SE choices for AI - suggestions

[Yitzi]

Yea I've really gotten on a tangent regarding many relatively small balance tweaks.

Small tweaks tend to be better, when they work.

Here's a simple example:
I have a 2/1 infantry unit, and so does my enemy.  It's my turn and they are separated by 1 tile.  If I move into the tile, my unit will die.  Therefore the tile between us is a 'deadzone' for me.  I cannot go there.  Conversely, neither can my enemy because I will kill them if they move beside me.  The tile is therefore a 'deadzone' for both of us, meaning a stalemale.  Neither side can advance.

Of course, if you have defensive units, you can use them to advance, and push the enemy back that way.  Or if you've got enough of a material advantage, you can just move forward along a whole line, and he won't be able to kill them all.

What does this mean?  Since offense vastly overpowers defense in SMAC, +1 movement generally puts the enemy into a deadzone.  You can generally force the enemy to retreat indefinately.  This is also why airpower is so good.

Actually, once AAA becomes available, defense is comparable or superior to offense when the attacker is an air unit (though choppers still get overpowered simply because they get so many attacks per turn even at a sizable distance).  ECM accomplishes the same thing vs. rovers, to a lesser extent.

[Nexii]

Actually, once AAA becomes available, defense is comparable or superior to offense when the attacker is an air unit (though choppers still get overpowered simply because they get so many attacks per turn even at a sizable distance).  ECM accomplishes the same thing vs. rovers, to a lesser extent.

It seems in my games that there's always a rush to Fusion (10) and Shard (13) while defense is still at 3.  Fusion Power and Satellites are just so good.  AAA seems to be a side tech, as are the mid-game defensive upgrades.  Thus the 'advancing column' never really works that well even when air comes into play.  The issue is that once your defensive garrison dies, the 'attack' troop dies to the next air unit with no losses (as it's usually a Rover with defense of 1).  Of course you can counter that air unit with an anti-air, so there does get to be a battle of attrition.  In the earlier game ECM is only +50%, which in most circumstances is not quite enough to offset the power of attack.  I will agree that once defense catches up to "6", air units can again be somewhat safe in a city with an Aerospace Complex and AAA garrisons.

Back on the topic of Gaia, you could make it so that -1 POLICE (or more) means you can't commit any atrocities, perhaps even with UN Charter repealed.  As well I don't feel punishment spheres should work with -POLICE SE.  -POLICE SE already applies to nerve stapling...I'm not sure why they didn't extend it.  But this would likely be too much to fix/change...I assume anyways.

[Yitzi]

Actually, once AAA becomes available, defense is comparable or superior to offense when the attacker is an air unit (though choppers still get overpowered simply because they get so many attacks per turn even at a sizable distance).  ECM accomplishes the same thing vs. rovers, to a lesser extent.

It seems in my games that there's always a rush to Fusion (10) and Shard (13) while defense is still at 3.  Fusion Power and Satellites are just so good.

I wonder if allowing 4 defense at Advanced Subatomic Theory would help balance things (together with nerfing satellites and making Doctrine:Air Power require AMA).  Then Silksteel could be 5, Photon could be 6, and Probability Mechanics is a powerful defensive tech anyway due to tachyon fields.

In the earlier game ECM is only +50%, which in most circumstances is not quite enough to offset the power of attack.

Well, before Missile weapons it gets fairly close (enough that a 2-to-1 numerical advantage should be enough to compensate); it's only after that that it lags behind.

I will agree that once defense catches up to "6", air units can again be somewhat safe in a city with an Aerospace Complex and AAA garrisons.

Why both?  Even with only one, you're looking at 6X2X1.25=15 against an attack of 10 or 13.

Back on the topic of Gaia, you could make it so that -1 POLICE (or more) means you can't commit any atrocities, perhaps even with UN Charter repealed.

I think this might be a good idea.

As well I don't feel punishment spheres should work with -POLICE SE.  -POLICE SE already applies to nerve stapling...I'm not sure why they didn't extend it.  But this would likely be too much to fix/change...I assume anyways.

Nah, it shouldn't be that too hard for the punishment spheres.  For atrocities it'd be harder, but that can always be house-ruled.

[Nexii]

I think even with those changes you'd still see a rush to Fusion and Shard.  The problem is moreso that they lie along the Fusion reactor line and that the defense techs can be skipped.  A fusion reactored 3 unit is as good as one without and 6 (though, the former may cost a bit more in some cases).  I noted that neither 8 (Chaos) nor 4 (Silksteel) are required for Fusion Power.  Now the intent was probably that you could 'rush' these at a long term cost, like with Gatling Gun (5).  So that might be okay as-is, if satellites didn't pile onto this problem.  A better fix might be to make Organic Superlubricant require Applied Relativity rather than Synthetic Fossil Fuels (a requirement you'll always have by getting Fusion, which leads me to think that was an error on the part of the developers).  I think it would be interesting if the satellites required Chaos and Silksteel instead, but I haven't really analyzed what that would imply for strategy.

[/quote]Why both?  Even with only one, you're looking at 6X2X1.25=15 against an attack of 10 or 13.[/quote]

Because once the AAA unit(s) die, the rest of your needlejets/copters on the tile with 1 defense get routed.   It's even more relevant with copters than needlejets because copters can attack over and over, whereas a needlejet can sometimes be counterhit (upon landing, or in the air.  Though I don't think it's too common to run very many AAA air units, they are generally not useful).  Therefore you have to have enough defense to prevent this from happening.  Running a lot of defense units is not that viable either, because you typically have many cities to defend.  Eventually you'll get surrounded, or your crawlers and formers with 1 defense will be whittled down.

A battle has to be considered in terms of total mineral losses (factoring for mineral production of both sides) and not just who has a higher number.  I have to do a more full analysis of optimal combat still, where not all units have the same cost.  Intuitively I think we all already know copters are too good, whereas infantry and attack ships are generally not so good.



I still feel the whole punishment sphere to avoid p-drones seems like an exploit.  In fact a lot of things that have this kind of an SE impact tend to be game breaking.  -5 POLICE from FM was intended to make it very hard to fight offensively with FM on.

[Yitzi]

I think even with those changes you'd still see a rush to Fusion and Shard.  The problem is moreso that they lie along the Fusion reactor line and that the defense techs can be skipped.

On the other hand, Fusion reactors are fairly high up as compared to Subatomic; furthermore, by the time you get Fusion reactors and are ready to get the fusion laser you've already had the ability to get Subatomic for quite a while.  Basically, even after getting fusion reactors (and other stuff you're likely to get such as synthetic fossil fuels), fusion laser is one more tech and Plasma Shard is three after that; Subatomic is 1 more tech, and silksteel is one after that.

Furthermore, Fusion power requires 18 techs, more if you stop to get weapons better than 5 or armor better than 2.  So yes, your 5/2/*2 unit is going to be stronger than your opponent's 8/4/*1...but that 5/2/*2 requires 18 techs, whereas your opponent could grab 6/4/*1 well before then and attack you (and his tree includes Industrial Automation whereas yours doesn't.)

I noted that neither 8 (Chaos) nor 4 (Silksteel) are required for Fusion Power.

Neither are 6 (Missile) or 3 (Plasma).

So that might be okay as-is, if satellites didn't pile onto this problem.

Satellites need nerfing in any case.

rather than Synthetic Fossil Fuels (a requirement you'll always have by getting Fusion

False; Synthetic Fossil Fuels is not required for Fusion.

I think it would be interesting if the satellites required Chaos and Silksteel instead, but I haven't really analyzed what that would imply for strategy.

Better idea: Switch the positions of Orbital Defense Pod and Sky Hydroponics Lab.

It's even more relevant with copters than needlejets because copters can attack over and over

Nerfing copter speed would reduce this substantially.

Running a lot of defense units is not that viable either, because you typically have many cities to defend.  Eventually you'll get surrounded, or your crawlers and formers with 1 defense will be whittled down.

Ok, that makes sense; while one of the two would be sufficient for a single city, or for a short period of time (or to defend an assault force from aerial defense), a long-term assault along a lengthy border does require both, plus some way to take out air units in the air.)

A battle has to be considered in terms of total mineral losses (factoring for mineral production of both sides) and not just who has a higher number.  I have to do a more full analysis of optimal combat still, where not all units have the same cost.  Intuitively I think we all already know copters are too good, whereas infantry and attack ships are generally not so good.

I think the answer for copters is to reduce them to 8 movement, rather than 8+2*reactor, and (because a lot of attacks won't help if you're usually going to die on the first one) to make AAA available before Air Power, and strengthen defense in general.

I still feel the whole punishment sphere to avoid p-drones seems like an exploit.  In fact a lot of things that have this kind of an SE impact tend to be game breaking.  -5 POLICE from FM was intended to make it very hard to fight offensively with FM on.

I'd agree here.

[Earthmichael]

The multi-attack capability of copters is just broken; copters should not have multi-attack.  If there is no way to mod copter to not have multi-attack, they should be banned, because they screw up the balance.

Even if you greatly reduce speed, copters are still very powerful in an active defense role.  They are way too powerful on defense even with low speed.

Copters are the reason air power is considered by many to overpowered.  With Needlejets only being able to attack every other turn, it is difficult for Needlejets to demolish the remaining defenders once the AAA defenders are destroyed.  In contrast, often a single copter can wipe out 4+ units in a stack once the AAA defenders are destroyed.

Even if you drop the speed of copters, a single copter can devestate a whole stack of attackers once the AAA defender(s) in the attacking stack have been destroyed.

[Buster's Uncle]

Copters would be almost completely useless if you nerfed the multi-attacks, wouldn't they?

[Earthmichael]

Copters would function as an attack/retreat unit, able to make a single attack then retreat to safety in a single turn.  This would still give them double the attack capability of needlejets, and they are much less subject to counterattack than needlejets.

Plus, if you need to travel particularly far, the copter can go twice as far as a needlejet, as long as you are willing to repair damage when you get there.

[Yitzi]

The multi-attack capability of copters is just broken; copters should not have multi-attack.  If there is no way to mod copter to not have multi-attack, they should be banned, because they screw up the balance.

Even if you greatly reduce speed, copters are still very powerful in an active defense role.

Unless you also boost defense enough that AAA units can defend their stack (which is not a whole bunch of spread-out bases and so does not suffer from the need to spread out defenders) at good cost-effectiveness (remember, air units don't do collateral damage, so stacking is a lot safer against them.)

Even if you drop the speed of copters, a single copter can devestate a whole stack of attackers once the AAA defender(s) in the attacking stack have been destroyed.

True, but if you spend 300 minerals of copters to kill 200 minerals of AAA defenders and 100 minerals of attackers, you haven't really come out ahead, have you?  So that means that, at the very least, there is some amount of boosting to AAA defenders that will solve that problem.  Exactly what that amount is may require testing, though.

[Earthmichael]

This is just the point.  Copters should not be used to justify any changes, because if you compensate for overpowered copters, you make Needlejets nearly irrelevant.

Far better to just ban copters.

As for mineral balance, if I am trying to attack, and  bring up a stack of 10 attackers, the defender only needs to get rid of the AAA defender(s) and then a copter or two can wipe out the rest of the stack, a single copter eliminating 4+ attackers, whereas a Needlejet can only take out one attacker every other turn.

[Nexii]

Hmm seems I was going by an incorrect tech tree chart. 

Though the point remains, offense techs are king and you should always beeline to Shard before Silksteel.

Air Superiority units are generally a sub-optimal purchase for many reasons:
higher cost than non-AS
-50% attack to ground
less movement speed than non-AS
AS takes up a slot (deep radar or clean have to be excluded)
A non-AS unit is on par when hitting an AS unit

Choppers to 8 move would still leave them overpowered.  They're moreso problematic because they also don't crash when out of fuel.  Why does this matter?  You can take a risk and sneak in a small stack to somewhere other than a city.  With infiltrate, you can know exactly where the enemy airforce is.  Since choppers have multiple attacks, it's a worthy gambit to wipe out an enemy's entire air force.  I would say air in general has way too much movement speed.  Needlejets, Copters, and Gravships alike.  Ideally the main benefit of air would not be the crazy movement, but its ability to fly over enemy troops.  Or at least ignore terrain which it already does.  Once air comes into play pretty much the only attacking ground units you want are Scout Rovers, just to capture cities.  This later becomes Drop Rovers.

Granted the AI isn't smart enough to play as a human would/should.  I'll have to do an analysis of AAA counterattack chains.  It gets more interesting, if both sides have the same movement on their air units.  AAA makes a defensive infantry unit cost effective against air even in the open.  But not quite cost effective enough to protect offensive land units under them.  Therefore you still end up making all Needlejets on offense.  Hence they are also overpowered, just less so than Copters.

[Yitzi]

This is just the point.  Copters should not be used to justify any changes, because if you compensate for overpowered copters, you make Needlejets nearly irrelevant.

Not really.  Needlejets can bomb enemy improvements (if copters try to do that, they land, take damage, and can be attacked by non-SAM units.)  Needlejets can attack enemy formers/crawlers more than 4 spaces away from where they're based.

As for mineral balance, if I am trying to attack, and  bring up a stack of 10 attackers, the defender only needs to get rid of the AAA defender(s) and then a copter or two can wipe out the rest of the stack, a single copter eliminating 4+ attackers, whereas a Needlejet can only take out one attacker every other turn.

Firstly, for a single copter to eliminate 4 attackers would require them to be only 3 spaces away (counting "right next to" as one space away.)  That's not exactly long-distance.  Secondly, with defense boosted, AAA would be quite a hassle to take out with only copters, probably costing you more than you gain (or at least giving a lower percentage bonus than simply waiting for the enemy to approach and them attacking your perimiter-defensed base*).  Thirdly, as the game progresses and more advanced reactors are used, it becomes possible to put some defense on attackers at no extra cost...it's not going to be enough to beat an attack, but it might damage the attacker enough to make 4 attacks in a row unfeasible.

*And if they try to go around the base, you should have enough time to take them out with rovers or infantry, a lot more efficient than copters.


I think you are being misled by your experience of copters being overpowered under the current rules and tech tree.  But that experience need not hold if things are changed.

Though the point remains, offense techs are king and you should always beeline to Shard before Silksteel.

True under the current tech tree; not necessarily under a changed tech tree.

Air Superiority units are generally a sub-optimal purchase for many reasons:
higher cost than non-AS
-50% attack to ground
less movement speed than non-AS
AS takes up a slot (deep radar or clean have to be excluded)
A non-AS unit is on par when hitting an AS unit

I discussed AAA rather than AS.  AS is useful when you want to attack air units, and that's about it.  (Note, however, that AS can be placed on ground units, in which case it does not affect movement speed or attack strength, and they probably wouldn't use deep radar anyway but it allows them to attack air.)

Choppers to 8 move would still leave them overpowered.  They're moreso problematic because they also don't crash when out of fuel.  Why does this matter?  You can take a risk and sneak in a small stack to somewhere other than a city.  With infiltrate, you can know exactly where the enemy airforce is.  Since choppers have multiple attacks, it's a worthy gambit to wipe out an enemy's entire air force.

Which circumstance are we talking about here?  If the enemy airforce is in the base, you're attacking the enemy's defenders (with damaged choppers).  If not, then you need AS (so your choppers have even lower speed and even fewer attacks), and you also need some way to lure them out of the base (not so easy.)

I would say air in general has way too much movement speed.  Needlejets, Copters, and Gravships alike.  Ideally the main benefit of air would not be the crazy movement, but its ability to fly over enemy troops.  Or at least ignore terrain which it already does.

I think that their movement speed does make sense; the problem is that it doesn't come at a larger penalty to combat effectiveness (which would do a lot more to require ground units than weakening air units in a way that leaves them superior to ground units).

Granted the AI isn't smart enough to play as a human would/should.  I'll have to do an analysis of AAA counterattack chains.  It gets more interesting, if both sides have the same movement on their air units.  AAA makes a defensive infantry unit cost effective against air even in the open.  But not quite cost effective enough to protect offensive land units under them.

AAA alone wouldn't, but a cheaper (read: free on defensive units) AAA plus an overall boost to defense might.

[Earthmichael]

There is no justification for Copter multi-attack.  It is the only air (or sea) unit with this capability.  Even higher tech air units do not have this capability.

Anything you do to increase defense against Copters with also affect all other air units (who don't need the fix).

Dropping copter mobility is a start, but it has little effect on defensive roles for Copters.  If I wait until a stack is 1-2 squares away from a city being defended, I can get 4-6 attacks from a single 8 speed chopper and still land safely.  This is a lot different than the attack every other turn from a Needlejet, which is then vulnerable to counterattack.  Choppers are why air power is widely considered overpowered, and they can still be overpowered even with only 8 speed.

[Yitzi]

There is no justification for Copter multi-attack.  It is the only air (or sea) unit with this capability.

And gravships are the only air unit that doesn't need fuel, and infantry are the only units with +25% vs. bases...different chasses have different strengths, and that's perfectly ok, as long as they pay for it somehow.  IMO, the best way to make copters pay for it (as compared to other air units) is with fairly small range.

Even higher tech air units do not have this capability.

But gravships (the only higher-tech air unit) have other strengths instead.

Anything you do to increase defense against Copters with also affect all other air units (who don't need the fix).

True to an extent, but copters will suffer a lot more, as (1) boosting defense hurts a unit that attacks several times a turn or is underpowered a lot more than it hurts a unit that only attacks every other turn anyway, and (2) needlejets might have the range to attack undefended targets such as terraforming or formers/crawlers near the border; copters with reduced range are only useful for defensive roles, which is a lot easier to defend against.

Dropping copter mobility is a start, but it has little effect on defensive roles for Copters.  If I wait until a stack is 1-2 squares away from a city being defended, I can get 4-6 attacks from a single 8 speed chopper and still land safely.

True, but at that point why not just use infantry or rovers to attack even more cost-effectively, and if you don't kill them all the first turn...that's what perimeter defenses/tachyon fields are for.

This is a lot different than the attack every other turn from a Needlejet, which is then vulnerable to counterattack.  Choppers are why air power is widely considered overpowered, and they can still be overpowered even with only 8 speed.

Only 8 speed would leave them overpowered, but I think that only 8 speed plus a small boost to AAA (making it come before choppers on the tech tree and reducing its cost would probably be enough) plus a boost to defense in general (which would both reduce their attacking effectiveness and thus ability to make multiple attacks safely in some circumstances, as well as reduce the threat posed by allowing offensive units to reach your base and thus make it less important to kill them quickly) would leave them useful but not overpowered.

Another thing you might not have considered: Once fusion reactors come into play, it is often possible to add a small amount of armor to offensive units without increasing the cost.  Now, 2 or 3 defense against 8 attack isn't going to win you the battle, but it will deal a few points of damage in losing, and that places a limit on how often a chopper can attack before it has to retreat or face a substantial chance of being destroyed.

I think the real issue, though, is that you're still thinking in "offense is supreme" mode, and multiattack is indeed irreparably broken under those circumstances.  But getting out of that mode at least somewhat will greatly weaken the effectiveness of multiattack, and thus of copters.  (Even if it's still be necessary to kill enemies in your territory before they can target your formers and crawlers, as long as they can't take bases without an overwhelming advantage, they have no reason not to use defensive units for that purpose...and copters aren't that great against defensive units even without AAA and are horrible against defensive units with AAA).

[Nexii]

There are a lot of issues with combat and combat modifiers.  It goes beyond just Copters, though they are the worst.  Almost all unit types are not viable.  In fact there's only 3 unit types that are useful all game.

Rovers (obsolete with Needlejets)
Needlejets (obsolete with Copters)
Copters
Once air comes out you run a few capturing rovers, and probes to smash defenses.

I know each new unit chassis should be important, but each new unit type makes the old completely obsolete.  +Move is an undervalued thing in mineral cost (I think we all agree on that).

Now I'd start with balancing infantry vs infantry battles.  With the +25% to base, I think they intended you to 'break' a base with infantry.  Unfortunately, with infantry having double the attack as defense, this doesn't work.  You can never get infantry next to a base safely.  So even at a basic level it's broken.

I feel that they really got the whole combat system backwards in SMAC.  Armor values should be equal to or greater than weapon values.  And then, bigger modifiers should be on the attack of a unit.  For example, give infantry +100% attack to base.  Rovers, +100% in the open (attacking from a base would not count).  Air units, +100% against fast units and non AAA-ships.  This sort of thing.  This creates more of a 'I make this unit to kill this unit' dynamic.  Likewise, rovers/air should have armor on them for balance purposes.  Though the concept of scrimping on weapon/armor to get mineral cost down was a decent one, they made it much too costly to have both on a unit.  The only unit with even close to sane costs with both is infantry, and its still much too high.