View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0026365 | AI War 2 | Suggestion | Feb 13, 2022 7:39 pm | Feb 15, 2022 9:52 pm | |
| Reporter | Sounds | Assigned To | Chris_McElligottPark | ||
| Status | closed | Resolution | won't fix | ||
| Product Version | Beta 3.801 Load Estimates And Unit Encyclopedia | ||||
| Summary | 0026365: Option 'Max Planets to Scouting At Once' adjust the default? | ||||
| Description | The main observation after numerous non-beta and beta playthroughs is that the default of 8 tends to spoil the game for many of the map types. What tends to happen (with the default of 8) after the initial capture of planets you end up getting to see too much of what should be unexplored planets and their underlying structures . 6 seems the better default value, but given the number of map types, their configuration and galaxy/planet sizing it might be too subjective to work across them all well. Suggestion - Add another configurable parameter to coalesce the explore depth that examines the number of possible branches of adjoining planets to determine the scounting of planet result. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
|
|
FYI general feedback from players over time has been that the default is too *low*. I think if it was changed, it would probably be more likely to be increased than decreased. |
|
|
Actually a lot depends on the number planets, the type of map and the configuration. Sometime 8 is low, but a lot of the map configurations - which I've played a lot of - it becomes pretty obvious where the AI's are and the best 'goodies'. One of the reasons I play with the planets hidden from the start is it alleviates the problem to some extent, but not always. With eight, on some maps you end up seeing most of the leaf nodes to early, which is one of the reasons why I wish we still had scouts from the previous game. In AI War 1 I liked the scouting mechanism (although a lot of players found it busy work) as it made for some pretty high tensity games when played on 8+ difficulties if you didn't have a handle on the choke points. All that said, my generally testing (outside of the DLC 3 beta) showed that 6 was the sweet spot for most of the non-trivial map set ups. Hence, as its pretty subjective preference, asking to have another customisable parameter/option. |
|
|
Well, it is already customizable for players in the game lobby. Right now you can just set it to 6 for all your games. The question is whether the default should be changed, which among other things will make the game more challenging for novices. |
|
|
The main feedback I got from a friend who bounced off playing the game is they disliked the map generation and exploration parts as they felt it was bit too cheesy. As I recall the comments were along the lines of "The game allows too much cheating; it seems odd you know where and what the exact weapons/ships are at planet without exploring them". I mentioned the scout mechanic was not brought over to help reduce the micromanagement, but they thought that was odd thing to remove. The only reason I bring it up now is that the new map type introduced in DLC3 (e.g. "Crazy...") has several parameters where the issue shows up a lot sooner than I was expecting. This came about as I had reset the game back to the default parameters for testing, so the default of '8' showed up the problem after 10 minutes of play time. Of course this is all very subjective, and changing the value to '6' is a no brainer for anyone whose played the game for a while. That all said the plethora of map types are fantatic and I love the ability to fine tune so many of the configurable aspects of the game. However the intent behind the suggestion is to make it a more behind the scenes approach - hence wondering if it is might be possible to add finessing this value through a calculable scout deph (rather than a simple raw base value) without further user intervention. |
|
|
I would just respectfully disagree with the assessment. ** I don't think it's at all a no-brainer that reducing to 6 is a no-brainer for experienced players. I don't recall this even ever coming up in discussions at the discord among skilled players. At the very least it's quite rare, and I remember one player who consistently played on difficulty 9 only because they thought 10 was too much of a grind, and they maxed out the scout number as high as they could and didn't think that was enough. It's an outlier ofc, but there have been some who just disliked scouting and wanted the whole map revealed at the start (which can be done in Debug if they really want it). The increased vision of command stations beyond what it used to be, the Spy unit, etc. were made in response to experienced players - some of them very good and some more average - who strongly thought the previous levels weren't enough. So I don't really know how else to say it ... that's just not where the playing community as a whole is at, and a default that moved in that direction would be almost certain to irritate more people than it satisfied. ** The response I would make to the person you are referring to is that nobody has found a way to make 'manual scouting' interesting without dramatically reshaping the game. I.e. if ships can move around at will, if you don't need a specific scout unit to know what's on a planet but any small ship will do, then that kind of scouting really isn't going to be anything other than pure, rote busywork. It would just be the game forcing the player to do a mindless task. On the other hand if you *are* required to have specialized units to know what is on a planet, that adds another layer of complication that impacts accessibility, for what tangible benefit? At the start of a typical game you only know 10% of the galaxy. By the time you have a handful of planets and are in/approaching midgame there's still a significant part that is hidden. I don't think that fits with no need to explore - there are players who use hack-scouting to discover more without capturing more planets, I've found myself occasionally capturing a planet I might not otherwhise take for that purpose, etc. |
|
|
Err I think you missed what I meant by a no brainer. I meant going to the custom screen and just changing the value to '6'. Please don't misunderstand, I'm not talking about any sort of change to gameplay. Just a way to make the explore initial stage a little more interesting with respect to what you can actually see. The reason I brough it up here is it was the first thing I noticed when I started playing on the 'Crazy' map from DLC 3. As this was part of the beta I thought I'd mention with a possible suggestion to reduce the issue. The second point about manual scouting, yep I totally agree with you. In the first game I really thought it was fun at the start when most of the area was unexplored. What I am suggesting here is a way to keep the initial starting fun of exploration (without actual scouts) with gradual decline as the map opens up. How to make add scouts to the game is not what I was suggesting. Apologies for any confusion. |
|
|
Okay, this was a challenging one, and I found myself really going back and forth on the topic. However, in the end, for a lot of players this would mean that using the Logi station in a cheesy fashion becomes pretty much required. I really like the idea of lowering this number -- a lot -- but this game has a lot of historical weight behind it with many players at the moment, and changing this default value is something I think would be too disruptive, despite my inclination to do so. |
|
|
I was going to add some screenshots this weekend to show how the value affect some of the maps. On some of these maps 7 and above tends to loose adversely affect games exporation with the end result the feels more like a puzzle. Looking again at some of Strategic Sage's playthroughs yesterday (great work by the way) showed some of the reasons why knowing too much about planets destroys any sense of exploration or tension. I'm guessing that's what a lot of players like, but it does minimises (to some extent) any need for deep strategic planning as the player has so much insight before the AI even get's started. However I do like the idea of keeping the AI progress low, but it feels a bit of a cop out and cheesy. One of the reasons I posted this ticket is that after playing Badger's Quick Start Campaign: 'The Hidden Badger' and add this minor tweak to settings, made exploration and tactics really shine. I then went on to play a different map configuration on a default of 8 and unfortunately ended up abandoning the game 30 minutes in, due to recognising the usual signs that a win was inevitable and not much fun play further with so much knowledge revealed by that point. No problem though, I'll just continue with 4 for most games, but I still believe 6 is about the sweet spot. |
|
|
What you aren't getting Sounds is that there is a rather specific method of play that gets more and more pushed the lower that vision slider goes. And it basically nullifies changing the defaults in a way that is a tax on player HaP and time. Logi stations reveal anything within two hops by default, hack scouting can give you a route that maximizes the potential of a Logi vision drop. Combined with the fact that the vision grants on AI station destruction are random across any of your borders you can often force 12+ systems to be revealed anyways. So in the end changing the default simply locks better knowledge around knowing specific tricks. You are completely free to change the settings for your own enjoyment, that is why they can be changed. But changing the defaults to simply make the difference between optimal play and what a new player can expect isn't particularly helpful. |
|
|
CRCGamer thanks for the feedback. Exploration in its current state is not as interesting as could be, but that's really a subjective thing and more to do with a person's particular play style / prefences. I'm not sure if its even possible to adjust around the edges without a full redesign of the mechanic, which leads to the question as to whether it would be the same game you'd be playing anymore. I think you're on to something that I hadn't thought of when you're said "... rather specific method of play that gets more and more pushed the lower that vision slider goes". For myself, on lower levels the game leans into a sense of mystery with the added intensity of needing a lot more exploration. On higher values it tends to become more of a puzzle based approach. At this stage I've played so many games where interest to continue generally is lost if the level is set too high for the type of map being used. On one occasion (over a year ago) at about the 40 minute mark, most of the key details of the map were revealed. Up until that point I was having a blast - thereafter not so much. Hence abandoning the game, and seeing if I could create a set of steps to win. The following night I applied these steps that resulted in a very disappointing and unsatisfying win. To date my thoughts about that specific game are that it felt more like I cheated than a real win. All that said; I'm guessing that I'm in the minority here about the sweet spot. However I also think you're probably right that there's only a specifc type of way to play it on lower levels. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 13, 2022 7:39 pm | Sounds | New Issue | |
| Feb 13, 2022 9:47 pm | Strategic Sage | Note Added: 0064414 | |
| Feb 13, 2022 10:08 pm | Sounds | Note Added: 0064415 | |
| Feb 13, 2022 11:46 pm | BadgerBadger | Note Added: 0064421 | |
| Feb 13, 2022 11:47 pm | BadgerBadger | Note Edited: 0064421 | |
| Feb 14, 2022 2:19 am | Sounds | Note Added: 0064429 | |
| Feb 14, 2022 2:41 am | Strategic Sage | Note Added: 0064430 | |
| Feb 14, 2022 5:58 am | Sounds | Note Added: 0064431 | |
| Feb 15, 2022 3:50 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Assigned To | => Chris_McElligottPark |
| Feb 15, 2022 3:50 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Status | new => closed |
| Feb 15, 2022 3:50 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Resolution | open => won't fix |
| Feb 15, 2022 3:50 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0064504 | |
| Feb 15, 2022 7:23 pm | Sounds | Note Added: 0064517 | |
| Feb 15, 2022 7:35 pm | CRCGamer | Note Added: 0064518 | |
| Feb 15, 2022 9:52 pm | Sounds | Note Added: 0064530 |
