UI / AI feature request

"Hard coded" attack types

from Sins Forums
I know how difficult this is to program from a pure AI standpoint, but there should be a way of hard-coding some options that could be controlled via a UI toggle.

Best example of a hard-coded attack tactic to use, the game can make units abide by these rules but would have a hard time coming up with by itself.

Mobile attacking force attacking static defenses, especially when defenses have range < attacker's range (missile frigates vs cannons).

We all know the scenario, we've all micro'ed it hundreds of times in this game and many before, attacking a fortified position with siege weapons, creeping up one structure at a time. Until the defense gets substantial mobile defenders it's a given that it will fall and the attacker should be able to do it without retaliation.

In current game terms, this means all ships on weapon range, just behind the missile frigates to protect them from incoming fighters meanwhile the missile frigates slowly advance, taking out one static defense after another. It's quite easy to micro and it's (relatively) easy to program as a hard-coded option. There is no reason why I should ever lose a resource (other than expendables like fighters) while advancing on static defenses if I have at least some weapons at longer range than the defenses. You could make a routine to do a logic check, if max range attacker > max range defender then option box "Use siege attack rules?" for player.

Another option that could be hard coded is when max range of planetary assault weapons allows for a firing opportunity that is out of range of defenders, this is a much harder task to program but a player could micro-manage clearing a "blind spot" for attackers and then feel safe allowing the AI to complete the assault. Priority could be programmed in to eliminate construction vehicles attempting to build new defensive structures.

My intent with this suggestion is to reduce mindless micro-management. Obviously this is of less use in human vs human battles but even then it forces the human player to have mobile defenses to support the static defenses. Heck, there's no reason why attacking craft can't be programmed to have the option of "do not advance into static defenses range unless explicitly ordered". I was playing over the weekend and even when I was micro-managing my assault I had a cruiser decide it wanted to use a special ability and off it went to "help" my missile frigates. Needless to say it died to 8 gauss cannons a few seconds later, taking the long way of turning around when I told it to move back behind the kill line.

3,366 views 5 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top
I agree. Something needs to be done to address this. Perhaps just increase the range of the static defenses? I doubled the range to try it out, and found it worked much better. The gauss cannons were actually effective when spaced evenly around the system. I could easily cover the system in such a way that at least 3 cannons attacked any vessel no matter where it was. I'm not sure what the ranges are for the system and the cannons, but the cannons ought to at least reach half way across the system. So, if they are on the outer edge of the system, they should be able to hit any ships on their side of the planet/asteroid. That way, you can build defenses at the entrance of each jump line without worrying about having ships completely bypass those defenses to just attack the planet. It would eliminate the whole problem of having to manually maneuver your ships in the system to avoid weapons platforms and hit them from long range. It would also make the weapons much more effective in combats involving large fleets and would make it much more difficult to kill the AI. The AI doesn't avoid your cannons to begin with, so allowing the human player the option of doing so simply stacks the odds in the favor of the human player.
Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top
The AI doesn't currently avoid your cannons.

There are much better placements for your cannons than at the entrances to your solar system - use them to protect key structures would be a better idea. Increasing their range so they can hit the jump point is rather absurd, as it would remove any need for any other type of mobile defense.

If you rely only on cannons and you they get bypassed, then it is time to build a defensive fleet.

The fewer turtle options, the better.

Then again, that's just my opinion. Perhaps one of the three races will have more advantageous defensive structures. Remember, we're just testing 1 of 3 right now.
Star Control: Origins
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top

The fewer turtle options, the better.


Hey, I like turtling! Some of us prefer that playstyle don'tcha'know.
Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top

The AI doesn't currently avoid your cannons.

There are much better placements for your cannons than at the entrances to your solar system - use them to protect key structures would be a better idea. Increasing their range so they can hit the jump point is rather absurd, as it would remove any need for any other type of mobile defense.

If you rely only on cannons and you they get bypassed, then it is time to build a defensive fleet.

The fewer turtle options, the better.

Then again, that's just my opinion. Perhaps one of the three races will have more advantageous defensive structures. Remember, we're just testing 1 of 3 right now.


I'm not advocating building the static system defenses so that they can completely repel an attacking fleet. I am just advocating not making them totally useless. Currently, I place 3 cannons, then a jump inhibitor, shield generator, and repair platform all in one small area. Then, I cluster 4 hangers and the rest of the cannons around those structures as tightly as I can. I make sure they are within range of my planet and other structures.

However, the computer is very _dumb_ when it comes to placing the static structures and when it comes to attacking static structures. They just plow right into the firing range of all the cannons and then fire at ships and soak up damage from the cannons. They die like a swarm of gnats being hit be a blast of RAID (the bug spray). On the other hand, human players move into a system, separate the ships from the cannons and kill them, then use long range attacks like LRM or bombers to deal with the cannons. The cannons are TOTALLY USELESS against human players. All I am advocating is that they be at least somewhat usefull. You can do this by ensuring they have a range capable of reaching half-way across the system. As it stands, increasing range won't help human players fend off AI attacks, because the AI moves right into weapons range as it is. They will just get in range a little bit sooner with a longer range on the platforms. However, it will help the AI fend off human attacks, because we will no longer be able to so easily avoid the cannons.
Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top
I think it would be nice to have options that allowed you to customize how your units auto attacked and such. And yes I think it would be great if the AI actually dealt with gauss defenses intelligently but the AI right now has a lot of major flaws so there is a good chance this is something they are working on.

As for the Gauss Cannon Range I think that's a lil off topic but personally I think their fine as is. I mean sure you can out range them with some unit types but so what. This is a very common thing in warfare. Catapults were often used to take down enemy walls and defenses from outside their attack range. Artillery is used now a days to take out bunkers and emplacements from outside their range. And again many people are asking for an advantage for using tactics and that is one right there but then many people it seems asking to remove it. Planetary defenses should never be enough to hold off a major attack they are merely a speed bump to slow down the attack and give time for defenders to arrive. Or they are to repel small strike forces.