It's also a game with less emphasis on unit micro than a typical RTS, including using 'fixed' turrets to contribute significantly to defense, leaving most of the player's mobile units free for offensive purposes.
Hostile planets, on the other hand, can present something of a puzzle to unravel. Ion Cannons, Orbital Mass Drivers, Guard Posts, Fortresses, Forcefields, etc. require the player to decide what needs to be taken out, in what order, and what ships should(or should not) be used/present, until the time is right.
"peeling the onion" or something like that.
Heh."peeling the onion" or something like that.
Well, it certainly makes us all cry.
On the other hand, one of my friends mostly likes the explosions.
Once the mantis category opens up for AI war 2, I'm going to submit a suggestion about this item. There's a certain kind of firework that has a reverb, a very deep bass boom. This particular firework doesn't look the prettiest, it's rather small, but displays will often send them up to increase the volume of the typical flower fireworks. It reminds me of a kind of cannon but with some reverb. Anyway, I wonder if we can get that sound into the game for some of the explosions or weapons.
<sense of scale>
<sense of scale>
The fact that upon reading 800 motherships with 32 AIP and I think to myself NOT "This looks shopped" But "I would love to hear the settings that caused THAT [Champion + 10/10 shenanigans?]" tells me that.
The level of extremes are unreal.
That's why Mobas are so popular. While there are always viable builds for a specific hero, the player has to adapt to what heroes the enemy heroes palys and also, what builds they use. That's btw why I hate the Dota Casual scene on lower tiers (where I reside sadly). Players there are dumb as a piece of bread (that got toasted), they have already made up their mind before the match started what items they exactly want to have on their hero. This is most seen on current popular heroes, like for example Phantom Assassin. Every PA player nowadays rushes Battle Fury simply because they think it's a strong item on PA but it isn't, its situational and those people don't even undrstand what "situational" means. They just follow their build and that's why they loose, because the opponent has something that counters their build and they aren't even thinking about doing soemthign different, they walkt the whole road down to hell just because they think their build is awesome.
However, in higher brackets in Dota (and Mobas in general) players think about what to pick at the right time, if your opponent is spell strong, they bick a spell blocker, if your opponent has strong attacks, they get more armor. Having to adapt your build to the situation and to your enemies is part of the fun. It is a mind game with your opponent, who can think of a better build to beat them.
Well, I think it depends if you are trying to play serious AI war to accomplish some goal or just want to go crazy. Sometimes, I will buy the stuff that seems the most fun- whatever creates more chaos. I'm not trying to win, just trying to create some huge space battle.
So yeah, giant battles. Must have.
We will have that feel. I will hound one developer to the ends of the earth to make sure it's there >D
<sense of scale>
The fact that upon reading 800 motherships with 32 AIP and I think to myself NOT "This looks shopped" But "I would love to hear the settings that caused THAT
Did you read his sig, by the way? ;)
When I read that name, I assume anything is possible :D
Very fascinating topic, thanks guys. The sense of dread is a really interesting aspect that I had not considered fully. So basically my idea of going to anime cel-shaded designs is a no-go?
...(hopefully you know I was kidding)
And squads, yeah squads... I still think there must be some kind of "abstraction" in terms of units. Having 1500 ships is fun and all, but it never really makes you feel like you command a real "fleet"
And squads, yeah squads... I still think there must be some kind of "abstraction" in terms of units. Having 1500 ships is fun and all, but it never really makes you feel like you command a real "fleet"
Suddenly champions and command ships take a new meaning.
I like it!
Did you read his sig, by the way? ;)
When I read that name, I assume anything is possible :D
When I read that name, I assume anything is possible :D
Funny, I think the same thing when I see a particular super-cat avatar...
10. Asymmetry. I really wish more games of this sort did this. This makes things extra fascinating to me, and it means that it wont feel like a "mirror match" also. I'm not fighting against JUST the units that I myself can also use. Sure, I'll definitely see some of them on the enemy's side... but at the same time the AI has it's own unique threats that I cannot use, and the same the other way around.Imo this (in addition to the amount of content and ways to approach the game) is one the most important aspects of AI War. The problem with PvE mirror matching is that the AI will never be as good as the player unless the AI is given "unfair" advantages like extra resources, reduced build times etc. which easily make it feel like the AI is "cheating". Thus it feels like the game is no longer hard but "cheap hard".
There are a lot of things already mentioned here but I'll add this one.Or you can build a massive beachhead and nuke hundreds of thousands of ships at once. (https://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,16525.0.html) I'd have waited a bit longer and nuked even more ships at once but the game started to freeze after the ~400k ships. Doing crazy things and succeeding against all odds is just something really awesome and rewarding when you manage to pull it off. I don't think you can do stuff like this in any other game so that too makes AI War unique.
Sense of scale.
You can have superbly massive battles raging across any one of a hundred plus systems, or you can take it down and relentlessly raid with handfuls of ships, and it can happen at the same time, in the same game.
Also, this. these moments. Those things that tell you you done messed up. Stuff like this.
Sometimes, I will buy the stuff that seems the most funYet another point for AI War. You can do/choose all the "fun things" and still be successful/effective. There are so many viable strategies and options that everyone finds something they like. In other games I've run numerous times into the problem of liking something that is vastly underpowered or unviable. For example enjoying playing a class in an RPG that has interesting mechanics and playstyle but ultimately finding out that it's underpowered/unviable and that I'd be much better of just choosing another class or build. In AI War I can take pretty much everything the game has to offer and build my own play style/strategy from that.
I'm flattered.When I read that name, I assume anything is possible :DFunny, I think the same thing when I see a particular super-cat avatar...
There are a lot of things already mentioned here but I'll add this one.Or you can build a massive beachhead and nuke hundreds of thousands of ships at once. (https://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,16525.0.html) I'd have waited a bit longer and nuked even more ships at once but the game started to freeze after the ~400k ships. Doing crazy things and succeeding against all odds is just something really awesome and rewarding when you manage to pull it off. I don't think you can do stuff like this in any other game so that too makes AI War unique.
Sense of scale.
You can have superbly massive battles raging across any one of a hundred plus systems, or you can take it down and relentlessly raid with handfuls of ships, and it can happen at the same time, in the same game.
Also, this. these moments. Those things that tell you you done messed up. Stuff like this.
More hacker uses is always an interesting choice.
More hacker uses is always an interesting choice.
Speaking of....
Hacking as a resource has been one of the best things to happen to AI War. The metal/crystal thing made less and less sense as time went on (it was virtually impossible to create a fleet that required 10 times more metal than crystal, or vice versa, leading to very balanced costs, leading to very balanced income, leading to virtually no distinction between the two). If resources could run out then it might've made sense to keep the distinction, but again, AI War was like "there's resources here, they're infinite, don't sweat it" and that was good.
==Note: this post may need its own thread==
I suppose I can say the one thing I would like to see changed, somehow, is for games to not take bloody forever. Three to six hours would be ideal. And I realized that epicly long games is one of the things AI War is known for, but I don't think it's really needed to make AI War AI War. Should they be possible? Sure, there are all kinds of playstyles and some of them favor longer games. But it's not about the time component, but the nature of progression, the ability to make further gains.
One of the things the game doesn't do well is forcing an end-game. You can grind to a long, drawn out stalemate easily where it's virtually impossible for the player to progress, but the AI doesn't do anything to actually crush the player. That is, the difficulty doesn't continue to ramp up when a stalemate occurs (as the player is no longer causing AIP increases, so they languish at defending against a statically sized wave after wave of attacks that cannot breach their defenses).
I don't know what can be done about it.
If we look at the Steam Achievements, we can set a baseline for "how many people have played for more than ten minutes" with the #1 most achieved achievement:
1. Rainy Day Savings: 50,000 Energy
Given that the game is currently "do you have energy? good, you get this achievement" as the 50k value used to be a lot and now it's half what you get for building a single reactor. Anyway, 28.2% of the people who own the game have this one. Generally the most common achievement gives you an idea of how many people are actually playing as it tends to be one you get on accident (makes me want to put in a "you ran the game" achievement to a game, just to see the numbers).
But let's look at the "win/loss" numbers.
"1. First Loss" 12.4%
Half! Half of the people who have played at all have ever lost a game!
"1. First Victory" 3.6%
And only 1 in 8 players has ever won a game.
Even if we add these together, that still leaves 3/8ths of the people who've played the game having not played it long enough to reach a conclusion. Instead they abandon the game and start a new one (or never come back). And that drawn out stalemate is likely the problem. No one is going to let the AI whittle away at their defenses just to have the game tell them that they've lost: they already know it. So they quit and maybe try again.
A lot of board games don't have this problem, where the end-state occurs right at the moment that its becoming apparent who's winning. Race for the Galaxy does it perfectly, managing to thread the needle between "arg, one turn!" and a runaway winner. That is, if there had been one more turn, only one person would have been playing: the guy everyone already recognizes as the winner, but if there'd been one fewer turns, it could be a tossup between Player A and Player B depending on what they did that last turn vs. what they would have done on a one-more.
Other RTS games usually have a tipping point as well, where one player achieves that upper hand that leads to an ever-widening gap in power, leading to a quick loss. The middle game there isn't a stalemate where neither player can progress, but rather a series of probing strikes, looking for a weakness to exploit, that when found tips the scales suddenly and decisively.
AI War though, I tend to find that if the AI throws a giant wave of ships at me, I can fend it off. But it leaves my own armada weak and unable to push back and in the time it takes me to rebuild, the AI has rebuilt too and we clash head on and neither of us accomplish anything. Some players here have found ways around this (cough, nukes, cough) but I tend to be AIP-averse and don't resort to warheads as my policy is "a nuke now means two nukes later" as the AIP rises.
I find stalemates and acceptable endgame. And I like that I control the pace. I like being able to invest over 100 hours (game time) into one match.
Though I will say that usually when I stalemate, it's because I made a mistake somewhere along the way.
I think it's a great part of the scale of this game. I can play my way, and you yours and it's all possible.
And let's remember that Steam isn't the only means of acquiring the game. I got mine off D2D back in the day :p It might provide a metric, but it isn't the only metric.
I suppose I can say the one thing I would like to see changed, somehow, is for games to not take bloody forever. Three to six hours would be ideal. And I realized that epicly long games is one of the things AI War is known for, but I don't think it's really needed to make AI War AI War. Should they be possible? Sure, there are all kinds of playstyles and some of them favor longer games. But it's not about the time component, but the nature of progression, the ability to make further gains.
That is very true.. the AIP mechanic is the core of AI War, if anything it needs even more reactive AI stuff tied to it because even at AIP 600 I don't really feel the dread (I know how to build a decent defense..)Time to increase the difficulty level then, no? I'd get bored on sandbox difficulty too.
One of the things the game doesn't do well is forcing an end-game. You can grind to a long, drawn out stalemate easily where it's virtually impossible for the player to progress, but the AI doesn't do anything to actually crush the player. That is, the difficulty doesn't continue to ramp up when a stalemate occurs (as the player is no longer causing AIP increases, so they languish at defending against a statically sized wave after wave of attacks that cannot breach their defenses).Perhaps the auto AIP increase could be tied to the difficulty level of the AIs?
Now how to cut out netfix time?Some things that increase netflix time:
Now how to cut out netfix time?Some things that increase netflix time:
-Waiting for resources for refleeting
-Grinding through AIs' brick wall defenses (I think this makes up the biggest portion of the nextflix time)
-Having to wait for a wave/CPA/whatever to hit just in case before the next (player's) attack
These are things that also deter new players from getting into AI War. Not sure how to fix them though.
One of the things the game doesn't do well is forcing an end-game. You can grind to a long, drawn out stalemate easily where it's virtually impossible for the player to progress, but the AI doesn't do anything to actually crush the player. That is, the difficulty doesn't continue to ramp up when a stalemate occurs (as the player is no longer causing AIP increases, so they languish at defending against a statically sized wave after wave of attacks that cannot breach their defenses).Perhaps the auto AIP increase could be tied to the difficulty level of the AIs?
Now how to cut out netfix time?Some things that increase netflix time:
-Waiting for resources for refleeting
-Grinding through AIs' brick wall defenses (I think this makes up the biggest portion of the nextflix time)
-Having to wait for a wave/CPA/whatever to hit just in case before the next (player's) attack
These are things that also deter new players from getting into AI War. Not sure how to fix them though.
#3 is an easy fix. #2 is half the fun for me. #1 will probably always be an issue.
We will have that feel. I will hound one developer to the ends of the earth to make sure it's there >D
Spire campaign:
"You mean the game not only knows, but intends for me to potentially kick the door down on an AI HW so I can blow them to bits before I finish it?"
"lol j/k if you go to far we sick a mothership at you. but we gave you the illusion it was a sneaky path, right? and if you are smart it actually IS a smart path..."
There were many stages in the spire campaign that asked the player: "Do you want to continue down this path, or just use the power you have?".
That is something I missed in the doomsday plot. I keep calling it doomsday plot, but maybe it was shadow plots? Sadly the system was far to binary for me to remember, yet alone pursue.
You could probably also achieve something similar by having ships cost a resource upkeep, such that having a big fleet will lower your resource production, and eventually halt it entirely. That would let you still save for something huge (like a SuperFortress) if you wanted to, by running around with a smaller fleet for a while.That can already be done by rebalancing the energy costs.
After a couple hundred hours of playing "keep AIP low because the AI will flatten you if it sees you as a real threat", having the option to suddenly switch to "conquer half the galaxy and launch a direct frontal assault" is a pretty great change of pace.
It got kinda laggy sometimes, though. :D
I suppose I can say the one thing I would like to see changed, somehow, is for games to not take bloody forever. Three to six hours would be ideal. And I realized that epicly long games is one of the things AI War is known for, but I don't think it's really needed to make AI War AI War. Should they be possible? Sure, there are all kinds of playstyles and some of them favor longer games. But it's not about the time component, but the nature of progression, the ability to make further gains.
-Add some sort of collision?
-Add some sort of collision?
No reason to. There is a Z direction.
Blobbing is a tactic, and not a smart one. It's effective when facing smaller enemy fleets to benefit from the protection of long ranged units, but against matching forces, splitting, baiting and interception are much more effective.
-Add some sort of collision?
No reason to. There is a Z direction.
That's true, but I do think there should at least be something to discourage blobbing and promote actual tactics.
Blobbing is a tactic, and not a smart one. It's effective when facing smaller enemy fleets to benefit from the protection of long ranged units, but against matching forces, splitting, baiting and interception are much more effective.
-Turrets and mines. They're stationary, but do they really need to be? It just makes things more of a hassle than they need to be. Just make them mobile defense bots that don't have warp drives or something so they can't cross wormholes. They'd be more effective obviously but I think they'll feel better if they were weaker but were actually more consistently useful. Often, enemy ships will just break through your line and run right past the turrets, making them pretty much pointless.
Yeah; can I just say, give this (https://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,13369.0.html) a read. You don't necessarily have to go all out with it, but even the simple lesson (http://i.imgur.com/8VLDIZt.png) of 'concentrate your Turrets near your Command Stations, instead of splitting them up among all the possible wormholes' is very useful.-Turrets and mines. They're stationary, but do they really need to be? It just makes things more of a hassle than they need to be. Just make them mobile defense bots that don't have warp drives or something so they can't cross wormholes. They'd be more effective obviously but I think they'll feel better if they were weaker but were actually more consistently useful. Often, enemy ships will just break through your line and run right past the turrets, making them pretty much pointless.
Tractor turrets, gravity turrets, EMP mines, the Military Command's translocation shots, and those kinds of goodies are there to make this harder. But yes, some stuff is meant to blast through. Turrets aren't a universal "stop everything". I tend to think that's okay. You can stop an awful lot with them once you figure out how to build a strong defense.
It takes away a lot of personality if they're changed into ships that are worse than your other ships, instead of something else entirely.
Eh, I won't debate AI War Classic strategy here. But maybe you're not playing at the edge of your skill.
I assure you, I was bored at 7/7. I first turned the Golems off and found a new game at 7/7. Once I relearned the basics of the game, I jumped straight to 8/8. First CPA was a steel wall. I learned again and carved my first >7 victory. I then jumped at 9/9 and spent months and many games on the first CPA. I'm currently at the gates of the endgame and I don't know if I'll make it through without starting it all over again.
Trust me, wherever you are on the difficulty ladder, bump it a notch. You'll learn... or die.
;D
-Turrets and mines. They're stationary, but do they really need to be? It just makes things more of a hassle than they need to be. Just make them mobile defense bots that don't have warp drives or something so they can't cross wormholes. They'd be more effective obviously but I think they'll feel better if they were weaker but were actually more consistently useful. Often, enemy ships will just break through your line and run right past the turrets, making them pretty much pointless.
Tractor turrets, gravity turrets, EMP mines, the Military Command's translocation shots, and those kinds of goodies are there to make this harder. But yes, some stuff is meant to blast through. Turrets aren't a universal "stop everything". I tend to think that's okay. You can stop an awful lot with them once you figure out how to build a strong defense.
It takes away a lot of personality if they're changed into ships that are worse than your other ships, instead of something else entirely.
Yeah; can I just say, give this (https://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,13369.0.html) a read. You don't necessarily have to go all out with it, but even the simple lesson (http://i.imgur.com/8VLDIZt.png) of 'concentrate your Turrets near your Command Stations, instead of splitting them up among all the possible wormholes' is very useful.-Turrets and mines. They're stationary, but do they really need to be? It just makes things more of a hassle than they need to be. Just make them mobile defense bots that don't have warp drives or something so they can't cross wormholes. They'd be more effective obviously but I think they'll feel better if they were weaker but were actually more consistently useful. Often, enemy ships will just break through your line and run right past the turrets, making them pretty much pointless.
Tractor turrets, gravity turrets, EMP mines, the Military Command's translocation shots, and those kinds of goodies are there to make this harder. But yes, some stuff is meant to blast through. Turrets aren't a universal "stop everything". I tend to think that's okay. You can stop an awful lot with them once you figure out how to build a strong defense.
It takes away a lot of personality if they're changed into ships that are worse than your other ships, instead of something else entirely.
Do we really have to place all of the mines and turrets and position the gravity turrets just right? Why can't we just do something like upgrade the command station to do these things, like create a planet-wide gravity field, long range tractors, etc.?
Do we really have to place all of the mines and turrets and position the gravity turrets just right? Why can't we just do something like upgrade the command station to do these things, like create a planet-wide gravity field, long range tractors, etc.?
The reason is, placing your turrets, choosing which ones to buy, and having range limitations gives meaningful decision points to the player. That creates a game.
That being said, I think the line place tool is hidden from the average player who doesn't even know it exists because the GUI needs improvement. And I think we'll get that GUI improvement.
I also fail to see how the difficulty level is of relevance here, the AI uses the same general tactics for difficulty 7+. Again, my issue is that I never get to do cool stuff with my fleet aside from hurl it at the other fleet.
Fallen Spire seems like it erodes the mechanics that give rise to tactical play; exos don't vary in speed, photon lances don't care about hull type, etc. But, some people still really love doing Fallen Spire. Fallen Spire probably needs its own thread to dig into what people like and don't like about it.
The reason is, placing your turrets, choosing which ones to buy, and having range limitations gives meaningful decision points to the player. That creates a game.