AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent

[Grand Lord Vito]

JLS the beta release for AIC 4.50 is great I played it all week end.
Some of the AI is a little agresive is this what you wanted? The plate armor for the out side hull is perfect and dosnt use very much internal space MORE WEAPONS . I like the Internal Structural Supports (leaky Armor) And with no armor load restrictions
The AI builds even more ships with even larger task forces (45+ ships in 3 Fleets with others ranging from 2 to 40 in the late game) Tere planet fighers may be a little to hard to crack should you tone this down?
They build more Colonies faster now it is getting very tough to keep at medium AI bonus
Are you going to implement the AI Spereworld SM ships still?
Keep up the good work.

Did you get my Email

[JLS]

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:

Tere planet fighers may be a little to hard to crack should you tone this down?

They build more Colonies faster now it is getting very tough to keep at medium AI bonus

Are you going to implement the AI Spereworld SM ships still?

Thanks GLV, I will have more for you this coming weekend.

I will recheck the AI fighter totals; however, we still want the adversary to Commit all in the conquest of the HW.


Agreed, I have leaned into the Medium AI setting a tad, we should look into this. When at low or med AI Bonus we do want to keep the competitive results near v4.0

Yes in regards to Olegs and Geo's recomendation.
I scraped the AI Players Sphere world Construction ship. Primarily the AI Construction Ship will scour the universe to create the Huge World and not have any attentions to Colonize it, allowing another (Human) Player to reap from the builders efforts� Perhaps when I complete the Enterprise TV Series � AIC add-on to represent the Expanse Spheres

[ May 02, 2004, 23:30: Message edited by: JLS ]

[Fyron]

4.11 to 4.50? Why such a big jump in Version numbers?

[Paul1980au]

Maybe SE5 will lead to a Version 5 as the fist for the new game

[JLS]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
4.11 to 4.50? Why such a big jump in Version numbers?

For the inquisitive mind


Basically when a minor change or add-on in beta or even my own (lets see the result test) is performed.
I will post a letter for example 4.11 to 4.11abc etc and then log that change, when/if that little packet is together I then roll the digits to for example 4.111 or 4.12

When there are major changes or conceptual additions and that usually did not involve any systemic changes (did not void existing games), the Version number then may be reclassified with just the rolling of an new digit for example 4.20 etc.

When changes led to a systemic proportion (any installs will void save games), then I will consider this a new generation hybrid and will run with or from for example 4.xx to 5.00 (when released).

In other words, when every little change is made then that change is logged. If it is decided that the change was invalid then the whole line bar is voided and the working AIC copy is rolled back to the desired past Version.
In just a few examples: AIC 4.11 Armor was revised to represent the Exterior Hull Plating more accurately and Structural Armor alone has been revised and then tweaked numerous times ETC. the Alpha and/or Numeric Version characters do move along with every change

Thursday when I Emailed some players the AIC beta so we will see where we are at, that Version went from 4.48a to 4.50 as to mark the first released beta towards the next Public AIC release
- - - - -

Originally posted by Paul1980au:
Maybe SE5 will lead to a Version 5 as the fist for the new game

For review, when se4 was released (and prior to gold) the new Version patch�s /upgrades where NOT consecutively released. 1.03, 1.11,"", etc.

Then se4 Gold was released. With its major changes and conceptual additions to the programming (Possibly not enough in mm�s opinion to designate se5)

Then came se4 gold�s upgrades or patch�s with Version designations also not released to the public consecutively. "","",1.78,1.84,1.91

Moreover, please review se4 history text file and the notations are for all changes by a number and I am sure the se4 programmers have a more complicated a system then what is documented. This may just be a method to track every specific change internally.

= = =

However, your suggestion does sound like a viable Marketing idea for Space Empire =V=

[ May 03, 2004, 14:48: Message edited by: JLS ]

[JLS]

Originally posted by JLS:

"~~~"

With Starliner Option OFF
(Defalted; otherwise, please re-enabled if desired)
Name := SO*
With *HP* above, this is a Standard Starting Option: Resulting in a more robust game that requires LESS Micro Management and logistics. Your game will be less dependent on Star Liners with this option.

This allows for a Civilizations advance towards organized Immigration doctrines. With this, Players are now able to build Debarkation Depots that can be tied together with your Empires Supply Hubs. Easily constructed, this will increase all Population migrations automatically and indiscriminately to all Colonized Planets in that System the Depot was constructed. The need and effort for Star Liners as Population transports are vastly diminished with this option enabled.

- - - -

Originally posted by oleg:

I still think this option is way too powerfull. You can easily outpace AI so I never play withthis automatic replicant centers. It removes any need for planet condition improvement, optimal expansion strategy planning, etc.

Better option would be faster and cheaper straliners tech for this option plus "gestation vats" with high value for population growth. You will get faster development but still retain Proportionesque feature of the mod.
Just my .2c

- - -

Originally posted by JLS:

Your point is valid, Oleg. With the Starliners ON (OS* option disabled) for your AIC game play option, you will continue to have a desperate need for increased Starliner numbers continuously. Retaining the feel that the Star Liners PVK and myself co-developed for Proportion Mod many years ago, provide.

Your reduced SL Organics suggestion has been play tested months ago. Reducing the Organic Costs for Star Liner LS with AIC, in many Players opinion does diminish the Economics and logistic feel for the need of agricultural support and its advancement to sustain massive Imperial population growths and expantion.

= = =

With regard to(OS* option enabled)

Again you have a point as it may apply to the relative POP numbers EARLY in the game when comparing Population Totals against the AI. However, there are many more variables that are in play with Starliners OFF that is not to the Human Players best interests when competing against the AIC AI overall or as well

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ==
Reply by JLS

Oleg, this may be a compromise.
An additional StarLiner Hull with reduced costs triggered by a subtech for those that want a competitive balance in multiplayer versus the Players that choose OS* to the players that may not desire OS* options that will also be available in solitare play.
The next Version will have increased Reproduction benefits for the generic System Bio Hospitals with added compensatory numbers on Gestation Vats for the Organic Race Players Concerns. Also to mention that this new SL tech trigger as well as the Immigration Techs both will be cancelable from the new game Techs Allowed menu for multiplayer agreement concerns.

Would this satisfy most players? And what would be the desired resource costs for the optional Star liner?

[ May 05, 2004, 02:01: Message edited by: JLS ]

[QBrigid]

Originally posted by oleg:

I still think this option is way too powerfull. You can easily outpace AI so I never play withthis automatic replicant centers. It removes any need for planet condition improvement, optimal expansion strategy planning, etc.

Oleg if a planet needs condtion improvement, does this stop you from sending Star Liners anyway? I still do and with AIC OS* option on, so will the Auto Starliners. In any case the improvment plant is needed to increase the reproduction

OS* = Auto Starliners is provided by AIC for people that do not want the troubles of optomal expantion projects that deal with the micro movements of 40 to 60 Starliners

I also play like you without the AIC OS* option and micro manage our population. But it is that others have the option not having to when they play AI Campaign.

Better option would be faster and cheaper straliners tech for this option plus "gestation vats" with high value for population growth.

JLS origionaly had higher Gestation Vat values with earlier Versions of AIC and as I recall you thought this should be reduced then. I also agree we now should go back to the old 2.xx GV Values.

[ May 05, 2004, 18:43: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

[QBrigid]

Originally posted by JLS:

Oleg, this may be a compromise.
An additional StarLiner Hull with reduced costs triggered by a subtech for those that want a competitive balance in multiplayer versus the Players that choose OS* to the players that may not desire OS* options that will also be available in solitare play.
The next Version will have increased Reproduction benefits for the generic System Bio Hospitals with added compensatory numbers on Gestation Vats for the Organic Race Players Concerns. Also to mention that this new SL tech trigger as well as the Immigration Techs both will be cancelable from the new game Techs Allowed menu for multiplayer agreement concerns.

Would this satisfy most players? And what would be the desired resource costs for the optional Star liner?

I like this, next time I play GLV and the guys I will have cheaper Starliners and when I go Solo I can play the game without the Cheaper Starliners so I keep the Econmics chalange.

As I posted earlier, I never like the reduction in Reproduction with the Bio Med Facility or the Gestation Vats.

[ May 05, 2004, 19:08: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

[QBrigid]

Originally posted by oleg:
I suggest to lower the cost of Starliner
With the AIC 4.0 changes, perhaps the time has come to balance this allowing OS* (off) to be a little more competitive with OS* on.

Yes I also agree with Oleg. But as a optional hull so the economics are not lost to the Players that like that stuff.

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:
I tend to agree.
"(Heavy) Armor Piercing Weapons additions to the non-racial techs, probably?"

QB,
PTF tends to agree with your Armor vs. Temporal and Crystalline post. What are your thoughts QB about adding more Armor Skipping Weapons for all the Races.

GLV, would this not water down your advantages when playing a Temporal or Crystalline race; What are your thoughts GLV?

I think the armor skipping weapons are fine as they are. My concern is the fact that Temporals or Crystallites can stack the Armor to there benifit. When the needed help that se4 v1.84 upgrade can give in this area is ignored then this is a concearn to me.

Originally posted by oleg:
"I don't see much problem with armour and armour piercing weapons in AIC. Shard cannons are rather weak and costly to research. Time-shifters are even weaker and are wasteless against ships with internal armour - better use normal, hard hitting weapons !"

GLV even though you play Temporal; if I am not mistaken you appreciated the AIC to-hit penalties on Armor shipping weapons as a means to slow their development= (advantage) but not cancel the advantages in the long run. In addition any Armor Skipping race will have to invest heavily in Combat Sensors and perhaps at some point a adversary may even Counter this with hi levels of ECM before attacking a Armor Skipping race.
GLV, could you elaborate more on this please.

Oleg GLV, what recomondations do you guys have for the strength ot the racial armor skipping weapons strength?

Originally posted by oleg:
As to racial armours, CA needs phased shields to work against PPB and many AIs use them. OA is usefull in small battles, but when AI send its Main Fleet, the targeted ships seldom live long enough to benefit from OA. The 1.84 "fix" that removed OA pre-generation really done OA in

QB, I know you had many thoughts about Organic Armor as well as Armor in general. Perhaps you may elaborate on this topic?
You also touched on the benefits of the 184 se4 gold patch, could you expand on this some more?

Sorry I am not sure what Oleg is saying??? Organic armor seems to be very strong post 184

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:
Side question: The plain armor still has got the armor ability removed, right (like in PvKs original good idea) ?

How do AIC players feel about this. Is there any friendly advice from AIC players on Leaky Armor to be introduce as a replacement or addition for PvKs armor style?

Nope. I like the derection and Posts that you and Fyron discussed about SJ's leaky armor for UNLIMITIED internal support armor and the new AIC Exterior Hull Plating that would be LIMITED to the amount of HULLS a ship has

Qbrigid I would like to thank you for all your contributions in AIC Psychic intel. Is there any ideas you may have to expand this addition to se4 AIC.

Thanks. No new ideas.

What are you going to do about total mine fields. PTF suggested 500/field. That would be to much are you going to keep them at 100?

What of the robo mining values. What some has suggested is (((way))) to high. You should keep them at the present values.

Do not foget the FQM Ancient Ruins thing Oleg mentioned. Are you going to reduce the Astroids in FQM?

The WP Computers. Do they really need so many levels?

[ May 05, 2004, 19:19: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

[QBrigid]

Originally posted by JLS:


I scraped the AI Players Sphere world Construction ship. Primarily the AI Construction Ship will scour the universe to create the Huge World and not have any attentions to Colonize it, allowing another (Human) Player to reap from the builders efforts� Perhaps when I complete the Enterprise TV Series � AIC add-on to represent the Expanse Spheres

Sad

I so looked forward to following Eees coattails and colonizing AI constructed Sphere worlds as I now enjoy the advantages of Eees warp openings and Astroid convertions