dev planning, anyone done it? - Page 3

Ianpolaris · March 5, 2003, 18:03

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 · March 5, 2003, 18:52

Quote:

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.

Quote:

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?

Quote:

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 · March 5, 2003, 19:01

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 · March 5, 2003, 19:24

Quote:

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.

Quote:

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.

Quote:

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?

Quote:

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 · March 5, 2003, 20:13

Quote:

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 · March 5, 2003, 20:35

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 · March 5, 2003, 22:32

Quote:

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.

Quote:

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 · March 6, 2003, 01:35

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 · March 6, 2003, 04:33

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

Ianpolaris · March 6, 2003, 11:52

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 · March 6, 2003, 12:16

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 · March 6, 2003, 12:50

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 · March 6, 2003, 13:05

Quote:

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 · March 6, 2003, 13:11

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 · March 6, 2003, 13:20

Quote:

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.

Quote:

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.

Quote:

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?

Ianpolaris · March 6, 2003, 14:15

Asleepathewheel,

I did say in general a human that micromanages will outperform an AI anytime. That averages out over a fairly long game....so even an occasional error will not always kill the human.

Secondly, I never said that Dev Plans should be eliminated. Please do not put words in my mouth. The original question dealt with how useful they were and IMHO they aren't that useful once you have learned the interface.

The sad fact is, I have found it is easier to preplan all the DEAs than use DevPlans largely because I can get some feel for how my empire is growing by assigning the DEAs while there is no information as to how exactly a Dev Plan will affect the growth of any particular planet (by information, I mean hard numbers I can evaluate).

The point is that for the "casual gamer" DevPlans aren't accessable which means that they have failed in their purpose almost by definition.

-Polaris

Anglophile · March 6, 2003, 14:36

Ianpolaris, I am going to have to agree with Togas, you have given up the game so you have forfeited your right to complain (especially in a thread nominally on the subject of Dev Plans). You made your point and I respect your point of view and agree with much of what you said the first time, the second time, the third time, the fourth time, ...., the nth time. We also are not stupid, we get it, move on.

As for Dev Plans, I am not clever enough to go into the code and find out what the defaults are. I have worked out that New means Industry DEA first (even if one's in the red with minerals), Mine DEA second, Space Super Fighter (once available) in the 1st military slot (bad), AstroUni (once avail) in the 1st Planetary slot (also not my first choice). Core Mineral Rich gets you a couple of farms, one R&D centre, enough mines for a surplus, the gov DEA and the rest industry DEAs. I don't know whether there is any way to use any of the plans except the five player choices (which are actually enough for me: Manufacturing, Mining, Farming, Research and Defense). I don't know if I do define them whether the Viceroy follows my version or the predefined version, so my system ignores them. I have the Empire setting on Specialized and use my defined plans in the Class 1 & 2 slots (sometimes the same plan, sometimes not). I do micromanage the critical planets but leave the rest to the Viceroy. My experience is that the Viceroy does follow the plans and generally puts the right DEAs in the right regions (e.g. Mines in Hostile Mountains and Bioharvest in Alluvial Plains, not vice versa). Just fine for most of my planets.

The Viceroy is not nearly as good at the Military and Planetary queues, although in the long run which order the planetary improvements get built is not that critical. The tendency to build infinite numbers of transports and land units is annoying but easy enough to control. All I want is a 'Lock' button for the various production queues so I could stop the Viceroy from returning the sliders to whatever default values 'he' wants, especially the Military Queue. That said, the Viceroy does do a pretty good job of balancing things when something new becomes available so I don't have to micromanage unless I want to.

And, off topic, that is one of the strengths of the game. First, the documentation sucks and the control system is not exactly obvious (I still have no idea what the system and empire tax settings have to do with anything). The first time through (to Turn 120 in a Huge 3 Arm galaxy, where I was tucked safely half way down one of the arms - so lots of time for the learning curve), I never really felt I was in control at all and was not convinced that I was going to like the game. Second time through (restart), using Dev Plans, I started not only to feel in control, but really was at least strongly influencing my Empire's direction. Third time through (up to Turn 70, great starting position on the southern fringe of the main galaxy body and in the Senate for the first time), I am really enjoying the game and am comfortable with the balance between micro and macro management that I've found. Back to the start of the paragraph - the game allows people to find their own preferred balance, which is a lot more than most games do. Yah, the game is not perfect; the AI seems agressive enough in declaring war, but not so far at prosecuting them. Yah, the graphics are surprisingly limited/uninspiring but I don't but a TBS game for graphics - but I do wish I had some and some more ship graphic options. But this is the unpatched version so better times may be ahead and version 1.00 is enjoyable for me and, to this point, remarkably bug free and stable. Of course, I've been working for a long time so a $50 investment is a non-factor and I thought MOO1 was a much more challenging (except for the Antarans early on - who were essentially impossible) game than MOO2, so my expectations were not impossibly high, nor was a looking for MOO 2.n, so my acceptance of MOO3 on its own merits might be an easier road for me than for others.

Ellestar · March 6, 2003, 14:51

Well, AI

I thought - to add one more paragraph or not? I see i must add it.

Even if AI will be more agressive, better manage colonies etc., then i must micro some more and that's all. In SMAC AI gets ~1,5x advantage every turn. Say 2x in 2 turns for simplicity. It's ~1000x in 20 turns or 1.000.000.000.000.000 in 100 turns. Well, it's easy to win even under these conditions.

It's easy to win in any TBS game against AI, even if AI cheating. If you want to win, you'll win. So, playing singleplayer is only training before MP.

Ianpolaris

I think i am the person who can navigate interface faster than anyone else in the game at least 95% of the time. I played StarCraft for 4+ years, not with friends, but with gosu players also (Orky team, they are also in [PG] clan), on tournaments etc. Yes, i am not that fast in FastClick, but i can click faster in TBS because i can think faster - RTS Micro is another matter, it's not like TBS micro except clicking itself. I have 11+ years TBS experience, so in overall TBS experience i'm losing mostly to 30+ years old (i am 22) players, but i can click much faster then they can - so have somthing to outperform they on the long run. Last thing - MOO3 expirience, but this is a matter of time.

In most other TBS games it's not an issue - FastCick don't give you an advantage (or small advantage), and experience means much more.

I think it's hm 'unfair' to use advantage at fastclick, but i also don't want to lose because another one using it. So, the MP game is unplayable.

P.S. Some advices on FastCilck (advices from players better than me in FastClick)

1) Good devices
1.1) Mouse
Best - Last DualOptical models from first released to last - Microsoft IntelliMouse Explorer 3.0; Logitech MX300, Logitech MX500, MS Blue.
There are some differencies in some features, but they are not important - because you can't use it effectively as a human, so choose from MX300 (classic form) and all others (ergonomic design) - what form you prefer. Overall - best quality, best precision, cursor never moves crazy no matter how fast you move mouse.

2nd best - Mitsumi Classic (ball mouse). Best ball mouse - no alternatives. Try to buy several from other places and choose best.

Never use non-dualoptical optical mouse (crazy cursor movement on fast movement speed), any wireless mouse (extremly heavy).

1.2) MousePad

Func Surface 1030 (best); Everglide Optical, X-Trac Pro Optical Mouse Pad - also good choices.

For Mitsumi Classic you can use fabric/cloth (don't know which word is better here) surface with rubber base/foundation, you must easily bend it to pipe.

1.3) MouseSkates - for less friction.

2) Software

2.1) MouseWare - if you have Logitech mouse download last version from logitech site. Acceleration set to 'NO', rate to 200 Hz (PS/2 mouse only).

2.2) Not using mouseware, PS/2 mouse - download (search engines) PS2Rate adjuster - there are many versions of it and set rate to 200 Hz also.

PS/2 has maximum rate 200 Hz (almost any mouse with soft, default mostly 80 Hz), USB - always 150 Hz, but some mouses has 800 DPI resolution only then plugged to USB port.

IMHO rate is not that important to TBS, so PS/2 (200 Hz)=USB (150 Hz).

3) Some training

Download piegates.exe from somethere (try to search 'piegates.exe' - only 'piegates' don't give you good results). World record is like 310, good result is 250 (not from the first time of course). Play ~3 games (30 secs each) several times a day.

www.missionred.com -> Reflex I, Reflex II, Reflex III
Good results - 420.000 (Reflex I), 1.200.000 (Reflex II), best - see top rankings.

Ianpolaris · March 6, 2003, 14:58

Anglophile,

I paid $50 for a game that I could not return (I was forced to give it away). That gives me the right to complain. Deal.

-Polaris

Ellestar · March 6, 2003, 15:20

Ianpolaris

Of course IMHO that is one reason why the documentation (and I don't just mean the manual) is so poor.

Well i also think so
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...30#post1773930

Anglophile

The Viceroy is not nearly as good at the Military and Planetary queues, although in the long run which order the planetary improvements get built is not that critical.

This is a joke???
1% advantage gives you 7.316 advantage on the long run (200 turns). THIS IS NOT CRITICAL??? So, if i have 700 ships vs your 100 and 700 planets vs your 100, you somehow want to win? Tell me please how you could manage to win under these conditions?

Ianpolaris · March 6, 2003, 15:33

Ellestar,

Great minds think alike

FWIW, I read your post and agree completely. I normally don't do "me too" posts, but I wanted you to know that I read it and agreed.

-Polaris

Anglophile · March 7, 2003, 10:06

Ellestar, I believe that maybe I have not been clear re the question you have asked me (because your question is meaningless on the point I was trying to make). So to clarify:

Each turn, each planet gets to spend PPs or AUs or whatever it is that is spent on up to 5 things (from the bottom up) - R&D, Terraforming, Planet Regional Improvement (i.e DEAs et al), Planet Wide Improvements, Military Items.

My comment was that the order that that the Planet Wide Improvements are built is not that critical. I stand by that remark. I really don't care much which pollution abatement system gets built first or whether I build the AstroUni before or after the Decomposition Center. Maybe I am missing something; maybe you misunderstood my comment to mean that the order of DEAs and/or Military Units get built is not important. These are clearly critical; the first of which is governed by those old Dev Plans this thread is supposedly about, the other is the one area of the game I do totally micromanage (although sometimes the Viceroy chooses what I would have).

Before I get argumentative about this, I would like some clarification about which one of us is missing the point.

Ianpolaris: yes you do have the right to complain (although caveat emptor holds even in the US where everything bad is always someone (who can generally be sued for millions of $$$) else's fault); I do question whether I am the right person to complain to as there is the square root of squat I can do about your issues.

Stuie · March 7, 2003, 11:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Anglophile
I do question whether I am the right person to complain to as there is the square root of squat I can do about your issues.

vmxa1 - So much for discussing the strategy of development plans. Maybe you should start another thread and try again, and this time those who just want to whine about the game might kindly avoid this blatant threadjacking.

sloejack · March 7, 2003, 11:51

This has been one of the weakest threads I've ever read on a given subject. For those of you who are really interested in how dev plans seem to work and real guidance in using them, check out the moo3 forum from the moo3.com site. I don't have the exact url to the thread at the moment but it's stuck to the top of the strategy forum there so it shouldn't be too hard to find.

darcy · March 7, 2003, 13:24

Since no one knows how planets are categorized or how dev plans are prioritized, a thread about this subject was doomed to go off-topic.

geneo2036 · March 8, 2003, 15:03

DEV planning doesn't work! And despite those that say it does, it doesn't.

Here's why. I played a game on huge galaxy and my empire ran up a huge surplus of food/minirals like the Viceroys tend to do.

So I changed every single dev plan to INdustry (all 3 choices per planet type). And not only did the AI not rearange some of the old DEAs to Industrial but even on new planets the Viceroy was still trying to build food/mining and research (which was pointless since i was at max tech already).

I don't know what you guys are talking about with DEA plans working but I have to manuelly change all my DEAs do do what I want and its a MAJOR pain as it takes many turns to scrap a bunch of DEAs and if you forget to go back every couple tunrs the Viceroy will start building a new dea (likely what was there before) whether if was on of off!!

After 50+ hours with this game- I have found almost nothing fun and a whole mess of frustration.

Every aspect of this game seems broken to me- Hell name a system and I'll give you 3 major problems with it.
Simply nothing in this game works

vmxa1 · March 8, 2003, 15:55

Remember that you will have many plans in effect for a given planet. ALL PLANETS, the two classes you see in the box and any othrs that apply such as Yellow/Red/Green.
If the AI is not acting fast enough, I make a player defined pair that are the same and slap them in. This seems to force the AI to do my bidding.

Ianpolaris · March 8, 2003, 16:17

vmxa1,

That might be true, but you really can't deny geneo's underlying point:

It is actually easier to preplan all your DEAs in advance (and turn the Planetary AI OFF) than it is to use (and constantly change Dev Plans) AND it gives you better control. That isn't exactly stellar macromanagement.

-Polaris

vmxa1 · March 8, 2003, 21:44

I am not sure I want to deny them, ok I will. I am able to get the AI to build what I want in a fairly timely manner with proper use of my dev plans. Is it intuitive or easy, no.
All I was saying is before you claim it does not work, be sure you understand that more than just the two plans you see are being used.

Ianpolaris · March 9, 2003, 05:50

Vmxa1,

I am not saying that it isn't possible. All I am saying is this:

Can you deny that it is just as easy to develope all planetary DEAs by hand (when you first colonize)?

Furthermore, isn't it obvious that you will always get more efficient results by so doing?

Given those two things above, is it any wonder why many of us regard DevPlans as pretty pointless?

-Polaris