I know I was slow to discover this but...

[chemical_art]

8 HW games on a 10 world map are interesting.

[Diazo]

That.....

would be one word for it I guess?

The game is not lasting long regardless of what happens.

D.

[Coppermantis]

I wanted to try that once. But I knew it would end poorly for me, but I decided not to.

Good luck if you try that.

[chemical_art]

There may have been a time it was hard, with multi-hw games humans getting diminishing caps not only for increasing mk's but it used to be that while caps increase with mult-hw, it was not a 1 * n increase, but less then that.

Now, caps directly increase both in mark and hw games.

However, I think this is fine. A 8 hw game on a 10 planet game does highlight something I suspected very much. Initially, the player is an absolute juggernaut. On a 10 / 10 game, the ai was sending 100 raid waves and 100 normal waves. This is on low caps. With my several thousands of units I laughed manically.

Toward the end, approaching 30ish aip, the ai was launching 1k waves.

End result? Low AIP games favor multi-hw games much more, but any aip above the floor is devastating and at 8 games will very quickly spiral out of control.

[Hearteater]

Maybe multi-HW should get a +AIP effect and a much smaller multiplier so the early game is an actual challange, and the late game doesn't get unwinnable if you leave the AIP floor.

[LaughingThesaurus]

I actually did this before you because screwing around and trying to break games is really fun for me.

[Cinth]

Maybe multi-HW should get a +AIP effect and a much smaller multiplier so the early game is an actual challange, and the late game doesn't get unwinnable if you leave the AIP floor.

I have a current 10/10 @ 16 Hws and it is playable still at 401 AIP. Early game has its own challenges now and mid game just gets increasingly brutal. At 800 AIP waves come in at a whopping 180,000 ships 

[chemical_art]

Maybe multi-HW should get a +AIP effect and a much smaller multiplier so the early game is an actual challange, and the late game doesn't get unwinnable if you leave the AIP floor.

I have a current 10/10 @ 16 Hws and it is playable still at 401 AIP. Early game has its own challenges now and mid game just gets increasingly brutal. At 800 AIP waves come in at a whopping 180,000 ships 

Hence the title 

I never claimed to be the first.

I bring this up for I notice the ai "defenses" whether it be forts, attritioners, etc, don't scale with number of HW. As a result, defenive ai types are pushovers with very many HW.

[Cinth]

Maybe multi-HW should get a +AIP effect and a much smaller multiplier so the early game is an actual challange, and the late game doesn't get unwinnable if you leave the AIP floor.

I have a current 10/10 @ 16 Hws and it is playable still at 401 AIP. Early game has its own challenges now and mid game just gets increasingly brutal. At 800 AIP waves come in at a whopping 180,000 ships 

Hence the title 

I never claimed to be the first.

I bring this up for I notice the ai "defenses" whether it be forts, attritioners, etc, don't scale with number of HW. As a result, defenive ai types are pushovers with very many HW.

I can agree with that. I haven't played against a defensive AI in awhile, but the seeding of specials could be scaled up.
I just wanted to offer a counter to your observations.  You can play a normal game with multiple homeworlds and get a good challenge across all AIP segemnts. I really don't see a need to add more AIP penalties or effects.

[contingencyplan]

Maybe multi-HW should get a +AIP effect and a much smaller multiplier so the early game is an actual challange, and the late game doesn't get unwinnable if you leave the AIP floor.

I have a current 10/10 @ 16 Hws and it is playable still at 401 AIP. Early game has its own challenges now and mid game just gets increasingly brutal. At 800 AIP waves come in at a whopping 180,000 ships 

Hence the title 

I never claimed to be the first.

I bring this up for I notice the ai "defenses" whether it be forts, attritioners, etc, don't scale with number of HW. As a result, defenive ai types are pushovers with very many HW.

This applies to things like Golems as well. In a 16-HW game I was playing [1], for example, I had to give up on using my Botnet golem - when a wave / threat in a system noticed it and began attacking it, it would get nuked down from full health in a matter of seconds just due to the sheer number of attackers, meaning I was having to fight an additional exo wave with no real benefit [2].

When I have some time, I'll probably post a thread to discuss issues related to high-HW games (especially the "losing the ability to construct unlocked ships" UI bug). Maybe tomorrow...


[1]: I abandoned that game after the recent cap-size changes; I think the game decided I had changed my mind and wanted to play on normal caps rather than very low, which was REALLY not going to work on my machine (~10k fleet ships, running under Wine).

[2]: Of course, it's entirely possible that I just wasn't using it as intended / wasn't playing well. My frustration was that the Botnet would die in a matter of seconds - it was impossible to see what was happening, pause, and even try to move the thing out of harm's way.

[Cinth]

This applies to things like Golems as well. In a 16-HW game I was playing [1], for example, I had to give up on using my Botnet golem - when a wave / threat in a system noticed it and began attacking it, it would get nuked down from full health in a matter of seconds just due to the sheer number of attackers, meaning I was having to fight an additional exo wave with no real benefit [2].

Botnet is ok. Use it against fleet ships and have some ships nearby to support it. MRS are also good to have close to keep it alive. Just back off the golem so it can repair while your support ships take on the wave. Don't involve your Botnet in Exo fights though.

When I have some time, I'll probably post a thread to discuss issues related to high-HW games (especially the "losing the ability to construct unlocked ships" UI bug). Maybe tomorrow...

UI limitation. With 16 bonus types you don't really need the ARS anyway.

[1]: I abandoned that game after the recent cap-size changes; I think the game decided I had changed my mind and wanted to play on normal caps rather than very low, which was REALLY not going to work on my machine (~10k fleet ships, running under Wine).

Run ultra low caps with 16 homeworlds.

[2]: Of course, it's entirely possible that I just wasn't using it as intended / wasn't playing well. My frustration was that the Botnet would die in a matter of seconds - it was impossible to see what was happening, pause, and even try to move the thing out of harm's way.

Like I mentioned above, you have to support golems with your fleet. That will take the pressure off it enough for you to get some use from them. Spirecraft are very useful and replaceable to an extent.

[Hearteater]

For a Botnet, put him under a ton of Force Fields and treat him like a turret.  You don't care about the damage reduction...it already does an insane amount and will still 1-shot almost everything.  But in a 16-HW game, you should have plenty of FF cap available to keep it safe.

[keith.lamothe]

In other words: if you can still see the botnet, place more forcefields on it.

[contingencyplan]

For a Botnet, put him under a ton of Force Fields and treat him like a turret.  You don't care about the damage reduction...it already does an insane amount and will still 1-shot almost everything.  But in a 16-HW game, you should have plenty of FF cap available to keep it safe.

In other words: if you can still see the botnet, place more forcefields on it.

Heh, fair enough. On that note (just so I'm clear), is the damage reduction a flat 75% regardless of how many FFs something's under, or does it depend on the number of FFs?

[keith.lamothe]

Heh, fair enough. On that note (just so I'm clear), is the damage reduction a flat 75% regardless of how many FFs something's under, or does it depend on the number of FFs?

Doesn't depend on number of FFs, just 75%