dev planning, anyone done it?

[Ianpolaris]

Asleepathewheel,

If it is so much better to assign those DEAs manually (and we both agree that it is apparently), then why have DevPlans at all? I mean really.....you only have to assign those DEAs once and only then when you colonize a planet. Then your plan is set. You also colonize planets seldom enough that this isn't a big micro-issue either.

As for replacing built DEAs, you are going to have to do that anyway devplan or no....because as you go up in tech, certain DEAs become more efficient which means you need less of them in your empire (sort of like needing less farmers in Moo 2 in late game). THAT means "micromanagement" in the late game all over again because your viceroy (Devplan or no) will not change a built DEA for you.

-Polaris

EDIT: FWIW you didn't have to micromanage Moo 2 anymore than Moo 3. Each Planet had an 'autobuild' button. Of course the AI was as dumb as a rock but that remains true even in Moo 3. I also remind you that with a 7 layer build-que and the ability to "autorepeat" builds (usefull for spies and terraforming), you could actually fire and FORGET most of your planets once the core building were built even in the late game. I also remind you that Moo2 unlike Moo3 had the options of "Housing" or "Trade" which allowed you to essentially forget core planets for extended periods of time.

Anyone that says that Moo2 required large amounts of Micro-Manage is kidding themselves. It doesn't.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
Asleepathewheel,

If it is so much better to assign those DEAs manually (and we both agree that it is apparently), then why have DevPlans at all? I mean really.....you only have to assign those DEAs once and only then when you colonize a planet. Then your plan is set. You also colonize planets seldom enough that this isn't a big micro-issue either.

Obviously a human can outdo the AI, that is not in question. The point is, novice players can use the vicerorys and they will do a competent job. The point is that turns will be faster for SP and MP. The point is that you can micro the game til your hearts content, and I can let it go and role play it as an empire. What is the problem there? Just because you micro everything, does that mean that I must? If i don't care about perfect efficiency, why do I have to do all that? Can't I play a quick and dirty game if I want to? Best of both worlds here, IMHO, I can play faster knowing that I give up some efficiency. You can play at your own pace. I have never played a game where I would trust the AI as much as this. MoO2? What a joke of an autobuild. Civ3? hello fleet of privateers. etc. This is the first game I've played where it can be played on both levels effectively.

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
As for replacing built DEAs, you are going to have to do that anyway devplan or no....because as you go up in tech, certain DEAs become more efficient which means you need less of them in your empire (sort of like needing less farmers in Moo 2 in late game). THAT means "micromanagement" in the late game all over again because your viceroy (Devplan or no) will not change a built DEA for you.

Why do I have to replace DEAs? See my above points.

I thought the AI would do this, albeit slowly. And, if it doesn't, then isnt this a gamey thing to do, on par with the changing of govt's to eliminate the HFoG, which the AI can't or won't do?

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
EDIT: FWIW you didn't have to micromanage Moo 2 anymore than Moo 3. Each Planet had an 'autobuild' button. Of course the AI was as dumb as a rock but that remains true even in Moo 3. I also remind you that with a 7 layer build-que and the ability to "autorepeat" builds (usefull for spies and terraforming), you could actually fire and FORGET most of your planets once the core building were built even in the late game. I also remind you that Moo2 unlike Moo3 had the options of "Housing" or "Trade" which allowed you to essentially forget core planets for extended periods of time.

Anyone that says that Moo2 required large amounts of Micro-Manage is kidding themselves. It doesn't.

Oh I'm well aware of MoO2 and all of its flaws. I remember quitting most games after achieving the big mo because the end was so tedious for me. Viceroys in MoO3 relieve half the burden and much more effectively than the autobuild ever did. Battlestations before factories? Great plan.

It doesn't "require" large amounts of micromanaging, but it was pretty necessary. The autobuild was pathetic. The viceroys in MoO3 are far superior. Galactic Cybernet? No need to go through a hundred planets individually, ithey wil buld it on its own.

I'm not saying the systems perfect, obviously itsnot. but I daresay the viceroy system is light years from what the autobuild in MoO2 was. I am in fact comfortable with leaving it to its own devices most of the time. (Except for military builds) which is more than I can say for its predecessor.

The point of this all is:

Viceroys and Dev plans allow people to play in multiple ways effectively. You may want to micro everything, and for the most part you can. I've found that despite the complaints about the UI, the game is pretty easy to play once you've figured everything out (which of course we haven't yet) Other people who are novices or like to roleplay as an emperor can play more macro, at the cost of some efficiency.

Does this make sense, or am I just rambling horribly off topic and point?

[Ianpolaris]

Asleepathewheel,

The problem is then that the game is contradictory in focus. If the Viceroys and the AI was supposed to make the game easier for the novice player, then why is there not written and clear documentation that the novice user can use?

Why is the interface that allows you to "macromanage" almost too complex to use?

You claim that it is much simply to use Dev Plans and let the AI handle it. That just isn't so.

The big problem is this (if you like macromanagement):

1. Macromanaging correctly is almost impossible because of the (lack of) documentation supporting it.

2. It is actually easier to micromanage your DEAs than attempt to fight the AI and macromanage them with DevPlans.

In short the game is a bit schizo. It actively discourages micromanaging with it's interface, but to get the most out of the game, you have to do it.....AND it turns out that once you have mastered the interface it is actually easier to micromanage things the interface doesn't want you to touch.

As for Moo 2, what do you think those 7 layer build ques were for! You qeued up your production and research buildings on colonization. The game would automatically tell you when you ran out and you would que it up again. After the first 14 items you could turn the autobuild feature on because anything you built after your production buildings (including polution reduction) was pure gravy at that point.

-Polaris

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
You claim that it is much simply to use Dev Plans and let the AI handle it. That just isn't so.

Actually a few posts ago, I said that this was the middle road. The first, for novices, is not to deal with the dev plans at all. Not dealing with them at all will give you a decent empire not great. The next step up in complexity is the dev plans system. You will have a more refined system here. finally you can micro every planet.

No, the documentation is not clear at all. Luckily people on these boards have figured out how much of this works and they can be put to use. I personally only went to dev plans after playing around with the regular game first, and I suspect most poeple would as well. for some people this game is enough. For others it is not. I probably am in the middle group-like to lay out the plans and make minor corrections here and there as need be.

What I'm saying is, for the novice player, you can really just worry about fleets and ship designs and spies and diplomacy and let the economy and builds handle themselves. But once you get bored with that, its not the end of the game, you can take more control of things.

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
The big problem is this (if you like macromanagement):

1. Macromanaging correctly is almost impossible because of the (lack of) documentation supporting it.

However, you would have to admit that this point is rapidly becoming moot as people on the boards explore these issues. The way I see it is, you (not you, you) can either complain about how QS didn't explain anything well (a valid criticism) or you could search the boards for how to do things. Now, that is not the way it should be. Docs should be useful. But with a little work, you can figure out what to do.

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
In short the game is a bit schizo. It actively discourages micromanaging with it's interface, but to get the most out of the game, you have to do it.....AND it turns out that once you have mastered the interface it is actually easier to micromanage things the interface doesn't want you to touch.

different people have different goals for the game.

If the developers didn't want you to be able to micromanage anything (the interface complaint) then why would they give you that option at all?

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
As for Moo 2, what do you think those 7 layer build ques were for! You qeued up your production and research buildings on colonization. The game would automatically tell you when you ran out and you would que it up again. After the first 14 items you could turn the autobuild feature on because anything you built after your production buildings (including polution reduction) was pure gravy at that point.

yes you could do that. but I just didnt' trust it enough. Perhaps after playing this game a few months, I will no longer trust the viceroy as much as I do now. But again, see my above points. And its amusing that you would trust the MoO2 to autobuild, but not the MoO3 viceroys to do the same. Frankly after MoO3, I find MoO2 to be inferior in most aspects, so we will just have to agree to disagree on that aspect I suppose.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Ianpolaris

Anyone that says that Moo2 required large amounts of Micro-Manage is kidding themselves. It doesn't.

I suspect that they mean in relation to Moo1. In that case it is more MM intense, but as you say you can reduce that quite a bit.

[Togas]

Ianpolaris,

You've made your point. Please, just stop. I'd like to read constructive posts and different opinions, not just reread the same rants over and over again.

You hate MoO3. Fine. You made your point days ago. Let the rest of us play in peace and quit complaining.

--Togas

[Grumbold]

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
1. I have found that if I do not turn off the Planetary AI, the AI will replace DEAs. I didn't find that out for several games because it is a difficult thing to spot....but as an exercise, try assigning *all* your planetary DEAs on colonization and then look at the planet some 50-100 turns later. It won't be the same (unless you do as I suggested). 'nuff said.

The only time mine have changed have been where the planet has suffered bombing. I'd agree it would be nice if the Ai would rebuild whatever got destroyed but it doesn't. My homeworlds have never deviated from what I've set on turn one.

[quote]A. You have gone 1600 turns by 'pressing turn'. While you might not have won yet (you will if you are a member of the senate), you also have not lost.

That is simply inexusable......*especially* when Rantz made a big deal in Dec about the game being delayed to make sure "it was done right".[quote]

Misunderstanding. I've played 1600 turns total in mulltiple games, two of which I lost, both senate losses. One from being outside the senate and the other from being inside but sandwiched between 2 ithkul and a guardian. I couldn't fight my way out of the box fast enough to outt expand the other races.

B. If defensive spies are so useful (and they are!), then there should be a way to automatically build spies to a certain percentage of the imperial budget. You don't get this one both ways....either macromanaging is desired in *all* cases or it should be truly *optional* in all cases.

It'd be a nice extra feature but I really don't get the logic of having one AI manager means you have to have one for everything. They gave you a way of skipping the parts of the game that they thought would be the most repetitive and tedious, not so you could skip the entire game and watch it like some kind of dry documentary report or Civ history replay.

I simply cannot agree with your conclusion that the game is wretched. It is certainly not one that will appeal to all gamers tastes and it needs patches and tweaks. That reminds me of a certain game of the year called Civ III. But you are right, every gamer should read up on the game and preferably get it from a store with a 10 day return policy. Thats just good advice for any purchase.

[Ianpolaris]

Togas,

You have no right to post that. I have the same right as any other poster to share my opinions about the game. In this thread I have been trying to restrict it to Dev Plans, but that isn't the point.

Saying I should "somehow go away" makes you look insecure at best and a board fascist at worst. The same applies in spade on the IG boards btw.

-Polaris

[vmxa1]

Well actually he has every right to post it and you have a right to ignore it, which you did.

[Ianpolaris]

vmxa1,

I got a bit hot there. You are right; I stand corrected. He did have a right to post that just as I have a right to post. It was bad manners and IMHO it does make him look like a board fascist.

-Polaris

[Ellestar]

Why this game is unplayable?

Well, you can't play against comp because you can easily win and can't lose (except comp' senate victory).

You can't play MultiPlayer because Micromanagement is much more efficient then any governor, devplans, autocolonize etc. But, say, it's 1% more efficient. Then, on turn 200, you got (1,01)^200=7.316 economic advantage. Tell me who can't win with 7.316 advantage??

To get this advantage, you must micromanage. Interface, AI (governors etc.), some game balnce things hinder you on this way. But you'll never win MP game if you don't do it. So, it's almost impossible to play MP game.

Some advices?

[Ianpolaris]

Ellestar,

You just showed why the game is unplayable as it is currently written.

If you are in SP mode, the AI rolls over and plays dead. Sure you win, but what's the challenge in that?

In MP mode, the victory will always go to the person who can navigate the interface fastest (remember timed turns can not be turned off in MP) which means it ceases to be a strategy game and becomes a 'click fest game' because you are right: Any micromanaging is always better than the AI 'macromanagement'.

Either way, as a strategy game, you can't play Moo III in a meaningful way.

My suggestion: Either wait until the game has been overhauled (or at least patched) [and you may be waiting a long time if I read Rantz and the other designers correctly], OR play something else.

-Polaris

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
Any micromanaging is always better than the AI 'macromanagement'.

Are you sure about that? I have seen humans make some pretty dumb moves in mp games. (and I have done some myself).


There is a third option to the ones you listed: go to igmoo and download an ai mod. They are working on fixing the ai, or at least improving it. The results are promising so far, not a perfect system yet of course, but an improvement.

[Ianpolaris]

Asleepathewheel,

Yes I am sure. Once the human knows what all the modifiers mean (and we aren't there yet for most of us), then yes in general a micromanaging human will beat any AI any time.

In fact (getting back to Dev Plans), this is why I find DevPlans to be largely useless. I micromanaged (or I did until I gave my game away) my DEAs for each world by hand (and it didn't take all /that/ long). I found I was much more efficient than the AI using DevPlans.

Of course IMHO that is one reason why the documentation (and I don't just mean the manual) is so poor. I don't think that QS developers want the human player to know the exact numeric effect their actions have on their empire. It is hard to Min-Max when you don't have hard numbers to work with...so I think that was deliberate. Of course Rantz and Co can't out and out say that or they'd be lynched.....but that is another issue for another thread.

-Polaris

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
Asleepathewheel,

Yes I am sure. Once the human knows what all the modifiers mean (and we aren't there yet for most of us), then yes in general a micromanaging human will beat any AI any time.

You've never played against someone that makes dumb mistakes? I have. And I have made dumb mistakes. Mistakes the ai wouldn't make in my place. How long have you played mp games? At a certain point you do gain competence and can trounce the ai, but there are always, always noobies who think they know what they are doing when they don't.

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
In fact (getting back to Dev Plans), this is why I find DevPlans to be largely useless. I micromanaged (or I did until I gave my game away) my DEAs for each world by hand (and it didn't take all /that/ long). I found I was much more efficient than the AI using DevPlans.

Great for you. So you don't need or like them, so they should be eliminated? like I said before, the game is accessible (more or less for micros and liesurely players.

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
Of course IMHO that is one reason why the documentation (and I don't just mean the manual) is so poor. I don't think that QS developers want the human player to know the exact numeric effect their actions have on their empire. It is hard to Min-Max when you don't have hard numbers to work with...so I think that was deliberate. Of course Rantz and Co can't out and out say that or they'd be lynched.....but that is another issue for another thread.

I agree with that, more numbers is better.

For instance, I've run across this, as I'm sure all players have, but the techs that add to the overdrive industry economy or something like that. what does that mean?