Semi-Poll: Increased AIP for indestructible capturables?

[chemical_art]

And finally, AIP plays into this. I would vote for making the "base" AI strength stronger (aka, the AI puts up more of a fight at low AIPs), but doesn't grow quite at strong as fast as AIP goes up. This should hopefully encourage people to be more willing to take stuff (both because they won't be punished for it quite so hard and because if they stay with low planet strats they will now be further behind due to the base strength increase)
However, the topic of AIP is big enough for its own forum post.

I would agree to this, although the how I do not know. Maybe the slope is less severe, but after the initial lull of time the AI floor raises to it reaches a minimal of saying 200 over 30 hours?

[chemical_art]

[Can you tell when I'm at home and when I'm on my phone?]

Yes: when you're more coherent than the character in your avatar, and when you're less.

It could be worse; it could be a Pinkie Pie avatar.

You know those burns that don't hurt but feel funny? I feel it now.

[keith.lamothe]

@TechSY730: the mapgen logic was changed some time ago to only put one "eye" ball (no pun intended) in the brutal pick bag with the rest of the options.  Since then I haven't seen actual numeric feedback indicating a statistically higher chance of eye than other pick.

It all comes back to the core: What is the right balance between the cost and benefit to the factory. Should the cost decrease, or the benefit increase?

The leading candidate in my mind is to make the mkIII fleetships (and ASC-related mkIII starships) have a mkIII tech cost as if mkIII was all you got for it, maybe slightly higher.

[Diazo]

I was looking at the poll in here. Then look at the general feeling toward fab/adv. fab/ASC. It seem that either people who don't think they are in need of a change or they are not worth to capture even with the 20 AIP baseline cost.

So I am trying to figure out why you people don't think it need a change? You think they are already powerful for what they offer? Sorry bit off topic.

The other issues is that we are talking about "two" "different" structures.

By that I mean that Fabs with super-weapons enabled are a lot less desirable then Fabs with no super-weapons enabled, but the costs to get a fab stay the same.

So the benefits never change, but as you enable other stuff their (relative) desirability decreases because the drawbacks do nothing but increase.

And then in this thread we have people talking about how they view fabs through the lens of the options they play with, which is different for everyone posting. (In general)

D.

[keith.lamothe]

[Can you tell when I'm at home and when I'm on my phone?]

Yes: when you're more coherent than the character in your avatar, and when you're less.

It could be worse; it could be a Pinkie Pie avatar.

You know those burns that don't hurt but feel funny? I feel it now.

It's a burn on the phone, really

But yea, I remember being really surprised a few weeks ago or whenever it was, when I saw a post of yours and wondered if there'd been an accident or something due to the, um, inventive spellings and so forth.  I hadn't noticed that kind of variance in your posts before that, though it may just be my bad memory.

[TechSY730]

It all comes back to the core: What is the right balance between the cost and benefit to the factory. Should the cost decrease, or the benefit increase?

The leading candidate in my mind is to make the mkIII fleetships (and ASC-related mkIII starships) have a mkIII tech cost as if mkIII was all you got for it, maybe slightly higher.

I'd vote for the slightly higher.

Higher is OK, but not the significantly higher we have now.


However, this doesn't do anything for the fabricators though...


Anyone else feel like having another giant conversation "loop" or two until we come up with something for the fabs?

[TechSY730]

And finally, AIP plays into this. I would vote for making the "base" AI strength stronger (aka, the AI puts up more of a fight at low AIPs), but doesn't grow quite at strong as fast as AIP goes up. This should hopefully encourage people to be more willing to take stuff (both because they won't be punished for it quite so hard and because if they stay with low planet strats they will now be further behind due to the base strength increase)
However, the topic of AIP is big enough for its own forum post.

I would agree to this, although the how I do not know. Maybe the slope is less severe, but after the initial lull of time the AI floor raises to it reaches a minimal of saying 200 over 30 hours?

You want to make the new forum post, or should I?

[chemical_art]

The leading candidate in my mind is to make the mkIII fleetships (and ASC-related mkIII starships) have a mkIII tech cost as if mkIII was all you got for it, maybe slightly higher.

That's interesting, but how much would that be? The cost break down now is

            Power    K Cost    Total Power    Total Cost
MK I:        1          0                   1                 0
MK II:       2          2500             3                  2500
MK III:      3          8500             6                  8500
MK IV:      4          8500             10                8500


In terms of K to power it breaks down as 833 / 1417 / 850  for total cost divided by K (lower is better, had to invert the numbers and numerical importance to make them not all super small fractions) for the base triangle ships.

[keith.lamothe]

By that I mean that Fabs with super-weapons enabled are a lot less desirable then Fabs with no super-weapons enabled, but the costs to get a fab stay the same.

Well, I think some fabs remain roughly as desirable (thinking shield bearers, TDLs, minirams, etc), because they're utility players rather than normal dps.

And if you're playing FS (without golems-hard or spirecraft-hard), to some extent the cost of grabbing the fab goes down because AIP matters less.  At least once you've got a few cities up.  I know I don't bat an eye at glassing a dozen or so extra planets for the K at that stage.  What's 300 AIP between friends (with photon lances)?  Haven't tried that north of diff 8, though

[chemical_art]

You want to make the new forum post, or should I?

You are certainly the better organized one.

I just shoot shotgun shells / tables / tantrums (at least that is what I considered my starship...argument to be) till i slay the target, and that doesn't work for OP posts well.

[Notice my broken up responses below? I simply lack the patience to eloquently quote people. I talk to you for one point, move on, and then address the next point.]

[keith.lamothe]

That's interesting, but how much would that be? The cost break down now is

            Power    K Cost    Total Power    Total Cost
MK I:        1          0                   1                 0
MK II:       2          2500             3                  2500
MK III:      3          8500             6                  8500
MK IV:      4          8500             10                8500

Well, very roughly speaking you're paying 1250 "per mkI-cap" for the mkII, so mkIII would be 3750.  Call it 4000 for the slight increase.

[chemical_art]

Well, very roughly speaking you're paying 1250 "per mkI-cap" for the mkII, so mkIII would be 3750.  Call it 4000 for the slight increase.

You know, I was just going to blurt out "Gut says 4k is a good amount" but then decided to actually do some research with that maths, and lo-and-behold!

[chemical_art]

But yea, I remember being really surprised a few weeks ago or whenever it was, when I saw a post of yours and wondered if there'd been an accident or something due to the, um, inventive spellings and so forth.  I hadn't noticed that kind of variance in your posts before that, though it may just be my bad memory.

For years, I couldn't post here at all with my dumbphone.

Now I have a smart phone, and either the voice to text gargles the message like a game of telephone, or I type and the result.is periods,and crap everywhere woth weirt spelling and knoe spellcheck 

Still, it is better then nothing for me, although I applaud those who take the time to get my meaning.

[chemical_art]

Well, I think some fabs remain roughly as desirable (thinking shield bearers, TDLs, minirams, etc), because they're utility players rather than normal dps.

And if you're playing FS (without golems-hard or spirecraft-hard), to some extent the cost of grabbing the fab goes down because AIP matters less.  At least once you've got a few cities up.  I know I don't bat an eye at glassing a dozen or so extra planets for the K at that stage.  What's 300 AIP between friends (with photon lances)?  Haven't tried that north of diff 8, though

That's the vibe I got mainly. Factories suffer hard because K in general is used more for defense so there less III/IV's to go around, but those fabs tend to be just as useful until they die.

And in FS, if you see a fab you like, drop a city on it! Even for FS that is fairly reliable defense.

[keith.lamothe]

But yea, I remember being really surprised a few weeks ago or whenever it was, when I saw a post of yours and wondered if there'd been an accident or something due to the, um, inventive spellings and so forth.  I hadn't noticed that kind of variance in your posts before that, though it may just be my bad memory.

For years, I couldn't post here at all with my dumbphone.

Now I have a smart phone, and either the voice to text gargles the message like a game of telephone, or I type and the result.is periods,and crap everywhere woth weirt spelling and knoe spellcheck 

Still, it is better then nothing for me, although I applaud those who take the time to get my meaning.

Ok, I'll update the AI to no longer assume inebriation in such cases