View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0027114 | AI War 2 | Balance Issue | Apr 23, 2022 12:32 pm | May 7, 2022 9:58 am | |
| Reporter | Strategic Sage | Assigned To | NRSirLimbo | ||
| Status | resolved | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Product Version | 5.001 First Post-Completion Tweaks | ||||
| Fixed in Version | 5.007 The Reasonable Architrav | ||||
| Summary | 0027114: Brutal Guardian Lairs & Ultimate Fortress rules & seeding | ||||
| Description | These are forced-on for Humanity Ascendant when any AI is 8+. Dismiss pointed this out on discord. I suggest the following changes: ** At the very least, they should be allowed to be turned off for HA. Challenger+ this makes sense. ** Brutal Guardian Lairs seed 3 per AI afaik. This gets insane for games with a number of AIs. I suggest a per-galaxy amount, or maybe 3 plus an additional one for each AI added, then spread the total amount evenly among the AIs. Or something. AFAIK there isn't anything else other than core worlds that spawns on a per-AI basis, and since these impact not just their own planet, having say a dozen of them in a 4-AI game means basically a majority of the galaxy is cut off by them. I think this is extreme and not good. Open to other seeding alternatives people may have. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
|
|
I concur. Also note that i use small galaxy and high intensity ai as a way to play games that last less than 5 hours. However, there's practically a guardian lair within 1 jump of everywhere when there are 6 lairs in a 40 star galaxy. I'd say scaling it based on galaxy size might be even more appropriate. If the number 6 was picked as a default for 80 star galaxy /w 2 ais, then 3 per 40 stars perhaps. For high intensity ai, you have very very little aip to spare, and these lairs do actually give you 15 aip a peace -- something to keep in mind. It's almost more like a distribution node that's balanced a bit against you but you have to kill anyway. |
|
|
I'm not as big a fan of scaling based on galaxy size FWIW. Smaller galaxies are better for the player in many ways, larger are harder, that's just an inevitable result of AIP etc. Basically the galaxy-size choice has inevitable consequences that you can't entirely work around, so the plusses and minuses that come with that should remain. |
|
|
If i can turn it off on HA at least...though i play expert some too, if i have to man up for that id still consider it a win. |
|
|
3+ an additional for each AI after the first seems reasonable to me. Can't comment too much on galaxy size as I've only ever played on 80 or 100 planet galaxies. |
|
|
The soft area denial these impose is great in small amounts. The problem gets rather pronounced with games involving multiple AIs. And it gets beyond aggravating when you mix this soft area denial on top of that of other factions like Zenith Architrave. If you have a couple ZA and three AIs in a game and at least one of the AIs is D8 you basically have half the map denied without paying some sort of exorbitant cost. A 15 AIP penalty cost on a structure that can potentially be seeded more than 10 times is just bad all around. These *need* a galaxy cap rather than being a per AI item. |
|
|
Perhaps an alternative arrangement, A hack to disable the guardian lair only available on HA or just give it a significant HAP cost to disable. |
|
|
* Brutal Guardians: ** The amount of Brutal Guardian Lairs in the galaxy now has a slider instead of single on/off switch, spawning anywhere from 0 to 6 in the galaxy (no longer 3 per AI), but always 3 if an AI of difficulty 8+ is present or starting with Expert mode. I still think that they should be present with higher-difficulty AIs, but if people dislike this it can be turned off too. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 23, 2022 12:32 pm | Strategic Sage | New Issue | |
| Apr 23, 2022 12:35 pm | Dismiss | Note Added: 0066300 | |
| Apr 23, 2022 12:37 pm | Dismiss | Note Edited: 0066300 | |
| Apr 23, 2022 12:39 pm | Daniexpert | Category | Wiki => Balance Issue |
| Apr 23, 2022 1:09 pm | Strategic Sage | Note Added: 0066305 | |
| Apr 23, 2022 9:25 pm | Dismiss | Note Edited: 0066300 | |
| Apr 23, 2022 9:27 pm | Dismiss | Note Added: 0066365 | |
| Apr 30, 2022 6:24 am | Ecthelon | Note Added: 0066554 | |
| Apr 30, 2022 6:24 am | Ecthelon | Note Edited: 0066554 | |
| Apr 30, 2022 6:27 am | CRCGamer | Note Added: 0066555 | |
| May 2, 2022 5:01 pm | Bob_1 | Note Added: 0066587 | |
| May 2, 2022 5:41 pm | BadgerBadger | Assigned To | => NRSirLimbo |
| May 2, 2022 5:41 pm | BadgerBadger | Status | new => assigned |
| May 7, 2022 9:58 am | NRSirLimbo | Status | assigned => resolved |
| May 7, 2022 9:58 am | NRSirLimbo | Resolution | open => fixed |
| May 7, 2022 9:58 am | NRSirLimbo | Fixed in Version | => 5.007 The Reasonable Architrav |
| May 7, 2022 9:58 am | NRSirLimbo | Note Added: 0066650 |
