Does AI strength to AIP need adjustment? (aka, is AIP too restrictive?)

[RCIX]

Wingflier: I would argue that the NSCA and NSBB are absolutely beastly against the AI.  Cloaking, Vampirism, and the healing ability makes those ships last a really long time.  Throw missiles or bombers on it and kite like a champ until everything is dead, then refill your HP on those conveniently placed wormhole gp.

I can see the AI getting very annoyed at its wormhole guard posts being used as Champion gas stations.

ROFL    The AI can go pound sand if it don't like it

Remember what we just did to the other normal guard posts?

Yea.

In regards to that, I've been kind of wanting wormhole guardposts to "put up or shut up" as it were. At least gain a load of shots so they can serve as repair disruptions for parking on a wormhole. Remember, you can always four shot them with an artillery golem 

Wasn't there some discussion of changing the way that crystal works? If that happens then a lot of this conversation about changing the economy appears a bit moot.

No big changes to how crystal works are planned currently, because none of the proposals could pass vetting.  For good reason, I think.

I'd be happy to spin my own if I could find an overview of what was already proposed.

[keith.lamothe]

It sounds like keith is waiting for... something before going ahead with major economy or combat changes. Not sure what though.

Generally only two ingredients are required: consensus and dev-time.  The former is actually more scarce on those subjects than the latter, believe it or not.

But I think the non-econ changes we've been discussing (the Lazy-AI toggle, basically) look worth trying for next release (with some possible adjustments to the exact numbers involved).  The dev-time part of that will need to wait a few days though.

[chemical_art]

Would be fine with shifting econ so it isnt so research dependeny and hw dominated as long as total econ isnt nerfed.

[TechSY730]

Wow, economy is such an important factor to almost everything in most strategy games, but it is one of the hardest things to balance. How do you deal with pressure?

[keith.lamothe]

Would be fine with shifting econ so it isnt so research dependeny and hw dominated as long as total econ isnt nerfed.

Yea, I'm figuring if it's clear that it's not actually an econ nerf then there wouldn't be as much opposition.  Though I don't think we need to change harvesters right now, with other significant changes coming.  That said, here are some numbers I think may work:

Average resource spots per planet from 4 => 7
MkI harvester stays at 20/sec
MkII harvester from 30/sec => 25/sec, knowledge cost from 4000 (for both) to 2500 (for both)
MkIII harvester from 55/sec => 32/sec, total knowledge cost from 9000 (for both) to 6000 (for both)

That changes the average per-planet from harvesters like this:
MkI: 80/sec => 140/sec
MkII: 120/sec  (+40/sec, K-cost 100 each) => 175/sec (+35/sec, K-cost 71 each)
MkIII: 220/sec (+140/sec, K-cost 64 each) => 224/sec (+84/sec, K-cost 71 each)

[Cinth]

Average resource spots per planet from 4 => 7
MkI harvester stays at 20/sec
MkII harvester from 30/sec => 25/sec, knowledge cost from 4000 (for both) to 2500 (for both)
MkIII harvester from 55/sec => 32/sec, total knowledge cost from 9000 (for both) to 6000 (for both)

That changes the average per-planet from harvesters like this:
MkI: 80/sec => 140/sec
MkII: 120/sec  (+40/sec, K-cost 100 each) => 175/sec (+35/sec, K-cost 71 each)
MkIII: 220/sec (+140/sec, K-cost 64 each) => 224/sec (+84/sec, K-cost 71 each)

I can see that working.. It's just a shifting of resources so each individual harvester is worth less overall (but you are giving us more nodes to harvest from). Also, it looks like a small buff on the large scale.

I'd actually like to see the before and after on my 119 controlled planet game.  I think I had around a 80k (m+c) income. Even in that game,  I could zero out my econ for hours rebuilding fleets

Edit: found the save and my PC said "Oh no, not again"

[Faulty Logic]

Basically it's a player strength check; if you're going to pop DCs while only holding 1-2 planets it should at least make you work for it 

I remain unconvinced. They are data centers, one of the few friendly structures in a galaxy of hate. Leave them be.

Or, if you must add this CPA thing, make it truly static and increase the number of DCs in the game.

[Diazo]

Basically it's a player strength check; if you're going to pop DCs while only holding 1-2 planets it should at least make you work for it 

I remain unconvinced. They are data centers, one of the few friendly structures in a galaxy of hate. Leave them be.

Or, if you must add this CPA thing, make it truly static and increase the number of DCs in the game.

My counterpoint would be that Data Centers are too effective.

When a low AIP game is hitting the AI HW's at 120 AIP with 80 or 100 AIP reduction from data centers? That's forcing you to take data centers or lose as the devs have to calibrate the AIs response assuming that players are going to nuke every data center they can.

Put another way, why does a single structure have the ability to cut the AI's response to your action in half?

D.

[RCIX]

Just want to point out that data centers will be next to useless in "normal" AIP games if they're nerfed for low AIP games.

[Toranth]

Basically it's a player strength check; if you're going to pop DCs while only holding 1-2 planets it should at least make you work for it 

I remain unconvinced. They are data centers, one of the few friendly structures in a galaxy of hate. Leave them be.

Or, if you must add this CPA thing, make it truly static and increase the number of DCs in the game.

It just occured to me:  What will this change mean for AI types like the Alarmist or One-way Doormaster?  Those basically require Datacenter killing to get a 'normal' game out of, anyway, because of the extra AIP-causing structures.

[keith.lamothe]

Just want to point out that data centers will be next to useless in "normal" AIP games if they're nerfed for low AIP games.

How would the usefulness of their AIP reduction be diminished by the counter attack?  Unless it actually kills you or starts a death spiral, it probably doesn't have any long term effect on the game.

@Toranth: good point on the AI types that get extra DCs, some accommodation would need to be made for those, but it's not too hard to accomplish.

[keith.lamothe]

Or, if you must add this CPA thing, make it truly static and increase the number of DCs in the game.

What do you mean by "truly static"?  I wasn't thinking it would scale with AIP, just with the count of DCs popped thus far.  Or do you mean make it not scale by that either?  Then it would need to either be strong enough that you couldn't survive popping even 1 on high difficulty, or weak enough that you could basically always survive popping one.

And in any event, wouldn't undoing a bit of the scaling-down of their effect on high difficulty be a more favorable-to-the-player compensation than increasing the count of DCs?  Assuming the numbers added up, I mean.

And I don't have to add it, it's just part of the toggleable thing that seemed to make sense.

[Histidine]

Quartering harvester K costs seems like it'd make lots of people have them simply on the basis of impulse buying. 500 K... why not?

I think halving K costs and output might be better. But then, my premise might also be completely wrong.

[keith.lamothe]

I think halving K costs and output might be better. But then, my premise might also be completely wrong.

The numbers I posted a few posts ago are closer to that, yea   But it's probably best to wait until after next release to mess with them.

[RCIX]

Just want to point out that data centers will be next to useless in "normal" AIP games if they're nerfed for low AIP games.

How would the usefulness of their AIP reduction be diminished by the counter attack?  Unless it actually kills you or starts a death spiral, it probably doesn't have any long term effect on the game.

@Toranth: good point on the AI types that get extra DCs, some accommodation would need to be made for those, but it's not too hard to accomplish.

Diazo seemed to be implying Data Centers should be less effective at AIP reduction