Aurora 4x
C# Fiction => Steve's Fiction => Earth Alliance => Topic started by: Steve Walmsley on December 14, 2020, 11:21:44 AM
-
Please use this thread for any comments on the campaign.
-
I dont know much about the Babylon 5 universe but what is the primary doctrine of the Centauri?
-
I dont know much about the Babylon 5 universe but what is the primary doctrine of the Centauri?
I can't speak to Steve's campaign, but B5 is still one of my favorite all-time shows, even if the graphics are a bit dated. The Earth civil war was just such a great sequence!
In the show the Centauri Republic began as a fading empire, which had fallen from its days of greatness and retreated from its former conquests. It was only interested in keeping what it had and trying to ride on the coattails of up-and-coming races like the Earth Alliance. Even so they had a powerful navy, just not the will to use it. If I remember correctly, Earth Force, in the show, would have had a hard time fighting the Centauri Republic in a stand-up fight, as the Centauri had relatively advanced tech and the Earthers were relatively new. The difference was, the Earther's, being young and hungry, were willing to fight while the Centauri Republic was old and tired.
The Centauri's evolved during the run of the show, though, as did all of the races.
-
The AI races won't follow the doctrine of their namesakes from the show, although there will be some that work out well. The Invaders will match the Shadows really well for example.
If you haven't watched Babylon 5, I highly recommend finding the DVDs or paying for it on Prime. Its a little dated now, but one of the best ever sci-fi shows.
-
I can't speak to Steve's campaign, but B5 is still one of my favorite all-time shows, even if the graphics are a bit dated. The Earth civil war was just such a great sequence!
In the show the Centauri Republic began as a fading empire, which had fallen from its days of greatness and retreated from its former conquests. It was only interested in keeping what it had and trying to ride on the coattails of up-and-coming races like the Earth Alliance. Even so they had a powerful navy, just not the will to use it. If I remember correctly, Earth Force, in the show, would have had a hard time fighting the Centauri Republic in a stand-up fight, as the Centauri had relatively advanced tech and the Earthers were relatively new. The difference was, the Earther's, being young and hungry, were willing to fight while the Centauri Republic was old and tired.
The Centauri's evolved during the run of the show, though, as did all of the races.
Huh. Ok then. For some reason i always get Star Gate and Babylon 5 confused.
-
The AI races won't follow the doctrine of their namesakes from the show, although there will be some that work out well. The Invaders will match the Shadows really well for example.
If you haven't watched Babylon 5, I highly recommend finding the DVDs or paying for it on Prime. Its a little dated now, but one of the best ever sci-fi shows.
Coolio.
-
Straight to action! I like that.
RougeNPS, I fixed your quotes.
-
Thanks. I have no idea how to do it properly.
-
Interesting start!
Having a slower but more heavily armed short range fleet is going to be a challenge. At least if the retaliation strike is not strong enough it will be relatively easy to bottle up their force in their system...
-
I finally get to watch a Steve AAR from the beginning, hooray!
Are there any specific mechanics being tested by this AAR, either new 1.13 additions or older additions that were not really showcased in the Imperium of Man campaign?
E:
Omega class Destroyer 78,125 tons
:o When you said "go large" you were not kidding holy rigatoni
-
The starfuries are using 3 shot railguns I noticed. And probably single weapon fire controls?
-
The starfuries are using 3 shot railguns I noticed. And probably single weapon fire controls?
Yes, both correct.
-
I can't speak to Steve's campaign, but B5 is still one of my favorite all-time shows, even if the graphics are a bit dated. The Earth civil war was just such a great sequence!
In the show the Centauri Republic began as a fading empire, which had fallen from its days of greatness and retreated from its former conquests. It was only interested in keeping what it had and trying to ride on the coattails of up-and-coming races like the Earth Alliance. Even so they had a powerful navy, just not the will to use it. If I remember correctly, Earth Force, in the show, would have had a hard time fighting the Centauri Republic in a stand-up fight, as the Centauri had relatively advanced tech and the Earthers were relatively new. The difference was, the Earther's, being young and hungry, were willing to fight while the Centauri Republic was old and tired.
The Centauri's evolved during the run of the show, though, as did all of the races.
Huh. Ok then. For some reason i always get Star Gate and Babylon 5 confused.
My two favorites! I'm doing a Stargate re-watch right now, as I hurt my back and I've been laid out on the couch for the last couple of days.
Kurt
-
That was a damn interesting start! Really excited for this one, although sad not to see any Nova-class Dreadnoughts in the EA fleet with their ridiculous amount of plasma cannons. Funnily enough I'm currently building an Omega-class Destroyer model (from Warp Models) so this is great accompaniment ;D
-
As there is no mention of research and survey rate, I gather this is 100% speed?
Great opening! What you classify as Destroyers would be a super-dreadnought for me, but hey ... Different universe ;D
-
As there is no mention of research and survey rate, I gather this is 100% speed?
Great opening! What you classify as Destroyers would be a super-dreadnought for me, but hey ... Different universe ;D
Yes, 100% on everything.
In Babylon 5, destroyers are larger than cruisers, so I am staying with the original nomenclature :). I guess that is true in Star Wars too.
-
That's what you get when you let George Lucas makes the ship classification! ;D
-
I guess that is true in Star Wars too.
That's what you get when you let George Lucas makes the ship classification! ;D
in SW displacement is by the length of the ship, I always wondered if we could add "dimensions" to Aurora
-
Yeah. In Star Wars, the current metric is based on the length, not tonnage or armament of the ship. The current system is called the Anaxes War College System.
I could enumerate its specifications but its easier if people just look it up. Star Wars ships are...absurdly large...the Eclipse II alone was over...something like 25 kilometers in length.
Edit: Just double checked, its 17k in length.
-
Yeah. In Star Wars, the current metric is based on the length, not tonnage or armament of the ship. The current system is called the Anaxes War College System.
I could enumerate its specifications but its easier if people just look it up. Star Wars ships are...absurdly large...the Eclipse II alone was over...something like 25 kilometers in length.
Edit: Just double checked, its 17k in length.
You have literally picked the biggest capital warship in the setting, except from the Death Star. And maybe some other weird outliers, because the star wars extended universe is huge, so who knows if something else was shown there.
Most SW warships are in the 300m - 2 km range
Incidentally, to me 300m for a starship is a corvette at best. I don't get why most settings use such tiny, insignificant, pathetic spaceships. Come on, you're literally traveling between the stars! Surely you can do better than a wet navy ship. That's simply pathetic.
WH40k battleships are all 8km+. Now that's an acceptable length for a warship.
EDIT: of course the shape matters too. I mean, something like a borg cube is still passable because it's 27 cubic km, being a cube. If barely so. But well, keep in mind we're technologically tens of thousands of years in the future. Having tiny ships makes very little sense as there are surely a lot less constraints than what we'd have in a near future space scenario.
-
The problem mainly stems from power constraints. The ISD II has an literal micro neutron star as its reactor for all its weapons, shield generator, and its Class 1 hyperdrive. There is a reason Star Wars ships are small compared to say...40K, 40K is pretty ludicrous in general. Take a look at the stats for ships in say BSG or Star Gate.
-
I feel I am derailing a bit too much XD Just one last post.
Imho in a far future sci-fi setting, and (very important) considering you are in vacuum so with no movement problems from size, you have TWO possible rough scenarios
1) weapons are superior to defenses. Making a ship twice as big does not make it twice more durable. In this case, you want to build a billion tiny, hard to hit ships as you cannot defend anyway. You want as many tiny ships as possible, your ships are all throwaways. The smallest, fully functional warship possible is all you want, build it indefinitely.
2) defenses DO scale favourably with size, larger ships are more durable and not throwaways. In which case making larger ships is something you generally want.
A lot of Sci-fi settings go for 2). In this situation, large ships are desirable. Which bring me to my second point. If we're thousands or tens of thousands of years in the future, with technology much, much beyond what we have, you have to suppose that assembly is not a problem.
In this case, I cannot justify large nations building "smallish" warships, except for patrol needs (so you can cover all your systems). Why would you? Bigger ships are just better and it's not a problem to assemble them. You are only limited by availability of materials and crew (and here we could also suppose these ships are mostly automated anyway... but Aurora does not model that).
So large nations, with the means to do so, WILL build large ships. There is zero logical reasons to artificially limit yourself to mid-size ships, if larger ships are just more powerful. For your main battle line, you build 5 large ships, not 15 medium ones.
Sorry for the rant, it's just a pet peeve of mine. I can forgive it for near-future sci-fi, but for far future sci-fi settings, maybe with thousands of inhabited worlds, I just cannot justify 100m long warships. Unless you assume that defenses are just weaker than weapons, in which case you go with tiny drones instead.
And just for the record. Right now in the real world we're moving towards option 1. In the near future, the main armed forces will move towards drone-like armed small units, large weapon platforms will disappear. A veritable swarm of drone-like weapon platforms, all automated.
What the far, far, far future will bring, we just don't know. I prefer to imagine my far future in a more interesting situation, rather than: my army is 2 billions small drones all exactly identical to each other.
-
There are physical reasons to limit ship sizes even if resources are available to build bigger.
The first one that comes to mind is, basically, the square-cube problem. Mass (and thus, force needed to achieve a given acceleration) increases as the cube of the length scale. But the ability of the structure to bear those forces only increases as the square. In effect, you have the problem of your engines ripping themselves out of the mountings. You can mitigate that with engineering (change the layout, spread out the engines, etc), but handling orientation is even worse. Huge ships need monstrous torques to rotate, and those loads can become unmanageable.
Basically, at a certain point going bigger forces you to slow down or the ship tears itself apart.
A related issue is heat dissipation (something most Sci-Fi ignores). Again, surface area (which is roughly your ability to dissipate heat) is proportional to the square of the length scale, while power requirements (and thus, heat generation) are proportional to the cube.
TL;DR: ships have the same problems living organisms do, and this limits their size.
-
As there is no mention of research and survey rate, I gather this is 100% speed?
Great opening! What you classify as Destroyers would be a super-dreadnought for me, but hey ... Different universe ;D
Yes, 100% on everything.
In Babylon 5, destroyers are larger than cruisers, so I am staying with the original nomenclature :). I guess that is true in Star Wars too.
I always assumed it was that the Omegas were a new generation replacing the Hyperions and Nova which relative sizes matched the respective Cruiser and Dreadnought designations and Mimbari was aside there was a larger capital on the plans but never produced.
Speaking of which will a Nova analogue be the Combat Drop troop ship to suppliament your Erebus and Phoebe class Troop Transports
Not sure it would be feasible to carry the division it did along with the 18 twin plasma cannons
-
There are physical reasons to limit ship sizes even if resources are available to build bigger.
The first one that comes to mind is, basically, the square-cube problem. Mass (and thus, force needed to achieve a given acceleration) increases as the cube of the length scale. But the ability of the structure to bear those forces only increases as the square. In effect, you have the problem of your engines ripping themselves out of the mountings. You can mitigate that with engineering (change the layout, spread out the engines, etc), but handling orientation is even worse. Huge ships need monstrous torques to rotate, and those loads can become unmanageable.
Basically, at a certain point going bigger forces you to slow down or the ship tears itself apart.
A related issue is heat dissipation (something most Sci-Fi ignores). Again, surface area (which is roughly your ability to dissipate heat) is proportional to the square of the length scale, while power requirements (and thus, heat generation) are proportional to the cube.
TL;DR: ships have the same problems living organisms do, and this limits their size.
I'm sorry but this is not what I consider far future sci-fi. What you just wrote are realistic, plausible expectations based on real-life physics for the near future.
Under these conditions, the only possible result is: Humanity never leaves the solar system and dies here.
If you want to have far future sci-fi you HAVE to suppose that there's progress in all fields, enough to justify actually moving through the stars. Such as, different materials with characteristics far beyond what we have now, or ways to go around that (maybe the entire hulls are kept together by forcefields?). If you suppose that we're limited by modern, real world polymers and metals, we're not going ANYWHERE else. No matter that we have no way to move at relativistic or faster than light speed anyway, so travel is impossible.
Incidentally, Aurora does exactly this, introducing TN materials which can do things normal metals and polymers can't do, and a way of travel that's beyond anything we have as of now. Without these basic assumptions, far future sci fi is impossible and you can at most colonize the solar system. Or perhaps use generational or cryo colony ships...
EDIT: and I'm not advocating for infinite size ships anwyay. I'm just saying that in a far future sci fi setting, if limits do exist they are surely much, much beyond a 500m ship anyway.
-
If you want to have far future sci-fi you HAVE to suppose that there's progress in all fields, enough to justify actually moving through the stars. Such as, different materials with characteristics far beyond what we have now, or ways to go around that (maybe the entire hulls are kept together by forcefields?). If you suppose that we're limited by modern, real world polymers and metals, we're not going ANYWHERE else. No matter that we have no way to move at relativistic or faster than light speed anyway, so travel is impossible.
A common assumption, but not quite correct. There are a surprising number of engine designs that we could build with near-future tech that would be useful for interstellar trips. Mars in three days, another star system in but a century.
Also, we wouldn't even need near-future technologies to build a dyson swarm. Kurzgesagt did a great overview video on them:
However, none of that that is really relevant for B5, which leans heavily on beam spam, jump gates and anti-gravity. And warships with rotating sections, for the less-advanced races like the humans.
This is an unlucky start if you ask me, but the first engagement did go EarthForce's way; perhaps with no forces in the system the Centauri will back down. On the other hand, maybe they have a colony in the system as well.
-
I think you missed my point.
It doesn't MATTER how far material science progresses. It's not a problem to be overcome so much as it's a nonlinear factor in the optimization to decide how large the ship should be. Improved materials will shift the location of the optimum, but won't eliminate the fact that there is an optimal size that is smaller than would be implied by "larger ships are more efficient."
The effect is not necessarily to make ships small. It's just that, even IF you assume that larger ships are better for defensive reasons, and so would want to make bigger ships rather than numerous smaller ones, you still wouldn't be incentivized to make bigger and bigger ships (even if you can afford them). There is a tradeoff, and improved tech doesn't make it disappear.
"I just cannot justify 100m long warships."
My point was that physics provides a justification, even if you remove fiscal constraints and set up weapons tech to encourage arbitrarily large ships.
-
all in this, so far my mind is still trying to understand the logistic of working on a 17km ship...
-
all in this, so far my mind is still trying to understand the logistic of working on a 17km ship...
Yeah, none of this is getting into the systems engineering challenge that designing, building, and maintaining such a vessel would be. Probably impossible without superhuman artificial intelligence support (since systems engineering difficulty scales combinatorically, not even something nice and easy like exponential).
-
Tram lines and people movers my friend. If you ever watched the Clone Wars, when they are on the Malevolence, you can see the trains going down the length of the ship.
Back on topic of this thread.
Eagerly awaiting the next Earth Alliance update Steve. ;D
-
Tram lines and people movers my friend. If you ever watched the Clone Wars, when they are on the Malevolence, you can see the trains going down the length of the ship.
Central London distance from Aldgate East to Earl's court is roughly 11km and it's already impossible to go end to end in less than 20 minutes by tube. Besides, the train won't come every second as between stops, going up and down the line, and people getting in and out you still have an average of 3 min delay between trains, sometimes more due to security reasons.
This is a good example as there are roughly 11 stations between the 2 narrowing it down to 1km per location meaning 500m max walking to reach a destination (which it's still a great distance to walk approx 5 minutes extra)
End to end ship travel time will be then an approximately 30-minute train trip plus waiting, not too bad.
-
I think you missed my point.
It doesn't MATTER how far material science progresses. It's not a problem to be overcome so much as it's a nonlinear factor in the optimization to decide how large the ship should be. Improved materials will shift the location of the optimum, but won't eliminate the fact that there is an optimal size that is smaller than would be implied by "larger ships are more efficient."
The effect is not necessarily to make ships small. It's just that, even IF you assume that larger ships are better for defensive reasons, and so would want to make bigger ships rather than numerous smaller ones, you still wouldn't be incentivized to make bigger and bigger ships (even if you can afford them). There is a tradeoff, and improved tech doesn't make it disappear.
"I just cannot justify 100m long warships."
My point was that physics provides a justification, even if you remove fiscal constraints and set up weapons tech to encourage arbitrarily large ships.
I will make one last attempt at explaining my point. I did not miss your point. I am simply saying that all these minute considerations do not matter at all to me. I am not trying to be snarky or condescending, nor I am trying to pick a fight. I work on complex mathematics every single day for my job and optimization is something I am unfortunately very acquainted with.
However I find it ironic that you are worried about heat dissipation and materials that can withstand sci-fi like accelerations, but are ok with easy and convenient faster-than-light travel that is, by today's mainstream physics, impossible.
To me, that is NOT what Sci-fi is all about.
Sci-fi is: "I'll be sure to attend to your graduation on Alpha centauri this weekend"
Sci-fi is: "admiral, your fleet is summoned to defend the core worlds. Be sure to be at planet x in the next 14 days"
Sci-fi is: "We're having huge overpopulation problems, let's resolve the issue by building a ring world"
Sci-fi is: "Our evil neighbouring empire has build ship that mounts a planet destroying weapon!"
Sci-fi is something that fills me with wonder and excitement, with ideas about technologies and sights impossible to even imagine right now. With progress beyond what I can easily imagine. And yes, even with imagined heroism, or great wars that end in defeat.
Sci fi is something that is... plausible, so long as you do not look too close. And I'll cite Clarke here
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
When I read of a setting where there's a nation that has colonized a hundred star systems, and the biggest ship it uses is 300m long, I just feel sad inside. Really? That's so.... boring. What was even the point of imagining this then? We can literally build skyscrapers much larger than that. I'll just go back to my daily job...
I think that Aurora does a pretty nice job with its travel system and TN materials, being... plausible, if you do not look too close. And allowing for a very rewarding simulation that is quite consistent and semi-realistic in many ways. And yes, I 100% roleplay the game.
Anyway, I understand we have different points of view. But I dislike being misunderstood, so I felt the need to explain. If you enjoy extraordinarly realistic simulations, maybe you would also like Kerbal Space Program. Beneath the silly exterior, the mathematics are quite complex and realistic.
-
optimization is something I am unfortunately very acquainted with.
Hah, I feel your pain. Such lovely useful tools, with so many knobs whose function I do not understand.
-
It's okay to love space opera. It's okay to love hard sci-fi. It seems you guys favour different flavours of the genre and that's okay. It's pointless to debate them as they are two completely different things. It would be like arguing whether 2001 or Lensman is better speculative fiction since both take place in space. And complaining that space opera is unrealistic or that hard sci-fi is boring is also kinda pointless - like complaining that water is wet ;D
-
optimization is something I am unfortunately very acquainted with.
Hah, I feel your pain. Such lovely useful tools, with so many knobs whose function I do not understand.
You turn one knob - something good happens! You turn another knob, something else good happens!
Your turn both knobs, and suddenly your 50,000-ton battleship is leaking fuel all over the Tau Ceti system.
It's okay to love space opera. It's okay to love hard sci-fi. It seems you guys favour different flavours of the genre and that's okay. It's pointless to debate them as they are two completely different things. It would be like arguing whether 2001 or Lensman is better speculative fiction since both take place in space. And complaining that space opera is unrealistic or that hard sci-fi is boring is also kinda pointless - like complaining that water is wet ;D
The magic of sci-fi is that the universe can be whatever the author or headcannoneer wants. One fan sees a limitless future with all the coolest toys humanity can dream of, another fan sees an exciting collision of cold reality and impossible dreams in the form of bold new physics frontiers. Also WH40K exists. Ultimately, it's all science, it's all fiction, thus it is all sci-fi and is frelling awesome even if not every universe is to everyone's taste.
Less arguing, more oversized warships and senseless killing of alien species, I say!!
-
optimization is something I am unfortunately very acquainted with.
Hah, I feel your pain. Such lovely useful tools, with so many knobs whose function I do not understand.
I have always loved numbers. I loved optimization a lot more before it was a major part of my job. :'( :'(
And that's why now I'm all in on the RP ;D
optimization is something I am unfortunately very acquainted with.
Hah, I feel your pain. Such lovely useful tools, with so many knobs whose function I do not understand.
You turn one knob - something good happens! You turn another knob, something else good happens!
Your turn both knobs, and suddenly your 50,000-ton battleship is leaking fuel all over the Tau Ceti system.
Assuming the ship is even there anymore! Maybe it went boom!
That made me laugh a lot ;D
It's okay to love space opera. It's okay to love hard sci-fi. It seems you guys favour different flavours of the genre and that's okay. It's pointless to debate them as they are two completely different things. It would be like arguing whether 2001 or Lensman is better speculative fiction since both take place in space. And complaining that space opera is unrealistic or that hard sci-fi is boring is also kinda pointless - like complaining that water is wet ;D
The magic of sci-fi is that the universe can be whatever the author or headcannoneer wants. One fan sees a limitless future with all the coolest toys humanity can dream of, another fan sees an exciting collision of cold reality and impossible dreams in the form of bold new physics frontiers. Also WH40K exists. Ultimately, it's all science, it's all fiction, thus it is all sci-fi and is frelling awesome even if not every universe is to everyone's taste.
Less arguing, more oversized warships and senseless killing of alien species, I say!!
Senseless? Depends really...
In some settings, the only good xeno is a dead xeno! ;D
-
I really like the setting and the immediate action! What is really needed though is a “Big Ships” option for the AI so they will adopt the comparative ship sizes to your own. Otherwise it’s going to be a tale of juggernauts taking on lots of little ships which feels somewhat opposite to the B5 I remember of Earth being outclassed with their tech and ships?
-
I really like the setting and the immediate action! What is really needed though is a “Big Ships” option for the AI so they will adopt the comparative ship sizes to your own. Otherwise it’s going to be a tale of juggernauts taking on lots of little ships which feels somewhat opposite to the B5 I remember of Earth being outclassed with their tech and ships?
Yeah, that is one reason I keep my ships relatively small, I try to keep them somewhat in line with the sizes NPR uses. And I don't think I ever fielded warship that had more than 50000 tons.
-
I really like the setting and the immediate action! What is really needed though is a “Big Ships” option for the AI so they will adopt the comparative ship sizes to your own. Otherwise it’s going to be a tale of juggernauts taking on lots of little ships which feels somewhat opposite to the B5 I remember of Earth being outclassed with their tech and ships?
Yes, that is a good idea. Would take some work though to create new design themes, so not likely in the near future. However, the AI will start building larger ships under the current code as its tech advances.
-
I really like the setting and the immediate action! What is really needed though is a “Big Ships” option for the AI so they will adopt the comparative ship sizes to your own. Otherwise it’s going to be a tale of juggernauts taking on lots of little ships which feels somewhat opposite to the B5 I remember of Earth being outclassed with their tech and ships?
Yes, that is a good idea. Would take some work though to create new design themes, so not likely in the near future. However, the AI will start building larger ships under the current code as its tech advances.
Would it be feasible to make design themes be something that the community could submit? Like name themes. I don't have any idea how they are implemented, so maybe this is super impractical.
-
I mean the Design board exists for a reason.
-
I really like the setting and the immediate action! What is really needed though is a “Big Ships” option for the AI so they will adopt the comparative ship sizes to your own. Otherwise it’s going to be a tale of juggernauts taking on lots of little ships which feels somewhat opposite to the B5 I remember of Earth being outclassed with their tech and ships?
Yes, that is a good idea. Would take some work though to create new design themes, so not likely in the near future. However, the AI will start building larger ships under the current code as its tech advances.
Would it be feasible to make design themes be something that the community could submit? Like name themes. I don't have any idea how they are implemented, so maybe this is super impractical.
These are basically implemented via at least six(?) tables in the database:
- DIM_DesignTheme: Most of the columns in this table are self-explanatory and just define how a race will design their ships, though I'm not entirely clear how all of them work.
- DIM_DesignThemeGroundFOrceDeployments: Currently only one theme exists with a number of entries which I believe describe the overall composition of the ground forces. This table additionally references DIM_AutomatedGroundTemplateDesign which references in turn DIM_AutomatedGroundTemplateElements, both of which are fairly straightforward.
- DIM_DesignThemeTechProgression: This one is the most confusing to me as I'm not sure how it works mechanically. It seems to tie into DIM_TechProgressionCategory.
There is also a table called DIM_AutomatedClassDesign which I am not sure is actually used directly by these tables, but given that the other DIM_Automated... tables are used it would make sense.
So to sum that up, allowing direct user submissions for new design themes would probably require Steve to document about 6-7 DB tables for users, which is a large task to ask for a questionable return on the time investment. Probably a better approach is an indirect submission system if some user(s) were to document these tables well enough, and describe them in terms of human-comprehensible semantics. This would mainly accomplish the task of making sure user submissions are reasonably complete (it's easy for users to say "the NPR should use Lasers and Plasma" and forget to specify, say, how big their engines should be or how many survey ships they will have active at once) which means the task of implementation for Steve is reduced to just typing some numbers into a table he already knows how to use.
I mean the Design board exists for a reason.
That is for ship and ground forces designs. Design themes which are being discussed here are the general philosophies NPRs can use to design their ships, fleets, and other less interesting things (such as colonization policy or number of fuel tankers to build), and doesn't really have a forum as it's a very under-the-hood thing for the most part.
-
DIM_DesignThemeTechProgression: This one is the most confusing to me as I'm not sure how it works mechanically. It seems to tie into DIM_TechProgressionCategory.
Steve mentioned in the bugs thread that NPRs research blocks of tech based on their design theme, then get all of the techs at once, rather than researching the same individual techs that the players see.
-
DIM_DesignThemeTechProgression: This one is the most confusing to me as I'm not sure how it works mechanically. It seems to tie into DIM_TechProgressionCategory.
Steve mentioned in the bugs thread that NPRs research blocks of tech based on their design theme, then get all of the techs at once, rather than researching the same individual techs that the players see.
That much I know. However the data in the table doesn't seem to directly correlate with specific techs, and the column for estimated RP makes little sense to me as many entries have a value of zero. Overall I don't know how it actually works or how new entries could be added, unless they are tied to specific bits of actual code in which case the players couldn't touch this table anyways.
In any case, shouldn't be a major issue as long as Steve knows how it works, if the player suggests a design theme based on lasers, mesons, and size-50 missiles, Steve could add that as long as the necessary information is provided and tweak the tables himself. In theory, anyways.
-
Guess the Centauri need better fighter defenses.
-
The particle beams are heavy hitters, but fire so slowly. Smaller beams with lower strength but faster reload would threaten beam fighters more effectively at a medium range.
The Centauri are paying for their tactical mistakes and overconfidence, but now with a larger fleet en route may have learned their lessons. I think Earth can still win this engagement, and even if the cost is heavy in ships and lives the strategic gains from a victory here will outweigh those losses in the longer term, as the Centauri will be effectively out of the picture as a future threat. Retreating now means committing to a costly jump point assault later on unless the Centauri are truly reckless enough to follow the Earth ships through.
In the long term Earth is potentially a bit screwed, as regardless of the final result here having an active enemy threat so close to Sol will cost many resources that cannot be leveraged against any other threats that materialize - whether those resources are destroyed in action or tied to the defense of a jump point. At least eliminating the Centauri will allow any surviving ships, however damaged, to be repaired and redeployed, hopefully before a new threat materializes.
-
Love to see heavy action like this. The Earth destroyers are pretty cool, and the beam fighters are dominating the battlefield! Beam warfare without (long-range) missiles is always fun :D
As for the larger armada approaching, a stand-up fight seems not possible. Retreat through the jump gate and trying to fight it out on the other side seems to be the way to go.
The Centauri improving their fighter targeting between waves was improvements to the AI code?
-
The Centauri improving their fighter targeting between waves was improvements to the AI code?
Yes, I tweaked it so they would use different fire controls to target different ships if they thought that was appropriate.
-
Great action and good to seem the beam fighters working. Was a bit surprised to see the trickle of ships attacking though, I thought AI now set up to avoid that sort of situation?
-
Great action and good to seem the beam fighters working. Was a bit surprised to see the trickle of ships attacking though, I thought AI now set up to avoid that sort of situation?
Yes me too. The larger group at the end is what the AI should do (and finally did) so as the developer I'm not sure why it sent forces in piecemeal, but as the player I am glad it did :)
-
I wonder if the AI was genuinely overconfident about the battle? Given the extra RP to start the scenario, while Steve used the RP to develop a variety of weapons the AI typically focuses on just a couple of weapons and so would have a higher tech level for its ships than Steve would. Maybe the AI judged their tech advantage to be larger than it was, based on the previous encounters, and underestimated the effects of tonnage and a poor anti-fighter doctrine.
Granted, this would still be a poor decision given the Mahanian nature of Aurora space combat, but it does give the AI a certain personality flair.
-
Do the results of interrogations (= picking up alien life pods) show up in the event log? I have never seen those. Or does it need some pre-requisite?
Thanks
Thomas
-
The events trigger if you get a certain number of intelligence points, which you don't see anywhere afaik. So you can pick up 7 ships worth of survivors and not get a message, but the eight ship might have enough crew left over that you hit a treshold and get a piece of info.
-
What Zap0 said, there's no event message tying the crew recovery to an intel event, recovering a crew just adds intel points under the hood and if you have enough points a cute intel weasel pops up from under the hood for no apparent reason. Not the best overall feedback, but since intel points are a hidden number it works pretty much on autopilot as long as you know that picking up the crew works that way.
-
Finally got around to reading all the updates, I'm really enjoying it.
I like that the ship sizes are not nice round numbers, it kind of bothers me but at the same time it gives them a certain rough and ready feel somehow.
I did notice in the first post that you have 3 active sensors on the Omega class, however the 130 res one seems to be redundant.
Did you intend to put a fighter resolution sensor on instead?
I'm interested to see whether the experience with the Centauri causes any changes to the Human fleet design or weapon usage (because it doesn't seem likely the Centauri will get off world any more).
-
I did notice in the first post that you have 3 active sensors on the Omega class, however the 130 res one seems to be redundant.
Did you intend to put a fighter resolution sensor on instead?
Its a secondary 1 HS sensor for redundancy. With such an expensive ship, I didn't want it to have to rely on a 6.8m anti-missile sensor if the main array was disabled.
-
I'm interested to see whether the experience with the Centauri causes any changes to the Human fleet design or weapon usage (because it doesn't seem likely the Centauri will get off world any more).
I'm hoping humans let this one sided affair get to their head and start building fleets consisting of boarding ships only. Because whu build stuff when you can steal it from other races.
-
I'm interested to see whether the experience with the Centauri causes any changes to the Human fleet design or weapon usage (because it doesn't seem likely the Centauri will get off world any more).
I'm hoping humans let this one sided affair get to their head and start building fleets consisting of boarding ships only. Because whu build stuff when you can steal it from other races.
Imagine building only boarding ships - the rest of your fleet is whatever you managed to get your hands on.
-
Steve, how long would it take EarthGov to build a repair ship with commercial hangers large enough to hold an Omega, so that you can repair the armor? Would it be quicker than waiting for the slipways to get free?
Also it'd be nice to have one anyway, it could be part of a forward base "station" when matched with a maintenance module ship so you don't have to send everything back to Earth.
-
Steve, how long would it take EarthGov to build a repair ship with commercial hangers large enough to hold an Omega, so that you can repair the armor? Would it be quicker than waiting for the slipways to get free?
Also it'd be nice to have one anyway, it could be part of a forward base "station" when matched with a maintenance module ship so you don't have to send everything back to Earth.
Yes, I thought of that too :)
The problem is I don't have commercial hangar tech and my two priorities at the moment are the salvage module (so I can salvage all the Centauri wrecks) and research rate 280. I'm also crippled by having a terrible logistics scientist, so I am using a 20% defence scientist for the salvage module. The lack of repair facilities is a real problem though. Maybe its time to add repair-only shipyards :)
-
Maybe its time to add repair-only shipyards :)
How would these work? Uses less workers per-ton but cannot build ships? Would it need to be retooled or can it just repair anything? Would the commercial-military distinction still exist?
-
Are you channelling President Clark or General Lefcourt? ;)
-
In before a "We took care of the Abbai, we can handle the Minbari" situation.
-
About that ...
Have you considered a task for shipyards where they 'blank the slate' (not 100% sure it is proper wording in English, sorry!), like if they never built a ship? That would obviously be costly, but that would put them in a ready mode for the future.
-
Steve, how long would it take EarthGov to build a repair ship with commercial hangers large enough to hold an Omega, so that you can repair the armor? Would it be quicker than waiting for the slipways to get free?
Also it'd be nice to have one anyway, it could be part of a forward base "station" when matched with a maintenance module ship so you don't have to send everything back to Earth.
Yes, I thought of that too :)
The problem is I don't have commercial hangar tech and my two priorities at the moment are the salvage module (so I can salvage all the Centauri wrecks) and research rate 280. I'm also crippled by having a terrible logistics scientist, so I am using a 20% defence scientist for the salvage module. The lack of repair facilities is a real problem though. Maybe its time to add repair-only shipyards :)
On the one hand it seems reasonable to allow a shipyard to partially repair armour by welding big plates of metal over the holes while the ship is floating around nearby in space, on the other hand you don't want to make things too easy.
Rather than adding a separate building you could make it a new task for a naval shipyard, I don't think commercial shipyards should be considered.
I think it should be limited to fixing 50% (maybe) of the total depth of the armour (rounding up), cost twice as much as normal and take twice as long as normal.
If the shipyard is busy with another job (ie no free slipways) then double the time required for the repair.
If the ship is larger than the shipyard slipways increase the time required by a factor (Ship Size / Shipyard Slipway Size), otherwise this factor can remain at 1.
Maybe there should be separate rules for commercial ships and stations but I've run out of tea good ideas.
-
Maybe its time to add repair-only shipyards :)
How would these work? Uses less workers per-ton but cannot build ships? Would it need to be retooled or can it just repair anything? Would the commercial-military distinction still exist?
Can not a shipyard repair anything that will fit into them without retooling; so long as it is the correct type, commercial or military and has a free slipway?
So it would be a question of are they cheaper or can they just repair anthing that will fit regardless of commercial-military
One could call them Dry-Docks.
-
Maybe its time to add repair-only shipyards :)
How would these work? Uses less workers per-ton but cannot build ships? Would it need to be retooled or can it just repair anything? Would the commercial-military distinction still exist?
Can not a shipyard repair anything that will fit into them without retooling; so long as it is the correct type, commercial or military and has a free slipway?
They do. Military both commercial and naval while commercial does the commercial only.
However, I did report it as a bug considering that you should retool for everything. -suggestion
You can even repair ships of higher tonnage!!!! -bug
-
Military shipyards should be able to repair anything of the same size or lower. Commercial should be able to repair any commercial ship of same size or lower. There is a bug at the moment allowing you to repair military in commercial, but I am not taking advantage of the bug.
-
Military shipyards should be able to repair anything of the same size or power. Commercial should be able to repair any commercial ship of same size or lower. There is a bug at the moment allowing you to repair military in commercial, but I am not taking advantage of the bug.
Thanks Steve, maybe this got un noticed http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11945.msg144180#msg144180
I have some ships to repair in my current campaign but I am away, will be happy to retest it, I may be mistaken.
-
Military shipyards should be able to repair anything of the same size or power. Commercial should be able to repair any commercial ship of same size or lower. There is a bug at the moment allowing you to repair military in commercial, but I am not taking advantage of the bug.
Thanks Steve, maybe this got un noticed http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11945.msg144180#msg144180
I have some ships to repair in my current campaign but I am away, will be happy to retest it, I may be mistaken.
I've been using 1,000-ton shipyards to repair 16,000-ton cruisers...I'd assumed it was WAI but it did seem odd to me, I just didn't feel like complaining at the time.
-
I must say, this game is far more hectic then anything I've played - multiple homeworlds all within a handful of jumps from Sol!
It's a good thing that Earthforce's navy started out oversized and well-equipped, compared to a more traditional start - they've been able to leverage their huge warships with devastating effectiveness, without taking (I'm pretty certain) a single loss.
-
I must say, this game is far more hectic then anything I've played - multiple homeworlds all within a handful of jumps from Sol!
It's a good thing that Earthforce's navy started out oversized and well-equipped, compared to a more traditional start - they've been able to leverage their huge warships with devastating effectiveness, without taking (I'm pretty certain) a single loss.
Far more hectic than anything I've played either :)
And I agree I picked a good time for an oversize starting force. A lot of damage yes, but only losses so far have been fighters, shuttles and a survey ship.
-
I must say, this game is far more hectic then anything I've played - multiple homeworlds all within a handful of jumps from Sol!
It's a good thing that Earthforce's navy started out oversized and well-equipped, compared to a more traditional start - they've been able to leverage their huge warships with devastating effectiveness, without taking (I'm pretty certain) a single loss.
Far more hectic than anything I've played either :)
And I agree I picked a good time for an oversize starting force. A lot of damage yes, but only losses so far have been fighters, shuttles and a survey ship.
Something I hadn't really registered until reading this playthrough is the way giant ships reduce the effectiveness of focus fire.
1 ship that is the equivalent of 4 smaller ships means that the best focus fire the enemy can do is effectively the same as if they had spread out their weapons across four ships. They end up needing to accumulate a lot more damage before combat effectiveness is impaired (and this doesn't get into the large ship's higher armor efficiency).
-
We've now had two alien species that ran their forces piecemeal into the human fleet. In the case of the Abbai, they probably wouldn't have had a chance anyway if they had doomstacked, but that would have been the logical action as the human fleet advanced on their homeworld.
Funny enough, it would have turned into Babylon 5's Battle of the Line... only with less mercy from the aggressors.
-
We've now had two alien species that ran their forces piecemeal into the human fleet. In the case of the Abbai, they probably wouldn't have had a chance anyway if they had doomstacked, but that would have been the logical action as the human fleet advanced on their homeworld.
Funny enough, it would have turned into Babylon 5's Battle of the Line... only with less mercy from the aggressors.
I need to take a look at the AI when I have some serious time on hand to avoid that situation in future.
-
Is there still shock damage in C#? After all those armour hits I'd have thought there'd have been some internal damage mounting up
-
How big is you ship and how big is the biggest hit your ship took?
-
Is there still shock damage in C#? After all those armour hits I'd have thought there'd have been some internal damage mounting up
Shock damage odds are scaled down by the size of the ship, so big ships are still fairly hard to shock damage. Also the current tech level is pretty low so there weren't many huge hits.
-
We've now had two alien species that ran their forces piecemeal into the human fleet. In the case of the Abbai, they probably wouldn't have had a chance anyway if they had doomstacked, but that would have been the logical action as the human fleet advanced on their homeworld.
Funny enough, it would have turned into Babylon 5's Battle of the Line... only with less mercy from the aggressors.
I need to take a look at the AI when I have some serious time on hand to avoid that situation in future.
To be honest this is probably a very difficult nut to crack as the main problem with AI is to recognise threat... both to their colonies and fleet in general.
As a human we can split our forces for maximum ability to scout and engage targets of opportunity while joining fleets together for a large strike.
If the AI tend to clump their fleets together too much it is easy to find and attack it and deal a death blow in one strike, if it split up too much their attacks become toothless when you concentrate your force.
This is the same problem that we have in real life during warfare, especially at sea where the areas are vast. If you concentrate force without knowing where the enemy is and how powerful they are you risk loosing your fleets due to bad luck or incompetence (take your pick). If you spread out and try to defend everything you can't really defend anything and become too weak. You need to be able to gather strength at the right moment and know where to direct it or it can backfire quite badly.
The AI need to be better at scouting and using more scouting squadrons that behave differently from offensive fleets. The fleets or main assets need to hang back until good targets have been identified and enemy defences probed. I presume the AI need to have three layers to their fleets... the main strike force, probing forces to protect the scouts and the scouting force which will mainly be lone ships, FAC and/or fighters.
How viable it is to teach the AI this I don't know. But when we as humans just apply a small amount of tactics the AI can usually don't compete even with a significant tech advantage when it comes to scouting, this makes FAC and fighters a bit too powerful against the AI as you can strike from large distances and the AI are none the wiser. On the flip side when I play against myself using the same powerful tactics on every side fighters and FAC are much harder to use effectively.
-
We've now had two alien species that ran their forces piecemeal into the human fleet. In the case of the Abbai, they probably wouldn't have had a chance anyway if they had doomstacked, but that would have been the logical action as the human fleet advanced on their homeworld.
Funny enough, it would have turned into Babylon 5's Battle of the Line... only with less mercy from the aggressors.
I need to take a look at the AI when I have some serious time on hand to avoid that situation in future.
The AI need to be better at scouting and using more scouting squadrons that behave differently from offensive fleets.
Yep
I think the AI makes already good decisions as long as they are "informed" decisions.
If you can add a string of code along with a series of ships dedicate to scouting or "spying" then the AI will be already more dangerous and probably unpredictable as it will be its choice to attack en masse, wait, or ambush.
It can already make decisions based on ship intel and system importance, now you just need the last bit.
I am no genius or code geek, but I think that this should be way easier that what you have coded so far for the AI behavior because the framework is already there.
EDIT: various spelling errors
-
In general I think that the AI are relatively smart and does well. It just need to understand concentration of force and scouting better.
It also need how to defend against smaller crafts a bit better as well, this I think is its most major design flaw.
-
The problem I find with the AI isn't the decision making, its the templates. The AI gravely needs better (and more varied) designs IMO. It just feels like I'm fighting the same ships with different weapons as opposed to every NPR feeling unique.
The only ships that I find proving the slightest challenge are missile ships but even then it feels like I'm fending off the same size 6 missiles
-
The problem I find with the AI isn't the decision making, its the templates. The AI gravely needs better (and more varied) designs IMO. It just feels like I'm fighting the same ships with different weapons as opposed to every NPR feeling unique.
The only ships that I find proving the slightest challenge are missile ships but even then it feels like I'm fending off the same size 6 missiles
It's a lot of work to setup complete NPR templates, including the tech progression, operational groups, etc. but I do agree the game would benefit from more templates. Time is the main issue at the moment.
-
The problem I find with the AI isn't the decision making, its the templates. The AI gravely needs better (and more varied) designs IMO. It just feels like I'm fighting the same ships with different weapons as opposed to every NPR feeling unique.
The only ships that I find proving the slightest challenge are missile ships but even then it feels like I'm fending off the same size 6 missiles
It's a lot of work to setup complete NPR templates, including the tech progression, operational groups, etc. but I do agree the game would benefit from more templates. Time is the main issue at the moment.
Is there any way the community could help? if you provide a template of the format you would need, then the community could probably help by making designs etc. to save you some time and work maybe?
Edit:
Might also have the added benefit of even surprising you a bit in some of your games, by meeting designs you don't already know well because you made them yourself =)
-
The problem I find with the AI isn't the decision making, its the templates. The AI gravely needs better (and more varied) designs IMO. It just feels like I'm fighting the same ships with different weapons as opposed to every NPR feeling unique.
The only ships that I find proving the slightest challenge are missile ships but even then it feels like I'm fending off the same size 6 missiles
It's a lot of work to setup complete NPR templates, including the tech progression, operational groups, etc. but I do agree the game would benefit from more templates. Time is the main issue at the moment.
Is there any way the community could help? if you provide a template of the format you would need, then the community could probably help by making designs etc. to save you some time and work maybe?
Edit:
Might also have the added benefit of even surprising you a bit in some of your games, by meeting designs you don't already know well because you made them yourself =)
I know there are many forum veterans who would jump at the opportunity to do this - you already do this with the CSV format for medals.
-
The problem I find with the AI isn't the decision making, its the templates. The AI gravely needs better (and more varied) designs IMO. It just feels like I'm fighting the same ships with different weapons as opposed to every NPR feeling unique.
The only ships that I find proving the slightest challenge are missile ships but even then it feels like I'm fending off the same size 6 missiles
It's a lot of work to setup complete NPR templates, including the tech progression, operational groups, etc. but I do agree the game would benefit from more templates. Time is the main issue at the moment.
Is there any way the community could help? if you provide a template of the format you would need, then the community could probably help by making designs etc. to save you some time and work maybe?
Edit:
Might also have the added benefit of even surprising you a bit in some of your games, by meeting designs you don't already know well because you made them yourself =)
I know there are many forum veterans who would jump at the opportunity to do this - you already do this with the CSV format for medals.
When I say a lot of work, I am not kidding :)
It requires some code changes, but the bulk of the work is done by modifying the database unless new AI behaviour is needed. It involves several different complex tables and there is a lot of scope for creating bugs.
You need the following new records:
DIM_AutomatedClassDesign for each new ship design. Unfortunately, it is all done numerically with the program tracking what each number in each field means. There are about seventy different parameters, most with multiple options. New options need new code.
DIM_DesignTheme is overall design theme for the NPR and affects different elements of ship design plus how the Empire is run. The same automated ship design will be different for each design theme, so two NPRs would design the same missile cruiser with different weightings for speed, armour, shields, weapons, fuel, etc. Again, lots of numbers for different options. There are 32 different themes at the moment, although some are more common than others.
DIM_OperationalGroup for the operational groups used by the NPR (battle fleet, patrol, survey scout, etc.). 58 group types so far. Any new group types would need extra AI code.
DIM_OperationalGroupElement: Which automated design combinations go into each operational group.
DIM_OperationalGroupProgression: How the NPRs builds new fleet types. Seven different progressions at the moment.
DIM_DesignThemeTechProgression: Order of tech development for all NPRs, but not every NPR develops everything.
DIM_TechProgressionCategory: Different approaches to tech development, including what techs not to research. Fourteen different progressions at the moment.
DIM_AutomatedGroundTemplateDesign for each new ground force template
DIM_AutomatedGroundTemplateElements for each element of each new ground force template
DIM_DesignThemeGroundForceDeployments for the normal deployments of the ground forces for a specific design theme
Have a look at the tables to see what I mean. If it isn't all setup correctly, it will cause bugs when the program runs.
Even with all of that, it is still just variations on a theme. To add something new, like NPR carriers, or to create different behaviour, such as Swarm or Invaders, requires a lot of new code.
-
The problem I find with the AI isn't the decision making, its the templates. The AI gravely needs better (and more varied) designs IMO. It just feels like I'm fighting the same ships with different weapons as opposed to every NPR feeling unique.
The only ships that I find proving the slightest challenge are missile ships but even then it feels like I'm fending off the same size 6 missiles
It's a lot of work to setup complete NPR templates, including the tech progression, operational groups, etc. but I do agree the game would benefit from more templates. Time is the main issue at the moment.
Is there any way the community could help? if you provide a template of the format you would need, then the community could probably help by making designs etc. to save you some time and work maybe?
Edit:
Might also have the added benefit of even surprising you a bit in some of your games, by meeting designs you don't already know well because you made them yourself =)
I know there are many forum veterans who would jump at the opportunity to do this - you already do this with the CSV format for medals.
When I say a lot of work, I am not kidding :)
It requires some code changes, but the bulk of the work is done by modifying the database unless new AI behaviour is needed. It involves several different complex tables and there is a lot of scope for creating bugs.
You need the following new records:
DIM_AutomatedClassDesign for each new ship design. Unfortunately, it is all done numerically with the program tracking what each number in each field means. There are about seventy different parameters, most with multiple options. New options need new code.
DIM_DesignTheme is overall design theme for the NPR and affects different elements of ship design plus how the Empire is run. The same automated ship design will be different for each design theme, so two NPRs would design the same missile cruiser with different weightings for speed, armour, shields, weapons, fuel, etc. Again, lots of numbers for different options. There are 32 different themes at the moment, although some are more common than others.
DIM_OperationalGroup for the operational groups used by the NPR (battle fleet, patrol, survey scout, etc.). 58 group types so far. Any new group types would need extra AI code.
DIM_OperationalGroupElement: Which automated design combinations go into each operational group.
DIM_OperationalGroupProgression: How the NPRs builds new fleet types. Seven different progressions at the moment.
DIM_DesignThemeTechProgression: Order of tech development for all NPRs, but not every NPR develops everything.
DIM_TechProgressionCategory: Different approaches to tech development, including what techs not to research. Fourteen different progressions at the moment.
DIM_AutomatedGroundTemplateDesign for each new ground force template
DIM_AutomatedGroundTemplateElements for each element of each new ground force template
DIM_DesignThemeGroundForceDeployments for the normal deployments of the ground forces for a specific design theme
Have a look at the tables to see what I mean. If it isn't all setup correctly, it will cause bugs when the program runs.
Even with all of that, it is still just variations on a theme. To add something new, like NPR carriers, or to create different behaviour, such as Swarm or Invaders, requires a lot of new code.
Even this explanation is very helpful, thanks.
-
I'm enjoying the write ups, and the explanation of the AI.
I think there is a common assumption that making the AI better is just a matter of adding a few more options or adding a couple of rules for specific situations, while in reality it's a long, grinding, in depth process which won't produce results for months, and risks making things worse rather than better.
-
I can no longer see any of the screenshots in the AAR. Can anyone else see them?
-
I can no longer see any of the screenshots in the AAR. Can anyone else see them?
See this thread: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=12356.msg147294#new
-
Thanks.
-
I can no longer see any of the screenshots in the AAR. Can anyone else see them?
See this thread: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=12356.msg147294#new
On a side note, I use imgur, and so far no issues.
-
What a cliffhanger!
-
I know I've already said as much in this thread, but goddamn, you've run into a lot of alien races this game!
It's making me think that I might try my next game with a 100% NPR generation chance, since, even if it's not what you actually chose, your continued encounters makes it seem like you're doing nothing but rolling natural 20's (or 1's, depending on your point of view) on getting new aliens into the galaxy - and it's definitely making things interesting!
-
I think it is designed that way (lots of close and different races) due to the underlying theme, or isn't it, Steve?
-
It's making me think that I might try my next game with a 100% NPR generation chance, since, even if it's not what you actually chose, your continued encounters makes it seem like you're doing nothing but rolling natural 20's (or 1's, depending on your point of view) on getting new aliens into the galaxy - and it's definitely making things interesting!
I think this would cause every habitable (CC0.00, dark blue) planet to have an NPR, which would make expansion a bit difficult as you'd be limited to either CC2.00 (light blue) worlds or you'd be fighting a lot of wars.
-
I think it is designed that way (lots of close and different races) due to the underlying theme, or isn't it, Steve?
Wasn't really designed to be so close. I had five NPRs between 25 and 75 light years, plus precursors, swarm and invaders active and NPRs can activate Spoilers and other NPRs.
A sixth NPR was created by one of the existing NPRs and there are currently three different Swarms. If I survive this, it will be a miracle :)
-
I think it is designed that way (lots of close and different races) due to the underlying theme, or isn't it, Steve?
Wasn't really designed to be so close. I had five NPRs between 25 and 75 light years, plus precursors, swarm and invaders active and NPRs can activate Spoilers and other NPRs.
A sixth NPR was created by one of the existing NPRs and there are currently three different Swarms. If I survive this, it will be a miracle :)
Bloody hell. That is a lot. I can barely deal with a single Swarm unless I spawn in ships.
-
A sixth NPR was created by one of the existing NPRs and there are currently three different Swarms. If I survive this, it will be a miracle :)
Bloody hell. That is a lot. I can barely deal with a single Swarm unless I spawn in ships.
At the moment I am only fighting one Swarm. The others are being fought by NPRs, so they will most likely be huge when I meet them :)
-
A sixth NPR was created by one of the existing NPRs and there are currently three different Swarms. If I survive this, it will be a miracle :)
Bloody hell. That is a lot. I can barely deal with a single Swarm unless I spawn in ships.
At the moment I am only fighting one Swarm. The others are being fought by NPRs, so they will most likely be huge when I meet them :)
Not to sound callous, but it will be about time you actually lost anything than mirror skirmish. It is becoming really boring and predictable - you start new huge campaign, steamroll over hapless aliens for a while and then get bored and abandon the campaign just to repeat same sequence but in different settings. [years ago, at least you played with many human factions and kept interest by role-playing their interactions]
I mean it as a constructive criticism, no offense - i have same problem with many books (for example David Weber, that guy is a walking Deus Ex machina :) )
So there is to hoping to you finally getting your ass kicked 8)
-
To be fair though, anyone but Steve would have gotten their asses kicked by this setup... . But I agree: the main goal of an AI is that it can beat you.
-
...you start new huge campaign, steamroll over hapless aliens for a while and then get bored and abandon the campaign just to repeat same sequence but in different settings...
I think most of those (at least for the C# version) can actually be attributed to Steve making major changes to the database which require him to flush everything; rather than boredom.
-
. . . you start new huge campaign, steamroll over hapless aliens for a while and then get bored and abandon the campaign just to repeat same sequence but in different settings. . .
I think most of those (at least for the C# version) can actually be attributed to Steve making major changes to the database which require him to flush everything; rather than boredom.
Good and true point.
However, Steve himself differentiates between test and regular campaigns. Please notice, these 4 campaigns are NOT classified as test ones, which kinda renders that point moot.
All i wanted to point out is:
1. better to have less elaborate campaign setup than opposite, so as not to eat up too much time on early solo game (arguable, but see e. g. W40k)
2. AI is apparently way too weak in his campaigns (95% steamrolling, human brain is still OP AF)
3. expanded point 2 - as with most strategic games, one has to impose (many) house rules on himself to give AI chance (otherwise its back to steamroll)
Like i said, its my opinion/advice to make his campaigns AARs more interesting and make less of aborted ones. Much of this stems from my own ongoing search for Aurora campaign balance. Still trying to find a way to have plausible setup with competent opposing AI without getting 15 minutes long month turns or infinite 6 hrs increment hell. . :-\
YMMV, of course ;)
unrelated question, is there any plan to re-balance pops for bit more realistic values? And ideally have AI prioritize to re-settling overflowing pop from high difficulty starts?