View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0009462 | AI War 1 / Classic | Suggestion - Game Mechanics | Sep 3, 2012 11:55 am | Sep 4, 2012 11:55 am | |
| Reporter | Toll | Assigned To | Chris_McElligottPark | ||
| Status | assigned | Resolution | open | ||
| Product Version | 5.076 | ||||
| Summary | 0009462: Cloaking Levels | ||||
| Description | In short, my problem (and I assume others with me) is that once the AI gets tachyon ships, scouting becomes nigh-on impossible. If they start with them, I generally just make a new game. To solve this, I propose splitting cloaking into levels as follows: All ships capable of cloaking except scouts gets a level one cloak. There might be other ships that should have a higher cloaking level, but scouts are the big ones. All ships cloaked by other units (cloaker starships etc) gets a level one cloak. Scouts (and possibly others) get a level two cloak. Cloaking boosters would only work within the same or higher levels. So a scout won't be able to boost an autocannon. Along with this split, we also split tachyon similarly: All ships except tachyon-specific ships (tachyon guardians, tachyon drones and decloakers) get a level one tachyon. Tachyon-specific ships gets a level two tachyon. Solution? Scouts now won't be revealed by tachyon micro-fighters etc. You still need to take down tachyon guardians to advance any length with them though. Cloaked raiding stays as it is. Tachyon microfighters can still detect autocannons going through wormholes and other sneaky attempts at infiltrating. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Internal Weight | |||||
|
|
What level of scouts are you scouting with in a game like that? The typical response to seeing lots of tachyon units is that you need to unlock higher-mark scouts and then send them all in a group together with the lower-mark scouts. The cloaking boosting that they then enjoy will make your scouting possible. I think it's a tactics shift that you need, not a general imbalance in the game. Unless you're already using that tactic and it's not working. But yes, when the AI has more tachyon stuff you're at a huge intel disadvantage, and there's a K tax. |
|
|
Scouts are actually the first ones I unlock. And sure, with a whole cap of them all going at once, I _might_ get five or six planets deep. Perhaps. But since there will always be decloakers at every wormhole in those scenarios (and more and more of them as the AIP increases), there's no real way to extend the range of them by raiding tachyon guardians (which are, again, generally the first things I raid). There's also the fact that the more stationary scouts you have, the less range you get out of the scouts you have left; with half a cap of all scouts, I generally make it two or three planets deep (unless I "cheat" with shields, but that assumes that I'm either playing as a Champion, and is rather limited in those cases, or that I've unlocked Shield Bearers, which is a feat in and of itself). |
|
|
This doesn't really sound like a bad thing to me. What it sounds like you're advocating is more sameness between scenarios -- ie, that scouting would be unaffected by the enemy forces. To me that seems a bit backwards: I think that the variety is a lot more interesting. Now, I can very much understand not liking some scenarios -- there are certain scenarios that I just immediately give up on, too, because I don't find them fun with my playstyle. But does if we nerf those out of existence, then all the interesting sort of side challenges that are unusual situations wind up disappearing. Here I think that diversity is better, honestly. It sounds like you're able to scout, just not remotely as far, and not while also leaving stationary scouts as watchers. That means that you have to not have stationary scouts until later, and you need to take more forward "scout launching bases" in order to get scouting done. OR you need to use transports to launch your scouts forward as far as you can, then further launch the scouts once the transports blow. Both of these solutions seem interesting to me, and it also gives the player even more opportunities for cleverness rather than just always using the same scouting techniques that they do in every game. That's why I feel like the diversity is cool, personally. |
|
|
To me, scouting is such an integral part that I think it should remain the same between scenarios, I guess. Knowing which planets to go for, knowing which to avoid, knowing where the AI homeworld is early on etc. are all things I try my hardest to establish as soon as possible in a game so I can plan accordingly. You do have a point that not knowing anything creates a very different kind of challenge though, and not one I had really even considered. To me, the whole first hour or two is dedicated to exploring, more or less (with a side of guard post raiding to weaken planets just in case I want to take them later on, and if not, well weaker planets is always good), so I might sometimes be blind to other playstyles, heh. |
|
|
No problem. :) |
|
|
That reminds me: There actually used to be 3 cloaked "states" (as opposed to levels as described here) -Fully cloaked -Partially revealed (position revealed, but identity and stats are not) -Fully revealed However, this proved to a bit confusing, and didn't add much in terms of strategy as you could shoot "position revealed only" just as easily as you could fully revealed ships. So the "partially decloaked" state was removed, and now it is a simple boolean. |
|
|
Also, It's been a while since you have posted on something related to AI War. Been busy with AVWW and SH? |
|
|
Nah, just that horrible thing called "Real Life" that's been eating up my time (and still gnaws at the soft chewy bits of it). So don't expect the same kind of mass-postings I did for AVWW for now, at least :) |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 3, 2012 11:55 am | Toll | New Issue | |
| Sep 3, 2012 12:01 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0028160 | |
| Sep 3, 2012 12:01 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Assigned To | => Chris_McElligottPark |
| Sep 3, 2012 12:01 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Status | new => feedback |
| Sep 3, 2012 12:12 pm | Toll | Note Added: 0028161 | |
| Sep 3, 2012 12:12 pm | Toll | Status | feedback => assigned |
| Sep 3, 2012 12:18 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0028162 | |
| Sep 3, 2012 12:25 pm | Toll | Note Added: 0028163 | |
| Sep 4, 2012 9:12 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0028182 | |
| Sep 4, 2012 10:04 am | TechSY730 | Note Added: 0028186 | |
| Sep 4, 2012 10:05 am | TechSY730 | Note Added: 0028187 | |
| Sep 4, 2012 11:55 am | Toll | Note Added: 0028190 |
