Intellekt Intellekt

For the AI's sake, why the heck doesn't this game have *automatic* fleeting in orbit?

▼

For the AI's sake, why the heck doesn't this game have *automatic* fleeting in orbit?

from GalCiv2 Forums
So, just why exactly do ships not automatically fleet up in orbit? (They only do so if you build the orbital fleet manager whatsit available midway through the game, thus spending money and space where you may not need to).

I can think of a lot of reasons why fleeting in orbit *should* be automatic:

1. It would help un-cripple the AI. Even at tough level, the AI obviously can't keep up with a human player's manouvers, and as a basic fact it keeps multi-ship forces in orbit around its planets. Those forces are picked off piecemeal. If they were automatically fleeted up they would be militarily useful defenders.

2. It would rid human players of tedious micromanagement in frontier areas. Basically, this game seems to lack any convenient "alert" feature to tell you that an enemy fleet is sneaking up on some obscure world while you're paying attention to the other side of the map. I've actually had worlds invaded because my defenders were properly fleeted up, and thus *not in orbit*, while an enemy just waltzed right in with a transport.

3. It's just plain realistic and "feels right" for new players. Brad wrote in some interview somewhere that he likes simulations where players can go more by feel. But there are a lot of places in Galciv 2 where, at least to me, it feels wrong and counterintuitive. Since most people on these forums are obviously not new players, perhaps my perspective on this one might be valuable.

Probably one of the reasons it's counterintuitive is that in almost EVERY other military game out there, including and especially Civilization, defenders of a city or other center of power have an *advantage*, not a crippling disadvantage.


I really think that changing this game mechanic would be just a win-win situation. Especially because it doesn't seem like you'd have to change the AI much (if at all), given that the AI is already leaving bunches of ships in orbit around its planets.

33,730 views 61 replies
Reply #51 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Bingjack, you may want to revisit the thread title. The point was to help the AI and make conquest more challenging. I'm finding it hard to imagine under what conditions not having AI fleets in orbit would be an advantage for the player.



Maybe you need to revisit the thread. Several players now have given you examples that it speeds planetary conquest.


I'm playing a game where the Drengin have at least two medium hull ships with > 100 attack in orbit around most planets. I can pick them off one by one with my large hulls, only losing one when the math behind the 1 hp rule somehow ends up in the Drengin's favor. If only two of these ships were fleeted, I would be faced with much heavier losses and lose one of my expensive ships for each planet. It wouldn't stop me, but the Drengin would be drawing some blood in exchange for their expensive ships.



Yes, thats why its considered an "advantage" (even though it hardly ever is) that you need to tech up to, and build the approriate building for. Are you proposing eliminating an opportunity for technological advantage in the game?

Why dont we just start everyone out with doom rays and hyperwarp too...thatll make them much more challengeing. I dont understand the point of your suggestion at all.

Reply #52 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Well, the point was that since the AI has a strong tendency to stockpile ships in orbit, we could make this a somewhat viable tactic instead of it being no tactic at all. I really don't think it is all that hard to understand. If you are afraid that this change would drag out the game or increase difficulty too much, then why don't you say that? If you really believe that the AI would be weaker for having orbiting fleets, then I can only assume you have spent far more time here than playing the game.

And Vinraith, I have to call BS on your last post too. A large majority posted that it was an idea whose time has come. It sounds to me like there are a few people who are afraid that they will have to go down a notch in difficulty level and feel like they would be demoted.
Multiplicity - Control multiple PCs using one keyboard and mouse
Reply #53 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

You know, the mere fact that there's as much disagreement as there is is a rather solid endorsement of leaving it free choice. The AI needs to understand when it's advantageous to build an OFM and when it's not (and no matter what the detractors say, sometimes it's definitely not). Forcing fleeting upon it in all circumstances doesn't solve anything.


If you look at the thread there's strong agreement that orbital fleeting should be automatic. The people who disagree seem to be arguing either that A) lack of orbital fleeting is an advantage to the HUMAN player, which misses the point or B) the AI should be seriously improved instead, which likely isn't going to happen even if it *could*.

Serious AI improvement in this aspect is a pipe dream, because what you're basically saying is "the AI should become a lot better at manouvering, actively intercepting human players, and knowing precisely when to use the cheeseball tactic of ultra-cheap delaying ships to allow mobile reinforcements to arrive". Problem is that in computer games in general - not just Galciv 2 - AIs are just not as good as human players at sneaky manouvers. It is REALLY HARD to make AIs good at this. How many games have you played where the AI can barely pathfind its way across a map? I've played lots.

That's why the game *needs* to support a decent static defense. Because the human player is always going to be able to outmanouver the AI, so when that happens the AI had better have a half decent ability to defend its planets. And the orbital fleet manager isn't good enough because you need mid-game technology to get it and at least a midway-developed planet to reasonably build it, and even then only the AI and the new human player needs it. So for the AI it's a handicap and for the new human player it's a source of sheer aggravation because they don't know they need it and don't understand why they can't seem to properly defend their worlds in this game the same way they do in every single other 4x game they've ever played.

(Sometimes I despair at the utter lack of concern people here give to whether things in this game should actually make *sense*, and especially whether things should be avoided if they're completely counterintuitive to new players).
Reply #54 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
If i thought for a moment that the AI would benefit from automatic orbital fleeitng I'd be all for it, I'm always in favor of making the game more challenging. Unfortunately this change will have little impact, other than to make conquest easier and faster, if my experience with AI's using OFM is any indication.

As to there being "strong agreement," I'm not even going to get into that kind of argument, I think the content of the thread speaks for itself.
Reply #55 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
The orbital fleet manager shouldn't be something you put down on a tile and forget about. The technology may become available, but that doesn't mean you or the AI should necessarily commit the maximum number of ships according to your logistics to an orbital defence fleet. What you really want is several waves of defenders, instead of the laughable ten ships you can at present have defend the planet.

To hold a planet until help comes, you need to inflict enough damage on your attacker so that his ships can't fight the next turn, or the turn after that. Otherwise, you're just as well evacuating and nuking the site from orbit.
Reply #56 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

To hold a planet until help comes, you need to inflict enough damage on your attacker so that his ships can't fight the next turn, or the turn after that. Otherwise, you're just as well evacuating and nuking the site from orbit.


I'm not sure what you're talking about. In the Galciv 2 combat system I've used, either you kill the enemy or he kills you. If you split your fleet into a bunch of little ships you are going to lose worse, it is just going to take you longer to lose. How much longer depends on his speed.

Which is another thing forgotten in this discussion... players who use cheeseball sacrifice-the-constructors delaying tactics against AI invaders are probably relying on the fact that AIs tend to build slow ships. Human players tend to build fast ships, often obnoxiously fast. In mid-game wars I am fighting with speed 3-4 ships, which means I can kill 3-4 seperate groups of defenders in one turn. In actual practice, those AI worlds with un-fleeted ships just take two turns to clear instead of one.
Reply #57 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
What I'm saying is that if one wave of defenders - the maximum according to logistics - isn't going to hurt the enemy enough to stop him attacking a second wave (because he's not strong enough to fight them) or better yet, wipe the enemy out completely, then the planet is probably already lost. And, because it's unlikely that you can squeeze in a third wave of defenders because there's only space for ten ships, two waves maximum is all you have.
Reply #58 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

You know, the mere fact that there's as much disagreement as there is is a rather solid endorsement of leaving it free choice. The AI needs to understand when it's advantageous to build an OFM and when it's not (and no matter what the detractors say, sometimes it's definitely not). Forcing fleeting upon it in all circumstances doesn't solve anything.


I disagree, because all the people who seem to like it the way it is are apparently always seem to easily outmatch the AI's planetary defenders even if they are in a fleet. And thus the argument they make is having them not in a fleet delays them more.

But unless they are simply attacking with one ship, they can simply break up their own attacking fleet to go through the defender's ships one by one. So their argument doesn't make much sense - they are only "delayed" because they don't want to go through the trouble of breaking up their attacking fleet.

And plus, in my case, I usually have fast ships. So I can burn through an entire stack of defenders 1 by 1 in a turn or so. (Only exception is Torian space with their 3pc speed limit)

And frankly, I don't think I've ever seen an AI send a relief force to a planet who has delayed an invading enemy. It's pretty much just a human tactic.


Reply #59 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I don't see much, if any, validity to the con side of the argument, even if the con side is posting as much letters as the pro side.

If you're more worried about movement points than an auto-fleet, then you're going to win anyway. Having the AI auto-fleet its ships isn't going to make a big difference either way.

If you ARE worried about a fleet, then it makes a very big difference, and that makes the AI substantially tougher where it would otherwise be a cakewalk.

It's an extremely simple bit of code change, and it does make a difference.

Does it make you unable to defend your colonies with freighters and colony ships?

GOOD!!!!

I never saw tugboats, tankers, and general space debris as viable defensive fortifications, ever.

If you want to make defensive holding actions, make a viable fleet that's boosted by orbital defense facilities. Making the OFM give sizable boosts to orbiting fleets will go some way towards making this a sensible technique, although too much defensive power in the game makes for a rather boring game (so we have to be careful about that one).

Reply #60 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I would love to see this feature in the game. It's one of the few things that never seemed right in my opinion. Even if it was just added as an Option it would really improve the realism of the game for me.
Reply #61 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
To the people that are afraid of losing the option of multiple ships to slow down the AI tactic, Stardock can just make it so that you have to fleet the ships yourself, just like you do over a starbase. There you go, everyone is happy. I'm sorry but it doesn't make sense to require losing a tile on every single planet in order to get your ships to do something that they can do anywhere else in the universe (and theoretically should be even easier at home with planet based sensors and command towers helping you out)