Sins of a Solar Empire
Page 9 of 13 Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
Hellbeans




Posts: 436

PostPosted: Tue, 12th Feb 2008 16:38    Post subject:
Excuse me for going a little out of topic, but which MOO in your opinion is the best? I read some mixed reviews on MOO 3, tho I've never played a game of the MOO series.


Blame! don't act!
Back to top
BruceWayne17




Posts: 151

PostPosted: Tue, 12th Feb 2008 20:51    Post subject: MOO
I play moo for years and still playing it and for me the best is MOO 2 and i still play the first one using DOSBox.

First MOO 12 megs Smile
Back to top
sabalasa




Posts: 369
Location: EST
PostPosted: Tue, 12th Feb 2008 22:05    Post subject:
Thank you csebal for not bashing me without reading what I had to say. And I also agree with you on the points you've pointed out where I got it all wrong. I think they tried the MP part with MOO2 and it was ... well a snore fest actually. It took freaking 20 minutes for the opponents to place their move in later stages of the game while you watching the "opponents move" screen Very Happy

And yes. If the top priority of this game was MP then I can finally understand why it was made that way like it was - making sacrifices the SP part Very Happy I'm a SP person because all the MP usually have the "build as big army as possible and then attack" strategy.

The only part I do not agree so easily is the AI always cheat part. I mean the AI has always the edge in micromanagement. The machine can do so many calculations no human being will ever be able to do and thus it will adjust the micromanagement sliders basically every turn in such way that the end result will be most efficient. Now..if a human being owns more than 4 resources he must micromanage every turn he will lose control and just hope for the best. That I do not consider cheating because a human theoretically can do this as well Wink It doesn't matter whether all these calculations would take hours to complete but all in all that's not a hidden feature. And the complexity algorithms of micromanagement is as far I can see the best way how to make the AI unbeatable and explainable how the hell can he have such a huge fleet against my 2 unarmed scouts Wink Add aggressive diplomacy, spying and optimal research to the mix and you have a formula for "extremely hard" AI to beat.

Cheating is when the computer player has advances in strategic resources (more planets during game start, more colony ships, unseen accuracy in exploration and exploitation like "they have been here before and know exactly how to get here"). In GalCiv even the devs confirmed in the end that their AI was so weak so they pumped it up with having more planets in the beginning, no fog of war and higher level of research.

And Hellbeans: I personally think that MOO2 was the best of MOOs for strategy playing.
MOO3 has a huge research tree, hellish micromanagement if you want to have control over everything or no micromanagement at all if you would like to have the planet commandants take care of it and utterly annoying AI that needs constant babysitting so they wouldn't turn against you.

MOO2 idea was to have an empire and all its resources as background infrastructure for your war that you must win at all costs. MOO3 focus is more at building the empire itself and then blast your opponents into space dust if you want to. But you don't have to at all Very Happy

That was actually indicated also in MOO3's intro...do not become the cancerous organism in the system but flourish and you will survive Wink


rgds
Sabalasa
Back to top
csebal




Posts: 455

PostPosted: Wed, 13th Feb 2008 18:55    Post subject:
Hellbeans wrote:
Excuse me for going a little out of topic, but which MOO in your opinion is the best? I read some mixed reviews on MOO 3, tho I've never played a game of the MOO series.

Personally, i love MOO2 the most, tho MOO1 has its charm as well.

MOO3 was the game that made me avoid anything that is not yet complete. I spent two years following its development, saw features promised then the whole game getting torn apart into little pieces until only the bare basics stayed in the final version.

I still had faith then and started an initiative to collect the bugs in the game into a comprehensive, easy to read list for the devs to make them easier to fix, along with my own classification on how sever the issue is in my opinion. Known as the Ultimate bug collection.

Quite interestingly it lived a long life even after i stopped updating it. I'm proud to have been part of that community, even though the fact that the company behind the game disbanded sucks.

Take a look if you want a piece of moo3 history.
http://www.ataricommunity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=289267

So the answer to your question again is: MOO2
Back to top
csebal




Posts: 455

PostPosted: Wed, 13th Feb 2008 19:13    Post subject:
sabalasa wrote:

The only part I do not agree so easily is the AI always cheat part. I mean the AI has always the edge in micromanagement. The machine can do so many calculations no human being will ever be able to do and thus it will adjust the micromanagement sliders basically every turn in such way that the end result will be most efficient. Now..if a human being owns more than 4 resources he must micromanage every turn he will lose control and just hope for the best. That I do not consider cheating because a human theoretically can do this as well Wink It doesn't matter whether all these calculations would take hours to complete but all in all that's not a hidden feature. And the complexity algorithms of micromanagement is as far I can see the best way how to make the AI unbeatable and explainable how the hell can he have such a huge fleet against my 2 unarmed scouts Wink Add aggressive diplomacy, spying and optimal research to the mix and you have a formula for "extremely hard" AI to beat.

There is your problem. Micromanagement does not require creativity, merely a good enough memory to know what you are doing and where you are doing it. Plus a fast hand with good hand-eye coordination to transfer your thoughts from your mind to the PC.

The CPU might be faster in that than you are, it sure has more memory than you do, but it is not micromanagement that will win a battle. Actually, in some game it is.. like in WC3, where success relies heavily on the use of certain abilities you have to manage yourself, but generally overall victory will be determined by strategy and tactics. Those however are far too complex for a CPU player to calculate in the time they have for it in an avarage game.

So unless you want the CPU think minutes on its next move every time, then you have to face tha fact, that with today's computing technology, the only AI that will give you even a hint of a challenge is an AI that cheats.

I am waiting for the day, when advanced artificial intelligence with learning capabilities will be fairly common in computing - just as much as im afraid of the same day - but until that day comes, you have to either stay for turn based games where the AI has the luxury of time in thinking, or better off.. stick to multiplayer games, where you can play against real human intelligence with no enforced handicaps or bonuses.

Sure, if an AI cheats too much, it quickly gets unbeatable, but i tell you what.. i spend hours playing MP games with a friend, trying to beat supreme commander AIs, that have infinit resources and infinite vision. Did i ever win? Hell no i didnt, but i've learned more through those games than i ever did in playing against any other regular AI in that game.

Hell i've gone from dead in 5 minutes to staying alive for an hour before getting overwhelmed, simply because constant challenge forced me to find newer and better ways to do what i do. Obviously, after a point there is no way you can improve any further, and then you have to face the fact, that the AI just cheats too much for you to beat it. Still.. i would rather play an AI that cheats like there is no tomorrow but packs a punch and keeps me on my toes, hell even defeats me all the time, than to play one i can just walk through without any effort after having played it once.

Same goes for playing with people. Maybe its me being wrong, but i actually like losing, as there is always something new to learn in losing whereas in winning you might not be able to tell if you did anything wrong.

In other words: It is easy to believe you did everything fine, when you've won, but you can't deny that you are flawed if you lose. Truth of life: we are all flawed and there is no hope to ever achieve flawlessness. The best we can hope for is to learn from our mistakes and never make the same mistakes again. Its just that we will never run out of new mistakes to make Razz


Last edited by csebal on Wed, 13th Feb 2008 19:16; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Ispep
VIP Member



Posts: 4117

PostPosted: Wed, 13th Feb 2008 19:14    Post subject:
Quote:
In GalCiv even the devs confirmed in the end that their AI was so weak so they pumped it up with having more planets in the beginning, no fog of war and higher level of research.

Where do you get this from ???

Besides, that doesn't really constitute 'cheating' even if it were true imo. It's an abstraction of intelligence that can be rationalised. Do you know of any competent AI that doesn't cheat (as you seem to be so opposed to the concept)? I can sympathise with your position as it's an ideal I share but I'd much rather square up against a competitive opponent in singleplayer than a stupid bot that resembles a 3 year old tapping away at the keyboard. It's just one of those things - and GalCiv series has a very competitive and (in my opinion more importantly) engaging AI.


Back to top
snoop1050
Banned



Posts: 5057

PostPosted: Wed, 13th Feb 2008 20:30    Post subject:
the ai in sins dont cheat, someone on the forums tried to claim the ai cheated in one of there games and a dev asked for the games replay because ai are never suposed to do anything that a player cant to get an advantage
Back to top
Hellbeans




Posts: 436

PostPosted: Wed, 13th Feb 2008 22:01    Post subject:
snop1050 wrote:
the ai in sins dont cheat, someone on the forums tried to claim the ai cheated in one of there games and a dev asked for the games replay because ai are never suposed to do anything that a player cant to get an advantage



Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
Take that Halo 3 players!


Blame! don't act!
Back to top
sabalasa




Posts: 369
Location: EST
PostPosted: Wed, 13th Feb 2008 22:20    Post subject:
Ispep wrote:

Where do you get this from ???


http://forums.galciv2.com/index.aspx?forumid=162&aid=155959
http://forums.galciv2.com/?forumid=162&aid=152260
http://forums.galciv2.com/?forumid=348&aid=133000

just to post a few. Just type "cheat" in the search box and read away Very Happy

And I know...all this to make the AI more "challenging" Wink In one of the threads the devs went like...OOOPS it has been like this since galciv1 and no one noticed Very Happy

Anyway...turn based strategy where the AI has the time to think have usually been the best strategy games. And galciv is a turn based strategy game.

The AIs reactions on the present situation and the enormous calculation power that is the problem for humans is usually balanced with the humans ability to think ahead and have a dynamic strategy while the AI's strategy is predestined from the moment on you click "Start game". Then the AI has only to "think" when to apply the predestined strategy (usually when the human player does not interfere). If the human interferes with the AI's strategy then the AI picks a predestined sub strategy of "how to make the human interference disappear most efficiently - if the human player has a tiny empire, wipe it away, if the situation is balanced or the human has a bigger empire - try to negotiate". If the human is violent, then make all my resource prepare for war. Stop spending on research and start producing defenses and offenses. Raise taxes, so many defenses and offenses can be bought. And that for every single planet. That was just a simple example with little micromanagement. In every turn the AI adjusts all parameters so the war machine production would be most efficient (and again on every single planet).

If a game uses that AI model - the game is for me Wink
If there aren't any distinctive "sub strategies" to be seen and the only sub strategy is the fact that AI's fleet is bigger and the human wouldn't dare to attack in the beginning anyway - well that game is for others but not me Wink In the end the AI just produces bigger fleets and that guarantees it's survival for long enough to grow big and become a "challenging" opponent Razz


rgds
Sabalasa
Back to top
Ispep
VIP Member



Posts: 4117

PostPosted: Wed, 13th Feb 2008 22:58    Post subject:
Quote:
In one of the threads the devs went like...OOOPS it has been like this since galciv1 and no one noticed


You're taking their comments out of context; "Like I said, it's been this way for years and no one (including us) noticed it." - At a glance it seems to be an anomaly in the code that they weren't aware of which grants the AI an extra turn at the beginning of a game - and in that same thread is a fix for it!

Your other thread relates to higher difficulty ratings - on the lower (just as challenging and engaging) difficulty ratings they don't, to the best of my knowledge, receive these bonuses - it's only when you crank up the difficulty that they get them.


Back to top
ShadowB




Posts: 894

PostPosted: Thu, 14th Feb 2008 05:00    Post subject:
That's true. In GalCiv2, the AI cheats only on the hardest difficulties, simply because technology can't allow for a smarter AI. But even without cheating, GalCiv2's AI is pretty formidable.
Back to top
sabalasa




Posts: 369
Location: EST
PostPosted: Thu, 14th Feb 2008 10:14    Post subject:
Ispep wrote:
You're taking their comments out of context; "Like I said, it's been this way for years and no one (including us) noticed it." - At a glance it seems to be an anomaly in the code that they weren't aware of which grants the AI an extra turn at the beginning of a game - and in that same thread is a fix for it!


Have you noticed the date when it was fixed and when galciv2 went gold? But anyway...it's just a game so there is no point arguing about it.

Let's drop the issue and move along Very Happy

OH...BTW this thread is all about SSE and not galciv Razz
We are way off topic already!


rgds
Sabalasa
Back to top
Ispep
VIP Member



Posts: 4117

PostPosted: Thu, 14th Feb 2008 11:00    Post subject:
sabalasa wrote:
Have you noticed the date when it was [DISCOVERED] & fixed and when galciv2 went gold?

Fixed the above comment Wink

Quote:
Let's drop the issue and move along Very Happy
OH...BTW this thread is all about SSE and not galciv Razz
We are way off topic already!

My original question was sincere, so I'm not arguing with you. To the best of my knowledge the AI in GalCiv doesn't cheat and the evidence you've provided doesn't go against that. I just wanted to clear up what you said and was curious as to whether you were right or not.


Back to top
sabalasa




Posts: 369
Location: EST
PostPosted: Thu, 14th Feb 2008 12:12    Post subject:
OK

Last post about galciv from me...I promise Very Happy

I think the meaning of the word "cheating" is very subjective. This was also discussed to death in the galciv forum. Some people dug their heels stating that AI cannot cheat because cheating is something only humans can do ie. betraying someone's trust and the AI has no conception of trust. Thats demagogy as I see it or rephrasing the statement into something irrelevant. The other ones were convinced that AI cheating is something when AI is using information that is denied to the human player.

Now then...
AI cannot backstab you - thus AI does not cheat.
AI does gain access to information that the human does not (no fog of war, tech trading etc) - is that cheating or bumping up the "competitiveness" of AI? That's subjective Smile


rgds
Sabalasa
Back to top
csebal




Posts: 455

PostPosted: Thu, 14th Feb 2008 14:45    Post subject:
sabalasa wrote:
OK
Now then...
AI cannot backstab you - thus AI does not cheat.
AI does gain access to information that the human does not (no fog of war, tech trading etc) - is that cheating or bumping up the "competitiveness" of AI? That's subjective Smile

wiki wrote:

A golf handicap is a numerical measure of an amateur golfer's playing ability. It can be used to calculate a net score from the number of strokes actually played, thus allowing players of different proficiency to play against each other on somewhat equal terms. Handicaps are administrated by golf clubs or national golf associations. Exact rules relating to handicaps can vary from country to country.

Now you wouldnt call that amateur to be cheating, just because he gets it easier would you? He is simply getting an advantage so that they can still get a competitive match.

Consider the AI "cheating" to be the same thing. Its not like the AI is doing things without asking you first. You set its level of AI advanteges by selecting the difficulty settings when starting a game. You dont want it to "cheat", simply ignore the difficulty settings from which it gets an advantage.

I really dont know whats the big deal about it. Not like the AI has much of a chance either way.. In most games you have to take on multiple teamed AIs to get an even remotely challenging experience, and that with cheating turned on..

In civ4, people beat sid level games and on that level the ai "cheats" like there is no tomorrow.. yet people still beat them.. on the normal difficulty level, prince i think, the last level where there is no cheating involved, the AI is so ridiculously easy to play, that it just isnt fun.

Same goes for RTS games as well, where without the extra resource bonuses and visibility the AI gets on higher difficulty levels, it simply is no match for human intelligence.

Bottomline: There is not cheating AI, merely handicapped human players.
Back to top
sabalasa




Posts: 369
Location: EST
PostPosted: Thu, 14th Feb 2008 15:22    Post subject:
OK!

I step back!

I already regret that I brought up that issue Smile

It's almost like Win vs Linux argument or the definition of software piracy - is it stealing or not Wink

As I said it's very subjective and there is no solution that would be acceptable for both sides Smile Handicapped or not...it's all about fair play anyway and everyone defines fairness for himself Wink


rgds
Sabalasa
Back to top
csebal




Posts: 455

PostPosted: Thu, 14th Feb 2008 15:46    Post subject:
sabalasa wrote:
OK!

I step back!

I already regret that I brought up that issue Smile

It's almost like Win vs Linux argument or the definition of software piracy - is it stealing or not Wink

As I said it's very subjective and there is no solution that would be acceptable for both sides Smile Handicapped or not...it's all about fair play anyway and everyone defines fairness for himself Wink


WIN / Not stealing. Period. Any more questions? Razz

There is some common sense to be made in defining fair play tho. I would hardly call me playing chess against a grand master on even terms to be pair play. The master would probably run circles around me and still beat me in a handful of moves.

Playing on even terms is only good for one thing, if you want to compare your skills against that of someone else. In that case, having various random variables and enforced handicaps making it easier / harder for one side to play is not a good thing, as it distorts results. Then again, if all you want to have is fun, and an even game.. then you got to give some advantages to the weaker side.

All in one, there is one thing in which i agree with you. It was a terrible mistake for you to bring up this issue. Smile
Back to top
sabalasa




Posts: 369
Location: EST
PostPosted: Thu, 14th Feb 2008 16:20    Post subject:
You look at things from your point of view without stepping back and looking at the big picture Razz

You wouldn't actually play chess against a grand master, knowing that you have a snowball chance in hell, would you?
So your argument is that the grand master should give you some advantages against his superiority to balance the game. Fair enough.

Now put another grand master into your seat...what will the other grand master think of it when he should also give the same advantages to the other grand master? Does that qualify as cheating?
Your definition is based on the assumption, that if you're not a grand master then no one else is (me and the world reasoning) which is statistically true in this case...99,999% of the population is not a grand master.

Now this discussion could go very philosophic and I rather avoid that kind of discussions Razz


rgds
Sabalasa
Back to top
sabalasa




Posts: 369
Location: EST
PostPosted: Thu, 14th Feb 2008 16:24    Post subject:
another good example of "me and the world reasoning" is:
I do not listen to country music. That means country music is not popular.

Now go tell that in Texas Very Happy


rgds
Sabalasa
Back to top
Blake_Stone




Posts: 8

PostPosted: Fri, 15th Feb 2008 00:39    Post subject:
I'm finally getting the hang of it, although the AI can be quite frustrating. They seem to flee most of the time (sometimes with more ships) and I start chasing them half-way across the solar system / galaxy. Other then that is a ok game , Imperium Galactica however is still my nr1 game Smile
Back to top
D4rkKnight




Posts: 801

PostPosted: Fri, 15th Feb 2008 02:27    Post subject:
Yeah I don't like fighting the AI they run too much, multiplayer is where its at.
Back to top
clragon




Posts: 470

PostPosted: Fri, 15th Feb 2008 05:16    Post subject:
not sure if this has been posted but this game got 9.0 on gamespot lol

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/sinsofasolarempire/review.html?sid=6185991
Back to top
snoop1050
Banned



Posts: 5057

PostPosted: Fri, 15th Feb 2008 06:06    Post subject:
D4rkKnight wrote:
Yeah I don't like fighting the AI they run too much, multiplayer is where its at.
yea i just had a nice 2v2, looked like my side were going to lose until i started the frigate spam of LRM's Laughing
the other team both attacked us at our homeworlds in a coordinated strike so we had to fend for ourselfs, i built 3 frig factorys and had one feeding my ally and 2 feeding my homeworld constantly Very Happy

i killed the fleet attacking me and helped make the other guy run away , by time we had fought off 2 waves from our enemys i had a fleet of 130 LRM's and a second of 71 that i was helping the other guy defend with Laughing

we came really close to losing aswell the game could have swung either way really but we managed to pull it back somehow its pitty not all games are like that usually there so one sided its impossible to even defend
Back to top
upstart_69




Posts: 1094
Location: Right behind you!
PostPosted: Sat, 16th Feb 2008 00:37    Post subject:
Blake_Stone wrote:
I'm finally getting the hang of it, although the AI can be quite frustrating. They seem to flee most of the time (sometimes with more ships) and I start chasing them half-way across the solar system / galaxy. Other then that is a ok game , Imperium Galactica however is still my nr1 game Smile


Yeah this is being addressed in patch 1.03 which is due soon, here's the quote:

Quote:
We hope to get v1.03 out by the end of the month (no promises though). Ironclad (and Stardock) are pretty exhausted from the final weeks of effort and the first week of launch so resting will be done.

So think of v1.03 as a few key tweaks that you think would really make the game more enjoyable not just for you but other people.

Here's an example of things we're talking about right now:

* Updated AI players
* More Game Speed Options
* More aggressive AI players replacing dropped players (i.e. active AI)
* AI surrendering
* Improvements to ICO
* Unit cap increases

We have lots of ideas. But the key thing to remember, we want to get 1.03 out this month if possible. So sure, we can all imagine things like random events or fancier diplomacy or other things of that nature but those would take far too long to get into the game.


BTW, did I mention how much my love for stardock is lately? If not, I will say it again. And it's not without its reasons. Just another one to add to the many: They shipped me not just the one copy I ordered, but TWO copies of the collector's edition. I am guessing because I had them switch my serial to my other already existing account. A screw-up obviously, but a good one in this rare case. Laughing


Core i7 920 @ 3.8Ghz | 6GB OCZ DDR3 8-8-8-24 @ 1600mhz | eVga x58 Mobo | 2 x eVga GTX 460 SLI | Intel X25-M + 3x Seagate + WD Black = 2.75TB | X-Fi Titanium | PCP&C Silencer 750 | G15 KB | G5 Mouse | G35 Headset | Z-5500 Digital | Samsung T260HD
Back to top
syke247




Posts: 147

PostPosted: Sat, 15th Mar 2008 15:05    Post subject:
1.03 patch out! And the official forums are ofcourse down so I have noone to talk to about it Sad

Shortlist highlights (my picks):
 Spoiler:
 


Unfortunately missing are fleet improvements, so I guess I still won't use them.

But the new AI is pretty good. I haven't seen it run away yet, mostly due to it kicking my ass and winning the game I just played.


Full changelist (with thanks to google cache)
 Spoiler:
 
Back to top
snoop1050
Banned



Posts: 5057

PostPosted: Tue, 18th Mar 2008 16:07    Post subject:
sins devs have said there game was the number 1 selling game in feburary according to there internally tracked sales.
its number #2 officially by that stupid agency that doesnt track walmart and digital sales
Back to top
kazemaky




Posts: 2273
Location: Estonia
PostPosted: Tue, 18th Mar 2008 18:14    Post subject:
It's one of the few RTS games that i like. Smile


i5-3570k @4.4gHz, MSI GTX 970 GAMING 4g OC'd, MSI z77a-g45, Corsair Vengeance 8gb 1600mHz, Corsair TX650 PSU, Crucial M4 128gb, WD 1.5 TB HDD, Seagate 1TB HDD, LG 27MB85R-B 1440p
RSI name: ctulu
Back to top
Ace170780




Posts: 472

PostPosted: Tue, 18th Mar 2008 22:50    Post subject:
Yeah personaly this game is the best space RTS i've played since Ascendancy back in the 90's o.O dont get me wrong there have been some descent ones but none that have got me hooked like this game does.
Back to top
A-A




Posts: 3153
Location: New york
PostPosted: Wed, 19th Mar 2008 00:32    Post subject:
Back to top
JBeckman
VIP Member



Posts: 34974
Location: Sweden
PostPosted: Tue, 1st Jul 2008 05:46    Post subject:
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/53384

Details on patch 1.1, updates a bit of everything.
Back to top
Page 9 of 13 All times are GMT + 1 Hour
NFOHump.com Forum Index - PC Games Arena Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)  


Display posts from previous:   

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group