Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: VarekRaith

quote:

ORIGINAL: taltamir

quote:

ORIGINAL: VarekRaith

quote:

ORIGINAL: taltamir

The knee jerk reaction of "OMFG auto sucks it should all be manual and micromanagement!" is entirely uncalled for. Automation is great, and it has been improving with each version. There are still some kinks to work out which can be done with specific solutions rather then broad strokes that would do more harm then good (disabling auto refuel entirely will do more harm then good... I remember the game before auto refuel, it wasn't as good as it is now)

Sigh, that's not at all what I'm saying.

That is exactly what you are saying. so is fishman.
I know, it SOUNDS great to say "why should I deal with auto-refuel doing something it shouldn't when I am on manual, manual should mean no auto-refuel (duh)". but that is wrong, manual without auto-refuel is a nightmare... Now you should have the ability to exclude ships, individually (and temporarily) from auto-refuel on manual. This is because fuel is so utterly and fundamentally important, and because you will have LOTS of ships and ALL of them need it. So manually refueling ALL ships is completely impossible for a human being... hence why it is on even in full auto. (which is due to an overwhelming and massive callout for it, this didn't exist in v1, and everyone clamored that it makes the game very unplayable, and they were right)

Programming exceptions to it is different than turning it off. You are right, you shouldn't have to get into a situation where auto-refuel is messing up your manual commands on manual control. But the solution is not to do away with auto-refuel... not a by a long shot. The solution is as I have described above. make specific exceptions and a puppet mode for cases not covered by those exceptions.

I never brought up auto refuel. I have no issues with auto refuel.
My issues are solely with the auto attack code. I don't like having my manual ships leave their assigned position to attack a slug on the other side of the system. I don't like it that when I tell them to stop, they retarget and go off again, ignoring my order. That's what my auto patrols are for. I don't like the fact that said ship will not return to where he was. I don't like my manual ships going on suicide runs because the auto target AI thought that lone frigate could take on a base. Just tweak the range at which manually controlled ships will auto engage hostiles. If it has to jump, it's too far. I don't have a problem with auto refuel. I use a combo of automated and manually controlled ships. Sheesh.

quote:

ORIGINAL: taltamir

quote:

ORIGINAL: VarekRaith

quote:

ORIGINAL: taltamir

quote:

ORIGINAL: VarekRaith

quote:

ORIGINAL: taltamir

The knee jerk reaction of "OMFG auto sucks it should all be manual and micromanagement!" is entirely uncalled for. Automation is great, and it has been improving with each version. There are still some kinks to work out which can be done with specific solutions rather then broad strokes that would do more harm then good (disabling auto refuel entirely will do more harm then good... I remember the game before auto refuel, it wasn't as good as it is now)

Sigh, that's not at all what I'm saying.

That is exactly what you are saying. so is fishman.
I know, it SOUNDS great to say "why should I deal with auto-refuel doing something it shouldn't when I am on manual, manual should mean no auto-refuel (duh)". but that is wrong, manual without auto-refuel is a nightmare... Now you should have the ability to exclude ships, individually (and temporarily) from auto-refuel on manual. This is because fuel is so utterly and fundamentally important, and because you will have LOTS of ships and ALL of them need it. So manually refueling ALL ships is completely impossible for a human being... hence why it is on even in full auto. (which is due to an overwhelming and massive callout for it, this didn't exist in v1, and everyone clamored that it makes the game very unplayable, and they were right)

Programming exceptions to it is different than turning it off. You are right, you shouldn't have to get into a situation where auto-refuel is messing up your manual commands on manual control. But the solution is not to do away with auto-refuel... not a by a long shot. The solution is as I have described above. make specific exceptions and a puppet mode for cases not covered by those exceptions.

I never brought up auto refuel. I have no issues with auto refuel.
My issues are solely with the auto attack code. I don't like having my manual ships leave their assigned position to attack a slug on the other side of the system. I don't like it that when I tell them to stop, they retarget and go off again, ignoring my order. That's what my auto patrols are for. I don't like the fact that said ship will not return to where he was. I don't like my manual ships going on suicide runs because the auto target AI thought that lone frigate could take on a base. Just tweak the range at which manually controlled ships will auto engage hostiles. If it has to jump, it's too far. I don't have a problem with auto refuel. I use a combo of automated and manually controlled ships. Sheesh.

Apologies, I must have mixed up your posts with his then.
Yes, I totally agree that on full manual the range of engagement should be shorter. I have stated as such specifically as one of the points that need fixing. Auto attack doesn't need to go away, just shorten (BUT ONLY when in manual mode... in full auto I expect my ships to go after stuff in the other side of the system).

quote:

ORIGINAL: VarekRaith

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Oddly enough, I don't have that happen. If I send it close, it will attack, but mine when on manual will not actively go chasing after stuff. You may need to reset your options...sounds like they have not released full control to you when they should have.

Possible, I don't know. I've reset options. I've actually reinstalled. This happens enough to cause me to post about it. Perhaps it's just our play styles? Maybe it just doesn't allow the kind of micro I want? Maybe I'm crazy?

quote:

ORIGINAL: VarekRaith

Would it be fair to suggest that the World Annihilator be exempt from auto targeting planets? I just had mine up and blast an enemy homeworld all without my input. Funny, but it killed my rep.

quote:

ORIGINAL: taltamir

quote:

ORIGINAL: VarekRaith

Would it be fair to suggest that the World Annihilator be exempt from auto targeting planets? I just had mine up and blast an enemy homeworld all without my input. Funny, but it killed my rep.

why would you keep that hunk of junk? not only is blowing planets terrible for you, it is expensive, it is slow, and its weapon's loadout sucks. Even its main canon does a mere 8000 points of damage, which is not nearly enough to penetrate the shields on any of my cruisers... I am quite sure on a 1 on 1 any of my capital ships can blow it up :).
Hopefully 1.05 weapon re-balancing would help.

And if you retire it at the nearest spaceport is maxes out one random tech field.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Deanco,

How are you managing your fuel? I have to say that I've never had that problem, not because it can't happen, but simply because I refuel my fleets before I send them out on any missions. That one action seems to allow me to avoid this kind of unfortunate timing on the auto-refuel.

The automation will certainly be tweaked further as time goes on as well, we realize there are still some unusual cases where it's not working as well as it should. However, it was added because when things were purely manual, there were other issues that players found even more annoying about ships not doing these things when they should.

As another suggestion, you should consider adding an extra fuel cell or two to your ship designs, it can go a long way towards limiting necessary refueling.

Regards,

- Erik

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Deanco,

How are you managing your fuel? I have to say that I've never had that problem, not because it can't happen, but simply because I refuel my fleets before I send them out on any missions. That one action seems to allow me to avoid this kind of unfortunate timing on the auto-refuel.

The automation will certainly be tweaked further as time goes on as well, we realize there are still some unusual cases where it's not working as well as it should. However, it was added because when things were purely manual, there were other issues that players found even more annoying about ships not doing these things when they should.

As another suggestion, you should consider adding an extra fuel cell or two to your ship designs, it can go a long way towards limiting necessary refueling.

Regards,

- Erik

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

The automation will certainly be tweaked further as time goes on as well, we realize there are still some unusual cases where it's not working as well as it should.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishman

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

The automation will certainly be tweaked further as time goes on as well, we realize there are still some unusual cases where it's not working as well as it should.

I think the basic problem is that the game is overriding the player's orders. That is something that is supremely irritating: If the player orders something, even if it seems silly, the thing should DO it. At least then when things go wrong, the player has no one to blame but himself. No one likes it when the computer tries to be a smart-ass. Orders should be considered EXTREMELY EMPHATIC if the player feels the need to give the same order twice in a row, since it means the unit is clearly not complying with them in a satisfactory manner.

quote:

Solution:
1. Make an exception for a ship manually ordered to invade a planet where it does not break to refuel if it can reach the planet on the current tank.
2. Make an exception for a ship ordered (manually or automatically) to colonize a planet where they do not break to refuel at all unless it would shorten the trip.
3. If attacking AI is off then ships should not auto engage beyond their weapons range (or maybe slightly beyond it, but not on the other side of the system).
4. There should be an override where you can tell a ship to ignore auto-refuel and auto-engage commands, be in complete puppet mode. You should be able to switch it on and off on a per ship/fleet basis. It should be a checkmark in the rightclick menu of a ship, showing either an empty box or a checked box next to puppet mode so you immediately know if it is on or off, and can toggle it at will.
5. A ship on auto should not engage a much more powerful enemy in the same system all by itself. (check weapons damage of enemy vs shields... if they can kill you way too quickly, don't engage alone)
6. I know there was another one but I forgot it... if someone can point me at an issue mentioned in this thread that isn't solved by the above suggestions I would probably recall it.

The knee jerk reaction of "OMFG auto sucks it should all be manual and micromanagement!" is entirely uncalled for. Automation is great, and it has been improving with each version. There are still some kinks to work out which can be done with specific solutions rather then broad strokes that would do more harm then good (disabling auto refuel entirely will do more harm then good... I remember the game before auto refuel, it wasn't as good as it is now)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bartje

How does the Auto Retirement impact the game?

Does the AI now propose retiring / scrapping certain ships that are worthless / not doing anything / just costing money?

I notice AI's sometimes have ships sitting around doing nothing that are costing lots of maintenetance; I have the same problem with this. Would be great if we had a minister / AI setting to just scrap or suggest scrapping them.

Did anyone else notice this?

quote:

ORIGINAL: taltamir

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishman

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

The automation will certainly be tweaked further as time goes on as well, we realize there are still some unusual cases where it's not working as well as it should.

I think the basic problem is that the game is overriding the player's orders. That is something that is supremely irritating: If the player orders something, even if it seems silly, the thing should DO it. At least then when things go wrong, the player has no one to blame but himself. No one likes it when the computer tries to be a smart-ass. Orders should be considered EXTREMELY EMPHATIC if the player feels the need to give the same order twice in a row, since it means the unit is clearly not complying with them in a satisfactory manner.

No, that isn't the problem at all, please read page 2 of this thread where it is discussed ad-nasium.
While it is certainly frustrating to repeatedly try and tell your troopship/colonyship to invade/colonize a planet 1 inch away and have it repeatedly cancel that order to go to another system to refuel (which has happened to me, and would be solved by the proposed solutions previously mentioned), the suggestion of disabling automation is HORRIFIC and would ruin the game via tedious micro-management. Auto-refuel (when on manual) has been implemented by popular demand and has made the game VASTLY better. It needs tweaking here and there, but it should not be disabled. The reason is because WEAPONS DON'T WORK without fuel. As such, a ship without fuel is a dead ship if combat is initiated.

Let me once again quote myself:

quote:

Solution:
1. Make an exception for a ship manually ordered to invade a planet where it does not break to refuel if it can reach the planet on the current tank.
2. Make an exception for a ship ordered (manually or automatically) to colonize a planet where they do not break to refuel at all unless it would shorten the trip.
3. If attacking AI is off then ships should not auto engage beyond their weapons range (or maybe slightly beyond it, but not on the other side of the system).
4. There should be an override where you can tell a ship to ignore auto-refuel and auto-engage commands, be in complete puppet mode. You should be able to switch it on and off on a per ship/fleet basis. It should be a checkmark in the rightclick menu of a ship, showing either an empty box or a checked box next to puppet mode so you immediately know if it is on or off, and can toggle it at will.
5. A ship on auto should not engage a much more powerful enemy in the same system all by itself. (check weapons damage of enemy vs shields... if they can kill you way too quickly, don't engage alone)
6. I know there was another one but I forgot it... if someone can point me at an issue mentioned in this thread that isn't solved by the above suggestions I would probably recall it.

The knee jerk reaction of "OMFG auto sucks it should all be manual and micromanagement!" is entirely uncalled for. Automation is great, and it has been improving with each version. There are still some kinks to work out which can be done with specific solutions rather then broad strokes that would do more harm then good (disabling auto refuel entirely will do more harm then good... I remember the game before auto refuel, it wasn't as good as it is now)

Some more suggestions I since though of:
6. Low on fuel should be triggered via a percentage of current fuel value rather then an absolute numerical value, if this is already the case, then a bug exists where a ship with over 80% fuel will go refueling and needs squashing... 10% is a good idea. maybe make it 5% even.
7. Fleets should maintain cohesion in the face of fuel shortages. let a few ships run out of fuel and just sit there with the fleet, when a certain percentage of the fleet's firepower has depleted its fuel, then have the whole fleet retreat as a whole to go refuel.
8. Non-fleet ships which can destroy all enemies in range before running out of fuel should continue firing even when reaching the auto refuel thresh-hold.

quote:

ORIGINAL: deanco2

Taltamir, all those solutions to the problem I encountered (which ruins the game for me) are not in the game yet.  The fact that you are proposing solutions indicates that even you, who likes the new automation, have issues with it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stardog
What's in store for Us in the upcoming 105 Update??.. Any new items &/or add ends ??..