No Defense against Bombs? - Endless Space

No Defense against Bombs?

Copied to clipboard!

LetoSilvermane

Newcomer

LetoSilvermane

Newcomer

11 years ago

Aug 23, 2013, 7:35:18 PM

I tested a star system improvement with all the defenses set to high values and found that nothing protects a star system from bombardment.

Seems to me that makes defenses kind of useless.

The effect of bombs can't be reduced. They are an on/off setting.

Unlike troops, fighters, and bombers; bombs never run out, are never destroyed, and never need to replenish. I can just hop from system to system bombing everything to rubble.

Doesn't that make bombs overpowered?

Am I missing something?

0badgesSend private message

cgboy2003

Newcomer

cgboy2003

Newcomer

11 years ago

Aug 23, 2013, 9:36:24 PM

LetoSilvermane wrote:
Doesn't that make bombs overpowered?

Weird, I remember that you can't bomb if you don't have enough siege and land invasion power.

If they really change it and it is not a mistake, the only explanation is that the bombs require too many things.

Therefore, the devs think that should be more useful?

But, it sounds like an error to me.

0badgesSend private message

Ca_Putt

Old

Ca_Putt

Old

11 years ago

Aug 23, 2013, 9:59:00 PM

Sure there is no real defence against bombs but It's a rather large hassle to declass a system you're probably going to conquer soon anyway. Bombing a System may reduce the invasion time but it also severely reduces the value of a system: "Oh great 5 Planets no buildings and 5 population" that's quite some Dusthole just to get the system running anytime soon.

0badgesSend private message

LetoSilvermane

Newcomer

LetoSilvermane

Newcomer

11 years ago

Aug 24, 2013, 2:50:48 AM

Interesting...

Has anyone ever been bombed by a computer controlled faction? If not, then there is no point having them waste space on their ships for bombs.

0badgesSend private message

cgboy2003

Newcomer

cgboy2003

Newcomer

11 years ago

Aug 24, 2013, 3:39:17 AM

LetoSilvermane wrote:
Has anyone ever been bombed by a computer controlled faction?

Once. The requirements for bombs are even too many for players, and the AIs probably have more difficulty to figure out.

I have to say that the devs of Endless Space follow very strict rules to design the game and the AIs, like designing a chess AI or something.

But obviously AIs can't perform well because there are too many rules to follow, more than a simple-minded AI can handle.

0badgesSend private message

Antera

Newcomer

Antera

Newcomer

11 years ago

Aug 24, 2013, 3:51:35 AM

cgboy2003 wrote:
But the devs do it like designing boardgames, very delicately.

I strongly disagree with this statement. While it may true in this particular case, there have been instances where the devs were anything but delicate. And AI completely fails to adapt (actually it was more the rules changed and the AI did not).

0badgesSend private message

cgboy2003

Newcomer

cgboy2003

Newcomer

11 years ago

Aug 24, 2013, 5:16:38 AM

Antera wrote:
I strongly disagree with this statement. While it may true in this particular case, there have been instances where the devs were anything but delicate. And AI completely fails to adapt (actually it was more the rules changed and the AI did not).

You know that's euphemism. I think you point out the major problems I am also worried about.

I delete that part before you reply to prevent some misunderstanding.

I don't think designing games and AIs in the way like designing boardgames and chess AI is good. They are totally different things.

The reasons are obvious: the AIs will never, like what you say, "adapt" like how we human beings do. Probably Deep Blue(the Chess AI of IBM) can, but commercial computer games don't have that luxury. Piracy, small market, capital...you name it.

And multiplayer mode like boardgames? Come on! I love boardgames, but you know how they work.

The common practices now, especially in co-op and multiplayer games, never treat AIs and players equally. Because they are not.

0badgesSend private message

NewAgeOfPower

Old Survivor

NewAgeOfPower

Old Survivor

11 years ago

Aug 24, 2013, 5:51:44 AM

LetoSilvermane wrote:
Interesting...

Has anyone ever been bombed by a computer controlled faction? If not, then there is no point having them waste space on their ships for bombs.

In my experience with over 140 hours of Disharmony play, about 50 hours Vanilla, I haven't been bombed once.

0badgesSend private message

LetoSilvermane

Newcomer

LetoSilvermane

Newcomer

11 years ago

Aug 24, 2013, 2:54:56 PM

In that case, I'll limit bombs to just their cruiser class invasion ships.

0badgesSend private message

Antera

Newcomer

Antera

Newcomer

11 years ago

Aug 24, 2013, 9:20:01 PM

cgboy2003 wrote:
You know that's euphemism.

Hahahaha, ok

0badgesSend private message

VIPMTB-Fritz

Wannabe Survivor

VIPMTB-Fritz

Wannabe Survivor

11 years ago

Aug 25, 2013, 11:47:46 AM

cgboy2003 wrote:
Weird, I remember that you can't bomb if you don't have enough siege and land invasion power.

If they really change it and it is not a mistake, the only explanation is that the bombs require too many things.

Therefore, the devs think that should be more useful?

But, it sounds like an error to me.

Thats what I m running into myself. Once system defenses are high enough specifically featuring AA defenses you cant even give your bombers the order to take off and launch bombs so bombs were striking me as useless in endgames.

0badgesSend private message

Arngrimr

Newcomer

Arngrimr

Newcomer

11 years ago

Aug 25, 2013, 3:40:06 PM

I never thought of using bombs on a system I intended to conquer within a few rounds, however if I'm engaging in guerilla warfare tactics going around with the sole intent of carpet bombing a few systems to set my opponent back without capturing the system that could be a strategy.

In theory it sounds good, but in practice in game it's much easier to just use invasion troops or sit in orbit for five turns.

0badgesSend private message

LetoSilvermane

Newcomer

LetoSilvermane

Newcomer

11 years ago

Aug 25, 2013, 5:31:24 PM

If it were harder to capture a system without bombing it first, then you'd have more incentive to use them. I'm not planning on going in that direction though. Instead, I'm focusing on balancing the collateral damage from troops, fighters, and bombers so a typical land invasion destroys about half the star system. This will slow the conqueror down, much the same way GalCiv2 did it.

0badgesSend private message

NewAgeOfPower

Old Survivor

NewAgeOfPower

Old Survivor

11 years ago

Aug 25, 2013, 11:37:53 PM

The issue with invasion in Endless Space is that it is a very binary mechanic; to invade you must have defeated all defending fleets. If you can take the orbitals of a system, you can probably hold it as well. Therefore, you can probably take the system if you can win the Space Battle.

This is why you see most custom races taking Feeble Warrior.

0badgesSend private message

cgboy2003

Newcomer

cgboy2003

Newcomer

11 years ago

Aug 27, 2013, 5:23:10 PM

Arngrimr wrote:
however if I'm engaging in guerilla warfare tactics going around with the sole intent of carpet bombing a few systems to set my opponent back without capturing the system that could be a strategy.

In theory it sounds good, but in practice in game it's much easier to just use invasion troops or sit in orbit for five turns.

That's exactly what I think. I only can imagine if Endless Space has a decent co-op mode, an enemy faction with that special ability could be a real threat and make the game exciting and challenging.

The common practices of those co-op games are just "assigning" the ability to an enemy, like Ravagers' artillery in Mass Effect 3 multiplayer. And the AI is easily designed because an enemy only has 1 or 2 special abilities, and what it can do is using them to kill players ,and all the enemies and abilities work together to pose a real threat to players.

But the devs of Endless Space spend a lot of time balancing everything, the AI has to make the best decision from so many options, strategies and techs, and it usually doesn't do well.

But a single-minded AI can do the single-minded things well, like "engaging in guerilla warfare tactics" and doing the most damage to players' infrastructures and crippling their economy.

And many single-minded AIs gather to become tough forces.

But it is only what I imagine, too bad.

0badgesSend private message

?

Click here to login

Reply

Comment

Characters : 0

0badgesSend private message

PostCancel