Rerouting and Cargo Astro Trains + hacking options for Astro Trains

[contingencyplan]

Mentioned in this thread is the fact that destroying Astro Train Stations to prevent them from routing through your planets can actually backfire in the case of cargo trains because they will continue to accumulate "points" but be harder to take out. Similarly, playing on very low intensities can have the same effect, given the lower seeding rate of the train stations.

So my first question: is this intentional in the sense of trying to provide a reason / "benefit" (rather, the ability to counter a detriment) for allowing Astro Trains to route through my planets? I thought that was the point behind the AIP cost of destroying the stations?

Here's an idea I had for Cargo Astro Trains (especially given the increased importance of hacking) to make them more interesting:

• M+C production from the planet is "rerouted" to the train, meaning that the planet's M+C production is 0 while a cargo train is present, and the resources are accumulated by the cargo train. When the train reaches a station, the resources are multiplied by a constant factor and transferred to the AI's resource pool.
  
  • In the case of multiple cargo trains, either each train accumulates the resources (causing a multiplicative effect) or the resources are split evenly.
  
  
• If the cargo train is destroyed on a player-controlled world, the train's accumulated resources are returned in bulk to the player.
  
  
• The AI can use these spend these resources on their "project."
  
  • The AI could also use these resources elsewhere --- (re-)building a guard post, or adding ships to a CPA or special forces, etc.

This would be combined with a new hack: "Divert Astro Train Project Resources." This costs a mild amount of HaP, but every time a cargo train deposits its cargo, a portion of the post-multiplier deposited resources is diverted to the player. Another hack, "Drain Astro Train Project Resources," would drain resources from the AI's pool and give it to the player over the duration of the hack, similar to a SuperTerminal.

The multiplier makes the AI resource pool an "interest-bearing" account. The player can then strategically choose whether to allow trains to route through his planets and making the AI more dangerous in exchange for having access to these resources for refleets, megaprojects, etc. If the answer is no, or if the intensity of the scenario is low, then the player is not further penalized past the AIP cost of destroying the stations.


While on the subject of hacking, I think there are a few other possible hacks that could be done:

• "Detonate Destroy EMP and Nuke Trains:" Mild HaP cost. Harmlessly destroys EMP and Nuke trains wherever they are. Likely should also prevent their spawning for, say, an hour.
  
  
• "Bug Trains:" Mild - high AIPHaP cost, but turns all Astro Trains into Scouts, so you get full visibility on those planets. More importantly, when playing on higher intensities (where EMP and Nuke trains can spawn), this would give the player an "always-on" warning about the location of these trains. Scouting disappears if either the station or the AI command center on the planet where the hack is occurred is destroyed.
  
  • This would also add a strategic element to where you want the trains to go, not just to where you don't want them to go.

Does this sound useful / fun, or is it too complicated to be worthwhile?

edit (2013-09-08): Fix Typos (thanks Bognor and Toranth) and clarify the intended "lose scouting" behavior of Bug Trains

[Toranth]

Last time we talked about Astro Trains, there were a whole lot of interesting ideas that got thrown out.  I'd love to see some of those implemented - for example, capturable Astro Train Stations (hint, hint).  But that's going to need to be part of a larger effort.

Your Cargo trains resourcing idea sounds interesting, but very complex without really adding anything.  The AI doesn't use M+C, so you are inventing a secret backend conversion rate between player resources and AI events.  Unless this is something obvious, it ends up seeming arbitrary and capricious - something most players don't like.  Even if it IS logical.
Combining this with a hack also complicates things - how do you display such income?  If it's a continual drain hack, it'd better be some pretty immense income, too, which makes balancing a problem.

The "Detonate Trains" hack could be useful... but I, for one, would NEVER would to detonate a nuke if I could possibly avoid it.  On the other hand, preventing spawning of those train types would be very useful.  On the gripping hand, balancing that (and handling the UI display of the effect: time left, etc) would be awkward - would it lead to an increase in other undesirable trains types, for example?

"Bug Trains" - this'd be a fun one.  I'm assuming you mean "HaP cost" rather than "AIP cost" though.  But yes, I think a hack that revealed where every train and train station was would be useful.  Possibly something like a one-time cost, but the effect only lasts as long as your hacking station exists.  Unfortunately, I don't think it'd really workable to give visibility to just the AI Trains or Stations, though.

I think that the hacking/astro train connection is going to be important to keep in mind.  However, I think a lot of people are a little unhappy with how the Astro Trains plot works at the moment, so until it gets reviewed, I don't see much happening with it.

[Kahuna]

just remove cargo trains
Boom! Problem solved!

[Bognor]

• "Detonate EMP and Nuke Trains:" Mild HaP cost. Harmlessly destroys EMP and Nuke trains wherever they are. Likely should also prevent their spawning for, say, an hour.
  

I guess you mean "Destroy" rather than "Detonate".

• ...Scouting disappears if either the station or the AI command center on the planet is destroyed.

Trains go through planets without stations, so it would need to be "Scouting requires either a Command Station or a Train Station to be present."  Though I'm not sure why you'd want scouting disabled in the only other case, which is a train pathing through a neutral planet without a station.

I think a lot of people are a little unhappy with how the Astro Trains plot works at the moment ...

Dunno why.  My last game had Astrotrains 5 and my current game has Astrotrains 7, and I've found them really interesting and fun.  I wouldn't want them on in every game, but that's why they're an optional plot.

The AI doesn't use M+C ...

I understand your point, but I'm not sure it really matters.  Mostly the AI gets its resources from outside the galaxy.  The Astrotrains plot would give the AI an additional income stream from the player(s), to be used specifically for plot-related functions.  I don't see that as an inconsistency.

... so you are inventing a secret backend conversion rate between player resources and AI events.

Not sure what you mean here.  Resource costs are shown whenever you mouseover an AI structure.


All up I like contingencyplan's ideas.[/list]

[Cyborg]

I like Astro trains. Their implementation needs work, however.

[contingencyplan]

I edited the OP to clarify the typos identified by Toranth and Bognor. Yeah, I meant HaP, not AIP, and NO I DO NOT WANT TO DETONATE A NUKE TRAIN EVER NO NO NO.

And the scouting idea is that the trains provide scouting at all times, so long as the planet where the hack occurred still has its station and command center. Giving scouting to stations as well might be useful too, but I hadn't considered that when writing the OP.

I don't think having the AI use M+C is that weird of an idea --- their units have associated costs, just like the humans' do. It's just presumed (I gather?) that the AI's manufacturing base is located elsewhere, not that the AI has no use for metal / crystal.

I think another good idea (hinted at by Kahuna) would be the ability to turn off certain trains, but 1) the UI for that would probably be too complex (and other areas of UI improvement would be higher priority) and 2) this is essentially a different version of the "turn off specific ships" idea.

Capturable train stations would be cool. Where was that discussed?

[Bognor]

Gotcha, and good idea.  Thanks for the clarification.

[Draco18s]

I like Astro trains. Their implementation needs work, however.

Agreed.

I've always played with them turned on (pre-1-11 scaling) for one AI (the other would get hybrids or something else instead).  Post-1-11 I decided to try a game with them on "low" because I'd always felt that the old on/off was a bit much (hence playing with it enabled for only one AI) and ran into the aforementioned problem.

I don't know about the suggested solution, but it's certainly a thought.

[Tridus]

The thing I didn't like about Astro Trains is that they basically forced me to build rally points everywhere I wanted to send ships to. Otherwise I'd send ships to go defend something, they'd get there, sit on the wormhole until I move them, and by then a train has come through and tractored half of them away. Highly annoying.

Course eventually at my super chokepoint of doom I managed to kill all the tractor trains off (along with the tachyon trains), and at that point I really stopped caring what the trains were doing.

[Bognor]

The thing I didn't like about Astro Trains is that they basically forced me to build rally points everywhere I wanted to send ships to. Otherwise I'd send ships to go defend something, they'd get there, sit on the wormhole until I move them, and by then a train has come through and tractored half of them away. Highly annoying.

You could disable tractoring units in the lobby.  Not certain that will work, though (those settings are a little buggy).

[Kahuna]

Make Cargo Trains spawn only if Astro Train intensity level is >= 5/10
http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=12193

[contingencyplan]

Make Cargo Trains spawn only if Astro Train intensity level is >= 5/10
http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=12193

I like the idea of cargo trains at 4 (x1 AI is what I'm playing at). I like their idea. It's just ((the RNG of cargo train generation + cargo trains reaching stations increases the pain + the encouraged response of "destroy stations to reroute trains)) that seems in dissonance. And I will fully grant I'm working from more of a theorycrafting standpoint than a war veteran standpoint.

My suggestions are kind of a "shooting for the moon" approach. We could just have cargo trains increase the project completion based on how many human planets they pass through, but that conflicts with the (interpreted) idea of encouraging the player to allow the trains to pass through their territory, aside from the AIP cost. Essentially, the strategic "carrot" (you get benefit X if you allow detriment Y) is "more better than" the strategic "stick" (choose whether detriment X or detriment Y appeals to you more, on a scale of -10 to -1).

While I agree that certain mechanics should only appear at higher intensities, it doesn't change the fact that mechanics should "work" regardless.

[LordSloth]

Idea: split trains into two different roles.

Your regular convoy would function as always, being a general nuisance however the RNG decides.

Every hour, announce: "Cargo Convoy departing from system A to system B", where systems A & B are either AI homeworlds or a pair of maximally distant (possibly max-2 if you want some unpredictability) systems with operating Train Stations.

Either spawn a special cargo train convoy or have all existing trains route for the departure point before heading towards the destination, depending on if you want to be able to weaken the convoy before the cargo event.

Routing for Cargo Convoys (rough plan) to show intent, possibly some crazy/stupid logic error, but I'm only brainstorming ATM.
Start Loop
Look at every system X hops out, where X starts at 1, form a list
Discard every system in that list without at train station.
Calculate that system's distance from the ultimate destination in hops.
Discard every system that does not take the convoy closer to the endpoint.
If no systems are closer, then increment X by 1 and return to start of loop.
End loop

Summary: Cargo Trains are a special convoy(s) that have their point of origin and destination announced and (near) maximally distant. They will select one of the nearest surviving train stations (that don't take them further away) as their interim goal. Construction goes up when a convoy reaches the ultimate destination, and not at any other times.

Depending on how/what ultimate starting and endpoint destinations are chosen (map type would be a huge factor), there would still be an advantage to leaving train stations up in player territory, but you could also route these trains/operate in hostile territory.

Bonus points if the special forces patrols respond to train assaults in AI territory.

[Draco18s]

Routing for Cargo Convoys (rough plan) to show intent, possibly some crazy/stupid logic error, but I'm only brainstorming ATM.
Start Loop
Look at every system X hops out, where X starts at 1, form a list
Discard every system in that list without at train station.
Calculate that system's distance from the ultimate destination in hops.
Discard every system that does not take the convoy closer to the endpoint.
If no systems are closer, then increment X by 1 and return to start of loop.
End loop

Sooo... Dijkstra's Algorithm.

[LordSloth]

Not quite, Draco. Dijkstra's algorithm might be a superior choice, but the key difference is:

My algorithm isn't at all concerned with the overall shortest path. It is concerned only with making the current trip between train stations as short a possible, and not further away from the ultimate destination then the current node. This could lead to some wild variance in route... which could be interesting or just plain frustrating given a lack of scouting information.

Calculating whether you're further away would probably require a pathfinding algorithm, though.