My Standards for 10/10 bug reports

[Faulty Logic]

I don't have a set of discrete criteria for my 10/10 games. I just evaluate based on whether or not something jumps out as unbalanced, or I have a lot of little things in my favor without a corresponding negative.

I suppose I should try a 5.071 game before I can demand further buffs, but I think the solution to the 10/10 "problem" will lie in beefing up the HWs.

About cheese: there is a very fine to nonexistant line between cheese and good tactics/strategy. Any definition of the distinction is bound to be either insanely complicated, self-contradicting, or vague.

Prefering "vague" I give my personal isCheese(tactic) function:
 
If it makes the game easy, or goes far beyond the intended scope of play then it is cheese.

No, I really cannot be much more specific, though I could give a long list of examples for things I consider cheese or not.

One not-cheese example that stands out, however: Finding new tactics from ship combinations and using them.

This is a very important part of the strategy and fun of this game, and one of the big reasons it is my favorite computer game ever.

[Kahuna]

I suppose I should try a 5.071 game before I can demand further buffs, but I think the solution to the 10/10 "problem" will lie in beefing up the HWs.

This is very true. How about increasing the amount of guarding ships and Guardians? A non alerted HW should have more guards than a non alerted normal planet. Non alerted HWs could also have a (10%-15%?) chance of getting reinforcements when all alerted planets do. You could think of this as an indirect AIP. HWs could also have a minimum of 1 brutal pick. And 25% chance to spawn a second brutal pick. 2 AIs both have 25% chance to spawn another brutal = 50%. Or 2x30%.

About cheese:

Hmm. Sometimes I use the term too widely.

[Bognor]

This is very true. How about increasing the amount of guarding ships and Guardians? A non alerted HW should have more guards than a non alerted normal planet. Non alerted HWs could also have a (10%-15%?) chance of getting reinforcements when all alerted planets do. You could think of this as an indirect AIP.

Actually, this is already implemented  :

Previously it was very easy to keep an AI from ever reinforcing its homeworld until the very end during the assault upon it. This is generally desirable as part of the game is not stirring up that hornets nest until you've got the extermination squad in position. But the complete lack of reinforcements there may be letting that end-challenge get a little too tame against careful players. So now there's a 0.25%/0.50%/1% chance on Diffs 7+/8+/9+ (respectively) of a homeworld receiving high reinforcement priority per reinforcement pulse.

HWs could also have a minimum of 1 brutal pick. And 25% chance to spawn a second brutal pick. 2 AIs both have 25% chance to spawn another brutal = 50%. Or 2x30%.

This is also already implemented  :

Now, for AI Homeworlds, it randomizes the three most brutal structures (Core Raid Engine, Core CPA, and AI Eye) separately from the rest of the structures:
On Diff 9+ it always gets two picks from this new set. So you could get an Eye + a Core Raid, or two CPAs, or two Eyes (which is actually kind of nice to you since they don't really stack), or whatever. But not 3 Core Raids. And not none of the above.
On Diff 8+ it randomly rolls (per homeworld) between one and two picks.
On Diff 7+ it always gets one pick.
Below Diff 7 it randomly rolls between zero and one picks.
As the set of core guard posts expands in the future (expansions, mainly), this "brutal" set can also be added to.

2x Eye has already been disabled

[TechSY730]

This is very true. How about increasing the amount of guarding ships and Guardians? A non alerted HW should have more guards than a non alerted normal planet. Non alerted HWs could also have a (10%-15%?) chance of getting reinforcements when all alerted planets do. You could think of this as an indirect AIP.

Actually, this is already implemented  :

Previously it was very easy to keep an AI from ever reinforcing its homeworld until the very end during the assault upon it. This is generally desirable as part of the game is not stirring up that hornets nest until you've got the extermination squad in position. But the complete lack of reinforcements there may be letting that end-challenge get a little too tame against careful players. So now there's a 0.25%/0.50%/1% chance on Diffs 7+/8+/9+ (respectively) of a homeworld receiving high reinforcement priority per reinforcement pulse.

True, but these chances are WAY too low. How about bumping 7+/8+/9+ to like 1%/2%/4% (aka, a factor of 4), and (less importantly) maybe give 5+/6+ the chances .25%/.5%?

[chemical_art]

At least I didn't break all the options here.

My waves were on. That's a plus!

[Diazo]

Careful here, I don't actually know how many reinforcement waves the AI gets over time but I'm pretty sure it is a lot.

A chance to reinforce the AI HW should be there I think but I'm not sure I want to boost it.

Keep in mind that long games happen also, the earliest I'll be attacking an AI HW in my current game is the 15 hour mark although 16 hours is more likely.

Boosting the AI HW reinforcement could quickly make those worlds invincible in a longer game.

Having said that, there are apparently changes coming to the AI HWs so I'm waiting on those before continuing on this issue.

D.

[Mánagarmr]

This forum I think is mostly (all?) native-english speakers.

You have no idea how wrong you are

[Kahuna]

Me speek englesh very baad. Me speek englesh so baad others can no understend of what me speekeng. Makes that you mad bro? Mad bro you?

[Diazo]

Well, good on you guys for having English good enough that it fooled me then. 

But really, the level of english I see sometimes on other forums is painful at times, it is nice to be see the posts on this forum in quality english.

D.

[Mánagarmr]

Amusingly enough, the worst abusers of the english language are often ignorant americans.

[Kahuna]

Amusingly enough, the worst abusers of the english language are often ignorant americans.

Who are also unable to understand that spelling and grammar errors should be expected from anyone who doesn't speak English as their first language. I for example have only studied English in school and only need and use English in the internet. Or when using my computer in general.. (I've changed the language of my operating system to English).. actually now that I think about this.. sometimes I use English more than my own language

[Diazo]

Heh.

I am certainly aware of that problem.

Being a native english (canadian) speaker who re-reads his posts before they go up, I like to think I'm posting with quality english.

However I do have a problem of wandering all over the place, looking back at my last AAR is painful reading the walls of text I put up.

I'm working on it and will do my next AAR differently, but it is something I'm working on.

D.