Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Megas]

I just want the ships to be used competently by AI.  Player can make those high-tech ships good, but when I already pilot something better, I still want smaller ships in my fleet, and it would be nice if the AI can use them.  Usable by AI is the use case I am most interested in because I will likely pilot Onslaught or better by the time I either recover the high-tech ships from the enemy or build some with my Orbital Works.

[Thaago]

I find that the AI is quite competent with the high tech 'burst speed' lineup (even the Wolf, despite it being a subpar ship in almost every way) as long as it has an aggressive AI in two major cases: 'punching down', and local numerical parity/superiority. As soon as in the immediate area your ships are not outnumbered and an order makes them close on a superior enemy (either full assault or an eliminate) the AI uses its system to move in and then starts doing the swap out->vent-> close cycle. The enemy is not being able to vent because of the numbers and missile threats. Its the usual skirmisher strategy and not unique to high tech, but high tech is good at it because of speed and ion. But this key part of high tech fighting is completely absent in 1v1 testing, because 1v1 testing is unrealistic and flawed.

An objection to this might be 'but you can't outnumber the AI', but when using a fast fleet that's not the case for 2 reasons:
1) the numbers only need to be local, and the player controls where and when engagements happen (unless they are using slow ships like Apogees). If the AI splits its forces (it often does going after control points) then local superiority is easy to achieve - any enemy ship sent alone to a control point is a kill that costs 1 command point for the eliminate order.
2) the player can kill the weak enemy ships before engaging the larger ones. High tech ships are good at 'punching down' like this as they are fast for their classes and can have good burst firepower. 'Punching down' isn't an afterthought or a ribbon of an ability that is not useful, its the crucial step 1 in every battle where skirmisher type units engage against superior enemies.

[Megas]

But this key part of high tech fighting is completely absent in 1v1 testing, because 1v1 testing is unrealistic and flawed.

I would not think that is unrealistic and flawed when it actually happens from time to time in a real fight when ships get separated from their main fleets, although they do not drag for minutes as done in an Apogee vs. Falcon duel.  (The drag out part is handy to know that your ship will survive until something else intervenes.)

If the game automatically determines ship behavior when I do not give orders, I do not want it to automatically tell Fury go after that cruiser because you are a cruiser too, and you can do it, when it probably cannot and will get clobbered.  Meanwhile, I am okay with letting SO Hyperion do whatever it wants because it is so strong.

[Draba]

I do feel Auroras are a tiny bit too expensive at 30 now, but swapped them out pretty fast in 9.5.1a so might be just missing the magic sauce for them.
Fury feels fine, kept 2 of them behind the line in a few fleets and if anything gets behind an eliminate order gets rid of it very fast and reliably. Both racked up tons of solo kills in most battles.

Champion is basically almost a high tech ship already, just swap out the two hybrid mounts with energy ones and that's pretty much a stronger Apogee focused more on offense. With far less awkward turret arcs of course.

Its speed is an absolute liability unless running in a well established cruiser and/or capital fleet, but if I'm running a fleet like that why would I take a medium firepower hybrid exploration ship? Especially now that the Champion is a thing. Its very hard to "punch up" with an Apogee, because it cannot run from the big threats that will eventually wear down its impressive shield and kill it.

Champion is my preference in most fleets, but Apogee does have 1 thing over it: squall only costs 18 DP and it can still get a weaker HIL/tach lance behind it.
Squall spam is glorious now, and gets around the main weakness of the Apogee. It can't get caught out if your feet pushes the enemy across the entire front, and can smash shields+get some beams on anything at a moment's notice.
Doesn't feel completely cheesy, but got my fill just in case it does get nerfed

[Goumindong]

7. Once the ship is at high flux, it starts backing off. Now, the Falcon clearly uses its Maneuvering Jets to chase down the ship, so in that case the AI knows to use its shipsystem to chase a target. It's just that for whatever reason, the same thing doesn't happen for the Fury nor the Aurora.

I think This is due to instantaneous damage and range banding.

That is. The fury is attempting to get into range while flux is low enough. But it is also accurately recording that it’s losing the fight right now and as a result should not get closer to a ship it’s currently losing against.

If a ship cannot punch its weight, let alone above it, then it is likely an inferior ship compared to one that can.

No. There is very much value in having different roles that ships can fill. A more expensive ship should generally fill that role better (but not necessarily better enough for the DP or maybe it fills other roles too)

[intrinsic_parity]

Yeah, my understanding is that the AI bases decisions about approaching/retreating on relative flux levels. If a ship has low flux while the enemy has high flux, it will play very aggressively, so a falcon that has a flux advantage will chase down its opponent. But if you have a range disadvantage, then you will take damage on shields while approaching before you can deal any damage, which sets you behind in the flux battle, and if that flux offset is too large, the AI decides it's losing and needs to back off and never actually gets into range. This is why capacity can be important for 1v1s, because it means that you need to take more damage to hit that threshold where the AI backs off, so it increases the chances of the AI committing to a fight.

A human understands that you need to commit to the fight to have a chance of achieving anything, but in a fleet context where committing can expose you to a lot of other threats, that can be very dangerous, and so the AI is generally set to play it safe and not commit unless it has a flux advantage unless you give it specific orders. I don't think that's totally unreasonable, but it definitely does not work as well in 1v1s. Eliminate orders can fix that to some extent though.

The aggressiveness of your AI does have a big impact too since it determines the tolerance of the AI to being at a disadvantage. I think this is the main tool the player has to work around these mechanics. Aurora and Fury basically require agressive AI IMO. Steady is too timid, and Aurora/fury don't have the hull/armor to tolerate reckless IMO.

I also feel like the AI doesn't really use mobility systems to achieve specific goals (like getting into range or chasing something down) with much consistency. It feels like it mostly just pops it randomly and doesn't do much, although I'm sure it's doing more than that under the hood. It feels like scarabs in particular love to pop their system and then just hover out of range.

[TaLaR]

AI can easily lose even perfect kiting machines, immortal from my point of view (mod ships with ridiculous combined range/speed/flux advantage over vanilla opponents they were facing for test fights). So I expect even less from just fast ships that have range disadvantage to deal with.

Aurora/fury don't have the hull/armor to tolerate reckless IMO.

Imo, nothing does. Even Onslaught will kill itself on first Radiant it meets. For non-SO ships Reckless is a win-more behavior that only works when there are no enemies that can threaten a ship before it kills them. SO ships don't have other choice than bum-rush anyway, so I guess it's fine for them.

I also feel like the AI doesn't really use mobility systems to achieve specific goals (like getting into range or chasing something down) with much consistency. It feels like it mostly just pops it randomly and doesn't do much, although I'm sure it's doing more than that under the hood. It feels like scarabs in particular love to pop their system and then just hover out of range.

Yep, definitely feels this way. Which is why AI works best with simplest to use ship systems (maneuvering jets or accelerated ammo feeder).

[Megas]

I find that the AI is quite competent with the high tech 'burst speed' lineup (even the Wolf, despite it being a subpar ship in almost every way) as long as it has an aggressive AI in two major cases: 'punching down', and local numerical parity/superiority.

The only thing going for Wolf is there are worse frigates because they were not designed for brawling, and they may be among to cheapest to mass produce.  As a solo fighter, Wolf is near bottom of the barrel.  Its flux stats are barely better other tech.  Shield is not as strong as some other high-tech, its dissipation is junk with its mounts.  Not sure if I want to use Wolf instead of Centurion or Lasher (which cost 4 DP instead of 5) for cheap disposable frigate spam.

No. There is very much value in having different roles that ships can fill. A more expensive ship should generally fill that role better (but not necessarily better enough for the DP or maybe it fills other roles too)

So far, the only other role I see is let the enemy shoot it until it dies unless I babysit it or pilot it myself.  Not what I expect from ships with an inflated or premium cost just because they are classic high-tech.  Better to grab a low-tech or midline (or unconventional high-tech) ship that can do its NPC role and more for less DP cost.

The aggressiveness of your AI does have a big impact too since it determines the tolerance of the AI to being at a disadvantage. I think this is the main tool the player has to work around these mechanics. Aurora and Fury basically require agressive AI IMO. Steady is too timid, and Aurora/fury don't have the hull/armor to tolerate reckless IMO.

And if the SIM does not honor fleet doctrine, then it makes it a real pain to test.  I can use officers, but their skills provide too much an advantage against unskilled opponents, and some of my ships will not have officers.  I want no officer fights to see how well the ship itself can perform.

I also wish fleet doctrine applied to the flagship.  I occasionally use autopilot, and Aggressive seems to be the best default behavior, not Steady.

AI can easily lose even perfect kiting machines, immortal from my point of view (mod ships with ridiculous combined range/speed/flux advantage over vanilla opponents they were facing for test fights). So I expect even less from just fast ships that have range disadvantage to deal with.

And this is how SIM Falcon loses to Apogee.  It cannot maintain that narrow range where it can shoot at Apogee without getting shot back by plasma cannon, although getting harassed by the large missile does not help Falcon either.

[Thaago]

I find that the AI is quite competent with the high tech 'burst speed' lineup (even the Wolf, despite it being a subpar ship in almost every way) as long as it has an aggressive AI in two major cases: 'punching down', and local numerical parity/superiority.

The only thing going for Wolf is there are worse frigates because they were not designed for brawling, and they may be among to cheapest to mass produce.  As a solo fighter, Wolf is near bottom of the barrel.  Its flux stats are barely better other tech.  Shield is not as strong as some other high-tech, its dissipation is junk with its mounts.  Not sure if I want to use Wolf instead of Centurion or Lasher (which cost 4 DP instead of 5) for cheap disposable frigate spam.

...

I agree completely. In many ways the Wolf's nearest competitor is not a proper combat frigate like Centurion, but instead is the Kite (especially Kite H's). Obviously Wolves are better than Kites, but they have many similarities: they have the same role in combat (skirmishers), they have the same missile firepower, similar speed profiles once the systems are put into play (Kite H is slightly faster), similar anti-shield firepower (single small kinetic vs 1 medium energy). The kite has a better shield (same efficiency and less base capacity, but omni), same or slightly better armor (H version), and less hull at 900 vs 1500. Wolves can mount Ion, have PD, and have much better anti-armor/hull capabilities so they certainly are better ships, but considering their descriptions its a closer call than I would prefer.

[Megas]

I agree completely. In many ways the Wolf's nearest competitor is not a proper combat frigate like Centurion, but instead is the Kite (especially Kite H's). Obviously Wolves are better than Kites, but they have many similarities: they have the same role in combat (skirmishers), they have the same missile firepower, similar speed profiles once the systems are put into play (Kite H is slightly faster), similar anti-shield firepower (single small kinetic vs 1 medium energy). The kite has a better shield (same efficiency and less base capacity, but omni), same or slightly better armor (H version), and less hull at 900 vs 1500. Wolves can mount Ion, have PD, and have much better anti-armor/hull capabilities so they certainly are better ships, but considering their descriptions its a closer call than I would prefer.

I tried Wolf, and the only way I could make hard flux loadouts work is to deploy several of the time and have them act as a pack, but I can also do that with Centurions and they work just as well for less DP cost, and they can solo some frigates unlike Wolf.  Lashers are nice, but they trade defense for offense and die a bit more, but they are cheap and I can mass produce them for chump change.  I even rather use Vanguard over Wolf because despite its weaknesses, Vanguard can crush some frigates and seriously damage some destroyers, plus the bounties just keep dropping pristine hulls, and most of them stay pristine after recovery (and the few that do not I salvage, more where they came from).  I have recovered more pristine Vanguard hulls than I can use at a time, and even after using them, I cannot get rid of them fast enough.  Rather, I recover more than I lose from fights.  (It is a crying shame to just scuttle them when I can use them instead.)

No matter what I tried, no hard-flux Wolf could ever win a duel against a proper combat frigate.  The only way I could win a frigate duel is with Wolf with Graviton and at least two Tactical Lasers.  I look at the flux stats, and they are too close to Centurion and Lasher, but they get better weapons, but Wolf does not.  It would be nice if Wolf was closer to Glimmer or Tempest.  Also, would not mind a 0.7 shield on Wolf like on some of its bigger brothers.

I rather use TT Brawler instead of Wolf.

[Thaago]

That matches my experience as well. While my Wolves are sort of useful because they stay alive and distract (unstable injector mandatory), I phase them out once I'm even close to the 240dp limit because they don't really contribute much other than distraction. And if they get into a solo fight while I'm not watching against something high performance like a tempest (or get swarmed by interceptors) then they will die fast. Luckily they are fast enough that there aren't too many ships that can kill them, but they just don't get kills either.