So let me get this straight Vic

[DankSlayer]

You made logistics even more of a pain in the ass for HUMAN PLAYERS ONLY? Because we all know that AI just gets cheats on the logistics/supply mechanics.

Maybe instead of introducing changes that made the logistic system more complicated, you first make it so the AI is more on the even ground with us in that regard.

[AranwenL]

if the ai had to play by the same rules it would be basically impossible for them to ever challenge a player.

[DankSlayer]

Originally posted by AranwenL:

if the ai had to play by the same rules it would be basically impossible for them to ever challenge a player.

there are strategy games where AI can challenge the player without just straight up cheating, it just needs to be taught how to play well.

It's crazy how AI War despite being such an old indie game is still a complex strategy game with the best artificial inteligence maybe ever, and without having to rely on cheats too - yes it starts with a great advantage each time, but aside from that it doesn't just rely on cheats to stand a chance against the player and can actually do clever moves - like how surprised I was when I captured an irreplacabe building from my AI opponent and then the moment I look elsewhere it just sends in a single fast-moving raid starship that bypasses & avoids all my defenses, then goes straight for that precious building and quickly destroys it before ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ off

I played wargames where the AI could actually give me a fair challenge and actually fight back, so its not impossible to actually make decent AI while keeping the odds even

Listen I love this game but the way how Vic goes about the development choices is pretty backwards at times, like coming up with this new weird system instead of just adding navy & water transports or making the logistics even more of a headache FOR THE PLAYERS while the AI continues to get special treatment and is allowed to just deploy legions of tanks while you're struggling to assure full supply for your modest army

[cranky corvid]

The recently introduced Midcore Logistics option simplifies the logistics rules by removing the need to micromanage how it gets split whenever it has multiple directions to choose from. Vic has stated he's planning to make the AI capable of playing on the Midcore Logistics rules as well, so look forward to that.

[DankSlayer]

Originally posted by cranky corvid:

The recently introduced Midcore Logistics option simplifies the logistics rules by removing the need to micromanage how it gets split whenever it has multiple directions to choose from. Vic has stated he's planning to make the AI capable of playing on the Midcore Logistics rules as well, so look forward to that.

This is just slapping a Spongebob band-aid onto a deep laceration wound. If playing on the default logistics rules greatly nerfs the player against the AI, then the game needs a serious rework.

[Slippy]

I hate the phrase 'AI cheats'. It doesnt cheat, its playing on an asymmetrical ruleset to human players in order to present a meaningful challenge. Major AIs can be cut off if you encircle them, just like the player.

My only real complaint is that the AI can build unlimited roads which leads to a few issues:
1. Major AIs expand territory rapidly. This isnt a huge issue as more territory doesn't always equal more resources but it does hem the player in a bit. This could be intended. It is also annoying that AIs can just route their roads right over mountains with 0 issues.
2. Dealing with AI road spaghetti is a bit of pain when you push into their territory as you need to destroy roads/set up a bunch of traffic signs.
3. As the AI can just route right over any terrain it means that a mountainous border is no different to a flat open plain.

Originally posted by TytusDeZoo:

This is just slapping a Spongebob band-aid onto a deep laceration wound.

Originally posted by TytusDeZoo:

If playing on the default logistics rules greatly nerfs the player against the AI, then the game needs a serious rework.

So the solution proposed is not adequate? Mid core logistics is a rework not a bandaid.

[cranky corvid]

Personally I plan to play only on the Midcore Logistics rules from now on because I don't think the default ones add anything but tedious micromanagement in comparison. The only really significant way it changes how the game is played seems to be that there's no longer any need to touch traffic signs except to close off branches that don't routinely need any logistics at all (to remove branching penalties). If you feel traffic sign management is important to the game experience, it doesn't seem like your wishes will be satisfied, but otherwise you're getting essentially what you want.

For my part, I would be happy if logistics was simplified even further, as I feel refocusing and branching penalties don't add anything to the game besides micromanagement and extra confusion for new players.

EDIT:

Originally posted by Slippy:

I hate the phrase 'AI cheats'. It doesnt cheat, its playing on an asymmetrical ruleset to human players in order to present a meaningful challenge. Major AIs can be cut off if you encircle them, just like the player.

The complaint seems to be about the AI getting logistics points for free, without any logistics assets. It seems like a much bigger advantage with the new patch, where you might need to spend, for example, 5000 ammo to move the frontline a hex where it would've previously taken only 500.

[Slippy]

Originally posted by cranky corvid:

For my part, I would be happy if logistics was simplified even further, as I feel refocusing and branching penalties don't add anything to the game besides micromanagement and extra confusion for new players.

Branching penalties definitely confused me when I was new player and refocusing is a bit weird - I am not sure that 'logistic injection' is really the intended way to play the game.

I think having a midcore and a hardcore (ie the existing way) is the perfect way to go about it, satisfying those who want something simpler and those who want something more crunchy.

I love tinkering with my logistics network and provides me with something to do between wars, and its a really unique system. Regardless I look forward to trying a mid core system.

EDIT sorry just seen your edit!

Originally posted by cranky corvid:

The complaint seems to be about the AI getting logistics points for free, without any logistics assets. It seems like a much bigger advantage with the new patch, where you might need to spend, for example, 5000 ammo to move the frontline a hex where it would've previously taken only 500.

That is a good point yeah. On the positive side this might provide some usage of 'lighter' artillery rather than just always opting for the biggest fattest gun possible, as they use less ammo (I think).

[willgamer47]

Back the the olden days when the game first appeared, I participated in many a logistics discussion that never came to satisfactory conclusions about the opaque, difficult, frustrating rules for players but not the AI. Played anyway and liked the game.

Now I use stress free midcore and like the game a lot more!

[Persony Person]

I just don't see the massive change in logistics which prompted the creation of this thread. Even if you skipped the Beta and went straight from 1.20d to 1.25. Nothing specific from the OP was pointed out that is different than before.

If anything, logistics is easier for the player with the implementation of Ammo factories. The main difference now I think is that you can't haul a 300mm cannon at the same speed as a 25mm one, realistic penalties now apply for the weight and ammo consumption of towed weapons.

Originally posted by Slippy:

I hate the phrase 'AI cheats'. It doesnt cheat, its playing on an asymmetrical ruleset to human players in order to present a meaningful challenge. Major AIs can be cut off if you encircle them, just like the player.

My only real complaint is that the AI can build unlimited roads which leads to a few issues:
1. Major AIs expand territory rapidly. This isnt a huge issue as more territory doesn't always equal more resources but it does hem the player in a bit. This could be intended. It is also annoying that AIs can just route their roads right over mountains with 0 issues.
2. Dealing with AI road spaghetti is a bit of pain when you push into their territory as you need to destroy roads/set up a bunch of traffic signs.
3. As the AI can just route right over any terrain it means that a mountainous border is no different to a flat open plain.

I share your sentiment about "AI Cheats", but I don't agree with complaints 1 and 3.

It might be different for me, because I only play on the largest maps possible, with as many AIs as possible, but I enjoy AI expansion the way it is. Whilst they'll have a headstart, you'll quickly surpass most AI major regimes anyway, as many of them run into different problems, but typically that of Non-aligned forces snaking and sabotaging their logistics or even losing wars to minor regimes. Some are even gone before you even knew where they were on the map. It ends up typically with 1-3 regimes out of 10 that you'll be battling for supremacy of the planet.

My favourite game was when I spawned near (but not right next to) the Nemesis AI, which expanded much further and faster than all the others. Whilst it was very strong, it overextended and started having wars on multiple fronts with other majors/minors. We traded settlements for the first 100 turns, until I started to get the tech advantage and defeat them with the help of other majors, which in turn also caused me to win the game.

In regards to mountain roads, I've only typically seen the AI build them if:
a. There is no other close by route available. In fact, I rarely ever see them engage in Mountain terrain unless there is no other terrain to occupy.
b. The mountain tiles are only a few tiles thick (which is not really a barrier anymore at mid-game due to high IP production). They (rightly so) seem to prioritise the cheapest route, I've never seen them yolo across Himalaya style terrain, by building a mega-motorway and then flanking with heavy tanks... They typically attempt to go around it and respect the terrain.
c. They just take advantage of roads made during the planet's generation, which I think is where a lot of the misunderstandings about mountain roads comes from.

So I don't agree that the AI just treats Mountainous terrain just as any other. The AI clearly (attempts to) treats it differently. The Spaghettification happens due to combat near frontlines with the AI determined to build a new route to replace one they just lost.

Originally posted by Slippy:

Originally posted by cranky corvid:

The complaint seems to be about the AI getting logistics points for free, without any logistics assets. It seems like a much bigger advantage with the new patch, where you might need to spend, for example, 5000 ammo to move the frontline a hex where it would've previously taken only 500.

That is a good point yeah. On the positive side this might provide some usage of 'lighter' artillery rather than just always opting for the biggest fattest gun possible, as they use less ammo (I think).

I've had to do this in my recent games. Because the ammo consumption of the high-calibre artillery is so high that it drains thousands of ammo per engagement. I think that's a great change as it forces the highest calibres to only effectively be used late game.

One legitimate problem though, that has been inverted is that when the AI used to push out lower calibre weapons where the player always could go the highest, the AI now only goes for the highest (or near highest) calibre, whilst the player more often than not can't do that and doesn't seem to be affected by ammo constraints.

Where I have the dilemma of either hitting harder but for a shorter period of time, or hitting weaker but for a longer period of time, their arty can always hit hard for a long period of time, even if they only have 1 city that I've half encircled and no metal sources to sustain the ammo production. Could be that they built up a very large stockpile, but I'm not sure on that.

Originally posted by TytusDeZoo:

It's crazy how AI War despite being such an old indie game is still a complex strategy game with the best artificial inteligence maybe ever, and without having to rely on cheats too - yes it starts with a great advantage each time, but aside from that it doesn't just rely on cheats to stand a chance against the player and can actually do clever moves - like how surprised I was when I captured an irreplacabe building from my AI opponent and then the moment I look elsewhere it just sends in a single fast-moving raid starship that bypasses & avoids all my defenses, then goes straight for that precious building and quickly destroys it before ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ off

AI war (1 and 2) is a completely different game and is not a typical 4x. That is more of a puzzle game, where you have to tread fine lines before the AI just has enough and swarms you with overwhelming force and beelines straight for your HQ. The rules are intrinsically designed to be asymmetric where it actively punishes the player for treating it like it is a 4x, so it's not exactly a fair comparison to make. Shadow Empire is more of a classic 4x, with it's main appeal being its scale, a very good world generator and a realistic take on strategic warfare that accounts for things like logistics, industrial capacity etc. There isn't really a game that you can really compare it to that I'm aware of, hence it's appeal.

Because of it's scale and the multitude of mechanics and factors at play, some aspects have to be sacrificed in order for it to work properly. One of which is currently, is the disproportionate approach to logistics between the player and the AI. Whilst it is noticeable, it's certainly not game breaking to the degree that you're painting it as. Even so, whilst I've never tried it, others have already suggested the alternate logistics mode. I think you should try that first before making further complaints about it.

[Slippy]

Originally posted by Persony Person:

It might be different for me, because I only play on the largest maps possible, with as many AIs as possible, but I enjoy AI expansion the way it is. Whilst they'll have a headstart, you'll quickly surpass most AI major regimes anyway, as many of them run into different problems, but typically that of Non-aligned forces snaking and sabotaging their logistics or even losing wars to minor regimes. Some are even gone before you even knew where they were on the map. It ends up typically with 1-3 regimes out of 10 that you'll be battling for supremacy of the planet.

Yeah as I mentioned I think this is intended - its just my brain going 'hey the AI has all this territory and I have nothing!' when I really should know that most of the planet is useless dirt. It just irks me when I see a major zoom right past my borders to the other side of me in a few turns when I know that isnt really possible for me to do, cutting me off! But its a minor complaint really. You are right that stronger minor regimes can halt major AIs, the stronger ones anyway.

That said you can get some weird game overs on smaller planets (3 major regime games) where a major can win the game without ever taking another regimes capital because they can eat up a few farmers and can quickly claim most of the territory, securing a win. Dastactics recent game on his YT channel ended that way.

[Persony Person]

Originally posted by Slippy:

That said you can get some weird game overs on smaller planets (3 major regime games) where a major can win the game without ever taking another regimes capital because they can eat up a few farmers and can quickly claim most of the territory, securing a win. Dastactics recent game on his YT channel ended that way.

Dastactic's problem was that he declared war on the wrong AI and never looked at the victory overview to see the scale of the threat until he lost. The regime he declared war on also wanted to be his friend.

So whilst he and the regime he was at war with were losing thousands of pop per turn in a relatively confined area of the map, the biggest AI was just chilling and had the rest of the planet for themselves. I'd say that was more his fault than the game's.

[[] ¬ []1 TEFLON DON 永遠のトランプ]

The logisitic issue has always been a flashpoint in the Shadow Empire community. Vic is a one man game developer and unfortunately we have to make do with the limitations that imposes. I highly recommend playing with midcore and easier logistics enabled to get over the hump. Remember to use the terrain to your advantage!