View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryLast Update
0009396AI War 1 / ClassicSuggestion - AI Behavior And TacticsOct 5, 2012 2:51 pm
ReporterTechSY730 Assigned Tokeith.lamothe  
Status resolvedResolutionfixed 
Product Version5.073 
Fixed in Version5.090 
Summary0009396: After waiting a long time on a wormhole, threat should "reroll" which planet to stalk
DescriptionCredit should also go to Hearteater, who also independently came up with this idea.

Copied from http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,11378.msg116344.html#msg116344

I would agree with making freed AI ships that have been waiting at a wormhole > N time "reroll" their target planet (which may choose the same planet again, which is fine. That would allow some buildup of threat, but overall spread out threat better). Also, that >N time should checked on a global timer, not a per ship timer, as otherwise individual ships would start bleeding off and then often times wind up doing nothing. If instead, the AI "batched" their checks (maybe check for ships waiting for >N time every N time interval?), you would typically see them group much better. This would fall apart some if you have lots of border planets though...

I thought I posted idea on mantis a long time ago, but it doesn't look like I did.
TagsNo tags attached.
Internal WeightFeature Suggestion

Relationships

related to 0007016 considering Reduce the firepower cutoff ratio that "stalking a wormhole" AI ships will wait for before entering 
related to 0009465 resolvedkeith.lamothe Give Freed AI Ships more possible actions 

Activities

Hearteater

Aug 29, 2012 9:28 am

reporter   ~0028049

I had to read my own thread to remember what I suggested :) . I think the below link gets to the post in question better. The paragraph under the heading THREAT is the one for this mantis issue.

http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,11378.msg116328.html#msg116328

TechSY730

Aug 29, 2012 11:36 am

reporter   ~0028052

Hmm, any idea about how long N should be? Or how long the interval between the "batch" checks for ships that have waiting >N time? (Expressing this in terms of N is fine)

Hearteater

Aug 29, 2012 12:12 pm

reporter   ~0028053

I'm guessing around 20-30 minutes for checks would work reasonably well. Threat already reacts very quickly to pulling firepower out of a system. This is really more of a strategic action, and I think the 20-30 minute time frame is enough time to keep the AI from feeling like it has ADD.

Soyweiser

Sep 2, 2012 10:28 am

reporter   ~0028127

You could also add a check every time the AIP is increased.

keith.lamothe

Oct 5, 2012 2:51 pm

administrator   ~0028598

For 5.090:

* Since "make the threatballs fish or cut bait" was 0000001 on the second round of the 6.0 poll:
** Threat ships behave as they used to for about 30 minutes after being freed, but after that they are switched to an alternate "Threat Fleet" behavior that is somewhat similar to the new Special Forces mechanic.
*** Note: this only happens on Difficulty 7+, as it's not the AI getting anything extra, it's just behaving more intelligently (in theory) with what it has.
** If an AI homeworld or core world is under attack, the threat fleet will rally to defend it.
** Otherwise, if it sees an accessible non-AI planet with a significant human presence that it thinks it can take out, it goes to attack that (it will still pool up at the entry wormhole in some cases, until enough of them are there to pass the threshold, so they don't march in to the grinder one-by-one).
** Otherwise, it picks a planet in AI territory to hang out at until either of the two above conditions are met.
** If a carrier is spontaneously formed from ships that have a significant threat-fleet population, the carrier (and anything it spawns) is also considered threat-fleet.

Not exactly what any one request was going for, iirc, but I think this will make that threat at least more interesting. Thanks for the feedback :)

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
Aug 29, 2012 12:01 am TechSY730 New Issue
Aug 29, 2012 9:28 am Hearteater Note Added: 0028049
Aug 29, 2012 11:36 am TechSY730 Note Added: 0028052
Aug 29, 2012 12:12 pm Hearteater Note Added: 0028053
Sep 2, 2012 8:03 am TechSY730 Relationship added related to 0007016
Sep 2, 2012 10:28 am Soyweiser Note Added: 0028127
Sep 3, 2012 8:54 pm TechSY730 Relationship added related to 0009465
Sep 4, 2012 3:51 pm tigersfan Internal Weight => Feature Suggestion
Sep 4, 2012 3:51 pm tigersfan Status new => considering
Oct 5, 2012 2:51 pm keith.lamothe Note Added: 0028598
Oct 5, 2012 2:51 pm keith.lamothe Status considering => resolved
Oct 5, 2012 2:51 pm keith.lamothe Fixed in Version => 5.090
Oct 5, 2012 2:51 pm keith.lamothe Resolution open => fixed
Oct 5, 2012 2:51 pm keith.lamothe Assigned To => keith.lamothe