Author Topic: The early game  (Read 30216 times)

Offline Draco18s

  • Resident Velociraptor
  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,251
Re: The early game
« Reply #75 on: February 09, 2011, 03:01:13 pm »
My main worry about that lost damage against command grade was exclusively for the MK V planets of the AI. I was was wondering how difficult it would be to destroy it with no command-station bonuses. I have yet to play that part in game, so I couldn't tell you for sure. In theory, any successful methods I could think of all involved trump cards of some sort such as golem / spireships and/or FS. Can the 40 million structure really be defeated assuming all it's core guard posts were gone if you did not get another bomber-type ship? How about if there was still defended by the many reinforcements of the homeworld?

Obviously that structure was designed with the bomber damage/bonus in mind.

As such, it would probably need to be re-tooled.

Quote
I also noticed the Cross Wave guard post having 100K armor. Really?!?

As I have said, the AI gets armor values that are just absurd sometimes.

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: The early game
« Reply #76 on: February 09, 2011, 03:07:13 pm »
The more I dive into this, the more deep it seems to get. This is starting to get pretty complex and is way off topic. I think it should be on its own thread.
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline Lancefighter

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,440
Re: The early game
« Reply #77 on: February 09, 2011, 03:09:10 pm »
Depth and complexity were never things that the average AI war game lacked  ;)
Ideas? Suggestions? Concerns? Bugs to be squashed? Report them on the Mantis Bugtracker!

Author of the Dyson Project and the Spire Gambit

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: The early game
« Reply #78 on: February 09, 2011, 03:13:05 pm »
The AI home command station is supposed to be hard to kill after all. However, if we go the route of making command station bonuses much rarer, they will probably need some bringing down of HP.

The non-home AI command stations are decently easy to kill even without bonuses, so that is not a problem.


Draco is right, normalization of armor values, especially for high Mk. Lvl AI exclusive stuff, should be a moderately high balance priority. Some things should have high armor, but 150k sounds absurdly high even for things that are meant to be really hard to kill.

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: The early game
« Reply #79 on: February 09, 2011, 07:05:49 pm »
What are the bonuses currently held by the fighter (and frigate)?

For 5.001 (as of Feb 09, 2011 7:00 PM EST)

Bomber (5 bonuses): 6 Heavy, 6 Artillery, 6 Command-Grade, 6 Ultra-Heavy, 6 Structural
Missile frigates (6 bonuses): 6 Light, 6 Neutron, 6 Swarmer, 6 Ultra-Light, 6 Refractive, 6 Composite
Fighter (3 bonuses): 2.4 Medium, 2.4 Close-Combat, 5 Polycrystal

Keep in mind that there are also some base attack power changes for each of these as well, but we are focusing on bonuses at the moment.
Also, remember that the fighter has a high firing rate and armor piercing, which helps to make up for its relatively low bonuses.

EDIT: If an admin thinks that this bonus discussion should go in a new thread, can the posts talking about it be moved there? Thanks.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2011, 07:10:24 pm by techsy730 »

Offline Draco18s

  • Resident Velociraptor
  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,251
Re: The early game
« Reply #80 on: February 09, 2011, 07:42:56 pm »
What are the bonuses currently held by the fighter (and frigate)?

For 5.001 (as of Feb 09, 2011 7:00 PM EST)

Derp, I didn't even think of looking at the wiki when I posted.

Now then, if we're going to "trade" command-grade bonus for a different bonus on one of the other two...

None the fighter have make sense (Medium being the closest thematically, but I don't like that idea).
Of the frigates "composite" would make the most sense, but again I'm not entirely happy with that.

However, we could move it to the Fighter with nothing in return, which would give the fighter a 4th bonus and leave the bomber with 4.  The frigate "wins" out and has 6 (notably 2 of them are "weird": neutron and refractive).

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: The early game
« Reply #81 on: February 09, 2011, 08:13:19 pm »
However, we could move it to the Fighter with nothing in return, which would give the fighter a 4th bonus and leave the bomber with 4.  The frigate "wins" out and has 6 (notably 2 of them are "weird": neutron and refractive).

That sounds like a good idea. Thanks to the current imbalance in usefulness of bonuses against certain hull types (which is not a bad thing), that may still be balanced. Of the 4 bonuses the bomber will have, 3 of them (heavy, structural, and ultra-heavy) are disproportionately useful, so it still all works out.

Just a question, how long will the various forms of command stations last against, say, 50 Mk. II bombers (on medium caps) if their command station bonus is removed. If the most used variations still die fast, then this change is kind of useless because bombers would remain great against most command stations even without the bonus, and thus remain a ff and command station killer.

EDIT: Also due to the different base attack, firing rate, and armor piercing of the fighter, what would be a good command station multiplier for the fighter to have?
As a side note, it that through the whole game, very few things should have a command station multiplier, and if they do, it shouldn't be very high (6x seems too high)
Command stations overall should be somewhat tough to kill.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2011, 08:19:32 pm by techsy730 »

Offline Sunshine!

  • Sr. Member Mark III
  • ****
  • Posts: 475
Re: The early game
« Reply #82 on: February 09, 2011, 08:27:11 pm »
On the player side, bombers are called in to deal with forcefields and fortresses, and pretty much nothing else (seriously, does anyone really use these to go after unprotected command stations?).  It's extremely easy to knock out any non-mk5 command station with fighters, so there's no use risking bombers.

On the AI side, bombers are good against forcefields that the humans have, and the command station bonus really doesn't mean much except against the human homeworld command station.

I also feel like it's wrong for bombers to not be the go-to for heavily defended targets (mk5 command stations being one such target).  So, the only real problem here is human homeworld command stations being too vulnerable to bombers.

There are probably a couple options available without actually changing bombers:
-Make the human home command station either immune to, or take reduced damage (a la deflector drones) from whatever ammo type bombers use (which, incidentally, is different from that of Bomber Starships), and reduce hitpoints on the human home command station (if necessary - though I don't think it really will be since it dies really easily anyway).

-Give the human home command station an "attrition polycrystal" ability (some kind of sonic resonance weapon that breaks down the crystaline structure or some such), so that mk1 and mk2 bombers will only last long enough to bust the forcefields, and past that the AI will need to use other ships.  Makes early bomber waves less of a threat, but makes later bomber waves still possibly game-breaking.  (this is probably an unworkable idea, just wanted to throw it out there to get discussion/ideas flowing).

Anyway, mostly what I wanted to say is that Command-Grade bonus is such a niche bonus that shifting it around won't make much of a difference, especially since the human home command station is really the only at-risk target.

Also, heavy is not a disproportionately useful bonus since there are very few ships with that armor type.  It comes down to something like Hybrids, Flagships (and light starships?), and maybe one or two fleet ships and guardians (beam guardian).  Ultra-Heavy is also not a disproportionately useful bonus - again, it's something like fortresses, armor ships, spire fleetships, and golems (and warp guardians).  Fortresses are avoidable, and the others are random (warp guardians only show up at higher difficulties).  If anything, it's the fortress penalty against polycrystal that makes bombers disproportionately useful, because they're the only thing that will survive against a fortress - how many people will actually say "oh man, I hate fortresses - oh look, Anti-armor ships and Z Chameleons have Ultra-Heavy bonus, I should take one of those"?  Nobody, because they don't have polycrystal armor, and there's not really enough other ultra-heavy to really justify those choices in that way.

I think, really, the most disproportionately useful bonus is polycrystal (because it means you don't die), it's just that fighters weren't getting a 10x bonus against polycrystal like the bombers were getting against ultra heavy.  That and there are ways around forcefields - use melee/infiltrators/eyebots to clear the units from under a forcefield, and pop the command station and the forcefield disappears.  The guard posts, regardless of their armor types (whether heavy, ultra heavy, command grade, structural), still die to a decently sized mob of fighters, so there's really no point to using bombers against those.

In reality, the only things bombers are absolutely needed for are fortresses, forcefields, and the final AI command station (well, golems as well maybe).  Against anything else, the solution is usually as simple as "throw fighters at it" - it could be that you NEED bombers to attack guard posts and command stations, and then you'd have to blow a pile of money on bombers before you even take your first planet, rather than just tossing a cap of mk1 fighters at it (mk1 and mk2 if it's a mk3 or mk4 planet).  It just seems that bombers are disproportionately important because they need to tackle the major obstacles, the ones that really stick out in your mind.  I challenge any of you to play a game without using fighters, and then tell me that fighters aren't, in truth, the disproportionately necessary fleet ship.

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: The early game
« Reply #83 on: February 09, 2011, 08:34:18 pm »
As long as a target can be viably killed due to a cheap fighter swarm then I don't think the bonuses make too much of a difference for either bombers or frigates. Granted, if I have some pressing need for their bonuses I'll take them, but usually I still find it more efficient to take the general, cheap usefulness of fighters rather then the expensive, situational usefulness of the frigates or bombers. As as been pointed out, Most game-breaking waves of bombers will still blow away your stations without the bonus, which was the reason of removing them in the first place.

As also been pointed out many times, this may be somewhat addressed next patch.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2011, 08:37:34 pm by chemical_art »
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: The early game
« Reply #84 on: February 09, 2011, 09:05:38 pm »
As long as a target can be viably killed due to a cheap fighter swarm then I don't think the bonuses make too much of a difference for either bombers or frigates. Granted, if I have some pressing need for their bonuses I'll take them, but usually I still find it more efficient to take the general, cheap usefulness of fighters rather then the expensive, situational usefulness of the frigates or bombers. As as been pointed out, Most game-breaking waves of bombers will still blow away your stations without the bonus, which was the reason of removing them in the first place.

As also been pointed out many times, this may be somewhat addressed next patch.

If non home command stations are so fragile that anything can kill them quickly (and even the home command station falls in a moderate time), then the problem is less about bonuses (though they do need to be adjusted some), but rather the rate of growth of waves.

As Draco pointed out elsewhere, as early as 400 AIP (assuming 7 or up difficulty) is enough for the waves to start becoming so large that you have to throw your entire fleet at it (in addition to turrets) to reliably stop it, and by the time you finish rebuilding from that attack, it won't be too much longer until the next wave. Even if they aren't any bombers in the waves, this sort of near unwinnability is still present.

(Well, Draco only said that as early as 400 AIP the waves start becoming too large, the rest of that paragraph was me reasoning further)

Kieth agrees that if that is indeed the case, 400 AIP is too early to hit that sort of aggression.

So in addition to rethinking the bonuses of the triangle fleets, two other issues need to be addresses before "rofl, uncounterable at this stage, curbstomp" waves in the early to mid game can become very rare.
One, adjust how wave size to AIP is computed, such that it doesn't grow to huge sizes so early. (There is already an issue (#2771) posted to deal with this.)
Two, make human command stations (including mk. I versions) tough enough such that a bonus against command station hull is needed to kill it in a reasonable time. In other words, make human command stations tough enough such that a bonus to command station means something.

So if these three things can be addressed, I think the early game (and mid game) will be much less prone to "unstoppable" losses.

EDIT: I don't expect all of this to be "fixed" by 5.001. Especially because 5.001 already changes balance and fixes several bugs that were affecting balance.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2011, 10:04:27 pm by techsy730 »

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: The early game
« Reply #85 on: February 09, 2011, 09:40:34 pm »
As Draco pointed out elsewhere, as early as 400 AIP (assuming 7 or up difficulty) is enough for the waves to start becoming so large that you have to throw your entire fleet at it (in addition to turrets) to reliably stop it, and by the time you finish rebuilding from that attack, it won't be too much longer until the next wave. Even if they aren't any bombers in the waves, this sort of near unwinnability is still present.

(Well, Draco only said that as early as 400 AIP the waves start becoming too large, the rest of that paragraph was me reasoning further)

Keith agrees that if that is indeed the case, 400 AIP is too early to hit that sort of aggression.
It depends: on diff 7, yes.  On Diff 8, I'd expect you to either need to commit some portion of your fleet OR have invested maybe 10k (just pulling that number out of the air) knowledge into extra turrets.
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games? Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Sunshine!

  • Sr. Member Mark III
  • ****
  • Posts: 475
Re: The early game
« Reply #86 on: February 09, 2011, 10:04:24 pm »
On diff 9, by 350 AIP, investing *just* 10k knowledge (which is about what it takes for basic turret, laser turret, missile turret, and MLRS turret mk2) is a recipe for suicide.  (Schizophrenic) Waves hit between 1000 and 2000 mk3 ships at that point (it was against... speed racer and tank I think?)  The only reason I was surviving those waves was because I was abusing a grav drill by gate raiding everything except one route into the grav drill planet, and even with 60 mk1 and mk2 (120 total) of basic, laser, missile and MLRS, mk3 military command, and counter-missile turrets (to protect against AI MLRS, which chew through turrets at mk3), and I still had to do a decent amount of savescumming to figure out what I was doing.  The solution was fortress mk1, but that's still a ridiculous amount of firepower needed to survive on a planet where the AI already takes forever to get within range to attack.

What with improved border aggression, stalking, guardians, exogalactic strike forces added in through minor factions, hybrid hives AI plots, I think waves don't necessarily have to be the major avenue of AI attack anymore.  Back in 2.0 that might have been the case, but now... I don't know if that's necessarily the case anymore.

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: The early game
« Reply #87 on: February 09, 2011, 10:08:18 pm »
On diff 9, by 350 AIP, investing *just* 10k knowledge (which is about what it takes for basic turret, laser turret, missile turret, and MLRS turret mk2) is a recipe for suicide.  (Schizophrenic) Waves hit between 1000 and 2000 mk3 ships at that point (it was against... speed racer and tank I think?)  The only reason I was surviving those waves was because I was abusing a grav drill by gate raiding everything except one route into the grav drill planet, and even with 60 mk1 and mk2 (120 total) of basic, laser, missile and MLRS, mk3 military command, and counter-missile turrets (to protect against AI MLRS, which chew through turrets at mk3), and I still had to do a decent amount of savescumming to figure out what I was doing.  The solution was fortress mk1, but that's still a ridiculous amount of firepower needed to survive on a planet where the AI already takes forever to get within range to attack.

What with improved border aggression, stalking, guardians, exogalactic strike forces added in through minor factions, hybrid hives AI plots, I think waves don't necessarily have to be the major avenue of AI attack anymore.  Back in 2.0 that might have been the case, but now... I don't know if that's necessarily the case anymore.

I think that you need to stop making difficulty and reasonibility assessments based off of level 9. At level 9, the AI is SEVERELY cheating and is meant to be stupidly hard.

Anyways, I get what you are saying here. One of the side effects of the AI being smarter is that the pacing of the game (including AIP vs. game stages) has been really shifted. Many of the AI formulas linking AIP to "toughness" and general caps and limits on the AI have not been updated accordingly. This is currently leading to unintentionally difficult mid games, even on lvl. 7
« Last Edit: February 09, 2011, 10:10:35 pm by techsy730 »

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: The early game
« Reply #88 on: February 09, 2011, 10:30:32 pm »
On diff 9 , by 350 AIP, investing *just* 10k knowledge (which is about what it takes for basic turret, laser turret, missile turret, and MLRS turret mk2) is a recipe for suicide.

Fixed that for you ;)

Diff 9 should be winnable for good players (before the recent change to wave sizes it generally wasn't), but it's obviously going to take a lot more.

And yea, like I said 10k was a number pulled out of the air, it could be higher than that even for Diff 8 400AIP.  I'd be curious to know how much higher, but it probably largely depends on one's defensive situation.
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games? Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Sunshine!

  • Sr. Member Mark III
  • ****
  • Posts: 475
Re: The early game
« Reply #89 on: February 09, 2011, 10:37:03 pm »
I think I completely failed to make my point - I didn't have any experience with difficulty 8, but the rate of scaling for waves between difficulty 8 and 9 is known, and they both hit mk3 at the same time (I believe?), so from there it should be relatively easy to extrapolate down with regards to the necessary components to survive at difficulty 8.  Difficulty 8 has such-and-such a ratio of ships per wave to diff 9 at such-and-such an AIP, and I'm giving an assessment of what was needed to survive the diff 9 waves, so apply the wave ratio to the knowledge requirement on diff 9 and you'll have a ballpark estimate of the kind of situation a player will be facing at diff 8.

And yeah, I know diff 9 is suicide - I've kicked it down to diff 7 while I keep trying to work through the fallen spire campaign (tried it once at diff 9 and hahahahahaha I learned my lesson).