SE choices for AI - suggestions

[Nexii]

Yea well the intent was that infantry and tanks with both weapons and armor would be viable.  Right now they're not.  Keep in mind, a lot of these free abilities like AAA/ECM would only apply to defensive infantry and tanks, so they wouldn't have that benefit.  You could also apply the speed increase cost on tanks, if they're too good (I'd argue EM's suggestion would mostly make rovers obsolete, whether this is good or not is debatable).

It should be that either weapons and armor start at 0 and go to 6 (with a factor of W*A), or chassis costs are all 1 less than I listed.   The former probably makes more sense.

An infantry with the best weapon and armor would cost 110.  Alternatively, you can buy a defensive infantry for 50 (with free modifiers) and an attack infantry to go with it for 70.  I think that's a pretty good balance.

[Yitzi]

Yea well the intent was that infantry and tanks with both weapons and armor would be viable.  Right now they're not.

Well, you didn't really think something called "shock troops" or "behemoth" would be cheap, did you?  (Although shock troops are still substantially cheaper than facilities of the same tech level).  I think having to choose a weakness for each unit makes for a more interesting game.

An infantry with the best weapon and armor would cost 110.  Alternatively, you can buy a defensive infantry for 50 (with free modifiers) and an attack infantry to go with it for 70.  I think that's a pretty good balance.

If you want "best of everything" units to be fairly common.  I think that the game works better if they aren't.

[Nexii]

A few things to consider:
If you're attacking and you lose your offense infantry, you're only down 70 minerals instead of 110. 
If you lose your defense garrison, the enemy has to commit an additional unit to kill off your offense unit.  This often sets up a counterattack.
It's much more vulnerable to rovers/air, unless you put ECM/AAA on it.  And in this case the 'good at everything' infantry would cost a lot more than 110.  If AAA has -1 for a modifier and ECM, each of these has a cost of 2 when weapon is double armor.  Not very viable to pay 220 for an all around infantry.

I do see some upsides to the all around infantry:
- 10 less mineral cost
- Less transport space
- Less support required
- More suited to Drop and other Cost: 1 modifiers not skewed to defense.  Where the defense unit would have to give up one of ECM/Trance/AAA to follow along.

Although if you really hated all around infantry it could also have the option of (W*A) applied.

[Earthmichael]

Just as Cruisers usually make Foil obsolete, I think Hovertalk should do this to Rovers.

I think the roles could be better defined with the special abilities, not the weapon and armor.  For example, the default unit would be your best reactor, best weapon, and best armor.  But for certain special roles, such as air defense, it might be costed so that it is cheaper (or even free) to add air defense to a defensive unit.  So there would still be a reason to create specialized units.

Most of my games do not get to Hovertanks, either.  For a typical game on the vets map, the game is usually over by turn 150 or less.  On a really huge map, I could see getting to higher techs before things get decisive.

[Nexii]

If you wanted to actively encourage max weapon/armor on all units, you could instead make the formula:

M = (max (W, 1.5*A) + C) * 10

With no (W*A) modifier on faster units.  You would also need to increase W/A cost amounts slightly.

[Yitzi]

A few things to consider:
If you're attacking and you lose your offense infantry, you're only down 70 minerals instead of 110. 
If you lose your defense garrison, the enemy has to commit an additional unit to kill off your offense unit.  This often sets up a counterattack.
It's much more vulnerable to rovers/air, unless you put ECM/AAA on it.  And in this case the 'good at everything' infantry would cost a lot more than 110.  If AAA has -1 for a modifier and ECM, each of these has a cost of 2 when weapon is double armor.  Not very viable to pay 220 for an all around infantry.

I do see some upsides to the all around infantry:
- 10 less mineral cost
- Less transport space
- Less support required
- More suited to Drop and other Cost: 1 modifiers not skewed to defense.  Where the defense unit would have to give up one of ECM/Trance/AAA to follow along.

Although if you really hated all around infantry it could also have the option of (W*A) applied.

It's not a question of "hate all around infantry", it's that discouraging all-around infantry is neither broken nor unbalancing, and so I don't think it's worth changing it from the original rules.

Just as Cruisers usually make Foil obsolete, I think Hovertalk should do this to Rovers.

They already do, for the same reason.  But at least foil is cheaper (and so is often better for formers, crawlers, and maybe colony pods); rovers should at least have that advantage.

I think the roles could be better defined with the special abilities, not the weapon and armor.  For example, the default unit would be your best reactor, best weapon, and best armor.  But for certain special roles, such as air defense, it might be costed so that it is cheaper (or even free) to add air defense to a defensive unit.  So there would still be a reason to create specialized units.

Interesting idea, but it'd just be too much unnecessary change for me.  But feel free to add your in the thread in Modding, and when I get to adding varying formulae I'll probably add whatever's there.

[Kilkakon]

What do people think about Gravships? Are they like ever used?

[Yitzi]

What do people think about Gravships? Are they like ever used?

I don't see why they wouldn't be, once the necessary tech becomes available.  They don't have multiattack like choppers, but still have good speed without needing a base or airbase nearby.

[Nexii]

Gravships are also cheaper than Drop troops and defense foils for capturing bases.  And they're much faster than ordinary Rovers and Hovertanks.  So while Copters will still make up most of your force, Gravships have their place.

Also Gravship formers and colony pods are nice to have, once you can spare the extra cost.

[Yitzi]

As I understand it, superdrones are only harder to suppress via psych, facilities turn them into citizens as easily as normal drones.

In the process of studying the drone rules, I found that this is not in fact true.  Facilities also take two units of drone suppression to suppress a superdrone, though they seem to work on them last.

[Yitzi]

As I understand it, superdrones are only harder to suppress via psych, facilities turn them into citizens as easily as normal drones.

In the process of studying the drone rules, I found that this is not in fact true.  Facilities also take two units of drone suppression to suppress a superdrone, though they seem to work on them last.

Well, I've investigated some more, and it is true, but doesn't show up in the final base display.  (It does show up in the psych breakdown, though; furthermore, it does not lead to actual drone riots.)  Thus, this raises the question: Is superdrones not being harder to suppress via psych a bug, or is the bug just that the drones in the main base screen display wrong?

[Buster's Uncle]

...It's a kind of bug in general that drone stuff is so impossible to anticipate and understand, and this particular thing is definitely part of that...

[Yitzi]

Once I finish looking over the code, I plan to post a full description of the rules, including options I plan to include in version 2.1.