

All these tests were done with a Neutral Culture, using a Starbase whose cost is exactly 20,000 mineral and 5,000 radioactives. The maintenance reduction of this ship is -50% according to the vehiclesize file.

Here are the results for a few values:
* 100: modified upkeep is 50, base upkeep 100
* 110: modified upkeep is 45, base upkeep 90
* 120: modified upkeep is 40, base upkeep 80
And so on.

So, a point in Maintenance actually decreases the base upkeep by 1. However, as all ships have a reduced upkeep, calculating the efficiency of increasing maintenance compared to increasing resource production will be a bit hard.

In the case of the Star Base (the most expensive ship to maintain):
* 110% maintenance costs 1400 points and reduces effective upkeep by 10% (9000 instead of 10000 here).
* 110% resource production costs 750 points and would have the same effect.
* 120% maintenance costs 4400 points and reduces effective upkeep by 20% (8000 instead of 10000 here)
* 120% resource production costs 1500 points. It is still cheaper to increase resource production than increasing maintenance.
* After that, a +10% decrease in maintenance costs 3000 points while a +10% increase in resource productions costs 3200 points. (If you DO need to increase organics as well)

A bit below in the post there were results with the Scout, and they were quite the same. Hmm... My previous results seem to not be that flawed, or the problem lies in my maths skills. Your choice.

And the Star Base is the most expensive ship to maintain, that is to say, the one which is most affected by upkeep reduction. And as you have pointed out JLS, there is an Engineering Section which improves maintenance, thus also reducing the need to increase the Maintenance characteristic. (I am not sure how this one is working though with regards to the formulas)

I don't understand your Last phrase though. How increasing resource production instead of decreasing upkeep could affect a standard game? But you do raise a valid point, as it may be useful to decrease upkeep in finite game in order to save resources. I cannot speak about Finite games though, as I seldom play them, so I will let someone else speak about these ones.

EDIT: here is a little, more practical example. Let's say you want to build 10 Star Bases, each requiring 10,000 minerals. You have 10 Space Yards, and each base is built in four turns. (2,500 minerals used each turn) Your mineral production is of 20,000 minerals.

- First case: you have a +20% bonus in resource production. You are now producing 25,000 minerals, enough to build all the Star Bases. When they are built, you will spend 50,000 minerals to maintain them. Meaning your economy will collapse in no time, but that's another problem.

- Second case: you have a -20% reduction in upkeep costs. You will have trouble when building the Bases, as you don't have quite enough minerals. (Hmm, it won't happen often in the game, only when you are paying little or no upkeep at all, when maintenance reduction is therefore useless. That is seldom the case, only in the early game or so.) Still, when the stations are built, you will spend 40,000 minerals each turn. You have a deficit of 20,000 mineral each turn, while in the first case, the deficit is 25,000.

- However, for the same price in points or slightly less (I assume you won't increase organic production much), you can have as much as 140 in resource production. You now have 32,000 mineral at your disposal each turn, resulting in a final deficit or 18,000 mineral. That's slighty better than in the second case, where the shortage of minerals was 20,000 minerals.

The bottom line is that maintenance can effectively be more useful than resource production, but it tends to only happen when upkeep is above your income as in the previous example. (And if you want to be really mean, you may increase the upkeep in the example even more. But if your upkeep is twice as important as your income, you are in serious trouble no matter what. )

However, there could be another factor, this time involving trade. But calculating the pros and cons of increasing Political Savvy over reducing maintenance is next to impossible. And perhaps there are circumstances under which upkeep is more important than increased resource production. (Circumstances which do not lead to an economical collapse, contrary to the example above though) Perhaps when you have either a swarm of low cost ships or a few, expensive vessels?

[ October 24, 2003, 16:05: Message edited by: Alneyan ]

[Alneyan]

That's definitively too long a post. I should try to sum up... Of course, I hope there are no major flaws in my reasoning. (The problem with the Scout ship wasn't probably one, as the effectiveness of increase in maintenance were the same, if you take into accounts percentages. But it wasn't really a bright idea though)

* Maintenance is too expensive cost-wise, especially above threshold, compared to resource production. (Which don't suffer much from the threshold, while the increase in cost for maintenance is... well, threefold)
* Maintenance is only becoming effective (compared to points, as 140 in resource production is more or less as expensive as 120 in Maintenance, if you don't go too high in Organic production) when the upkeep is much higher than your income. Not a good situation to be in for obvious reasons.
* Maintenance will be more useful than resource production if you are relying heavily on trade. Knowing if Political Savvy is more interesting than maintenance decrease depends mostly on the circumstances, as having a single weak partner isn't the same thing as having T&R treaties with 19 huge Empires.
* Maintenance is likely more effective in finite games, but I cannot speak about such games.
* Resource production isn't working in all circumstances. If you are an adept of remote-mining, increasing maintenance can be a wise move. Again it depends on how much of your income comes from remote-mining.
* Maintenance may be more useful under special circumstances. I am trying to see a credible circumstance under which resource production is less useful than increasing maintenance. (Except for remote-mining and trade, although who knows, I might try to delve into these matters as well. )
* And finally, what did you mean by your Last few words JLS here?

Originally posted by JLS:

[...] But there is a much broader effect on this value throughout your AIC game in regards to Mining, Farming, and Refining Characteristics not only in Finite but also the Standard starts as well

[ October 24, 2003, 16:20: Message edited by: Alneyan ]

[JLS]

Also to recapitulate:
Foundationally speaking, the base Maintenance Cost Percentage has not changed from that of any previous Version of AIC.
So if you always set the maintenance of =0 then there is no effect what so ever.

However, it will get a little pricy with the additional 200pt cost over 5%, now.
If I am not mistaken; going to 5% maintenance is basically the same as v3.02 and may be even cheaper then AIC Versions before 3.0.
Granted the Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Threshold is now (5%) in v4.0 where it used to be (10%) with Version 3.02.

[Alneyan]

Originally posted by JLS:
Also to recapitulate:
Foundationally speaking, the base Maintenance Cost Percentage has not changed from that of any previous Version of AIC.
So if you always set the maintenance of =0 then there is no effect what so ever.

However, it will get a little pricy with the additional 200pt cost over 5%, now.
If I am not mistaken; going to 5% maintenance is basically the same as v3.02 and may be even cheaper then AIC Versions before 3.0.
Granted the Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Threshold is now (5%) in v4.0 where it used to be (10%) with Version 3.02.

I have to admit I didn't delve into Maintenance in 3.02. But IIRC, the threshold cost wasn't of 300 points, as it is this change that made me look how Maintenance is handled.

At threshold, the cost is 300 instead of 200 points as you seem to believe. As you have given other values (the ones from PvK mod I believe), I gather they will change? Yes, an increase of "only" 200 after threshold seem more reasonable for me. (But you shall not worry, I will redo my calculations then. )

The cost before threshold is fine enough, slightly more expensive than increasing resource production, but nothing important. My main concern is after threshold, when the cost is suddenly of 300 points, which is an increase by threefold.

In AIC 4.0 settings.txt file:
Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Max Pct := 130
Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Min Pct := 75
Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Pct Cost := 100
Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Threshold := 5
Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 300
Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 100

Hmm, it seems like I also made a mistake as I thought the threshold was at 108. However, the code says it is at 105. My calculations are biaised then, as Maintenance was slighty cheaper in my calculations than in reality.

[ October 24, 2003, 16:48: Message edited by: Alneyan ]

[JLS]

I am not sure where you would like to have the maintenance at, but as I said at a 5% gain, you are still about at v3.02 levels.

Again, the Base Maintenance Cost Setting are the same, just the threshold costs up and the percentage has been lowered to 5% as opposed to v3.02 10%.

You may add to your maintenance abilities, Alneyan and possibly gaining a advantage by choosing:
1: The Crystalline Racial Trait that may save you an additional 20% towards in System maintenance costs.
2: The Engineers Culture gains an additional 5 towards Maintenance costs.
3: The AIC alternate Workers Culture gains an additional 6 Towards Maintenance costs.

If that is not enough, there is always the FREE AIC Human Player Starting Option:
(o2) Increased amount of Cultural Centers start on your Home World and the Ability to build many more Resource Settlements on Colonial Worlds
(o3) Excellent Advantage for a much higher proportions of resources in your game over 150% higher

- - -

With AIC v4.0, you may notice an increase of near 40% towards Mineral Gathering Facilities over v3.02 may offset the 5% Maintenance Threshold a bit

I do not know how many defense bases will hold up in the late game against the AI; but a Mobile fleet of just 10 lvl III light cruisers for example:

Please let’s look at the Numbers: an average 10 CL Squadron is the equivalent of
Average Level III CL = 1750 to 2000 per for a Total 17500 to 20000 Minerals.

AIC v4.0...
One Average (good) Medium Breathable Mineral Planet at 105% and all else even. With 16 Mining Settlement @ 600x16= 10,080. With 16 Mining Colonies@750= 12,600 and with 16 Mining Complex= 16,8000, not even counting Planet happiness levels or your Racial Culture Traits.

Now introduce Industrial Centers and Industrial Complex above can increase as high as 30% upon 30% of that total. At level III Mineral Colonies, and a Level II Industrial Center; respectfully may yield 14,000 and with (o2) this may exceed 21,000 plus output of Minerals; from just one Medium Mining Colony in a well Colonized System. A Large Mining Colony would yield a much larger amount etc.

With this said, you only need One Medium and One Small Breathable Mining Colony (not even to count your Home World) to produce the required Minerals for just the Squadron of 10 CLS.

Also to Consider your Trade Dividends with other Empires this is easily obtainable and to also consider there are many more Planets out there for you to still invest in, also to mention asteroid mining, surplus resource trading at your Trade Center or with a direct offer to another Race and/or pure intimidation to gain extra needed recourses.

The Key is to plan your Technology to improve your Economy to be able to afford Ships and to maintain the building of Facilities, Cities and infrastructure to afford more Ships to gain control of more Systems to repeat this process



[ October 24, 2003, 17:52: Message edited by: JLS ]