View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0023947 | AI War 2 | Balance Issue | Oct 11, 2020 1:52 pm | Oct 13, 2020 3:40 pm | |
| Reporter | Arides | Assigned To | Chris_McElligottPark | ||
| Status | resolved | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Product Version | 2.608 MP Deduplication And Bugfixes | ||||
| Fixed in Version | 2.611 AI Defensive Huddle | ||||
| Summary | 0023947: Killing a player forward base leads to immediate deep strike & reserve deployment | ||||
| Description | When in combat far away (but not in deep strike range), the AI sometimes kills the forward base, and suddenly the fleet is in "deep strike". While technically true, the AI seems to really like this move a lot, and I think I even saw it snipe the base and run away from turrets. Is this intended behavior? I would very much prefer either some grace period to be able to retreat in an orderly manner, or wait until the AI re-takes the base, which would basically accomplish the same thing. The 15s before zillions of reserves are deployed and eventually join the hunter fleet are usually not nearly enough to do anything sensible. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
|
|
It is intended behavior. Originally there was no warning which is what I would personally prefer. I think losing the only 'tether' to the rest of the player territory should have consequences. |
|
|
In most strategy games one of the main components is supply lines. The cost of overextending is the threat of getting supplies cut off. AI WAR doesn't deal with supplies but instead losing a key planet counts as deep strike leads to reserves deployment. Since supplies is part of strategy I'm not a fan of removing this behavior. |
|
|
If you are deepstriking with only one planet as "support" this is a risky strategy. Being punished for playing a risky style is not a bug. |
|
|
I see, thanks for clarification. I'm fine with it when it's intended behavior :) I tried closing this ticket as "Not an issue", but it complained about incorrect workflow.. I'll just leave it here then.. |
|
|
It actually was unintended behavior! * Planets now keep track of the last time they were owned by a human, the last time they were owned by the AI sentinels, and the number of "major AI structures" that are currently on a planet. * There is a new is_major_ai_structure boolean that can be set on ships. If this is true, then they will count as "major AI structures" for the above. ** Guard posts, the AI King command station version (not phase 2 mobile), AI command stations (normal and reconquest) all automatically get counted as this. ** Other major structures for the AI are explicitly defined as: warp gates, AI eyes, troop accelerators, black hole machines, AI fortresses, AI superfortresses, raid engines, alarm posts, and magnifiers. * The way that "a deepstrike is happening" is calculated is a lot more complicated now, but actually does a better job. ** Previously it was "players have a big force X distance away from planets they own." *** That might sound elegantly simple, but the problem is that if you have a planet you own way out in the middle of the AI empire and you lose that planet, suddenly you're deepstriking and getting hit by AI Reserves unexpectedly. ** Now, if the humans own the planet, or have owned the planet within the last 20 minutes, then for purposes of deepstriking calculations it acts as if you still own it. *** That gives you 20 minutes (gametime) to get your planet recaptured before it starts thinking of you as being in enemy territory. Even if the AI recaptures the planet during that 20 minute period, it doesn't matter. ** But wait! What if you are using "aggressive command station" placement? Basically, where you go hard into an AI planet, pop their command station, and throw your own up as fast as possible... before dealing with the entire rest of their planet. *** That's fine, but it will now still count as deepstriking. So if the AI Reserves were going to come for you, they'll still come for you if you use this tactic. *** Essentially, if there are any "Major AI Structures" (as defined above) on a planet, then it will NOT count as a human planet, even if it is currently a human planet. And this overrides the grace period, too. *** Actually, this means that if the AI recaptures the planet, it will be overriding the planet while it has its new command station and guard posts there. You have to kill those first, and then your grace period resumes (if you had 5 minutes left after doing that killing, then you have those 5 minutes left). *** It also means that if somehow the AI buys something from the Zenith Trader on a planet that is neutral that you then take, or something crazy like that happens, then it could wind up blocking you. That's way less likely, though. ** The overall goal of these changes is to make deepstriking detection more accurate, and prevent the AI from sniping your command station and taking advantage of you... and to keep you from sniping their command station and taking advantage of them. ** Thanks to Badger, zeus, and others for ideas on this, and Asteroid for reporting the initial issue. * In the planet tooltip, if a planet has any major AI structures on it, it now shows that number. ** If you hold any of the hotkeys that show more than basic detail, then it will also list what those structures are. * In the planet tooltip, if a former AI homeworld is now owned by nobody or owned by someone else, it now says it was a former AI homeworld. ** Same deal for if the planet was once a human homeworld. * In the planet tooltip, if a planet was owned by humans within the last 20 minutes, but is not curently owned by them, it shows how long ago it was owned by humans. ** It also tells you that "Deepstriking reprisals, if relevant, will not take place until it has been 20 minutes" ** If humans owned the planet longer ago than that, it now shows how long it has been since humans owned it, but in a drab sort of green, and without the nice message about deepstrikes. Thanks! |
|
|
I thought the AI was being smart when it took out my forward base while attacking their Home-World. |
|
|
It is, but it's not supposed to get AI Reserves on top of that as a bonus. It's just supposed to be denying you income or a staging point or energy or whatever it was. |
|
|
I'm disappointed in this move as often I don't care to lose my forward base except the danger of a deepstrike. In one game with three level 7 AI I used military bases at choke points and use logistic bases as a forward base which I didn't care to hold. I had to make sure it was well defend in order to hold off attacks which means I had to uses a lot of energy. Now I don't have to bother defending this base so less threat of a brownout. |
|
|
Hmm, okay, I do see your point. Perhaps I'll make a new galaxy option related to this. |
|
|
I have just reworked AI Reserves, so I think a 20 minute timer is no longer necessary. |
|
|
I've downed it to 60 seconds, with the option to have 0 to 1200 seconds: * New field in the AI Behaviors section of the galaxy options: AI Reserves Grace Period ** If you lose a planet deep in AI territory, how many seconds will you have to recapture the planet before the AI Reserves start anti-deepstriking attacks against you? ** The default is 60 seconds (1 minute), to give you a moment to collect yourself, but still probably have the deepstriking attacks kick in at least a bit if the AI snipes you off a forward planet base. ** This is vastly reduced from the 20 minute grace period (1200 seconds) that the game gave you as of last version, but the AI Reserves attacks are more gradual now in general. And you can still increase this to 20 minutes if you want (but that will not be considered a "pure" 10/10/10 win if you're aiming for that). Thanks! |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 11, 2020 1:52 pm | Arides | New Issue | |
| Oct 11, 2020 4:24 pm | Strategic Sage | Note Added: 0059145 | |
| Oct 11, 2020 4:34 pm | Smidlee | Note Added: 0059147 | |
| Oct 11, 2020 7:45 pm | BadgerBadger | Note Added: 0059149 | |
| Oct 12, 2020 4:31 am | Arides | Note Added: 0059156 | |
| Oct 12, 2020 7:38 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Assigned To | => Chris_McElligottPark |
| Oct 12, 2020 7:38 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Status | new => resolved |
| Oct 12, 2020 7:38 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Resolution | open => fixed |
| Oct 12, 2020 7:38 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Fixed in Version | => 2.611 AI Defensive Huddle |
| Oct 12, 2020 7:38 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0059182 | |
| Oct 12, 2020 8:35 pm | Smidlee | Note Added: 0059183 | |
| Oct 12, 2020 8:45 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0059184 | |
| Oct 13, 2020 6:04 am | Smidlee | Note Added: 0059194 | |
| Oct 13, 2020 10:36 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0059197 | |
| Oct 13, 2020 3:11 pm | BadgerBadger | Note Added: 0059207 | |
| Oct 13, 2020 3:40 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0059208 |
