AI Campaign => For a Challenging AI opponent [Archive] - Page 5

pathfinder

November 2nd, 2003, 03:57 AM

*scratches head*

Getting double entries for ships when I go to build. EG Scout--two Versions one with abilities listed and one without. I checked off on both human and the 3 AI special "abilities" before start of game. Mistake?

Using AIC Version 4 with FQM regular and my added races.

[ November 02, 2003, 02:01: Message edited by: pathfinder ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 2nd, 2003, 05:56 AM

JLS the ship-moved Event has has seporated my fleets with v3.02, se4 and other mods.

Pathfinder I also accidently clicked AI only traits http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

QBrigid

November 2nd, 2003, 04:46 PM

that se4 ship moved event in the default zip as well, when it hits it will automatically break up the fleet and I lost a few Legendary fleets with that event
ALL I ever play is AIC no-warp and have been flung many unconnected systems away and have seen the same with the AI, it is not that big of a deal. But I would not want to be paying for a Baseship and have that flung faraway in any game without supply.
Maybe you should just can the SE4 ship-moved in AI Campaigns high, default and the planet destroyed AIC Random Event zips http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 02, 2003, 14:52: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

QBrigid

November 2nd, 2003, 04:56 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
~TIP~ Players always be careful and choose all partnerships well with the AI in any game play style. If you give your System Maps and the only AI connection is you, in a Not-Connected game may have a consequence that is usually of greed from that AI Player as it may be with a Human player opponent http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

~TIP~ When the AIC AI Players asks you for a Research, Military or Partnership agreements; in most situations, it is for that AI Players benefit, and not so much yours. Please re-think all agreements that exceed the Trade agreements. Even a Research agreement will have long-range effects with the wrong AI Players and that may not be conducive for your Empires overall goals. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Who would be the "wrong" AI Players to have a research agreement with?

QBrigid

November 2nd, 2003, 05:00 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
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.

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 Good I have a great no-warp game in progress http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

More AI colonizers http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Back to playing the AI with no bonus http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

[ November 02, 2003, 15:01: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

QBrigid

November 2nd, 2003, 05:04 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
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 I like this http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Originally posted by JLS:
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

This is one reason why many are fond of the Star Liners with MASS settings as with PvK's Proportions MOD and AIC
I much perfer Star Liners in my game and will never play with option 1 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 02, 2003, 15:36: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

Alneyan

November 2nd, 2003, 05:08 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
Who would be the "wrong" AI Players to have a research agreement with? Anyone you may fight a while after. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif The AI benefits more from a Research treaty than you do usually, and so you would be well advised to carefully consider every Trade and Research Alliance. (You should benefit from a Trade Treaty though, but I will have to check)

The same can be true for any game though, you definitively don't want to help the research of your future enemy. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif And as research tends to be the limiting factor...

QBrigid

November 2nd, 2003, 05:17 PM

I don't want to help those nasty Krill in my AIC no-warp game even if they have a culture that gives them -10 Research and Trade.
I notice the Xenophobics don't bother me to much with agreement requests in AIC but the Terrans and the Cue Cappa's +10 Trade Culture will really benifit more then I will Alneyan with Trade and Research agreements I think the Sellega to.

I always say no to the Terrans and Cue Cappa but I like the Sellega AI we always agree.

I try to max out all agreements with the Neutrals I think this is good even though the Cluck gets the advantage.

[ November 02, 2003, 15:38: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

QBrigid

November 2nd, 2003, 05:22 PM

Alneyan how are the Char. change tests coming along?

QBrigid

November 2nd, 2003, 05:43 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
How can you agree to a question? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif I agree with you http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif <hr /></blockquote>http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif "AGREED" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

JLS

November 2nd, 2003, 07:27 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:

Alneyan how are the Char. change tests coming along?
Alneyan is making excellent headway QB. However, it will not be totally finished until v4.02 or v4.03 because of the many General AI data changes, I will save this daunting task when all the Modules are near finished and this is when the AI upgrade will be the most productive. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
--

Maybe you should just can the SE4 ship-moved in AI Campaigns high, default and the planet destroyed AIC Random Event zips
This is good logic QB http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
- - -

I don't want to help those nasty Krill in my AIC no-warp game even if they have a culture that gives them -10 Research and Trade.
I notice the Xenophobics don't bother me to much with agreement requests in AIC but the Terrans and the Cue Cappa's +10 Trade Culture will really benifit more then I will Alneyan with Trade and Research agreements I think the Sellega to.

I always say no to the Terrans and Cue Cappa but I like the Sellega AI we always agree.

I try to max out all agreements with the Neutrals I think this is good even though the Cluck gets the advantage
Out of the above list the CueCappa may make best Trade and Research friends, they are Honorable and it will take much for them to break treaties it also not expected the Cue will backstab, unlike the Xiati or the Fazrah.

As Alneyan suggests it is more in the geo placements of the Races, if the Terran or Sellega are far away and an unlikely threat, then sure I will enter a Research with them.

I rarely enter Partnerships; my Rudders are much too valuable.

I will enter a Military agreement if I need a refuel or My Ally needs to refuel their ships in-rout to a shared enemy, or they are trusted and they wish to post a defense fleet over some of my planets. When and if the Military Agreement is not to my best interest I ask for a reduction to a lesser agreement, however sometimes the AI Player may be adamant and wish not to change agreements. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Cluk and Tex are great trade-research and allies.

Nultoh gets a bit stuffy but he is ok.
Zynarra does not want to be bothered

Kitra on the other hand if close demands to much in the way of tribute, so I rarly enter a Research, he is my fav early attack. His Carb breathers fit very well; serving my Hydro Empire http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ November 02, 2003, 17:39: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

November 2nd, 2003, 07:54 PM

The characteristic changes are going on, I think there is only one area left (but an annoying area. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) And then there will be the AI tweaks JLS mentioned.

I tend not to sign on any treaty above Trade Alliance with close Empires, and I will never, ever, sign a Partnership treaty. (At least against the AI) Research helps your future enemy, while resources are much less of a problem. In fact, having a Trade agreement with your future opponent can be useful, since he/she will spend more resources and have a higher income. The removal of the trade agreement might collapse his/her economy. *Evil snicker* That is, when you are playing with a human obviously. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

But then, I am somewhat a isolationist in SEIV, always setting up frontiers that should not be crossed. (Who said minefields?) Hence the problem with trade agreements. I wish you could have a trade agreement without setting up a military trust between the two Empires. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif My dream is unfortunately impossible to set up in multiplayer, except if you do... erh... assimilate all the other Empires.

oleg

November 3rd, 2003, 02:33 AM

Originally posted by pathfinder:
*scratches head*

...I checked off on both human and the 3 AI special "abilities" before start of game. Mistake?

Using AIC Version 4 with FQM regular and my added races. Yes, AI and humans have separate hulls for each ship class. Check the hulls.txt file for details.

Grand Lord Vito

November 3rd, 2003, 08:19 AM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
But then, I am somewhat a isolationist in SEIV, always setting up frontiers that should not be crossed. (Who said minefields?) Hence the problem with trade agreements. I wish you could have a trade agreement without setting up a military trust between the two Empires. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif My dream is unfortunately impossible to set up in multiplayer, except if you do... erh... assimilate all the other Empires. Alneyan JLS has made the AI easier in 4.0 you can hide behind your minefields allot longer now. But if that was me you where playing against, no minefield will keep me out, you will need a big fleet with fighters http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

You dont need military trust… If you want their cash then trade, if you need there fuel take use it and if you want to share research just do it. You can always reduce the agreements with no penelty.

[ November 03, 2003, 06:21: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

oleg

November 3rd, 2003, 03:36 PM

How to capture AI colony ships ???
According to components, AI colony module gives 25 defenders, crew quorters - 55. 80 together. I have a ship with 3 BP-II - 3x40 -> 120 marines.
Still, boarding ship refuses to board until both colony module and crew quoters are destroyed http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

JLS

November 3rd, 2003, 03:43 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
You dont need military trust. If you want their cash then trade, if you need there fuel take use it and if you want to share research just do it. You can always reduce the agreements with no penelty. GLV
Some AI players won't want to downgrade the agreement, eventually they may come around. In the least GLV as Alneyan indicates; try to avoid Military Agreements with the Fazrah and Xiati http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

As I recall QB was backstabed by the Fazrah recently and lost the Home World to a series of plague and radiation bombs http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

[ November 03, 2003, 13:48: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 3rd, 2003, 05:00 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
How to capture AI colony ships ???
According to components, AI colony module gives 25 defenders, crew quorters - 55. 80 together. I have a ship with 3 BP-II - 3x40 -> 120 marines.
Still, boarding ship refuses to board until both colony module and crew quoters are destroyed http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif Yes, Oleg. GLV mentioned that earlier in an Email.

This is set because the se4 AI sends its Colony Ships out unescorted as with any other se4/mod.

In a LAN/multiplayer game, all a Human Player has to do is capture Colony Ships of the AI�s; wave after relentless wave http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I will look into an alternate system however http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 03, 2003, 15:05: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 3rd, 2003, 05:14 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by oleg:
How to capture AI colony ships ???
According to components, AI colony module gives 25 defenders, crew quorters - 55. 80 together. I have a ship with 3 BP-II - 3x40 -> 120 marines.
Still, boarding ship refuses to board until both colony module and crew quoters are destroyed http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif Yes, Oleg. GLV mentioned that earlier in an Email.

This is set because the se4 AI sends its Colony Ships out unescorted as with any other se4/mod.

In a LAN/multiplayer game, all a Human Player has to do is capture Colony Ships of the AI�s; wave after relentless wave http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I will look into an alternate system however http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif <hr /></blockquote>Why not simply put SDD on colony ships ?

I must be really stupid but I still don't understand why my ships refuse to board despite having numerical advantage ?
120 vs 80.

JLS

November 3rd, 2003, 05:19 PM

As a tip that was past down from DogScuff, I have left it somewhat easy to Capture the AI players POP Transports....

Now this will be a very useful alien ship, and if you time the Capture right, it will reward you a slave or 2 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

As I was saying to Alneyan the other day and as per GLVs Email. With the AIC AI v4 catch-up upgrade, there will be, a revamp on what AI designs that may be easily captured and what won�t.

However, the AI POP transports will always be an easy target http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 03, 2003, 15:56: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 3rd, 2003, 06:01 PM

Ahh, I found my mistake ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

The numbers should be multiplyed by 4 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

AI ship has 80X4=320 marines http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

[ November 03, 2003, 16:05: Message edited by: oleg ]

Alneyan

November 3rd, 2003, 08:33 PM

GLS, I meant a trade partnership without allowing my unreliable partner to be able to travel through my systems without authorization, and without setting up some mines layers here and there. I didn't speak about Military Alliance, although I see now my words were quite misleading. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

And do not worry, I love fighter wings. A lot of fighters. They are so effective against an unwary target, who bet you would never, ever, use any fighter or seeker and therefore forego PDC altogether. Or on the other hand, to make your opponent believes you are actually using fighters, while it was a mere decoy. *Snickers*

JLS

November 3rd, 2003, 08:42 PM

I agree Alneyan, se5 should have such a trade agreement that also totally implies
-> Keep out <-

That�s it Anleyan keep him guessing http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

*Snickers*

[ November 03, 2003, 18:48: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

November 3rd, 2003, 08:55 PM

Here are the current considered values for characteristics in AIC 4.01. Feel free to comment away. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Two characteristics are still somewhat of a problem:
- Environemental Resistance: I tend to find this characteristic use dubious at least, as it duplicates Happiness and Reproduction. (The only use would be to allow some optimizations with the costs for raising these characteristics) Does anyone here finds this characteristic to have some use in the game? If so, please say so, I may have missed something here. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
- Maintenance: the previous value has been changed, but I am still doing some calculations about this one. Maintenance is not the easiest characteristic in the game to balance, and it is likely one of the most important in the game. (At least when it comes to economics)

So without further addendum:

Characteristic Physical Strength Max Pct := 200
Characteristic Physical Strength Min Pct := 75
Characteristic Physical Strength Pct Cost := 25
Characteristic Physical Strength Threshold := 20
Characteristic Physical Strength Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 35
Characteristic Physical Strength Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 10
Characteristic Intelligence Max Pct := 135
Characteristic Intelligence Min Pct := 75
Characteristic Intelligence Pct Cost := 50
Characteristic Intelligence Threshold := 20
Characteristic Intelligence Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 80
Characteristic Intelligence Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 20
Characteristic Cunning Max Pct := 140
Characteristic Cunning Min Pct := 75
Characteristic Cunning Pct Cost := 20
Characteristic Cunning Threshold := 20
Characteristic Cunning Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 70
Characteristic Cunning Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 10
Characteristic Environmental Resistance Max Pct := 105
Characteristic Environmental Resistance Min Pct := 95
Characteristic Environmental Resistance Pct Cost := 10
Characteristic Environmental Resistance Threshold := 1
Characteristic Environmental Resistance Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 10
Characteristic Environmental Resistance Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 10
Characteristic Reproduction Max Pct := 130
Characteristic Reproduction Min Pct := 95
Characteristic Reproduction Pct Cost := 25
Characteristic Reproduction Threshold := 1
Characteristic Reproduction Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 75
Characteristic Reproduction Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 10
Characteristic Happiness Max Pct := 130
Characteristic Happiness Min Pct := 90
Characteristic Happiness Pct Cost := 25
Characteristic Happiness Threshold := 5
Characteristic Happiness Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 50
Characteristic Happiness Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 10
Characteristic Aggressiveness Max Pct := 140
Characteristic Aggressiveness Min Pct := 75
Characteristic Aggressiveness Pct Cost := 90
Characteristic Aggressiveness Threshold := 5
Characteristic Aggressiveness Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 135
Characteristic Aggressiveness Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 20
Characteristic Defensiveness Max Pct := 130
Characteristic Defensiveness Min Pct := 75
Characteristic Defensiveness Pct Cost := 100
Characteristic Defensiveness Threshold := 5
Characteristic Defensiveness Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 150
Characteristic Defensiveness Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 20
Characteristic Political Savvy Max Pct := 130
Characteristic Political Savvy Min Pct := 75
Characteristic Political Savvy Pct Cost := 25
Characteristic Political Savvy Threshold := 15
Characteristic Political Savvy Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 65
Characteristic Political Savvy Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 10
Characteristic Mining Aptitude Max Pct := 150
Characteristic Mining Aptitude Min Pct := 75
Characteristic Mining Aptitude Pct Cost := 50
Characteristic Mining Aptitude Threshold := 20
Characteristic Mining Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 65
Characteristic Mining Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 10
Characteristic Farming Aptitude Max Pct := 150
Characteristic Farming Aptitude Min Pct := 75
Characteristic Farming Aptitude Pct Cost := 25
Characteristic Farming Aptitude Threshold := 20
Characteristic Farming Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 50
Characteristic Farming Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 10
Characteristic Refining Aptitude Max Pct := 150
Characteristic Refining Aptitude Min Pct := 75
Characteristic Refining Aptitude Pct Cost := 30
Characteristic Refining Aptitude Threshold := 20
Characteristic Refining Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 55
Characteristic Refining Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 10
Characteristic Construction Aptitude Max Pct := 130
Characteristic Construction Aptitude Min Pct := 75
Characteristic Construction Aptitude Pct Cost := 50
Characteristic Construction Aptitude Threshold := 10
Characteristic Construction Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 75
Characteristic Construction Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 10
Characteristic Repair Aptitude Max Pct := 130
Characteristic Repair Aptitude Min Pct := 95
Characteristic Repair Aptitude Pct Cost := 15
Characteristic Repair Aptitude Threshold := 5
Characteristic Repair Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Pos := 100
Characteristic Repair Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 10
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 := 200
Characteristic Maintenance Aptitude Threshhold Pct Cost Neg := 20

Alneyan

November 3rd, 2003, 09:11 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
I agree Alneyan, se5 should have such a trade agreement that also totally implies
-> Keep out <-

That�s it Anleyan keep him guessing http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

*Snickers* Yes, it would make sense, in the real world I believe you cannot quite send your armies in your partner's capital without having to face some consequences. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif But a less efficient trade agreement then.

Don't worry JLS, I am keeping my strategies secret. *Conspiratorial nod* Don't expect me to tell you my tactics usually involve the use of... of ships, that is what I meant.

JLS

November 3rd, 2003, 09:20 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLS:
I agree Alneyan, se5 should have such a trade agreement that also totally implies
-> Keep out <-

That�s it Anleyan keep him guessing http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

*Snickers* Yes, it would make sense, in the real world I believe you cannot quite send your armies in your partner's capital without having to face some consequences. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif But a less efficient trade agreement then.

Don't worry JLS, I am keeping my strategies secret. *Conspiratorial nod* Don't expect me to tell you my tactics usually involve the use of... of ships, that is what I meant. <hr /></blockquote>"Don't worry JLS, I am keeping my strategies secret."

This is very wise, Alneyan. You never know, you two may cross swords someday http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

- - -

The AI Player usually does not hang out in your systems with the Simple Trade or Research agreements, but sure, it will understand that such an agreement is tantamount to right of passage.
However, with the Military or Partnership treaties the AI players tends to orbit our Worlds; to much for my likening. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 03, 2003, 19:24: Message edited by: JLS ]

deccan

November 4th, 2003, 12:45 AM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
And do not worry, I love fighter wings. A lot of fighters. They are so effective against an unwary target, who bet you would never, ever, use any fighter or seeker and therefore forego PDC altogether. Or on the other hand, to make your opponent believes you are actually using fighters, while it was a mere decoy. *Snickers* I wonder who you're talking about. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

pathfinder

November 4th, 2003, 01:30 AM

Holy "stuff"!

been playing SEIV since it came out and saw the AI use stellar manip for the first time....one of my AI opponents just created a new planet in one of my systems....Yikes! They are also opening warp points.....some how I got a bad feeling about this http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

This is in my "mod" of AIC. All I have done so far is make 4-5 custom (sota) races.

[ November 03, 2003, 23:31: Message edited by: pathfinder ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 4th, 2003, 02:38 AM

Pathfinder look out for the Preitorians they wasted most of the Drushka systems with their System Star Destroying weapons in my game, I will wait to build that Facility that can block this before I turn on them.

IIRC it is at sheild lvl 10???

[ November 04, 2003, 00:39: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 4th, 2003, 02:43 AM

Oleg I like your armour ideas for the AIC Fighters and Sats in v4.01 (SWEET).

[ November 04, 2003, 00:56: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 4th, 2003, 02:47 AM

This is very wise, Alneyan. You never know, you two may cross swords someday Just bring it on http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Grand Lord Vito

November 4th, 2003, 02:53 AM

Here are the current considered values for characteristics in AIC 4.01. Feel free to comment away. Alneyan the characteristics look GREAT.

oleg

November 4th, 2003, 05:02 AM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
Oleg I like your armour ideas for the AIC Fighters and Sats in v4.01 (SWEET). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I still think AIC miss small meson bLaster and small graviton beam. Small MB should be proportionaly smaller and weaker compared to small APB. Small GB should have a rate of 3 - between "generic" fighter weapons and small AM torpedo. Damage should be like small APB but skip ALL shields. According to the description, it is fast alternating pulses of tractor and repulsing beams shaking the target. So far I did't see any shield in Sci-FI that can block ship' shatter. For example, Enterprise always shakes violently whenever anything hits its shields. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ November 04, 2003, 03:04: Message edited by: oleg ]

QBrigid

November 4th, 2003, 03:07 PM

I also like the Armor Oleg, but lets not make the fighters to powerful http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

The DUC fighter cannon is smaller then most and IMHO a generic race has a bunch of fighter weapons allready.

QBrigid

November 4th, 2003, 03:11 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
Here are the current considered values for characteristics in AIC 4.01. Feel free to comment away. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Two characteristics are still somewhat of a problem:
- Environemental Resistance: I tend to find this characteristic use dubious at least, as it duplicates Happiness and Reproduction. (The only use would be to allow some optimizations with the costs for raising these characteristics) Does anyone here finds this characteristic to have some use in the game? If so, please say so, I may have missed something here. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
- Maintenance: the previous value has been changed, but I am still doing some calculations about this one. Maintenance is not the easiest characteristic in the game to balance, and it is likely one of the most important in the game. (At least when it comes to economics)
Alneyan the new Maintenance look good.

Why do you tend to find the Environemental Resistance characteristics use dubious at least, as it duplicates Happiness and Reproduction?
I am not sure I understand.

Alneyan

November 4th, 2003, 03:26 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
Alneyan the new Maintenance look good.

Why do you tend to find the Environemental Resistance characteristics use dubious at least, as it duplicates Happiness and Reproduction?
I am not sure I understand. It seems like I forgot to add something in my post about ER. A raise of 5 points in Environemental Resistance is equivalent to a raise of one point in both Happiness and Reproduction. That is to say, 105 Environemental Resistance is equivalent to 101 Happiness AND Reproduction.

Then, if you want to improve either Reproduction or Happiness, you may want to raise these characteristics, leaving Environemental Resistance with no particular purpose. The other option would be to decrease the costs for Environemental Resistance in such a way that it would be cheaper to raise ER before tweaking Happiness and Reproduction, but it seems a bit over complicated and artificial for me.

Deccan, don't forget PDC is not working against fighters in our game, hence the little annoyance my fighters were. We shall see what will bring the next wave(s?) of attack(s?) though. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

JLS

November 4th, 2003, 04:03 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
Oleg I like your armour ideas for the AIC Fighters and Sats in v4.01 (SWEET). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I still think AIC miss small meson bLaster and small graviton beam. Small MB should be proportionaly smaller and weaker compared to small APB. Small GB should have a rate of 3 - between "generic" fighter weapons and small AM torpedo. Damage should be like small APB but skip ALL shields. According to the description, it is fast alternating pulses of tractor and repulsing beams shaking the target. So far I did't see any shield in Sci-FI that can block ship' shatter. For example, Enterprise always shakes violently whenever anything hits its shields. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif <hr /></blockquote>Oleg, sounds like a plan. I will see what can be done for v4.01 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

QB, as long as the racial trait Fighter weapons are somewhat balanced, the many options for the "generic races� with fighter design, will not upset your Psychics or other Race abilities, in the end and overall it is a fine addition. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

oleg

November 4th, 2003, 04:40 PM

Yes, I'm not advocating new better fighter weapons. Simply want to have more choices http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Grand Lord Vito

November 5th, 2003, 12:59 PM

I play the Temporals but if the puny generic race wants more beef, more power to them http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Good suggestion Oleg http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

JLS

November 5th, 2003, 06:34 PM

========================================
AI Campaign V4.01 UPGRADE
========================================

Features Alneyan�s Characteristics Values.

Conceptual:
New Event Multiplayer Module
~

Facilities:
New Additional Multiplayer Facilities.
Planet Lore revised for the Organic Races ~Oleg, GLV
Refining and Agrarian Urban Structures revised ~Oleg, GLV
Raised most Research Facility levels.
Tweaked some facilities
~

Vehicles:
Freighter was the Small StarLiner.
Medium StarLiner is available with ship Const.2 ~Oleg
Large StarLiner will also appear earlier in your game now.
Fast Colonizers go a little faster ~GLV
Resupply Space Station fuel storage raised to 20kt.
~

Components:
New Additional Multiplayer Components.
Revised Repair Bay Compartments.
Reduced Open Warp costs ~GLV, Alneyan
Reduced Create Planet Costs ~QB
AI Minesweeping Components Ability at Se4=5 max
Added Small Meson BLaster Fighter Weapon ~Oleg
Added Small Graviton Beam Weapon ~Oleg
Revised some Component costs.
~

NOTES:
Tweaked AI
Ship-moved is now a CAT event and has been removed from some Default zips ~Oleg
Designs names have been added to Dsnames folder ~Clark
Added Fyrons internet site shortcut for many more design names.

Reduced Asteroid resource values for Non-Finite Games ~Oleg

Next AIC Version will feature Pathfinders FQM add-on with fully up-graded AI Players that can deal with the most industrious astro-miner http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

= = = = =
AI Campaign Complete v4.01
- - - - -
AI Campaigns v4.01 upgrade files. Will upgrade v4.xx to v4.01 (Will break saved games) 1042k
- - - - -
AI Campaigns v4.01 patch only. Will patch existing saved game (will NOT break saved games)) 110k. NOTE: Does not include many of the bells and whistles as the v4.01 Upgrade Files.

(>>> AI Campaign v4.01 (http://www.johnlsullivan.net) <<<)

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

[ November 08, 2003, 14:12: Message edited by: JLS ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 6th, 2003, 02:04 AM

JLS I think your v4.01 addition with the MultiPlayer Module for LAN and PBEM games is a great idea. I cant wait to start my next LAN game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

oleg

November 6th, 2003, 03:29 PM

JLC, I noticed you reversed Torpedos to stock-SE status http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif But as we all know, sE Torpedodes suck !!! There've been many discussions on the subject and AFAIK that was the consensus. No wonder PvK raised Torpedos damage.

If you think torpedoes are too strong, please give them to hit bonus. +10 to AMT and +15 to QT.
That will give a nice choice to human players and it complement hard-to-hit small ships nicely.
Basically, one will have a choice to weild a knife (APB for exmample) if confronted with a dog (large, easy to hit ship) or folded newpaper (low-damage, easy to hit AMT) if attacked by a swarm of mosquitos. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I would also like +10 to-hit to enveloping acid globule. All other racial big hitters have bonuses - high-energy magnifier, tachion cannon and mental singularity projector. Why not EAG ? It is not like it has extarordinaly characteristics. Far from that, TC is better even before to-hit bonus !

JLS

November 6th, 2003, 03:53 PM

Their was many objections to the high strength of the v3.00 Anti-Mater Torps in earlier Posts.

Will do Oleg,
Good compromise http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

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

[ November 06, 2003, 16:07: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 6th, 2003, 11:37 PM

If you are starting a new game with the new v4.01 Complete or Upgrade files, option-zips are optional http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 06, 2003, 22:06: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 7th, 2003, 12:45 AM

About Torpedos:

start with +5 for AMT I and add 1 for a level till QM V.

EAG -> start with 2 and add +2 per level.

Just how I would like it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Nothing more.

JLS

November 7th, 2003, 01:00 AM

Originally posted by oleg:
About Torpedos:

start with +5 for AMT I and add 1 for a level till QM V.

EAG -> start with 2 and add +2 per level.

Just how I would like it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Nothing more. Sounds like a plan http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 06, 2003, 23:01: Message edited by: JLS ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 7th, 2003, 06:46 PM

JLS I like the way the Strategic Fighters are researched for AIC v4.01 multiplier and the increased Repair Bay Components. The armed fighter cockpit hits seekers have you considered bringing back the ability for fighter cannons also to shoot down missiles?

QB do you want to have a NO-WARP PBEM game?

JLS

November 7th, 2003, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
JLS I like the way the Strategic Fighters are researched for AIC v4.01 multiplier and the increased Repair Bay Components. The armed fighter cockpit hits seekers have you considered bringing back the ability for fighter cannons also to shoot down missiles?
Oleg and I decided long ago it would upset Missile balance and droped it on the Cannons. However, we can revisit this in tests, please let us know what you think after that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

The Repair Bay Compartment upkeep should be reduced, please also test: 25%/20%/15% repectivly and 10% for multiplay.

[ November 07, 2003, 19:55: Message edited by: JLS ]

QBrigid

November 8th, 2003, 01:03 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:

QB do you want to have a NO-WARP PBEM game? Sure what is the AI Player bonus setting?
I want a 500 point mp Handicap against you GLV http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

AI Bonus low at the most, Cent map with 8 or more clusters, a medium amount of computer players with neutrals and with AIC v4.01 default events at med freq. OK?

If you want to remove the Psycos from the game thats ok by me, but you can play GLV http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ November 08, 2003, 11:23: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

QBrigid

November 8th, 2003, 01:54 PM

I like the new StarLiners, the Multiplayer options and most of all Alneyan�s Characteristics Values along with PvKs Cultures http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Nice job guys with AIC v4.01 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

[ November 08, 2003, 11:57: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

oleg

November 8th, 2003, 08:21 PM

I want to put a dissending vote. I do NOT like the new options. What's the point ? Especially HP option 1. What do you mean it is "standard" ? It is a betray of Proportions phylosophy, IMO ! Now I can drop reproduction to 0 and still worry not about new colonies ! The stock SE is closer to the "reality" for God sake ! Yes, I am really angry about latest developments. AIC, as I suppose, was designed to make a chalenging and interseting AIs. Unfortunately, lately it was deluted to almost pre-TDM game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif Sure, we can keep all new options but, please introduce them with a message like "for suckers only who have no balls to stand up to AI" Or something like that. Sorry, I just quite upset that most of AIC development was focused on spoiling the challenge http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Alneyan

November 8th, 2003, 09:08 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
(...) Especially HP option 1. (...) These three words (or four) say all, it is an option. If you don't like it, fine, that's why it is an option in the first place. Nobody obliged you to pick this option I believe. And you may even take additional disavantages to compensate this option, like, say, Reduced Planet Capacities? (Without using the 2000 points given by this trait.)

JLS

November 8th, 2003, 09:43 PM

Oleg,
I do not understand. If you play without option SO*, you will require the game to have the Star Liners that PvK and I designed for Proportions a few years ago.

With AIC Version 4.01 AI.

For example, without SO* and MP* your game will be near exact to AIC v3.02, however the Star Liners are bigger now. Again, I do not understand; the AI Players in AIC v4.01 WILL win and respond at the same ratios as v3.02. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Many like a StarLiner dependent game, I do. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

= = = = = = = = =

Name := SO*
Description := With *HP* above, this is a Standard Starting Option: 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.
Only pick SO* if you do not want a whole lot of Star Liners and many like this option. This option alone the AI wins close or at the same Ratios and moreover the AI may respond quicker and with a little more aggression then then v3.02, if players fail to build a small combat fleet early.

Many also like this option, for few to no Star Liners in the game.

= = = = = = = =

Name := MP*
Description := Multiplayer - LAN, PBW and PBEM games must have above Option *HP*, and SO* above is optional. ->NOTE: Please ask HOST to confirm your MP Handicapping levels and all start settings.
Pick MP* only if you want a game with increased Research and Resource Mega Facilities also with some increased Components that are all GREAT in a Multiplayer game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
In addition this can be used in a solo game, if a speeder game is desired, this option is effective against the AI and you should out produce v3.02 defaults.
This option alone the AI is not as close to the same Ratios of wins as v3.02. However the AI responds very well and is well recieved by the Players for its LAN/PBEM and PBW potential http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

With all the above starting options combined the AI may have to be bumped up one bonus level to reflect v3.02.

With the AI at High bonus the AI will dominate and Crush most if not all. This should be researved for a few AI's in a Multiplayer game.
= = = = = = = =

The below options have always been available in AIC

Name := O1
Description := With *HP* above, this option presents an Advantage for Balance: That will result in a Better all around Human Players Home World and its Colonies.

Name := O2
Description := With *HP* above, this option presents an Excellent Advantage: For a higher Proportions of Resources (not recommended for Finite Games).
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

The options are not very confusing and are listed right on the top of the Traits menu. It is always better to have option then not to have at all.
As you pick more starting options and mp Handicap points even the non-Role Playing Cultures; it becomes much easier to beat the AI so bump up the AI Bonus or pick less starting options http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Above all have fun http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 08, 2003, 21:27: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 8th, 2003, 10:22 PM

NOTE: Players are not required to have the starting AIC v4.01: MP* or SO* options to play Multiplayer.
If they prefer a game that reflects v3.02 style, play your game with just the familiar (required Human Player top option, as always) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 08, 2003, 20:24: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 8th, 2003, 10:51 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
Sure, we can keep all new options but, please introduce them with a message like "for suckers only who have no balls to stand up to AI" Or something like that. Sorry, I just quite upset that most of AIC development was focused on spoiling the challenge
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

The descriptions speak for themselves and just with the SO* 'the no Starliners option' the game is still very tough, indeed http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
However I, like you; perfer to play without SO* and the rest of the options, when playing a solo game.

- - - -
Oleg, how do you feel about the new Cultures and Characteristic values?

Also the Star Liners; I believe all is happy that the medium and large Star Liners are now in play sooner, what are your thoughts?

= = = = = =
With the FQM add-on in the next Version, the AI as promised will be updated and fine-tuned to handle the most industrious Human Player astro-miner, so fear not Oleg; the AI will be even tougher then v3.02 in some areas and circumstances.

[ November 08, 2003, 21:45: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 9th, 2003, 12:54 AM

Well. i do not object to options itself. just the description "standard option" Holy cow, are't we all suppose to use "standard options" by default ?

As to the new cultures and settings - I did't check them carefully - they sort of disrupt races _general files so I was reluctant to start new games in fear of inadequte race trait selections. Or are my fears unfounded ?

JLS

November 9th, 2003, 01:18 AM

Originally posted by oleg:

Well. i do not object to options itself. just the description "standard option" Holy cow, are't we all suppose to use "standard options" by default ?
I do wish I had better literary skills, the SO* is listed as a Standard Option because there really is no real advantage over no Star Liners when it comes to the AI, and Players should not feel like the are being offered a free handicap bonus with SO* http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif . Unlike O1, O2 and the MP Handicaps levels that yields a free bonus to the Human Players.
- - - -

As to the new cultures and settings - I did't check them carefully - they sort of disrupt races _general files so I was reluctant to start new games in fear of inadequte race trait selections. Or are my fears unfounded ?
This is a good question and PvK�s Culture adaptations do really enhance the AI Players individualities over v3.02 and that of se4. For example, the Science race is greater with science but really lacks Intel. A little (SMAC) embellishments here. Berserkers are great in combat but really do lack production and science. With v4.01 the AI is handling this very well and tweaks can still be made http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I noticed the Human Players may struggle with the new Cultures this is why the Research levels have been increased about 25% and Culture tweaks can still be made. My fear still, may be the -10 Berserkers production level for Human Players. To be safe and for those that really do not want Role Playing Cultures I added the five Populace Cultures http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Alneyan fixed AIC char settings to avert some possible cheats in addition he reduced maintenance among many other char tweaks. Overall many players believe this is well balanced http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Any additional needed game production balancing; coming from that area of Facilities output themselves.
What do you think?

[ November 09, 2003, 00:05: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 9th, 2003, 03:06 AM

Well, my basic gut feeling is that you should revert to balancing "stock" AIC - no HP options 1,2.. etc. In fact I think it is already very well balanced against non-bonused AIs. All extra HP options -except negative of course http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif - I really like supply eaters! should be clearly marked as "OK, you are not good enough, here is some help http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif I really think you pay too much attention to these gimmiges - please focus more on weapon ballance http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 09, 2003, 01:10: Message edited by: oleg ]

oleg

November 9th, 2003, 03:19 AM

Originally posted by JLS:
...This is a good question and PvK’s Culture adaptations do really enhance the AI Players individualities over v3.02 and that of se4. For example, the Science race is greater with science but really lacks Intel. ...Or no ! I simply worry if new setings will make AI_general.txt files to drop some characteristics because of going overboard of 2000 points, for example. I want to check it before starting any game against AI. I certainly do not want any "1500/2000" AIs http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

P.S. My own HP race is no longer valid due to the 4.01 overdraft on 120% science http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif -Actually it is a good idea to smack eggheads , I'm 100% behind http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ November 09, 2003, 01:23: Message edited by: oleg ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 9th, 2003, 12:10 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
IMO ! Now I can drop reproduction to 0 and still worry not about new colonies !
The stock SE is closer to the "reality"!
Oleg the same applies to se4 when the reproduction drops to zero and we bring in population transports or starliners to fill it with pop. What I like is that the AIC Debarkation Depot does the same thing but automatically for us. It is only one pop a turn and consider that population will increase every 10 turns in AIC it is not a big deal. I think this is great for us lazy people that dont want to push a lot of star liners around through out the whole game.

Not true I don’t see how having a few Human Player options will bring stock se4 even close with or with out the Star Liners, you don’t have the Cultural Centers that are truly CULTURAL like you do in AIC, you dont have the cultural racial Cities and a lot of the other cool things like the AIC Trade Centers, OutPosts, Tactical Fighters, Planet Lore facility for a few of many AIC examples.

Where else can you play Space Empires in FINITE and not have the AI crash and burn by sucking its resources dry, how se4 realistic is that. Now I can play Finite with out the Star Liners and the AI in v4.01 is just as tuff as ever http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 09, 2003, 12:43: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 9th, 2003, 12:39 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
Well, my basic gut feeling is that you should revert to balancing "stock" AIC - no HP options 1,2.. etc. In fact I think it is already very well balanced against non-bonused AIs. All extra HP options -except negative of course http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif - I really like supply eaters! should be clearly marked as "OK, you are not good enough, here is some help http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif I really think you pay too much attention to these gimmiges - please focus more on weapon ballance http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Oleg I have been playing LAN for a long time and we have always used the AIC mp Handicap System for my friends and that is why we still play against each other, not everybody can play every night like us http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Now with the new MP* multiplay option our multiplayer games can be set to an increased "evolution" speed this is http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

There are only 4 starting options in AIC v4.01.

OS*: No starliners as a Standard pick. I really like this one.

MP*: This is awesome for its Multiplayer capabilities http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif great for my LAN and PBEM games

O1: Gives a little more starting research, resources and larger cargo at the Colonies. This option is great for the new players to AIC.

O2: Increase all productions and now the Players can have that "dream team" fantasy race and it is also good for new players to AIC.

It is always better to have option then not to have at all.
This is also what I like about AIC http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Weapon balance, we are always tweaking the weapons, a matter a fact Oleg you just posted if you change the Torpedoes and the EAG to (x#x } then you will be totally happy.

I think that is what JLS asked of us in his email when he sent us the v4.01 beta file "Please give v4.01b a test drive. Any and all the suggestions for new stuff in multiplay would be helpful. We also need to take a look at overall Racial balances with weapons and facilities blah blah"; You know what he asked of us Last week http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 10, 2003, 10:58: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 9th, 2003, 01:10 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
Or no ! I simply worry if new setings will make AI_general.txt files to drop some characteristics because of going overboard of 2000 points, for example. I want to check it before starting any game against AI. I certainly do not want any "1500/2000" AIs http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
 Oleg you might already know JLS droped the AI General point selection about 10 to 20% for v4.01. So we can test Alneyans first Version of the characteristics settings http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif I dont know about you but I dont want to worry about the AI when sully asks me to test Mineral Aptitude at 50 or maintenance at 250 or what ever, thats why JLS lowered the files, just compare it to v3.02 you will see a little surplus in v4.01, and I think it is cool he took that time for us.

My impression of his plan is after testing a bunch of Alneyans characteristic numbers and we ALL agree on the final Characteristic, trait and culture release. Then he planes to add on FQM and then as he has said the total update of the AI to include a rebalance Characteristic and traits with the new Cultures

How can JLS balance the v3.02 AI to v4.01 when we ALL are not finished testing and agree on the values or committed to the final char/trait/culture numbers. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

That is what v4.02 is about

P.S. My own HP race is no longer valid due to the 4.01 overdraft on 120% science http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif -Actually it is a good idea to smack eggheads , I'm 100% behind http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif I noticed you did not reply on Alneyans characteristics post.

It is good JLS lowered the AI general files, now we all can particapate on tweaking Alneyans settings a little, without the worry of breaking the AI http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Post or in my case email the findings so we can put the final setting to bed with v4.02 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 09, 2003, 12:30: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 9th, 2003, 01:27 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:

QB do you want to have a NO-WARP PBEM game? Sure what is the AI Player bonus setting?
I want a 500 point mp Handicap against you GLV http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

AI Bonus low at the most, Cent map with 8 or more clusters, a medium amount of computer players with neutrals and with AIC v4.01 default events at med freq. OK?

If you want to remove the Psycos from the game thats ok by me, but you can play GLV http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif <hr /></blockquote>QB there is one more thing, we have 4 Human players total and 4 Players at AI low bonus (Eee, Toly,Ter and Ulk) also with 3 neutrals to be 2 rocks and one Ice.

I will give you the 500 mp Handicap points a little more for the other Human Player but the both of you can not take SO* AIC starting option and just play with your starliners - ok?

Since you love the Star Liners anyway, we will test 2 Starliner vs. 2 no Starliner against 4 AI players for JLS.

Check your email QB http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 09, 2003, 12:54: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 9th, 2003, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
About Torpedos:

start with +5 for AMT I and add 1 for a level till QM V.

EAG -> start with 2 and add +2 per level.

Just how I would like it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Nothing more. JLS I definitely agree with Oleg on the AMT and QMT but not to that extreme and only at the QMT levels.
{Remember the early Enterprise episode when testing the newly acquired Klingon Torpedoes almost went full circle and almost hit the Enterprise} http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

The EAG should not be any better, the BUG eyes are very strong with weapons now http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ November 09, 2003, 12:00: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

JLS

November 9th, 2003, 04:26 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
My impression of his plan is after testing a bunch of Alneyans characteristic numbers and we ALL agree on the final Characteristic, trait and culture release. Then he planes to add on FQM and then as he has said the total update of the AI to include a rebalance Characteristic and traits with the new Cultures

How can JLS balance the v3.02 AI to v4.01 when we ALL are not finished testing and agree on the values or committed to the final char/trait/culture numbers. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Post or in my case email the findings so we can put the final setting to bed with v4.02 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif AIC v4.12 with FQM and the full updated AI Players will be out in about a week, thanks guys. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

This Versions will not break existing games.

[ November 09, 2003, 14:43: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 9th, 2003, 04:41 PM

Oleg if you are reinforcing that maybe we should drop O1 and O2 for multiplayer reasons; you absolutely have a valid point http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Let us not rush into this we have much time to consider all possibilities http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

= = =

What are your thoughts in respect to the new Char/Trait Costs and the Culture modifiers so we can finalize the settings before the next Version?

Do you feel there should be a Science Characteristic or any Changes?
There may also be a reduction in the Colonizer Techs to 400 from 500 to balance some no-warp games.

- - -
I am leaning towards this change in culture:

Berzerkers
Production := -5
Research := -15

Artisans
Happiness := 6

Renegades
Happiness := 3

What do you all think?

[ November 09, 2003, 15:25: Message edited by: JLS ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 10th, 2003, 12:38 AM

Originally posted by JLS:
Berzerkers
Production := -5
Research := -15
I like this change.

oleg

November 10th, 2003, 03:18 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by oleg:
About Torpedos:

start with +5 for AMT I and add 1 for a level till QM V.

EAG -> start with 2 and add +2 per level.

Just how I would like it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Nothing more. JLS I definitely agree with Oleg on the AMT and QMT but not to that extreme and only at the QMT levels.
{Remember the early Enterprise episode when testing the newly acquired Klingon Torpedoes almost went full circle and almost hit the Enterprise} http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

The EAG should not be any better, the BUG eyes are very strong with weapons now http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif <hr /></blockquote>Yes, I may be went overboard with bunuses for AMT.
Most other weapons, like DUCs have hidden to-hit penalties (they are not displayed on weapons info but present in components.txt file). Effectively AMT have something like +5 from the start.
But QT definetly should have extra bonuses !

oleg

November 10th, 2003, 03:21 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
...

What are your thoughts in respect to the new Char/Trait Costs and the Culture modifiers so we can finalize the settings before the next Version?

Do you feel there should be a Science Characteristic or any Changes?
There may also be a reduction in the Colonizer Techs to 400 from 500 to balance some no-warp games.

- - -
I am leaning towards this change in culture:

Berzerkers
Production := -5
Research := -15

Artisans
Happiness := 6

Renegades
Happiness := 3

What do you all think? I did't play many games with new characteristics yet but I like new values. Making reasearch aptitude more expansive is a good thing - before it was a no-brainer to pick +20 every time.

JLS

November 10th, 2003, 03:23 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
But QT definetly should have extra bonuses Agreed, thanks Oleg.

QBrigid

November 12th, 2003, 01:49 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by oleg:
(...) Especially HP option 1. (...) it is an option. If you don't like it, fine, that's why it is an option in the first place. Nobody obliged you to pick this option <hr /></blockquote>I like playing without SO* option, I like the old feel to AIC. But I guess their are some that like to play more se4 style without the need to build Starliners with this auto-Starliner option, thats why JLS put OS* in http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 12, 2003, 12:12: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

QBrigid

November 12th, 2003, 01:52 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
AIC v4.12 with FQM and the full updated AI Players will be out in about a week, thanks guys.
JLS, I would like to help beta test this FQM add-on release http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

oleg

November 12th, 2003, 10:58 PM

I have some comments about Stellar Manipulation.

First of all, I concede its current state is something of my design and wishes. I complained about two things:
First, old human tech SM gave 3, 4, 6 LY per level for warp openers. I thought it is not long enough, JLS obliged and changed values to 4,6 and 10 LY.
Second, I complained about _VERY_ slow expansion of agressive races in non-warp games. Once again, JLS accomodated my wishes and lowed SM cost by 50%.

AI plays very well now IMHO. But, and I mean BUT, the combination of those two tweaks made human SM very robust. In the game I play with latest settins, it is very easy for humans to get very effective expansion tool.

I suggest to restor the values of human SM warp openers to 3,4 and 6 LY. It should't be a problem given the new cheap research cost !

Just MHO, may be i'm too harsh on feloow humans http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

JLS

November 12th, 2003, 11:10 PM

Oleg we will give 30LY @ sm1 and 50LY @ sm2 a spin with Fyrons FQM add-on. I will have the files to you soon http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

FYI http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif open warp was in AIC Version 3.xx 30LY/50LY and always 100LY at sm3.

QB suggested tiny planet create at sm1 then small CP at sm2; this works well in conjunction with FQM add-on for AIC, any thoughts about this change?

[ November 12, 2003, 21:32: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 12th, 2003, 11:25 PM

LAST chance on any setting changes affecting the AI, I start the AI update soon http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

oleg

November 12th, 2003, 11:48 PM

Yes, my mistake, it was always 10 at SM 3 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif

So, FQM will be a part of AIC now ? Good, but _watch out_ for starting HW settings - medium/large moons will expose one of the remaining SE bugs !

JLS

November 12th, 2003, 11:54 PM

What se4 bug are you highlighting Oleg?

AIC will have all its traditional maps plus an additional Player regenerated Centurion map http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

FQM will be better then 90% independent from AIC and all the help is needed to balance all the portage kinks with FQM to AIC, with the following few Versions http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 12, 2003, 22:03: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

November 13th, 2003, 01:21 AM

So, FQM will be a part of AIC now ? Good, but _watch out_ for starting HW settings - medium/large moons will expose one of the remaining SE bugs ! How long has it been since you Last played FQM? That has been fixed for a long, long time. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif There are no large moons, and the few that have medium moons can not be used as home systems. So, you only encounter the bug with bad HW starts.

JLS:
If SE4 selects a planet that happens to be a moon as a homeworld, it will isntead use the planet that moon orbits as the home, keeping the planet's atmosphere, size and type and not changing it to be that of the race that will live there as normal. But, this is never an issue with average or good HW starts in FQM, only bad. Canning all those lovely small moons is, quite frankly, not an option I have ever been willing to consider. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 12, 2003, 23:23: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

November 13th, 2003, 01:28 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Canning all those lovely small moons is, quite frankly, not an option I have ever been willing to consider. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Agreed.
Fyron, FQM is absolutely beautiful and detailed; I have been absorbed in it all week.

[ November 12, 2003, 23:29: Message edited by: JLS ]

QBrigid

November 13th, 2003, 02:00 AM

Originally posted by JLS:

What are your thoughts in respect to the new Char/Trait Costs and the Culture modifiers so we can finalize the settings before the next Version?

Do you feel there should be a Science Characteristic or any Changes?
There may also be a reduction in the Colonizer Techs to 400 from 500 to balance some no-warp games.
- - -
I am leaning towards this change in culture:
Berzerkers
Production := -5
Research := -15

Artisans
Happiness := 6

Renegades
Happiness := 3
What do you all think? Alneyan's Characteristics seem perfect.

Berzerkers = good change for AIC.
Artisans, Renegades Happiness = I would leave this at PvK's settings.

A reduction in the Colonizer Techs at 400 to balance some no-warp games, is my idea. I like it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ November 12, 2003, 12:01: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

pathfinder

November 13th, 2003, 03:30 AM

I am using AIC with FQM and so far no problems at all. The small atmosphere moons are a VERY nice aspect IMHO.

Only thing me gonna do is try and get rid of damaging warp points....cause ah just don't likes 'em... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Fyron

November 13th, 2003, 06:14 AM

Have you gotten the latest Version of FQM? I greatly reduced the appearance of damaging WPs... and, it is really easy to remove them, just open up StellarAbilityTypes.txt, find the Unstable Warp Point, and set the chances for all of the damaging abilities to 0 (but leave all others, for flavor; they do not impede movement in the slightest http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ).

oleg

November 13th, 2003, 04:17 PM

Is it possible to make damaging warp-poits when one open new warp point ? Or does it work only during map generation ?

JLS

November 13th, 2003, 05:05 PM

I believe it is per [chance StellarAbilityTypes settings] during the map generation phase of a new game. All in game created warps are [normal].

Great suggestion Oleg, we will add some minor warp point abilities to [normal Warp Point Category] so you may find some variety with the in-game created warp points http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 13, 2003, 15:21: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

November 13th, 2003, 11:39 PM

In addition it may be wise not to transfer any chaotic warps or any major damage items from FQM. No it wouldn't. You would break a few dozen FQM system types, which are ONLY used in the Chaotic Region quadrant. So, you ONLY get chaotic WPs IF you specifically select the Chaotic Region to make a map, which is only a good idea for MP play, and the FQM help files specify that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Chaotic warp points are NEVER used in any other quadrants. Including them does not in any way alter the other quadrants.

Fyron

November 13th, 2003, 11:40 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
I believe it is per [chance StellarAbilityTypes settings] during the map generation phase of a new game. All in game created warps are [normal].

Great suggestion Oleg, we will add some minor warp point abilities to [normal Warp Point Category] so you may find some variety with the in-game created warp points http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Nope. Created warp points do not have abilities. Objects created via stellar manipulation are NOT of the "Normal etc." type, they are of no type. Only created storms can have abilities, and those maximums for them are definted in Settings.txt.

[ November 13, 2003, 21:41: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

November 14th, 2003, 12:58 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> In addition it may be wise not to transfer any chaotic warps or any major damage items from FQM. No it wouldn't. You would break a few dozen FQM system types, which are ONLY used in the Chaotic Region quadrant. So, you ONLY get chaotic WPs IF you specifically select the Chaotic Region to make a map, which is only a good idea for MP play, and the FQM help files specify that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Chaotic warp points are NEVER used in any other quadrants. Including them does not in any way alter the other quadrants. <hr /></blockquote>Agreed, the AI Players would have a hard time with Chaotic Warps. I removed all calls that would Subscribe to chaotic warps as well as the Chaotic Quad maps for this Version.

[ November 13, 2003, 23:01: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

November 14th, 2003, 01:06 AM

Agreed, the AI Players would have a hard time with Chaotic Warps. Which is why it is a multiplayer option...

I removed all calls that would Subscribe to chaotic warps as well as the Chaotic Quad maps for this Version. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Removing the calls is redundant, as just removing the Chaotic Region makes it so that the only system types that use the chaotic warp points are NEVER used by any other quadrant... But still, http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

[ November 13, 2003, 23:07: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

November 14th, 2003, 01:08 AM

I see your MP point, Chaotic Regions back in.
AI be da...---...

Thanks Fyron.

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

[ November 13, 2003, 23:11: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 14th, 2003, 02:12 AM

Originally posted by pathfinder:
Only thing me gonna do is try and get rid of damaging warp points....cause ah just don't likes 'em The AI Players do not like some of them, either http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

= = =
Pathfinder you must keep the AIC StellarAbilityTypes.txt and much of the AIC Systemtypes.txt intact; it is for the most part AI friendly and import any needed FQM data. Otherwise, you will lose many AIC subscriptions to the files and error. In addition it may be wise not to transfer any chaotic warps or any major damage items from FQM.

With FQM v2.07.
Recommend using all AIC Normal, Radioactive, and Unstable Warp points. Inserting normal warp points for most normal FQM ASteroid) player start systems, and Radioactive warp for radioactive potential systems and Unstable warp points for most systems with any unusual gravity influences.

The AI is dealing with most ports just fine http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 13, 2003, 13:23: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 15th, 2003, 01:49 AM

I would like to have "cure plaque level II" in Medical Teams I. They are totally useless now - Sick Bay is a much better component ! And if you play with high chance events, getting cure to Pl.II is almost a must. And it takes too much research IMHO.

JLS

November 15th, 2003, 11:55 AM

This makes good sense, Oleg. If we are going to commit to a few Medical Ships on standby then lvl 2 med teams should be default (nice touch Oleg), and the ships Sickbay component will remain at existing levels.

[ November 15, 2003, 09:57: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 15th, 2003, 12:42 PM

I played few games with new cultures and honestly, space combat penalties to some cultures, like Scientists, make them unplayable. Right now I play either Neutrals or Engeneers. The rest is very much skewed one way or another.
Just MHO.

JLS

November 15th, 2003, 01:53 PM

Some of us very much agree with you Oleg http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

There WAS room for much point advantage in AIC with PvKs Cultures. For example, I take Berserk and then drop the new-game Trait [char] defense or offense modifier and gain several hundred points; this can be resolved by setting the char min to 99 for a few definite role reverse possibilities.

Yes, we need to tweak the cultures closer to AIC v3.02 with a happy medium for all� http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

We need to take on the cultures, one at a time.
Reference

Name := Berzerkers v3.02
Production := -5
Research := -5
Intelligence := -5
Trade := -5
Space Combat := 10
Ground Combat := 10
Happiness := 5
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := -1
Repair := 0

Name := Berzerkers PvK
Production := -20
Research := -20
Intelligence := -20
Trade := -20
Space Combat := 10
Ground Combat := 10
Happiness := 5
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := -10
Repair := -10

Name := Berzerkers v4.11
Description := A highly factioned culture with an unending desire for conquest. Berzerkers are tremendous fighters with no apparent regard for personal safety. This single-minded lust for combat takes a toll on their culture's ability to advance its economy.
Production := -5
Research := -10
Intelligence := -10
Trade := -20
Space Combat := 10
Ground Combat := 10
Happiness := 3
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := -3
Repair := -1

- - -

Name := Warriors v3.02
Production := -1
Research := -2
Intelligence := -2
Trade := 0
Space Combat := 3
Ground Combat := 5
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

Name := Warriors PvK
Production := 0
Research := -10
Intelligence := -10
Trade := -5
Space Combat := 5
Ground Combat := 5
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := -5
SY Rate := -5
Repair := 0

Name := Warriors v4.11
Description := A culture dedicated to the pursuit of combat and conquest. Strong familial bonds hold the society together and allow it to advance in non martial areas.
Production := -5
Research := -5
Intelligence := -15
Trade := -10
Space Combat := 5
Ground Combat := 20
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

- - -

Name := Traders v3.02
Production := 0
Research := 0
Intelligence := 0
Trade := 15
Space Combat := -2
Ground Combat := -10
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := -1

Name := Traders PvK
Production := 0
Research := 0
Intelligence := 0
Trade := 5
Space Combat := -1
Ground Combat := -5
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

Name := Traders v4.11
Description := Citizens of this culture are dedicated to the pursuit of meeting other races and establishing trade with them.
Production := -3
Research := -3
Intelligence := 0
Trade := 20
Space Combat := 0
Ground Combat := -5
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

- - -

Name := Politicians v3.02
Production := -5
Research := 0
Intelligence := 0
Trade := 5
Space Combat := 1
Ground Combat := 0
Happiness := 5
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := -1
Repair := 0

Name := Politicians PvK
Production := -16
Research := 0
Intelligence := 0
Trade := 5
Space Combat := 2
Ground Combat := 0
Happiness := 5
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

Name := Politicians v4.11
Description := A highly political culture allows for advanced trade and superior leadership in combat. However, as often happens with a politically centric directive, the basics of industry are neglected.
Production := -5
Research := 5
Intelligence := 5
Trade := 10
Space Combat := 3
Ground Combat := -5
Happiness := 3
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

- - -

Name := Artisans v3.02
Description := A populace devoted to the leisure and cultural pursuits. This society keeps is populations very happy.
Production := -3
Research := 0
Intelligence := 0
Trade := 0
Space Combat := -1
Ground Combat := -5
Happiness := 10
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

Name := Artisans PvK
Description := A populace devoted to the leisure and cultural pursuits. This society keeps is populations very happy.
Production := 0
Research := 0
Intelligence := 0
Trade := 0
Space Combat := 0
Ground Combat := 0
Happiness := 10
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := -7
Repair := 0

Name := Artisans v4.11
Description := A populace devoted to the leisure and cultural pursuits. This society keeps is populations very happy.
Production := -2
Research := -1
Intelligence := 0
Trade := 5
Space Combat := 0
Ground Combat := -10
Happiness := 6
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

- - -

Name := Scientists v3.02
Production := -1
Research := 5
Intelligence := 0
Trade := 0
Space Combat := 0
Ground Combat := -10
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := -1
SY Rate := -1
Repair := 0

Name := Scientists PvK
Production := -4
Research := 5
Intelligence := 0
Trade := 0
Space Combat := 0
Ground Combat := 0
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

Name := Scientists v4.11
Description := The majority of the given population are devoted to scientific endeavors.
Production := -5
Research := 15
Intelligence := -15
Trade := 0
Space Combat := -5
Ground Combat := -5
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

- - -

Name := Workers v3.02
Production := 5
Research := -5
Intelligence := -5
Trade := -5
Space Combat := 0
Ground Combat := 0
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 3
Repair := 2

Name := Workers PvK
Production := 5
Research := -1
Intelligence := -1
Trade := -1
Space Combat := -1
Ground Combat := -1
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

Name := Workers v4.11
Description := A culture which values hard work above all else. Industry is given precedence above all other tasks.
Production := 10
Research := -5
Intelligence := -5
Trade := 0
Space Combat := 0
Ground Combat := 5
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 3
Repair := 1

- - -

Name := Schemers v3.02
Production := -2
Research := -4
Intelligence := 5
Trade := 2
Space Combat := 0
Ground Combat := 0
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

Name := Schemers PvK
Production := 0
Research := 0
Intelligence := 7
Trade := -2
Space Combat := 0
Ground Combat := 0
Happiness := -5
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

Name := Schemers v4.11
Description := A society with a natural disposition towards dark deals and political machinations. This society is adept at intelligence operations.
Production := 0
Research := -5
Intelligence := 20
Trade := -5
Space Combat := 1
Ground Combat := 5
Happiness := -1
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

- - -

Name := Zealots v3.02
Production := -2
Research := -5
Intelligence := -3
Trade := 0
Space Combat := 5
Ground Combat := 10
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

Name := Zealots PvK
Production := -11
Research := -20
Intelligence := -20
Trade := 0
Space Combat := 5
Ground Combat := 10
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

Name := Zealots v4.11
Description := A culture completely dedicated to a single goal. All thought and effort is expended with this goal as the result. Though industry and intellectual pursuits suffer, this society excels at combat.
Production := 2
Research := -15
Intelligence := 10
Trade := 0
Space Combat := 5
Ground Combat := 15
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

- - -

Name := Engineers v3.02
Production := 0
Research := 1
Intelligence := -2
Trade := -5
Space Combat := -5
Ground Combat := -5
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 2
SY Rate := 5
Repair := 10

Name := Engineers PvK
Production := 0
Research := 0
Intelligence := -2
Trade := -3
Space Combat := -3
Ground Combat := -5
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 2
SY Rate := 5
Repair := 5

Name := Engineers v4.11
Description := A populace that is dedicated to engineering pursuits. These beings are adept at construction, maintaining, and repairing complex vehicles.
Production := 0
Research := -5
Intelligence := -10
Trade := -10
Space Combat := 0
Ground Combat := 0
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 5
SY Rate := 5
Repair := 5

- - -

Name := Merchants v3.02
Production := 0
Research := -3
Intelligence := -3
Trade := 5
Space Combat := -3
Ground Combat := -5
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 5
SY Rate := 0
Repair := -2

Name := Merchants PvK
Production := 0
Research := -8
Intelligence := -8
Trade := 5
Space Combat := -2
Ground Combat := -5
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 5
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

Name := Merchants v4.11
Description := Merchants have directed themselves towards economic pursuits. They excel at trade and deep space supply.
Production := -3
Research := -5
Intelligence := 5
Trade := 15
Space Combat := 0
Ground Combat := -10
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 2
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

- - -

Name := Renegades v3.02
Production := -2
Research := -2
Intelligence := -2
Trade := 10
Space Combat := 5
Ground Combat := 0
Happiness := 5
Maintenance := -3
SY Rate := -3
Repair := 2

Name := Renegades PvK
Production := -2
Research := -2
Intelligence := -2
Trade := 5
Space Combat := 2
Ground Combat := 0
Happiness := 5
Maintenance := -5
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 2

Name := Renegades v4.11
Description := A society almost to the point of anarchy, Renegades are highly factioned Groups that prefer to work separately. Their diverse yet happy lifestyle keeps their population spreading throughout the galaxy.
Production := -5
Research := -5
Intelligence := 5
Trade := 5
Space Combat := 5
Ground Combat := 0
Happiness := 4
Maintenance := 3
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 4

- - -

Name := Xenophobes v3.02
Production := 0
Research := 0
Intelligence := 5
Trade := -5
Space Combat := 0
Ground Combat := 0
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

Name := Xenophobes PvK
Production := 0
Research := 0
Intelligence := 5
Trade := -5
Space Combat := 0
Ground Combat := 0
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

Name := Xenophobes v4.11
Description := A culture which has no desire for interaction with other cultures. They desire to remain apart and distinct from the rest of the galaxy.
Production := 0
Research := 5
Intelligence := 5
Trade := -20
Space Combat := 0
Ground Combat := 0
Happiness := 0
Maintenance := 0
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 0

[ November 15, 2003, 12:47: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 16th, 2003, 02:23 AM

Originally posted by oleg:
I played few games with new cultures and honestly, space combat penalties to some cultures, like Scientists, make them unplayable. Right now I play either Neutrals or Engeneers. The rest is very much skewed one way or another.
Just MHO. "skewed one way or another" is what PvK is attempting to accomplish with his Culture Mod.

You may find Engineering the best choice for you, but actually many prefer the way of the: Renegade/Warrior or the trader/merchant /Politician and lets not forget Schemers http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

By far the worst is the Zealots (over all Rel. trait balance reasons)

As a player, I still very much prefer the Science race and then work on some weaknesses thru pre-game char. I can always better my crews with quick Combat sensors and some good Training much earlier then most other races; but it is tough to get to research and computer level 3 without the Science culture and some added char intelligence.

However, please consider your compromises.
As a Science culture, in thee end; I will NEVER be as acclimated to Combat as a Warrior, Production as a Worker or even Trade as a Trader/Merchant or have the enhanced Ship Management techniques as an Engineer or Renegade http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
~
On average, it is safe to say that the other Cultures will NEVER compare to Eee and my own Science and Research totals http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 16, 2003, 14:58: Message edited by: JLS ]

gosho mladenoff

November 16th, 2003, 03:08 AM

hi JLS love your mod. I was wondering if you had any plans to add more flavor to the weapons available in the AICampaign. I particularly like Devnulls mod point defense missiles, missile racks, heavy missiles and crystal and bio seeker weapons. the missiles would definitly give more insentive to research and use this underpowered area in SE 4. It may be to much work to add the code to to the ai but for the human player it might be a simple matter f cut and paste...

any thoughts...

ggm

deccan

November 16th, 2003, 06:54 AM

Originally posted by gosho mladenoff:
hi JLS love your mod. I was wondering if you had any plans to add more flavor to the weapons available in the AICampaign. I particularly like Devnulls mod point defense missiles, missile racks, heavy missiles and crystal and bio seeker weapons. the missiles would definitly give more insentive to research and use this underpowered area in SE 4.I second this. I really like the thought of Devnull missiles in AIC.

gosho mladenoff

November 16th, 2003, 05:28 PM

I can understand the desire not to appropriate many of the original ideas of Devnull's mod because of the uniqueness and work which went into them. However some ideas are not unique and are quite common or obvious in the SF world. David Weber's Honor Harrington series and the Starfire game both deal with expanded missile possibilities. Sprint missiles (high speed or direct fire missile platforms), LR and Heavy Missile platforms, PD missile platforms are not unique ideas to Devnulls mod. Yes Devnulls has done a wonderful job in filling out the tech tree for the special techs (crystal, organic etc..) but that should not be an excuse to limit the possibilities of AICampaign. Perhaps we could ask Devnull and his team if we could use some of his ideas. Personnally I feel the mods would be quite complementary to one another.

ggm

Grand Lord Vito

November 16th, 2003, 09:28 PM

Gosho Mladenoff you have obviously never went up against the AIC Ulkra-Tul AI Player with that large destroyer fleet of se4 Parasite seeker missiles or the AIC Phongs crystal se4 Torpedoes http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif
I shriek at the sound of the incoming AIC Sergetti or Terran light missiles and se4 Drones fired by the AI players. Just when you have the point defense escorts retrofitted to go into battle against seekers, now you are confronted with, there Ally the Xiati with temporal weapons and no missiles, good luck defending both fronts contested by AIC ai players. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

[ November 16, 2003, 19:30: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 16th, 2003, 09:42 PM

I like the AIC Berserkers http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif I like the AIC Renegades http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif I will take the Warriors http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif no wait going with the Berserks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Take out the Science and Enginners early allow no survivors http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

[ November 16, 2003, 19:48: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

QBrigid

November 16th, 2003, 10:55 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
this can be resolved by setting the char min to 99 for a few definite role reverse possibilities

Yes, we need to tweak the cultures closer to AIC v3.02 with a happy medium for all... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
Maybe 95 for combat char min. I feel that 99 will reduce our role playing options.

If we organize the Cultures by the general values, maybe this will help. The trade and economic aspect of AIC is very important so depending on how I want to approach the game I would choose, from pure trade to some combat or ship management and some trade.

Name := Traders
Production := -3
Research := -3
Trade := 20
Ground Combat := -5

Name := Merchants
Production := -3
Research := -5
Intelligence := 5
Trade := 15
Ground Combat := -10
Maintenance := 2

Name := Politicians
Production := -5
Research := 5
Intelligence := 5
Trade := 10
Space Combat := 3
Ground Combat := -5
Happiness := 3

Name := Renegades
Production := -5
Research := -5
Intelligence := 5
Trade := 5
Space Combat := 5
Happiness := 4
Maintenance := 3
Repair := 4

[ November 16, 2003, 21:04: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

QBrigid

November 16th, 2003, 11:14 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
If we organize the Cultures by the general values, maybe this will help. The Combat aspect of se4 is also very important.

Name := Berzerkers
Production := -5
Research := -10
Intelligence := -10
Trade := -20
Space Combat := 10
Ground Combat := 10
Happiness := 3
SY Rate := -3
Repair := -1

Name := Warriors
Production := -5
Research := -5
Intelligence := -15
Trade := -10
Space Combat := 5
Ground Combat := 20

Name := Renegades
Production := -5
Research := -5
Intelligence := 5
Trade := 5
Space Combat := 5
Happiness := 4
Maintenance := 3
SY Rate := 0
Repair := 4

Name := Politicians
Production := -5
Research := 5
Intelligence := 5
Trade := 10
Space Combat := 3
Ground Combat := -5
Happiness := 3

[ November 16, 2003, 21:19: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

QBrigid

November 16th, 2003, 11:18 PM

JLS if we add some research to the Artisans, other then the Xenophobes and Politicians, this will give an alternate choice for Science. A little combat on the Xenophobes would not hurt http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I have never played PBW and I am playing my first multiplayer se4 game with GLV and his freinds but the way I understand PBW, many Human Players do not enter agreements with each other, so added combat for the Xenophobes could induce players for this Culture.

Name := Scientists v4.11
Description := The majority of the given population are devoted to scientific endeavors.
Production := -5
Research := 15
Intelligence := -15
Space Combat := -5
Ground Combat := -5

Name := Politicians v4.11
Production := -5
Research := 5
Intelligence := 5
Trade := 10
Space Combat := 3
Ground Combat := -5
Happiness := 3

I suggest:

Name := Artisans
Description := A populace devoted to the leisure and cultural pursuits. This society keeps is populations very happy.
Production := 0
Research := 5
Ground Combat := -10
Happiness := 8

Name := Xenophobes
Description := A culture which has no desire for interaction with other cultures. They desire to remain apart and distinct from the rest of the galaxy.
Research := 5
Intelligence := 5
Trade := -20
Space Combat := 5

[ November 16, 2003, 21:37: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

QBrigid

November 16th, 2003, 11:44 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
up against the AIC Ulkra-Tul AI Player with that large destroyer fleet of se4 Parasite seeker missiles
I shriek at the sound of the incoming AIC Sergetti or Terran light missiles and se4 Drones fired by the AI players. They will murder you http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

gosho mladenoff

November 17th, 2003, 01:08 AM

I'm not sure the AI needs more options, because they always come on strong. ( I end up cheating by trading for techs and ships just to stay even ) but it gives more flavour and choices to a human player to let it choose to equip its ships with missile racks or sprint missiles (DF)so as to do some damage to a fleet that heavily outnumbers you. heavy or LR missiles used to pound a fleet while maintaining standoff distance. missile PD for slow firing but highly accurate PD systems...

Devnull's give's a baseline for these systems but my personnal feeling is that:

sprint missiles: 1/2 capital ship damage 1/2 range DF or speed 30

LR or Heavy missiles : x2 weight, x1.5 damage and 1.5 range and 1.5 resistance

Missile Racks: x3 damage and resistance, reload 30

PD Missile: accuracy +40 reload 2 or 3 damage +30 or +40

ggm

JLS

November 17th, 2003, 02:24 AM

Thank You, gosho mladenoff http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

With Fyron�s permissions and by the additions of Fyron Quads to AIC fulfills Fyron�s goals and intentions for FQM. The same also applies with PvK�s Culture add-on and both are a hugh asset for AI Campaign and Space Empires.
However, Devnull is a supported and well-maintained Mod. Rollo and the Devnull team have invested much. It would not be fair to the Devnull creators to assimilate their works or concepts and this certainly would not be of good character on my part...

= = =

In regards to Missiles not holding up in the se4 mid to end game; I believe is the desired philosophy and doctrine of the se4 creators. Many others share in this game play philosophy for LR Missile obsolescence, with the emergence for the current se4 mid-game SR Fighter Rocketry and the in-game Player designable Long Range Drones.

You may find that the currant se4 small to large Drone with LR Missiles or PvKs light Missile platform design, although not a fighter; may be more resilient and pack more options for you, then the se4 fighters. Best of all, this is dependent on your design and your set strategy and purpose http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Giving the AI a few more Weapons or Facility options is usually never a problem for the AI Players http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
We all will explore some additional missile and missile platform design options for AIC. If you have any ideas for any Components or Facilities that is not a direct (se3/4) product of any other active designer, and anyone would like to add this to AI Campaign, please post the design here.
Chances are it will be in a future release.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

JLS

[ November 16, 2003, 14:37: Message edited by: JLS ]

gregebowman

November 17th, 2003, 03:23 AM

JLS,

Maybe someone's mentioned this before, but I couldn't create a regular colony ship because the the colony ship is only 101kt, and the colony module was 730?!!! I had to wait several turns before I could create a fast colony ship. This is my first time playing this mod, and I thought that was unusual. How can one correct this?

Fyron

November 17th, 2003, 04:22 AM

With Fyron�s permissions and by the additions of Fyron Quads to AIC fulfills Fyron�s goals and intentions for FQM. The same also applies with PvK�s Culture add-on and both are a hugh asset for AI Campaign and Space Empires.
However, Devnull is a supported and well-maintained Mod. Rollo and the Devnull team have invested much. It would not be fair to the Devnull creators to assimilate their works or concepts and this certainly would not be of good character on my part... Are you saying that FQM is not a supported or well-maintained mod? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Actually... it would not in any way be of bad character... the ideas are posted freely to be used.

Fyron

November 17th, 2003, 04:25 AM

I have never played PBW and I am playing my first multiplayer se4 game with GLV and his freinds but the way I understand PBW, many Human Players do not enter agreements with each other, so added combat for the Xenophobes could induce players for this Culture.
Yes they do... most players sign trade and research alliances with everyone they meet, as soon as they meet them!

Originally posted by gregebowman:
JLS,

Maybe someone's mentioned this before, but I couldn't create a regular colony ship because the the colony ship is only 101kt, and the colony module was 730?!!! I had to wait several turns before I could create a fast colony ship. This is my first time playing this mod, and I thought that was unusual. How can one correct this? Check out the component "weapon" mounts.

[ November 17, 2003, 02:26: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

gosho mladenoff

November 17th, 2003, 04:31 AM

______________________________________________
Maybe someone's mentioned this before, but I couldn't create a regular colony ship because the the colony ship is only 101kt, and the colony module was 730?!!! I had to wait several turns before I could create a fast colony ship. This is my first time playing this mod, and I thought that was unusual. How can one correct this?
_________________________________________________

The colony ship has an integral colony module built in which has 1000 cargo to carry 1 pop.
just design the colony ship without the component and it will work fine..

ggm

JLS

November 17th, 2003, 04:22 PM

gosho mladenoff if you have a specific design that is yours that you would like to contribute to AIC, please post a semi to completed Version and we all would be very happy to test it.

I am sure Devnull's sprint missiles, LR or Heavy missiles, Missile Racks, and PD Missile work awesome in Devnull and please post the accolades on the Devnull thread, I am sure this would be appreciated.

Again if you are implying that I should use another designers work with out their permissions this is nonsensical, plagiaristic and a total disregard for there intellectual abilities. In regards to specific data from other MODs to include Rollo�s labor and concepts, I do believe to maintain integrity you would need his expressed permission to offer any of Devnull�s labors and concepts to others.

= = =

Please consider this, if an active mod designer is constructing a mod and communicating openly on the forum with the players of that mod or release a beta or Versions for others to test, this is not a warrant or affirmation for others to take the ideas. If so I would include all of the fine and uncompleted Adamant data in AIC or the Completed Data from AST Star Trek MOD and say (WOW look at my MOD and my labor). And then insist that Fyron post my (rip-off) on the MMs web site and SpaceEmpires.net with the MOD info; I supply. When in fact all I did was copy and paste much of his data with some title changes and with little intellectual thought.

Sure, I can say some credit here belongs to Fyron; however, what will be true and realistic is Fyron�s motivations will deteriorate on the continuance of his works if others continue to rip off his Ideas without his expressed permissions.

I hope you understand what I am attempting to say here http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

gregebowman

November 17th, 2003, 04:34 PM

Originally posted by gosho mladenoff:
______________________________________________
Maybe someone's mentioned this before, but I couldn't create a regular colony ship because the the colony ship is only 101kt, and the colony module was 730?!!! I had to wait several turns before I could create a fast colony ship. This is my first time playing this mod, and I thought that was unusual. How can one correct this?
_________________________________________________

The colony ship has an integral colony module built in which has 1000 cargo to carry 1 pop.
just design the colony ship without the component and it will work fine..

ggm Thanks for the info. I wasn't sure what was going on.

Fyron

November 17th, 2003, 04:42 PM

In regards to specific data from other MODs to include Rollo�s labor and concepts, I do believe to maintain integrity you would need his expressed permission to offer any of Devnull�s labors and concepts to others. Which he would give at the drop of a hat... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Of course, he is not the one that made those missiles, but he is technically the one in charge of that mod these days.

I hope you understand what I am attempting to say here Of course. That does not mean I have to agree with you though. If you want to use ideas from Adamant, go right ahead. Just list me in the credits (or better, just include the Adamant Mod Readme + Credits files), and all is well. It is not as if every single idea in Adamant was my own. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif Now, if you were to simply copy Adamant Mod and rename it, claiming it as your own, that would be a problem. But using ideas from it is not an issue. Borrowing a few ideas from a mod does not compromise anyone's intellectual integrity, especially if you give credit!

Did you see PvK, Rollo, SJ and others complain about Derek's Mod that was made a while ago combining Proportions, Devnull, P&N and other mods? No! In fact, they even offered assistance.

[ November 17, 2003, 14:47: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

November 17th, 2003, 04:49 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Which he would give at the drop of a hat... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Of course, he is not the one that made those missiles, but he is technically the one in charge of that mod these days. Agreed Rollo has done a fine job and without question, he is the point man.
- - -
�Which he would give at the drop of a hat... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif �

Perhaps, but he has not; to my knowledge.
And if I know Rollo he would contemplate what the founders may do; first. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 17, 2003, 14:50: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

November 17th, 2003, 04:55 PM

Since Devnull was a combination of a lot of people's ideas on the forums (plus a few of Devnullicus'), I think those "founders" would not object to it either. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

[ November 17, 2003, 14:55: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

November 17th, 2003, 05:09 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

In fact, they even offered assistance.
Derek had permissions; this is my argument.
- - -

Of course. That does not mean I have to agree with you though. If you want to use ideas from Adamant, go right ahead. Just list me in the credits (or better, just include the Adamant Mod Readme + Credits files), and all is well.
You do have the right to offer your data Fyron, but others may have issue with you offering something that is not yours to offer.

= = = = =

Please, lets move on.

I really need more player input on the culture values used for v4.11 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 17, 2003, 15:10: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 17th, 2003, 05:13 PM

While we all would like to see more different missiles, I disagree that seekers are only for earlier game.
1st, small ships are very usefull in AIC, because of speed, combat bonuses and AIC' economics. But it also reduces the effect of large mounts and suddenly the missiles' damage looks attractive !
2nd, Mixture of fighters and missiles rules. It is possible to saturate the point-defence even in large fleet battles. Just MHO.

JLS

November 17th, 2003, 05:19 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
While we all would like to see more different missiles, I disagree that seekers are only for earlier game.
1st, small ships are very usefull in AIC, because of speed, combat bonuses and AIC' economics. But it also reduces the effect of large mounts and suddenly the missiles' damage looks attractive !
2nd, Mixture of fighters and missiles rules. It is possible to saturate the point-defence even in large fleet battles. Just MHO. Agreed Oleg, above and with Drones, Missile Sats and Missile Weapon Platforms any Player, be them Human or AI can saturate a battlefields environment with se4 seekers.

[ November 17, 2003, 15:22: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

November 17th, 2003, 05:35 PM

Derek had permissions; this is my argument. Ok... that is not much of an argument... go ask permission, problem solved! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

You do have the right to offer your data Fyron, but others may have issue with you offering something that is not yours to offer. I have not offered anything that is not mine to offer.

[ November 17, 2003, 15:36: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

November 17th, 2003, 05:41 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
JLS if we add some research to the Artisans, other then the Xenophobes and Politicians, this will give an alternate choice for Science. A little combat on the Xenophobes would not hurt http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Name := Scientists v4.11
Description := The majority of the given population are devoted to scientific endeavors.
Production := -5
Research := 15
Intelligence := -15
Space Combat := -5
Ground Combat := -5

Name := Politicians v4.11
Production := -5
Research := 5
Intelligence := 5
Trade := 10
Space Combat := 3
Ground Combat := -5
Happiness := 3

I suggest:

Name := Artisans
Description := A populace devoted to the leisure and cultural pursuits. This society keeps is populations very happy.
Production := 0
Research := 5
Ground Combat := -10
Happiness := 8

Name := Xenophobes
Description := A culture which has no desire for interaction with other cultures. They desire to remain apart and distinct from the rest of the galaxy.
Research := 5
Intelligence := 5
Trade := -20
Space Combat := 5 PBW inexperience aside QB, your suggestions does have merit.

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

Grand Lord Vito

November 17th, 2003, 10:46 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
While we all would like to see more different missiles, I disagree that seekers are only for earlier game.
1st, small ships are very usefull in AIC, because of speed, combat bonuses and AIC' economics. But it also reduces the effect of large mounts and suddenly the missiles' damage looks attractive !
2nd, Mixture of fighters and missiles rules. It is possible to saturate the point-defence even in large fleet battles. Just MHO. Missiles, Drones and Fighters are great in AIC and when you plan on large ships, good Combat Sensers and ECM is a must. I like this because a rush to Battle Cruiser will need much more then just the big ship with heavy guns.

[ November 17, 2003, 20:48: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 17th, 2003, 10:53 PM

The colony ship has an integral colony module built in which has 1000 cargo to carry 1 pop.
just design the colony ship without the component and it will work fine..
__________________________________________________
Thanks for the info. I wasn't sure what was going on. I never read the readmes either http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Grand Lord Vito

November 17th, 2003, 10:59 PM

JLS with cultures go with most of PvK culture mod that works for AIC, and have the se4 Cultures or even better v3.02 Cultures as a alternate and ditch the Populace Cultures http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Imo

gregebowman

November 17th, 2003, 11:01 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />
The colony ship has an integral colony module built in which has 1000 cargo to carry 1 pop.
just design the colony ship without the component and it will work fine..
__________________________________________________
Thanks for the info. I wasn't sure what was going on. I never read the readmes either http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif <hr /></blockquote>I guess it does pay to do so. I've downloaded quite a few mods lately, so it's hard to keep track of what mod does what.

oleg

November 17th, 2003, 11:02 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />
The colony ship has an integral colony module built in which has 1000 cargo to carry 1 pop.
just design the colony ship without the component and it will work fine..
__________________________________________________
Thanks for the info. I wasn't sure what was going on. I never read the readmes either http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif <hr /></blockquote>Me either ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif In fact, I post exactly the same question about the UNGODLY LARGE colony modules not long time ago. Very confusing for rush neads http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Grand Lord Vito

November 17th, 2003, 11:08 PM

I THINK
JLS tryed to keep the ship KT down with Starliners and Colony ships to keep the overall points down for non-combat ship builds.

This helps the AI be more in tuned with diplomacy or something. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

The large Colonizer moduale is for Large Transports and larger ships for the players to devise there own strategy with.

[ November 17, 2003, 21:11: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

oleg

November 17th, 2003, 11:12 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
I THINK
JLS tryed to keep the ship KT down with Starliners and Colony ships to keep the overall points down for non-combat ship builds.

This helps the AI be more in tuned with diplomacy or something. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Exactly ! Balancing player score was the prime reason for the seemingly counterintuative designs for colony ships and starliners. JLS obviously hoped we will read READ.ME before complaing. How wrong he was http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Grand Lord Vito

November 17th, 2003, 11:16 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
I THINK
JLS tryed to keep the ship KT down with Starliners and Colony ships to keep the overall points down for non-combat ship builds.

This helps the AI be more in tuned with diplomacy or something. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Exactly ! Balancing player score was the prime reason for the seemingly counterintuative designs for colony ships and starliners. JLS obviously hoped we will read READ.ME before complaing. How wrong he was http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif <hr /></blockquote>http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif LOL http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

JLS

November 18th, 2003, 03:55 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
Maybe 95 for combat char min. I feel that 99 will reduce our role playing options.
Agreed, 99 was just an example however.

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
JLS with cultures go with most of PvK culture mod that works for AIC, and have the se4 Cultures or even better v3.02 Cultures as a alternate and ditch the Populace Cultures Imo
Agreed, I am just going to have the se4 default Cultures as the alternative to PvKs Culture Mod.

As with v3.02 and now with v4.11 most Culture values will be based on se4 Characteristic points or double points with an combined offensive and defensive value like combat, with the players feed back on the strengths and weakness of the Cultures and how the AI is perceived to be balanced in the end. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Reference
>Value Point Structure towards v4.11<
Production := 7
Research := 5
Intelligence := 2
Trade := 2
Space Combat := 10
Ground Combat := 2
Happiness := 3
Maintenance := 7
SY Rate := 3
Repair := 1

[ November 18, 2003, 16:56: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 18th, 2003, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
JLS obviously hoped we will read READ.ME before complaing. How wrong he was http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ November 18, 2003, 14:05: Message edited by: JLS ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 18th, 2003, 07:30 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
If you want to use ideas from Adamant, go right ahead. Just list me in the credits JLS I am going to combine Adamant and maybe other MODS with AIC so there AI will be more like AIC in:
Plagues
Economics
Planetary Bombardment
Finite Economics
Planet Capture
Planet defense
Tactical Fighters
Minefields
Multi-player handicapping
Improved event frequency
AIC Diplomacy

Is this ok with you and would you give me a hand with this?

[ November 18, 2003, 18:58: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

November 18th, 2003, 09:27 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Originally posted by QBrigid:
Maybe 95 for combat char min. I feel that 99 will reduce our role playing options.
Agreed, 99 was just an example however.

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
JLS with cultures go with most of PvK culture mod that works for AIC, and have the se4 Cultures or even better v3.02 Cultures as a alternate and ditch the Populace Cultures Imo
Agreed, I am just going to have the se4 default Cultures as the alternative to PvKs Culture Mod.

As with v3.02 and now with v4.11 most Culture values will be based on se4 Characteristic points or double points with an combined offensive and defensive value like combat, with the players feed back on the strengths and weakness of the Cultures and how the AI is perceived to be balanced in the end. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Reference
>Value Point Structure towards v4.11<
Production := 7
Research := 5
Intelligence := 2
Trade := 2
Space Combat := 10
Ground Combat := 2
Happiness := 3
Maintenance := 7
SY Rate := 3
Repair := 1 <hr /></blockquote>JLS there is room to go to 90% Combat. This will allow more player tweaks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I may need to drive my Psyco-Berserker stats up even higher http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

JLS

November 18th, 2003, 10:23 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
JLS there is room to go to 90% Combat. This will allow more player tweaks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I may need to drive my Psyco-Berserker stats up even higher http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif I am still working the min Char% numbers, most results will average about the same return on reductions as in default se4, but with less actual reduction http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

GLV, you are berserk enough http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ November 18, 2003, 20:29: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 18th, 2003, 11:24 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
JLS I am going to combine Adamant and maybe other MODS
Is this ok with you and would you give me a hand with this? Actually GLV, I am already helping Fyron a little with his Adamant mod now, perhaps after Fyron and the Adamant team are finished; I may be able to lend a hand. However, any AIC or se4 specifics question; I will be happy to answer.

In addition, I am sure Fyron can always use another hand now on the Adamant Team, and for sure you have been very instrumental with AIC over the months. Your experience would also be of value to Fyron in one capacity or another.

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

JLS

[ November 18, 2003, 21:43: Message edited by: JLS ]

deccan

November 19th, 2003, 11:52 AM

I recently started playing this mod in earnest. Some quibbles:

1) Some of the descriptions are off. For example, for the Light Carrier, "Large size makes base easier to hit in combat" should obviously be "ship" instead. Also, "Maneuverability decreases chance to hit targets" is a bit weird. Should be something like "Poor maneuverability decreases chance to hit targets".

It would be nice too if the description for the Engineering Section mentioned that it is regenerative armor and how much it decreases maintenance. I had to look into the text files to find out.

2) Why are there extra tech levels in fields such as Construction, Colonial Development etc. that are never used?

deccan

November 19th, 2003, 10:56 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
Thank you Deccan, consider it done.
If you wish to help with any more Descriptions please feel free, it appears your English and literary Imagination is superior to that of mine, together we can do some house keeping for the next releasesI'll see what I can do. No need for praises though. Do you prefer that I edit the data files directly or just send you reworked descriptions?

JLS

November 19th, 2003, 11:17 PM

Thanks please send your reworked descriptions.

JLS

November 20th, 2003, 02:58 AM

Originally posted by deccan:

I recently started playing this mod in earnest. Some quibbles:

1) Some of the descriptions are off. For example, for the Light Carrier, "Large size makes base easier to hit in combat" should obviously be "ship" instead. Also, "Maneuverability decreases chance to hit targets" is a bit weird. Should be something like "Poor maneuverability decreases chance to hit targets".
Typo, Thanks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

"Poor maneuverability decreases chance to hit targets" is a finer structured sentence.

Thank you Deccan, consider it done.
If you wish to help with any more Descriptions please feel free, it appears your English and literary Imagination is superior to that of mine, together we can do some house keeping for the next releases http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
- - -

It would be nice too if the description for the Engineering Section mentioned that it is regenerative armor and how much it decreases maintenance. I had to look into the text files to find out.
You have a point I will look into this. However, I do not know how textbook we want to get, after all this is just the se4 titles of some actions and the need to call that action from the se4.exe so se4 can work its mathematical wizardry. Truly, in this case there is no organic regeneration happening within the components. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
- - -

2) Why are there extra tech levels in fields such as Construction, Colonial Development etc. that are never used? Every release I mix some techs and AI files up a bit for flavor, I also believe that in most, but not all techs Players do not want to memorize the absolute Tech Paths.

Ended-opened Techs have been in and discussed with AIC since the beginning and many Players like an open tech and not knowing that there maybe still a prereq out there for advancement. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 19, 2003, 15:51: Message edited by: JLS ]

deccan

November 20th, 2003, 04:09 AM

Originally posted by JLS:
You have a point I will look into this. However, I do not know how textbook we want to get, after all this is just the se4 titles of some actions and the need to call that action from the se4.exe so se4 can work its mathematical wizardry. Truly, in this case there is no organic regeneration happening within the components. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif What was the rationale behind making it regenerative armor anyway? It's so small and you can only put in one per vehicle, so it hardly seems to make a difference. I was annoyed for a while, because I somehow got it into my head that this was a "Repair 1 component per turn" component so I thought it was pretty cool and put it in all my ships.

Furthermore, I think detailed stats ought to be given whenever possible. For example, as a legacy from Proportions, the descriptions of your Point-defense weapons give the precise amount of to-hit bonus. I think this is a very good thing, and lets player decide better how to use those components as he or she likes.

deccan

November 20th, 2003, 10:02 AM

Suggestions only. Use or not as you wish:

For Components.txt

<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">

Name := Engineering Section
Description := Ship's centralized engineering center where trained personnel coordinate maintenance and basic ship repair services.

Name := Sick Bay
Description := Ship's clinic. Provides basic medical services for the ship's personnel only.

Name := Sick Bay I
Description := Ship's medical bay. Provides medical services for the ship's personnel and emergency medical relief to friendly colonies.

Name := Ram Scoop I
Description := Collects loose hydrogen for combustion with solar energy to generate supplies for a ship.

Name := Allegiance Subverter I
Description := Psychic attack to mentally conquer the crew of the target vehicle. If the crew does not convert, it is unaffected. Will not work against Master Computers.

Name := Medical Team I
Description := Can cure and possibly prevent light medical emergencies.

Name := Medical Team II
Description := Can cure and possibly prevent moderate medical emergencies.

Name := Medical Team III
Description := Can cure and possibly prevent a medical crisis.

Name := Medical Cure IV
Description := Can cure level 4 plagues.

Name := Medical Cure V
Description := Can cure level 5 plagues.</pre><hr /></blockquote>For VehicleSize.txt

<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Name := Freighter
Short Name := Starliner
Description := A hull designed to transport cargo or large numbers of people and their belongings, Starliner Module is recommended for the transport of Population.

Name := Starliner
Short Name := Medium Starliner
Description := A large hull designed to transport cargo or large numbers of people and their belongings, Starliner Module is recommended for the transport of Population.

Name := Medium Transport
Short Name := Medium Transport
Description := For tasks too large for the ST.

Name := Large Transport
Short Name := Large Transport
Description := For large-scale deployments of units or to transport large amounts of supplies or cargo across long distances.

Name := Scout
Short Name := Scout
Ability 2 Type := Combat To Hit Offense Plus
Ability 2 Descr := Good maneuverability increases chance to hit targets.

Name := Escort Carrier
Short Name := Escort Carrier
Ability 3 Type := Combat To Hit Offense Minus
Ability 3 Descr := Poor maneuverability decreases chance to hit targets.

Name := Light Carrier
Short Name := Light Carrier
Ability 1 Type := Combat To Hit Defense Minus
Ability 1 Descr := Large size makes ship easier to hit in combat.

Name := TAC Fighter-S
Short Name := Sml Tactical Fighter
Ability 1 Type := Combat To Hit Offense Plus
Ability 1 Descr := Excellent maneuverability increases chance to hit enemy targets in combat.
Ability 2 Type := Combat To Hit Defense Plus
Ability 2 Descr := Small size and excellent maneuverability decreases chance of being hit by enemies.

Name := Small Fighter
Short Name := Strat Fighter Sml
Description := Fighter capable of inter-system sub-light travel.

Name := Small Satellite
Short Name := Small Satellite
Ability 1 Type := Combat To Hit Offense Minus
Ability 1 Descr := Lack of mobility increases difficulty of locking onto enemy targets.
Ability 2 Type := Combat To Hit Defense Minus
Ability 2 Descr := Lack of mobility increases chance of being hit by enemies.

Name := Resupply Space Station
Short Name := Supply Space Station
Ability 3 Type := Supply Storage
Ability 3 Descr := Immobility and large proportion of supply storage space makes this Resupply Station a poor platform for weapons.
Ability 3 Val 1 := 20000
Ability 3 Val 2 := 0</pre><hr /></blockquote>

JLS

November 20th, 2003, 03:13 PM

Originally posted by deccan:
Suggestions only. Use or not as you wish:

For Components.txt

For VehicleSize.txt
Thanks Deccan this is good stuff, revising v4.11 to your text descriptions now.

JLS

November 20th, 2003, 04:11 PM

Originally posted by deccan:
What was the rationale behind making it regenerative armor anyway? It's so small and you can only put in one per vehicle, so it hardly seems to make a difference. I was annoyed for a while, because I somehow got it into my head that this was a "Repair 1 component per turn" component so I thought it was pretty cool and put it in all my ships.
It is still a good idea to put the Engineering Section on most your ships http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif and most Players really do like the AIC Engineering Section http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

The right-click for existing description.
Name := Engineering Section I
Description := Ships centralized operations center where trained personal carry out ship and tasked operational services.
Damage Resistance := 45

.Damage Control.
.Increases Ships maintenance efficiency.

Perhaps adding {combat} with damage control may be more applicable, but then again not. The engineering section also may take the initial blunt of {movement} thru some sectors, asteroids, storms, and warp points that will offer your ship damage as a toll for the right of passage.

I do like your descriptions. However �basic ship repair services� can not apply to the Engineering Section since the engineering section does not make repairs.
�Damage Control� at least as of now, seems the most applicable.

However, �basic ship repair services� makes a nice fit towards the AIC:

Name := Repair Bay Compartment I
Description := Component fits on most ship hulls and repairs other ships in space.
."Basic ship repair services" of 3 components per turn.
. Installs on any ship.
. Do to logistics, Efficiancy loss.
.Operations results in less defenses.

Furthermore, I think detailed stats ought to be given whenever possible. For example, as a legacy from Proportions, the descriptions of your Point-defense weapons give the precise amount of to-hit bonus. I think this is a very good thing, and lets player decide better how to use those components as he or she likes. Agreed for the most part http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Right-Click AIC Point defense Cannons you will notice +nn to hit there http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

AIC also goes with a �to hit on early beam and some torp weapons, perhaps a mention of �newly prototyped weapon targeting result in a -2 to-hit�.
However, the exact numbers to me still seem way to textbook, with v4.11 we have inserted for most beam weapons �~newly prototyped weapon targeting results in a slight decrease in targeting�.
AMT �~prototype results in a moderate decrease in targeting�
NS weapons "~prototype results in a moderate decrease in targeting
Etc.

AIC will have a plus to hit on most higher level beam and torpedo weapons, so I have yet to devise a descriptive phrase for the plus levels. Any ideas on a few descriptive phrases?

[ November 20, 2003, 14:24: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

November 20th, 2003, 04:54 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
AIC will have a plus to hit on most higher level beam and torpedo weapons, so I have yet to devise a descriptive phrase for the plus levels. Any ideas on a few descriptive phrases? A few random ideas:

"An improved firing system results in a slightly more accurate weapon." "This weapon reduced recoil when firing results in slightly more accurate attacks." For low bonuses.
"This weapon access to sensors data gives it a better accuracy than average." "Basic heat based targetting means this weapon is more likely to hit its target." For average bonuses.
"Tiny computer chips built in on this weapon makes it much more accurate." "Advanced targetting systems allow this weapon to track its target, resulting in a much improved accuracy." For the best bonuses.

Or for weapons with a rate of fire greater than one: "The delay before firing allows this weapon to be slightly/more/much more accurate than average." "The slower rate of fire allow targetting systems to calculate a slightly/more/much more precise trajectory."

Here you are. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

oleg

November 20th, 2003, 05:12 PM

JLC, I remember you posted about returning to the 3.02 AI politics in the next patch. What exactly is the change ? Right now I am playing 4.01 game against 10 AIs and almost WHOLE politics table is green. Only two wars. I am at peace with all AIs http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Boring !!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Alneyan

November 20th, 2003, 05:41 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
JLC, I remember you posted about returning to the 3.02 AI politics in the next patch. What exactly is the change ? Right now I am playing 4.01 game against 10 AIs and almost WHOLE politics table is green. Only two wars. I am at peace with all AIs http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Boring !!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Oh, then, you could try to see if the Declare War option is really working. A war on ten fronts is an appealing prospect, isn't it? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif I tend *not* to do too much diplomacy with the AI for this reason, they are too easy to abuse for my liking. (Especially in mods other than AIC, where I can consider Non-Aggression treaties) And you don't have to fear an AI betrayal that way, if you are a paranoiac race.

Obviously, in multiplayer, it is definitively a whole different story. Here diplomacy rules as queen, or bullying and threatening, depending on your Empire. Who said I belong to the latter Category? *Smirks*

QBrigid

November 20th, 2003, 06:05 PM

Is the code used by deccan effecting my browser?
He will have to add some returns or just post it in text.

Fyron

November 20th, 2003, 06:09 PM

Yes, but it will only be an issue while that post is on the first page. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

QBrigid

November 20th, 2003, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
JLC, I remember you posted about returning to the 3.02 AI politics in the next patch. What exactly is the change ? Right now I am playing 4.01 game against 10 AIs and almost WHOLE politics table is green. Only two wars. I am at peace with all AIs http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Boring !!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif The Violent psycos declare wars in my game.

But I think JLS has set the declare war value high for other races in the Last release so they will not commit to a full game at war but they will get very angry and break treaty negotians but there is always a chance they will become freinds much latter.

I like this approach but I tend to agree with you Oleg the Psycos should be a little more psyco http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

QBrigid

November 20th, 2003, 06:17 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Yes, but it will only be an issue while that post is on the first page. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Thanks Fyron, it looked a little weird http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

QBrigid

November 20th, 2003, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by deccan:
Suggestions only. Use or not as you wish:

For Components.txt

For VehicleSize.txt
_____________________

Thanks Deccan this is good stuff, revising v4.11 to your text descriptions now. Awesome, deccan http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

[ November 20, 2003, 16:22: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

QBrigid

November 20th, 2003, 06:28 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLS:
AIC will have a plus to hit on most higher level beam and torpedo weapons, so I have yet to devise a descriptive phrase for the plus levels. Any ideas on a few descriptive phrases? A few random ideas:

"An improved firing system results in a slightly more accurate weapon." "This weapon reduced recoil when firing results in slightly more accurate attacks." For low bonuses.
"This weapon access to sensors data gives it a better accuracy than average." "Basic heat based targetting means this weapon is more likely to hit its target." For average bonuses.
"Tiny computer chips built in on this weapon makes it much more accurate." "Advanced targetting systems allow this weapon to track its target, resulting in a much improved accuracy." For the best bonuses.

Or for weapons with a rate of fire greater than one: "The delay before firing allows this weapon to be slightly/more/much more accurate than average." "The slower rate of fire allow targetting systems to calculate a slightly/more/much more precise trajectory."

Here you are. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif <hr /></blockquote>How do you guys come up with this stuff.

QBrigid

November 20th, 2003, 06:41 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
I have some comments about Stellar Manipulation.

AI plays very well now IMHO. But, and I mean BUT, the combination of those two tweaks made human SM very robust. In the game I play with latest settins, it is very easy for humans to get very effective expansion tool.

I suggest to restor the values of human SM warp openers to 3,4 and 6 LY. It should't be a problem given the new cheap research cost !

Just MHO, may be i'm too harsh on feloow humans http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Oleg do you think raising the SM tech cost up a little maybe better in slowing the pace to prevent the rapid expansion.

Existing AIC warp opened at 4ly, 6ly and 10ly at sm3 works really good in a no-warp game with most FQM and upper AIC maps.

[ November 20, 2003, 16:43: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

QBrigid

November 20th, 2003, 06:49 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
So, FQM will be a part of AIC now ? Good, but _watch out_ for starting HW settings - medium/large moons will expose one of the remaining SE bugs ! Is this true?
I read in a post that the AI will get hung up with pop transport if there are moons present.

I don't care if this is true, we want FQM http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ November 20, 2003, 16:50: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

Alneyan

November 20th, 2003, 06:58 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
I read in a post that the AI will get hung up with pop transport if there are moons present.

I don't care if this is true, we want FQM http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Fyron answered below in the thread that the problem with moons as homeworlds is no longer true. (That is what you quoted) And as far as I know, the AI handles perfectly well moons, I saw it transfering population from one world to another, both of them with colonized moons.

I believe these... well, sentences came from playing too much and above all, having too much imagination and free time on my hands. *Smirks*

Fyron

November 20th, 2003, 08:17 PM

You will only ever encounter a problem with HWs if you use a bad planet start. Unless, of course, JLS merged FQM into AIC improperly and did not maintain the careful allow HW settings on all of the systems in FQM. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

JLS

November 20th, 2003, 09:27 PM

QB you read this in a post a few months ago, however QB you have not seen this in AIC v4. Oleg and others have made this post some time ago, I am not sure of all the details.

In all cases, the AI uses a Debarkation Depot and Transports. The AI in AIC should never have Population problems http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
- - - - -

You will only ever encounter a problem with HWs if you use a bad planet start. Unless, of course, JLS merged FQM into AIC improperly and did not maintain the careful allow HW settings on all of the systems in FQM.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif FQM ported fine http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

QB made no mention of a Home World Fyron, is there an issue with moons and AI transport in other applications?

[ November 20, 2003, 20:00: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

November 20th, 2003, 10:48 PM

QB made no mention of a Home World Fyron, is there an issue with moons and AI transport in other applications? No. Alneyan was alluding to the HW issue, so I was just making it more explicit.

deccan

November 20th, 2003, 11:37 PM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
Oleg do you think raising the SM tech cost up a little maybe better in slowing the pace to prevent the rapid expansion.
I would agree that SM feels far too easy. Having planet creating ships all over the place is easy and feels like a really cheap advantage over the AI.

Fyron

November 20th, 2003, 11:39 PM

Welcome to the world of SE3. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif In fact, SM was so easy that it was a good tactic to go around blowing up all of your planets and building a new large one from them (no huge)! Asteroids had no "size" in SE3. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ November 20, 2003, 21:43: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JLS

November 21st, 2003, 12:25 AM

Originally posted by deccan:
Originally posted by QBrigid:
Oleg do you think raising the SM tech cost up a little maybe better in slowing the pace to prevent the rapid expansion.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I would agree that SM feels far too easy.
Agreed, the reduction of v4.0 SM research cost was hasty on my part, the consensus is to raise this back to v3.02.
- - -

Having planet creating ships all over the place is easy and feels like a really cheap advantage over the AI.You may be surprised, the AIC AI Players do well with its own Colony expansions via its own Create Planet vessels.

There will be only a slight Human Player advantage here http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 20, 2003, 22:45: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 21st, 2003, 12:30 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Welcome to the world of SE3. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif In fact, SM was so easy that it was a good tactic to go around blowing up all of your planets and building a new large one from them (no huge)! Asteroids had no "size" in SE3. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Blowing up the AI players Star Systems or Planets have little to NO Human Player Advantages to that of the AI Players, in AIC http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Actually, with AI Campaign; it is the Human Player that MUST be on its guard against the AI players Star or Planet Destroyers, http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 20, 2003, 22:32: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 21st, 2003, 01:07 AM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by oleg:
I have some comments about Stellar Manipulation.

AI plays very well now IMHO. But, and I mean BUT, the combination of those two tweaks made human SM very robust. In the game I play with latest settins, it is very easy for humans to get very effective expansion tool.

I suggest to restor the values of human SM warp openers to 3,4 and 6 LY. It should't be a problem given the new cheap research cost !

Just MHO, may be i'm too harsh on feloow humans http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Oleg do you think raising the SM tech cost up a little maybe better in slowing the pace to prevent the rapid expansion.

Existing AIC warp opened at 4ly, 6ly and 10ly at sm3 works really good in a no-warp game with most FQM and upper AIC maps. <hr /></blockquote>May be. I really not sure. Old cost was too high for current AI settings IMHO - some races would wait 200+ turns before 1st WP. Now, with low AI bonuses, EEE opens WP at turn 50 ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif May be some value in between is optimal.

Deathstalker

November 21st, 2003, 01:36 AM

"AI plays very well now IMHO. But, and I mean BUT, the combination of those two tweaks made human SM very robust. In the game I play with latest settins, it is very easy for humans to get very effective expansion tool. "

Just my 2 cents but....if what your looking for is a cheaper way for the AI use stellar manip then you could go one of two routes.

One, make a tech tree that is for the AI only and have certain techs (like SM) available early on.

Two, make a mount (yeah I know, I AM mount happy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif ), have the stellar manip component cost a HUGE amount to begin with in resources and then make an AI mount reducing the cost, that way if humans want to use it it costs alot to build the ship itself even though the research is fairly easy....

just my 2 cents anyway...... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

JLS

November 21st, 2003, 01:45 AM

Originally posted by Deathstalker:
make a mount (yeah I know, I AM mount happy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif AIC v4.11 will be released very soon; there are some added AI Player SM provisions to assist with FQM, and that really do not have much effect on most the AIC standard maps http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Deathstalker after this release, we would be beholden if you could spruce up the AIC comp enhancement file http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

[ November 21, 2003, 00:18: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 21st, 2003, 01:48 AM

Originally posted by oleg:
Old cost was too high for current AI settings IMHO - some races would wait 200+ turns before 1st WP. Now, with low AI bonuses, EEE opens WP at turn 50 ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif May be some value in between is optimal. I could not agree with you more Oleg http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

JLS

November 21st, 2003, 01:58 AM

Originally posted by QBrigid:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by oleg:
JLC, I remember you posted about returning to the 3.02 AI politics in the next patch. What exactly is the change ? Right now I am playing 4.01 game against 10 AIs and almost WHOLE politics table is green. Only two wars. I am at peace with all AIs http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Boring !!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif The Violent psycos declare wars in my game.

But I think JLS has set the declare war value high for other races in the Last release so they will not commit to a full game at war but they will get very angry and break treaty negotians but there is always a chance they will become freinds much latter.

I like this approach but I tend to agree with you Oleg the Psycos should be a little more psyco http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif <hr /></blockquote>AI Players to commit fewer wars, and yet still be very aggressive is a goal we will obtain.

As you recall with v3.02 and prior, the AI was tuned for the Human Player to have 20 to 40+ odd Star Liners plus the usual combat and support fleets.
With v4.0 for the Players that have chosen starting trait option SO* now alleviates most of the need for a large Star Liner fleet and I did not want the the AI Players to find this an early weakness with Human Players ship totals. There was a need to tone down the AI politics a bit and then set to a happy medium, and this may require a few more tweaks.

However, the Violent and Psychotic and even the Impulsive Races should still be true to form with the previous AIC v4.01 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 21, 2003, 00:15: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 21st, 2003, 02:39 AM

I would like another culture added:

Gedonists !! - Close to artisans but still different:

++ to happines (obvious)
+ to reproduction (not sure here, kids are pain !)
-- to conditions tolerance (obvious)
- to ground combat (painfull business!)

Fyron

November 21st, 2003, 02:57 AM

+ to reproduction (not sure here, kids are pain !)
-- to conditions tolerance (obvious) These can not be modified via culture.

Deathstalker

November 21st, 2003, 04:12 AM

"Deathstalker after this release, we would be beholden if you could spruce up the AIC comp enhancement file "

I would love to (as I stated much earlier) but I'm afraid of one thing and that is ruining the game. My mods have one thing in common and that is big dramatic changes. Your mod is very exact and quite complex (and thats a compliment, trust me, its obvious the time you guys have put into this....I just cut/paste and throw in some ideas and see what works...)

If I did do some mounts I'd worry I'd upset some sort of balance that would throw off some players (ie, make a Robo-Miner mount and make it too easy to aquire minerals, make an engine mount and all of a sudden fuel is no longer a worry.)

How about if those of you who have a little stake in the game (the modders and players) give me an idea of what could use mounts and what couldn't? The Last thing I want to do is ruin a good thing.

oleg

November 21st, 2003, 04:16 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />+ to reproduction (not sure here, kids are pain !)
-- to conditions tolerance (obvious) These can not be modified via culture. <hr /></blockquote>Ouh, did't know about this. Than this idea is kind of moot http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif .

Taera

November 21st, 2003, 06:56 AM

I would like to suggest AIC AI players to have their 'gets angry over enemy/ally colonizable planets' falsed down. This setting makes little sense and realy distrupts the political world of the AI, no matter how bad it is.

JLS

November 21st, 2003, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by Deathstalker:
"Deathstalker after this release, we would be beholden if you could spruce up the AIC comp enhancement file "

I would love to (as I stated much earlier) but I'm afraid of one thing and that is ruining the game. My mods have one thing in common and that is big dramatic changes. Your mod is very exact and quite complex (and thats a compliment, trust me, its obvious the time you guys have put into this....I just cut/paste and throw in some ideas and see what works...)

If I did do some mounts I'd worry I'd upset some sort of balance that would throw off some players (ie, make a Robo-Miner mount and make it too easy to aquire minerals, make an engine mount and all of a sudden fuel is no longer a worry.)

How about if those of you who have a little stake in the game (the modders and players) give me an idea of what could use mounts and what couldn't? The Last thing I want to do is ruin a good thing. This sounds like a fine initial plan, if we put something together then you, and I will decide what enhancement would affect what area of AIC play.

For example if the robo mounts are to productive or any other enhancement will change the balance of Solitaire, then all we have to do is keep it in AIC multiplay http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

�make an engine mount and all of a sudden fuel is no longer a worry� I do not see how this is a playable enhancement if it is acquired to early in the game. However, if it is well received and is out around the same time as reactors; then why not http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

In addition, we would have a starting optional trait for (Deathstalkers Comp enhancements)D-Comp for any items that are neat and fun, but may allow to many advantages over the AI.

With a group of us testing with Deathstalkers lead; I know we will do good things.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 21, 2003, 13:22: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 21st, 2003, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by Taera:
I would like to suggest AIC AI players to have their 'gets angry over enemy/ally colonizable planets' falsed down. This setting makes little sense and realy distrupts the political world of the AI, no matter how bad it is. But how then would you make AI to declare war on you ? Once you get peace, AI won't brake it ever ! - boring !!

JLS

November 21st, 2003, 03:42 PM

Taera post is right on, and is also similar to that of the v4.0 and v4.01 AI; the non-Violent and non-Psychotic races could always have a more stable attitude. Furthermore, if the Human or the Violent AI Player wants to mix it up with a relatively peaceful Player, then let the games begin.

However, as Oleg and others have mentioned the Violent races should tend to lean towards a Violent and not-so peaceful solutions to their goals and thru the frustrations, over time may pull them towards the violent means http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Psychotic races will be expected to be Psyco in all actions, more so after the first 50 turns http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Aggressive Races in AIC have the AI doctrine towards colonization, (this is similar to the Human Player that desires to build Colony Ship after Colony ship to the eventual dismay of others http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif and the politics and attitudes are more of a derivative from the Culture� Example: Merchant, Schemers etc,

Xenophobes for the most part will take their time with treaty conceptions. However, I finally conceded to the first 50-turn option in AIC v4.0 by modifying the chance somewhat so players may explore beyond that Xenos boundaries. After the first 50 turns, the Races will loose this plus-friendly modifier http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
This is somewhat ok. However, the main draw back is the Amonkrie; this is an Honorable race, so once in agreements, it is tough for them to morally break a treaty. Some players have expressed their desire to loose the first 50 modifier on the Xenos? But this may lead to in game road blocks.

Renegades when in the right situation will require tributes to remain in their good graces and should not be trusted.

Schemers never can be trusted.

Warriors are a balance between Honorable and Violent.

Politicians, Traders and Merchants desire Trade, Research and refueling privileges and may ask for partnerships more then any other race.

Impulsive also will require the setting to exasperate some impulsive actions as break treaties etc. and a closer declare war trigger that may be their downfall in the end, as is in the real world with impulsive leaders that have always brought calamity to their civilization.

The AI settings file along with anger and the final Political file are perfect tools for setting the trim.
Traits, Cultures, Demanor and the Race designers notes are all part of that AI's makeup http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
= = = = = = = =

Also to say, your next AIC game the AI with the possible exception of the Psychotic Races, will in all probability not display the same attitudes from the AI inter-politics thru-out; as your Last encounter http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 21, 2003, 15:04: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 21st, 2003, 10:05 PM

================================
AI Campaign V4.11 ~ November 21, 2003
================================

Features Fyron�s FQM add-on ~Fyron, Pathfinder, QB

CONCEPTUAL:
Reduced Repair Component upkeep for Multiplayer option.

COMPONENTS:
Improved accuracy for many (high level) beam and torpedo weapons ~Oleg, GLV
Medical Teams II at Med tech 1 ~Oleg
Added (tiny) Planet creator ~QB

Gosho Mladenoff suggested Devnull additions:
Sprint Missile ~Rollo and Devnull Mod, GM
Missile Pods ~Rollo and Devnull Mod, GM
Heavy Bombardment Missile ~Rollo and Devnull Mod, GM

TECH:
Raised Stellar Manipulations Tech Cost
Reduced Colonizer Tech Research ~QB
Added External Mount Missile Weapons ~GM, Rollo

VEHICALS:
Orbital Resource extraction Station

NOTES:
Many much improved item descriptions ~Deccan
Human Player Empire files for all races.
AI Player Empires files are in the Extras folder.
Orbital Resource Station will probably be just in Multiplayer
Resupply Base although unlikely, also may be moved to multiplayer
Most AI general files completed.
Some beta AI player tweaks for FQM add-on.

Gosho Mladenoff is presently testing new AIC designs that may be ready for the next release. Other players are contributing new Components and Facility designs. We will hold off on the AI design and research tweaks until the new designs are finished and tested.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AIC v4.11 complete with FQM add-on = 4.67 MB
AIC v4.11 upgrade files with FQM add-on = 1.25 MB

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

((> ALL AIC DOWNLOADS <)) (http://www.johnlsullivan.net)

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

[ November 22, 2003, 04:53: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 02:11 AM

AIC v4.11 Notes:

What is supplied with the initial AIC v4.11 download, is a lite image folder that consists of about a dozen FQM nebula images, Nova and black hole.
A separate optional add-on download for the complete 70+meg FQM images will be available for download at the AI Campaign web site next week.
This will be an automatic AIC install.
FQM included will be:
All 34 nebulas
All 4 novas
Black hole 3
Starmap optional

- - -

New Devnull Missile Systems and the new AIC Orbital Resource extraction Station will need to be tested and tweaked to the players liking.

[ November 22, 2003, 00:25: Message edited by: JLS ]

deccan

November 22nd, 2003, 05:13 AM

Originally posted by JLS:
Gosho Mladenoff suggested Devnull additions:
Sprint Missile ~Rollo and Devnull Mod, GM
Missile Pods ~Rollo and Devnull Mod, GM
Heavy Bombardment Missile ~Rollo and Devnull Mod, GMYahoo! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 05:40 AM

GM did a real nice job with the initial Missile set.

Some how I messed up the initial upload of the Bombardment Missile, there is a 52k Component upgrade file at the site below.

This file will NOT break a v4.11 saved game; this file will be constantly updated as tweaks and other items are added. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

((> AIC 4.11a Missiles <)) (http://www.johnlsullivan.net)

JLS

[ November 22, 2003, 06:33: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 22nd, 2003, 09:13 AM

Thanks !!!
FQM-sparse is a joy ! So many asteroids, so loittle time http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I think Drushoka is in big trouble however - moons with atmospheres kills the advantage of atmosp-none. Restricted planetary expl finishes them off http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Fyron

November 22nd, 2003, 09:15 AM

Some beta AI player tweaks for FQM add-on.Such as?

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 09:42 AM

Originally posted by oleg:
Thanks !!!
FQM-sparse is a joy ! So many asteroids, so loittle time http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I think Drushoka is in big trouble however - moons with atmospheres kills the advantage of atmosp-none. Restricted planetary expl finishes them off http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Yes, in FQM Drushoska is at a disadvantage, GOOD http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif they have seen their share of large empires with the upper maps.

I will have a few replacement AI players in the near future http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 22, 2003, 07:43: Message edited by: JLS ]

Taera

November 22nd, 2003, 11:14 AM

Take a closer look at the anger file. This one, i believe, is fairly expansive to allow different types of races.

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 04:33 PM

All towed Missiles have a structure with less then 10kt as not to be an armored distraction from actual in-ship damage http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

The bombardment missile was released as a towed Missile with a tonnage of 20kt and the Missile Pods has a 10kt Tonnage and use none of the Ships supply.

((> AIC 4.11a Missiles <)) (http://www.johnlsullivan.net)

If it is desired to raise the Bombardment missile to 100kt tonnage with less restrictions. However, I was under the impression there was a heavy Missiles still in the works, GM http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
- - - -

I wonder if perhaps light missile damage resistance isn't a bit low for its class ?
comments?
Perhaps, I figured we would take some baby steps with the overall Missile package.

[ November 22, 2003, 16:23: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 22nd, 2003, 05:20 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
...I wonder if perhaps light missile damage resistance isn't a bit low for its class ?
comments?
Perhaps, I figured we would take some baby steps with the overall Missile package. [/QUOTE]

I really would like to see higher seeker damage resistance for rhese one-shot missile. Otherwise they are useless, especially in strategic combat - AI is hopeless http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Two-per ship limits the abuse of bombardment missiles anyway.

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 05:26 PM

Originally posted by Taera:
Take a closer look at the anger file. This one, i believe, is fairly expansive to allow different types of races. Agreed, Taera.
I must admit, I have been tempted to increase the Per Attack Location to 2 and a few Psychos too 3.
The Psychos in AIC are currently 2. However, if we set the other races too 2; this may tend to draw them into conflicts with the other AI Players early, and then loose some focus on the Human Players http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

= = =
Other then:
Per Attack Location, Per No Treaty Ship, Per Ally, Per Enemy Ship.
Minimum Anger, Regular Decrease, Mega Evil Empire.
Intelligence Against Us and
the 6 Combat with the player results.

The remaining anger values are primarily message driven.

REFERENCE
se4 AI anger file

<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">
Per Attack Location := 2
Per No Treaty Ship := 0
Per Ally Ship := 0
Per Enemy Ship := 0
.
Minimum Anger := 0
Regular Decrease := -3
Mega Evil Empire := 50
.
Combat Attacking Won := 3
Combat Attacking Lost := 10
Combat Attacking Stalemate := 0
Combat Defending Won := 3
Combat Defending Lost := 15
Combat Defending Stalemate := 0
.
Intelligence Against Us := 5
.
Receive General Message := 0
Receive Propose Treaty := 0
Receive Accept Treaty := -3
Receive Refuse Treaty := 10
Receive Offer Counter Treaty Proposal := 0
Receive Break Treaty := 10
Receive Declare War := 20
Receive Propose Trade := 0
Receive Accept Trade := 0
Receive Refuse Trade := 5
Receive Offer Counter Trade Proposal := 0
Receive Give Gift := -3
Receive Accept Gift := 0
Receive Refuse Gift := 5
Receive Offer Tribute := -3
Receive Accept Tribute := 0
Receive Refuse Tribute := 5
Receive Want a gift := 10
Receive Want a tribute := 10
Receive Demand your surrender := 20
Receive Remove your ships from system := 5
Receive Remove your colonies from system := 5
Receive Leave planet := 5
Receive Stop hostile actions against empire := 5
Receive Break treaty with empire := 5
Receive Declare war on empire := 0
Receive Make peace with empire := 0
Receive Support us against another empire := 0
Receive Attack empire in system := 0
Receive Attack planet := 0
Receive Stop espionage activities := 0
Receive Stop sabotage activities := 0
Receive Stop attacks in system := 0
Receive Surrender := 10
Receive Grant independence to colony := -5
Receive Demand / Request / Warn := 0
Receive Accept Demand/Request := -5
Receive Refuse Demand/Request := 5
</pre><hr /></blockquote>

[ November 22, 2003, 17:26: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 05:54 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
I really would like to see higher seeker damage resistance for rhese one-shot missile. Otherwise they are useless, especially in strategic combat - AI is hopeless http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Two-per ship limits the abuse of bombardment missiles anyway. PvK�s Proportions original Light Missile System Design.
A Light missile system designed to maximize rate of fire.
Weapon Seeker Dmg Res := 3, 4, 5, 5, 6

AIC pre v4.11 Light Missile System
Weapon Seeker Dmg Res := 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

AIC v4.11
Missile Rack
Light Missile system designed to maximize rate of fire.
Weapon Seeker Dmg Res := 2, 2, 3, 3, 3,

The current Missile package values are presented with the consideration to the advent of the new Sprint and other Missiles. In addition, it may be wise to err in caution.
After some in-game saturation tests we will rework the numbaers http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Agreed Oleg, the Terran AI Players current design may require more Missile Racks with some new Sprint Missiles to saturate the target areas Point defense. Moreover, this will be so; when you guys have all the Missile designs tweaked for their tasks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Please consider the eventual total Missile package and how they may complement each other, and we must try not to make any one system a clear use all System, IMO.

[ November 22, 2003, 16:31: Message edited by: JLS ]

oleg

November 22nd, 2003, 06:21 PM

I am concern about heavy one-shot missiles like bombardment missiles. They MUST have strong resistance. From my experience, the first round of missile fire rarely reach target - fleets are compact, PD is not distracted by fighters or light missiles. Also, there is no guarantee whatsoever strategic AI will target ships that could be reach in the end. Most earlier misslies salvos are wasted IMHO. Heavy external missiles MUST have heavy resistance to be of any use IMHO.

Fyron

November 22nd, 2003, 06:31 PM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Some beta AI player tweaks for FQM add-on.Such as? <hr /></blockquote>You seem to have missed my question...

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 06:36 PM

Mostly very minor tweaks Fyron, nothing that really is worth highlighting.I need much more familiarity of the AIC AI�s perception of the FQM quads and then lock into some hard changes.

Alneyan

November 22nd, 2003, 06:39 PM

About apparently missed Posts: did you read the few phrases I thought of about bonuses to accuracy? You didn't reply to these suggestions, was it a mere overlook or you simply don't like these? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

A few random ideas:

"An improved firing system results in a slightly more accurate weapon." "This weapon reduced recoil when firing results in slightly more accurate attacks." For low bonuses.
"This weapon access to sensors data gives it a better accuracy than average." "Basic heat based targetting means this weapon is more likely to hit its target." For average bonuses.
"Tiny computer chips built in on this weapon makes it much more accurate." "Advanced targetting systems allow this weapon to track its target, resulting in a much improved accuracy." For the best bonuses.

Or for weapons with a rate of fire greater than one: "The delay before firing allows this weapon to be slightly/more/much more accurate than average." "The slower rate of fire allow targetting systems to calculate a slightly/more/much more precise trajectory."

Here you are. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 06:44 PM

Alneyan, I new I would not get this past you http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

I really did not want to add too much to the descriptions so I have a bogus ability set up for just this with a R-Click and just yours and deccans phrases. However, I decided to hold off until the next release, with all the Component testing next month.

[ November 22, 2003, 16:49: Message edited by: JLS ]

Alneyan

November 22nd, 2003, 06:50 PM

I see JLS. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Don't worry, I am not watching you, but merely... erh... ensuring that no post is missed. *Smirks* *Checks if the prone-to-be-discovered probe is working fine, and if the other transparent-near-impossible-to-detect probe is also working and chuckles* http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Fyron

November 22nd, 2003, 06:52 PM

It is generally a bad idea to leave vague descriptions on components and facilities... it is a very simple procedure to just open up the text files and look at the exact values anyways. Save the hassle and just tell us what they do in the descriptions! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 07:00 PM

Agreed Fyron. However, there are some Weapons with existing lengthy defined descriptions, it may be best to have the new weapon�s phrases and or comments in the Right click screen.

A matter of preference for the most part http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 22, 2003, 17:02: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

November 22nd, 2003, 07:02 PM

Well ability tags are part of the overall description I was refering too... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif That is the best place for the descriptions of abilities (as well as to hit bonuses and penalties, which should ALWAYS without fail be mentioned).

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 07:11 PM

Then we agree for the most part. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

However, I do not want to be too textbook with exact absolute discriptive equations in AIC and since this is just a number that is further modified, many feel "This newly Protyped weapon will have a slight decrease in weapons accuracy." is just as appropriate as "-2 to hit."

[ November 22, 2003, 17:15: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 07:40 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
Mostly very minor tweaks Fyron, nothing that really is worth highlighting.I need much more familiarity of the AIC AI�s perception of the FQM quads and then lock into some hard changes. I am currently playing a FQM Standard cluster no-warp to test the AI�s use of your neat Asteroids and other strategies they may initiate on there own.
(Eee warped in 6.7 years) And the AI is doing VERY WELL in no-warp with FQM http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
- - - -

After about 150 or so turns I plan on testing (actually playing) a large amount if not most the Major AI Players plus only Kithra. In a very congested FQM quad environment.
Then start tweaking the v4.11 AI from there, then repeat from the first starting save, tweak and then repeat again and pass along any and all AI file changes.

[ November 22, 2003, 18:34: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

November 22nd, 2003, 07:45 PM

However, I do not want to be too textbook with exact absolute discriptive equations in AIC and since this is just a number that is further modified, many feel "This newly Protyped weapon will have a slight decrease in weapons accuracy." is just as appropriate as "-2 to hit." Ah, but it is not as appropriate. It should definitely mention how much the penalty is. There is no reason to force players to have to look in components.txt to see what their stuff actually does.

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 07:49 PM

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

And to consider nothing will be carved in stone http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 22, 2003, 17:55: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

November 22nd, 2003, 07:56 PM

Ah, but the to hit modifiers are carved in stone. It is a hassle to have to check the data files just to see what the to hit bonuses from a weapon are.

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 08:06 PM

In respect of:

"This newly Protyped weapon will have a slight decrease in weapons accuracy." is just as appropriate as "-2 to hit." with many Players.
Fyron your preference has been made.
In addition, that this one to-hit value is only part of a total multitude of modified values, that in the end; most players may not have this known absolute executed value, in any one given situation http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Your point is of academics and is of coarse a valid point to reinforce your preference http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 22, 2003, 18:28: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 08:40 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
I am concern about heavy one-shot missiles like bombardment missiles. They MUST have strong resistance. From my experience, the first round of missile fire rarely reach target - fleets are compact, PD is not distracted by fighters or light missiles. Also, there is no guarantee whatsoever strategic AI will target ships that could be reach in the end. Most earlier misslies salvos are wasted IMHO. Heavy external missiles MUST have heavy resistance to be of any use IMHO. We are now at a starting point, as you play change some values and let us know what you decide is a fair setting http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Fyron

November 22nd, 2003, 08:40 PM

So do you or do you not plan to continue annoying people with the mod's descriptions? It has nothing to do with "academics"...

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 09:28 PM

We have not decided this yet; otherwise, it would have been released in v4.11 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I am sorry you find this annoying Fyron, the majority of players have no issues with the bullet description being descriptive as opposed too numbers. Nevertheless, true, this may be new and we need to see the final result, and as I said, it is not carved in stone http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 22, 2003, 20:22: Message edited by: JLS ]

Fyron

November 22nd, 2003, 11:03 PM

The majority of players have not said anything on this issue...

JLS

November 22nd, 2003, 11:52 PM

Oleg and QB, when playing no-warp in your opinion would you prefer to see the EEE around the 6 year mark or the 10 year mark ?

JLS

November 23rd, 2003, 02:28 AM

Components File 4.11b

This tested out well, please let me know what you think.

Raised damage resistance on Missile Racks and Bombardment Missiles.

Missile Rack
Light Missile system designed to maximize rate of fire.
Weapon Seeker Dmg Res := 3, 4, 4, 4, 5

Bombardment Missiles
From Weapon Seeker Dmg Res := 45,55,60

_ _ _ _

Additional AI Player no-warp tweaks for FQM

((> AIC 4.11b Components update (52kb) <)) (http://www.johnlsullivan.net)

[ November 23, 2003, 00:34: Message edited by: JLS ]

gosho mladenoff

November 23rd, 2003, 02:30 AM

Just a small heads up

bombarbment missile 1 has wrong weight and damage resistance of 10 and 5 should be 100 and 100.

other than that looks good.

I wonder if perhaps light missile damage resistance isn't a bit low for its class ?
comments?

ggm

QBrigid

November 23rd, 2003, 03:41 AM

Originally posted by JLS:
Oleg and QB, when playing no-warp in your opinion would you prefer to see the EEE around the 6 year mark or the 10 year mark ? Eee warping 7 - 9.9 years is good.

AI's Create Planet works good in FQM with the req of ship const=5 and SM 2 thru 4 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 23, 2003, 01:47: Message edited by: QBrigid ]

oleg

November 23rd, 2003, 07:47 AM

I think the current AI state is fine. Could be better of course, but what wan't http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Do not worry much about Missile rack damage resistance - single shot from PD of fighter stacks will wipe out the whole stack regardless of the changes. It is a moot point IMHO. Misslie pods is another thing. I would like bigger value for them. May be +15.

JLS

November 23rd, 2003, 11:58 AM

I think the current AI state is fine. Could be better of course, but what wan't
QB, Eee with three Planets and well prepared, warps in about 5-7 Years at AI bonus low http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

When the new weapons are finished, we will add the research and the new designs to some of the AI along with a few PD Escorts and more PD on the large slower ships. Along with a tweaked design file, for all http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
- - - -

Do not worry much about Missile rack damage resistance - single shot from PD of fighter stacks will wipe out the whole stack regardless of the changes. It is a moot point IMHO. Misslie pods is another thing. I would like bigger value for them. May be +15.
Fighter vs. Missile is not a bad thing for the Players with Planet defense and will ensure the Players will have to escort their Fleets with Carrier Interceptors in that strategy. However, the AI may not always have a carrier when it is abroad.

[ November 23, 2003, 10:01: Message edited by: JLS ]

pathfinder

November 23rd, 2003, 04:25 PM

Oh oh...new AI designcreations? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

oleg

November 25th, 2003, 02:49 AM

I do not like AI' planet creators. Right now it builds only medium-sized planets. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif I played non-conected FQM-sparse game for 300+ turns and AI converted all those nice asteroid belts with Huge and large asteroiuds into boring medium size planets http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Yes, I understand it was done to balance AI which would overwise have a big advantage but still... May be let AI have large planet builder but make it longer to research ??

JLS

November 25th, 2003, 04:26 PM

As a start, the AI Planet Creators was released with the Large and Huge=OFF for fear the AI will mount to great of an early Planet lead over the Human Players. Sunday mourning a few more Players added input to FQM asteroids balance with no-warp and we decided to go with the large and huge appearance as presented in the AIC v4.11b for the time being.

In no-warp games the AI will need ship construction 5 along with stellar manipulation 3 Large and 4 for Huge Asteroid to planet.

= = = = = = = = = = =
Components File 4.11b

Raised damage resistance on Missile Racks and Bombardment Missiles.

Missile Rack
Light Missile system designed to maximize rate of fire.
Weapon Seeker Dmg Res := 3, 4, 4, 4, 5

Bombardment Missiles
From Weapon Seeker Dmg Res := 45,55,60
_ _ _ _

Additional AI Player no-warp tweaks for FQM

((> AIC 4.11b Components update (52kb) 11-22-2003 <)) (http://www.johnlsullivan.net)

[ November 25, 2003, 16:07: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

November 25th, 2003, 06:36 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
I do not like AI' planet creators. Right now it builds only medium-sized planets. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif I played non-conected FQM-sparse game for 300+ turns and AI converted all those nice asteroid belts with Huge and large asteroiuds into boring medium size planets http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Yes, I understand it was done to balance AI which would overwise have a big advantage but still... May be let AI have large planet builder but make it longer to research ?? Agreed Oleg, past AIC releases the AI Players did have early access to larger Planet Creators. With the amount of Asteroids in FQM, we divided the appearance, but I am all for increasing the AI ability in this area if the players feel ok about this http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

oleg

December 1st, 2003, 01:26 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
Oleg and QB, when playing no-warp in your opinion would you prefer to see the EEE around the 6 year mark or the 10 year mark ? In one game against low-bonus AIs, Eee opened a warp point to my system at the year 5.3 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif
And catched me completely unprepared http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

JLS

December 1st, 2003, 07:05 PM

Wow http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif
Oleg do you recall how many Planets the Eee had in its Home System, it loves to build research Colonies http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

oleg

December 2nd, 2003, 01:09 PM

Only two. But it does not need many since low bonus gives 2X research. It is of course quite rare to have Eee next system. But even if it is far away, such earlier WP opening slow down the game considarably and it is essential, IMHO, to have first ~100 turns to proceed as fast as possible in non-conected games (I have a low level of patience http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif )

pathfinder

December 14th, 2003, 06:18 PM

I have an intersting no warp point 4.11 game going atm. an "event" opened a warp point in a colony system of mine and lo and behold but either the Phong or Jeanar (sp) have opened many wp. I do know the Phong are busy building planets.

PsychoTechFreak

December 14th, 2003, 11:14 PM

Why do you restrict remote miners to 3 per vehicle? Isn't it punishment enough already to get material from 1 ship per sector? *hmpf* , why did I research for battle station...

FQM, excellent ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Now I would like to somehow get USM integrated. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Imperial

December 15th, 2003, 05:27 PM

Was organic miners for ships left out intentionally?--just curious cause i can build the mineral and rad ones for ships.

Fyron

December 15th, 2003, 07:14 PM

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:
Now I would like to somehow get USM integrated. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Simple. Copy Formations.txt and DefaultStrategies.txt from USM into your AIC folder, and it is integrated. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

JLS

December 16th, 2003, 11:47 PM

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:
Why do you restrict remote miners to 3 per vehicle? Isn't it punishment enough already to get material from 1 ship per sector? *hmpf* , why did I research for battle station...

FQM, excellent ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

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

PTF, we need to look at this a bit more, the AI may not be able to keep up with our remote mining; if we can have the early jump http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

However you may find the Resource Station profitable, this is granted at Industry level 3.

[ December 16, 2003, 21:53: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

December 16th, 2003, 11:52 PM

Originally posted by Imperial:
Was organic miners for ships left out intentionally?--just curious cause i can build the mineral and rad ones for ships. Yes Imperial, organic mining components have been excluded from ships and bases. However, you have the Habitat Domes for satellites and the Resource Station has some intrinsic Organic collection

Fyron

December 17th, 2003, 12:55 AM

JLS is back! Check your email and PMs. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

pathfinder

December 19th, 2003, 04:01 AM

Oy! The Phong and Jraenar (sp) are certainly using both stellar manipulation and some devious ship design. Large transports being used as both ship repair AND "jeep" carriers.....waaaa!

and those (*&^% Phong love to throw 1000 troops into ground combat (per transport) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

oleg

December 19th, 2003, 04:28 AM

Wrong http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif It is medium AI transports with 100+ fighters and repair bays. I shudder to think what they do do me with large transports http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

AI in AIC has few cards in the sleeve !

Makinus

December 19th, 2003, 12:11 PM

I know that AIC is optimized for Finite Resources, but the AI degrades too much without Finite Resources?

oleg

December 20th, 2003, 02:15 AM

Originally posted by Makinus:
I know that AIC is optimized for Finite Resources, but the AI degrades too much without Finite Resources? No. It works even better. JLS tweaked AI facilities to produce some resourses even after planet was mined out. In normal game it is an extra source of resources for AI which is independend from planet value. It greatly improves AI in all game setupa since it no longer build mineral miners on 1% mineral planet http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

PsychoTechFreak

December 28th, 2003, 07:37 PM

What about the (immense) minesweeping ability of AI ship hulls?
Defending minefields don't make sense against AI fleets anymore. And if I need a good minesweeper, should I just capture an AI transporter http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif ? Did you change anything to the ship designs, like removed minesweepers, don't use mine layers etc. ?

JLS

January 13th, 2004, 11:22 AM

The AI in AI Campaign; always handled Mine Fields very well, the direction we have been seeking is to make the AI ships displacement size less as effective compared with past AIC releases and adding many more Mine Sweepers to most of the AI fleets. In this way we can limit the Psycho AI�s violent expansions in the early game with little to no effect in the Psychos mid and late game; as they will now be at a disadvantage building far less sweepers, but will build a a few more replacement war ships http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Furthermore, after several decades of game play minefields are just an annoyance for all the AIC AI's, and the only sure defensive wall; as it would against a good Human opponent (is a comprehensive combined warp point defense with Sats, Fleets, Fighter and Drone Carriers, Bases etcetera. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Yes, good point PTF. ALL future AI designs will have the AI minesweepers vulnerable to boarding attacks... You will have this in the next update http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ January 13, 2004, 11:16: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

January 13th, 2004, 11:54 AM

Originally posted by Makinus:
I know that AIC is optimized for Finite Resources, but the AI degrades too much without Finite Resources? You will find that the AI in AIC plays a very strong Finite game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

The AI does have a planed degradation, but this should be expected around 600 turns, and then it will start to decline. However, many of the AI leaders will have enough resources to continue well beyond 1000 turns. In addition, the AI finite degradation is programmable in AI Campaign; so if you desire more or less in the way of game length, please let me know and we will make adjustments.

PTF and I found after 500 turns to be the best setting. However, this was March 2002 and there has been a lot of additions and changes since then. GLV is AI Campaigns strongest Finite Proponent, his latest opinion is that the AI is Solid in all Finite game variations except (ONLY SAME TYPE starts), but then again this start may yield little for the Human Players as well http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

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

[ January 13, 2004, 11:13: Message edited by: JLS ]

Grand Lord Vito

January 16th, 2004, 10:30 PM

Actually your AI plays GREAT in all types of games and AI Campaign is the only MOD that the AI does not self destruct in when playing finite http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Grand Lord Vito

January 16th, 2004, 10:34 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Imperial:
Was organic miners for ships left out intentionally?--just curious cause i can build the mineral and rad ones for ships. Yes Imperial, organic mining components have been excluded from ships and bases. However, you have the Habitat Domes for satellites and the Resource Station has some intrinsic Organic collection <hr /></blockquote>That resource Station is great, I thought it was impossible to have multi resource type extraction at the same location (((SWEET)))

Profitable to http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

JLS

January 21st, 2004, 03:54 PM

Thanks GLV, the Resource Station is a fine tool, and may be very useful in Finite games and most FQM games. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

- - - -

I will structure the AI minesweeping with the delay of there capability in the research files and reduce the High displacement hull types to have less mine defenses; in this way AI strays may be easily picked off and there pop supply lines may be mined with greater success.

However, I will not remove the ability all together from the hulls; as to prevent the Human Players launching an immediate 100 mines from a planet and thereby destroying the AI�s LARGE invasion fleet and its thousands of troops and hundreds of fighters that took the AI many months to muster.
If the savvy Human Players can defeat this strategy the AI also must have this guaranteed ability http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ January 21, 2004, 14:06: Message edited by: JLS ]

PsychoTechFreak

January 21st, 2004, 09:49 PM

I think it is all right as long as mines are not completely useless against AI, I mean a 100 mines (if it is restricted to that number) swept by 2 large AI transporters could be kinda overpowered and annoying.

I have got another issue now, I am not sure how the AIC community thinks about it, let's discuss...

Personally, I do not like restrictions to players at all, especially for ship designs. I mean, it is ok if it is for roleplaying matters to restrict yourself not to build things like organic armor ram ships, massive remote mining battle stations and whatnot, but I think it could be better to do this on a voluntary basis.I always remove all restrictions to numbers of components (which is almost every component), otherwise I would never build a remote mining station with only 3 miners, or a resource station - as far as I have seen it even has got a restriction to one per unit, it is just a waste in space, so I never build any of them.

EDIT: I have stopped my Last game just because of the annoying restrictions. It has been something like: I need resources, so the research goes for miners III and then battle stations - and crap, restricted to 3 per unit. Next, I have to defend against a mighty neighbor, tried 100 minefields , useless: a 20 ship fleet just sweeps everything without even a damage although they do not carry any minesweepers (a look into the AI hull designs opened my eyes). Next idea: I could defend the WPs with organic ram ships, NOTHING, again RESTRICTIONS, RESTRICTIONS and RESTRICTIONS to RESTRICTIONS. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

[ January 21, 2004, 21:00: Message edited by: PsychoTechFreak ]

oleg

January 21st, 2004, 11:17 PM

I always thought the whole mine system in SEIV is rather silly and I am perfectly happy this exploit does not work against AIC AIs at all. Good ridance, just MHO.

Paul1980au

January 22nd, 2004, 04:27 AM

You know you can always create new ship classes in the mod section - a few mods exist with new ship types etc. However i would like to see more flexibility in the ship designs aspects. A improved AI would be need - my suggestions for smart mines (with limited movement), cloaking mines (cloaking capacity) and dumb mines of course standard run of the mill mines.

Any constructive suggestions for possible patch improvements to the mines structure for the v 1.85 eare welcome.

Grand Lord Vito

January 22nd, 2004, 03:43 PM

Originally posted by oleg:
I always thought the whole mine system in SEIV is rather silly and I am perfectly happy this exploit does not work against AIC AIs at all. Good ridance, just MHO. I agree with Oleg, the AI in se4 never dealt with mines as far as I am concerned getting rid of mines all together is fine by me if no one likes your compromise JLS.

In multiplier or solitaire games, with se4 and most MODS against an inexperienced Player or any AI, I do not even need to worry about Weapon Platforms, troops or any Planet defense just Mines.

When the AI comes around I launch 100 Mines over the Planet and the entire AI fleet is Dead http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

This is one more reason why I like AIC. The AI still gets backed up and takes losses the first 100 turns or so and then he gets better and better at Mines by turn 200 most AI Fleets are untouchable with mines.

Also the Human Players gets to play with mine fields basically just like se4 wanted it and the AI is not at a total loss. So when Playing Multplayer with an AI and one Human Player can not take advantage of the AI in AIC and the other 2 Human are fighting it out.

Actually in multiplayer I would rather be next to a Human Player then any of the AIC VIOLENT RACES.

[ January 22, 2004, 15:40: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

January 22nd, 2004, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:

EDIT: I have stopped my Last game just because of the annoying restrictions. It has been something like: I need resources, so the research goes for miners III and then battle stations - and crap, restricted to 3 per unit. Next, I have to defend against a mighty neighbor, tried 100 minefields , useless: a 20 ship fleet just sweeps everything without even a damage although they do not carry any minesweepers . When I play against Human Players I never relly on Minefeilds but PTF you think it is OK against the AI?

Lets look at the AIC Numbers.

IN AIC just 20 Scouts, Escorts, Frigates, or Destroyers in any Combination with each other would NOT break thru a minefield and ALL would be LOST by that AI including any troops or units.

A Fleet of 20 Destroyers would break thru with heavy damage but a fleet of only 19 Destroyers would all be LOST. The AI allways fleets an assortment of ships so it would be rare to see (if ever) just 20 destroyers in a fleet before Carriers are out and with the fleet in AIC.

Do you have any Idea how much the average AI has in destroyers by turn 100 PTF. In a no or just a Low bonus (about 20 if that) less to NONE in most NO bonus games and can you imagine the position that AI was in when it would lose 20 ship in any mod?

Only the Pshyco and berserk AI race in AIC will come back and try it again, and thats when I go for them, and if it is early enough that they do not have the count to stop me.

But hey, this is just me, when I started the game and I new I was near a Violent race and I knew I was going to have my hands full and that’s the kind of game I like. But if I started next to Ulkra or the Eee even Sallaga, then it would be an easier game unless I ticked the friendly AIC race off.
If you do not wan't an early hard fought game then restart the game if you are near a violent race. Other wise you will need more then 100 mines to stop the Violent AI's that will continue to try to smash thru.

If you where against me you would need more then a minefeild to hide behind http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ January 22, 2004, 15:44: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

Grand Lord Vito

January 22nd, 2004, 04:55 PM

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:
I have got another issue now, I am not sure how the AIC community thinks about it, let's discuss...

Personally, I do not like restrictions to players at all, especially for ship designs. I mean, it is ok if it is for roleplaying matters to restrict yourself not to build things like organic armor ram ships, massive remote mining battle stations and whatnot, but I think it could be better to do this on a voluntary basis.I always remove all restrictions to numbers of components (which is almost every component), otherwise I would never build a remote mining station with only 3 miners, or a resource station - as far as I have seen it even has got a restriction to one per unit, it is just a waste in space, so I never build any of them.

Next idea: I could defend the WPs with organic ram ships, NOTHING, again RESTRICTIONS, RESTRICTIONS and RESTRICTIONS to RESTRICTIONS. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif How much mining would you want PTF, you know the AI cant keep up, do you want a BASE or a SHIP to robo-mine 10000 resources well thats more then trade with any player, heck that is more then most planets can produce.

RESTRICTIONS
JLS lets start the game at Cruisers I think scouts are to restrictive.

Reduce warhead size and have 20 of them so I can take out Baseships with one tiny scout, instead just damaging them as it is now with with my one Temporal Ram scout.

I like the Resource Station, it is a first. But really, why give them only this at the most per STATION?

1800 Minerals
1800 RADS
300 Orgainics
More depending on the Planets percentage.

Per turn from one BASE and this includes auto refuiling in most systems .

I think you should raise this to 3000 even 10000 for all resources per turn per base, what would this do to a se4 game?

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

[ January 22, 2004, 15:30: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

JLS

January 22nd, 2004, 09:17 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:

How much mining would you want PTF, you know the AI cant keep up, do you want a BASE or a SHIP to robo-mine 10000 resources well thats more then trade with any player, heck that is more then most planets can produce.

RESTRICTIONS
JLS lets start the game at Cruisers I think scouts are to restrictive.

Reduce warhead size and have 20 of them so I can take out Baseships with one tiny scout, instead just damaging them as it is now with with my one Temporal Ram scout.

I like the Resource Station, it is a first. But really, why give them only this at the most per STATION?

1800 Minerals
1800 RADS
300 Orgainics
More depending on the Planets percentage.

Per turn from one BASE and this includes auto refuiling in most systems .

I think you should raise this to 3000 even 10000 for all resources per turn per base, what would this do to a se4 game?

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif (1)~ If you start at Medium Tech Start you will be close to what you desire GLV, please remember the AI will also be at a Medium Tech Start (However AI is slightly limited at onset)

(2) Your point is made with the Cobalt Warheads on Ram Ships GLV, however there are currently (NO) load restrictions and the values are basicly the same as stock se4.
With the addition of an option not a restriction http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

(3)~ I feel PTF is correct here, the intrinsic minerals, Rads and could be raised on the AIC Resource Station (a little) and this will play well with Fyrons FQM maps and should not have such a large impact on the General and AIC maps.

= = =

In general what I think would happen to se4 and any MOD with to much in the way of Robo-Minning.
Force other Human Players in a Multi-Player game to match a MINNING strategy; especially in a map with many asteroids and moons. With all this Micro-management required it may make a PBM game undesirable for many and a LAN game impossible to play in the latter game.
In a game with and against the AI, we know the AI can not build Robo-Miners as per se4 constraints and this will lead to the ability to yield large fleets and overpower the AI and change the balance of a Multiplayer game dramatically.

- - -
With a modest amount resource extraction to be decided by the Players, we would like to see the classic asteroid system with the classic maps, an advantage to have; but not a game winning advantage.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ January 22, 2004, 19:24: Message edited by: JLS ]

PsychoTechFreak

January 22nd, 2004, 09:17 PM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:
When I play against Human Players I never relly on Minefeilds but PTF you think it is OK against the AI? Well, if you think using technology is cheating against AI, it can be checked off by game setup (research area). Similar to trade exploits, I do never trade with AI. Mines could be changed to be less destructive also - something like 50 maybe. Or PDF cannons could get some minesweeping ability - like in devnull. I think, if minefields are useless against AI hulls anyway, why bother to research and build them? Why not restrict the according research area at all in this case?

Component restrictions are removed altogether even to engines - especially with QNP, I like to be free to design whatever I like. Organic races should be able to create organic ships, a dreadnought with 3 org. armor components is ...
just not my game.

[ January 22, 2004, 19:21: Message edited by: PsychoTechFreak ]

Fyron

January 22nd, 2004, 10:02 PM

I like the Resource Station, it is a first.Thats not true. I do not recall which mod it was, but I have seen robo miner ships and stations in at least one mod a few years back...

JLS

January 22nd, 2004, 10:02 PM

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:

Well, if you think using technology is cheating against AI, it can be checked off by game setup (research area). Similar to trade exploits, I do never trade with AI.
Mines could be changed to be less destructive also - something like 50 maybe.
Good point PTF,
Shutting off mines tech is the way to go in Solitaire, if one does not want Mines. However, in a Multiplayer game some players may not want it off.

- - -

Or PDF cannons could get some minesweeping ability - like in devnull.
Devnul is a awesome mod and sure that is an option, but the se4 Classic Mine strategy is not there for Humans versus Human Players. In addition when Devnuls Point Defence at 5 Mines sweeped it is actually almost doubled that of the AIC fixed AI Destroyer Hull MS capabilities of only 3. Now if we load several Devnul Pds that has no LOAD restriction to the AI design they can outsweep almost any AIC AI Hull.

AIC still attempts to preserve the se4 classic Minefield feel with out totally exploiting the AI.

- - -

Component restrictions are removed altogether even to engines - especially with QNP, I like to be free to design whatever I like. Organic races should be able to create organic ships, a dreadnought with 3 org. armor components is ...
Actually you can put 5 Organic armors on any ship not 3, but I see your point.

I placed the restrictions to see how the new 1.84 se update could be utilized. Many like the Armor restrictions since AIC sports many Armour Configurations, but to be Honest with you, I also do not like this restriction and it is gone from Ships and Bases http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

- - -

I think, if minefields are useless against AI hulls anyway, why bother to research and build them? Why not restrict the according research area at all in this case?
To be honest PTF, mine fields are also almost useless against many experienced Human se4 Players as well, would you not agree? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ January 22, 2004, 20:20: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

January 22nd, 2004, 10:58 PM

Originally posted by Paul1980au:

You know you can always create new ship classes in the mod section - a few mods exist with new ship types etc. However i would like to see more flexibility in the ship designs aspects.
What new ships designs would you suggest for AIC?

A improved AI would be need - my suggestions for smart mines (with limited movement), cloaking mines (cloaking capacity) and dumb mines of course standard run of the mill mines.
You have an interesting concept here. The main problem as it is now, is that many concepts may not work with the AI.

For example Anti-Engine Mines.

The AI would be crippled not destroyed and stuck at that location (no more engines), yet costing large amounts of support resources and the AI is none the wiser http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Further example: In se4 the AI calls its designs to be built by :
Planet Per Item (PPI) and Must Have At Least� Please see reference.

In this example the AI has 5 Dreadnoughts even worse 2 Colony ships as well; disabled by anti-engine mines and unable to fulfill it missions. However the AI sees this and sure it wants them repaired, but it can not get it to return to a Repair Yard. However when the AI Construction File looks at the [Must Have At Least numbers] it has the 5 Dreadnoughts and 2 Colony ships and will not fulfill any Must Have At Least orders because the ships exist.

Please remember, this AI is paying resources for the 5 Dreadnoughts and in stock se4 where only the Best and/or Largest ships is built; this may halt a majority of that Ship Types Construction.
It will certainly slow or even Halt Colony Ship Production�

The AI Ship with disabled engines is a sad sight to see http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
A designer must consider the PPI also when designing there AI race , however, not to the point where it will break the bank in the late mid to end game
(A planet may have many slots in se4, however many also only have one slot for that AI Minning Facility to support those large Capital Ships) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Any constructive suggestions for possible patch improvements to the mines structure for the v 1.85 eare welcome. SJ is working on a MOD that may have an alternative to the way Mines are currently handled and I look forward to his work.

Other then that I would like to see the Minefeilds only be placed at Warp points as to represent an area that is funneled and congested so the mine hit will make sence (to me anyway), not in open space or a few in a planets vast orbit.

= = = = = = = = =
Reference

se4 Default_AI_Construction_Vehicles

Entry X Must Have At Least:
Must have this many of this type in existance, or being built.
If not, then build more.
This comes before Planet Per Item.

AI State := Infrastructure
Num Queue Entries := 39
Entry 1 Type := Defense Base
Entry 1 Planet Per Item := 100
Entry 1 Must Have At Least := 0
Entry 2 Type := Attack Ship
Entry 2 Planet Per Item := 20
Entry 2 Must Have At Least := 2
Entry 3 Type := Colonizer
Entry 3 Planet Per Item := 80
Entry 3 Must Have At Least := 1
Entry 4 Type := Weapon Platform
Entry 4 Planet Per Item := "
Entry 4 Must Have At Least := "

[ January 22, 2004, 21:25: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

January 23rd, 2004, 12:21 AM

Originally posted by PsychoTechFreak:

I think it is all right as long as mines are not completely useless against AI,
Agreed PTF, we will keep at it to make it better http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

- - -

I mean a 100 mines (if it is restricted to that number) swept by 2 large AI transporters could be kinda overpowered and annoying.
100 mines in a sector is the default with AIC as it is in se4, a larger setting is possible.
However the AI has a daunting task constructing and placing 100 mines per field, can you imagine the AI needing to double that effort http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Yes the Human Player can load Mine Sweeper Components in total on Medium Transports, do you recommend this be restricted?

- - -

I have got another issue now, I am not sure how the AIC community thinks about it, let's discuss...

Personally, I do not like restrictions to players at all, especially for ship designs. I mean, it is ok if it is for roleplaying matters to restrict yourself not to build things like organic armor ram ships, massive remote mining battle stations and whatnot, but I think it could be better to do this on a voluntary basis.I always remove all restrictions to numbers of components (which is almost every component), otherwise I would never build a remote mining station with only 3 miners, or a resource station - as far as I have seen it even has got a restriction to one per unit, it is just a waste in space, so I never build any of them.
Thank you for the presented issues, the best way to handle Restrictions would be a one by one basis.

Ram Ship Cobalt Warheads are not restricted in AIC and you also have the ability that is restricted in se4 lifted so in AIC you may load them in total on Transports, for a neat Horatio Nelson fire ship.

Organic Armour is at 5 max, this was all discussed many months ago about restricting armor. Moreover, I am also partial to lifting the armor restriction as well. However, other players were adament about this issue as it applies to haveing restrictions on armor.

The AI is not overly effected even by its current designs by any changes with armor restrictions; so sure we have total freedom here.
However, this may yield advantages to other race types. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
Many felt that the Organics have the armor avantage at 5, plus combine this with other PvK v4.11 armors. Then the advantage is followed by the Crysteline...

The removal of the Armor restrictions will only play into the Temporals and Cryseline favor; races with early armor skiping weapons and further distence Psychic and other race advantages http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

In jest "I have tons of armor on my ships and your investment is worthless to my weapons" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif
However their claims may be just nitpicking?

Remote Mining should be modest in nature.
However, what would you recommend for possible per turn ship/base gross robo-minning net numbers with a 100% planet value?

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

[ January 22, 2004, 23:19: Message edited by: JLS ]

JLS

January 23rd, 2004, 12:25 AM

Originally posted by oleg:
I always thought the whole mine system in SEIV is rather silly and I am perfectly happy this exploit does not work against AIC AIs at all. Good ridance, just MHO. Agreed

JLS

January 23rd, 2004, 01:43 AM

Originally posted by Grand Lord Vito:

I agree with Oleg, the AI in se4 never dealt with mines as far as I am concerned getting rid of mines all together is fine by me if no one likes your compromise JLS.
As PTF points out, you will have the option to turn off the mine tech and this works for me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

- - -

In multiplier or solitaire games, with se4 and most MODS against an inexperienced Player or any AI, I do not even need to worry about Weapon Platforms, troops or any Planet defense just Mines.

When the AI comes around I launch 100 Mines over the Planet and the entire AI fleet is Dead http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
Agreed, this is a great defense early in AIC because the AI will need more then 18 destroyers or a few carriers to blow thru one hundred mines.

It is unlikely 50 scouts or escorts even 30 or 40 Frigate can get thru a 100 minefield early in your AIC game.

Either way, any number of AI ships will sure tune up your minefield http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Also to note: The AI has several standard minesweeper designs of its own and it know how to use them (at warp points) not as good over your planet...

However, once the AI fleets Fighter Carriers the chances are greatly increase the AI will penetrate a 100 Minefield http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

- - -

This is one more reason why I like AIC. The AI still gets backed up and takes losses the first 100 turns or so and then he gets better and better at Mines by turn 200 most AI Fleets are untouchable with mines.

Also the Human Players gets to play with mine fields basically just like se4 wanted it and the AI is not at a total loss. So when Playing Multplayer with an AI and one Human Player can not take advantage of the AI in AIC and the other 2 Human are fighting it out.
Remember the Higher the AI Bonus the faster it will reach CV techs

- - -

Actually in multiplayer I would rather be next to a Human Player then any of the AIC VIOLENT RACES. Absolutely, I also would prefer starting adjacent to a Human Player then a Medium to High Bonused (Psycho or Berserker) AIC AI major Player.
Even if we have OS* and MP* starting trait Options in play for that game.

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

[ January 22, 2004, 23:54: Message edited by: JLS ]

Grand Lord Vito

January 23rd, 2004, 10:51 PM

Originally posted by JLS:
Thank you for the presented issues, the best way to handle Restrictions would be a one by one basis.

Ram Ship Cobalt Warheads are not restricted in AIC and you also have the ability that is restricted in se4 lifted so in AIC you may load them in total on Transports, for a neat Horatio Nelson fire ship.

Organic Armour is at 5 max, this was all discussed many months ago about restricting armor. Moreover, I am also partial to lifting the armor restriction as well. However, other players were adament about this issue as it applies to haveing restrictions on armor.

The AI is not overly effected even by its current designs by any changes with armor restrictions; so sure we have total freedom here.
However, this may yield advantages to other race types. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
Many felt that the Organics have the armor avantage at 5, plus combine this with other PvK v4.11 armors. Then the advantage is followed by the Crysteline...

The removal of the Armor restrictions will only play into the Temporals and Cryseline favor; races with early armor skiping weapons and further distence Psychic and other race advantages http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

In jest "I have tons of armor on my ships and your investment is worthless to my weapons" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif
However their claims may be just nitpicking?

Remote Mining should be modest in nature.
However, what would you recommend for possible per turn ship/base gross robo-minning net numbers with a 100% planet value?

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif 100 minefeilds are perfect

Minesweepers on transport are fine I see no reason to restrict this.

I am all for the removal of armor restrictions but then again I am a Temporal Race and this will be to my advantage. Plus the guys I play LAN games against, would like the edge they have with Organics. Besides with Component add numbers you are using se4 v1.84 update to its fullest.

You also may want to take a look at Cobalt Warheads, this may lead to exploits and restrict them somewhat.

Remote mining is good where it is IMO and AIC is designed for a more manageable ship count, raising the mining abilities will upset this and dig into LAN games.

[ January 23, 2004, 20:58: Message edited by: Grand Lord Vito ]

PsychoTechFreak

January 24th, 2004, 07:53 AM

100 mines in a sector is the default with AIC as it is in se4, a larger setting is possible.
However the AI has a daunting task constructing and placing 100 mines per field, can you imagine the AI needing to double that effort [[Wink]]

Yes the Human Player can load Mine Sweeper Components in total on Medium Transports, do you recommend this be restricted? No restrictions to the number of components, IMO. If you think a component is overpowered, just change it to a bigger size or more expensive.
Devnull has got 500 mines per sector; it is always a matter of balancing minesweeping ability and size of minefields. I do not use it often, it is just a kind of Last resort sometimes in the early game.

Remote mining is good where it is IMO and AIC is designed for a more manageable ship count, raising the mining abilities will upset this and dig into LAN games. You don't play finite resources, do you?