Author Topic: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?  (Read 14342 times)

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #30 on: September 01, 2012, 01:44:53 pm »
Odd, I do the opposite.

Outlast the planet till the ai runs out of special forces to send. If the SF start to overwhlem, hide on a world the sf don't care about, burst back on the scene and slay some more before they overwhelm you again.
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline Professor Paul1290

  • Sr. Member Mark II
  • ****
  • Posts: 395
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #31 on: September 01, 2012, 01:58:00 pm »
In some way, the new Special Forces are exactly such a thing. Wipe out the planet before the blob of SFs arrive :P

Something like that, though that's a bit more "macro" than I was thinking.


Something else that comes to mind that would cause a commander to "split the blobs" is when there are multiple places or things you do not want the enemy to reach, such as when you need to protect multiple positions or objects.

This is something AI War doesn't have much of within systems currently. Right now maybe you try to keep AI units away from certain easy to kill starships and maybe the wormhole you came through if you didn't build any defenses on the other side yet, but that's usually it. Creating more situations where the player would be encouraged to get more slow moving "soft friendlies" from point A to point B within an AI controlled system would help with this.

Offline barryvm

  • Jr. Member Mark III
  • **
  • Posts: 88
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #32 on: September 01, 2012, 02:28:41 pm »
A guardian with large area of effect damage and long range would go a long way to stop me forming large blobs and moving them around planets towards their destination without paying much/any attention.
Or something similar to the Spire ship's beams which damages many units in a row (by which I am NOT asking for the AI to get the spire ships at ANY point).

Are the eyes not made to counter the strategic blob attack ?
Besides, blobs moving stately around attacking hundreds of AI ships are a beautiful sight.

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #33 on: September 01, 2012, 02:37:44 pm »
About the "it's too easy to free the whole planet, and its too easy to free ships in general" and the "planet's don't have much on them", I suggested to give the AI more on each planet, but make it harder to free AI ships. This would make planets more challenging because they have more on them, harder to free the whole planet due to there being more on that planet on average, and harder to "bait" AI defenders because it is not only harder to free the whole planet (again, due to there being more on the planet), but harder to free defenders in general (because each unit wouldn't free themselves at a sneeze).

Also, I wonder if making the AI smarter with tactical fleet management would encourage humans to be smarter with it as well. They do a decent job with tractoring and cloaking units, but I wonder if clever positioning tricks (kiting, moving ships away from their counters, retreating damaged ships to engineers, etc) with ships in general would be good behaviors for the AI to have. (Of course, this would need to be implemented in such a way that the AI doesn't try to kill your CPU in each battle when trying to compute how to micro)

EDIT: Also, I think buffing the AOE guardians like lightning guardians a bit may be in order. In fact, what ever happened to that balance pass to the guardians?

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #34 on: September 01, 2012, 02:53:54 pm »
EDIT: Also, I think buffing the AOE guardians like lightning guardians a bit may be in order. In fact, what ever happened to that balance pass to the guardians?
The general impression I got when mentioning that around the time I buffed the core guard posts was "no! guardians don't need a buff! please!" ;)
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 KDR_11k

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 904
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #35 on: September 01, 2012, 03:56:02 pm »
The biggest difference to milsims is that your units in AI War are usually disposable. Even a total wipe on the offense just means you need to wait a bit until your full force is rebuilt.

I'm strongly opposed to using AOE as an anti-blob system. That would be plain unfair due to the limited formation options and if you had those options you could easily tell your forces to spread out and not get hit by much AOE. Also AOE negates a lot of the force strength, greatly rewarding the use of small numbers of hardy units (i.e. starship fleets).

Opps, I'm wrong!

I will say I would like more timed events of a similar flavor: Bad if you lose, and a carrot if you win.

A super carrot?
« Last Edit: September 01, 2012, 04:07:38 pm by KDR_11k »

Offline Toranth

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,244
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #36 on: September 01, 2012, 04:05:49 pm »
About the "it's too easy to free the whole planet, and its too easy to free ships in general" and the "planet's don't have much on them", I suggested to give the AI more on each planet, but make it harder to free AI ships. This would make planets more challenging because they have more on them, harder to free the whole planet due to there being more on that planet on average, and harder to "bait" AI defenders because it is not only harder to free the whole planet (again, due to there being more on the planet), but harder to free defenders in general (because each unit wouldn't free themselves at a sneeze).
(snip)
Part of the problem is that systems are small these days.  Lots of things have ranges in excess of 10,000 distance, and plenty of stuff has speed over 100 as well.  This means that as soon as you've entered a system, pretty much everything can be involved in the battle in no more than 20 or 30 seconds.


In some way, the new Special Forces are exactly such a thing. Wipe out the planet before the blob of SFs arrive :P
Except that now there are redundant versions of these things. 
Super Guardians = Golemite / Crafty Spire AI for everyone.
SF defensive fleets = Hybrids in Defensive mode.
A couple of other ideas have been floated, but they seemed similar to existing idea, i.e. new AI Eyes.

While I'm glad to see something done to give the AI an actual reactive feel, I can't help but feel that SF fleets are nothing more than a defensive only version of Hybrids.  Super guardians would be a scaled-down, defensive only version of Golems/Spirecraft.  Not necessarily bad, but kinda makes those AI types silly.

The complaint about taking planets being to easy has a couple of causes that I can see:
1)  Each planet stands alone.  The AI may have 100,000 ships in universe, but only 1000 on any given planet. 
2)  There's almost never any need to act against more than one planet at a time.
3)  An AI planet's main defense is not the ships on it, but the AIP increase the player takes if the system is destroyed.
4)  Planets are DEFENSIVE threats, aka a threat to an attacking player's fleet only.  Waves are the only real threat to a player's survival.

There are things that can be done to address these issues. 
For item #1, the Hybrids and the new SF fleets are attempts to compensate.  I'm not sure what else can be done, except uping the scale of the response ("Alert!  The AI Homeworld has dispatched a Hunter/Killer to deal with your invading fleet!  It will arrive in X:xx!")
For issue #2, it has been suggested that there could be special timed events (like the Rebel Human Colonies) to promote spreading out.  Unfortunately, the only 'penalty' the game has against players in to increase AIP, and there's already a lot of stuff that does that.
item #3 is more meta-game, not tactical - but it makes the point that what the player is doing WILL have consequences and increase future difficulty.  It's also the reason high-level players attack to neuter rather than kill.  Changing this changes the entire structure of the game.
Finally, #4.  There's really nothing to be done here unless waves are dramatically reduced in size/power.  Then, there would be room for the AI planets to get their offensive act together.  Right now, however, there's only threat.  And threat is basically a next Wave "+ x ships" counter.  4 is also complicated by the fact that humans tend to minimize exposed surface to the AI, through the use of whipping boys, gate raiding, Warp jammers, etc.  Switching the planets to having offensive threat obsoletes all of those.


So, what do people actually want changed?  I think Keith had it right:  The real problem is not that it is too easy, but that it is too uninteresting.  If all planets are the same, then all your battles are the same.
The game already has plenty of things that are interesting - Think of the Peacemaker AI type.  Would people like it better if more planets had things like OMDs, Grav Drills, Planetary Cloakers, Interplanetary Munitions Boosters, Black Hole Machines, Armor Booster/Inhibitors, SuperFortresses, CounterSpys, Dyson Spheres, Radar Jammers, Neinzul Rocket Corps, Neinzul Nests/Clusters, Troop Accelerator, Alarm posts, Devourer Golem, Raid Engine, Attritioners, or AI Eyes?
Every one of those has some impact on how to approach a planet, including determining if it is even WORTH messing with a planet.
Do people just want more planetary specials?  Maybe a planet with a Grav Drill, Planetary Cloaker, and 2 SuperFortresses?  Would anyone consider that "too easy" or boring?  Actually, i think that'd be pretty awesome, myself... Maybe a new AI Type - the Heavy Builder, that gets multiple specials per planet.

Offline KDR_11k

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 904
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #37 on: September 01, 2012, 04:14:25 pm »
Well, I suggested an AI type that also reacts to short-term player actions to force more guerilla style play, maybe that could be turned into an AI plot instead:

http://arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=9366

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #38 on: September 01, 2012, 04:27:19 pm »
About the "it's too easy to free the whole planet, and its too easy to free ships in general" and the "planet's don't have much on them", I suggested to give the AI more on each planet, but make it harder to free AI ships. This would make planets more challenging because they have more on them, harder to free the whole planet due to there being more on that planet on average, and harder to "bait" AI defenders because it is not only harder to free the whole planet (again, due to there being more on the planet), but harder to free defenders in general (because each unit wouldn't free themselves at a sneeze).
(snip)
Part of the problem is that systems are small these days.  Lots of things have ranges in excess of 10,000 distance, and plenty of stuff has speed over 100 as well.  This means that as soon as you've entered a system, pretty much everything can be involved in the battle in no more than 20 or 30 seconds.

Hmm, I wonder if it would be good for the game to cut all fleets ship, guardian, and possibly starship ranges to 3/4 or so of their current range, or something like that (and associated ranges, like auto-kite distance, repair range, etc., though these would need to be considered on a case by case basis).
Notice I deliberate left out turrets. Messing with turret range would really mess with existing turret placements, though it wouldn't be the end of the world. Also, I left out spirecraft, golems, and above, as having good range would be something to make them unique. And finally, I left out support ranges (engineer repair range, forcefield range, etc), as these feel about right currently.

Offline Faulty Logic

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,194
  • Bane of the AI
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #39 on: September 01, 2012, 04:40:59 pm »
I see no problem with strategic blobbing: minimizing the portion of the fleet needed for defence is one of the overarching tensions of the game. If you have excellent defences in place, then using the entire fleet is your reward.

Tactical blobbing, however, often diminishes the fun for me. I agree with Techsy's proposed solution, but I don't think that alone will be enough. I want there to be AI patrolling defence fleets.
http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=9137

If offensive AI actions are the only thing to threaten us, I think that there should be guardians which can trigger those actions (unless destroyed, which requires the player to at least launch a strike force from their blob).

http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=9088

A lot of good ideas here. That said, I think the change should be more of a tweak than an overhaul, because the actual taking of non-homeworld planets is not that important a part of the game.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2012, 04:53:30 pm by Faulty Logic »
If warheads can't solve it, use more warheads.

Offline Hearteater

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,334
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #40 on: September 01, 2012, 05:05:00 pm »
The the existing guardians are there to stay, more or less, but I have wanted for a while to do "super guardians" to kind of bridge the gap for the AI between starships/guardians and golems.
You know I support this idea :) .

Offline Martyn van Buren

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #41 on: September 01, 2012, 05:10:40 pm »
A guardian with large area of effect damage and long range would go a long way to stop me forming large blobs and moving them around planets towards their destination without paying much/any attention.
Or something similar to the Spire ship's beams which damages many units in a row (by which I am NOT asking for the AI to get the spire ships at ANY point).

Are the eyes not made to counter the strategic blob attack ?
Besides, blobs moving stately around attacking hundreds of AI ships are a beautiful sight.

Do we even think more AOE would help?  I feel like a guardian with a long-range, powerful AOE strike would encourage me to send in a cap of raid starships first to kill it and clear the way for my blob, much as I do with ion cannons.

Offline orzelek

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,096
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #42 on: September 01, 2012, 05:47:16 pm »
About the "it's too easy to free the whole planet, and its too easy to free ships in general" and the "planet's don't have much on them", I suggested to give the AI more on each planet, but make it harder to free AI ships. This would make planets more challenging because they have more on them, harder to free the whole planet due to there being more on that planet on average, and harder to "bait" AI defenders because it is not only harder to free the whole planet (again, due to there being more on the planet), but harder to free defenders in general (because each unit wouldn't free themselves at a sneeze).
(snip)
Part of the problem is that systems are small these days.  Lots of things have ranges in excess of 10,000 distance, and plenty of stuff has speed over 100 as well.  This means that as soon as you've entered a system, pretty much everything can be involved in the battle in no more than 20 or 30 seconds.

Hmm, I wonder if it would be good for the game to cut all fleets ship, guardian, and possibly starship ranges to 3/4 or so of their current range, or something like that (and associated ranges, like auto-kite distance, repair range, etc., though these would need to be considered on a case by case basis).
Notice I deliberate left out turrets. Messing with turret range would really mess with existing turret placements, though it wouldn't be the end of the world. Also, I left out spirecraft, golems, and above, as having good range would be something to make them unique. And finally, I left out support ranges (engineer repair range, forcefield range, etc), as these feel about right currently.

I would actually start from something like overall range reduction proposed here and then increase reinforcements a bit. This and new focus logic should lead to more tactical options when fighting for given planet.

Also increasing planetary space (if feasible?) or making sure that things are spaced by certain distance would help in creating the "battlefields in battlefield" fell that is long gone from game. Certain units like snipers, bombards and few others would need some special logic probably since they severely disturb ability to fight smaller fights on planet rather than fighting with whole planet.

Offline DeBunny

  • Newbie Mark II
  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • The Watcher
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #43 on: September 01, 2012, 07:24:41 pm »
I am largely neutral to blobbing being a problem, as it were, but I don't mind the idea of having to think a bit more.
That sounds entertaining enough.

Personally liking the idea of super guardians, whether they're optional or not.


Also mentioning an idea that occurred to me when folks mentioned spire beam weapons and ion cannons, as decent responses to things with some adjustments.
What if there was an AI weapon placement that worked like the ion cannon, in that it instakilled by mark, but shot a faster fat projectile in a straight line, that pierced?

If it shot a thing into a blob, it would just carve a bloody hole through the group, unless they were spread about or deliberately moved.

Maybe it's a terrible idea, but it seemed like an interesting union of the two ideas.

Offline Wingflier

  • Core Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,753
  • To add me on Steam, click the little Steam icon ^
Re: Discussion: How to make "blobbing" a less viable tactic?
« Reply #44 on: September 01, 2012, 09:49:02 pm »
There seems to be a lot of community interest in these "Super Guardians", perhaps I should make a Mantis Report on their behalf :P
"Inner peace is the void of expectation. It is the absence of our shared desperation to feel a certain way."