Author Topic: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]  (Read 10989 times)

Offline superking

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,205
Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« on: March 13, 2011, 06:59:15 pm »
I lover de AI war and the all round awesomeness of its developers, but I dont like AI war 4.0 onward, and no matter how many times I boot it up and try get back into it, I come away unhappy. I'm not complaining in the sense I expect somthing to be done about it- I've had my moneys worth of fun out of AI war about 30x over- but encase any other players share my issues. I still have the last version of AI War 3.0 installed and recently started playing it again, so much of my critisism is probably a result of being able to compare the two- I perceive many changes as steps backward

Critisisms
  • The main menu screen of AI war 4.0+ is ugly, much uglier than the 3.0 menu screen. the 3.0 screen had a sensible layout in terms of function, with the writing large and spread out down the screen. the current menu screen crams everything into the bottom left. the old menu screen had stationary stars and moving nebula. It looked nice. the new one has moving stars, which looks frankly archahic (and often wrong, with the star layers moving at illogical looking speeds relative to eachother). the list of expansions in the top right hand corner is really ugly.
  • an extension on the menu systems, the buttons are essentially black with an ugly white halo round them. the white halo around buttons looks really poor in my oppinion
  • The GUI on the game lobby screen looks much less proffesional than the 3.0 lobby. the menu panels are seperate, leaving a blank spot of grind in the bottom right hand corner on a wide screen that looks really poor.
  • the AI War font now in use looks childish, and can be difficult to read where smaller
  • the children of neinzul music, particually the children of neinzul menu music, is frankly dreadful in my oppinon... it sounds more like midi and completely lacking the tone of the other two menu tracks.
  • the removal of the 3.0 group move toggle button from the bottom left game GUI is a crime, it was such an elegant solution to the problem of having to switch between group and independant move that didn't require me to hold down 3 keys to que FRD group-moves... I miss that button terribly.
  • firing up 3.0 again made me remember how very good the strong/weak display was. this has been raised enough times, but it was so liberating to be able to know at a glance if cruisers are effective against MRLS, or zenith polarisers, instead of having to squint at armour types. quick quiz: off the top of your head, do you know what armour type the spire tractor platform is? and which trigange and bonus units have a bonus against that type? if you dont, you need to look at lots of panels and lists of bonuses.
  • game balance. this requires a longer rant and I'll do this tommorow, watch this space (or dont). much of this involves spire ships, both the numbers the AI use them in, the inconsistencies of targetting them w/ seige starship, and other balance issues, like the weakness of flagships (the higher base HP of raid starships, considering the 20% damage everything does to them.) and gaurdians, fortresses.

apolagies if these kind of observations are unwelcome

[edit]

Quote
Are you playing the latest beta, or the last stable version?

yes, I always update before playing.

Quote
I'm not sure why you are complaining about the Neinzul soundtrack. I like it. Yes, its title music is most certainly not all that great (in fact, I might replace it with another song in my installation), but the rest of it sounds fine IMO.

yes to clarify, my complaint there is 99% targetted at the neinzul menu music, some of the neinzul tracks are pretty nice. the neinzul menu music track really spoils the tone for me. It's not a huge problem since I can easily just delete it out the game folder, just raising the issue encase others felt the same.

Quote
And of course there's the reference tab itself, but I imagine you're wanting something that doesn't involve opening any windows.

yeah, to me having to open the reffrence window little better than having to squint around at each ships stats to see if it has a bonus against the armour class of a given target (and then whether it has an attack that makes it useless against targets it lacks bonuses against, or whether it would lose anyway due to having feeble HP or somthing similar). this is even more of a chore to me because the armour classes are just so arbitary- there is no visual indication on any ship of what armour class it is, and no logical connection between ship size, or armament, or anything else, and armour type. its seemingly random, so lots of stat checking or memorising is required everytime you encounter a new type of ship.

Quote
On the removal of the group move toggle button, my condolences on your loss Wink  We were making a concious decision to not have a dedicated piece of HUD just for that one movement modifier.  But I hadn't realized how much some people missed that.  So just put in for 5.004:
* Added "Toggle Use-Group-Move-By-Default" In-Game key-bind (no default key, but you can set one on the In-Game tab of the input bindings window):
** Toggles the value of the Use-Group-Move-By-Default global control (normally changed through the controls screen, but can be set this way for convenience).
** Note that if you have the controls window open while using this key-bind, the controls window will not automatically update to reflect the change as that would destroy any changes made since the window was opened.
** To make it easier to know which way it was toggled (without having to open the controls window, which would defeat the purpose), using this toggle displays a local message on the screen noting the change.

ah keith, you are an officer and a gentleman  :) although why you would remove a peice of the hud that was so revolutionary and functional!
TA spring & starcraft do not have a dedicated group move/independant move button, but I sure wish they did because it reduced keyboard usage (I am a beleiver that the less the player has to use the keyboard when playing, the better and more functional the game GUI. TA spring scores highly here, and SC II very poorly.)

Quote
Ships are far better balanced now (except for spire fleetships - that's being worked on, I believe).  An option should probably be added to "disable Spire fleetships" while the ships are being fixed though, because running up against certain Spire fleetship units can simple ruin a game, moreso than any other existing units (even eyebots, since those can now be defended against).

I think more than anything else, this is the single biggest problem with AI War currently: the AI usage of neinzul fleet ships.

consider:
you are on AIP 10, on a mark II planet. the AI has about 26 ships on most of its planets.

you attack the planet with a moderate force.

in situation A, the AI does not have spire fleetships. it reinforces with about 30 odd random ships that have a shipcap that is some small variant default 96. This is perfectly manageable, as the reinforcing ships have a total DPS of around 35% of a single shipcap.

in situation B, the AI has tractor platforms and stealth battleships unlocked. it reinforces with 4-5 of each plus a few other little ships. this is horrific and terrible, as the reinforcing ships have a total DPS and HP of 200% a normal shipcap. this is the equivalent of the AI reinforcing with 192 fighters... at AIP 10.

the difference in difficulty between situation A and situation B is huge.
this is increased further by the lack of counters for both of these ships- the radar dampening and sneakiness of the cloaked battleships makes it difficult to engage them with all your forces at once unless clumped, and none of the default ship types have a bonus VS the armour type of Tractor platforms, Turret. seige starships do not target them despite their high HP and size- this struck me as quite illogical as it took me a while to realise it was not firing. it adds up that Destroying 4-5 tractor platforms with MK I and MK II ships will take you a while, by which time the AI reinforces again, with a similar number of spire fleetships.

until the spawning of reinforcing ships is in some way proportional to their shipcaps- eg, spawning a shipcap=15 ship costs the same as spawning 6x shipcap=90 ships (or is 6x less likely), the AI unlocking low shipcap units is always going to artifically up the difficulty.

Quote
As for GUI and music, that basically boils down to personal taste mostly (at least the music). I did like the old sci fi-ish GUI, but the new one does not bother me, its not like it matters to me what the buttons look like (and they are not bad either imo, just different), all I am really interested in is pure gameplay, and the rest is fluff on top of it

I often get friends and housemates to try out AI war and most of them place great importance on visuals and polish, they will fail to be immersed or even dismiss the game out of hand if it dosnt look appealing. the menu screen & game lobby of 3.0 just looked that much more polished (even if it was lower-res).

Quote
The GUI on the game lobby screen looks much less proffesional than the 3.0 lobby. the menu panels are seperate, leaving a blank spot of grid in the bottom right hand corner on a wide screen that looks really poor.

just to come back to this point, does anyone else play at a resolution where this looks wonky?

[edit]

the balance between many of the bonus types (specifically base game & zenith rem) is actually pretty good, if less interesting than the 3.0 interactions.

teleport raiders, impulse emitters, deflection drones, acid sprayers & most the neinzul types are weak and I suspect are still never chosen by experienced players as starting types.

spacetanks & Z charmeleons suffer from being dull concepts (just bombers with better stats.) the tank isnt especially slow or tough, and the charmeleon is just a bomber with huge DPS but without the bonuses (and with a superfluous invisiblility while stationary, given their stats). Z charmeleon would be more interesting as a slow defensive ambush unit, and spacetanks as somthing with a little more contrast from the bomber.

N viral shredders never received the reproduction from lightning that made their concept interesting. the N ais attack waves are not well balanced or enjoyable to fight.

due to some interaction with the new armour system, the Z mirror no longer causes any significant damage with reflected projectiles (where before it had the possiblity to be incredibly devestating, or just die almost instantly toshots from a missle unit). its gone from one of the most interesting and potentially most powerful units (but not often) to somthing very washed out, a tougher deflection drone with a superfluous reflection ability.

the new parasites, both the standard ship and the leech starship, are sterile and uninteresting now, with complicated formulas governing their reclamation and a general loss of identity. the leech starship in particular has gone from one of the most iconic units (the spray of leech projectiles, the clever methods players developed of optimising farming). the old parasite system sure wasnt balanced, but it was fun, it was interesting and it could potentially have been balanced into sanity without being gutted. the new system is not interesting, and while the parasite bonus ship is actually more effective (in some circumstances) than the old ones, the new leech starship is horrible and dull... a large element of the 3.0 gameplay that really was fun removed.

the bomber starship had a more interesting concept in 3.0 (the spray of bomber projectiles that crippled engines) than it does now (a slow firing seige starship weapon with super short range).

the light starship is useless and very expensive now, and it dies to gaurdians almost instantly.

the flagship is likewise very weak compared to the other lines, where it used to be a powerhouse. the old 3.0 debate was always whether to unlock raid, flagship or leech first; now, raid is the best choice. bomber starships are the alternative, vital unless you want to spend long periods of game watching the HP of spire gaurdposts slowly trickle down. flagships are potentially useful for the damage boosts, but weak. seige starships are no longer useful at sniping gaurdposts or hitting shields from a distance where the nightmares underneath cant rip you apart (the two reasons players are most likely to want a seige unit) and now perform anti gaurdian & starship only- however, their targetting is inconsistant and they have no effect vs Stealth battleships, blade spawners or tractor platform, all of which are terrifiying at MK III+ and all difficult to counter in the rapidity that the AI reinforces them. the leech starship is not worth using or unlocking. the raid starships stats seem completely unreasonable and illgoical (an ultra-light armour type, only with 90,000 armour.. that seems like alot of armour, but its also the fastest ship in the game and the most resilient starship for straight up fighting.)

the spire fleetships are overpowered. fighting an AI with gravity rippers or the other slowing type becomes agony. the armour rotter is incredibly powerful and effective in the players hands (for attacking gaurdians, gaurdposts, starships etc). the blade spawner is the ultimate seige units in players hands, and in the AIs hands makes attacking AI systems a miserable affair. the tractor platform is devestating in the AIs hands because the numbers they reinforce with and their armour type (turret) making them difficult to quickly destroy with most units (and immunity to seige); the stealth battleship at higher marks (III+) is madness (and when used by the player, in a group with MK I, II & III together becomes an all powerful raiding tool), and in the hands of the AI (ie. large numbers, cloak, dampening and seige immunity) almost unstoppable.

a number of gameplay mechanics- AI eye + spire gaurdposts, fortresses etc- make the player resort to long periods of extremely dull and agonizing repetition.

all of these might seem like minor niggles, but they add up to somthing fairly broken. I find most of my games atm are ruined by the apperance of AI spire fleetships, whereby I take gross losses and get frustrated.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2011, 07:29:12 am by superking »

Offline Philo

  • Full Member Mark II
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
Re: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« Reply #1 on: March 13, 2011, 07:11:43 pm »
Well I've been playing just from the 5.0 era really so I can't say much to that. Although I agree with the flagships, they need to be buffed. They cost so much and the payoff is really nothing.

Offline Sunshine!

  • Sr. Member Mark III
  • ****
  • Posts: 475
Re: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« Reply #2 on: March 13, 2011, 07:59:55 pm »
It's definitely different in gameplay, and some players are going to like it and others won't.  The change from AI turrets to AI guardians put more emphasis on ship-to-ship combat, so instead of choosing structure-busting bonus ships like I always did in 2.0 and 3.0 (I would literally only play with infiltrators, those things were godly), I consistently choose ship-to-ship units in 4.0 and 5.0.  This is a mixed bag for me, but it opens up other opportunities.  Imagine if you had to assault an AI planet that uses the same turrets that players now have?  It would be a nightmare.

While I'm on the thought of turrets, someone should run some comparisons between 2.0/3.0 turrets and the current batch of turrets to test effectiveness - I have an inkling that 2.0/3.0 turrets are still much more effective (in their setting) than current turrets are.

Ships are far better balanced now (except for spire fleetships - that's being worked on, I believe).  An option should probably be added to "disable Spire fleetships" while the ships are being fixed though, because running up against certain Spire fleetship units can simple ruin a game, moreso than any other existing units (even eyebots, since those can now be defended against).

As for siege starship targeting, I have suggested in the past that any ship that is immune to fusion cutters should also be targetable by siege starships, because they've jumped from being a "small" ship to being a "large" ship, even if they aren't starship sized.  I also think not allowing siege starships to target forcefields makes them a much more niche-oriented ship that has very few uses if the prior change is not made.

Edit:  I'm not sure if raid starships will ever end up being fixed because of how disjoint their uses are for players/AI, but in larger quantities than 2 or 3 (even in groups of 2 or 3) and especially at higher marks, they're the most game-breakingly ridiculous things to see the AI show up with.  Considering a mk3 raid starship will take out a Home Command Station in 3 shots, they're a problem.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2011, 08:12:30 pm by Sunshine! »

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2011, 10:07:07 pm »
Are you playing the latest beta, or the last stable version?

The last stable version has a near game breaking bug where the AI in many cases can ignore the caps that are supposed to be placed on Spire "fleet" ships. This was fixed in 5.001, but it is sad that many players staying with the stable versions will be forced to eat a very unbalanced situation with AI Spire ships.

The AI also has a SEVERE penalty in the numbers of them they can spawn in waves. Around a .05 multiplier for most of the "starship tier" of Spire fleet ships.

If you are concerned about the balance of Spire "fleet" ships in general, I can see that. For now, you can turn the ship availability to normal, and that will remove the worst offenders of balance among the Spire fleet ships, though sadly it will also remove a bunch of other nifty units.

Also, some balance issues have been made much better in recent betas. Despite it being a beta, 5.003 is very stable and already noticeably better balanced; I would recommend playing it instead of 5.000.

As for the UI stuff, yes, it looks a little ugly now, but its not the worst I have seen. Besides, for the most part, it is clear enough what you have to do, so the overall design is good.

I'm not sure why you are complaining about the Neinzul soundtrack. I like it. Yes, its title music is most certainly not all that great (in fact, I might replace it with another song in my installation), but the rest of it sounds fine IMO.

Offline Shrugging Khan

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,217
  • Neinzul Y PzKpfw Tiger!
Re: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« Reply #4 on: March 13, 2011, 10:18:30 pm »
apolagies if these kind of observations are unwelcome
STOP!
Be a critic, or be nice. being both just waters down the point  >:(
The beatings shall continue
until morale improves!

Offline Zeba

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Grumpy Olde Man
Re: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« Reply #5 on: March 14, 2011, 02:42:19 am »
"the removal of the 3.0 group move toggle button from the bottom left game GUI is a crime, it was such an elegant solution to the problem of having to switch between group and independant move that didn't require me to hold down 3 keys to que FRD group-moves... I miss that button terribly."

/this

oh god this.

Offline zebramatt

  • Master Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,574
Re: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« Reply #6 on: March 14, 2011, 04:10:57 am »
I disagree emphatically about the strong vs. weak data. The only thing worse than having no data is having unreliable data. And you can still garner all the same essential information now through the Reference screen - but without it being presented as any kind of definitive guide on what was 'strong' vs. what.

It was certainly not useful to 'know' that ship type A was strong against ship type B only to discover that in most circumstances ship type B actually blew A out of the universe.

Offline superking

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,205
Re: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« Reply #7 on: March 14, 2011, 04:20:32 am »
It was certainly not useful to 'know' that ship type A was strong against ship type B only to discover that in most circumstances ship type B actually blew A out of the universe.

what ships did this 'the strong/weak lies' relationship exist between? I found it extremely useful for quickly knowing what to send against what and at what approximate advantage. why I would I need any more information? I'm using the ships in huge masses, exact numbers were unimportant. obviously we are all welcome to our oppinions, but I found the display very useful.

Offline Mánagarmr

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,272
  • if (isInRange(target)) { kill(target); }
Re: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« Reply #8 on: March 14, 2011, 06:43:39 am »
I disagree emphatically about the strong vs. weak data. The only thing worse than having no data is having unreliable data. And you can still garner all the same essential information now through the Reference screen - but without it being presented as any kind of definitive guide on what was 'strong' vs. what.

It was certainly not useful to 'know' that ship type A was strong against ship type B only to discover that in most circumstances ship type B actually blew A out of the universe.
Definately. I LOVE the new system with a fiery passion. The old system was convoluted and inherently confusing. The new system is much easier to get a grip on.
Click here to get started with Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports.

Thank you for contributing to making the game better!

Offline Sunshine!

  • Sr. Member Mark III
  • ****
  • Posts: 475
Re: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« Reply #9 on: March 14, 2011, 08:39:12 am »
While I am generally extremely favorable on the new system (especially for non-fleet ships - the strong/weak data given for turrets, starships, and odd fleetship cases was quite unreliable), there was some usage in the strong/weak data that was very helpful when you knew how to use it.  Particularly, the information about how long it would take one cap to destroy another cap, and how well the ships would do in that combat.

With the bonus types, sometimes there's an issue of ships having certain bonuses, but not actually being very good against the ships they have bonuses against.  It's really an edge case here, but an example would be things with ultra-light bonus actually being terrible against raid starships (though everything's terrible against them, so that doesn't count).

What I do really like about the current system is it's extremely easy to see, on the fly, exactly what your ship can do in a general sense.  This can be important for knowing what kinds of situations to throw your ships into without painstakingly running through experiments of weird cases the strong/weak wouldn't cover.  Also, when selecting bonus ships, we were never told the strong/weak data, which discouraged experimentation for new players because trying new ships was always such a crapshoot (does this ship really do what it says it does?  how effective is it actually?  With armor bonus types, you can see that clearly without having to dig into disgustingly large excel files.)

So yeah, it won't tell you whether fighters kill something faster than bombers, but the system now is generally so much easier to use on the fly, especially in non-fleetship engagements, than it has been in the past.  In fleetship engagements, it should be decently easy to calculate relative DPS of your ships vs. other ships (does my ship have a bonus against that ship?  does their ship have a bonus against mine?) to decide if it's an engagement you really want to get into.  None of the data is hidden in a giant excel spreadsheet, and no ships are getting disgusting x50 damage bonuses against anything else anymore (Vultures being an exception).  I think the system has advanced even though it's left behind some decent features to keep down on information overload.

Offline Shrugging Khan

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,217
  • Neinzul Y PzKpfw Tiger!
Re: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« Reply #10 on: March 14, 2011, 09:18:25 am »
I'm fine with the new system. Granted, I play a lot more than most others, so I naturally memorise more of the armor types and what's strong against them; but it is, in any case, better than the 'invisible bonus' system.
The beatings shall continue
until morale improves!

Offline Ozymandiaz

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 813
  • King of kings
Re: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« Reply #11 on: March 14, 2011, 10:39:07 am »
It was certainly not useful to 'know' that ship type A was strong against ship type B only to discover that in most circumstances ship type B actually blew A out of the universe.

what ships did this 'the strong/weak lies' relationship exist between? I found it extremely useful for quickly knowing what to send against what and at what approximate advantage. why I would I need any more information? I'm using the ships in huge masses, exact numbers were unimportant. obviously we are all welcome to our oppinions, but I found the display very useful.

Last I heard thats on the to do list for returning? And I agree, it was nifty mostly because I can not for the life of me remember all of the different damage types and armor types :).

As for GUI and music, that basically boils down to personal taste mostly (at least the music). I did like the old sci fi-ish GUI, but the new one does not bother me, its not like it matters to me what the buttons look like (and they are not bad either imo, just different), all I am really interested in is pure gameplay, and the rest is fluff on top of it :).

Overall I find the balance in 5.003 pretty good actually. Some things might need some tweaks, sure, but still the gameplay is overall good, and i would say better then the latest 3.189 (was it?) version (I still got it as well on my drive some place, as I had a game I could only finsih with that version ;) ). The Spire being the newest ships may still need some tweaks. And fortresses might need a little bit as well. That said i have not been able to get as many games in the last weeks, and will be interested to hear your thought on the rest of the balance.
We are the architects of our own existence

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« Reply #12 on: March 14, 2011, 10:50:44 am »
apolagies if these kind of observations are unwelcome
STOP!
Be a critic, or be nice. being both just waters down the point  >:(
No, actually I really appreciate courtesy in the context of negative feedback.  It helps me distinguish when someone is being rationally displeased and when someone is just plain angry.  It also makes it easier to listen without giving up in frustration.  If someone just goes in all-guns-blazing I typically ignore them; I don't feel compelled to subject myself to that sort of thing :)

Anyway, details:

- On the menu/font/CoN-music... sorry, nothing I can do there.  For myself, I happen to like all of those. especially the CoN music (could live with a smaller/neater display of expansions on the main menu, but hey).

- On the removal of the group move toggle button, my condolences on your loss ;)  We were making a concious decision to not have a dedicated piece of HUD just for that one movement modifier.  But I hadn't realized how much some people missed that.  So just put in for 5.004:
* Added "Toggle Use-Group-Move-By-Default" In-Game key-bind (no default key, but you can set one on the In-Game tab of the input bindings window):
** Toggles the value of the Use-Group-Move-By-Default global control (normally changed through the controls screen, but can be set this way for convenience).
** Note that if you have the controls window open while using this key-bind, the controls window will not automatically update to reflect the change as that would destroy any changes made since the window was opened.
** To make it easier to know which way it was toggled (without having to open the controls window, which would defeat the purpose), using this toggle displays a local message on the screen noting the change.

- On the strong/weak data, wanted to make sure you knew about this from the 5.002 release notes:
Quote
** Added new PlanetView KeyBind: "Show Strong/Weak Info":
*** Defaults to Alt+W.
*** When this is active and the mouse cursor is over a ship, each planetary summary sidebar entry will display Win/Lose/Draw (and a % indicating intensity of win or loss, if it's not a draw) as a rough indicator of how effective a cap of the ship type under the cursor would be against a cap of the entry's ship type.  Since planetary summary entries frequently include multiple distinct types of ships, this is perhaps most useful in conjunction with the "Guide" mode of the planetary summary that shows all ships of a given mark level (the default key for switching to guide mode is F1).  However, even in normal mode this can be useful to at least get a rough feel for which of your ships on the planet are the best you have on hand against a specific target.
*** Caveat: this is not using a full simulation or anything like that, it uses the same simplified formula as the reference tab uses.  So stuff with modules won't really get accurate results (because it's only counting the base hull), etc.
*** Suggestions on text color, default keys, etc, are quite welcome; we're not totally happy with the effect right now but don't have a lot of time to fiddle with alternatives.
** Added new PlanetView KeyBind: "Strong/Weak => One Vs One":
*** Defaults to Alt+E (so the full combination would be to hold Alt+W+E).
*** When both this and the "Show Strong/Weak Info" keybind are active, the strong/weak info shown will use a one-ship vs. one-ship comparison instead of the normal cap vs. cap comparison.

The percent you see there is roughly analagous to the old strong/weak %'s, though it's not based on a full-blown simulation like the old way (but is still based on the exact same attack power computations that the game itself uses, and doesn't require re-running the sims every version).

And of course there's the reference tab itself, but I imagine you're wanting something that doesn't involve opening any windows.  But if someone's looking for number-of-seconds-for-A-to-kill-B, that's definitely there.

- On the game balance, I'd like to think the fleet ship balance has is at least in the "ok" range after recovering from the change-from-shields-to-armor and change-from-per-ship-to-per-hull-type-bonuses, etc, but I haven't been through all the starships (notably flagships) and the guardian balance pass isn't done, etc.  So the overall balancing process is still very much ongoing, and input is welcome.

Siege Starships definitely have a personality problem now, I'm not happy with them not being able to shoot ff's, etc.  That was so much of the point behind the Siege Starship as opposed to the old Dreadnought that it came from.  Now it's back to being an anti-starship (and anti-guardian) starship for all intents and purposes.  Which is ok, I suppose, given that the Bomber Starship was added to the human arsenel after the Siege's transformation, but the Siege is no longer a Siege, and probably just needs to be renamed again and given appropriate changes to give it a more compelling role.

On the spire ships and how many the AI uses, that's an ongoing effort both to fix the bugs (none currently known remaining, iirc) where the AI just refused to be limited in their use and to tweak the balance.  Input on that is welcome, though it will be most effective if based on actual gameplay experience in 5.003+ since stuff has been changing, etc.


Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games? Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Sunshine!

  • Sr. Member Mark III
  • ****
  • Posts: 475
Re: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« Reply #13 on: March 14, 2011, 11:30:13 am »
When it comes to fleet ship balance, aside from impulse emitters I cannot think of any ships I am violently opposed to being given.  Stats-wise I think Commandos and Infiltrators are on the weak side, but I have seen at least a few players report that they're happy with commandos, and infiltrators definitely have their uses what with the giant HP Boosts AI FFs have received in recent times, and the mechanic for auto-destructing forcefields once everything under them is cleared and the command station is destroyed.  Player usage in mind, I think balance is the best it's been in quite a while (perhaps best it's ever been).

Now that I think of it, Impulse Emitters could probably be fixed if they're given some armor-type bonuses under the following conditions:
-3 or 4 bonus types, two of which should be relatively "common" armor types, and the fourth should be structural (if present)
-The armor types they are getting bonuses against do not appear on large ships such as starships, spirecraft or golems.  Exception: Ultra-Light.  Impulse Emitters could be made as a decent counter for Raid Starships.

Doing something like this should give them some utility against smaller ships that only use 50 energy each without changing their effectiveness against larger ships*.

*This is assuming they're currently even effective against larger ships.  If they're not, I'm not entirely sure what to suggest.

Offline superking

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,205
Re: Some Negative Feedback [Sorry]
« Reply #14 on: March 14, 2011, 12:01:36 pm »
Quote
Are you playing the latest beta, or the last stable version?

yes, I always update before playing.

Quote
I'm not sure why you are complaining about the Neinzul soundtrack. I like it. Yes, its title music is most certainly not all that great (in fact, I might replace it with another song in my installation), but the rest of it sounds fine IMO.

yes to clarify, my complaint there is 99% targetted at the neinzul menu music, some of the neinzul tracks are pretty nice. the neinzul menu music track really spoils the tone for me. It's not a huge problem since I can easily just delete it out the game folder, just raising the issue encase others felt the same.

Quote
And of course there's the reference tab itself, but I imagine you're wanting something that doesn't involve opening any windows.

yeah, to me having to open the reffrence window little better than having to squint around at each ships stats to see if it has a bonus against the armour class of a given target (and then whether it has an attack that makes it useless against targets it lacks bonuses against, or whether it would lose anyway due to having feeble HP or somthing similar). this is even more of a chore to me because the armour classes are just so arbitary- there is no visual indication on any ship of what armour class it is, and no logical connection between ship size, or armament, or anything else, and armour type. its seemingly random, so lots of stat checking or memorising is required everytime you encounter a new type of ship.

Quote
On the removal of the group move toggle button, my condolences on your loss Wink  We were making a concious decision to not have a dedicated piece of HUD just for that one movement modifier.  But I hadn't realized how much some people missed that.  So just put in for 5.004:
* Added "Toggle Use-Group-Move-By-Default" In-Game key-bind (no default key, but you can set one on the In-Game tab of the input bindings window):
** Toggles the value of the Use-Group-Move-By-Default global control (normally changed through the controls screen, but can be set this way for convenience).
** Note that if you have the controls window open while using this key-bind, the controls window will not automatically update to reflect the change as that would destroy any changes made since the window was opened.
** To make it easier to know which way it was toggled (without having to open the controls window, which would defeat the purpose), using this toggle displays a local message on the screen noting the change.

ah keith, you are an officer and a gentleman  :) although why you would remove a peice of the hud that was so revolutionary and functional!
TA spring & starcraft do not have a dedicated group move/independant move button, but I sure wish they did because it reduced keyboard usage (I am a beleiver that the less the player has to use the keyboard when playing, the better and more functional the game GUI. TA spring scores highly here, and SC II very poorly.)

Quote
Ships are far better balanced now (except for spire fleetships - that's being worked on, I believe).  An option should probably be added to "disable Spire fleetships" while the ships are being fixed though, because running up against certain Spire fleetship units can simple ruin a game, moreso than any other existing units (even eyebots, since those can now be defended against).

I think more than anything else, this is the single biggest problem with AI War currently: the AI usage of neinzul fleet ships.

consider:
you are on AIP 10, on a mark II planet. the AI has about 26 ships on most of its planets.

you attack the planet with a moderate force.

in situation A, the AI does not have spire fleetships. it reinforces with about 30 odd random ships that have a shipcap that is some small variant default 96. This is perfectly manageable, as the reinforcing ships have a total DPS of around 35% of a single shipcap.

in situation B, the AI has tractor platforms and stealth battleships unlocked. it reinforces with 4-5 of each plus a few other little ships. this is horrific and terrible, as the reinforcing ships have a total DPS and HP of 200% a normal shipcap. this is the equivalent of the AI reinforcing with 192 fighters... at AIP 10.

the difference in difficulty between situation A and situation B is huge.
this is increased further by the lack of counters for both of these ships- the radar dampening and sneakiness of the cloaked battleships makes it difficult to engage them with all your forces at once unless clumped, and none of the default ship types have a bonus VS the armour type of Tractor platforms, Turret. seige starships do not target them despite their high HP and size- this struck me as quite illogical as it took me a while to realise it was not firing. it adds up that Destroying 4-5 tractor platforms with MK I and MK II ships will take you a while, by which time the AI reinforces again, with a similar number of spire fleetships.

until the spawning of reinforcing ships is in some way proportional to their shipcaps- eg, spawning a shipcap=15 ship costs the same as spawning 6x shipcap=90 ships (or is 6x less likely), the AI unlocking low shipcap units is always going to artifically up the difficulty.

Quote
As for GUI and music, that basically boils down to personal taste mostly (at least the music). I did like the old sci fi-ish GUI, but the new one does not bother me, its not like it matters to me what the buttons look like (and they are not bad either imo, just different), all I am really interested in is pure gameplay, and the rest is fluff on top of it

I often get friends and housemates to try out AI war and most of them place great importance on visuals and polish, they will fail to be immersed or even dismiss the game out of hand if it dosnt look appealing. the menu screen & game lobby of 3.0 just looked that much more polished (even if it was lower-res).

Quote
The GUI on the game lobby screen looks much less proffesional than the 3.0 lobby. the menu panels are seperate, leaving a blank spot of grid in the bottom right hand corner on a wide screen that looks really poor.

just to come back to this point, does anyone else play at a resolution where this looks wonky?

1000th post!!
« Last Edit: March 14, 2011, 12:21:22 pm by superking »