A 3 player FFA and 2 wtfs

from Sins Forums

I played a 3 player FFA in multiplayer tonight, which I lost as usual. I lost mainly because it quickly turned into a 1vs2, me being the "1". That's ok, I can't prevent that from happening. However :

 - One player quit the game early on. I didn't even notice, but an AI took his place. WTF. I've had to fight against an AI the whole time, while the human player built his army and started to whoop my ass on the other side of the system. I never wanted to play against an AI. I can't think of a strategy game where an AI will automatically and necessarly replace a human player when he resigns. That's just ridiculous.

 - The AI just won't abandon. He just keeps building dozens and dozens of useless LFs, which routinely get destroyed by my LRMs and my capital ship. I must raze each and every one of its colonies and each and every building before it's defeated. This takes a lot of time (we're talking about at 45 minutes here) when any player would have resigned and allowed me to concentrate on my other opponent.

 - But it doesn't stop there either ! Even when the AI is supposedly defeated (no planets left, player icon in diplomacy window has shattered glass in front of it), it makes no difference ! It will still attack you with its remaining ships. I left a few krosov frigates to destroy his last colony and moved my fleet to face my other adversary, but meanwhile he built a Dunov. After the Dunov was complete, his lost his last planet and was defeated. However, the Dunov started killing the Krosovs and rasing the planet afterwards. I didn't have time to check if he actually colonized it, but WTF ! In any strategy game I can think of, when a player is defeated, first you get some feedback like "player defeated" (none in Sins, you need to check the diplomacy window to be sure), and secondly his remaining units will either be destroyed or stand idle. They certainly won't start attacking !

 

Anyway, I'm a bit frustrated by my defeat because I feel like I wasted my time against a stupid AI that wouldn't resign and wouldn't even accept defeat once I had delivered it onto him.

 

While we're at it, what's a good counter against mass HCs ?

28,700 views 13 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top

I can understand you're frustration, and i've seen that before, although it usually happens when the AI that has no colonized worlds but has an ally, and is along with a few structures and is able to pseudo-survive through him.  It may even be a case that the computer decided to just continue playing til the complete and utter end rather than surrender once all planets are destroyed (much like the option that player has at the end of a match).  not sure if this is the case but it's at least a theory.  Other than that, I hope this venting helped get over the annoyance of the loss.

For me to counter HCs, i usually field a fleet of my own HCs along with carriers with a mass of support cruisers (primarily the healer cruisers) to out last them and to annoy the hell out of them in the case of Advent guardian's push ability

Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top

Generally, you are.........ed.

The AI is unwilling to stop attacking even though you have removed its legs and arms. It's not even a draw to it! (homage to Search for the Holy Grail).

Start11 - Customize the Start Menu and Taskbar in Windows 10/11.
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top

While we're at it, what's a good counter against mass HCs ?

End of quote

Bombers will slaughter them, but that's only viable if you can cover them from enemy fighters.  If you have strike craft supremacy, though, you can just deploy bombers with impunity and heavy cruisers won't be a problem anymore.  Most support cruisers can disable them with ease, as well.  The Hoshiko can pretty well disable all heavy cruiser damage, while both guardians (with repulsion) and subjugators can keep them out of the loop.  I'm not much for Vasari support cruisers, but nano-disassemblers work wonders on heavy cruisers.

 

I empathize with you on the matter of the AI, but on the other hand you should have gotten a substantial experience advantage from all those free light frigate kills.  I do think it should be a game option as to what happens to a player upon surrender.  Being taken up by an AI is a possibility, but defeat or allied control would also work just fine.

Reply #4 from Stardock Forums Top

That's what the latest patches of Sins did:  strengthen AI. Heck, in Entrenchment, pirates are powerful. Not even 3 capital ships matched with 30 frigates are sufficient to decimate their entire fleet. And that's not even multiplayer.

The improved AI is what many Sins players have always rooted for. I suggest that you master dealing with the AI in single player first, exploiting its weaknesses.

 

Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top

What a way to go.  The other player maybe even knew that this could happen and used it to his advantage which he got anyways.

Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top

Quoting AxeEmAll, reply 4
That's what the latest patches of Sins did:  strengthen AI. Heck, in Entrenchment, pirates are powerful. Not even 3 capital ships matched with 30 frigates are sufficient to decimate their entire fleet. And that's not even multiplayer.

The improved AI is what many Sins players have always rooted for. I suggest that you master dealing with the AI in single player first, exploiting its weaknesses.

 
End of AxeEmAll's quote
It's not a problem if the AI is good. It's a problem IMO that an AI is automatically assigned to a player that leaves the game. I mean, if the player thought he was defeated and left, then he shouldn't be a problem anymore ! But with an AI taking over his possessions, he is still a problem ! And the stronger the AI, the more that's true !

 

Also it's a problem that an AI won't surrender without any chance of winning, in an FFA. If the AI was allied with someone else, he should resist until the very end, of course, to help his ally as much as possible, but alone, what's the point ? Pissing me off ?

 

I do think it should be a game option as to what happens to a player upon surrender. Being taken up by an AI is a possibility, but defeat or allied control would also work just fine.
End of quote

 Exactly.

Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top

This is a feature that was added to the game at player request.... it does kind of suck in FFA though.

When you play team games, like 3v3 - 5v5, it sucked really bad when someone dropped or quit.  A lot of poeple were happy when the AI took over for dropped players, because when the game first came out and you lost a player, you were pretty screwed.

BTW, this is why some of us don't like FFA...especially a 3 way FFA.  Every FFA I have every played, everyone either ganged up on me, or quit when they realized they can't beat me (sometimes after an hour of buildup without actually fighting me!).  I find locked team games to be a lot more enjoyable.

Reply #8 from Sins Forums Top

The player needs to SURRENDER not QUIT to prevent an AI taking over!!!

But alot of ppl won't do that as they don't want the defeat on their record

Reply #9 from Sins Forums Top

The player needs to SURRENDER not QUIT to prevent an AI taking over!!!

But alot of ppl won't do that as they don't want the defeat on their record
End of quote

 

Mehh...if my ally wants to give up, I WANT him to hit QUIT so I have a computer AI helping me for a bit until it dies...better than nothing.

Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top

Yeah - but that is a teams game, not FFA!!!

Reply #11 from Sins Forums Top

Yeah - but that is a teams game, not FFA!!!
End of quote

True, in an FFA, they should surrender...my bad.

Reply #12 from Sins Forums Top

Quoting Hack78, reply 8
The player needs to SURRENDER not QUIT to prevent an AI taking over!!!

But alot of ppl won't do that as they don't want the defeat on their record
End of Hack78's quote
To be honest, I didn't know the difference. I've always clicked "quit" regardless of the outcome of the game. I've indeed lost more games than is indicated by my record.

Again, that's pretty stupid. A player leaving the game has, by definition, resigned. It's like that in Starcraft, and it's like that in Age of Empires, and it works. The only way of quitting without getting a negative point on your record is by causing a physical disconnection. Your record will then indicate you have had a certain number of disconnects. A player who always avoids defeat this way will have an unusually high number of disconnects on his record, allowing other players to know he's likely to do that, so the system can't be too much exploited.

Well in Sins, this explains why you see people with hundreds of victories and almost no defeats. At first I was wondering if they were some kind of Gods - no, they just click "quit".

That's called a broken system. RTSes have done this right for more than a decade now - why fix what isn't broken ?

Reply #13 from Sins Forums Top

Well in Sins, this explains why you see people with hundreds of victories and almost no defeats. At first I was wondering if they were some kind of Gods - no, they just click "quit".
End of quote

Only if the total number of games is WAY above the total of won+lost. You have to account for Mini-Dumps for these players. When over 300 games have been played, they will have had the desync issues from 1.05 etc... to contend with...

e.g. 350 games played, 220 won and 40 lost. That is not a quitter. That is a "god" as you put it.

However 350 played, 100 won, 20 lost is a quitter...