AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent [Archive] - Page 4

Alneyan

September 22nd, 2003, 03:44 PM

Firstly, the reproduction/ER increase costs. I will do a few calculations for different possible values for reaching, say, +20% in reproduction. You will have to choose then. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

As for the Organic Facilities, I have to admit I am myself not fond of this trait, so I am not in a position to really speak about the other organic facilities. Nonetheless, you seem to make a point as Organic facilities are a bit improved if these facilities suit your playstyle.

I would support the reduction of the research requirements for the Replicant Centers, but not the actual improvement of the Replicant Center (contrary to what I wrote in my Last post), because I also thought of another factor. +20 million inhabitants a year is fine enough (for me at least) on well populated planets, but this would be a problem with planets much less populated. I find it quite strange when your tiny moon is "producing" 20 million settlers each year while it is only populated by 3 millions. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif And as you cannot restrict the use of a given facility, then reducing the requirements would be easier.

Sure Oleg, if you are patient enough that is to "develop" the number of this population. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif (Requiring micromanagement to put one million of these settlers to each planet with a Replicant Center, to increase the "creation" rates) Then it would be useful indeed. I have to admit I would prefer to use Atmosphere Converters, but that is merely a matter of taste. (Or that is because of my own silliness) Good point. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

JLS

September 22nd, 2003, 05:06 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLS:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
Also can you explain the planet value system a little more in depth.

ThanksIn regards to (PV) this is the textbook answer from Frequently Asked Questions.

Basically, the FAQ will apply for all Human Players that play AIC. With the exception of Cities and Urban Centers Homeworlds inclusive; they afford Commerce (Imperial Trade if you will) to the Human Player and is thereby unaffected by PV to a degree in AIC.

Loosely, this application of Commerce is applied also to the entire economy for the AI on AIC and is thereby NOT effected by poor Planet Values. Directly that is

I will follow-up with how I Interpret the AI perceptions on some PV applications and AI scenarios.
<hr /></blockquote>How do you "Interpret the AI perceptions on some PV applications and AI scenarios."<hr /></blockquote>Please picture this if you will. One human and One AI player are close with three systems dividing you two.

Systems:
(A) Human Players Rock Home World (YOU GLV)
\
(B) (YOU CLAIM) With one 130% empty HUGE OPTIMAL- Mineral ICE Planet, you have already colonized (or not) most of the Rock planets worth Colonizing here.
/
(C) Theoretical No-Mans Land, with a full Asteroid belt.(BOTH CLAIM - or not)
\
(D) (AI Claimed) Sparse and terrible non-GAS Planets however it does have one 99% mineral large ICE Planet.
/
(E) AI Players Home Gas World

Ok, now you guys have enjoyed this great agreement of Military and friendship for many years.

Until on this day; the AI Player achieves ICE Colonization and as a result of the [AI_Planet_Types file]* demands this AI Player to go for the (B) 130% Mineral ICE Planet; by passing >(D) 99% mineral ICE Planet
{We all have seen this; with the AI going to the boonies to Coloize, in our games}.

Now this really gets you up set http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif
and you start to demand thru diplomacy; that you want that (B)130% ICE Planet,
but nooow >the AI Player says up yours http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
so you keep demanding http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif he keeps saying nooow >up yours http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
until one of you breaks the Agreements, not necessarily war but that could be the option as well.

You now have the advantage of a powerful assault fleet.
Catching this trusting AI Player, that may have only been in the Infrastructure or Not Connected AI States� Hmmm, then again if you noticed extra BSY�s being built by him in the recent; just maybe he was Preparing for the attack on you. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Anyway, you take the (B) 130% ICE Planet out (WACK �20% PV) right from the top and across the board this planet is now at minerals 104%. Then (WHAM �20% PV) he now just took you out. Planet now at 83% mineral PV�

�Hey wait a minute�; this AI Player Says to him self. �never mind�, I actually like the >(D) 99% mineral ICE Planet better now.
Also since (B)Planets Value is now below 100%, the AI Player may just move on to the next Item on the AI_Planet_Types file; certainly that planet is no longer a consideration for that AI in respects to a Mineral Colony.

So all is now happy ever after and you guys make up� Until you attack him again GLV, you blood thirsty warmongering (bleep) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
- - - -

Basically, in a lot of peaceful scenarios the AI will be come less insistent as the desirability of Planets PV is decreased. They�re by less likely for the AI Players to commit its assets in Systems he cannot efficiently reach or fight over with any realistic strength; wave after wave or again and again.

Also to note: If the AI is in the Neg of any resource, his next Colony will be most likely will be the Closest Planet; regardless of the PV for that Resource. This explains why the AI builds Mining Colonies on Min 40*Orgs 123*Rads 132. Then you say why did the AI build Mining Facilities here; I would have made this a RAD Colony... Dumb AI http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
You, not knowing the AI Player needed minerals; because you just took all his >in that Last Offer Trade of AI's 100000 mins for your 80001 Rads that {one way trade} resulted in the AIs now scraping and scurrying to recover from deficits.

= = = = = = = =

Reference

Se4 Default AI_Planet_Types file

AI State := Exploration, Infrastructure, Prepare for Attack, Attack, Secure Holdings After Attack, Incursion, Prepare for Defense, Defend (Short Term), Defend (Long Term)
Planet Type := Mining Colony
Max Per System := 100
Percent of Colonies := 100
Minimum Planet Size for Type := Medium
Mineral Value := 101
Organics Value := 1
Radioactives Value := 1
Maximum Total in Empire := 2

AI State := Exploration, Infrastructure, Prepare for Attack, Attack, Secure Holdings After Attack, Incursion, Prepare for Defense, Defend (Short Term), Defend (Long Term)
Planet Type := Mining Colony
Max Per System := 100
Percent of Colonies := 35
Minimum Planet Size for Type := Small
Mineral Value := 101
Organics Value := 1
Radioactives Value := 1
Maximum Total in Empire := 0

AI State := Not Connected
Planet Type := Mining Colony
Max Per System := 100
Percent of Colonies := 50
Minimum Planet Size for Type := Small
Mineral Value := 101
Organics Value := 0
Radioactives Value := 0
Maximum Total in Empire := 0

Or just in the Neg for Minerals http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

AIC Settings
Planet Value Percent Loss After Owner Death := 20

[ September 22, 2003, 23:53: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

September 22nd, 2003, 06:34 PM

As for descriptions, I would still believe to add the values or perhaps even a description highlighting how efficient the reproduction is. (For instance, a "small mechanoid assistance during childbirth" for the weakest facility to something like "promotes the use of Genetics to drastically improve the reproduction and the fertility in this system" or something around these lines.)

The point would be to give the player an idea on how efficient these Cultural Centers are in improving the reproduction rates, so that he/she will decide whether to build another facility (with a better value) or not. Sadly, SE:IV keeps on saying that "You already have a facility in this system with similar abilities", even if this facility is outdated compared to the one you would like to build. And for obvious reasons, you cannot destroy your Cultural Centers to see their importance during an actual game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif (Except if you DO want a challenge that is)

JLS

September 22nd, 2003, 07:09 PM

You are correct, we should add the Values to the CC description http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Consider it done for AIC 4.0 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ September 22, 2003, 18:15: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

September 22nd, 2003, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
Firstly, the reproduction/ER increase costs. I will do a few calculations for different possible values for reaching, say, +20% in reproduction. You will have to choose then. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I would support the reduction of the research requirements for the Replicant Centers, but not the actual improvement of the Replicant Center (contrary to what I wrote in my Last post), because I also thought of another factor. +20 million inhabitants a year is fine enough (for me at least) on well populated planetsAgreed http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

10 Pop as a start is not really that bad either.
Certainly, much more Pop for an advanced Urban Center construction.
Even Hundreds of Pop for as an Industrial Planet with a Shipyard to be more effective then a BSY's.

[ September 22, 2003, 18:39: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

September 22nd, 2003, 08:20 PM

What do you mean by?

Originally posted by JLS:

Certainly, much more Pop for an advanced Urban Center construction.I am not sure I get your meaning. Do you mean a Replicant Center is more effective on a well populated world, or the contrary? Or something else completely different?

JLS

September 22nd, 2003, 08:28 PM

Actually, I may of missunderstood you, I thought we were past the RC and you meant you would be happy at 20m POP?

And with that I started babbeling http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ September 22, 2003, 19:29: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

September 22nd, 2003, 08:31 PM

I did say so a few Posts ago, but I changed my mind afterwards for the reason you mentioned and my Last point. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif I will be happy with less tech requirements for this facility. (If I play an Organic race that is. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

Oh, I see where the problem was, I said 20 millions is fine for well populated planets, but not for much smaller ones. I believe it was the reason for the misunderstanding.

[ September 22, 2003, 19:33: Message edited by: Alneyan ]

JLS

September 22nd, 2003, 08:42 PM

As a proposal, as I said; I agree and that it may be time to drop the RC tech req.

However, there are Players that may feel that this is too much to give the Organic Races�

Best not to get stuck on this http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
When Races where rebalanced from 2.xx going into and for v3.00 many players at that time, was concerned that I gave Planet Lore 1-3 to the Organics just to seal a deal that kept most happy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Therefore, this gave way to Psychic Intel to the Psychics and Creatation ot the Temporal BSY.
Then a few months latter the Crystalline felt slighted and the compromise was a Crystal Rad improvement Plant, that may really only help in Finite play and some resource trading, and since then it has been quite, until as I say the Temporals now may want more http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ September 22, 2003, 20:27: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

September 22nd, 2003, 08:50 PM

I do understand your concern, and besides, there has not been much feedback on the RC for now (at least on the thread), so waiting is wise. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif (As for the other traits, I do not have much to say about them, but worry not, I shall find something to complain about. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

JLS

September 22nd, 2003, 09:00 PM

Great, please give some opinion on the Temporals, I have had some requests to reinforce this trait http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

A few suggested more in the line for more advantages build Rates on the Temporal BSY.
One suggestion was that the Temporal CC should have 9 or 10% for System Research up from 5%.

Oleg, you also like temporals, how do you find that balance?
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ September 22, 2003, 20:49: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

September 22nd, 2003, 09:15 PM

I would be happy with All Racial Players Balanced with only a slight edge to the Organics.
Religious to complement any choice http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

A better then slight edge to Non Racial Players, and this is why the Non Racial players received one Facility similar to that of each Racial Player, which is really only an advantage of one, since that shared facility is also avail to each of the other Racial Players http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ September 22, 2003, 20:38: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

September 22nd, 2003, 11:26 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
Great, please give some opinion on the Temporals, I have had some requests to reinforce this trait http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

A few suggested more in the line for more advantages build Rates on the Temporal BSY.
One suggestion was that the Temporal CC should have 9 or 10% for System Research up from 5%.

Oleg, you also like temporals, how do you find that balance?
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif I like Temporal in non-connected games where fast research is very important and nobody can beat Temporal here ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif My only suggestion is to have Temporal Planet Space Yard - with faster building rate than normal shipyard - available from the start. And why not if we have temporal base space yard ? To balance it, connect tech requirement for higher level with Space Yard Technology. Temporal player shall have to research both SY and Temporal tech. to get better facilities IMHO.

oleg

September 22nd, 2003, 11:32 PM

About Starliner pictures - There are many Neo-standard shipsets nowdays. Neo-standard includes a TransportTiny picture. It is not used in AIC at all. Why not make it a primary picture source for Starliner hull ?? That's what I made in my instalment and am very happy playing very beatifull custom shipsets that now have distinct starliner pictures http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ September 22, 2003, 22:34: Message edited by: oleg ]

JLS

September 22nd, 2003, 11:40 PM

Also proposed by Several Players; is an increase in StarLiner Speeds and Transport Speeds as it relates with propulsion levels, this looks like it may be in for AIC v4.0 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Desired proposed StarLiner speeds:

Ion Engine, Contra Engine, Jacketed Engine, Quantum Engine

Small StarLiner with I=2 ~ J=3 ~ Q=4
Medium Starliners with C=2 ~ J=3
Large Starliner with J=2 ~ Q=3

Main concern here, it that a huge freight capacity carrying units to the front at rapid speeds, and the AI may be unable to keep up

[ September 23, 2003, 00:53: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

September 22nd, 2003, 11:48 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLS:
Great, please give some opinion on the Temporals, I have had some requests to reinforce this trait http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

A few suggested more in the line for more advantages build Rates on the Temporal BSY.
One suggestion was that the Temporal CC should have 9 or 10% for System Research up from 5%.

Oleg, you also like temporals, how do you find that balance?
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif I like Temporal in non-connected games where fast research is very important and nobody can beat Temporal here ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif My only suggestion is to have Temporal Planet Space Yard - with faster building rate than normal shipyard - available from the start. And why not if we have temporal base space yard ? To balance it, connect tech requirement for higher level with Space Yard Technology. Temporal player shall have to research both SY and Temporal tech. to get better facilities IMHO.<hr /></blockquote>Thats doable http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
The only worry is in Multiplayer/LAN games and as a Planet SY with to high a Rate; may then build advanced Urban Centers to quickly.
This should not be a problem at level one sounds good to me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ September 23, 2003, 00:46: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

September 22nd, 2003, 11:58 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
About Starliner pictures - There are many Neo-standard shipsets nowdays. Neo-standard includes a TransportTiny picture. It is not used in AIC at all. Why not make it a primary picture source for Starliner hull ?? That's what I made in my instalment and am very happy playing very beatifull custom shipsets that now have distinct starliner pictures http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Great Idea. Consider it done http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ September 22, 2003, 23:04: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

September 23rd, 2003, 05:38 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
Also proposed by Several Players; is an increase in StarLiner Speeds and Transport Speeds as it relates with propulsion levels, this looks like it may be in for AIC v4.0 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Desired proposed StarLiner speeds:

Ion Engine, Contra Engine, Jacketed Engine, Quantum Engine

Small StarLiner with I=2 ~ J=3 ~ Q=4
Medium Starliners with C=2 ~ J=3
Large Starliner with J=2 ~ Q=3

Main concern here, it that a huge freight capacity carrying units to the front at rapid speeds, and the AI may be unable to keep upFor reference concerns, how fast are Starliner with all the propulsion technologies with AIC 3.2? I do tend to not use these ones much when I reach high levels in Propulsion, so I have yet to see a Small Starliner with Quantum Engines. (And Propulsion is not usually my priority)

And around the same lines, how fast are the Transport hulls in comparison? Same remark as above for me. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif (I should run such a test by tomorrow, as I unfortunately have to work tonight. *Grumbles about The Life, the Universe and Everything and tries to refrain himself from launching SE:IV* http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

oleg

September 23rd, 2003, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
.... Thats doable http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
The only worry is in Multiplayer/LAN games and as a Planet SY with to high a Rate; may then build advanced Urban Centers to quickly.
This should not be a problem at level one sounds good to me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Yes, as long as level 1 is not much faster than normal SY, there should be no problem. If someone wants to build facilities faster, he will have to research SY+temporal tech. first. The situation would be almost identical to what we have now.

oleg

September 23rd, 2003, 09:09 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
Also proposed by Several Players; is an increase in StarLiner Speeds and Transport Speeds as it relates with propulsion levels, this looks like it may be in for AIC v4.0 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Desired proposed StarLiner speeds:

Ion Engine, Contra Engine, Jacketed Engine, Quantum Engine

Small StarLiner with I=2 ~ J=3 ~ Q=4
Medium Starliners with C=2 ~ J=3
Large Starliner with J=2 ~ Q=3

Main concern here, it that a huge freight capacity carrying units to the front at rapid speeds, and the AI may be unable to keep upI don't like it. Especially speed 3 for "j" engines. It is not that difficult to research and it effectively makes your starliners 50% more efficient - you either can slash your fleet by conciderable numbers or make population shipping 50% faster. May be et "q" level, but not at "j".
Just MHO.

Devin Bass

September 24th, 2003, 05:38 PM

Hello,
Is there anyway to play this mod to take advantage of the improvements to the combat module without experiencing the lengthy econmoic/colony portion of the game?

Thanks
Devin

mottlee

September 24th, 2003, 06:03 PM

Grand Lord Vito

September 25th, 2003, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
I don't like it. Especially speed 3 for "j" engines. It is not that difficult to research and it effectively makes your starliners 50% more efficientI also agree with Oleg. Faster Starliners will take away from the logistics of AIC. This will really be a step backwards, I play tested it, and it stinks. Besides we have fast Pop transports with Medium Transport hull and just level 1 cargo bays. I like Alneyans ideas with the reproduction characteristics better, if a player wants increase the population faster with out to much logistics then play the Organic Race or beef up it up from the Empire settup with Alneyans characteristics http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Oleg had a good idea about supplying images for the Human Players, there should also be a Scout and a CVE pic as well for each race.

[ September 25, 2003, 13:24: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

September 25th, 2003, 02:34 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
I like Temporal in non-connected games where fast research is very important and nobody can beat Temporal here ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif My only suggestion is to have Temporal Planet Space Yard - with faster building rate than normal shipyard - available from the start. And why not if we have temporal base space yard ? To balance it, connect tech requirement for higher level with Space Yard Technology. Temporal player shall have to research both SY and Temporal tech. to get better facilities IMHO.Great ideas for temporal balance and like Oleg said there at level one it does not make a difference with the advanced urban centers.
Besides IMHO by folding space and time. We Temporals should be able to build everything faster http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

I never like the idea of having to scrap the original HW planet shipyard just to build the Temporal one, now all we have to do is Upgrade http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif GREAT Idea Oleg http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

[ September 25, 2003, 13:43: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

September 25th, 2003, 03:01 PM

Originally posted by GLV:
No Warp Point games are boring
Try No Warp with FINITE, now this is a challenge

Actually, I will take up JLS’S suggestion to try No Warp COMBINED with NOT all warp Points Connected.
This with a regenerated Centurion Map to my liking and for my total pleasure, I will play with FINITE resources
Originally posted by JLS:
some may disagree about N-W being Boring.
However some may also agree, you really have your hands full playing No-Warp in Finite.

Also note: In a No Warp COMBINED with NOT all warp Points Connected game there is a good chance that you will start with one opened adjacent System. If you also play with Neutrals, you may get lucky and have Tex, Cluck, Nultoh, or Bobroba next door from jump http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif to Trade with as well, so this may be of some aid in your Finite game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
I am having the time of my life, the adjacent system is (was) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif the Bobroba.
Sure the trade and research agreement was fine, but there Home World flying the GLV national flag is finer http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[quote]You may be pleasantly surprised, what a little diplomacy can do (YOU WAR MONGER http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
My diplomacy leads with my gunboats
Diplomacy is for sissies http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Grand Lord Vito

September 25th, 2003, 03:15 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
“Hey wait a minute”; this AI Player Says to him self. “never mind”, I actually like the >(D) 99% mineral ICE Planet better now.
Also since (B)Planets Value is now below 100%, the AI Player may just move on to the next Item on the AI_Planet_Types file; certainly that planet is no longer a consideration for that AI in respects to a Mineral Colony.

Basically, in a lot of peaceful scenarios the AI will be come less insistent as the desirability of Planets PV is decreased. They’re by less likely for the AI Players to commit its assets in Systems he cannot efficiently reach or fight over with any realistic strength; wave after wave or again and again.
So if the AI went to a far away system to colonize and then any Player glassed that new Colony. That Planets value will drop and that AI is less likely to travel all the way back because there is a good chance that a better planet is closer to him, so that cycle is not repeated again and again. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Also to note: If the AI is in the Neg of any resource, his next Colony will be most likely will be the Closest Planet; regardless of the PV for that Resource. This explains why the AI builds Mining Colonies on Min 40*Orgs 123*Rads 132. Then you say why did the AI build Mining Facilities here; I would have made this a RAD Colony... Dumb AI http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
You, not knowing the AI Player needed minerals; because you just took all his >in that Last Offer Trade of AI's 100000 mins for your 80001 Rads that {one way trade} resulted in the AIs now scraping and scurrying to recover from deficitsThis is why you set up the AI to trade for my two to his one. in resource kt.
This makes sense because it makes it difficult to accidentally-bankrupt the AI http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Now this really gets you up set
and you start to demand thru diplomacy; that you want that (B)130% ICE Planet,
but nooow >the AI Player says up yours
so you keep demanding he keeps saying nooow >up yours
until one of you breaks the Agreements, not necessarily war but that could be the option as well.

You now have the advantage of a powerful assault fleet.
Diplomacy nothing http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif That is MY CLAIMED SPACE.
I would break the agreement- capture the bloody AI and there the GLV national flag will fly http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ September 25, 2003, 14:23: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

oleg

September 25th, 2003, 03:30 PM

JLS

September 25th, 2003, 07:59 PM

Well I guess the raising of Starliner speeds did not fly. They will remain as v3.02...

AIC v4.0 may have the perfect solution for everyone http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif and you all will be pleasantly surprised for its simplicity http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

JLS

September 25th, 2003, 08:15 PM

Originally posted by Devin Bass:
Hello,
Is there anyway to play this mod to take advantage of the improvements to the combat module without experiencing the lengthy econmoic/colony portion of the game?

Thanks
DevinHello Devin http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

GLVs Medium Tech level starts is a more gradual introduction and you will benefit with an increased infrastructure techs and buildings to support your fleets sooner.

Olegs suggestion is indeed a lot of fun for a death match against the AI, however the AI Player will make minced meat out of you; at higher AI player bonuses.
+
In addition to both the above suggestions, you may want to start also with *Human Player Trait Options 1 and 2 this will afford you a good size fleet with out even having to build one single additional facility http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

If this is your first AIC game, it is suggested to play your games at AI Player bonus NONE, until you are more familiar with the Economics and the different mechanics of AIC.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ September 25, 2003, 20:19: Message edited by: JLS ]

Grand Lord Vito

September 26th, 2003, 01:59 AM

HI Devin Bass and Welcome to the Forum http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Try this for your next NEW GAME settings:

Player Settings: Starting tech Level MEDIUM. You will start with most the early Tech tree including destroyers. Level high will give you a Home World like se4 and tons of Tec's to mess with. It will be more of a death match against You and the AI, but what ever floats your boat http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
I play MEDIUM settings if I want a to end a game sooner, it cuts out most of the early builds http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Technology: Set to LOW, you can research Tec's much faster.
I like this for No-Warp or not all warp games. It also works well in any style game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I agree with Mottlee, I also like the building up to the crescendo.

[ September 25, 2003, 14:29: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

PsychoTechFreak

September 28th, 2003, 07:13 PM

What is your favorite quadrant type for a non (or semi-) connected, finite resources setup?

JLS

September 29th, 2003, 02:21 PM

I would have to say the CENTURION RUINS Quad is my favorite AIC MAP. I regenerate this map first, and then I play with Low, Medium, or High amount of Computer Players in the start settings; depending on the Centurion map that was just generated. When playing Finite I prefer playing (Not) all Warp Points connected to that of No-Warp games, because there is a chance of a friendly neighboring Neutral Player, although on rare occasions I have started neighboring with another major AI Player.

Any of the Quad Maps are also good for a No-Warp or Not all Connected located in the upper portion of the Quad Map Menu.

PTF, would you suggest, or do you have any ideas for an enhanced Finite map, that can be used in many situations to be added to AIC?

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ September 29, 2003, 13:42: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 1st, 2003, 03:05 PM

I know, unbelievable the amount of Event hits you get when the Players become fewer and the Event Chance is set at high pre game settings and this can be a problem.

If a Player wants more good and bad events, but not to be overwhelmed in the late game.
Maybe it would be a good strategy to start a game at a Moderate chance setting (or just have High around 60% in the Settings file) then build the plus chance Heroes Epic for the early game and as the other Players die off, scrap that Facility for the minus chance Epic http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 01, 2003, 14:29: Message edited by: JLS ]

PsychoTechFreak

October 1st, 2003, 04:20 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
If a Player wants more good and bad events, but not to be overwhelmed in the late game.
Maybe it would be a good strategy to start a game at a Moderate chance setting (or just have High around 60% in the Settings file) then build the plus chance Heroes Epic for the early game and as the other Players die off, scrap that Facility for the minus chance Epic http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Something in the concept still makes me feel uncomfortable with the good events, balance-wise. If I refuse to build Heroes (or if one AI race does not build them), I would be cursed if all other races pave their systems with +Heroes, because this increases my event per hit chance by almost 100%. I think, either the event per chance modifiers should be removed completely or the good events should be removed to keep the hardcoded intention of this issue? I mean, good events is a nice idea, but if the hardcoded situation does not support this idea, it will be hard to find workarounds for all aspects, AI- and balancewise. Just my thoughts at the moment, don't be offended, I like the ideas, but ...
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

JLS

October 1st, 2003, 06:25 PM

In regards to the Event modifiers and with respect of the -CBEC Epic this is Identical to the existing FATE Shrine but will be in play by all races http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
However, +CBEC is another matter and agreed, this needs to be well tested for function and so far so good, have you seen something with the +CBEC, PTF?

The consensus is that most Players want a combination of good events and bad events to remain for AIC. Therefore, it seems that the Default events file will include both good and bad.

However, others do not want this expanded on. So there will be 3 quick and easy overwrite ZIP file folders for the alternative so that ALL players will have what they want�
A: se4 Classic Events,
B: (new Default AIC good & bad)and
C: my favorite; AIC good and very bad Events. All to include Settings overwrites as well to reflect the appropriate chance settings.

The AI Players WILL be programmed to deal with any Event File option that is listed above, this has been completed and tested ands tested 90% with 8 Players and 2 Ntrls with good results from the current AIC v4.0 default Events file.

So far the Hardcode has not been an issue for the events them selves with Basic Good/Bad event selections in the mix, other then actual occurrence percentages decrease as the number of Events available increases, that I have seen in any way in the Last several weeks.

The only issue that we need to really put behind us; is whether se4 will critical error overtime with multiple plus CBEC readings. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Some other hard code Error questions and or functions.
When a Random warp is opened or Closed with a prevention facility is in play, this seems to be OK, but getting the warp to event open is rare indeed. Their is also other examples but we seemed to be past them and resolved or it will just not be included in the default AIC Events file.

[ October 01, 2003, 19:03: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 1st, 2003, 06:40 PM

The initial chance numbers ranging near L40 M60 H90 posted by us is NOT likely going to be the AIC default.

Low will absolutely be 10% or 15% tops, when players want low event frequency they will get low frequency, with no real need to build any Epic Facility to modify the event occurrences. But there options still will be open http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Medium will range in-between 20 and 40% at or under a 30 % there is no need to build a �Epic but there may be the need to build the +Epic since most players are requesting this to be set at 50% default.

High really sounds good and currently plays very well at 90% when you are Playing a game against 15 or more Players; but when they start dieing off then frequency becomes nightmare for the HUMAN Players. Therefore, the logical default HIGH setting will be 40 to 60% so the �Epic (or Faith Shrine) will have the Players desired frequancey effect on event occurrences when players die off.

[ October 01, 2003, 18:01: Message edited by: JLS ]

PsychoTechFreak

October 1st, 2003, 08:01 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
High really sounds good and currently plays very well at 90% when you are Playing a game against 15 or more Players; but when they start dieing off then frequency becomes nightmare for the HUMAN Players. Therefore, the logical default HIGH setting will be 40 to 60% so the ?Epic (or Faith Shrine) will have the Players desired frequancey effect on event occurrences when players die off.My understanding of events frequency and events distribution is about this: You can not modify the overall number of events in the galaxy by Epic or Faith Shrines, this should be a fixed frequency given by the event frequency setup. With Epic facilities you should be able to modify only the occurrences frequency in the regarding systems, which will be neutralized if every system gets the same modifier. Players with the highest lucky modifiers will only push the events to the more cursed players, but the sum of events will remain the same. If every player has got the same modifier in all of his systems, the events should happen in the same way as if there would be no modifiers at all.

[ October 01, 2003, 19:03: Message edited by: PsychoTechFreak ]

JLS

October 1st, 2003, 09:06 PM

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:

My understanding of events frequency and events distribution is about this: You can not modify the overall number of events in the galaxy by Epic or Faith Shrines, this should be a fixed frequency given by the event frequency setup
Correct, the Settings Data File will have the overall BASE numbers (not fixed) at these proposed percentages for all System in the Quad.

Low Chance = 10% as was AIC v3.02 settings with many good events added (no harm here)
Medium = 30% up 10% from AIC v3.02
High = Undecided but most likely this will be around 55% Chance
= = =

The AIC v4.0 Default Events file Severity Categories:
Low won�t even have -5 Planet Condition or �20 PV events they moved up to medium events but low also will have many low end good events.

Medium will have (NO) scalding events and many good events. The Rebel, -10 PC etc. and Warp Close are or have been gone. Warp Close/Open and Rebel is now just in High and Cat as it was. -10 PC and -40 PV is out of the game for now.

High will have most the usual AIC 3.02 Events with a few GREAT new good events.

CAT will have most the usual AIC v3.02 Events with 2 Spectacular and new good EVENTS.
- - -

Epic facilities you should be able to modify only the occurrences frequency in the regarding systems, which will be neutralized if every system gets the same modifier.
Basically.

However, with this example I may explain better:

Lets say the Settings file is set for medium 30% and the Human Player choices Medium Event Frequency at the pre-new game settings EVENTS menu.

Therefore, the base is now 30% Chance that an event will be called from the se4 hardcode protocols.

Please note, the Players Can alter this if he/she desire up or down for each system.
By the Epic Facility that if or when be built in that System.

For example the Home System may want the �40% Chance Facility
Where none may be wanted in another established System.
However there WILL be a strong desire to increase the CHANCE for a Friendly roll or that deadly roll for the Random GREAT to Spectacular Event with a +Epic of 20% in that newly Colonized system.

Or the MED 30% base may be to boring at that point in there game for some players and they may desire to increase the Systems chance with a +Epic.

Players in the game may realize that the High setting of 55% was fine and very exciting for 15 Players. But now its down to 7 survivors and they are worried about the increasing frequency of events being dispersed now only over 7 players instead of the full 15 starting Players. I believe they will definitely want the -CBEC and start building the �40 Epics in almost every system, to be sure as the survivors get even fewer and the discernments are handed out to you and a few.
- - - -

Players with the highest lucky modifiers will only push the events to the more cursed players
Lucky (under another title and will be FREE in AIC) may be desired by a Player and it will represent 50% fewer events, this is good for a Multiplayer game and the Majority want the pre-game Event setting higher then you would like them to be.

Cursed (under another title in AIC) may be desired, if the majorities in a Multiplayer game want the Events LOW and then this will be FREE to you if you want a possibility of increased events for your Character Race.
- - - -

, but the sum of events will remain the same. If every player has got the same modifier in all of his systems
True, only if a Epic or even the Fate Shrine is and was never built in that System, or one believes the Fate Shrine was never fixed by MM or just has no faith.

However, the overall SUM to include the different modifiers from the Epic or Fate Shrine will change the results of the overall in System Events when built; if all else is true. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
True? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

EDIT: Added
REFERENCE

ABILITIES DATA FILE
Change Bad Event Chance - System
Value1 = Percentage change in chance for bad event for entire system (+/- percentage).
Value2 =

= = = =

Version History for Space Empires IV
Version 1.66:
8. Fixed - "Lucky" racial trait was not always working.
9. Fixed - Abilities "Change Bad Event Chance - System" and "Change Bad Intelligence
Chance - System" were not always working.

= = = = =

================================================== =====================================
GAME SETTINGS DATA FILE ~ AIC ~ 4.00
================================================== =====================================

================================================== =====================================
*BEGIN*
================================================== =====================================

Allow CD Music := FALSE
Use Old Log Political Message Display := FALSE
"~"
"~"

[ October 01, 2003, 20:36: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

October 1st, 2003, 09:33 PM

JLS, not quite. The chances for events in Settings.txt are not chances for a system, they are instead simply the chance that an event will occur on any given turn. A random event is not called for in any particular system; it is generated separately, and then a target is chosen after the event is generated. Once the event occurs, then a random system, planet, ship, etc. is selected as its target. Without any modifiers, all systems have exactly identical chances of being hit. Those numbers are indeed fixed for the entire game (unless you change the file mid-game, of course). No facilities can have any possible affect on them. All that the facilities do is fiddle with which system gets hit, not with the chances that an event will occur.

[ October 01, 2003, 20:35: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

October 1st, 2003, 09:47 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

JLS, not quite. The chances for events in Settings.txt are not chances for a system, they are instead simply the chance that an event will occur on any given turn.
As I POSTED http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

�Correct, the Settings Data File will have the overall BASE numbers (not fixed) at these proposed percentages for all System in the Quad.�

�Therefore, the base is now 30% Chance that an event will be called from the se4 hardcode protocols.�
- - - -
-

A random event is not called for in any particular system; it is generated separately, and then a target is chosen after the event is generated. Once the event occurs, then a random system, planet, ship, etc. is selected as its target.
Agreed

Without any modifiers, all systems have exactly identical chances of being hit.
This is where the CBEC modifies this chance of the event to actually occur in that system.

Those numbers are indeed fixed for the entire game (unless you change the file mid-game, of course). No facilities can have any possible affect on them. All that the facilities do is fiddle with which system gets hit, not with the chances that an event will occur.
I was explaining that the Setting Data file Numbers are a base, and that the sum will be Modified by CBEC. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

An absolute SUM cannot be absolutely fixed, if it still can be further modified, or our are we just splitting hairs here, Fyron http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 01, 2003, 20:51: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

October 1st, 2003, 09:55 PM

You missed the point. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

�Correct, the Settings Data File will have the overall BASE numbers (not fixed) at these proposed percentages for all System in the Quad.� I was explaining that the Setting Data file Numbers are a base, and that will be Modified. This is wrong, as is much of the rest of the post, based off of this sort of thing. The numbers are absolutely fixed. Nothing you can do or change in the game (short of modding the data files) can affect these numbers in any way. It does not matter how many fate shrines you have or what racial traits you have; the chance of an event occuring on any turn is fixed (as the event is generated BEFORE a target is selected; they are totally independant processes). Additionally, from the rest of the post, it seems that you are saying that each system has a X percent chance of events, based on the settings. But, this is not true at all. The chance of an event hitting a system is just based on how many systems there are, regardless of the event chance settings. This is not splitting hairs, it is clarifying what those settings actually do and how they actually work. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

There is nowhere near a (for example) 10% chance each turn that a system will be hit by an event. With 100 systems, it is more like a 0.1% chance each turn that a particular system will be hit (and that is of course totally inaccurate due to randomness http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ).

[ October 01, 2003, 20:56: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

October 1st, 2003, 09:56 PM

Completeted Reference:
ABILITIES DATA FILE
Change Bad Event Chance - System
Value1 = Percentage change in chance for bad event for entire system (+/- percentage).
Value2 =

= = = =
Version History for Space Empires IV
Version 1.66:
8. Fixed - "Lucky" racial trait was not always working.
9. Fixed - Abilities "Change Bad Event Chance - System" and "Change Bad Intelligence
Chance - System" were not always working.

= = = = =

================================================== =====================================
GAME SETTINGS DATA FILE ~ AIC ~ 4.00
================================================== =====================================

================================================== =====================================
*BEGIN*
================================================== =====================================

Allow CD Music := FALSE
Use Old Log Political Message Display := FALSE
"~"
"~"
Event Percent Chance Low := 10
Event Percent Chance Medium := 30
Event Percent Chance High := 55
"~"
"~"

Fyron

October 1st, 2003, 10:07 PM

Not sure what the point of copying those lines from the data files was. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif So, I will await your next response. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 01, 2003, 21:07: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

October 1st, 2003, 10:07 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
You missed the point. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> �Correct, the Settings Data File will have the overall BASE numbers (not fixed) at these proposed percentages for all System in the Quad.� I was explaining that the Setting Data file Numbers are a base, and that will be Modified. This is wrong, as is much of the rest of the post, based off of this sort of thing. The numbers are absolutely fixed. Nothing you can do or change in the game (short of modding the data files) can affect these numbers in any way. It does not matter how many fate shrines you have or what racial traits you have; the chance of an event occuring on any turn is fixed (as the event is generated BEFORE a target is selected; they are totally independant processes). Additionally, from the rest of the post, it seems that you are saying that each system has a X percent chance of events, based on the settings. But, this is not true at all. The chance of an event hitting a system is just based on how many systems there are, regardless of the event chance settings. This is not splitting hairs, it is clarifying what those settings actually do and how they actually work. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

There is nowhere near a (for example) 10% chance each turn that a system will be hit by an event. With 100 systems, it is more like a 0.1% chance each turn that a particular system will be hit (and that is of course totally inaccurate due to randomness http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ).<hr /></blockquote>If I understand you correctly and with this new example�
That if a ship has a to hit of �0� with out a Combat Sensor installed.
Then installed a Combat Sensor on that ship, what I understant you to say; is sinuous that the +10 To Hit modifier one gets with a combat sensor will not change that base line sum; and that Ship will always hit at "FIXED" zero in the above example.

Well anyway can you please explain how you sum up this ability to the Base line setting sum of 30% Event Frequency that is in the Settng Datafile with: -40% CBEC http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

. ABILITIES DATA FILE
Change Bad Event Chance - System
Value1 = Percentage change in chance for bad event for entire system (+/- percentage).
Value2 =

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 01, 2003, 21:26: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 1st, 2003, 10:07 PM

[ October 01, 2003, 21:08: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 1st, 2003, 10:13 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Not sure what the point of copying those lines from the data files was. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif So, I will await your next response. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Sorry Fyron, my cat sat on the ENTER key and added a double reply before I was finished... I fixed the Last Posts http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif

Fyron

October 1st, 2003, 10:23 PM

The facilities and traits affect the random selection process that determines which system gets hit by a generated event. The settings.txt stuff affects the chance of an event being generated in a turn.

The facilities and traits have no affect on whether an event is generated or not. They only come into play when the game selects a random target for the event. This is because the game first randomly determines if an event is to occur on a given turn, based on the Settings.txt lines. Then, it picks the type of event randomly based on severity settings and what is in the Events.txt file. Finally, it selects a target for the event. This is where the facilities and traits come into play: they can make it more or less likely that an object in a given system will be chosen for the event to hit it. But, the event has already been generated, and will hit something regardless of the facility/trait modifiers (if they add up to 100% event reduction and are in all systems, the event will still occur anyways). Unless, of course, there is no valid target for the event, such as a ship bomb when there are 0 ships in the game. I do not know what happens then; the game either cans the event for that turn or it picks a new event type.

The combat sensor is not handled in the same way at all, because vastly different functions are at work for it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Basically, the (for example) "base chance" of 30% of an event hitting a system is wrong. It is just a 30% chance that an event will be selected to occur on a given turn. The "base chance" of an event hitting any particular system is 1 / total number of systems (x 100% if you want a percent value instead of a decimal http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ).

JLS

October 1st, 2003, 10:34 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
This is where the facilities and traits come into play: they can make it more or less likely that an object in a given system will be chosen for the event to hit it. But, the event has already been generated, and will hit something regardless of the facility/trait modifiers (if they add up to 100% event reduction and are in all systems, the event will still occur anyways).Let narrow this down to this paragraph, if we could please. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

You are telling us here that the event will hit anyway, even as you say there is a 99% or better reduction in an event to occur in that system, and that a Colonized planet will get hit in that system no matter what? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

The facilities and traits affect the random selection process that determines which system gets hit by a generated event. The settings.txt stuff affects the chance of an event being generated in a turn.

The facilities and traits have no affect on whether an event is generated or not. They only come into play when the game selects a random target for the event. This is because the game first randomly determines if an event is to occur on a given turn, based on the Settings.txt lines. Then, it picks the type of event randomly based on severity settings and what is in the Events.txt file. Finally, it selects a target for the event
This portion you agree on what I already posted for the most part http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Unless, of course, there is no valid target for the event, such as a ship bomb when there are 0 ships in the game. I do not know what happens then; the game either cans the event for that turn or it picks a new event type.
The Event, I believe is caned, because there are less events overall occouring with -40% CBEC

[ October 01, 2003, 21:44: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

October 1st, 2003, 10:44 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
This is where the facilities and traits come into play: they can make it more or less likely that an object in a given system will be chosen for the event to hit it. But, the event has already been generated, and will hit something regardless of the facility/trait modifiers (if they add up to 100% event reduction and are in all systems, the event will still occur anyways).Let narrow this down to this paragraph, if we could please. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

You are telling us here that the event will hit anyway, even as you say there is a 99% or better reduction in an event to occur in that system, and that a Colonized planet will get hit in that system no matter what? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif <hr /></blockquote>Fyron means that, when an event has been generated (say, there is a 50% chance in settings.txt, an event should be generated every two turns), it *will* happen no matter what. Let's say there are only two systems in the system. In the first one, -99% chances to have an event, in the second one, no special facilities.

The event will almost always hit the second system with such an event, but if there were a facility giving -99% chances for an event in this system as well, then the odds would be roughly equal. However, what happens if an event cannot occur in a given system is still unknown. (If it is a Star Destroyed event where there are no stars in thsi system for instance)

Either the system is chosen before the event type (and then, when the event isn't comptabible, the program chooses another event or cancel the event) , or the event type is chosen before the targeted system, meaning a system without ships cannot suffer from a "Ship Moved" event. The second would seem the most likely and the easier to use, but who knows?

Fyron

October 1st, 2003, 10:46 PM

Yes. The traits/facilities do not prevent events from happening, they just shift the targets around. I am not sure if a system protected by a 100% facility can be hit by a random event or not if there are open systems elsewhere with appropriate targets. But, if all systems have the same level of protection (even 100%), it all evens out and gets you back to the starting chance of each system being hit by an event. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif This does not make your Epic facilities useless, of course. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Edit:
Beat to post, for once. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

[ October 01, 2003, 21:48: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

October 1st, 2003, 10:47 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
The event will almost always hit the second system with such an event, but if there were a facility giving -99% chances for an event in this system as well, then the odds would be roughly equal. However, what happens if an event cannot occur in a given system is still unknown. (If it is a Star Destroyed event where there are no stars in thsi system for instance)

Either the system is chosen before the event type (and then, when the event isn't comptabible, the program chooses another event or cancel the event) , or the event type is chosen before the targeted system, meaning a system without ships cannot suffer from a "Ship Moved" event. The second would seem the most likely and the easier to use, but who knows?[/QB]I belive he stated in that post.

"
Unless, of course, there is no valid target for the event, such as a ship bomb when there are 0 ships in the game. I do not know what happens then; the game either cans the event for that turn or it picks a new event type."

I belive it will be CANED...

JLS

October 1st, 2003, 10:50 PM

Fyron

October 1st, 2003, 10:52 PM

Those just mean that the code for that was glitchy and was not always taken into account when selecting a target system. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Go run some tests. I might do the same. But, I must leave now, so bye. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Just make 2 systems, 2 human players. Mod a free facility (no tech, no resources) that does 100% fate shrine ability, increase chance of events, see what happens.

Oh, and if you want to email MM about this, feel free to. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 01, 2003, 21:56: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

October 1st, 2003, 11:16 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Yes. The traits/facilities do not prevent events from happening, they just shift the targets around. I am not sure if a system protected by a 100% facility can be hit by a random event or not if there are open systems elsewhere with appropriate targets. But, if all systems have the same level of protection (even 100%), it all evens out and gets you back to the starting chance of each system being hit by an event. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif This does not make your Epic facilities useless, of course. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Those just mean that the code for that was glitchy and was not always taken into account when selecting a target system. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Go run some tests. I might do the same. But, I must leave now, so bye. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Just make 2 systems, 2 human players. Mod a free facility (no tech, no resources) that does 100% fate shrine ability, increase chance of events, see what happens.

Oh, and if you want to email MM about this, feel free to. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif OK, thanks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Here is some published and recent data in regards to Traits effecting Events; to get your test started with: http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Half of what I believe to be true, I based on this, in regards to the modifying of the the Base setting sum.
Please note the Lucky race: Absolutely no event

PTF's Events tests (http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=009929;p=5)

=============================
Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak :

PsychoTechFreak
First Lieutenant
Member # 1289

posted September 10, 2003 18:15
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't forget, I only have listed high/catastrophic events. But probably we get this answered.

Setup:
2 Races (no-AI mod), one race is cursed (+100), the other is lucky (-100)
events chance 100
I modified the events.txt to ONE low event (planet value change +1), bad planet start (settings modified to 0).

After 20 years I can stop already:
Cursed race: 181 events
Lucky race: Absolutely no event

So I guess, MM's fix about event chances has been successful. But I will try some other values lower than +/- 100 with Medium severities.

With High/Catastrophic I might change to 10 planet start to see if the assumption about the master planet comes true. Another reason is the no-ai races can not colonize, so there would be no comparison between homeworlds, masterplanet and colonized worlds.

EDIT:
Changed setup to 1 medium event, same as above but with lucky -50, cursed +50 and swapped player slots (to exclude this).

After 20 years:
Cursed race: 181 events
Lucky race: Absolutely no event

This is not a copy/paste error, the event count has been the same.

Now I have got a High events game running, NO events for both races after 10 years, one on one, 1planet start. I think I could switch over to 10 planet start with a very long run soon (500 years or more).

NO events after 53 years, process time seems to be more than with low/med events. Probably the program tries to bring up an event, but is not allowed to do so?

BTW, Fyron is correct with 100% chance and one event per turn:
There are no events from 2400.0 through 2401.9. If you count the turns/events from 2402.0 through 2420.0 what is it? 181 events, correct.

[ September 10, 2003, 19:46: Message edited by: PsychoTechFreak ]


PsychoTechFreak
First Lieutenant
Member # 1289

posted September 10, 2003 20:13
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim test for medium events:
Cursed is set to 0 event chance modifier (racial trait)
Lucky is -10

2407.0 Cursed race has got 51 events (one each turn from 2402.0 through 2407.0.

Lucky race is still on zero events. I think about a 3rd race with another event chance modifier for the next test run.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[ October 01, 2003, 22:39: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 1st, 2003, 11:58 PM

Originally posted by JLS:

Correct, the Settings Data File will have the overall BASE numbers at these proposed percentages for all Systems in the Quad.

Low Chance = 10% as was AIC v3.02 settings with many good events added (no harm here)
Medium = 30% up 10% from AIC v3.02
High = Undecided but most likely this will be around 55% Chance
= = =

The AIC v4.0 Default Events file Severity Categories:
Low won�t even have -5 Planet Condition or �20 PV events they moved up to medium events but low also will have many low end good events.

Medium will have (NO) scalding events and many good events. The Rebel, -10 PC etc. and Warp Close are or have been gone. Warp Close/Open and Rebel is now just in High and Cat as it was. -10 PC and -40 PV is out of the game for now.

High will have most the usual AIC 3.02 Events with a few GREAT new good events.

CAT will have most the usual AIC v3.02 Events with 2 Spectacular and new good EVENTS.
- - -

Lets say the Settings file is set for medium 30% and the Human Player choices Medium Event Frequency at the pre-new game settings EVENTS menu.

Therefore, the base is now 30% Chance that an event will be called from the se4 hardcode protocols.

Please note, the Players Can alter this if he/she desire up or down for each system.
By the Epic Facility that if or when be built in that System.

For example the Home System may want the �40% Chance Facility
Where none may be wanted in another established System.
However there WILL be a strong desire to increase the CHANCE for a Friendly roll or that deadly roll for the Random GREAT to Spectacular Event with a +Epic of 20% in that newly Colonized system.

Or the MED 30% base may be to boring at that point in there game for some players and they may desire to increase the Systems chance with a +Epic.

Players in the game may realize that the High setting of 55% was fine and very exciting for 15 Players. But now its down to 7 survivors and they are worried about the increasing frequency of events being dispersed now only over 7 players instead of the full 15 starting Players. I believe they will definitely want the -CBEC and start building the �40 Epics in almost every system, to be sure as the survivors get even fewer and the Event dispersements are handed out to you and a few.
- - - -

Lucky (under another title and will be FREE in AIC) may be desired by a Player and it will represent 50% fewer events, this is good for a Multiplayer game and the Majority want the pre-game Event setting higher then you would like them to be.

Cursed (under another title in AIC) may be desired, if the majorities in a Multiplayer game want the Events LOW and then this will be FREE to you if you want a possibility of increased events for your Character Race.
- - - -
Bottom line, and to resume posted information and to recap my perceived resulted overall Event actions.

If a player starts a game in default LOW 10% or even Medium 30% Frequency Setting as there option it should NEVER be critical for that player build a Heroes Epic Facility or a Faith Shrine as I posted.

Some MODS have Event Percent Chance L=15 - Med =30 and High =45 and that file works very fine at default.

AIC will be 10% higher then that High setting.

= = = =
However, the new AIC events file will have MORE good events and less bad events then the past.
- - - -
In regards to the Event modifiers and with respect of the -CBEC Epic this is Identical to the existing FATE Shrine but will be in play by all races

However, others do not want this expanded on. So there will be 3 quick and easy overwrite ZIP file folders for the alternative so that ALL players will have what they want�
A: se4 Classic Events,
B: (new Default AIC good & bad)and
C: my favorite; AIC good and very bad Events. All to include Settings overwrites as well to reflect the appropriate chance settings.

The AI Players WILL be programmed to deal with any Event File option that is listed above, this has been completed and tested at 90% Chance with 8 Players and 2 Ntrls with good results to insure fun and enjoyment for the Human Player.

One issue that we need to really put behind us; is whether se4 will critical error overtime with multiple plus CBEC readings.


[ October 02, 2003, 00:51: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

October 2nd, 2003, 12:36 AM

JLS, http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

I ran a test, here is a log file:

test.txt (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/newuploads/1065051214.txt)

I am not convinced that the change bad event chance ability and the traits were ever fixed... again, you should run some tests. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I have a zwheihander handy (heh) to thwack anyone that wants to complain about using non-default files. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

JLS

October 2nd, 2003, 12:48 AM

Thanks Fyron, will do http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I will test at a default setting of Chance 25% Event; not "changed event chance in Settings.txt to 100"% as this MAX and unrealistic setting may counteract with the -CBEC. And with a -30 Fate Shrine as we discussed in the earlier Posts http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
Probaly with a few other AI Players, 1 ntrl and myself for 5 Players in total.
Counting manually and loging the events that Hit me with out the Fate Shrine, and then the count with the default -30% Fate Shrine III.

Any and all may join with this test, but please use all se4 DEFAULT FILES. To include stock se4 events file. Game event freq HIGH and stock -30 Fate Shrine III Facility and about 4 to 6 total players. This will insure all files are of indentical benchmark. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Also note: You will be hit with more frequant events as the other Players die or removed form game. And the added builds of a -30% Fate Shrine may reduce these hits providing there are three or more Races Total. At 2 Races it may hard to count the minus effects of your new Fate Shrine.

= = =

In additon Fyron, do you feel the trait lucky also has not been fixed; by reducing in game overall events?

[ October 02, 2003, 00:46: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 2nd, 2003, 01:48 AM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
I do like this Veneration tree, the players will know be able to choose between being protected against events (but not having good events), or suffering from these events and having a good event from time to time. I wonder if there will be players that won't build these facilities though. As for the events chances, I would second you on increasing the odds for the High setting. When you pick this setting, you do want events to occur, don't you? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif (And of course, 90 is supposed to mean almost an event each turn, but all these events should not target a single Empire.)
When testing AI Campaigns next release, as the AI Players die and removed from the game the Event frequency to hit the ALIVE players is increased, for example game started with 10 Players there are now 4. With the events, chance set greater then 50% percent I was being hit by events quite frequent. By building the �40% Heroes Epic the Events was reduced significantly� If a MOD is set for Event chance percent to be greater then 30 or 60% depending on MOD, then there will need to be access to -CBEC for ALL Players http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 01, 2003, 12:50: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

October 2nd, 2003, 01:59 AM

JLS, my question was, would there be players who will NOT build the facilities reducing the chances for events? (Or players who will build the Shrines improving the odds of an event that is) I can see fairly easily why I would like to reduce the events in a given system/all systems, but not the contrary.

Fyron

October 2nd, 2003, 05:21 AM

not "changed event chance in Settings.txt to 100"% as this MAX and unrealistic setting may counteract with the -CBEC Nope, all it will do is mean you have to hit end turn fewer times. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif But if you want to hit end turn a lot, go right ahead. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

The purpose of making a 100% fate shrine was to see if you could get total protection of a system, which you apparently can not. From what I was seeing, you do not appear to get any protection at all. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Hopefully it was a fluke and MM is not delusional with the "fix." http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif The reduced number of events was to make a reliable benchmark. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I have no idea on the lucky trait, but I assume it uses the exact same code fucntions, just accessed from different places. Why write the same code twice? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 02, 2003, 04:22: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

October 2nd, 2003, 10:48 AM

When it comes to Faith there are and will be very many believes and controversy�s. This is not a bad thing in the game, I mean really who will believe that an Heroes Epic can increase events in a System by up to 20% with their Civilization Heroes, Idols and Gods that dabble with the events. Or a Fate Shrine that can be used by all with the believe their Civilizations thoughtful seers who may predict the future and can avert disasters by as much as 40%.

This is also what faith is all about, and it is good that there will be diversity in believe and disbelieve of the possibilities.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 02, 2003, 11:07: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 2nd, 2003, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
"changed event chance in Settings.txt to 100"% as this MAX and unrealistic setting may counteract with the -CBEC"

Nope, all it will do is mean you have to hit end turn fewer times. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif But if you want to hit end turn a lot, go right ahead. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
Actually, I plan on playing a the se4 game as and the only Religious Trait player in that se4 game.
Therefore, when I end my turns it will be with the satisfaction of Playing Space Empires with PvK�s trait Balance MOD with about 4 AI Players and Logging the events in a High Frequency Events game with the consideration that the Fate shrine {may} be of benefit for my race http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

The only modification will be to give my race all the Fate Shrines from the start, with the default benefits of the Happiness, CBIC, and CBEC. And the enjoyment of playing PvKs Trait Balance MOD that keeps the CORE se4 DATA intact and changes the Characteristics Cost as to represent Balance and the enhanced Culture choices are fantastic and may be right on for anyone that enjoys roll playing in there Space Empires game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 02, 2003, 11:11: Message edited by: JLS ]

PsychoTechFreak

October 2nd, 2003, 07:36 PM

If you plan to compare two or more games with different system event modifiers, make sure the number of systems is the same in all test games. I think it could be a good idea to create as many systems as players. The smaller the galaxy the better to observe event distribution (my favorite word).

The purpose of making a 100% fate shrine was to see if you could get total protection of a system, which you apparently can not. From what I was seeing, you do not appear to get any protection at all. [[Frown]] Hopefully it was a fluke and MM is not delusional with the "fix." [[Wink]] The reduced number of events was to make a reliable benchmark. [[Wink]] What is a 100% FS? Is it -1000 ?
BTW, I have seen some other data than the cursed races got all events. It has not always been the case, it was weird, sometimes the events have happened almost exclusively at one planet, sometimes even at a lucky one. I think the event fixes have changed something, but who knows what?

[ October 02, 2003, 18:45: Message edited by: PsychoTechFreak ]

Fyron

October 2nd, 2003, 10:23 PM

I had only 2 systems and 2 players in my test. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

The game refused to load the facility file if the ability was any more negative than -334 (or was it -333?), as can be seen in my test log. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif I used an ability of -100 in my tests. I could use positive values greater than 334, but did not really test for the limit. I have no idea whether this trait is stored in 10ths or 1s. It would be best to ask MM on that, as randomness makes it difficult to test (that, and you can not use -1000... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif ).

[ October 02, 2003, 21:24: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

October 3rd, 2003, 10:19 AM

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:
If you plan to compare two or more games with different system event modifiers, make sure the number of systems is the same in all test games. I think it could be a good idea to create as many systems as players. The smaller the galaxy the better to observe event distribution (my favorite word).
Thanks, PTF.
Good point http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
I am playing with a small Spiral map with 26 Systems with a high event setting =25%. I have 7 Systems Colonized now. 6 total Players with 2 neutrals in the game.

The First 120 turns resulted with 4 Event hits to my empire, Plague being the worst.

Exactly at turn 121 the -30 Fate Shrine III was built in the Home System only.

Plan to play another 100 turns before the second -30 Fate Shrine is built in another System.

I am turn 132. With the defensive positions strengthened from the eminent threat of invasion from the Jraenar http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

In regards to the same amount of Systems as players, how often is that kind of a game played, what this suggests will direct all Events to a Home System. The goal is to play and to test the events in a real game environment with 4-6 Players, a small map (with about 12 to 30 Systems; whatever the participants desires to track events with Fate Shrines, with the emphasis on playing. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 03, 2003, 11:42: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 3rd, 2003, 12:29 PM

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:
Fyron, JLS, one of the important things about this (Aaron has confirmed it). You can not test the event chance with one player because the events are distributed over the races. If you have got 100 events in a game with two players and both of them have no positive or neg. modifiers (like fake shrine) to event chances, then every one gets about 50. One player would get 100 even with lucky trait, because there is no other player who attrackts the other events. If one race has got lucky trait, the other is cursed, then the distribution would be different (I am not good in maths now) , e.g. 40/60 or whatever.= = =

It may be best to use the Fate Shrine in actual game play, it does have an impact. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

When I was play testing the game Last week with a very high chance % frequency 60+% , and with a start 10+ Players then as the players dropped out of play; the Event distribution HITS start to become enormous and problematic per player.
The minus -CBEC Epic Facility did help, a lot.

In the 25% Chance se4 game I have now with only 6 Players and I have 7 System out of 26. It appears that just the one �30 Fate Shrine built in the Home System seems to have an effect. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 03, 2003, 11:48: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

October 3rd, 2003, 03:41 PM

One test game is certainly not conclusive, as their is a lot of quirky randomness in the SE4 event generation. Ask PTF. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

PsychoTechFreak

October 3rd, 2003, 05:46 PM

There could be even a different event handling between simultaneous and classic movement, see my Last post:

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=009929;p=1

On the other hand this could have been also a matter of randomness http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

JLS

October 3rd, 2003, 06:10 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
One test game is certainly not conclusive, as their is a lot of quirky randomness in the SE4 event generation. Ask PTF. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Agreed http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

In addition, is some of this quirky behavior from the new wave of Event files themselves? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
With some of the redundennt no matter how modified that event is, we are working into our mods. In essence, even though we may change the effect and or Severity etc this does not change the fact that it is a duplicate and may yield some interesting but extraordinary results.

I found in the early tests of the new and improved reorganized event file the infamous 4.01 beta that some events would expel back to back. And when I started reducing some duplicate events (FOR EXAMPLE �5 PC �10 PC and the dreaded �20 PC to just one -5 PC that this every now and then back to back hit was no longer.
This is fine for a good event like +PC or +PV or even +POP but not good for a duplicate of for example Planet Destroyed or even Close Warp.

I also am going back to basics with se4 event files for a few long and drawn out games, as a refresher on the events also to see, since the se4 Defaut lacks duplicates is there any definable routines.

Then to get back to finishing the current AIC Event file that is not even close to resemble the 4.01beta, to insure that if there is any definable routines; that with in reason this be exclusively for good Events http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

= = =
EDIT: Also to remind AIC Players that the AIC Event tests at the PTF test site reflects the Obsolete 4.01 Events Beta file I originally requested to be tested Last august or September. And as a result of that test and others along with input from, Oleg, GLV, PTF, Fyron and Others the AIC�s Event file is coming along very nicely.
Not to say there are not a few edges in need to be honed still. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 03, 2003, 17:39: Message edited by: JLS ]

Grand Lord Vito

October 5th, 2003, 07:26 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> not "changed event chance in Settings.txt to 100"% as this MAX and unrealistic setting may counteract with the -CBEC Nope, all it will do is mean you have to hit end turn fewer times. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif But if you want to hit end turn a lot, go right ahead. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

The purpose of making a 100% fate shrine was to see if you could get total protection of a system, which you apparently can not. From what I was seeing, you do not appear to get any protection at all. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Hopefully it was a fluke and MM is not delusional with the "fix." http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif The reduced number of events was to make a reliable benchmark. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I have no idea on the lucky trait, but I assume it uses the exact same code fucntions, just accessed from different places. Why write the same code twice? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif <hr /></blockquote>JLS, I also agree with Fyron I don't think Aaron ever fixed the Fate Shrine either, I don’t know why Aaron said he did if he if he really never did. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

[ October 05, 2003, 18:27: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

JLS

October 5th, 2003, 10:16 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> not "changed event chance in Settings.txt to 100"% as this MAX and unrealistic setting may counteract with the -CBEC Nope, all it will do is mean you have to hit end turn fewer times. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif But if you want to hit end turn a lot, go right ahead. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

The purpose of making a 100% fate shrine was to see if you could get total protection of a system, which you apparently can not. From what I was seeing, you do not appear to get any protection at all. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Hopefully it was a fluke and MM is not delusional with the "fix." http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif The reduced number of events was to make a reliable benchmark. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I have no idea on the lucky trait, but I assume it uses the exact same code fucntions, just accessed from different places. Why write the same code twice? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif <hr /></blockquote>JLS, I also agree with Fyron I don't think Aaron ever fixed the Fate Shrine either, I don’t know why Aaron said he did if he if he really never did. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif <hr /></blockquote>GLV I believe the Fate Shrine works as Aaron and MM say it does, why is it that you feel it does not?

[ October 05, 2003, 21:17: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

October 6th, 2003, 12:54 AM

Even when I had the ability on -100, the events were equally distributed between 2 systems. They were not even distributed slightly differently. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Grand Lord Vito

October 7th, 2003, 02:39 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
GLV I believe the Fate Shrine works as Aaron and MM say it does, why is it that you feel it does not?I tested it with event chance 100%, 4 races and one system per race. I also removed alot of good and a few duplacate bad events from your beta event file to see if bad events would occur and they DID http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

QBrigid

October 7th, 2003, 03:07 PM

I think the problem is in your test, GLV.

The se4 Fate Shrine does work http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 07, 2003, 14:08: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

Fyron

October 7th, 2003, 04:43 PM

The only thing that could be wrong with his test is if he built a fate shrine in every one of those systems. If not, his test is perfectly valid (assuming he tried a couple games and hit end turn sufficiently long to get a good average). Have you run actual tests Qbrigid, or are you just saying that?

[ October 07, 2003, 15:44: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

October 7th, 2003, 07:26 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLS:
GLV I believe the Fate Shrine works as Aaron and MM say it does, why is it that you feel it does not?I tested it with event chance 100%, 4 races and one system per race. I also removed alot of good and a few duplacate bad events from your beta event file to see if bad events would occur and they DID http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif <hr /></blockquote>GLV, there are many ways to test a file.
If I may ask you to consider the parameters of your test with this following example:

Lets say you are about to test a Tractor Trailer Truck.

Chance is the equivalent of the throttle. You may consider that setting the chance of 100%; may be synonymous of putting a Cinder Block on the gas pedal (FULL THROTTLE)

By removing some of the Events; this MAY be synonymous with emptying the Trailer and having a Lighter Vehicle for your test. (Less LOAD Distribution)

Now setting the Systems to one per Player; is synonymous with test-driving this Truck with Trailer, in a test track that ovals your (DOMICILE) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Lets recap your test:

1: At Full Throttle
2: Little Load in the back end and with out any good distributions.
3: That is with your House, home and family in probable harms way.

All this to test a simple brakeing system; that is synonymous with the simple �30% Fate Shrine. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Please try a 25 or 30% chance with the se4 stock Event file at default with an average but small Starting set-up. To test the -CBEC Fate shrine, you may see some effect. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 07, 2003, 18:41: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

October 7th, 2003, 10:05 PM

Event chance 100 only means that events occur more frequently, so it takes less end turn clicking to rn tests. It has no bearing whatsoever on the Fate Shrine ability....

Makinus

October 8th, 2003, 09:01 PM

While i wait my printer to finish my Last work let me hare with other Users of AI Campaign MOD the modification that i did in the mod (redundant isn't it?):

I reduced the pop mass, allowing the starliner modules to transport 10M instead of the 1M of the MOD, and changed the starting maintenance of the empire from 100 to 25, reducing it a lot.

I found that, with these modifications, it was possible to have a faster game with AI Campaign, while i don't noticed any degradation of the AI.

I reduced maintenance beacuse in 9 time in 10 i'm beaten to death by AI empires that have lots of ships while i cant support a mere LC squadron of 10 ships....

Thanks again for this wonderful mod, it really changed the way i saw SEIV....

JLS

October 8th, 2003, 10:13 PM

Agreed, on Pop Transfer and early game Reproduction levels being slow and sometimes arduous in current AIC v3.02.

AIC v4.0 will have an answer to increased Population transfer and Reproduction Rates as a starting Human Player Advantage Option.
AIC v4.0 will also reduce the need for Starliners also as an Option and this all will not have need to change any Base Setting for AIC that most enjoy.

However:
AIC is based on MASS =1000 any change will have global effects.

Reducing the Maintenance numbers down is also the equivalent to not needing many Mineral Planets and sure, this works for you and it will make your game EASY.
However, I have already made avail options for you to increase your Productions with even other advantages as well.
In addition to any Trait Options, Characteristics and Culture Options you have choosen at pre game set-up. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Please lets look at the Numbers: an average 10 CL Squadron is the equivalent of
Average Level III CL = 1750 to 2000 per for a Total 17500 to 20000 Minerals.

Average (good) Medium Breathable Mineral Planet at 105% and all else even. With 16 Mining Settlement= 6750. With 16 Mining Colonies=9600 and with 16 Mining Complex=12800
Now introduce Industrial Centers and Industrial Complex above can increase as high as 30% upon 30% of that total. At level II, III and Level II respectfully may yield 14000 plus output of Minerals; from just one Medium Mining Colony in a well Colonized System. A Large Mining Colony would yield a Larger amount etc.

With this said, you only need One Medium and One Small Breathable Mining Colony (not even to count your Home World) to produce the required Minerals for just that Squadron.
Also to Consider your Trade Dividends with other Empires this is easily obtainable and to also consider there are many more Planets out there for you to still invest in, also to mention astroide minning, surplus resourse trading at your Trade Center or with a direct offer to another Race and/or pure intimadation to gain extra needed Resourses. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

The Key is to Plan your Research to improve your Economy to be able to afford Ships and to maintain the building of Facilities, Cities and infurstructure to afford more Ships to gain control of more Systems to repeat this process http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
= = = =

The AI Players Fleets have a Make-up, that is not inclusive to any one Class of ship, so it is rare you will find the AI with 10 Light Cruisers.

With a drastic cut in the settings and with the current always upgradable AIC Engineering Section Component and the AIC Maintenance Facility for the Human Player; sure it will be easier and quicker for you to achieve 20 Cruisers with a few Carriers and you should ROCK. In addition, if you wish to capture planets; this is further an investment that you have made expeditious, this also pertains to the increased resources to have for many BSY's, SSY, Defence Bases, Repair/Support Ships and etc - not to mention Stellar Manipulations and or Tectonics Vessels� With the less demand for Resources, you can now build many Intel Facilities with an off balanced attack on the AI, research for you should now be at an unbalanced ease, etc.

A reduction or change in base AIC settings will change the Balance, and the game may be come redundent from game to game when margins are widened.

Please utilize the supplied Starting AIC Human Player advantage Trait options and any or all MP Point bonus to add to your Character, you will achieve an advantage in the game and you may have that "Dream Team" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif with out the worry about semi permanent DATA changes.

= = = =

The goal for AI Campaign is for any one AI Player to beat any Human Player 4 out of 10 times. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

As it is now, with AIC v3.02 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
At AI Bonus NONE: most of us beat the AI 90% of the Time.
At AI Bonus LOW: most experienced Players beat the AI 60% of the Time.
At AI Bonus Moderate: very experienced Players win about 30% to 40% of the time and it is near impossible to beat the AI with a poor start.

AIC Version 4.0 is expected to inadvertently increase Human Player results for victory in all but High AI Bonus games; also to reduce some of the current Human Player Micro Management with AIC. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

High bonus is reserved for some to most multiplayer Games that may include only one or possibly two AI major Players, certainly just Neutrals.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 08, 2003, 23:16: Message edited by: JLS ]

Makinus

October 9th, 2003, 12:20 PM

Thanks for the in-depth analisis of my changes of your Mod, it really helped me to have a better understanding of the effects of my changes.

In fact, i'm increasing the maintenance setting again (no to the original, but not so low as the way i was using...)

My major problem with the game is beacuse i'm a very poor player, because i like to roleplay a lot, and don't use advantages that would go against the "characterization" of my race...

One example: my race don't use fighters or mines...

One thing that frustrated me was battles where, in a Medium tech start, None AI bonus, No Tactical Combat, i had a Fleet composed of around 10 Light Cruisers with beams and the AI came with a fleet of around 20 Frigates, also with beams, and it completely anihilated my fleet with only light damage to the AI ships...

One answer could be that i have a bad design of ships, but i always try to counter the designs of the AI, i.e.: if the AI use Armor skipping beams, i invest heavily in shields and don't use armor in my ships, and vice-versa...

In the example mentioned above, i would think that 20 Frigates would be equally matched with 10 Light Cruisers, because one ship (Frigate) is roughly the half of the tonnage of the other (Light Cruiser), but my LC's keep being minced with none or only small damage to the AI ships..., and when the AI started to use fighters my battles became worse, because i had to strip weapons/armor/shields of the ships to get space for Point-Defense...

I reduced the maintenance so i could have more ships to counter the AI, because i found that to counter a AI frigate i needed one Light Cruiser, and my fleets only became effective when i had one LC for each of the AI's Frigates...

It is intentional that one AI Frigate is the equivalent of one player Light Cruiser? Or i'm doing something wrong?

With the reduced maintenance (from 100 to 25) i started to defeat the AI 50% of the time in None AI bonus, while before i only defeated the AI around 10% of the time...

Like i said before, i increased again the maintenace, but i'm thinking about increasing the speed of the starliners to allow faster Pop Transport and increasing again the Pop mass to allow 5M of pop for each starliner module, i hope that this don't degrade the AI too much...

thanks.

[ October 09, 2003, 11:26: Message edited by: Makinus ]

oleg

October 9th, 2003, 04:14 PM

Bigger is not always better in AIC. Smaller ships have substantial attack/defence bonuses. AI ships have extra bonuses too. It is quite possible your cruisers could not simply hit AI' frigates. I see it happens to mee too http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

One solution is to use missiles. If it against the role-playing character of your race, use small ships as well ! Or invest heavily in scanners/ECM.

You don't use fighters. It certainly makes you vulnerable. Then use point-defence beams instead of point-defence cannons They are quite effective against fighters. Also, select "don't fire on fighters" in strategies. Normal guns are a waste against AIC fighters. Hope it helps.

I strongly advise against lowering maitenace cost. Ships have build-in maintenance reductions optimized for 100%. Lowering would destabilize game balance. Use "engeeniring section" on all your ships, research Chemistry II and build maintenence-reducing buildings !

JLS

October 11th, 2003, 03:32 PM

Originally posted by Makinus:
I reduced the pop mass, allowing the starliner modules to transport 10M instead of the 1M of the MOD, and changed the starting maintenance of the empire from 100 to 25, reducing it a lot.
Makinus, this has merit and we have been playing with MASS numbers of 50, 100, 200 and 500 for some time with varied results. When the MASS is changed, the Settings files Pop Modifier numbers also have to reflect the change otherwise a fresh load of 60 Colonists (from a Mass=50 setting) for a new Colony with old MASS=1000 settings. This would mean that the Planet is good to go whit the one load, and in most areas of productivity. With this one load of 60 may far out gain the AI Players potential with se4 v1.84 AI Pop Transport protocols. There are a few more issues of coarse in lowering MASS in respects to global effects.

If AIC v4.0 new Human Player Option (3) {when released} --> does not answer the Pop Transfer issues in a way that satisfies the new AIC Players that prefer a more robust system, even to say with less micromanagements of Star Liners in general; then AIC may adopt a base MASS of 500 or less as an option for play http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

= = =

Oleg, great follow up post. Thanks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 11, 2003, 14:58: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

October 11th, 2003, 03:45 PM

Reducing Pop. mass is against the core value of the Proportions/AIC mods. It is about realism after all, right ?
Then be prepared to invest a fortune when moving New York City to the Mars for God sake ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif NYC, as I see it in Sex&City is very very vulnerable and gentile, BTW.

If game seems to be too dificult, I suggest to mod AI bonuses, but NOT human traits. Make AI weaker but keep a chalenge of the risky and difficult space colonisation for humans !

[ October 11, 2003, 14:46: Message edited by: oleg ]

JLS

October 11th, 2003, 03:54 PM

Agreed Oleg, I am hoping that AIC v4.0 new game play option (3) will appeal to some and not at all remove the core and base mass of 1000 structure that many of us enjoy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

oleg

October 11th, 2003, 04:25 PM

Currently, I enjoy non-connected games. Games give the REAL thrill of opening the warp point to the Unknowing. Something very close to the experience of "In the Death Ground" book by Whites and Weber. No any SE setups come even close IMNO. But, and I mean BUT, the xenophobic AIs, like Xi'Chung, have too much Stellar Manipulation research penalty. I like to play small AI bonuses but still, aggresive AIs do not expand even past 200 turns barrier. BORING, bugs must spead like an infection ! - just my IMHO, of course. I would like to see them get Stellar Manipulation a bit earlier. At least in bonused games, at least. We play it for purely masochistic experienes, not for a lazy win http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ October 11, 2003, 15:30: Message edited by: oleg ]

JLS

October 11th, 2003, 06:18 PM

Understood, and this is a hard one to call for the majarity though... However, I will make additional files with advanced SM option for the few Psycos and 2 Xenos Races http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

However, there is also something to be said; by NOT knowing who is in you current game and that there is always and at anytime; a chance that you may open your next Warp into a well prepared Psycho or Xenos Players Home System http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

In addition, never knowing whether a Violent Psycho Races may have a few Breathable Science and/or a large to hugh Planet Colonized that is full of Urban Centers to get the edge on Research to exceed the aprox 20 Year SM date http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 11, 2003, 18:30: Message edited by: JLS ]

QBrigid

October 11th, 2003, 09:26 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
However, there is also something to be said; by NOT knowing who is in you current game and that there is always and at anytime; a chance that you may open your next Warp into a well prepared Psycho or Xenos Players Home System http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif
I would perfer finding the Psycos and not them finding me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif and the longer I have to prepair the better. I normally open my first warp in about 7 to 10 Years. I have seen the Eee, Tolytan and Praitorians, Cue Cappa and Terran even Abbi out and about in about 10 years, sooner for the first three http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 11, 2003, 20:28: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

JLS

October 15th, 2003, 04:59 PM

QB, the AI Research files will be tweaked a little with AIC 4.0 as Oleg suggested with respect to Open Warp http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif = some of the races you mentioned will also warp a little sooner. In addition the Aggressive, Nuetrals,Impulsives and the some Violent races will at least get to 6-ly sooner, however this may happen in AIC v4.1 when we will redux most of the AI files to catch up to the new AIC Version 4 system. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 15, 2003, 16:06: Message edited by: JLS ]

Grand Deceiver

October 16th, 2003, 11:15 AM

Last night while conducting offensive operations against another empire I had some very strange things happen.

Several (8) small fleets with an average of (11) vessels each had just entered into Tactical Combat Operations (TCO) with the express purpose of liberating a planet.

A majority of the vessels were Frigates with a normal movement of (5) in TCO.

A full 75% of all vessels involved showed only a movement of (2)..(which is not the norm as stated above).

These vessels were not damaged..and had entered the sector with plenty of Supplies and Strategic Movement (consequently..these same vessels and fleets had conducted TCO a few turns earlier with no degredation of effectivness).

Also....even tho the Targeting % was showing a (99) to attack the planet...the vessels with reduced movement would not engage the planet (I have checked the strategies and could find nothing to preclude them from engaging..plus it was Tactical combat..so I had MY finger on the trigger..not the AI)

Has anyone else ran into this?

I was playing the AI Campaign..so I will post in that thread also.

Grand Lord Vito

October 18th, 2003, 11:49 AM

Grand Deceiver

What race had frigates that moved only 2 and about what turn was it? Was it the AI or a ship that you made?

If they are moving normal but not glassing the planet then it may be this you are seeing. I think JLS has some of his AI to have CAPTURE PLANETS as opposed to optimal range as a main fleet strategy, with some of the small fleeted AIs just block-aiding the planet until the main assault force arives with the troops.
This may explain why his AI does Capture a lot of planets, I also hate when my home world gets block aided by the AI and just knowing that its main assault forces in only turns away. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

[ October 18, 2003, 11:46: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

oleg

October 18th, 2003, 04:01 PM

IMHO, AIC and Proportions give the most variety in ship/unit designs than any other SE mod. You can win with a horde of small ships or few large ships or even better of, a right mixture. There is no simple "new ship hull -> better ship hull" relation embedded in stock SE. The AIC' tactical variety is very interesting.

oleg

October 18th, 2003, 04:05 PM

BTW, JLS, any provisional date for 4.0+ ?
I'm bored playing 3.2 no-warp points games http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Fyron

October 18th, 2003, 09:57 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
IMHO, AIC and Proportions give the most variety in ship/unit designs than any other SE mod. You can win with a horde of small ships or few large ships or even better of, a right mixture. There is no simple "new ship hull -> better ship hull" relation embedded in stock SE. The AIC' tactical variety is very interesting.You get that in Adamant Mod too, though to an even greater degree, as theer are no sized-based scale mounts at all. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Saber Cherry

October 18th, 2003, 11:35 PM

What Version of Proportions is AIC based on?

And... what is there in Proportions not present in AIC?

Also, do Proportions and AIC both include the racial points balance change? If not, how do you combine 2 mods?

-Cherry

Fyron

October 18th, 2003, 11:40 PM

I think that JLS either already has his own balance changes to the traits and such in AIC, or is going to incorporate PvK's trait balances in the next Version of AIC (which should be out soon).

AIC has quite a bit of stuff that is not in Proportions. You'd have to get the mod yourself though, as there are so many it would take a while to find them all and list them.

Saber Cherry

October 19th, 2003, 12:14 AM

AIC has only 19 shipsets/races. Is it possible to add more (for example, from the TDM pack), or will that break the game? Or should I add new races for the pictures, but then copy the AI text files from existing AIC races? I'm a little confused.

Fyron

October 19th, 2003, 12:50 AM

You shold copy the AI files from an existing race in AIC, renaming them appropriately. Make sure to use the name and description stuff from the AI_General.txt that came with the new race so that it will be named differently in-game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif (though use the trait calls used by the AIC race you copied).

Saber Cherry

October 19th, 2003, 01:02 AM

Thanks! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Grand Lord Vito

October 19th, 2003, 01:03 AM

Originally posted by oleg:
Bigger is not always better in AIC. Smaller ships have substantial attack/defence bonuses. AI ships have extra bonuses too. It is quite possible your cruisers could not simply hit AI' frigates. I see it happens to mee too http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

One solution is to use missiles. If it against the role-playing character of your race, use small ships as well ! Or invest heavily in scanners/ECM.

You don't use fighters. It certainly makes you vulnerable. Then use point-defence beams instead of point-defence cannons They are quite effective against fighters. Also, select "don't fire on fighters" in strategies. Normal guns are a waste against AIC fighters. Hope it helps.

I strongly advise against lowering maitenace cost. Ships have build-in maintenance reductions optimized for 100%. Lowering would destabilize game balance. Use "engeeniring section" on all your ships, research Chemistry II and build maintenence-reducing buildings !Right on Oleg - I also use missile frigates espeaclly very early in the game.

Most AIC BEAM TYPE weapons require Combat Sensors when that BEAM weapon is still at low level or proto-typed.
Most Temporal Weapons, Crystalline Shard, Phasers, Helborer and Null Space Weapons also need at least level 3 if not better Combat Sensors.

Remeber to set your figters to go after the AI Fighters first the Ships and bases in the Empires Stragy setup. (use the Armed Cockpit)
Also make "pure" Fighter Intercepters with just cannons and the armed Cockpit. (that just attack fighters, Seekers on others, Drones and Satillites.)

Have a few Anti-Ship types with just Torpedos and the un-armed Cockpit and set them not to attack fighters, Sats drones (Just Ships and Bases)

Also have Bombers that attack planets with good sheilding to attack JUST planets and NEVER put the Armed Cock pit on a bomber or a Torbedo Bomber.

oleg

October 19th, 2003, 03:20 AM

The major difference between AIC and Proportions is the special AI technology in AIC. In Proportions, all technologies are available to humans and AIs alike. Otherwise gameplay is very similar.

QBrigid

October 20th, 2003, 08:19 PM

Oleg I am haveing a hard time beating the AI at low bonus. Do you have any suggestions?

oleg

October 20th, 2003, 10:44 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
Oleg I am haveing a hard time beating the AI at low bonus. Do you have any suggestions? I have a hard time too http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif But that's the idea, right ? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

It is hard to give a generic advise, it all depend on game setup and opposite races.

Currently, I am in love with missiles (seeking parasite rules !) on a largest hull available. However hard JLS (and other guys) try to optimise AI, the rigid structure of AI files can not adopt to either generic beam ships or dedicated missile hoards.

Even if AI has a numerical advantage, the generic narure of ship designs spread PD fire and stacks of 3+ missiles can get through.

Also, unless I am fighting crystalline race, advanced emmisive armour is a good protection agaonst pesky frigates and fighters http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 20, 2003, 21:47: Message edited by: oleg ]

JLS

October 21st, 2003, 05:47 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
BTW, JLS, any provisional date for 4.0+ ?
I'm bored playing 3.2 no-warp points games http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif !!! SOON !!!

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

pathfinder

October 22nd, 2003, 01:44 AM

Using the AI Campaign. Made a new race out of the Cue Cappa found in the MOD. New race homeworld has no facilities?! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif What did I do wrong? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

pathfinder

October 22nd, 2003, 02:27 AM

Originally posted by pathfinder:
Using the AI Campaign. Made a new race out of the Cue Cappa found in the MOD. New race homeworld has no facilities?! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif What did I do wrong? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Nevermind, fixed it.

Grand Lord Vito

October 22nd, 2003, 12:03 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
I am haveing a hard time beating the AI at low bonus. Do you have any suggestions? Go to Ship Yard tech 3 as fast as possable then upgrade BSYs and Planet shipyards.
Missile weapons are very good early until you get good sensor Lvl 3 and beam weapon levels 2 or 3 should do it.
Mines only help very early in the game so do this soon. You mist go with 100 lvl 2 MISSILE sats with one PD on each to kill the AI fighters as soon as you can over the warp points.

JLS, is AIC v4.0 going to be out this week or next.

Pathfinder, remember to give the AI 1-3 traits in their general file and when modding AIs in AIC that they grow in relation to Ship Construction so it is best to space this out over there research file.

[ October 22, 2003, 11:14: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Deceiver

October 22nd, 2003, 12:17 PM

Sorry it took so long to reply to my Strange Tact Combat Question.....It was a matter of the ships being out of supply.....Lord help me..sometimes im just not so bright! Thanks for the replies.

pathfinder

October 22nd, 2003, 11:26 PM

Grand Lord Vito: I just copied existing AIC races so hopefully that won't be a problem. Not changing much except weapon names to co-incide with Pax Empieria and same with races and their files.

JLS

October 24th, 2003, 08:05 AM

=======================================
AI Campaign V4.0 UPGRADE
=======================================

Conceptual:
New Event file with good and bad events; and a Default high zip file that operates at 84% High Event Chance frequency for an ever changing universe. Settings of 100% is Possible without the Heroes Epic or a Cursed starting trait.
Added additional Random events with images.
New 6 varied Event file zip options.
Tweaked Finite Economics Module.
Tweaked AI Balance Module.
Tweaked AI Player Minesweeping - Mottlee
Reduced AI inherent Minesweeping.
Tweaked Strategic and Tactical Fighter Module.

TECH:
New Tech Veneration.
New Tech Immigration.
Tweaked some additional Techs.

Facilities:
New Facilities Debarkation Depot.
New Facilities Heroes Epics and Faith Shrine.
Increased Climate Control Facility values, Alneyan.
Tweaked Nature and some Planet Utilization Facilities costs ~Oleg
Lowered Costs and increased capacity for Resource Storage Facilities ~GLV & Oleg
Further tweaked Planet Utilizations.
Tweaked many Facilities.

Vehicles:
New Frigates now can have 5 Engines.
Reminder that Fast Colonizers also can have 4 Engines.
Revised Freighter Cargo Capacity.
Tweaked small ship maneuverability modifiers for increased specialization.
Human Players Fast Frigates have gained an extra engine.
New Deep Space Supply Base.

Components:
New Ram Scoop Components.
Emergency Propulsion Fix ~ PTF
Corrected some Roman Numerals 3 ~Spoo
Revised Solar Sails ~Spoon
Revised Fighter and Sat Armor ~Oleg
Tweaked many Components.

Intel Projects:
New 2 varied Psychic Intel Zip Options.
Revised and tweaked Psychic Intel Projects and Intel Facilities.

Quadrant Maps:
Open Warp distances for Stellar Manipulation 1 (3to4)(5to6) ~QB
Added/or tweaked Centurion Systems for all quads.

Interface:
Corrected many Typos.

Notes:
Revised order for Random Events ~Oleg
Revised Happiness File ~Fyron
Refugee Images ~Oleg
Some additional AI Player med and late game growth tweaks
Non Psychotic AI anger levels adjusted to be more tolerant to the Human Players with this Version.
Adaptations from PvK's Culture Mod.

Human Player may mix options below.

NEW~Trait Human Player option 1 (O1*) Human Players Advantage: Resulting in a more robust game that requires LESS Micro Management and logistics. Your game will be less dependent on Star Liners with this option.
~Trait Human Player option (O2) Human Player - Advantage for a Balance: That will result in a Better all around Home World.
~Trait Human Player option (O3) Human Player - Excellent Advantage: For a much higher Proportions of Resources (not recommended for Finite Games).
~Trait Human Player option (O4) Human Player - Results in a game requiring more logistics.

~Players may also add (mp1 thru 3) for Handicapping for Multiplayer. MP1-3 May also be used in Solo games, great for a Dual Race Bonus.
~Trait Human Player option (SF) Human Player - Terminal Advantage: Strategic Fighters(gives Fighters System move capabilities)
NEW~Races that you wish not to start your next random game; Place in the [Pictures folder/Race removed from play folder].

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

AIC v4.0 is a stand alone and full upgrade.
Download size (4.07 meg)

(>>> AI Campaign v4.0 (http://www.johnlsullivan.net) <<<)

[ October 24, 2003, 07:37: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

October 24th, 2003, 10:04 AM

From what I have seen, great job JLS! I have the feeling I will love the first option, as I tend to be quite lazy from time to time. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

For now, I have only one query: how Maintenance is supposed to be working? It seems like the Maintenance characteristic doesn't do much. Here are a couple of examples:

* 100: costs nothing, upkeep 10%
* 105: costs 500 points, upkeep 9,5%
* 115: costs 2900 points, upkeep 8,5%
* 130: costs 5900 points, upkeep 7,0%
Culture neutral for every test, and the test was done with a ship needing 1000 mineral. The results for the upkeeps are accurate with a margin of 0,1% , although I could redo them with a more expensive ship. The results were checked by the organic and rad costs and the upkeep for these two resources.

So, a point in Maintenance reduces the upkeep by 0,1%, while Maintenance costs 300 points after 108. Isn't this cost a bit too much? Or am I missing something really obvious JLS?

Yes, I do need to live up to my status of Most Annoying Black Hole. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

oleg

October 24th, 2003, 04:06 PM

Yes, it is indeed seems to be more profitable to invest in production. What ship type did you use ?
I wonder if low maintenace hulls (like small transports) or expensive (like colony ships) make any difference ?

Alneyan

October 24th, 2003, 04:16 PM

There are circumstances under which maintenance is slightly more useful though, but even then, the difference isn't really important. And likewise, I believe that increasing resource production is more important when you don't have much ships and you are building a lot of ships and/or facilities. (In the early game for instance)

However, thanks very much Oleg, you made me realize I picked a "maintenance reduced" ship http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Now redoing my calculations. Sorry for my silliness. *Grumbles*

EDIT: Actually, almost all ships are using a "Reduced maintenance" ability according to the vehiclesize file, but not all show that ability in their descriptions. Thus partially explaining my mistake. (Only partially since I could have checked that is)

[ October 24, 2003, 15:23: Message edited by: Alneyan ]

JLS

October 24th, 2003, 04:28 PM

What you say in regards to maintenance for AIC has merit, AI Campaign holds this value at a premium as we discussed in an earlier post. The importance of the Engineering Section and Maintenance Facilities play an important and timely role through out your game.
Oleg is correct as your ships increase in cost so will your maintenance expenses. We will always consider do I really need to have CT or Jacketed engines on the workhorse�s such as Transports, Freighters etc. You will be surprised the planning needed to maintain a balanced budget.

If you also notice, Resource Producing Facilities have been increased a little, and yes increased resource gathering characteristics will yield the immediate profit, but there is a much broader effect on this value throughout your AIC game in regards to Mining, Farming, and Refining Characteristics not only in Finite but also the Standard starts as well http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 24, 2003, 15:47: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 24th, 2003, 04:39 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLS:

[b]NEW~Races that you wish not to start your next random game; Place in the [Pictures folder/Race removed from play folder].

BAD idea - SEIV MUST have at least 20 races in pictures folder. If it has less than 20, weird things can happen ! <hr /></blockquote>It has worked totally fine, you move the Races you do not want to play to the not wanted folder, but you are correct; plus your race there must be at least:
3 Races in a Low AI Player game
7 Races in a medium AI Player game
12 Races in a High AI Player game

Other wise you may have a duplicate AI player, but if you have 13 Races at all times in your Race directory you will never have a Problem since that is what the default high Player Settings are set at (12).

Neutrals always should maintain 6, otherwise you may have a duplacate in a Med possably a High Player game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Thanks Oleg, I will add that 13 minimum Races are needed in your Primary [Pictures/Race Folder] http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

REFERENCE

Minimum Computer Player Low Setting := 1
Maximum Computer Player Low Setting := 3
Minimum Computer Player Medium Setting := 4
Maximum Computer Player Medium Setting := 7
Minimum Computer Player High Setting := 8
Maximum Computer Player High Setting := 12

Minimum Neutral Player Low Setting := 1
Maximum Neutral Player Low Setting := 3
Minimum Neutral Player Medium Setting := 2
Maximum Neutral Player Medium Setting := 10
Minimum Neutral Player High Setting := 3
Maximum Neutral Player High Setting := 6

[ October 24, 2003, 15:50: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

October 24th, 2003, 04:49 PM

All these tests were done with a Neutral Culture, using a Starbase whose cost is exactly 20,000 mineral and 5,000 radioactives. The maintenance reduction of this ship is -50% according to the vehiclesize file.

Here are the results for a few values:
* 100: modified upkeep is 50, base upkeep 100
* 110: modified upkeep is 45, base upkeep 90
* 120: modified upkeep is 40, base upkeep 80
And so on.

So, a point in Maintenance actually decreases the base upkeep by 1. However, as all ships have a reduced upkeep, calculating the efficiency of increasing maintenance compared to increasing resource production will be a bit hard. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

In the case of the Star Base (the most expensive ship to maintain):
* 110% maintenance costs 1400 points and reduces effective upkeep by 10% (9000 instead of 10000 here).
* 110% resource production costs 750 points and would have the same effect.
* 120% maintenance costs 4400 points and reduces effective upkeep by 20% (8000 instead of 10000 here)
* 120% resource production costs 1500 points. It is still cheaper to increase resource production than increasing maintenance.
* After that, a +10% decrease in maintenance costs 3000 points while a +10% increase in resource productions costs 3200 points. (If you DO need to increase organics as well)

A bit below in the post there were results with the Scout, and they were quite the same. Hmm... My previous results seem to not be that flawed, or the problem lies in my maths skills. Your choice.

And the Star Base is the most expensive ship to maintain, that is to say, the one which is most affected by upkeep reduction. And as you have pointed out JLS, there is an Engineering Section which improves maintenance, thus also reducing the need to increase the Maintenance characteristic. (I am not sure how this one is working though with regards to the formulas)

I don't understand your Last phrase though. How increasing resource production instead of decreasing upkeep could affect a standard game? But you do raise a valid point, as it may be useful to decrease upkeep in finite game in order to save resources. I cannot speak about Finite games though, as I seldom play them, so I will let someone else speak about these ones. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

EDIT: here is a little, more practical example. Let's say you want to build 10 Star Bases, each requiring 10,000 minerals. You have 10 Space Yards, and each base is built in four turns. (2,500 minerals used each turn) Your mineral production is of 20,000 minerals.

- First case: you have a +20% bonus in resource production. You are now producing 25,000 minerals, enough to build all the Star Bases. When they are built, you will spend 50,000 minerals to maintain them. Meaning your economy will collapse in no time, but that's another problem. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

- Second case: you have a -20% reduction in upkeep costs. You will have trouble when building the Bases, as you don't have quite enough minerals. (Hmm, it won't happen often in the game, only when you are paying little or no upkeep at all, when maintenance reduction is therefore useless. That is seldom the case, only in the early game or so.) Still, when the stations are built, you will spend 40,000 minerals each turn. You have a deficit of 20,000 mineral each turn, while in the first case, the deficit is 25,000.

- However, for the same price in points or slightly less (I assume you won't increase organic production much), you can have as much as 140 in resource production. You now have 32,000 mineral at your disposal each turn, resulting in a final deficit or 18,000 mineral. That's slighty better than in the second case, where the shortage of minerals was 20,000 minerals.

The bottom line is that maintenance can effectively be more useful than resource production, but it tends to only happen when upkeep is above your income as in the previous example. (And if you want to be really mean, you may increase the upkeep in the example even more. But if your upkeep is twice as important as your income, you are in serious trouble no matter what. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

However, there could be another factor, this time involving trade. But calculating the pros and cons of increasing Political Savvy over reducing maintenance is next to impossible. And perhaps there are circumstances under which upkeep is more important than increased resource production. (Circumstances which do not lead to an economical collapse, contrary to the example above though) Perhaps when you have either a swarm of low cost ships or a few, expensive vessels?

[ October 24, 2003, 16:05: Message edited by: Alneyan ]

Alneyan

October 24th, 2003, 05:15 PM

That's definitively too long a post. I should try to sum up... Of course, I hope there are no major flaws in my reasoning. (The problem with the Scout ship wasn't probably one, as the effectiveness of increase in maintenance were the same, if you take into accounts percentages. But it wasn't really a bright idea though)

* Maintenance is too expensive cost-wise, especially above threshold, compared to resource production. (Which don't suffer much from the threshold, while the increase in cost for maintenance is... well, threefold)
* Maintenance is only becoming effective (compared to points, as 140 in resource production is more or less as expensive as 120 in Maintenance, if you don't go too high in Organic production) when the upkeep is much higher than your income. Not a good situation to be in for obvious reasons.
* Maintenance will be more useful than resource production if you are relying heavily on trade. Knowing if Political Savvy is more interesting than maintenance decrease depends mostly on the circumstances, as having a single weak partner isn't the same thing as having T&R treaties with 19 huge Empires.
* Maintenance is likely more effective in finite games, but I cannot speak about such games.
* Resource production isn't working in all circumstances. If you are an adept of remote-mining, increasing maintenance can be a wise move. Again it depends on how much of your income comes from remote-mining.
* Maintenance may be more useful under special circumstances. I am trying to see a credible circumstance under which resource production is less useful than increasing maintenance. (Except for remote-mining and trade, although who knows, I might try to delve into these matters as well. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )
* And finally, what did you mean by your Last few words JLS here?

Originally posted by JLS:

[...] But there is a much broader effect on this value throughout your AIC game in regards to Mining, Farming, and Refining Characteristics not only in Finite but also the Standard starts as well 

[ October 24, 2003, 16:20: Message edited by: Alneyan ]

JLS

October 24th, 2003, 05:38 PM

Also to recapitulate:
Foundationally speaking, the base Maintenance Cost Percentage has not changed from that of any previous Version of AIC. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
So if you always set the maintenance of =0 then there is no effect what so ever. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

However, it will get a little pricy with the additional 200pt cost over 5%, now.
If I am not mistaken; going to 5% maintenance is basically the same as v3.02 and may be even cheaper then AIC Versions before 3.0.
Granted the Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Threshold is now (5%) in v4.0 where it used to be (10%) with Version 3.02.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Alneyan

October 24th, 2003, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
Also to recapitulate:
Foundationally speaking, the base Maintenance Cost Percentage has not changed from that of any previous Version of AIC. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
So if you always set the maintenance of =0 then there is no effect what so ever. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

However, it will get a little pricy with the additional 200pt cost over 5%, now.
If I am not mistaken; going to 5% maintenance is basically the same as v3.02 and may be even cheaper then AIC Versions before 3.0.
Granted the Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Threshold is now (5%) in v4.0 where it used to be (10%) with Version 3.02.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif I have to admit I didn't delve into Maintenance in 3.02. But IIRC, the threshold cost wasn't of 300 points, as it is this change that made me look how Maintenance is handled.

At threshold, the cost is 300 instead of 200 points as you seem to believe. As you have given other values (the ones from PvK mod I believe), I gather they will change? Yes, an increase of "only" 200 after threshold seem more reasonable for me. (But you shall not worry, I will redo my calculations then. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

The cost before threshold is fine enough, slightly more expensive than increasing resource production, but nothing important. My main concern is after threshold, when the cost is suddenly of 300 points, which is an increase by threefold.

In AIC 4.0 settings.txt file:
Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Max Pct := 130
Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Min Pct := 75
Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Pct Cost := 100
Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Threshold := 5
Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 300
Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 100 Hmm, it seems like I also made a mistake as I thought the threshold was at 108. However, the code says it is at 105. My calculations are biaised then, as Maintenance was slighty cheaper in my calculations than in reality.

[ October 24, 2003, 16:48: Message edited by: Alneyan ]

JLS

October 24th, 2003, 06:29 PM

I am not sure where you would like to have the maintenance at, but as I said at a 5% gain, you are still about at v3.02 levels.

Again, the Base Maintenance Cost Setting are the same, just the threshold costs up and the percentage has been lowered to 5% as opposed to v3.02 10%.

You may add to your maintenance abilities, Alneyan and possibly gaining a advantage by choosing:
1: The Crystalline Racial Trait that may save you an additional 20% towards in System maintenance costs.
2: The Engineers Culture gains an additional 5 towards Maintenance costs.
3: The AIC alternate Workers Culture gains an additional 6 Towards Maintenance costs.

If that is not enough, there is always the FREE AIC Human Player Starting Option:
(o2) Increased amount of Cultural Centers start on your Home World and the Ability to build many more Resource Settlements on Colonial Worlds
(o3) Excellent Advantage for a much higher proportions of resources in your game over 150% higher

- - -

With AIC v4.0, you may notice an increase of near 40% towards Mineral Gathering Facilities over v3.02 may offset the 5% Maintenance Threshold a bit http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I do not know how many defense bases will hold up in the late game against the AI; but a Mobile fleet of just 10 lvl III light cruisers for example:

Please let�s look at the Numbers: an average 10 CL Squadron is the equivalent of
Average Level III CL = 1750 to 2000 per for a Total 17500 to 20000 Minerals.

AIC v4.0...
One Average (good) Medium Breathable Mineral Planet at 105% and all else even. With 16 Mining Settlement @ 600x16= 10,080. With 16 Mining Colonies@750= 12,600 and with 16 Mining Complex= 16,8000, not even counting Planet happiness levels or your Racial Culture Traits.

Now introduce Industrial Centers and Industrial Complex above can increase as high as 30% upon 30% of that total. At level III Mineral Colonies, and a Level II Industrial Center; respectfully may yield 14,000 and with (o2) this may exceed 21,000 plus output of Minerals; from just one Medium Mining Colony in a well Colonized System. A Large Mining Colony would yield a much larger amount etc.

With this said, you only need One Medium and One Small Breathable Mining Colony (not even to count your Home World) to produce the required Minerals for just the Squadron of 10 CLS.

Also to Consider your Trade Dividends with other Empires this is easily obtainable and to also consider there are many more Planets out there for you to still invest in, also to mention asteroid mining, surplus resource trading at your Trade Center or with a direct offer to another Race and/or pure intimidation to gain extra needed recourses.

The Key is to plan your Technology to improve your Economy to be able to afford Ships and to maintain the building of Facilities, Cities and infrastructure to afford more Ships to gain control of more Systems to repeat this process http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 24, 2003, 17:52: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 24th, 2003, 06:38 PM

Agreed, when not playing an Organic Race, but with Human Player Option 1 selected =(less Star Liners), the surplus food is only good for trade at your Center or with other Races http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 24, 2003, 17:46: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

October 24th, 2003, 07:03 PM

No, I don't have myself trouble with maintenance, I am only saying that the maintenance characteristic is currently too expensive after threshold to be a viable option. If I had a problem with maintenance, you are right I would take Crystalline. (I always forget if it is -20% or -30% maintenance in a given system though) And if you take Crystalline, Engineering Sections, Alternate Worker (+10% production resource AND +6% maintenance) with not too expensive hulls, maintenance is even less a problem.

My main concern is that increasing the maintenance characteristic at the beginning of the game isn't currently worth it, except perhaps in a couple of situations. (Finite games mostly, or a game in which you play a race like the Nomads in P&N for instance, and perhaps other special cases) And it is especially true when you are after threshold, when every single point in Maintenance costs 300 points, while its effects are somewhere between almost nothing and -0,5% of upkeep, depending on the hull.

Currently I would only consider taking high values of mineral production, as there doesn't seem to be a drawback for doing so. (As I am NOT playing a finite game. Such a case is quite different I gather) Although I may consider raising Maintenance as far as the threshold, when it is still cheap.

As I was... well, a bit too harsh I believe, I should say that the situation may be the same in previous Versions of the mod, or in the vanilla game, and that I failed to see it then. (Quite likely) But it was this 300 points after threshold that stroke me the very first time I launched the game. And besides, I can only welcome an attempt to change the way maintenance is handled, compared to the vanilla game. (I am not sure how it was in AIC 3.2. *Grumbles*)

For now, I would support an increase of the cost after threshold for the mineral production (perhaps 100 points?) and a decrease of the cost needed to increase maintenance after threshold, especially as they are other ways to decrease upkeep. (200 points?) Please keep in mind though that these are only rough values, and I have yet to fully consider these proposals, with yet other calculations.

JLS

October 24th, 2003, 07:23 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:

And if you take Crystalline, Engineering Sections, Alternate Worker (+10% production resource AND +6% maintenance) with not too expensive hulls, maintenance is even less
Agreed, I posted this info more of a FYI for the new comers to AIC http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

My main concern is that increasing the maintenance characteristic at the beginning of the game isn't currently worth it - And it is especially true when you are after threshold,

when every single point in Maintenance costs 300 points, while its effects are somewhere between almost nothing and -0,5% of upkeep, depending on the hull.
Exactly, up to 5% may be worth it. However, beyond 5%, it may be too pricey for most http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Currently I would only consider taking high values of mineral production, as there doesn't seem to be a drawback for doing so.
With AIC v4.0, you may notice an increase of near 40% towards Mineral Gathering Facilities over v3.02 may offset the 5% Maintenance Threshold a bit

Although I may consider raising Maintenance as far as the threshold, when it is still cheap.
As do most of us http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

For now, I would support an increase of the cost after threshold for the mineral production (perhaps 100 points?) and a decrease of the cost needed to increase maintenance after threshold, especially as they are other ways to decrease upkeep. (200 points?)
Please keep in mind though that these are only rough values, and I have yet to fully consider these proposals, with yet other calculations. We sure have time to consider tweaks for v4.01, but you may may approve of the compensatory additions; with the increased values for the Mining Facilities after all http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 24, 2003, 18:24: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 24th, 2003, 07:26 PM

JLS

October 24th, 2003, 07:35 PM

New Event file with good and bad events; and a Default high zip file that operates at 84% High Event Chance frequency for an ever changing universe. Settings for the Default are LOW 20% MED 40% HIGH 60% frequency.

Use your judgment when starting a new game and that at first it may be best to use the Starting Event Frequency :

For your New in Game Starting Options:
Low Player Count (set at Low in game Event Frequency)
Med Player Count (set at Low or med in game Event Frequency)
High Player Count (set at Med or High in game Event Frequency)

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Alneyan

October 24th, 2003, 07:40 PM

Yes, idealistically every characteristic or trait would be equally viable, but that is only... well, an ideal. For now, Maintenance doesn't quite seem to be attractive after threshold, while I would believe that almost all other characteristics can be useful with regards to a specific play style.

I will tell you after some play how I consider minerals compared to previous Versions, and how necessary it seems to raise mineral production. (But at a mere 60 points after threshold, it seems so tempting to raise mineral anyway, even if you won't lack this resource. Minerals are always in shortage in all the other games, so why not having a surplus of minerals to make a change? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

And it goes without saying that, for now, I am the only one who gave my opinion about this subject. So the tweak cannot quite happen now, with only a single voice. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Grand Lord Vito

October 24th, 2003, 09:37 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
New Event file with good and bad events; and a Default high zip file that operates at 84% High Event Chance frequency for an ever changing universe. Settings for the Default are LOW 20% MED 40% HIGH 60% frequency.
JLS the new Events are fantastic. I started my game at dawn and I haven't stopped playing the game since http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Did I mention your new Events are great. I like the way set up the Medical Teams as an event that gives us a chance to answer a medical crisis before it gets out of control, nice touch.

Warping that now has a new meaning http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

RAIDERS: Playing against them is like a game with in a game (sweet)

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

[ October 24, 2003, 20:45: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Fyron

October 24th, 2003, 11:16 PM

Hmm... looks like time for AI work for a certain mod... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Revised Happiness File ~Fyron For the 8 millionth time... I did not make that file. I have no idea who did, but it was not me. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

[ October 24, 2003, 22:23: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

PsychoTechFreak

October 25th, 2003, 12:39 AM

Observing the Extras folder http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

I assume "default psychic intel" could be implemented in the default intel projects file, or is it different?

And, what does this intel projects file do: "psychic intel HP CI" ?

What's tha difference(s) between default, high and low event frequency files?

Ah, this weekend will become a good one... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

oleg

October 25th, 2003, 01:34 AM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
From what I have seen, great job JLS! I have the feeling I will love the first option, as I tend to be quite lazy from time to time. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

For now, I have only one query: how Maintenance is supposed to be working? It seems like the Maintenance characteristic doesn't do much. Here are a couple of examples:

* 100: costs nothing, upkeep 10%
* 105: costs 500 points, upkeep 9,5%
* 115: costs 2900 points, upkeep 8,5%
* 130: costs 5900 points, upkeep 7,0%
Culture neutral for every test, and the test was done with a ship needing 1000 mineral. The results for the upkeeps are accurate with a margin of 0,1% , although I could redo them with a more expensive ship. The results were checked by the organic and rad costs and the upkeep for these two resources.

So, a point in Maintenance reduces the upkeep by 0,1%, while Maintenance costs 300 points after 108. Isn't this cost a bit too much? Or am I missing something really obvious JLS?

Yes, I do need to live up to my status of Most Annoying Black Hole. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif I think maintenance numbers are fine - if you spend 500 points, upkeep of 1K ship goes from 100 to 95 -> reduction by 5% -> your economy is better of by 5% in minerals, radio and organics. To get the same effect by raising production bonuses, you should spend points to buy 5% in all 3 categories.

Grand Lord Vito

October 25th, 2003, 01:35 AM

Sweet job JLS, looks like I will be playing AIC all week end. Nobody should miss me at work today http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

oleg

October 25th, 2003, 01:40 AM

Originally posted by JLS:

[b]NEW~Races that you wish not to start your next random game; Place in the [Pictures folder/Race removed from play folder].

BAD idea - SEIV MUST have at least 20 races in pictures folder. If it has less than 20, weird things can happen !

Alneyan

October 25th, 2003, 01:58 AM

Originally posted by oleg:
I think maintenance numbers are fine - if you spend 500 points, upkeep of 1K ship goes from 100 to 95 -> reduction by 5% -> your economy is better of by 5% in minerals, radio and organics. To get the same effect by raising production bonuses, you should spend points to buy 5% in all 3 categories. It only works when you are under threshold though. (That is, before 108) After that, you will need 1500 points to have a relative reduction of 5% of the upkeep. So here are the numbers for and after threshold:
* 800 points for a reduction of 0,8% of upkeep, you would need 1000 points for a reduction of 1,0% of the upkeep. A ship costing 100 mineral every turn would then cost 90 mineral.
* 1500 points for a reduction of 0,5% of the upkeep, and you would need 3000 points to have a reduction of 1%. Your ship costing 90 mineral would then need 80 mineral every turn.
You would therefore need 4400 points for having a relative reduction of 20% of the upkeep. (8X100 for 108 and then 12X300 after 108)

On the other hand, you only need 500 points to have a +20% in mineral, organics or radioactives. 1500 points for a global improvement of +20% then, although organics are usually not that useful. These figures are still before threshold, which is at 120. An increase of 1% requires 25 points.

At this moment, you have virtually the same effect for almost 3000 less points.

Now after threshold, at 120:
* You need 60 points to increase your mineral production by 1% => 1200 points for an increase of 20%
* You need 50 points to increase your organics/radioactives production by 1% => 1000 points for an increase of 20%
* 3200 points then for a global increase of 20%, although once again, organics aren't that useful.

So for 4700 points, you have an increase of +40% of your production, while on the other hand, your maintenance costs may be reduced by 20% for 4400 points.

However, I have yet to take into account the cultures. Although it seems like the Worker culture helps more production than maintenance, and so won't change much. Before I digress even more, are my calculations credible for you JLS or am I forgetting something essential? I mean, there may be a flaw in the reasoning. (Silly maths) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

EDIT: About your example Oleg, you need 500 points to reduce upkeep by 5% (100 => 95), but you only need 375 points to increase resource production by 5%. So even there, increasing resource production is cheaper. (For instance, in one case, you pay 95 mineral upkeep and produce 100 mineral, in the other case, you pay 100 mineral upkeep and produce 105 mineral)

[ October 24, 2003, 13:02: Message edited by: Alneyan ]

JLS

October 25th, 2003, 06:07 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

Hmm... looks like time for AI work for a certain mod... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif
Absolutely, I am starting with the Adamant AI Sunday night after football; true a little late but as promised. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

"Revised Happiness File ~Fyron"
For the 8 millionth time... I did not make that file. I have no idea who did, but it was not me. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif I really think you did it; but you now have forgotten, Fyron... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Regardless, that happiness file is great, and was instrumental with the revision of the AIC�s default Human Players Happiness cell http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Fyron

October 25th, 2003, 06:30 AM

Make sure to get the latest Version before you start on AIs. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

JLS

October 25th, 2003, 07:09 AM

Will do Fyron, I will post at Adamant to confirm the correct DL Version http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

JLS

October 25th, 2003, 07:25 AM

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:
Observing the Extras folder http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

I assume "default psychic intel" could be implemented in the default intel projects file, or is it different?
And, what does this intel projects file do: "psychic intel HP CI" ?
Psychic Intel Human Player Counter Intelligence zip file option will help to reinforce the Human Players defense against the AI Players Intel attacks, should the AI Players Psychic Intel effects become to burdensome.

The Intel zip options may be interchanged and counterchanged at any time thru out your game, just reload the save from desktop.
- - -

What's tha difference(s) between default, high and low event frequency files?
All these option zip files are for players that may not be comfortable changing the Data settings, so if they want to experiment with different Event looks; now they can, with a simple zip change that is not unlike the initial AIC mod installation procedure.

AIC v4.0 supplied EVENT Options:
(e1) You may interchange or counterchange any of the Default Events low, med or high at any time, just reload save from desktop.

All three-default Event files are identical in all categories and will have NO in-game irreversible or game stopping events http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
e1a: AIC default LOW Event Frequency zips option; is complete with a settings file at L10%, M20%, H50%.
e1b: AIC DEFAULT Event Frequency zips option; is complete with a settings file at L20%, M40%, H60%.
e1c: AIC default HIGH Event Frequency zips option; is complete with a settings file at L30%, M60%, H84%.

I feel 84% is the frequency maximum for the extreme default settings files and it make a nice fit with the Heroes Epic +15 CBEC = 99% chance for that system, if you can believe in those Heroes, Idols and Gods mumbo-jumbo stuff http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

- - -
Also supplied for the Players that wish to have added deadlier events:

(e2) AIC Events Planet destroyed zip option: L10%, M20%, H50%.
In addition, once this is added to an on going game you really should not interchange back to a default Events of option (e1abc). Knowing that there is still a possible Planet Destroyed in the mix and that cell (34) may need to be called again in about Time Till Completion := 10 . So basically, if you where to go back to defaults from a greater option and Last 11 turns I would think you are now good to go, with out error for the remainder of that game.

(e3) AIC Events Star destroyed zip option: L05%, M20%, H40%.
In addition, once this is added to an on going game you really should not interchange back to a default Events of option (e1abc)or (e2). Knowing that there is still a possible Planet Destroyed and Star destroyed in the mix and that cell (34 and or 35) may need to be called again in about Time Till Completion := 30 . So basically, if you where to go back to defaults from this greater option and Last 31 turns I would think you are now good to go, with out error for the remainder of that game.

== == ==

(e4) Stock se4 events must start new game zip option: L05%, M10%, H25%.
The se4 Stock Events file may be added, however this must be for a new game only. If you add (e1), (e2) or (e3) chances are you will error at some point in your game due too; all cells not even close to that of the default Event files and TTC READ ERROR will occur in games beyond 19turns.

== == ==

Inclusive of the above, you may use any Event option when starting a new game�
You may interchange or counterchange any of the Default Events low, med or high at any time, just reload save from desktop.
In addition you may add EVENT option (e2)or(e3) to (e1)without error fear.
You also may add EVENT option (e3) too (e2) also without error fear.

= = =

Whos is on first. No He is at third. Who is on first? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ October 25, 2003, 06:44: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 25th, 2003, 09:00 AM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
�New Event file with good and bad events; and a Default high zip file that operates at 84% High Event Chance frequency for an ever changing universe. Settings for the Default are LOW 20% MED 40% HIGH 60% frequency."

JLS the new Events are fantastic. I started my game at dawn and I haven't stopped playing the game since http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif
Great, glad you are enjoying your game.

What FREE Human Player starting traits did you choose?
= = =
NEW~Trait Human Player option 1 (O1*) Human Players Advantage: Resulting in a more robust game that requires LESS Micro Management and logistics. Your game will be less dependent on Star Liners with this option.
~Trait Human Player option (O2) Human Player - Advantage for a Balance: That will result in a Better all around Home World.
~Trait Human Player option (O3) Human Player - Excellent Advantage: For a much higher Proportions of Resources (not recommended for Finite Games).
~Trait Human Player option (O4) Human Player - Results in a game requiring more logistics.

~Players may also add (mp1 thru 3) for Handicapping for Multiplayer. MP1-3 May also be used in Solo games, great for a Dual Race Bonus.
~Trait Human Player option (SF) Human Player - Terminal Advantage: Strategic Fighters(gives Fighters System move capabilities)
= = =

Did I mention your new Events are great. I like the way set up the Medical Teams as an event that gives us a chance to answer a medical crisis before it gets out of control, nice touch.
Yes I did make note of your mention's http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

This is a result form Oleg's observation that we loose way to many Colonies to: Level 2 and Level 3 se4 Plagues.

If you noticed with AIC v4.0; Medical teams WILL prevent a Medical Crisis at a Colony; providing the Releif ship arrives in time to apply the necessary medical treatments.

~TIP~ You may want to always maintain a Medical Team or two on Stand-by for any Colony that may become in need http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
- - -

Warping that now has a new meaning http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
Agreed, with v4.0 default events and Event Frequency setting are High and you have a Moderate Player Count in your game: Your Warp Opener could be very busy keeping the warps open.

And yes there will be an ever changing universe with some apposite conditions http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif
- - -

RAIDERS: Playing against them is like a game with in a game (sweet)
This is adopted from the Eye candy MOD and really comes into Play again when some apposite conditions are in effect http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

~TIP~ You may want to always maintain a Security Fleet of about 4-12 inexpensive Scout Class vessels at the ready and available for the full use of any Governors discretion, for the welfare of that Colony http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

= = =
Thanks GLV http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 25, 2003, 23:27: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 25th, 2003, 12:11 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Then you want to get the Design Names Anthology.

http://dna.spaceempires.net/ This is a great addition to AIC, all that may be interested just copy the downloaded Dsgnname folder to your AIC directory http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

(> Design Names (http://dna.spaceempires.net/) <)

[ October 25, 2003, 11:12: Message edited by: JLS ]

QBrigid

October 25th, 2003, 02:16 PM

Originally posted by JLS:

NEW~Races that you wish not to start your next random game; Place in the [Pictures folder/Race removed from play folder].

It has worked totally fine, you move the Races you do not want to play to the not wanted folder, but you are correct; plus your race there must be at least:
3 Races in a Low AI Player game
7 Races in a medium AI Player game
12 Races in a High AI Player game

Other wise you may have a duplicate AI player, but if you have 13 Races at all times in your Race directory you will never have a Problem since that is what the default high Player Settings are set at (12).

Neutrals always should maintain 6, otherwise you may have a duplacate in a Med possably a High Player game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Thanks Oleg, I will add that 13 minimum Races are needed in your Primary [Pictures/Race Folder] http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

REFERENCE

Maximum Computer Player High Setting := 12
JLS its ok to move:
Cryslonite
Fazrah http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif
Krill
Piundon
XiChung http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

This leaves 15 races in the RACES folder.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

QBrigid

October 25th, 2003, 02:45 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
=======================================
AI Campaign V4.0 UPGRADE
=======================================[/b]
Conceptual:
New Event file with good and bad events; and a Default high zip file that operates at 84%
New 6 varied Event file zip options.
I perfer low Events, the way I understand it now with the defalt low is 20% - med is 40% and high is 60%.

I plan on playing a NO-WARP game with med players and event frequancy set to 40% med setting.
Is this what your suggested settings?

New Deep Space Supply Base.
What does this do?

Intel Projects:
New 2 varied Psychic Intel Zip Options.
Revised and tweaked Psychic Intel Projects and Intel Facilities.
I liked the way v3 was, is there much change?

Quadrant Maps:
Open Warp distances for Stellar Manipulation 1 (3to4)(5to6) ~QB
Added/or tweaked Centurion Systems for all quads.
I am going to use the Cent Systems map, for my no warp game. Is there any changes to the other maps that I should consider?

Did you add the FQM optional maps in v4.0?

NEW~Trait Human Player option 1 (O1*) Human Players Advantage: Resulting in a more robust game that requires LESS Micro Management and logistics. Your game will be less dependent on Star Liners with this option.
~Trait Human Player option (O3) Human Player - Excellent Advantage: For a much higher Proportions of Resources (not recommended for Finite Games).
NEW~Races that you wish not to start your next random game; Place in the [Pictures folder/Race removed from play folder].
I am going with options (1) and (3) and with 15 kind races at no AI bonus. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

v4.0 download is now complete. I will let you know how I do. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

[ October 25, 2003, 13:49: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

HercMighty

October 25th, 2003, 02:59 PM

My question has to do with these:

Also supplied for the Players that wish to have added deadlier events:

(e2) AIC Events Planet destroyed zip option: L10%, M20%, H50%.
In addition, once this is added to an on going game you really should not interchange back to a default Events of option (e1abc). Knowing that there is still a possible Planet Destroyed in the mix and that cell (34) may need to be called again in about Time Till Completion := 10 . So basically, if you where to go back to defaults from a greater option and Last 11 turns I would think you are now good to go, with out error for the remainder of that game.

(e3) AIC Events Star destroyed zip option: L05%, M20%, H40%.
In addition, once this is added to an on going game you really should not interchange back to a default Events of option (e1abc)or (e2). Knowing that there is still a possible Planet Destroyed and Star destroyed in the mix and that cell (34 and or 35) may need to be called again in about Time Till Completion := 30 . So basically, if you where to go back to defaults from this greater option and Last 31 turns I would think you are now good to go, with out error for the remainder of that game.

Both zips have a events.txt and settings.txt, how if I do E2 then do E3 does E3 not get over written? what if I do it the other way around, E3 and E2? Are you supposed to say:

Leave event frequency at default, upgrade to E2 and then Upgrade to E3. E3 containing E1,E2,E3? I am just a little confused.

QBrigid

October 25th, 2003, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
[QB] Yes, idealistically every characteristic or trait would be equally viable, but that is only... well, an ideal. For now, Maintenance doesn't quite seem to be attractive after threshold, while I would believe that almost all other characteristics can be useful with regards to a specific play style.
JLS why did you change the AIC Maintenance threshold?

QBrigid

October 25th, 2003, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by HercMighty:
[QB] My question has to do with these:

Also supplied for the Players that wish to have added deadlier events:
I agree Herc, I read the JLS post to PTF and I was totally http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

Alneyan

October 25th, 2003, 03:27 PM

The file "Star Destroyed" include both the events "Star Destroyed" and "Planet Destroyed", so you don't have to add both. The file "Planet Destroyed" is only there if you would like to see your planets threatened, but not the whole system at once if the star collapses.

Here are the event chances for these two files:
- For "Star Destroyed":
* Low event chance: 5%
* Medium event chance: 20%
* High event chance: 40%
- For "Planet Destroyed":
* Low event chance: 10%
* Medium event chance: 25%
* High event chance: 60*

If you want to change these values, you will have to edit the file: settings.txt after you have applied one of these two files. The lines to change are these ones:

Event Percent Chance Low := 10
Event Percent Chance Medium := 25
Event Percent Chance High := 60 Although I wouldn't advice you to increase even more the odds for such catastrophic events, but if you want to, feel free to do so. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Lastly, if you put either Planet Destroyed or Star Destroyed, you shouldn't remove these events and so you shouldn't change the files before the end of the game. As there is a warning before a Planet or a Star is destroyed (10 turns or 30 turns), removing these events once they are in the game is risky. An AI Empire may have been stricken by such an event, and has only received the warning but the event is still NOT finished. If you remove the event, the game will have problems when the event is applied.

In short, if you want to use either "Star Destroyed" or "Planet Destroyed", do *not* alter the events file during the game.

Hopefully, my post will make sense. Hopefully.

oleg

October 25th, 2003, 03:38 PM

JLS, Why did you remove Planetory Lore from Organic Tech. ??? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

I think it was a very nice touch. Something I can comprehend as a natural feature of the organic tech.

If you think it was unbalancing, increase the cost and/or link to the parallel progress in Planetory Engenering. But please, restore this facility, I really like it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

[ October 25, 2003, 14:39: Message edited by: oleg ]

Grand Lord Vito

October 25th, 2003, 03:45 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
if you put either Planet Destroyed or Star Destroyed, you shouldn't remove these events and so you shouldn't change the files before the end of the game. As there is a warning before a Planet or a Star is destroyed (10 turns or 30 turns), removing these events once they are in the game is risky. An AI Empire may have been stricken by such an event, and has only received the warning but the event is still NOT finished. If you remove the event, the game will have problems when the event is applied.

In short, if you want to use either "Star Destroyed" or "Planet Destroyed", do *not* alter the events file during the game.

Hopefully, my post will make sense. Hopefully. Makes perfect sence now - thanks Alneyan

I have been using the default files supplied with AIC v4.0 at HIGH frequency with the medium Computer Players and I can’t say it enough the events are just totally awesome http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

JLS just got hit with a level 1 plauge at my Home World and lost about 34 colonists about three turns went by before my medical ship came to its rescue. oops I guess the BSY could of done it in 2 turns http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif I have never seen a HW get hit before this.

I like that you reduced the SM techs, have you decided lowering the open warp component?

Grand Lord Vito

October 25th, 2003, 03:48 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
JLS, Why did you remove Planetory Lore from Organic Tech. ??? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

I think it was a very nice touch. Something I can comprehend as a natural feature of the organic tech.

If you think it was unbalancing, increase the cost and/or link to the parallel progress in Planetory Engenering. But please, restore this facility, I really like it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif I just started playing dual races and I liked this faciliy to JLS --- WE WANT IT BACK http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Alneyan

October 25th, 2003, 03:50 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> New Deep Space Supply Base. What does this do? <hr /></blockquote>To sum up, this is a base that can be built in deep space, and which allows you to resupply your ships in space, if you make a fleet with the "base" and wait until next turn I believe. It can be found after some research with the other ships. (It is regarded as being a ship by the game since you cannot make a fleet with bases by default) I hope I didn't spoil too much when talking about this novelty, as its functioning isn't too intuitive because of SEIV limitations.

About this vessel JLS, part of its description says "Auto refueling is 200kt min. per month in most Systems." I have to admit I didn't really understand that part. Especially as the ability for this description is a regular "Offense Minus". Sure, it is a minor detail as you can see. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 25, 2003, 14:51: Message edited by: Alneyan ]

oleg

October 25th, 2003, 03:58 PM

Ok, I tried "human bonus #1' trait - the one that gives free replicant center.

IT WAS A HORROR !!! Instead of "reducing micromanaging" I was plunged into the worst micromanagement game of my life ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

You see, I am an Evil Overlord of my Empire. every time my HW is 2000/2000, I'm loosing 1M of obidient slaves ! - NO WAY, I must build MORE starliners to clear the room for newborns...

Very soon I had an ungodly fleet of starliners shipping people. Next, I got moons with 100/100 population and small domed planets with 200/200 - now i must build dozens more ships to solve the population crisis http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

Very soon it was a complete nightmare and micro-hell. Then I got lucky and conquire alien planet with other-atm. (CO2) breathers. Now if I spread them around, they will grow like bugs and I won't need any stinking Atm. converters, I can simply clone more aliens. but it need even more starliners and micromanagemnt.
-----
Finally, I gave up. This option is a pure EVIL if you reaaly care about your empire. NEVER MORE ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

Grand Lord Vito

October 25th, 2003, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
New Deep Space Supply Base.

What does this do?
This is perfect for the asteroid, ti or binary and empty star systems that are back to back with a nebula, black hole etc. or a system with un-colonizable planets so you can refuel large fleet.

What is even cooler is that you don’t have to refill it with supplies it automatically resupplies itself each month with its own replenishment fleet http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif JLS

Alneyan

October 25th, 2003, 04:13 PM

Or it can be useful in an enemy system, as it is faster to put into action than a planet with a supply base. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Oleg, yes it can be a nightmare if you do want to prevent any waste. But why not forgetting about this waste? I won't even mention what will happen when you have ten systems for instance, and other "toys".

I am myself in love with this option, but I am a lazy player when it comes to micromanagement. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif And even expansion in other systems is so much easier with this option, as you can colonize these worlds much faster than with Starlines, although you could also use both options. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Grand Lord Vito

October 25th, 2003, 04:20 PM

I don’t see what the big deal is Oleg, I look it as auto starliners that fill your planets so you don’t have to. This make for less micromanagement.

I don’t see how you are loosing slaves when you are gaining one per turn in all the Planets and if the Home World stays full as it usually does with v3.02 with the Organic Gestation Vats and the Replicant Center. Hmmm same effect actually.

I noticed in v4.0 with the immigration Option the Organic Replicant centers produce more per turn then v3.02

Grand Lord Vito

October 25th, 2003, 04:25 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
although you could also use both options. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif I think if you do not take Human Player Option 1* it plays just like Version 3.02. But without Planet Lore for my Organics.

Alneyan

October 25th, 2003, 04:35 PM

Sorry GLV, what I meant is that, when colonizing other systems (or even major planets in your system), you could still use a lot of Starliners to speed up the process along with option 1. In minor systems, I tend to send only few or even none at all Starliners, if I am patient enough. Especially now that I am having an early war which is an heavy strain on my economy. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

oleg

October 25th, 2003, 05:01 PM

Certainly, HumanTech I idea is to help the casual players to stand up aginst AIs on steroids. Still, after my first experience i would never ever pick up this option again - obviously. I'm a micro nut and it is way too easy to dominate AI with so many extra people. I would really like to see an option for 2M cargo small starliners to reduce ship numbers.

oleg

October 25th, 2003, 05:14 PM

Yes, GLV, if one assume HP-I option is a representation of hidden starliners to help micro-man., there is no problem. But my heart bleeds when I see a full planet with no room for new "subjects". Involuntarely I want to releave the crisis and plunge into the more micro-man. than ever before !

JLS

October 25th, 2003, 05:24 PM

I am also with you Oleg, I prefer the Star Liner system as well. However, Option (O1*) is a fair compromise for those that want a more robust and less micromanaged game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

JLS

October 25th, 2003, 05:44 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
I would really like to see an option for 2M cargo small starliners to reduce ship numbers. We can do this Oleg and consider it done http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif GLV <-> Oleg http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Ok ok the Planet Lore is BACK http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Yes GLV, to complement the reduction in SM tech the cost for the Open Warp and the Create Planet Components also will be reduced http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 25, 2003, 16:45: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 25th, 2003, 06:35 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:

I plan on playing a NO-WARP game with med players and event frequancy set to 40% med setting.
Is this what your suggested settings?
Yes, default is set on L20, M40 and H60 percent
However if you feel that L20 is not low enough, QB please go to the AIC extras folders and double click on the AIC default LOW Event Frequency and install this as you did the original AIC v4.0.Zip.

I had you in mind with this file; the result will be the same events but at L10 percentage low chance frequency that you preferred in a much earlier post http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
- - -

Intel Projects:
� New 2 varied Psychic Intel Zip Options.
Revised and tweaked Psychic Intel Projects and Intel Facilities.�

I liked the way v3 was, is there much change?
I believe this will suit you just fine, the idea behind most changes here are to help the AI use more efficient Intel projects

For example, Ship and Unit data Espionage etc. that is useless for the AI
- - -

Open Warp distances for Stellar Manipulation 1 (3to4)(5to6) ~QB
Added/or tweaked Centurion Systems for all quads.
]I am going to use the Cent Systems map, for my no warp game. Is there any changes to the other maps that I should consider?

Did you add the FQM optional maps in v4.0?
Not many changes here, just more emphasis for Binary Centurion Systems versus the Ancient, or Dead Centurion Systems.

Alas, no. I will have FQM add-on ready for v4.02. In addition I would like Fyron to get a look the end result, before the release.

Only a few updates left in me and that is it, I plan on having someone else maintain AIC.
- - -

JLS its ok to move:
Cryslonite
Fazrah
Krill
Piundon
XiChung

This leaves 15 races in the RACES folder.
That is its purpose. Your Random game will now be blind and random without the chance of an undesired Race participating. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Maintain 13 races in the primary folder in your Solo games and one additional per multiplayer http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 25, 2003, 18:17: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

October 25th, 2003, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Then you want to get the Design Names Anthology.

http://dna.spaceempires.net/ This is a great addition to AIC, all that may be interested just copy the downloaded Dsgnname folder to your AIC directory http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

(> Design Names (http://dna.spaceempires.net/) <) <hr /></blockquote>That is a bad idea. Just copy it into the default Dsgnname folder, and make sure your AIC folder has none. No sense duplicating all those files. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Alas, no. I will have FQM add-on ready for v4.02. In addition I would like Fyron to get a look the end result, before the release. I am sure it will be fine. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Only a few updates left in me and that is it, I plan on having someone else maintain AIC. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

[ October 25, 2003, 18:30: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

October 25th, 2003, 07:35 PM

Thanks Fyron. That does make more sense. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Players also may want to delete the current AIC Dsgnname folder in there AICampaign directory so se4 will default.

JLS

October 25th, 2003, 09:08 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
JLS why did you change the AIC Maintenance threshold? In short, one reason for a premium maintenance is to help prevent the Human Player from building 3-5 lvl III BSY followed by 40 to 60 MISSILE Frigates with in the opening 7.5 years and then assault the AI that is limited to se4 rules. The key here is to match the AI players first 60 turns of production or even better then a determined human player, but not so great that the AI will over dominate in a no AI bonus game.

If the Human Player succeeds in capturing many AI Colonies or worse its Home World (at defaults to only include O1*) in the first 10 Years; I have Failed most Players.

- -

We also must consider that the AI Players settings is to a semi docile state for most with-in the first 5 years; as to help allow other players the right of passage, aggrements, keep early wars down and to readily expand in non-cluster style games.

- - -

With mid and high level increases in the Mining Facilities and with savvy AIC resource trading the experienced Human Player should be on keel with the Mid Pack AI major Players in about 10 Years v3.02 and about 15 Years with v4.0 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

= = = =
Granted this may need to be re-balanced for AIC v4.0 and I really did not have all the time I wanted to accomplish this. I am Leaving this balance in Characteristics Values and Thresholds in Alneyan hands for an up coming Version. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 25, 2003, 21:02: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 25th, 2003, 11:16 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by QBrigid:
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> New Deep Space Supply Base. What does this do? <hr /></blockquote>To sum up, this is a base that can be built in deep space, and which allows you to resupply your ships in space, if you make a fleet with the "base" and wait until next turn I believe. It can be found after some research with the other ships. (It is regarded as being a ship by the game since you cannot make a fleet with bases by default) I hope I didn't spoil too much when talking about this novelty, as its functioning isn't too intuitive because of SEIV limitations.

About this vessel JLS, part of its description says "Auto refueling is 200kt min. per month in most Systems." I have to admit I didn't really understand that part. Especially as the ability for this description is a regular "Offense Minus". Sure, it is a minor detail as you can see. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif <hr /></blockquote>I missed this post earlier today, sorry Alneyan.

Some may find this Deep Space Re-supply Base; more effective then a mere functioning and not too intuitive novelty, in many applications http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif Actually I understood you did not want to post the spoiler http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Agreed, the sentences do not fit the way you may expect when looking at the item with-in the Data Files. However if you check it with ALL TECHS option and hover over the Hull in Vehicle size then view the intended abilities descriptions, it all comes together relatively well for the Player. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

In order to construct the Deep Space Re-Supply Base in another Players System, you will need a Space Yard of any sort and the need to defend. Yes, this is another tool to aid us in our glorious successes. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 25, 2003, 22:23: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

October 26th, 2003, 10:58 AM

What I meant JLS is that the functioning of the Resupply Base can be not really intuitive to grasp when you are not familiar with the way Bases and fleets are handled in the game. And yes, I can see many uses, if I can think of using this hull next time. *Grumbles*

I looked within the game and couldn't find what you meant by this sentence. My bad, I thought "min" meant "Mineral" while it should be "minimum" I gather. And then this sentence applies to the capacities of the base to generate its own supplies. Don't ask me why I thought of a mineral generation on this base. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

QBrigid

October 26th, 2003, 11:13 AM

Originally posted by JLS:
Thanks Fyron. That does make more sense. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Players also may want to delete the current AIC Dsgnname folder in there AICampaign directory so se4 will default. That is a bad idea http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

I just finished my design and saved it to the Dsgnname folder and it stands out nicely in the AIC directory. I also copied a few neat design names from DNA and put them in my AIC directory. It is better to keep the AIC Dsname folder and place the design files you like then to fish thru several hundred that comes with DNA SEIV default folder http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 26, 2003, 09:25: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

QBrigid

October 26th, 2003, 01:07 PM

Originally posted by JLS: Well thank you JLS, but 40 percent is just fine and I am going to set the High Frequency setting next game. This is fun. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Option 1 is fine and it does speed the game along with less management but I also like Star Liners, as Oleg said there is just something about the feel of Star Liners. Besides I have had scores of population joining my colonies vie your new Random Events with the Star Liner and Refugee events. Medical teams are a nice touch as well.
I also want to apologize for my Posts long ago. When I questioned the new Event file would be better then v3.02. GREAT JOB!

I did not notice many changes in Psychic Intel other then def-con color code http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Opps. 16 races in the RACES folder worked fine but I forgot to take the krill out and don�t ya know they are in the game and at WAR with Cue Cappa. They also where a WAR with the Zynarra until that warp closed.

I decided not to play a no-warp game and to try a standard Centurions game to check out the new maps. I am proud to tell you I am doing fine and holding my own http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif It is almost 200 turns and I am in forth place with a 8 players with 2 nuetrals. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I am also happy to report that 2 new Independent Races have been �spawned � the new Races that joined the game are:
Trebor Empire and the Canarus Kingdom. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif
I have not found them yet, but the Canarus I can reach after a few more Military agreements. I have not found the Trebor system yet.

Hey {NEAT} this means in some games there will be a independent Spawned with my name�
Can you imagine the Brigid Clan? Cool � Wait then again, can you imagine?
Fyron Imperium
Oleg Federation
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Them Coming alive in your game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 26, 2003, 11:18: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

QBrigid

October 26th, 2003, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
We also must consider that the AI Players settings is to a semi docile state for most with-in the first 5 years; as to help allow other players the right of passage, aggrements, keep early wars down and to readily expand in non-cluster style games.
- - -
With mid and high level increases in the Mining Facilities and with savvy AIC resource trading the experienced Human Player should be on keel with the Mid Pack AI major Players in about 10 Years v3.02 and about 15 Years with v4.0 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
This "AI Players settings is to a semi docile state" do you program that or is that built in se4?
- - -
I like AIC economics as they are JLS.

Oleg and GLV showed me the ways of the Warrior Class - now I KICK BUTT http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

JLS

October 26th, 2003, 06:24 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLS:
Thanks Fyron. That does make more sense. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Players also may want to delete the current AIC Dsgnname folder in there AICampaign directory so se4 will default. That is a bad idea http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

I just finished my design and saved it to the Dsgnname folder and it stands out nicely in the AIC directory. I also copied a few neat design names from DNA and put them in my AIC directory. It is better to keep the AIC Dsname folder and place the design files you like then to fish thru several hundred that comes with DNA SEIV default folder http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif <hr /></blockquote>Actually I plan supplying the Phongs, Terrens in the least and yes of coarse we all will have the copy of QB�s new designs http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

EDIT: With-in the next AIC Dsname folder will be an IE link to FYRONS DNA MOD, Fyrons folder has tons of great design names, and is a must to have http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

http://dna.spaceempires.net/

QB
This "AI Players settings is to a semi docile state" do you program that or is that built in se4?
This setting is set by the AI Designer, and will help set the opening game tone for that AI Player http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

= = = = = = = =
Reference
Race_AI_Politics file

Accept Treaty First 50 Turns Modifier := ##
Propose Treaty First 50 Turns Modifier := ##

[ October 26, 2003, 23:24: Message edited by: JLS ]

PsychoTechFreak

October 26th, 2003, 06:43 PM

I have got an answer from MM regarding catastrophic events and homeworlds:

In both (sim and turn-based) a players' HW (or their first HW) is immune from catastrophic events. It was too devastating to have the HW obliterated by an event. The immunity has not been in the early Versions of SEIV.

Well, I can YES this for all of my longterm simultaneous games, but not for turn-based (this seems to be a *cough* bug *cough* in turn-based). Another strong reason to play simultaneous.

Oleg, I recall a problem with AI population distribution under non-simultaneous also, any news on this ?

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=23&t=009929

JLS

October 26th, 2003, 08:02 PM

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:

I have got an answer from MM regarding catastrophic events and homeworlds:

In both (sim and turn-based) a players' HW (or their first HW) is immune from catastrophic events. It was too devastating to have the HW obliterated by an event. The immunity has not been in the early Versions of SEIV.
This is good news http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Well, I can YES this for all of my longterm simultaneous games, but not for turn-based (this seems to be a *cough* bug *cough* in turn-based). Another strong reason to play simultaneous.
"Another strong reason to play simultaneous." http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 26, 2003, 18:34: Message edited by: JLS ]

pathfinder

October 26th, 2003, 08:08 PM

JLS: FQM with the AIC MOD. I use a cut/paste of FQM lite and then cut out the asteroid heavy quadrants. How would I get that quadrant file to you for a peek at what I did?

JLS

October 26th, 2003, 08:19 PM

GREAT, Thanks Pathfinnder... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Sullivan_JohnL@msn.com

[ October 26, 2003, 18:20: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

October 26th, 2003, 08:38 PM

I suggest reconstructing the other quadrant types (cluster, spiral, grid, etc.) from the Mid-life No Ast Belt quadrants. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

JLS

October 26th, 2003, 08:42 PM

It will be so http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Thanks Fyron

pathfinder

October 26th, 2003, 10:35 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
I suggest reconstructing the other quadrant types (cluster, spiral, grid, etc.) from the Mid-life No Ast Belt quadrants. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Which is basically what I did....I thimk http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

zippped file sent. hope it helps. I like using FQM since it has moons with atmospheres.

[ October 26, 2003, 20:41: Message edited by: pathfinder ]

JLS

October 26th, 2003, 11:34 PM

Thanks for the QuadrantTypes file.

However, you did not send the AIC/FQM compatible StellarAbilityTypes, SystemTypes file. If they are not complete that is ok, I can get to it.

Fyron

October 26th, 2003, 11:44 PM

The "special" quadrants like Newborn, Old, Ancient, Star Heavy, etc. are trickier to reconsruct, so I suggest just copying them from FQM and doing some find-replaces to change their "standard # AS I" systems to the "no ast belt" Versions. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

JLS

October 26th, 2003, 11:59 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
The "special" quadrants like Newborn, Old, Ancient, Star Heavy, etc. are trickier to reconsruct, so I suggest just copying them from FQM and doing some find-replaces to change their "standard # AS I" systems to the "no ast belt" Versions. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Agreed, thats what I am doing now while downloading the needed Adamant Files http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

pathfinder

October 27th, 2003, 12:26 AM

Originally posted by JLS:
However, you did not send the AIC/FQM compatible StellarAbilityTypes, SystemTypes file. If they are not complete that is ok, I can get to it. Didn't use those from FQM...for better or worse...used the "stock" AIC files...

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif me learning as I go with regards to these files.

JLS

October 27th, 2003, 12:41 AM

Pathfinder you did a great job with the QuadrantTypes file, and this will save a lot of time THANKS. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

However, that file will need to Subscribe to the SystemTypes file and that to the StellarAbilityTypes file.
Again thank you for doing most of the work http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I will send you the files when I am done, so we may both test them and to get your OK on them.

[ October 26, 2003, 22:56: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

October 27th, 2003, 01:40 AM

Originally posted by pathfinder:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLS:
However, you did not send the AIC/FQM compatible StellarAbilityTypes, SystemTypes file. If they are not complete that is ok, I can get to it. Didn't use those from FQM...for better or worse...used the "stock" AIC files...

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif me learning as I go with regards to these files. <hr /></blockquote>Umm... SystemTypes.txt is critical for using FQM quadrants...

Also, StellarAbilityTypes.txt is not critical, but it is very nice (save possibly the WPs that cause damage, but the other WP abilities are perfectly ok). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 26, 2003, 23:41: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

October 27th, 2003, 01:41 AM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
Besides I have had scores of population joining my colonies vie your new Random Events with the Star Liner and Refugee events. Medical teams are a nice touch as well.
I am happy you are enjoying AIC v4.0.

However, the 4.0 Event File is not �mine� this Events file along with the option files is based in total from the contributions of: PTF, Oleg, GLV, Fyron, Alneyan, QB and many more that posted in those few threads since August; all I did was listen... And there is still more that will be added to this file, and again it will be others that will make this all happen http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Remember the first infamous 4.0beta http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif
AIC is a total team effort http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 26, 2003, 23:56: Message edited by: JLS ]

pathfinder

October 27th, 2003, 02:45 AM

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif

sent the other two files...at least they may be good for comparison

JLS

October 27th, 2003, 03:17 AM

Wow, thanks again Pathfinder, the files look great http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 27, 2003, 13:10: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

October 27th, 2003, 03:25 AM

So Pathfinder, are you done playing the B5 Mod PBW game? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

pathfinder

October 27th, 2003, 04:41 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
So Pathfinder, are you done playing the B5 Mod PBW game? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif I only got my my hotmail account unmessed in the Last week or so. So, is it worth it for me to take back the ShagToth?

Doesn't seem worth the effort since that Version of the MOD isn't being worked any more.

Fyron

October 27th, 2003, 06:33 AM

It is kinda sad that people decided to just abandon all that hard work and start over... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

See for yourself if the empire is still worth it: http://pbw.spaceempires.net/b5modgame/

It looks in good shape from what I can see. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Maybe we should move this to the B5 Mod thread? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

oleg

October 27th, 2003, 04:23 PM

I think advanced refining and organic facilities are way too costly.

Refining Center:
cost : 10k M, 60k O and 40k R
produce: 100+50 M, 25 O and 200+300 R (second term is from sun)

Normal City:
cost : 10k M, 30k O and 25 R
produce: 150+150 M, 75+75 O and 100 R

Imagine extreme case: I colonise a planet with 100%M, ZERO% O and 100% R.

RC will give me 675 in total, city gives 475.
difference - 200 per month.

Now cost: 110k for RC 55 for city.
55k:200 = 275 turns before RC breaks even !!!
Not to mention construction time - I can construct 2 cities for the time AND cost of 1 RC.
It would definetly outperform RC even if I'll need to trade resources.

Yes, I understand RC may be usefull if I'm desparate for radioactives but that is not very common situation and then I would probably find faster solution then invest so heavily into RC.

Similar situation with agrarian ecosystem, IMHO.

I build few such facilities but only because I like the look http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif and have a lot of spare materials.

I suggest make them cheaper. 10,40,30 for RC and
10,30,40 for AE.
Lesser buildings would need rebalancing as well.
Just MHO.

JLS

October 27th, 2003, 05:26 PM

Thanks Oleg, makes sense, I will check it out.

Alneyan

October 27th, 2003, 05:46 PM

JLS, the values given in the descriptions are not exactly the ones used in the Value lines. According to the descriptions, a Refining Center should produce more than what Oleg has found, because these values are lower. I believe the same is true for other facilities, I will check more in depth.

And worse, the Refining Center is more efficient only when it comes to radioactives, you will have more minerals and organics with a City, for the same amount of research points and a slight difference of intelligence points, in favour of the City.

Perhaps you may also think of increasing the mineral production of the Refining facilities, while lowering their cost? But they do need an improvement of some sort, as for now they are only needed if you are in need for radioactives. And even then, they are not too effective since you only have 500 radioactives or so.

The same goes true with Agrarian Ecosystems, which only produce 550 organics and are beaten in all other fields by a City.

JLS

October 27th, 2003, 08:05 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Alneyan:

JLS, the values given in the descriptions are not exactly the ones used in the Value lines. According to the descriptions, a Refining Center should produce more than what Oleg has found, because these values are lower. I believe the same is true for other facilities, I will check more in depth.
Hmm, I do not see any error in the data versus the description for the Refining communities family of three.

After all, there has been Hundreds of thousands of entries made by my self and we both know I can miss a few.

And worse, the Refining Center is more efficient only when it comes to radioactives, you will have more minerals and organics with a City, for the same amount of research points and a slight difference of intelligence points, in favour of the City.
You will have to play finite to understand the Value of Imperial Trade thru the Refining Family. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Perhaps you may also think of increasing the mineral production of the Refining facilities, while lowering their cost? But they do need an improvement of some sort, as for now they are only needed if you are in need for radioactives. And even then, they are not too effective since you only have 500 radioactives or so.
Please note the Refining Communities Descriptions.
An established society focused on energy production~ ~ ~

Adding more Resources, may and would change the intents for this Facilities.

Furthermore, if you wish not to capitalize on the value this Structure yields in Finite Play thru the commerce of Imperial Trade I can understand this. Alternatively, if you do feel the value of the City is greater then your reference in Non-Finite Play; please, build and upgrade to the Cities and if not playing Finite, build Radioactive Extraction Facilities for any needed Rads http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

But to consider equaling or even cloning all the Urban Centers. Well that sounds like it may take from AIC in what it offers.

Refining and Agrarian Communities have a purpose in AIC and this is different from Cities that you may be refereeing.

Alneyan, I do have an open mind, and I may not understand your specifics.

[ October 27, 2003, 18:25: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 27th, 2003, 08:19 PM

Oleg, I did not forget you, it has been a while since a finite game...

I will have to build a Refining Settlement then Upgrade it and Compare it to the Community. Build a Colonial Settlement and Upgrade to City. Etc...

I will look real close at your suggestion http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Alneyan

October 27th, 2003, 08:31 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
Hmm, I do not see any error in the data versus the description for the Refining communities family of three.

After all, there has been Hundreds of thousands of entries made by my self and we both know I can miss a few. I believe I saw why I was mistaken, I thought the description saying "average income [insert values here]" wasn't taking Imperial Trade into account, while it is taking trade into account. (I thought that the Refinering Center produced, say, 500 radioactives and then add a bonus of 300 radioactives thanks to trade)

You will have to play finite to understand the Value of Imperial Trade thru the Refining Family. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Isn't there a structure though that generates "solar" radioactives, for finite games? 150 radioactives a turn at best, a bit less than Refinering centers agreed, but much cheaper. Except if you are really limited by facility slots that is. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Please note the Refining Communities Descriptions.
An established society focused on energy production~ ~ ~

Adding more Resources, may and would change the intents for this Facilities.

Furthermore, if you wish not to capitalize on the value this Structure yields in Finite Play thru the commerce of Imperial Trade I can understand this. Alternatively, if you do feel the value of the City is greater then your reference in Non-Finite Play; please, build and upgrade to the Cities and if not playing Finite, build Radioactive Extraction Facilities for any needed Rads http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

But to consider equaling or even cloning all the Urban Centers. Well that sounds like it may take from AIC in what it offers.

Refining and Agrarian Communities have a purpose in AIC and this is different from Cities that you may be refereeing. [/QB]Yes, it isn't exactly their purpose, but then, Cities also generate quite a few Minerals. Or perhaps you may want to reduce their mineral production? After all, a city has to "generate" minerals in order to build... erh, buildings, but maybe not enough to actually have a surplus. Yes, it is yet another idea thrown quite randomly, as I have yet to delve into these facilities. (Hmm, quite a short post actually, sorry do not develop more)

JLS

October 27th, 2003, 08:44 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
Except if you are really limited by facility slots that is.
Don't play a tiny map http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
- - -

Isn't there a structure though that generates "solar" radioactives, for finite games? 150 radioactives a turn at best, a bit less than Refinering centers agreed, but much cheaper. Except if you are really limited by facility slots that is.

- - -
Yes,

Solar Power Plants a Massive solar collectors which generate power.

It is real cheap, fast to build, requires very little Population to operate and a real moneymaker when built in a Bi or Tri System http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif and when you consider Trade at a Trade Centers or Offer Trade with other Races; well the potential usually keeps the ink in the black across the board�{FAST} http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

With your keen mind try a finite game with the AI at No Bonus� Defiantly have Neutrals in your, well all games actually, average 6-9 AI Major Players count is fine for finite and the top AIC Galaxies map, in a size a bit larger then Non-Finite is Suggested� The Centurion Systems Map is more fun with many neat things, but it is also the most favorable for the AI and could be tricky for someone new to finite.

There are many players that enjoy Finite with AIC Economics. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

= = =
When Playing Finite:

~TIP~ In the AIC realm of Finite. RADS are the most precious of resource http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

~TIP~ Many consider Crystallurgy and/or Deeply Religious the best Traits http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

~TIP~ All insist that Planetary Utilization is the best Tech Area http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

~TIP~ Above all avoid any and all early game WARS!
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 27, 2003, 20:41: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 27th, 2003, 09:21 PM

Yes, it is yet another idea thrown quite randomly, as I have yet to delve into these facilities. Keep throwing the Ideas, we will only make it better http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

oleg

October 27th, 2003, 11:36 PM

Please, ignore, some computer mistake...

[ October 27, 2003, 21:40: Message edited by: oleg ]

Fyron

October 27th, 2003, 11:40 PM

nm then http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

[ October 27, 2003, 21:41: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

oleg

October 27th, 2003, 11:48 PM

It is difficult to balance all game setups with one set of files.

From my experience, radio and agro facilities do not need improve in productions.

But they definetly must be made much cheeper. By 30 or 50 percents. Just like I suggested in older post.

pathfinder

October 27th, 2003, 11:55 PM

Are ya'll saying that I may actually have to trade to survive in AIC?! *pathy passes out*

oleg

October 27th, 2003, 11:56 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
nm then http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif Wow, you catched my original post http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

I keep a picture of you, engulfed in flames but still typing the one Last post... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Please, no !!!!

oleg

October 27th, 2003, 11:58 PM

Originally posted by pathfinder:
Are ya'll saying that I may actually have to trade to survive in AIC?! *pathy passes out* No. But you must be Ugly Good.

Fyron

October 28th, 2003, 12:13 AM

Originally posted by oleg:
Wow, you catched my original post http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

I keep a picture of you, engulfed in flames but still typing the one Last post... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Please, no !!!! Well my post was made just after you edited your old one... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

I am not living at home, and my family is safely away from the fire... Trust me, if the fire was near enough to be a danger to me, my computer (and my other belongings) and myself would be far away by now. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

[ October 27, 2003, 22:14: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

pathfinder

October 28th, 2003, 12:48 AM

Originally posted by oleg:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by pathfinder:
Are ya'll saying that I may actually have to trade to survive in AIC?! *pathy passes out* No. But you must be Ugly Good. <hr /></blockquote>Ugly I can handle, as for good http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

JLS

October 28th, 2003, 12:49 AM

Originally posted by pathfinder:
Are ya'll saying that I may actually have to trade to survive in AIC?! *pathy passes out* Trade Center helps out until you find a good AI trade partner, and that is only if and when you need or want to http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

oleg

October 28th, 2003, 02:40 AM

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:
... Oleg, I recall a problem with AI population distribution under non-simultaneous also, any news on this ?

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=23&t=009929 No http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif I think it needs a hardcode fix by MM which is unlikely since this problem does not affect stock SE.

Grand Lord Vito

October 28th, 2003, 07:14 AM

Originally posted by oleg:
It is difficult to balance all game setups with one set of files.

But they definetly must be made much cheeper. By 30 or 50 percents. Just like I suggested in older post. Oleg have you even played AIC in Finite

JLS my friends and me play Finite all the time and we think the balance has always been fine, I guess you did the impossible JLS and did balance all game setups with one set of files, AIC not only works great in Finite it Works Great in No-Warp.

The Refining Community, Refining Society, and Refining Center are crucial to winning when playing finite, more so if you are not a Crystal Race.

Oleg in a finite game radioactive can disappear quickly. The radioactive traded at these centers are real important, not to mention the research the storage and every thing that is included.

Hey I am all for reducing the cost, but is it realistic, I think a Refining Centers are much more important in Finite then most Cities. If your playing a standard game then build Cities and when you need rads just build the Rad extraction facilities. I am not at my gaming computer but the Rad Community should be about twice that of the Colonial Settlement and close if not more then the Colonial Community where ever that falls it might. Oleg, did you notice JLS droped the Facilities upgrade cost to 40%. Now it is way cheeper and more productive to upgrade. But if building Cities strait up works for you, gp for it, although that does not make much sence Oleg because if you start at the Colonial Settlement you gain its production as you upgrade to a City, not to mention it a heck of a lot faster.

This is pretty much the way it has been set up since Last February, to say 50% reduction in cost now with out even playing AIC Finite. Heck why now even think to use the Crystal Trait to get there Solar and Rad Value stuff. This sounds way out to me, if there was an older post I see why it was missed

Imagine extreme case: I colonise a planet with 100%M, ZERO% O and 100% R.
Oleg. IIRC the City is about Equal to the Refining Society not a Refining Center
In that scenario with a 100% mineral and a 100% rad combined planet

If you look at all the numbers it would be more productive to build Mining Complexs that give 1000 Minerals a pop and if rads are need which is rare in a Non-Finite Game then I would build a few Radioactive Extraction Facilities this is a Mining Planet and get the pay check now.

Not time consuming Huge Cities, think about building Cities on planets like only breathable 60%, remeber the Imperial trade is not subject to Planet Values.

[ October 28, 2003, 06:13: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

October 28th, 2003, 07:56 AM

Originally posted by JLS:
What FREE Human Player starting traits did you choose?
= = =
NEW~Trait Human Player option 1 (O1*) Human Players Advantage: Resulting in a more robust game that requires LESS Micro Management and logistics. Your game will be less dependent on Star Liners with this option.
~Trait Human Player option (O2) Human Player - Advantage for a Balance: That will result in a Better all around Home World.
~Trait Human Player option (O3) Human Player - Excellent Advantage: For a much higher Proportions of Resources (not recommended for Finite Games).
~Trait Human Player option (O4) Human Player - Results in a game requiring more logistics.

~Players may also add (mp1 thru 3) for Handicapping for Multiplayer. MP1-3 May also be used in Solo games, great for a Dual Race Bonus.
~Trait Human Player option (SF) Human Player - Terminal Advantage: Strategic Fighters(gives Fighters System move capabilities)
= = =

If you noticed with AIC v4.0; Medical teams WILL prevent a Medical Crisis at a Colony; providing the Releif ship arrives in time to apply the necessary medical treatments.

~TIP~ You may want to always maintain a Medical Team or two on Stand-by for any Colony that may become in need http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
- - -
Agreed, with v4.0 default events and Event Frequency setting are High and you have a Moderate Player Count in your game: Your Warp Opener could be very busy keeping the warps open.

And yes there will be an ever changing universe with some apposite conditions http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif
- - -

~TIP~ You may want to always maintain a Security Fleet of about 4-12 inexpensive Scout Class vessels at the ready and available for the full use of any Governors discretion, for the welfare of that Colony http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
I am in LOVE with option 1, the game play much faster and even has a new feel.
I play option 1 and 2 in AI Low Bonus games to get the competion down.
I used mp 1-3 for my Dual Temporal and Organics Race. Thanks for the starting Temporal Yard, good Idea Oleg http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif I also won a Medium AI bonus game with my dual Race that was v3.02 and I had the best start ever plus Strategic Fighters.

The TIPS are a big help thanks

Grand Lord Vito

October 28th, 2003, 08:02 AM

Originally posted by JLS:
However, the 4.0 Event File is not “mine” this Events file along with the option files is based in total from the contributions of: PTF, Oleg, GLV, Fyron, Alneyan, QB and many more that posted in those few threads since August; all I did was listen... And there is still more that will be added to this file, and again it will be others that will make this all happen http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Remember the first infamous 4.0beta http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif
AIC is a total team effort http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif You did more then listen Sully, you did wonders with the newest AIC Random Event file http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 28, 2003, 06:03: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Alneyan

October 28th, 2003, 12:57 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
Don't play a tiny map http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif You do know what kind of maps I play JLS. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I will perhaps try again a Finite Game, with or without High Tech cost this time.

oleg

October 28th, 2003, 03:14 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
Oleg have you even played AIC in Finite

JLS my friends and me play Finite all the time and we think the balance has always been fine, I guess you did the impossible JLS and did balance all game setups with one set of files, AIC not only works great in Finite it Works Great in No-Warp.

The Refining Community, Refining Society, and Refining Center are crucial to winning when playing finite, more so if you are not a Crystal Race.

Oleg in a finite game radioactive can disappear quickly. The radioactive traded at these centers are real important, not to mention the research the storage and every thing that is included.

Hey I am all for reducing the cost, but is it realistic, I think a Refining Centers are much more important in Finite then most Cities... Sometimes I play Finite but I don't like it very much. Nature shrine is such a valuable building in Finite. I simply can not force myself not to pick Deeply Religious http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Upgrade routine indeed makes cities less profitable - refining community cost 30K while colonial settlement only 6K.

40% upgrade cost makes settlement->City cost 28K
ref.comunity->ref.center cost 74K
The 46K difference will be repaid in 230 turns http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Unless it was the first building on your first colony, game may be over by that time !

Grand Lord Vito

October 28th, 2003, 05:52 PM

I am at my computer now Oleg and you are right http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

JLS did you drop the Cost of Cities and not drop or raise the cost of the Rad and Agr?

JLS you want to consider a decrease in the Refinning Com. but about 20 to 30% like Oleg recommended.

50% is to great.

[ October 28, 2003, 15:59: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

October 28th, 2003, 06:03 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
I will perhaps try again a Finite Game, with or without High Tech cost this time. You are joking right Alneyan.
In se4 you will be to low on the planet value by the time you researched Planet utilization 4 never mind Planet Utilization 6 or 7.

I dont think it is wise playing Finite at High Tech cost.

Try playing Finite at default or LOW Tech cost with No AI bonus http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 28, 2003, 16:07: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Alneyan

October 28th, 2003, 06:16 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Alneyan:
I will perhaps try again a Finite Game, with or without High Tech cost this time. You are joking right Alneyan.
In se4 you will be to low on the planet value by the time you researched Planet utilization 4 never mind Planet Utilization 6 or 7.

I dont think it is wise playing Finite at High Tech cost.

Try playing Finite at default or LOW Tech cost with No AI bonus http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif <hr /></blockquote>*Cough* Deeply Religious *Cough* Well, I am not sure if the Nature Shrine would work as well as the Value Improvement facilities though. I have to admit I tend to beg for pain to be dropped on me from time to time. *Smirks*

But would it work with a Nature Shrine instead of the Planet Utilization field? (Meaning no, or very late, Atmospher Converters though. Except with the use of Boarding Parties that is)

Grand Lord Vito

October 28th, 2003, 06:56 PM

JLS I think the v3.02 AI in 4.0 is still great but you also said you were going to upgrade the AI to catch up to v4.00. You said this will be done for v4.01 or v4.02.

When and how do you plan on doing this is you are (AWAY)

Grand Lord Vito

October 28th, 2003, 07:07 PM

JLS:
Only a few updates left in me and that is ithttp://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Right I heard this before from you JLS http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

JLS

October 28th, 2003, 08:16 PM

Oleg, Alneyan and GLC, is this more in line with your desires?

If so, it will be in v4.01 patch that is will be released in a few weeks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Name := Refining Community
Description := The first stage of an organized self-sustaining community. Development of techniques, skills focusing on Radioactive Refining.
Facility Group := . Advanced Communities
Facility Family := 171
Roman Numeral := 0
Restrictions := None
Pic Num := 85
Cost Minerals := 3500
Cost Organics := 8000
Cost Radioactives := 4000

Name := Refining Society
Description := A large established society focused on energy production. This includes a local government, cultural institutions, and various interdependent communities and habitats.
Facility Group := . Advanced Communities
Facility Family := 171
Roman Numeral := 1
Restrictions := None
Pic Num := 86
Cost Minerals := 5000
Cost Organics := 15000
Cost Radioactives := 10000

Name := Refining Center
Description := A large established society focused on energy production. This includes a local government, cultural institutions, and various interdependent Societies and habitats.
Facility Group := Zenith Urban Center
Facility Family := 171
Roman Numeral := 2
Restrictions := None
Pic Num := 80
Cost Minerals := 10000
Cost Organics := 45000
Cost Radioactives := 20000

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Name := Agrarian Community
Description := The first stage of an organized self-sustaining community. Development of techniques, skills focusing on agriculture.
Facility Group := . Advanced Communities
Facility Family := 170
Roman Numeral := 0
Restrictions := None
Pic Num := 84
Cost Minerals := 3000
Cost Organics := 3000
Cost Radioactives := 7500

Name := Agrarian Society
Description := A large established society focused on sustainable agricultural development. This includes a local government, cultural institutions, and various interdependent communities and habitats.
Facility Group := . Advanced Communities
Facility Family := 170
Roman Numeral := 1
Restrictions := None
Pic Num := 87
Cost Minerals := 5000
Cost Organics := 8000
Cost Radioactives := 12500

Name := Agrarian Ecosystem
Description := A network of developed societies focused on maintaining, cultivating, harvesting, and living within an advanced ecosystem.
Facility Group := Zenith Urban Center
Facility Family := 170
Roman Numeral := 2
Restrictions := None
Pic Num := 88
Cost Minerals := 10000
Cost Organics := 15000
Cost Radioactives := 40000

JLS

October 28th, 2003, 08:31 PM

GLV.

Alneyan and I have decided to test these Warp Open values.

Any feed back on this? If its a go and after testing then it will be out in the v4.01 patch.

I am not going (away) ???

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Name := Gravitational Quantum Resonator I
Cost Minerals := 16000
Cost Organics := 0
Cost Radioactives := 3000
General Group := Stellar Manipulation
Ability 1 Type := Open Warp Point Distance
Ability 1 Descr := Can open a warp point out to a system 40 light years away.
Ability 1 Val 1 := 4
Ability 1 Val 2 := 0

Name := Gravitational Quantum Resonator II
Cost Minerals := 24000
Cost Organics := 0
Cost Radioactives := 6000
General Group := Stellar Manipulation
Ability 1 Type := Open Warp Point Distance
Ability 1 Descr := Can open a warp point out to a system 60 light years away.
Ability 1 Val 1 := 6
Ability 1 Val 2 := 0

Name := Gravitational Quantum Resonator III
Cost Minerals := 36000
Cost Organics := 0
Cost Radioactives := 9000
General Group := Stellar Manipulation
Ability 1 Type := Open Warp Point Distance
Ability 1 Descr := Can open a warp point out to a system 100 light years away.
Ability 1 Val 1 := 10
Ability 1 Val 2 := 0

Name := Gravitational Quantum Resonator IV
Cost Minerals := 50000
Cost Organics := 0
Cost Radioactives := 18000
General Group := Stellar Manipulation
Ability 1 Type := Open Warp Point Distance
Ability 1 Descr := Can open a warp point out to a system 150 light years away.
Ability 1 Val 1 := 15
Ability 1 Val 2 := 0
Descr := Sml Transport Mount. GQR-V requires MT mount

Name := Gravitational Quantum Resonator V
Cost Minerals := 50000
Cost Organics := 0
Cost Radioactives := 25000
General Group := Stellar Manipulation
Ability 1 Type := Open Warp Point Distance
Ability 1 Descr := Can open a warp point out to a system 200 light years away.
Ability 1 Val 1 := 20
Ability 1 Val 2 := 0

Name := Gravitational Quantum Resonator VI
Cost Minerals := 70000
Cost Organics := 0
Cost Radioactives := 32000
General Group := Stellar Manipulation
Ability 1 Type := Open Warp Point Distance
Ability 1 Descr := Can open a warp point out to a system 250 light years away.
Ability 1 Val 1 := 25
Ability 1 Val 2 := 0
Descr := Med Transport Mount GQR-VII requires LT mount

Name := Gravitational Quantum Resonator VII
Cost Minerals := 80000
Cost Organics := 0
Cost Radioactives := 40000
General Group := Stellar Manipulation
Ability 1 Type := Open Warp Point Distance
Ability 1 Descr := Can open a warp point out to a system 300 light years away.
Ability 1 Val 1 := 30

[ October 28, 2003, 19:33: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

October 28th, 2003, 08:44 PM

One addendum about your Last post JLS. Please keep in mind there are differences in size between the different openers, which explain why the cost of some is lower than what you would expect.

* The level opener 5 requires a Medium Transport, as its size is about 450kt.
* The Last opener (level 7) needs a Large Transport, its size being above 700kt.

As for the facilities, I will let Oleg and GLV speak, I am no expert about Finite Games, and since these facilities are above all useful in Finite. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

JLS

October 28th, 2003, 09:17 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
As for the facilities, I will let Oleg and GLV speak, I am no expert about Finite Games, and since these facilities are above all useful in Finite. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif At these reduced cost numbers, they may become a little more attractive in our Non-Finite games. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

My main concern: If so, we need to keep an eye on the overall combined research package versus the AI over all Techs in the late Mid Game. In-game play testing will decide the future of these changes. However if this is another step in allowing more (but not easier) AI low to Medium Bonus Game; Human Player Victories, I am all for it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 28, 2003, 19:45: Message edited by: JLS ]

QBrigid

October 29th, 2003, 10:42 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
In that scenario with a 100% mineral and a 100% rad combined planet

If you look at all the numbers it would be more productive to build Mining Complexs that give 1000 Minerals a pop and if rads are need which is rare in a Non-Finite Game then I would build a few Radioactive Extraction Facilities this is a Mining Planet and get the pay check now.

Not time consuming Huge Cities, think about building Cities on planets like only breathable 60%, remeber the Imperial trade is not subject to Planet Values. Wow, I was building Cities on great minning planets. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
Since I also do not play finite I forget that Imperial trade is not subject to Planet Values and is very helpful also in non-finite.

I see what you mean GLV it does make more sense building pure Extraction Facilities instead on 100% plus planets http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 29, 2003, 21:11: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

QBrigid

October 29th, 2003, 11:02 PM

Originally posted by oleg:

Upgrade routine indeed makes cities less profitable
Oleg it is indeed more profitable to build the Colonial Settlement first then up grade to a town or Cities. Or a Refinning Comunitie then Upgrade to a Society or Refinning Centers, right?

This way you have the production of the base facilitie while it is up-gradeing and GLV mentioned that it is 60% cheaper to upgrade then to build "strait up" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 29, 2003, 21:13: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

QBrigid

October 29th, 2003, 11:06 PM

JLS I love the Raiders in AIC can you make it so they can block trade at far away warp points?

Alneyan

October 30th, 2003, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
JLS I love the Raiders in AIC can you make it so they can block trade at far away warp points? What would you ask exactly? I don't quite understand you. Keep in mind though that limitations in SEIV apply to the Raiders unfortunately.

JLS

October 30th, 2003, 06:42 PM

Yes and no, QB.

I have a plan, but I need to present it to PTF so he can work his magic to Refine and Test it, as he did with the AIC events file.

In regards for the need to defend far away warp points, well if you notice there are many that say there is a difference in the feel of Option one�s addition to AIC that reduces the need for Star Liners. In effect this is similar to your desires, for if you can not build up far away or troubled contested Systems with Star Liners and an ongoing supply of POP then you are in effect; blockaided at that geographical location http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

This is one reason why many are fond of the Star Liners with MASS settings as with PvK's Proportions MOD and AIC http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 30, 2003, 17:01: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

October 30th, 2003, 11:18 PM

This is one reason why many are fond of the Star Liners with MASS settings as with PvK's Proportions MOD and AIC And why many others are not fond of them... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Grand Lord Vito

October 31st, 2003, 11:09 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> This is one reason why many are fond of the Star Liners with MASS settings as with PvK's Proportions MOD and AIC And why many others are not fond of them... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif <hr /></blockquote>That what I like about AI Campaign you can play with lots and lots of Star Liners, a few Star Liners or non at all.

I also prefer not to have Star Liners, Fyron . http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
Well, then again I like a few. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ October 31, 2003, 09:35: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

October 31st, 2003, 11:29 AM

1: JLS, you should drop the Engines per move for the Fast Colonizer to 11 from 12 so you can get one more move out of it but you should raise its cost.

2: I like the newly revised Refining Communities Family. IMO you should drop the Rads on the Agrarian Family just a bit more but otherwise they test fine so far.

3: PvKs Culture add-on plays great!!! But as a result of AIC's Engineering Races you should have a -5 Research to that Culture for balance.

4: You also should add a few more Warp Openers to the Science and Engineering Races to open some Warps that close by AIC random Events.

The new Fast Frigates are awesome, I also like the revised Military Barracks in AIC v4.0 you added a Military Presence Value that will make the planet Populations Happier.

Alneyan thanks, the new warp openers play perfect. Early Warp Openers now can retrofit to the Create Planet and back. The Maintenance wont kill you and now having a Stellar Science ship always available, that is really needed for some AIC Random Event set-ups and quick to build in No-Warp games.

[ October 31, 2003, 10:13: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

JLS

October 31st, 2003, 05:18 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:

1: JLS, you should drop the Engines per move for the Fast Colonizer to 11 from 12 so you can get one more move out of it but you should raise its cost.
Agreed http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
- - -

2: I like the newly revised Refining Communities Family. IMO you should drop the Rads on the Agrarian Family just a bit more but otherwise they test fine so far.
Thanks for testing http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif OK, I will give this a look see.
- - -

3: PvKs Culture add-on plays great!!! But as a result of AIC's Engineering Races you should have a -5 Research to that Culture for balance.
I have also noticed the current imbalance for the AIC engineering races, I will work the AI and/or revisit that Culture http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
- - -

4: You also should add a few more Warp Openers to the Science and Engineering Races to open some Warps that close by AIC random Events.
Agreed, plus a few more races as well http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
- - -

I also like the revised Military Barracks in AIC v4.0 you added a Military Presence Value that will make the planet Populations Happier.
Helps where troop build ups won't http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 31, 2003, 15:28: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

October 31st, 2003, 05:35 PM

Oleg, the Medium Star Liner makes a nice fit for the beginning of the game. Thanks.

I also have the Large Star liner in at Ship Construction 5.
Renamed the Small Starliner to Freighter.

Again thanks Oleg; AIC now plays much better when Option (1) is not choosen; with the above changes. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

AIC v4.01 will be out in a few days, so keep the Suggestions coming http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 31, 2003, 15:43: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

October 31st, 2003, 06:02 PM

The new, cheeper Stellar Manipulation makes easier to build planets from asteroids. Very high production values of asteroids makes them much better than "normal" planets. May be decrease asteroid values a bit ?

Also, in non-conected games, some AIs build nebula destroyers very ealier and promptly converts nice looking systems into boring emptiness with a star in the center. No big deal of course but I would really like to have nebulaes for longer !

JLS

October 31st, 2003, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by oleg:

The new, cheeper Stellar Manipulation makes easier to build planets from asteroids. Very high production values of asteroids makes them much better than "normal" planets. May be decrease asteroid values a bit ?
Agreed, exelent point http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
- - -

Also, in non-conected games, some AIs build nebula destroyers very ealier and promptly converts nice looking systems into boring emptiness with a star in the center. No big deal of course but I would really like to have nebulaes for longer ! Agreed http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 31, 2003, 16:21: Message edited by: JLS ]

pathfinder

November 1st, 2003, 01:09 AM

JLS: do ALL the data/AI files have to be updated to the new Version or are critical ones that need to be updated?

JLS

November 1st, 2003, 03:14 PM

All players, please enjoy your current AIC v4.0 games http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

AI Campaigns next players update v4.01 will patch into current v4.0 games and will NOT break any existing games.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Pathfinder also to mention: http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
AIC v4.0 Upgrades v3.##
This was a full upgrade and the v4.0 AI, does depend on much of the DATA from AIC v4.0.

Some AI Players diplomacy was intentionally less aggressive for AI Campaigns v.4.0 release and many will be tweaked with AIC v4.01 to be a bit more aggressive. In addition, to include (some) increased AI Colonization. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 01, 2003, 13:40: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 1st, 2003, 03:41 PM

I have a complaint about "random ship teleportation" event. It is an innocuous event by itself, gives a lot of fun to humans and has no effect on AI in connected games. BUT, in non-connected it can wreck a total havoc on AI. Example: Terrans are usually robust AI with respect to stellar manipulation and colonization. However, in my latest game, terran vessel has been teleported to another AI system with open warp point. I am not sure what happened next, but I suspect Terrans switched from "non-connected" to "explore" state. They have steller manipulation ship buil but it does nothing. They also have two idle Rock colony ships and refuse to build any Ice colony ships despite having several colonizable planets in home system. Terrans are in complete mental block. I' pretty sure it is because they can see unexplored open WP but can not reach it. AI routine is completely confused. (i can send savegame file to anyone interested)

oleg

November 1st, 2003, 03:47 PM

On the second thought, tt may be deeply rooted in the AI algorythm for WP opener. I think it operates this way: open WP from HW system to some other system and then use that system as an operational base for WP opening. However, if AI can "see" some other, unreachable, system due to random ship move event, it tries to send a stellar manip. ship there. Since it is impossible, it goes into total mental block http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

pathfinder

November 1st, 2003, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by JLS:

Pathfinder also to mention: http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
AIC v4.0 Upgrades v3.##
This was a full upgrade and the v4.0 AI, does depend on much of the DATA from AIC v4.0.

Some AI Players diplomacy was intentionally less aggressive for AI Campaigns v.4.0 release and many will be tweaked with AIC v4.01 to be a bit more aggressive. In addition, to include (some) increased AI Colonization. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Ok, good enough. Just means a bit of work for me in "MyMod" (name TBD)

JLS

November 1st, 2003, 04:29 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
I have a complaint about "random ship teleportation" event. It is an innocuous event by itself, gives a lot of fun to humans and has no effect on AI in connected games. BUT, in non-connected it can wreck a total havoc on AI. Example: Terrans are usually robust AI with respect to stellar manipulation and colonization. However, in my latest game, terran vessel has been teleported to another AI system with open warp point. I am not sure what happened next, but I suspect Terrans switched from "non-connected" to "explore" state. They have steller manipulation ship buil but it does nothing. They also have two idle Rock colony ships and refuse to build any Ice colony ships despite having several colonizable planets in home system. Terrans are in complete mental block. I' pretty sure it is because they can see unexplored open WP but can not reach it. AI routine is completely confused. (i can send savegame file to anyone interested) I agree with your observation Oleg on the se4 "random ship teleportation" event. I reduced the effect in AIC v4.0 Events too 2 from se4 setting of 3. Perhaps an Effect Amount := 1 may be worth a further try, but the Event does add a (little) fun for Human Players but I am sure it won't be missed.

Consider this change for v4.01. If it is of no effect then (Ship - Moved) event may be subsequently out of the AIC LOW-Default Event options http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Ship - Moved has little value when not connected because there is no link to the other Home Systems so in effect no diplomacy will take effect. In connected games it also has its flaws but is still neat non-the-less http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Thanks Oleg http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Reference
Type := Ship - Moved
Severity := Low
Effect Amount := 2 (se4=3 and AIC v4.01 = 1 or zero
Message To := Owner
Num Messages := 1
Message Title 1 := Spatial Anomaly
Message 1 := A freak spatial anomaly has transported [%VehicleName] to an entirely different solar system.
Picture := ShipMoved
Time Till Completion := 0
Num Start Messages := 0

[ November 01, 2003, 15:12: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 1st, 2003, 04:55 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
On the second thought, tt may be deeply rooted in the AI algorythm for WP opener. I think it operates this way: open WP from HW system to some other system and then use that system as an operational base for WP opening. However, if AI can "see" some other, unreachable, system due to random ship move event, it tries to send a stellar manip. ship there. Since it is impossible, it goes into total mental block http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Oleg this Ship � Moved Event is the same as or less effect as se4 in a no warp game, it will depend how random you want your events frequancy set in your no warp game.

Also to say that being Random, that in every game the AI Players may play different depending on the Situation. The Higher the Event Frequency; the more Events will contribute to the situational changes in your game and many like this and set the Event Frequancy to HIGH. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

In regards to your Terrans, Oleg as it is with se4 Ship-Moved Event�
Well maybe a mental Block in Stellar Manipulations at this point in time http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif However, the Terran AI in your current game will still flourish with Research and Ship, Fighter and Base Upgrades in addition its infrastructure. However, not many Systems in that game, but in the next it may blow your doors off. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Please don't get too hung up on this in your game; at some point, another Player will open the warp and the Terrans will be free again to romp, grow, and play. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 01, 2003, 15:53: Message edited by: JLS ]