Poll: Worst Unit Of The (time interval) Award (IV)

[Wanderer]

They need to move to be able to trigger a minefield, yes.  But if they hit a minefield, park for 1 second, and then move again, they will hit the same minefield as they start moving.  Solution?  Riots. Tractor Modues. Lots of little waypoints   And in practice I imagine a dense attack situation would lead to more than 16 enemy ships touching each minefield during the wormhole exiting.

Hmm, just thought of something.  Grav IIIs forcing 2kph through a minefield COULD result in significant 'continuous' hits.  I wonder how 'wide' a minefield is in seconds at 2kph...

Nummy.  I have new toys.

[Eternaly_Lost]

Personally, I am not sure if the buff to the Warp Jammer is good enough given that it takes just 1 Starship on the Warp Jammer's planet to send the AI onto alert from human forces, I don't see any time that I could use it, given that if you don't leave any defences on a planet, the AI likes to wander in and kill it, and if you leave a defense you just set the AI on alert from that meaning that the Warp Jammer bonus might as well have been plays smooth Jazz well you watch it, for all the tactical difference it is going to make.

I do like the Harvester and Exoshield changes.

[Bognor]

Personally, I am not sure if the buff to the Warp Jammer is good enough given that it takes just 1 Starship on the Warp Jammer's planet to send the AI onto alert from human forces ...

My understanding is that the Warp Jammer would prevent ships on the planet containing the Warp Jammer from putting adjacent planets on alert.

From the release notes:

* Warp Jammer Command Stations, in honor of tying for third in the first "Worst Unit" poll it was eligible for:
** Now prevent their planets from putting adjacent AI planets on alert. 
*** Those adjacent planets can still be put on alert any other way (for example, but another bordering human world without a jammer or by a significant human presence on the planet or a different adjacent planet).

the planet = the planet we're talking about going on alert, not the planet with the warp jumper, I presume.

[TechSY730]

Personally, I am not sure if the buff to the Warp Jammer is good enough given that it takes just 1 Starship on the Warp Jammer's planet to send the AI onto alert from human forces, I don't see any time that I could use it, given that if you don't leave any defences on a planet, the AI likes to wander in and kill it, and if you leave a defense you just set the AI on alert from that meaning that the Warp Jammer bonus might as well have been plays smooth Jazz well you watch it, for all the tactical difference it is going to make.

I do like the Harvester and Exoshield changes.

The Warp Jammer command station does not put adjacent AI planets by its mere presense, unlike normal command stations (or neutral planets, for that matter). However, sending in a military force on that adjacent planet will put it on alert.

Thankfully, human military presence on human planets will not trigger AI alertness (or at least, it shouldn't), meaning you can build up and pile on starships and other stuff all you want on the planet with the warp jammer and the planets adjacent to the warp jammer will never go on alert. Only when you send in enough military to trigger "alertness" will the planet go onto alert.

You are right though. The warp jammer command station won't do squat against freed ships or any other non-warping method the AI uses to send ships into your planet.

[keith.lamothe]

Don't misunderstand.  Though I like options, I'm really just discussing one of the ways this game is heavily differentiated from similar games in the same general concept.  It's not really a gripe, per se, but a discussion of mechanics.  In general, this game is an inverted triangle to difficulty as you 'gain speed'.

Yea, I don't think anything that's literally been the same since before 1.0, considering the kind of stuff that has changed since then, is really in need of changing.  And I'm not thinking of trying to make fundamental changes to the raiding/guerilla/rebuilding stuff, but rather seeing a gap in the gameplay that makes a nice target for expansion features   Anyway, enough about that, talking about stuff this early would just cause disappointment later.

There's little reason to raid *1* outpost, for example, when all the reinforcements will just go to a different guardpost in the same system, making the rest that much harder to raid.

Actually, when a planet is reinforced each reinforceable structure (guard post, command station, etc) is given a certain "X" strength of ships.  That X does not vary by the number of reinforceable structures in the system (otherwise doing a full neuter of a system would just result in reinforcement dumping a pile of ships on the command station).  So knocking out a guard post does reduce the total amount of ships a planet will receive per reinforcement, though it also reduces the invisible "population cap" beyond which any additional guarding ships on that planet will be automatically freed.

Of course, some systems require your entire fleet to 'raid', but that's more attacking the juggernautt in pieces than 'raiding'.

"Oh look, 3000 human ships!  That tickles!"

My concern here is more about the mapgen resource balancing, but as mentioned, that'll take some mechanical tinkering to change.  Until then I can live with the dynamic of economy being balanced back towards harvesters a while.  It'll certainly make my low-world high AI games easier.

It's not a huge deal in principle.  I figure I can probably change homeworlds to have 10 spots instead of 12 and normal planets to have 2-4 instead of 1-4 in half an hour (most of that's just finding the code and understanding it), and test to see if it moves stuff around pretty quick.  The tricky part would be if it does, in fact, move stuff around

[Nodor]

I appear to play oddly.

In my last several attempts at taking 110 planets, I've run into situations where I'm dealing with either Blade Spawners, Zenith Bombards, and/or Sentinal Frigates in the AI's hands.   Because my fleet ball has an expected lifespan of 3-4 seconds when facing these foes, and due to the Raid Engine AI's, technologist AI's, and exo-galactic strikes, I have been unable to risk my fleet ball. 

As a result, I am now frequently reducing planets 2 jumps out to just command centers, warp gates, and wormhole guardposts via hours of micro with starships or sniper style units.   Guerilla Raiding is still effective, it's still reasonably efficient and while it may not be as fast as the fleet ball smash option, depending on the tactics/ships, it can be very effective.

What I am trying to say, is while these options may not be the best for you, the raiding balance is in a fairly good place and should not be messed with until 6.0 throws everything into the air.

[TechSY730]

Don't misunderstand.  Though I like options, I'm really just discussing one of the ways this game is heavily differentiated from similar games in the same general concept.  It's not really a gripe, per se, but a discussion of mechanics.  In general, this game is an inverted triangle to difficulty as you 'gain speed'.

Yea, I don't think anything that's literally been the same since before 1.0, considering the kind of stuff that has changed since then, is really in need of changing.  And I'm not thinking of trying to make fundamental changes to the raiding/guerilla/rebuilding stuff, but rather seeing a gap in the gameplay that makes a nice target for expansion features   Anyway, enough about that, talking about stuff this early would just cause disappointment later.

Yea, these sorts of discussions can be tabled until AI war becomes the focus again and there are some more concrete proposals on the table.
I would like to say that I really don't want a "massive" change in the "feel" of the game. Even through everything its been through, the feel of the most of the overall game strategies in 5.0 still "feels" the same as the most of the overall game strategies in 3.0. Sure, things are much more polished, and some changed in mechanics have really altered strategies, and I fear AIP much more, but the over "feel" of how to approach the game is still the same.

My concern here is more about the mapgen resource balancing, but as mentioned, that'll take some mechanical tinkering to change.  Until then I can live with the dynamic of economy being balanced back towards harvesters a while.  It'll certainly make my low-world high AI games easier.

It's not a huge deal in principle.  I figure I can probably change homeworlds to have 10 spots instead of 12 and normal planets to have 2-4 instead of 1-4 in half an hour (most of that's just finding the code and understanding it), and test to see if it moves stuff around pretty quick.  The tricky part would be if it does, in fact, move stuff around

I would be for this change, if it doesn't move around wormholes in existing save games. In this case, it is an easy fix.
If it does, no need to stress yourself out to try "rejigger" the system to make it "backwards compatible" with this change, especially with AVWW 1.0 looming in a week or so.

[TechSY730]

I appear to play oddly.

In my last several attempts at taking 110 planets

That's pretty much all that's needed right there. The game is designed to punish you (aka, the AI REALLY hating you) if you start taking that much. But, it is doable.
EDIT: I'm not criticizing or insulting your strategy, but rather pointing out the game is designed to be very tough if you start doing this. But it is a perfectly valid strategy.

And I can see why keeping a "fleet ball" around for defense would be needed when facing this sort of situation, and thus must resort to "raiding" with small-ish fleets for offense.
As I said, raiding can be effective, its just not as effective as similarly sized detachments (scaling for the scale of unit counts/unit caps) of other RTS, and the per-ship ship caps sometimes make it such that you can't work around that by building more.

[Nodor]

"you can't work around that by building more."

THIS.

I cannot stress how important it is for brute force to NOT always be the correct choice.  Since I lack the CPM to play starcraft 2 (35 does not cut it) I tend to macro RTS games (Did I mention I like the pause option?).  Not having the option put factories on "spawn ships" with a target path to the enemy homeworld, and then wait for the game to end because I out economied/built/acquired is a very refreshing experience in an RTS.

The differnce for me in AI War vs. Starcraft 2, is one requires fast mouse clicks and optimized tactics, the other requires thinking through complex strategic options and selecting the right mix of tools and then using them effectively.

[rickynumber24]

Part of the reason the pacing for this game seems odd, particularly to 'older hands' who are more used to all the little details in between, is because of the surge-wait optimal method of playing.  It would be best if we returned to base to pick up new ships continuously, actually, but the time that can sometimes be involved in that when you're warring 3 worlds out can be prohibitive.  So can the K for the Factory Ships.  There's little reason to raid *1* outpost, for example, when all the reinforcements will just go to a different guardpost in the same system, making the rest that much harder to raid.

I thought that reinforcement waves were multiplied by the number of guard posts in the system, and therefore blowing up guard posts reduces the number of enemy reinforcements.  Have I been misunderstanding that part of the documentation?

[Hearteater]

As Keith clarified:

Actually, when a planet is reinforced each reinforceable structure (guard post, command station, etc) is given a certain "X" strength of ships.  That X does not vary by the number of reinforceable structures in the system (otherwise doing a full neuter of a system would just result in reinforcement dumping a pile of ships on the command station).  So knocking out a guard post does reduce the total amount of ships a planet will receive per reinforcement, though it also reduces the invisible "population cap" beyond which any additional guarding ships on that planet will be automatically freed.

So yes, killing Guard Posts does reduce the number of ships received on a reinforcement pulse.

[keith.lamothe]

It's a good thing I decided to stick my coding and not reply at that particular time, or I'd have been ninja'd at quoting myself.

[Wanderer]

As Keith clarified:

Actually, when a planet is reinforced each reinforceable structure (guard post, command station, etc) is given a certain "X" strength of ships.  That X does not vary by the number of reinforceable structures in the system (otherwise doing a full neuter of a system would just result in reinforcement dumping a pile of ships on the command station).  So knocking out a guard post does reduce the total amount of ships a planet will receive per reinforcement, though it also reduces the invisible "population cap" beyond which any additional guarding ships on that planet will be automatically freed.

So yes, killing Guard Posts does reduce the number of ships received on a reinforcement pulse.

That is not how I understand it:

Q: I guess the question is does the AI get a set number of planets to reinforce (he can reinforce 100 ships to a planet with 5 command posts or 20 to a planet with 1 command post as 1 reinforcement) or a set number of ships to reinforce that he must spread out according to the available command centers?
 
A: Yes, a set number of planets per reinforcement event. This is dependent on how many planets do not belong to the AI, as discussed in the main body of the article above. The ships are a set number per planet, roughly speaking, so if there are fewer guard posts then it will reinforce more heavily at the remaining ones. But it's using rough percentiles, not fixed numbers, so the numbers won't line up exactly. It's in your favor to have fewer posts there, let's just say.
 

From the wiki, here: http://www.arcengames.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=AI_War_-_AI_Reinforcements

[TechSY730]

As Keith clarified:

Actually, when a planet is reinforced each reinforceable structure (guard post, command station, etc) is given a certain "X" strength of ships.  That X does not vary by the number of reinforceable structures in the system (otherwise doing a full neuter of a system would just result in reinforcement dumping a pile of ships on the command station).  So knocking out a guard post does reduce the total amount of ships a planet will receive per reinforcement, though it also reduces the invisible "population cap" beyond which any additional guarding ships on that planet will be automatically freed.

So yes, killing Guard Posts does reduce the number of ships received on a reinforcement pulse.

That is not how I understand it:

Q: I guess the question is does the AI get a set number of planets to reinforce (he can reinforce 100 ships to a planet with 5 command posts or 20 to a planet with 1 command post as 1 reinforcement) or a set number of ships to reinforce that he must spread out according to the available command centers?
 
A: Yes, a set number of planets per reinforcement event. This is dependent on how many planets do not belong to the AI, as discussed in the main body of the article above. The ships are a set number per planet, roughly speaking, so if there are fewer guard posts then it will reinforce more heavily at the remaining ones. But it's using rough percentiles, not fixed numbers, so the numbers won't line up exactly. It's in your favor to have fewer posts there, let's just say.
 

From the wiki, here: http://www.arcengames.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=AI_War_-_AI_Reinforcements

Hooray, contradicting documentation!

I guess someone will need to dig into the code and find out what is really happening, and then update the wiki accordingly.

[Wanderer]

There's little reason to raid *1* outpost, for example, when all the reinforcements will just go to a different guardpost in the same system, making the rest that much harder to raid.

Actually, when a planet is reinforced each reinforceable structure (guard post, command station, etc) is given a certain "X" strength of ships.  That X does not vary by the number of reinforceable structures in the system (otherwise doing a full neuter of a system would just result in reinforcement dumping a pile of ships on the command station).  So knocking out a guard post does reduce the total amount of ships a planet will receive per reinforcement, though it also reduces the invisible "population cap" beyond which any additional guarding ships on that planet will be automatically freed.

Wiki needs an update if that's true.  My visual evidence implies otherwise, but I don't usually argue with devs about their own games.  I shall stand corrected... and slightly confused.