naselus

Have had to ditch the strategic resource stuff. While the AI was actually handling it pretty well, it appears that they can ignore strategic resource costs when upgrading. Also, it caused their blueprints to out-tech themselves, which just forced the AI to stop building. I suspect we'd need something more akin to the AI ship designing in GC2 to get round that. I'm keeping the durantium cost on hulls, though, since the AI can't upgrade hull sizes and will always be able to produce

All the ideology-giving projects were removed and the text just hasn't been replaced.

Yeah, I've had this in a couple of soaks - on conquest/alliance only victories where obviously no one side has managed to take everything over.

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="7" id="3567991"] I'm definitely struggling using the system they made. On paper, being able to go through pre-made ships seems "easier" but in reality, I'm really having a hard time getting the AI to make the kinds of ships I want it to have. For example, I currently have no way to make the ships faster on big maps. In GalCiv II, I had the AI design the ships from scratch. It was really hard to do but it resulted in fllexible, ad

[quote who="DARCA1213" reply="34" id="3567964"] Just let-it-go as it would be fun and cool to have in the game and that's all that matters. It won't kill you. [/quote] I see, the arguments put forward in favour were all 'it's unrealistic for Yor to be effected by X', and then when we furnished real life examples of stuff which would do so it becomes' let's not worry about the realism'. Fair enough. I also don't think it woul

[quote who="rspiccaver" reply="4" id="3567858"] I think you are wrong in this regard, I have most definitely seen 0.1 growth on one turn and 0.2 growth on another followed by 0.1 again etc. I noticed this last night during a soak and thought I remembered a post about this. [/quote] That's a little better. % based bonuses are still hilariously pathetic, though.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/u0oyvn1nejy5uy4/iabwip.rar?dl=0 This is the whole lot that I'm currently using. AI strategies are in the non-standard files, all of which are called '*strat.xml'.

[quote who="TurielD" reply="48" id="3567860"] Naselus, can you put your AI code up on Github or somewhere similar? [/quote] I'll be putting the WIP version of IAB on dropbox probably tonight, provided I have internet when I get home - I moved house last weekend and have been connecting through a very limited hotspot from my mobile phone for the last few days, but should have unlimited fibre online today. They said 'any time between midday and

[quote who="Maiden666" reply="32" id="3567717"] [quote]What laws exactly? That photons are pulled back? The curvature of spacetime allows for greater values than c, this is not a contradiction of Einstein's theories. This also explains the immense inflationairy expansion of space right after the BigBang, space itself isn't limited to c.[/quote] The curvature of spacetime doesn't really work right when you have this level of gravitation - that's why

It's looking very promising indeed thb. Last night I ran a couple of proper playthroughs rather than soaks. In both, at least one AI managed to get much larger numbers of plents than me (Iridium in the first game had 3 times as many as me by turn 150, Krynn in the second had twice as many) while most other AI players were at about level pegging with me. Now, I wasn't playing all-out - no cheese tactics or super-min-maxing - but the difference in the AI's per

[quote who="Maiden666" reply="28" id="3567660"] Alot of this is debatable. The implication that a Black Hole forms a gateway to another universe etc and that if someone falls into it disappears from our universe actually violates the physical laws of the standard model (which, granted, is incomplete). In more crude words, if I vanish through it to appear somewhere else then the other mass that basically forms the black hole in the first place would vanish as well, but witho

[quote who="Maiden666" reply="26" id="3567606"] You are missing the point. If a microscopic lifeform eats on metals or minerals then it won't feed on your innards. It'll have absolutely no interest going there, which, I assume, is the topic of this thread, that a weapon designated to target biological life will not target metal. Nanobots are not biological, they are nanite robots. Now I'm not saying that such nanobots couldn't be designed, but doing so under the name "Bio

Ah, might be due to the fow command thing. EDIT: Yeah, definitely was, I'm now seeing the AI moving scouts around happily. Weird that it turned theirs off too; it didn't seem to make them any better at spotting planets in the early game.

[quote who="Goatmeal" reply="9" id="3567576"] I'm not sure the effects of large pop need to be balanced. Even with birthing subsidies through the roof it will take a long time to fill a planet with 60 plus billion people (unless you are synthetic....). The game will already be virtually decided by that time. Plus, the game has multiple mechanics that break down as they approach the extremes. It's not new to the franchise...I mean look at the precursor ship

Well, from another soak I can see a few things: The base-game AI is massively weaker than the ones I've written. Seriously, the AIs do very well upto turn 100 and then falls off a cliff as it reverts to the 'normal' AI pattern. This is probably partly due to my other changes (the expansionist AIs cut very close to bankruptcy and in my first soak actually fell into the hole, with their budget becoming hopelessly in the red from colony maintenance), but the ge

tbh, I'm currently rebalancing the whole system to use 100 as the maximum population on a planet. Many things make more sense at that point. Growth can be manipulated much more effectively if you have more significant digits to work with; it's easier for the player to determine whether %-based or raw number based improvements are better; it nerfs the power of under-developed colonies (since they have much more limited population now); and it slows down natural growth to something a li

For some reason, the AI has stopped moving its scouts in my current build; it builds them and just leaves them parked immediately outside the shipyard. Are you seeing anything similar, or is this a result of something I've changed?

It occurs to me that a big part of the problem with military SBs is that the buffs they provide are completely unnecessary against the AI atm, as it simply can't produce good enough ships to counter a human beyond turn 100, and can't produce enough of them to match a human-sized fleet. If these two problems were dealt with, then we might find that a wall of military starbases on a hot border suddenly becomes rather more viable.

[quote who="rspiccaver" reply="39" id="3567531"] Precedent goes to the last strategy defined in the AIStrategyDef.xls which meets the factions criteria. Also, the is not the current age the faction is in, it is a check to see if the faction has unlocked that age or beyond. In the vanilla xml these two reasons are why Aggressive_Strategy_General is never used. ExpansionStrat_Aggressive is defined afterwards (it should have appeared before) a

[quote who="Maiden666" reply="21" id="3567523"] As for B-weapons, these are highly specialized organisms to work under a very specific situation. Bacterias that are able to thrive within us, inside of a closed wet etc organic body will ususally die when brought to a different habitat like a clean, dry, cool metallic surface in exposure to aggresive agents like oxygen and certain EM waves. And a bacteria that would metabolise metal wouldn't be able to metabolise anything inside of an

Remember that Malevolent has an ideology choice to make them immune to culture flip, too - this may explain part of the difficulty that people are encountering with stubborn flips (and might also outright break cultural victory in some cases).

[quote who="Captain Patch" reply="50" id="3567507"] If GC3 is representative of the current hardware minimum requirements, I truly am screwed. Looks like I'll be doing nostalgia gaming (GOG titles, etc.) for the foreseeable future. [/quote] Well, no, not necessarily. You can't handle the very biggest maps, but really everything upto and including Huge should play with no problems. You just need to accept th

I think the fact that we have 3-4 modders all producing mods which outright remove or replace LEP suggests that the mechanic is in dire need of re-evaluation. Especially since multiple modders are also finding that maintenance not only works, but the AI actually handles it [i]better[/i] than LEP on large maps, even without modification...

[quote who="a0152570" reply="19" id="3567400"] Did not think this would be a hot issue when i posted. Still think it would be a cool twist if certain races had buffs/immunity/weakness from certain types if invasions [/quote] It would be cool, but it doesn't exactly take a lot of imagination to explain why they don't. There's really no reason why the Yor should be immune to genetically tailored biological weaponry. The biological weapons

[quote who="Stalker0" reply="35" id="3567363"] What happens to the AI's current building if it changes strategy? For example, the AI is building a colony ship, but then switches into a new strategy. Does it finish the colony ship, cancel it, put it at the bottom of the queue? [/quote] I'm pretty sure it completes whatever it was doing.