AI Homeworld Defense

[Vacuity]

I'm afraid I'm still slightly confused as to how that would help.  Isn't that just copying the homeworld's problems onto the core worlds?  If I have a map with one core world per homeworld, won't I have to deal with all those (possibly overlapping) clone guardposts on the core world instead?  If I get a clone grav post and clone wrath lance on the core world how has this mechanic helped things?

If the idea is that you pick the "easiest route in" to the homeworld and take out all the clones on the way then that only really works on maps where the homeworld is guaranteed to have at least two approaches.  Additionally, that likely makes the core world the "climactic fight", rather than the homeworld, which seems a little odd.

I presume I am still missing something about the explanation, so my apologies for being stupid here...

[LaughingThesaurus]

I guess the biggest weakness is the idea that you can still only have one core world open to attack and thus it's still really tough to crack. However, if there are multiple core worlds you have access to (Or if you can get, say, a cloaked assault transport into the core worlds) you can exploit the weaknesses in the defense because it's more likely for there to actually BE weaknesses.

[Vacuity]

There's also an issue where on some maps it ends up necessary to go through a core world to a world beyond to reach something there, such as an ARS + Core Shield A.  At present that's already quite challenging, but might prove outright impossible under the setup you propose.

Edit: Thinking about it, this is also an issue with the idea I supported where core guardposts get separated onto core worlds as well.  One core guard post with tachyon coverage within range of the entrance/exit wormhole and the world becomes (at a minimum) exceedingly bloody to cross.  If one of the CSGs is on the far side of the planet then the player has a really serious and unavoidable problem.  Removing tachyon coverage from the core guardposts would solve that, but is not really desirable.

[LaughingThesaurus]

There very often is an alternate route, in situations like that. If you literally must go through a core world to reach a CSG-A, you might just be playing on a heavily chokepoint-y map anyway.

[Vacuity]

I'm willing to make chokepoint-heavy maps a bit more difficult in one way or another, but my concern is that it could easily make a map essentially impossible: I can't reach the CSG A(s) because one or more core guardposts are in the way, and I can't kill the core guardposts because I can't reach the CSG A(s).

That's a seriously undesirable side-effect no matter what the map type or style of play.

[KDR_11k]

Also it means core worlds are as dangerous as AI HWs. However it would also mean that the reserve would have to be used as it is on the HW which would make it easier to force it to split up.

[chemical_art]

The core worlds would be a lot more dangerious, but not as much. They do.t spawn with the current goodies AI HW do, their comm station would be vunnlerable, abd the strategic reserve would be less vigilant.

[Cyborg]

The core worlds would be a lot more dangerious, but not as much. They do.t spawn with the current goodies AI HW do, their comm station would be vunnlerable, abd the strategic reserve would be less vigilant.

Are you okay?

I have lost track of where this thread has gone. I'm going to say that we already have a couple ways to create a break in the stalemate. Showdown devices and the spire are two examples.

[chemical_art]

The core worlds would be a lot more dangerious, but not as much. They do.t spawn with the current goodies AI HW do, their comm station would be vunnlerable, abd the strategic reserve would be less vigilant.

Are you okay?

I have lost track of where this thread has gone. I'm going to say that we already have a couple ways to create a break in the stalemate. Showdown devices and the spire are two examples.

I was responding to:

Also it means core worlds are as dangerous as AI HWs. However it would also mean that the reserve would have to be used as it is on the HW which would make it easier to force it to split up.

In saying that the core HW would still not being as strong as a AI HW.

However, to your point, the features you mention are optional, while core and brutal picks are not. They are not on the same level, and if one is balancing defense features on the assumption of optional stalemate breakers then that isn't balance at all.

[LaughingThesaurus]

Absolutely what Chemical Art said. No Minor Faction should be necessary to beat a game of AI War in a reasonably plausible fashion. You should not, under any circumstance, need anything like Fallen Spire or Showdown Devices to finish the game unless you've made terrible mistakes and raised AIP to really high levels, kept core worlds on alert, etc, in which case... the AI should just kill you rather than there even being a stalemate in the first place. I mostly play without Minor Factions, myself.

[TechSY730]

Absolutely what Chemical Art said. No Minor Faction should be necessary to beat a game of AI War in a reasonably plausible fashion. You should not, under any circumstance, need anything like Fallen Spire or Showdown Devices to finish the game unless you've made terrible mistakes and raised AIP to really high levels, kept core worlds on alert, etc, in which case... the AI should just kill you rather than there even being a stalemate in the first place. I mostly play without Minor Factions, myself.

In this sort of case, eventually the AI will take aggressive action towards you with the sheer amount of "overflow" that will start being sent at you via border aggression, and if you let it keep going for really long, scrap waves. Once all the worlds fill up, which they will eventually, that can start being a painful amount of active aggression.
However, depending on your AIP, the rate of this aggression may not be enough to take you out. Although +AIP over time would solve that, not everyone plays with +AIP over time.
But then again, if you asked for an opponent whose max-strength does not grow over time if you don't do anything, stalemate prone situations if you don't take action as well is sort of a natural result.


That said, back during the AI HW buff period, Keith has stated he would like to see someone test out the new AI homeworlds without resorting to cloaked warhead cheese or superweapons, and see if it still seemed reasonable. Sadly, I don't think anyone got back to him on that, and maybe that's why it seems that AI homeworlds got overbuffed; no one vetted them using non-superweapon, non-cheese tactics. 

[Draco18s]

That said, back during the AI HW buff period, Keith has stated he would like to see someone test out the new AI homeworlds without resorting to cloaked warhead cheese or superweapons, and see if it still seemed reasonable. Sadly, I don't think anyone got back to him on that, and maybe that's why it seems that AI homeworlds got overbuffed; no one vetted them using non-superweapon, non-cheese tactics. 

Might be why my current game has stalled.

Every attempt I've made on the homeworlds so far has either resulted in catastrophic casulties with negligible progress or "reasonable" casualties and negligible progress.

[chemical_art]

That said, back during the AI HW buff period, Keith has stated he would like to see someone test out the new AI homeworlds without resorting to cloaked warhead cheese or superweapons, and see if it still seemed reasonable. Sadly, I don't think anyone got back to him on that, and maybe that's why it seems that AI homeworlds got overbuffed; no one vetted them using non-superweapon, non-cheese tactics. 

During the 6.X era I did it with a 7/7 game.

However, I rolled a half dozen times to ensure I wouldn't get a bad roll :/ And the HW attack was still a reasonable challenge, while the rest of the game I was asleep.

[KDR_11k]

The core worlds would be a lot more dangerious, but not as much. They do.t spawn with the current goodies AI HW do, their comm station would be vunnlerable, abd the strategic reserve would be less vigilant.

Who would ever fight on the HW instead of the core worlds then?

[TechSY730]

The core worlds would be a lot more dangerious, but not as much. They do.t spawn with the current goodies AI HW do, their comm station would be vunnlerable, abd the strategic reserve would be less vigilant.

Who would ever fight on the HW instead of the core worlds then?

I think the idea is the some of the (formerly) AI HW exclusive stuff will seed on the core worlds instead. Some of the stuff will still be on the AI homeworld and couldn't be "bypassed" (presumably, some of the core guard posts and at least one of the brutal picks, assuming the brutal pick system is still in place). So you will still have to do some fighting on the AI homeworld.

Plus, if you think you got the numbers, you might as well avoid having the homeworld alerted longer than needed, bypass the core world, and just go for the homeworld straight up. (This is assuming that taking out the coreworlds is an optional addition to help weaken the homeworld, through that "linked guard post" system or some other system)