Can we get some tweaks to the Ships Reinforcement Priority Sequence?

Prev1
Anrath
216 posts Member
edited January 2019
So thanks to the great work from the Fleet discord server we now roughly know the AI reinforcement priority sequence, but we all know there are issues with it.

For example:
1) The horribly low priority for PloKoon's ship as a reinforcement.
2) Inability to get Vader's ship out first before a Tank like Biggs if both are reinforcements (even with Vader's ship first in the sequence).
3) Scimitar coming out before Vader's ship, even if Vader is listed first.

So can we get some more player control on the Ships Reinforcement Priority?

Perhaps reinforcement spots 1&2 can have absolute priority over spots 3&4 ( no matter what ships are used)?
So then reinforcement sequence of:
Vader Reaper, Biggs Scimitar would come out in that Left to Right sequence. As would the sequence:
Vader Reaper, Scimitar Biggs

So a simple change where the priority sequence remains unchanged, accept that the AI only compares spots 1&2 for priority and not all 4 spots, until the 3rd reinforcement will be called and then it just compares spots 3&4.

Anyone else have any ideas how to improve the ship's reinforcement priority sequence (please no " Get ride of it!" comments. Want something more constructive)?

Replies

  • I don't understand why they don't code it so that the reinforcements come out in the order you set them in your lineup, it just doesn't make sense the way it currently works. I don't think the AI should make any decisions regarding reinforcement priority, it shouldn't look at the 1st and 2nd reinforcement and then make a decision between them, it should just always go with the priority order that the player sets.
  • This was a ships 2.0 fix. I actually like it more but I wish they would put a lower priority on tanks if you’re not in desperate need of one. It would be nice if the AI could read that your HT is at full health and taunting so Vader is a better reinforcement than biggs.
  • Needs to go back to the ole way - how we set them. Period. It’s too automated now.
    SnakesOnAPlane
  • +1.
    Theres no point building a strong bench (or lineup for that matter) if the AI makes stupid decisions and loses the match anyway.
  • Drazhar
    784 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    1) The AI doesn't know what the ships do. It probably just knows what ships have a taunt, in fact it always throws bossk, boba clone Sgt and such ships out first. Then it throws out damage and then Plo, as the last one.
    2) Expecting the AI to use basic strategy is quite optimistic. I wouldn't count on that. Don't use a lineup that is that specific, the AI will never get it right, not even randomly
    3) The AI somewhat likes Scimitar a lot, I think this is a pre-ships 2.0 thing. Anyway, scimitar's special is one of the two or three skills the AI knows, even if it doesn't know how to properly use it. It just gives the counter to the ship with the most health and protection.
  • TVF
    36518 posts Member
    This was a ships 2.0 fix. I actually like it more but I wish they would put a lower priority on tanks if you’re not in desperate need of one. It would be nice if the AI could read that your HT is at full health and taunting so Vader is a better reinforcement than biggs.

    Why do you like it better? I don't see how anything can be better than allowing us to set the priority ourselves like we did in 1.0. Unless you like it because you can climb easier now.
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • ShaggyB
    2390 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    Please base it on where i put them in my line up order.

    Currently i have 1st slot vader and second phantom. Cpu always calls phantom first then vader.

    But i dont need that. Vader coming out will end the match in most cases for my arena. There is only one person in my arena that can survive that.

    Not sure how hard it is for him/her to beat me... but i can floor him/her in 1 min 15 seconds if i play it my way
  • Easy! Put your 1 and #2 reinforcement in the 3 and 4 slot
  • TVF
    36518 posts Member
    Easy! Put your 1 and #2 reinforcement in the 3 and 4 slot

    That makes no difference. AI does not call by slot unless two ships are in same priority tier.
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Anrath wrote: »
    So thanks to the great work from the Fleet discord server we now roughly know the AI reinforcement priority sequence, but we all know there are issues with it.

    For example:
    1) The horribly low priority for PloKoon's ship as a reinforcement.
    2) Inability to get Vader's ship out first before a Tank like Biggs if both are reinforcements (even with Vader's ship first in the sequence).
    3) Scimitar coming out before Vader's ship, even if Vader is listed first.

    So can we get some more player control on the Ships Reinforcement Priority?

    Perhaps reinforcement spots 1&2 can have absolute priority over spots 3&4 ( no matter what ships are used)?
    So then reinforcement sequence of:
    Vader Reaper, Biggs Scimitar would come out in that Left to Right sequence. As would the sequence:
    Vader Reaper, Scimitar Biggs

    So a simple change where the priority sequence remains unchanged, accept that the AI only compares spots 1&2 for priority and not all 4 spots, until the 3rd reinforcement will be called and then it just compares spots 3&4.

    Anyone else have any ideas how to improve the ship's reinforcement priority sequence (please no " Get ride of it!" comments. Want something more constructive)?

    No. Set thw priority to user defined. 1st slot first, 2nd out second, etc.

    No compare. The ai should go in order. Anything else requires specific situational awareness that i would not expect from ai.

    If i put them in a specific order i expect that to be how they are used.
  • TVF wrote: »

    Why do you like it better? I don't see how anything can be better than allowing us to set the priority ourselves like we did in 1.0. Unless you like it because you can climb easier now.

    1. If I set any ship (Vader for instance) as first priority, it’s impossible for him to always be the best choice. If my opponent wipes out 2 ships early, getting Vader probably won’t turn the match to my favor.
    2. If the AI always calls reinforcements in the same order every time, it would only take my opponents a few attempts against me to memorize my reinforcement order and then set their lineup to beat it.
  • TVF
    36518 posts Member
    TVF wrote: »

    Why do you like it better? I don't see how anything can be better than allowing us to set the priority ourselves like we did in 1.0. Unless you like it because you can climb easier now.

    1. If I set any ship (Vader for instance) as first priority, it’s impossible for him to always be the best choice. If my opponent wipes out 2 ships early, getting Vader probably won’t turn the match to my favor.
    2. If the AI always calls reinforcements in the same order every time, it would only take my opponents a few attempts against me to memorize my reinforcement order and then set their lineup to beat it.

    #2 is an argument to allow us to set the order like we did in 1.0. That doesn't explain why you like it better in 2.0, in fact it contradicts it.
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • I 100% agree. I want my vader to come out EVERY time 1st regardless of what's going on. And in order for that to happen, I can't have certain ships as reinforcements and that is 100% a very lame system.
  • I have better luck only using 1 benched ship. It will always come out. I only drop 3-5 spots a day and always get back to 1.
  • TVF
    36518 posts Member
    I have better luck only using 1 benched ship. It will always come out. I only drop 3-5 spots a day and always get back to 1.

    Lol you must be on a new shard.
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »

    Why do you like it better? I don't see how anything can be better than allowing us to set the priority ourselves like we did in 1.0. Unless you like it because you can climb easier now.

    1. If I set any ship (Vader for instance) as first priority, it’s impossible for him to always be the best choice. If my opponent wipes out 2 ships early, getting Vader probably won’t turn the match to my favor.
    2. If the AI always calls reinforcements in the same order every time, it would only take my opponents a few attempts against me to memorize my reinforcement order and then set their lineup to beat it.

    #2 is an argument to allow us to set the order like we did in 1.0. That doesn't explain why you like it better in 2.0, in fact it contradicts it.

    How does #2 contradict my argument? Ships 1.0 called reinforcements the way you set them regardless of battle situation. Ships 2.0 calls anyone from the bench regardless of order that you set and based on battle situation. And I agree AI prioritization is off, but that can be adjusted rather than overhauled.
  • TVF
    36518 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    It calls based on Prioritization Tiers. So under 1.0 I picked the order. Under 2.0 the AI picks from tier 1 first no matter what order I put them in. Then tier 2. Then tier 3. How is no control better than some control?

    And under 1.0 if you were really that worried about your opponents knowing your order of RI, you could change it. Now you can't. That's why your concern contradicts your desire.
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • TVF wrote: »
    It calls based on Prioritization Tiers. So under 1.0 I picked the order. Under 2.0 the AI picks from tier 1 first no matter what order I put them in. Then tier 2. Then tier 3. How is no control better than some control?

    And under 1.0 if you were really that worried about your opponents knowing your order of RI, you could change it. Now you can't. That's why your concern contradicts your desire.

    Thanks for reading half of my post before crafting your response. Maybe one day you’ll read the other part...or just jump to another thread to contradict someone else.
  • Jarvind
    3920 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    This seems like the kind of thing that wouldn't be as much of a blessing as you'd think. Granted, the AI is pretty predictable in that it will almost always call a tank if it has one available, but the fact is that's usually the right move. Attacker ships are incredibly squishy, so by the first reinforcement call you usually need to bring in a taunter to take the heat off them.

    Even if you're using Almighty Hound's Tooth, hallowed be thy protection up, it often makes sense to call a 2nd tank in with your first reinforcement to cover the 1-turn gap between its taunts.
    u58t4vkrvnrz.png



  • Vader will not help as a reinforcement with the new Millennium Falcon...
  • As many have stated before.
    Please just use the ships in the order I put them in.
    Using my order will win me more battles than the way the AI plays it. The current way will win some, but just using my set order will win more often.
  • Jarvind wrote: »
    This seems like the kind of thing that wouldn't be as much of a blessing as you'd think. Granted, the AI is pretty predictable in that it will almost always call a tank if it has one available, but the fact is that's usually the right move. Attacker ships are incredibly squishy, so by the first reinforcement call you usually need to bring in a taunter to take the heat off them.

    Even if you're using Almighty Hound's Tooth, hallowed be thy protection up, it often makes sense to call a 2nd tank in with your first reinforcement to cover the 1-turn gap between its taunts.

    I think this is well said and I agree. I run HT and sun fac in the starting lineup with no tanks as RI, but prior, I ran sun fac as an RI and called him first while on offense every time. The way ships are built now, it’s nearly impossible to win with just 1 tank.

    My fleet stays top 10 all day with this new lineup (no tanks in RI) and I think the AI does a good job of calling Vader or Spy as the first RI. The third choice is Plo Koon and it almost never calls the fourth. For reference, you can do a battle on auto to check the order or just ask shard mates.

    All this to say, if you’re running 1 tank in the starting lineup and none in RI, the AI should be calling the order you want and you’re probably losing a lot of battles. If you have 3 tanks in your fleet (at least 1 in RI) and the AI is calling the tank as a first RI, you have too many tanks.
  • Yeah because the new system isn't more confusing and convoluted then the system in 1.0. Just another example of CG fixing something that wasn't broke to begin with.
  • Jarvind wrote: »
    This seems like the kind of thing that wouldn't be as much of a blessing as you'd think. Granted, the AI is pretty predictable in that it will almost always call a tank if it has one available, but the fact is that's usually the right move. Attacker ships are incredibly squishy, so by the first reinforcement call you usually need to bring in a taunter to take the heat off them.

    Even if you're using Almighty Hound's Tooth, hallowed be thy protection up, it often makes sense to call a 2nd tank in with your first reinforcement to cover the 1-turn gap between its taunts.

    I think this is well said and I agree. I run HT and sun fac in the starting lineup with no tanks as RI, but prior, I ran sun fac as an RI and called him first while on offense every time. The way ships are built now, it’s nearly impossible to win with just 1 tank.

    My fleet stays top 10 all day with this new lineup (no tanks in RI) and I think the AI does a good job of calling Vader or Spy as the first RI. The third choice is Plo Koon and it almost never calls the fourth. For reference, you can do a battle on auto to check the order or just ask shard mates.

    All this to say, if you’re running 1 tank in the starting lineup and none in RI, the AI should be calling the order you want and you’re probably losing a lot of battles. If you have 3 tanks in your fleet (at least 1 in RI) and the AI is calling the tank as a first RI, you have too many tanks.

    There are plenty of fleets that can win (and hold) with only 1 taunter including many of the mace fleets. Sometimes having a second tank in your back pocket is good in case bad rng costs you HT early on, but you can't leave that as a defensive fleet because the AI prioritization then messes up your lineup.
  • TVF wrote: »
    This was a ships 2.0 fix. I actually like it more but I wish they would put a lower priority on tanks if you’re not in desperate need of one. It would be nice if the AI could read that your HT is at full health and taunting so Vader is a better reinforcement than biggs.

    Why do you like it better? I don't see how anything can be better than allowing us to set the priority ourselves like we did in 1.0. Unless you like it because you can climb easier now.

    I like it because if you have the right set of reinforcements, they will do it much more effectively. If my ships are dying, I'd want Plo Koon to be out first, not Vader.
  • So some passion on this issue I see :D

    To everyone that was just asking for ships RI ordering to reverse to 1.0 method, I think you are banging your head against a wall. CG might tweak its AI reinforcement method, but I wouldn't expect them to go back to the 1.0 method. They had reasons for the change, be it more $$ or weaker defending so Ships Arena becomes more competitive or perhaps they have it so the latest ships have better AI and so this feeds into more $$ (like squad arena is).

    Anyway i think the best we can hope for is a tweak that gives us more control and doesn't make as many ships useless to have in your defensive RI because of the bad AI.

    But, on Offense ships 2.0 reinforcementing is just the same as ships 1.0 if you do it manually. If you are trying to win on auto you are either: spending money (and so might have an edge that allows you to auto), or you are not playing to your fleet's potential and autoing agaisnt weaker players, or you should be expecting to lose many of your battles. I don't see AI reinforcement stupidity on auto during your offense climb as a good argument that CG will respond to.

    So it's only a real issue when our fleets defend.
    And thus what we are asking is to make ships harder to climb in (with better defending AI / RI sequence). I doubt anyone wants to make fleets that defend so well that only whales can climb, so some degree of defending fails are needed.
    Personally I think the current ships 2.0 reinforcement priorities make many ships useless to have in RI, and why I think tweaks are needed (not to make climbing harder necessarily, but to make ships just more interesting). So Tank priorities lower; Healer+Dispeller ships priorities higher; and perhaps some other tweaks.

    But let's try to come up with a couple more constructive suggestions about how to tweak the reinforcement priorities.

    Cheers.
  • Anrath wrote: »
    So Tank priorities lower; Healer+Dispeller ships priorities higher; and perhaps some other tweaks.

    But let's try to come up with a couple more constructive suggestions about how to tweak the reinforcement priorities.

    Cheers.

    I think this would be a good first step. If issues continue after lowering tank priority, they could look elsewhere for improvements.

    Or just randomize reinforcements with no priority so every match is different :smile:
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    Anrath wrote: »
    So Tank priorities lower; Healer+Dispeller ships priorities higher; and perhaps some other tweaks.

    But let's try to come up with a couple more constructive suggestions about how to tweak the reinforcement priorities.

    Cheers.

    I think this would be a good first step. If issues continue after lowering tank priority, they could look elsewhere for improvements.

    Or just randomize reinforcements with no priority so every match is different :smile:

    I would totally get behind total randomization on defense.... makes climbing easier and does make things interesting as your not fighting same thing robot style
Sign In or Register to comment.