So, this whole crystal thing (wait I think I used that title already...)

[Billick]

I like this idea, with the main reason being that seeing the "AI's expected response to further hacking..." message up the whole game makes me OCD  . 

[Aklyon]

I like this idea as well, though I think someone brought up the question of how it would effect FS already.

[keith.lamothe]

@Toranth: Yes, the interface for hacking would need to improve: just collapse the existing hacker types into one "hacker" unit type and give it a menu (like a normal build/buy menu) with the different forms of hacking, though only the buttons applicable to the planet would work.  Off the top of my head, I think I would implement it by each button placing a different cloaked-immobile unit that would have a countdown, and when the countdown hit zero it just blows up and you get whatever hacking effect (though some would happen over the process, like knowledge hacking or ST-hacking).  So the AI wouldn't have to respond to the presence of the "hacker" unit type at all, any more, just the placed devices.

That would also address Cinth's "What is going to happen when you have say 5 hackable items on a single planet?" question.


@_K_: Yes, this is a pretty massive buff to the player, both in the hacking itself and in the m>=<c implosion.  The hacking itself will need to be internally balanced (and balanced with respect to AIP) such that it's properly bounded (I think currently it's properly bounded) and not something that just lets the player run away with the game without working for it.  Other than that I don't want to tie this too closely to a specific counterbalance such that you can't get one without the other.  There's stuff like the non-Lazy AI thing which (if on) is a pretty big nerf to the player (that change alone may make a "fair" 10/10 effectively unwinnable), and more of that kind of thing could wind up happening in the future as well (like the surveillance-station-based counter-responses to DC destruction and Command Station destruction, though that would also be disable-able from the lobby).

Anyway, it could move the overall balance back towards the player, but in that case the main way of dealing with it is for people who want more challenge to pick some lobby settings to crank up in response.  If that leads to some folks hitting the "ceiling" such that 10/10 isn't killing them, then I step in   And if it turns out there's anything internally imbalanced about the hacking feature, then of course that would need fixing.


@Faulty_Logic: ok, can negotiate on the "hacking cost" for permanent Adv-Fact/ASC/Fab "access", but I think it's still worth more than 20 AIP (not that the hack itself would cost AIP, but speaking in equivalancies) because spending 20 more AIP just gets you another one that you can lose, not a permanent one.  But yea, it doesn't need to go totally bananas on you, given the small scope of a fab and the K costs associated with making good use of an Adv-Fact/ASC.

If you truly make it core and expansive, this could almost be your show piece for a new expansion.

I think we can add onto it with the next expansion, but for it to be a core resource it needs to be base-game and have enough base-game "hacking types" for it to make sense without the expansion.  But some of them could be expansion-specific, yes.  There's a fair bit of work involved, after all.

I really like these hacking things.. but what do they have to do with crystal?

Absolutely Nothing! Bwahahahaha... ahem.

Just to be clear, the nebulous "response" is not permanent, right? Increased ship deployments, triggered waves, maybe CPAs or exo galactic strike forces, but not encouraging a treadmill effect.

Right, hacking response (as currently implemented for knowledge hacking, ship design hacking, and superterminal hacking) is all "spikes" on the graph of how much the AI wants to kill you, as opposed to the steadily-moving-towards-boiling-water effect of AIP.  That's not to say the AI's response units just go *poof* the moment the hack ends; it can have lasting consequences but not because it buffs the AI for the rest of the game like AIP does.

I like this idea as well, though I think someone brought up the question of how it would effect FS already.

I saw a couple mentions of it, but I'm not sure what the question is.  Is it a question of what happens when you can raise AIP really high, etc?  A logarithmic scaling of hacking-room by AIP would let us basically define a point beyond which further AIP doesn't give you much more hacking room, because otherwise you could just run away with the game via hacking in an FS situation, etc.


Anyway, will work on some tentative numbers later, since I think there's general agreement on the basic idea.

* keith.lamothe suspects an ambush.

[Aklyon]

* keith.lamothe suspects an ambush.

An ambush! Curse them! Wait, wrong game 

[Fluffiest]

I like the idea of expanding hacking into a core game mechanic. I like it a lot. I'm even more fond of hacking capacity going up with AIP (question: Would it actually go up with AIP, or would it go up with something closely tied to AIP like AIP Floor, number of human-controlled planets, or number of AI planets on alert?)

One thing, though - I wouldn't want to see hacking for anything mundane. No "metal hacking", no "energy hacking". I'd say no knowledge hacking, but we already have that, and there'd be an outcry if it were taken back out. No AIP hacking, except the superterminal which is a one-shot thing. Certainly no ship cap hacking. Essentially, I don't want hacking for any of the other essential resources, because I think that would end up as the only thing people hack for, unless it were prohibitively dangerous, in which case you'd only do it if you were already losing.

I want each hack to be unique, carefully considered, and cool. Getting a different bonus ship type out of an ARS counts. You make the decision based on what you see in the ARS list; it's different for every game, and you didn't plan to do it when you started. The Superterminal hack counts, if only because you only get one shot at it.

Other hack ideas?

Protection hack. Makes one capturable (normally a Fabricator or Advanced Factory, but if you think you can pull this off against a Gravity Drill or an Ion Mk IV, more power to you) permanently invisible to the AI, as a prelude to capturing that world. This lets you keep those things even in the face of exo waves. Sure, you might lose the planet and have to retake it later, but it's no longer GONE FOREVER. I like this more than the idea of hacking the ability to produce Mk IV or Core ships from your own shipyards, because you still need to take the planet.

Train hack. I don't know exactly how to elaborate on this, but being able to turn the Astro Trains against the AI - or just reduce their impact - would be great. Obviously, only on a world with an astro train station.

Decoy hack. Lure the Special Forces and possibly the threatfleet - or even the Strategic Reserve, if you drop this on a Core world - to a location of your choice. Proceed to ambush them, or just go and stomp all over whatever your real target was while they're distracted. Maybe it affects the Nemesis frigates as well, maybe not.

Hybrid IFF hack. Get the Hybrids and the AI shooting at each other for a while, enough to clear out a particularly nasty Hybrid chokepoint.

Spy Hack. Permanent scout-vision on the hacked world. Possibly all adjacent worlds as well.

An Eye Hack might be cool, as an alternative way to deal with Eyes.

I quite like the Neinzul attractor beacon that Irxallis suggested as a way to stymie smaller AI attacks and speed-bump the big things like exo-waves. An alternative might be a Teuthida Virus Hack, turning the AI forces on that planet into a swarm of horrible zombies which deal zombie reclamation damage, turning the planet into a no-go area for AI and human forces alike. I only suggest this because it feels more like a literal "hack" that way.

I like the idea of AI command station special abilities. I'm even more fond of the idea of using the hacking ship to shut them down, steal them, or re-purpose them. I want to add a suggestion to this, though: If this is implemented, can we get a special hack to disarm the Scorched Earth AI's fail-deadly command station bombs?

I don't know how I feel about the supply hack. I guess the only way would be to try it and see.

I also like the idea of an AI type with an extra-vicious response to hacking. Firewall AI sounds good, but I just know I'll refer to it as the BOfH.

[keith.lamothe]

(question: Would it actually go up with AIP, or would it go up with something closely tied to AIP like AIP Floor, number of human-controlled planets, or number of AI planets on alert?)

Either effective AIP (the number you see, which is adjusted for reduction and floor) or total AIP.  The former would be interesting because you'd want to hack before popping DCs (which would bring your effective AIP, and thus hacking-room, down).  But the latter would be less fiddly for exactly the same reason, since it is monotonically increasing.  And less likely to turn superterminal hacking into an apocalyptic event (not that I'm opposed to that...)

One thing, though - I wouldn't want to see hacking for anything mundane. No "metal hacking", no "energy hacking". I'd say no knowledge hacking, but we already have that, and there'd be an outcry if it were taken back out. No AIP hacking, except the superterminal which is a one-shot thing. Certainly no ship cap hacking. Essentially, I don't want hacking for any of the other essential resources, because I think that would end up as the only thing people hack for, unless it were prohibitively dangerous, in which case you'd only do it if you were already losing.

Well, I don't think hacking-for-resources would crowd out all other forms of hacking.  If anything, I imagine metal-hacks and energy-hacks would be rare.  Partly because I'd probably only let them work against specific AI command station types, but mostly because spending a one-time resource (like K, AIP, or hacking-room) to gain an easily-replenished resource (like m or e) is something that generally only makes sense if you have both a shortage in the renewable resource and either a very low one-time-cost (like distribution nodes) or a very high payoff (like harvester upgrades).

I wouldn't want to do hacking for a ship cap increase on types you could already build, for a variety of reasons.  Just the permanent unlocking of mkIV or mkV stuff.


Oops, gotta run.

[KDR_11k]

- edit: and another (not doing too good a job about not talking details yet, am I?) relatively low-impact-on-response form of hacking could be "suppress the AI Eye on this planet" as long as the hacking is happening.  Or perhaps it's just a permanent condition once the hacking is done, but that would need a bit higher response.

I think this and a few other options like it could defuse a lot of "impossible to win" situations. You know, when people get two forts, an eye, ions and mass drivers plus a raid engine and grav drill.

[chemical_art]

- edit: and another (not doing too good a job about not talking details yet, am I?) relatively low-impact-on-response form of hacking could be "suppress the AI Eye on this planet" as long as the hacking is happening.  Or perhaps it's just a permanent condition once the hacking is done, but that would need a bit higher response.

I think this and a few other options like it could defuse a lot of "impossible to win" situations. You know, when people get two forts, an eye, ions and mass drivers plus a raid engine and grav drill.

I agree. Having a "wild card" would help.

[chemical_art]

The more I think about this, , the more I like it.

This covers a variety of "what if?" situations elegantly. In effect, they are like warheads except even more diverse and not tied to AIP.

The result is that the player is equipped with a lot of tools, but can only use a few, but isn't penaltized for using them unless they use too many.

Perfect.

[keith.lamothe]

I think this and a few other options like it could defuse a lot of "impossible to win" situations. You know, when people get two forts, an eye, ions and mass drivers plus a raid engine and grav drill.

Yea, another hacking type for "sabotaging" a fort to just blow it up.  You'd definitely be motivated not to do that if you could avoid it considering that you're (in one sense) paying something translateable to K or AIP to resolve a one-time tactical situation, but there are times where players would like to be able to make that trade.

[Radiant Phoenix]

I love this idea!

I might actually hack something now...

(I normally only even consider hacking ARSs and root terminals)

[LaughingThesaurus]

What everybody else said.

I do have one question, though. How do you actually tell us what our "hacking antagonism" is? What is that resource measured by? Is it, say, measured similarly to AI Progress? Will the resource be listed in such a way that we actually can see "Oh, this is a 20 scale hack. It'll be a bit of a problem" or "Oh god, we're at 100 HA already, this will take everything we have"? So, kind of like AIP where you can just glance at it and say 'yeah, I'm about this level of screwed'? Or, what? How's it going to be communicated to the player?

[keith.lamothe]

I do have one question, though. How do you actually tell us what our "hacking antagonism" is?

Right now it just gives you a descriptive word, but that's just a categorization of a raw number under the hood.  For this we'd either rescale the internal number or at least display it on a scale something like AIP.  I could probably just have it show a %, where 0 is "the AI will have minimal response to the next hack" and 100 is "the AI is going to go coocoo for cocoa puffs if you hack again", with some mouseover numbers showing the actual hacking points "consumed" and how many would need to be consumed at the current AIP to cause a 100% response.

And yea, the individual hacking buttons on the hacker's interface could tell you how many points would be consumed either during the hack or after it completes.  Much like how stuff tells you how much AIP you get when it blows up, etc.

[Wingflier]

Can we add a hacking mechanic that makes MKIV Enclaves useful?

How about MKIV Enclaves become active after you hack an MKIV Factory (if you've unlocked all the previous Enclave Ships and paid the 2k Knowledge cost), so the player doesn't have to spend 14K Knowledge on them which just isn't going to happen.

[Vyndicu]

All of this sound good. I approve of my idea being stolen. I expect full credit. 

Now that said. I am curious about two situations. Image you are starting a fresh new game. You see at least 3 MK5 fab to hacks within few hops. So you decide to go all ballbuster to hack all at once and it hit 95 percent antagonism. How do AIP increase quickly raise the antagonism ceiling for lack of a better word? Is it right away with each AIP point or bit more gradual at each threshold? If yes to former I can see myself taking a full "invasion" fleet to pop 10 command stations all at once just before hacking begins.

Or perhaps you could better yet try to "grab" attention of the AI by attacking something. I don't know deepstrike? Blowing up guard posts? Then it would temporarily raise the AI antagonism ceiling and encourage you to do more 'raiding' while doing hacking instead of going insane with AIP especially in a FS campaign. Does that make sense?