View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0006291 | AI War 1 / Classic | Suggestion - AI Behavior And Tactics | Mar 1, 2012 12:01 pm | Nov 6, 2012 2:22 pm | |
| Reporter | TechSY730 | Assigned To | |||
| Severity | feature | ||||
| Status | considering | Resolution | open | ||
| Product Version | 5.027 | ||||
| Summary | 0006291: New AI Modifier - Exo Wave Like Wave Composition | ||||
| Description | Based on a post from the forums, see that more more details and discussion. http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,9907.0.html The basic idea of this modifier is that if it is on, the AI will use a variant of the Exo wave logic for fleet composition. This is essentially "schizophrenic" waves on "steroids", as not only would it give variance over fleet ship type, but also variance of starships, guardians, the relative ratios of all of these, and possibly even Mk. level (depending on how the existing Mk. level system for waves interacts with this new modifier) Of course, it would need to scale to be similar in difficulty to the current system. So a normal first wave (no crazy high AI difficulties, handicaps, or wave size boosting modifiers) won't contain a large number of guardians or starships or worse. The overall firepower of the exo-wave versions should be similar to what the standard wave logic would spit out. (This implies that the random variation that the classic logic provides would also apply here) This would be for attack wave composition ONLY, the existing logic for the incoming ships (which IIRC, is the normal freed ship logic) would still hold. (Though the exo logic could possibly be used for waves that spawn in AI territory) These would only be for attack waves that the AI spawns ships for. So only normal wave attacks, raid engine waves, and counterattack guardpost waves. Defensive reinforcments, cross planet attacks, and scrap waves would keep their current logic, even with this modifier on. (though the defensive reinforcements might be able to work with it) I don't know if (excepting certain AIs) if golems and up should be blacklisted for these waves. I also don't know how the current mark to use for waves (the thing the AIP on the HUD) should interact with this. And finally, I don't know how to sanely convert "wave points" to "exo points" and still preserve similar orders of difficulty and firepower before and after conversion. Some AI specific notes: 1. AI specific wave multipliers would need to be factored into how much exo-points they get 2. If the AI has unlocked Neinzul youngling ships (either by their type or a normal unlock by the AI), then younglings should NOT be blacklisted for these waves, unlike normal exo-waves 3. If the AI is the Spire Hammer, then the Spire capital ships they can use should not be blacklisted for these waves, unlike normal waves, or possibly always just get one "free" spire captial starship in its waves. 4. If the AI is the golemite, then the AI should be able to insert in the significantly weaker golemite versions of these golems for a decent amount less than the exo-wave versions of the golems (and not have these weakened golems blacklisted if other AIs have exo-golems blacklisted for these waves) (this is assuming the golemite can use golems in attack waves. If not, ignore this point) 5. If the AI is the Starship commander, then it should either get a "discount" on the exo-wave cost of starships, or it should always just get one "free" starship in its waves. 6. If the AI is the Crafty Spire, then it should either get a "discount" on the exo-wave cost of spirecraft, or it should always (or sometimes) just get one "free" spirecraft in its waves. 7. If the AI is a non-turtle Technologist, then it needs a decent multiplier to its exo-wave size if wave Mk. caps do not get factored in normally. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Internal Weight | Feature Suggestion | ||||
| related to | 0009865 | new | Intelligent wave composition and use |
|
|
Just to dissuade some fears, let me repeat: The firepower and difficulty of the wave under this new option would be of a similar scaling of the classic wave logic. This option is to increase variety in waves, not to increase firepower of waves Also, it would be an AI modifier (or possibly AI plot), meaning it is COMPLETELY OPTIONAL. |
|
|
I understand that this would require a lot of balance work to get the "conversion rate" right, and thus may have to wait and become a feature in the next expansion. |
|
|
I love it. But types need to be considered for the wave composition, not just marks. After all, a H/K MKI is only a mark one, its also still a HUNTER KILLER. |
|
|
Even H/K MkI is very, very expensive in "exo-points" (substantially more expensive than Mk. III starships, or even most Mk. V starships, IIRC. They're even more expensive then several of the golems) the waves would have to be very big before you start seeing them, and even then, all the rest of the ships would have their numbers cut down severely (compared to if they didn't go for the H/K) because of how much the AI had to put its wave's "points" into that H/K. Basically, you wouldn't be seeing H/Ks in waves unless waves would of been big enough to have H/K like levels of net firepower anyways. |
|
|
Then I repeat my previous statement. I love it. Maybe then waves will become a threat to my choke points. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 1, 2012 12:01 pm | TechSY730 | New Issue | |
| Mar 1, 2012 12:03 pm | TechSY730 | Note Added: 0020081 | |
| Mar 1, 2012 12:04 pm | TechSY730 | Note Added: 0020082 | |
| Mar 1, 2012 3:18 pm | tigersfan | Internal Weight | => Feature Suggestion |
| Mar 1, 2012 3:18 pm | tigersfan | Status | new => considering |
| Nov 2, 2012 1:02 pm | TechSY730 | Relationship added | related to 0009865 |
| Nov 5, 2012 10:36 pm | Zane Wolfe | Note Added: 0028909 | |
| Nov 6, 2012 10:57 am | TechSY730 | Note Added: 0028910 | |
| Nov 6, 2012 10:57 am | TechSY730 | Note Edited: 0028910 | |
| Nov 6, 2012 10:58 am | TechSY730 | Note Edited: 0028910 | |
| Nov 6, 2012 2:22 pm | Zane Wolfe | Note Added: 0028912 |
