some questions about SEIV

[klausD]

Hi all,
I would like to ask you some questions regarding SEIV, if you dont mind. Many thanks for answering.

-recently I attacked an enemy AI Fleet per tactical combat in a sector with an empty planet. The sizes of both fleets have been large. (I had 120 ships in wall formation and my enemy in about 55 in a kind of spider formation)

But what I do not understand is why my fleet was already in the center of the tactical screen beginning from the first turn of the combat. And the weird thing was the enemy AI fleet was in the center of the screen too. So both fleets began the combat partially intermixed and in close combat range of 1-5 squares from the first turn on. Normally the fleets starts at the outer edge of the tactical screen and not in the center (except warp assaults) Do you have any explanation about this odd event?

-other questions about some lines in the "AI-default setting" file.
what does that mean? And which effect do you think have these lines to the AI behaviour?
-Turns to Wait until next attack
-Maximum Systems to Defend at a Time
-Get Angry Over Allied Colonizable Planets
-Get Angry Over Enemy Colonizable Planets
-Percentage of Allied Planets to consider as Attack Locations for Anger
-Percentage of Enemy Planets to consider as Attack Locations for Anger

Again thank you in advance for your time.
bye
Klaus

[PvK]

Originally posted by klausD:
... Do you have any explanation about this odd event?

It happens when there are many ships and/or any big object in the sector, such as a planet. It's a limit of the program that it doesn't place ships very fairly in all situations, especially with many ships involved, or if both fleets are travelling the same direction.

-other questions about some lines in the "AI-default setting" file.
what does that mean? And which effect do you think have these lines to the AI behaviour?
-Turns to Wait until next attack

I think it means turns the AI will wait before ordering another attack on an alien location. The lower the number, the more frequently it will order new attacks on enemies.

-Maximum Systems to Defend at a Time

The AI makes a (lame) attempt to protect its systems by assigning a fleet or some ships to some of its systems. But it won't try to defend all of them at once. This tells it how many to try to defend. I'm not sure what the other limits of the algoritm are, but it never seems to do a very good job of defending anyway.

-Get Angry Over Allied Colonizable Planets

Determines whether an AI gets mad at allied empires when it sees that they have colonized planets which it could colonize. I'm not sure if this is based on colonizer tech or breathable status, or both.

-Get Angry Over Enemy Colonizable Planets

Same thing, but referring to enemy empires it is already hostile towards.

-Percentage of Allied Planets to consider as Attack Locations for Anger

Again, a measure of how many of the allied planets should generate hostility for this AI. Implies it may be related to the field for anger from attacks. I.e., if the AI is set to get mad at allied colonizable planets, it sees 10 such planets, and this is set to 20%, it might get as mad as if it had been attacked twice but taken no losses. At least, that's my guess at what this means.

-Percentage of Enemy Planets to consider as Attack Locations for Anger

Same but for hostile empires.

I have a question for you, if you're in Vienna. How's "Damage Unlimited" doing? Has to be my favorite name for a game store that I've ever seen.

PvK

[klausD]

PvK,
thanks alot for your kind and helpful information.

To your question:
"Damage Unlimited" is so far the largest hobby store in Austria. I think the business success is mostly good. (I did not hear from financial problems) And true, the name is quite funny.

Personally I have worked on several projects with the peoples which own the store, but some years ago we had a court issue because of open bills they refused to pay and therefore I am no friend of this shop.

BTW: The product prices of this shop are in the most times very ambitious. But the product range is good. There are another smaller (but not cheaper) stores in Vienna, but the most game material I am buying comes from a Germany internet retailer.

Have you been in Vienna? Do you want to visit our nice little city? (no. 3 capital city in world wide living quality according to some polls) If yes, maybe you want to meet some natives (me) for live chatting in one of our famous coffee houses.

Bye
Klaus

[Renegade 13]

That's strange...I've never had that particular bug before at all. Plus, if you outnumber him that badly, you should beat him anyway right? Play for a while longer and see if you run into the bug again. It could just be that you were really unlucky....twice!!

Also, Malfador said that 1.91 was going to be the Last patch. No more are planned.

[klausD]

Thanks for your answer. Did you ever play a single tactical combat with in about 130-150 ships and 600+ fighters? Then you should encounter the same problem. I am sure that this is a kind of algorithm bug and not "unluck" as such. I am wondering if I am the only one with this prob with my copy of SE4.

The game description should include. "Excellent tactical combat system. But only usable with small ship numbers".

KlausD

[Q]

I had similar problems in strategic combat. The placement of the ships is not different as far as I know for tactical/strategic combat.
KlaudD, how many ship positions has the formation you used?
I have seen this close starting position especially if there were more ships in my fleet than positions in the formation or if there were ships outside of fleets.
And I agree that it should have been fixed as it can make you loose a battle, that you would have won with starting positions apart.
The only situation (apart from warp points) where IMO the close starting position would be correct is when one side has a cloaked fleet. But then of course this fleet should get the first shot too.

[ April 09, 2004, 16:52: Message edited by: Q ]

[klausD]

It happens when there are many ships and/or any big object in the sector, such as a planet. It's a limit of the program that it doesn't place ships very fairly in all situations, especially with many ships involved, or if both fleets are travelling the same direction.

quote:

I had the same situation again (80 player ships against in about 45 of the enemy AI) and there was NO object in the sector. (and no travelling in the same direction because it is a turnbased game) it was free space. And again the programm setup both fleets in the center of the tactical screen. And both have been intermixed. As far as I can evaluate this, its a very serious bug and should be adressed in the next patch.


Instead of doing some 3D fancy stuff, Aaron should rather instruct the AI not to place big fleets in the center of the tactical screen. It seems that he has not played much his own game with big fleets involved.

I am wondering that no one did mention this bug before. I am so angry about this, that I am really close to quit the current game and the SE series at all.

bye
KlausD

[klausD]

Q,
I dont know how many positions the formation have. I use the "wall" formation for my fleets which is inclosed in the standard game.

And for me its not about "winning or loosing" a battle or something. I am just very angry because MM should have already fixed this serious bug after several years of patch releases.

Or should I suppose that Aaron did not test play his own game if more than 100 ships are involved?

bye
KlausD