It is getting frustrating - still nothing is resolved

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Then producing units, mod them properly is just one aspect of the strategy. After you have to group them properly (a stack of 6 planes is smart, a stack of 6 supports not so) and finally tactically use them intelligently.
 
Ericridge, please stop it with that. I bought the damn thing from the Paradox website, not Triumph. I think they are both willing to fix the game under their JOINT banners. Jezuz man...

Thanks for the bump though.
 
Would you yell at the Steam platform development team to fix your problems with Team Fortress 2?
Would it change anything if I was posting on the Team Fortress 2 website, using images and impressions from the Team Fortress 2 community, and just happen to use the name "Steam" in the post?
 
The equivalent would be posting on the steam page for TF2 and blaming the steam platform developers for the game being bad. You're going after people who have no control over the process.
 
Well, is this the formal AOW: Planetfall forum? Am I missing the boat here? I was under the impression that this is the place to be to talk about AOW: PF. Is there a better place? Otherwise, I think the argument holds. If there is no better, it is indistinguishable.
 
The argument wasn't about this being the right place to post it, it's about who you're blaming (and, indirectly, assigning credit to - the part I care about). Everything that's been said about this game's development basically states paradox has no hand in it. You're just wrong.
 
Man I wouldn't have said anything if you didn't double down on it.

Ericridge, please stop it with that. I bought the damn thing from the Paradox website, not Triumph. I think they are both willing to fix the game under their JOINT banners. Jezuz man...

So just don't say something so blatantly wrong and I won't tell you how wrong you are. Ok buddy?
 
Man I wouldn't have said anything if you didn't double down on it.



So just don't say something so blatantly wrong and I won't tell you how wrong you are. Ok buddy?
Damn, you really want that BFF ring, don't you. Know though, BFFs are a lifelong commitment. Don't ask for it if you don't plan to do the work. Just 'sayin.
 
I bought the game off Steam. I guess I'd better go direct my suggestions to Valve. :p
You too HousePet? We are all so much better than this. When does the madness end? Let's decide together to live in a world with no hate. Help me break the chain. Let the cycle end with us.
 
Guys lets not derail this thread with useless bickering.

AI in terms of tactical/strategic combat and economic management need to keep being worked on. If anybody has some insights or ideas for how to do that, I'd love to hear them.
 
Hmm for dealing with NPCs, now that we have AI personalities attached to pre-made commanders, I would add another "under the hood" preferred NPCs list to each of them.

For instance, say Giorna, syndicate heritor would have attached a list of NPC priority as such:
1. Forgotten
2. Psi fish
3. Paragorn, etc...

Upon launching a map, where apparently the AI starts in contact with all NPCs present, they would entertain only 1 NPC faction, with priorities as per their list.
For the rest of NPC factions, they woild maintain neutral relationships, meaning declining quests and accepting demand (requirements to not be at war).

In the above examples, let's say a map is created with psi fish, paragorn and autonom, then commander Giorna would only entertain the psi-fish faction (cause no Forgotten) and decline all quests and accept all demands of paragorn and autonon.
 
Hmm for dealing with NPCs, now that we have AI personalities attached to pre-made commanders, I would add another "under the hood" preferred NPCs list to each of them.

For instance, say Giorna, syndicate heritor would have attached a list of NPC priority as such:
1. Forgotten
2. Psi fish
3. Paragorn, etc...

Upon launching a map, where apparently the AI starts in contact with all NPCs present, they would entertain only 1 NPC faction, with priorities as per their list.
For the rest of NPC factions, they woild maintain neutral relationships, meaning declining quests and accepting demand (requirements to not be at war).

In the above examples, let's say a map is created with psi fish, paragorn and autonom, then commander Giorna would only entertain the psi-fish faction (cause no Forgotten) and decline all quests and accept all demands of paragorn and autonon.
That still leaves the core issue. The AI does not manage the quests and demands of the factions at all. This still seems impactful even when the NPCs are turned to passive, so there are no consequences to quests. There is some sort of barrier to them completing the quests as a priority, and probably accepting their demands. Even with 3 NPCs, they will still be at war if the quests aren't satisfied and the demands aren't accepted. So what do you do?

I think that they should definitely buy units in that order, but it won't solve the problem. The issue is fundamental. Putting it in the hands of the human player makes a lot of sense. Something like the computer always getting the reward when the quest timer expires, is an option. It doesn't even need to try. Then you can get a part of the NPC's quest reward by sniping it, thereby stealing that reward, and their goodwill with the NPC faction. It should have a political consequence when not at war, but be a part of the game. If this were adopted, maybe you could even have it give full rewards with some trait or doctrine.

Or it could just get off it's butt. But the problem is that we are dealing with easy problems and hard problems. Increasing the AI's abilities seems the least likely to be changed. Some simple solutions really need to be put on the table. Any idea on that side?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Seems like you might be terminally stubborn on assigning credit to people not deserving of it. I'm going to try this.


Paradox in this specific case is one of a publisher, they have no hand in developing the game whatsoever. Beyond providing a platform + forum for triumph studios to make the game/communicate on. If it was developed by paradox it will look completely different. It hasn't been said anywhere whatsoever that paradox has a hand in development for planetfall. If they did, triumph studios would've had to mention it long time ago.

I struggle to find any data anywhere on the internet that says that paradox sends their devs over to develop the AI and make the game for triumph studios. So I think the extent of what paradox does is help provide some help to make truimph studio able to release their game to several platforms at same time to PC, PS4, Xbox etc. Maybe? Even then, I have my doubts.
 
  • 3
Reactions: