Can we make AA units auto target gunships instead of fighters?

Discussion in 'Balance Discussions' started by stuart98, March 2, 2014.

  1. gunshin

    gunshin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    790
    Likes Received:
    417
    In what scenario is it ever a good idea to build bombers instead of fighters for the purpose of an air fight? You seem to be playing with some idiots.

    It is pretty clear cut, and its also pretty obvious the priority system is either not in place, or not finished.
  2. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    It's not that you go and build them, it's that you have them spare for the situation when it happens.

    And using the priority system, you know that bombers are first, fighters are second.

    And in that situation, there is a exploit, ready to be used.


    So from there, what's the point in the priority system, when priority's change.
  3. gunshin

    gunshin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    790
    Likes Received:
    417
    You clearly misunderstand the implementation of the priority system. Priority systems are not global and the same for every unit. They are unit specific for each type of unit. Multiple units may share the same priority list, such as the spinner and stinger. But a spinner would not share the same priority list as the ant / 'alleged' tank.
  4. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    Ok, but we are talking about a single type of unit.

    And in that priority list, or any kind of list, players will use it to purposely use it against you.

    Much like when tanks could shoot aircraft, people sent fighters above them to distract them.

    Yeah that is a situation that happened with a first come first serve targeting system, but it's not like a priority system changes much.

    It's still an exploitable situation, because people know the priority list, and cant change it based on the situation.

    And because you can't change the priority system to what you need it to do, then what's the point in it at all?
  5. gunshin

    gunshin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    790
    Likes Received:
    417
    If you want to change it based on the situation you have the ability to target things manually, but i do not understand why you would ever want peregrines to target the bombers first. If you are in the position of being sniped by Hornets, you are in deep ****, because 1. He has a large amount of them (10+) 2. a substantial peregrine force to rival yours (in which case its your own fault you are behind).

    I dont understand your reasoning for thinking that a priority system is abusable because you could make hornets be targetted by peregrines before the enemies peregrines. In EVERY air-air battle, having more peregrines will ALWAYS be better than an air force split between peregrines and hornets. This is nothing like the ground battles that could potentially occur.

    When you say that its coincidental that they use hornets in the battle to draw fire, their intention was never to win air dominance in the first place, because building hornets does NOT help that.

    Seriously, are you putting any thoughts into your simulations or not? This is precisely why there are only a few people in the community at the top, because the majority lack the abilities to think about the situations and sort between relevent information and not. Its also not just about the situation, but the events leading up to it that count as well, and the events that unfold afterwards.
  6. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    That is one situation, where targeting bombers, is the priority, but that isn't every situation.

    If all your aircraft shoot at the bombers, then your opponent just shoots at your fighters and has a greater chance at killing your fighters off ans they kill the bombers.

    This isn't a sandbox situation, im not talking about a fair battle, because that doesn't happen.

    Nor can you micro your fighters ignore their priority system in time, that isn't feasible to expect a player to do.

    No, no it doesn't, they build bombers for other jobs, and then decide to use them to do this job on the fly.

    As with the tank AA situation, you don't build fighters to distract your enemy's tanks, you just do it off hand from other situations.

    So, you are just going to insult me, this is your closing argument point? A insult, and a gloat about being the best?

    That doesn't help your argument.
  7. gunshin

    gunshin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    790
    Likes Received:
    417
    I dont need to be the best to see how stupid you are being, and nor do i claim to be the best. I have barely played this game over the past months, and whilst i have only brief information on the current balance on the game, the theory and strategies behind it are still easily grasped. It is clear to me that i could abandon this game for many months, and still come back and beat you. Our thought processes are just that different.

    With a real priority system, every unit will ALWAYS target the most dangerous enemy to them, if its possible. Peregrines will ALWAYS target other peregrines over bombers. This is clear cut. There is no sideways angle of this. Now, unless i am mistaken, they still have not done a global health increase right? In such a case, bombers could never be used as tanking aircraft, and nor should they. If we are talking about 2 players engaging with equal resources spent into aircraft, the one with the most peregrines (ignoring any potential micro, because the fact could be made that a smaller peregrine force could potentially beat a larger one with micro) will always win.

    If you are using a combination of ground AA and fighters against a bomber/fighter army, then yes, you could potentially have a small inconsistency with targetting due to the priority system because any ground AA will always shoot at bombers if possible, and the Air AA will always shoot at fighters.

    In what way would removing the priority system ever help the game given any situation, because even for the one i just mentioned, it is still beneficial to have one.
  8. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    Whatever dude, go brush your ego some place else.
  9. chronosoul

    chronosoul Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    941
    Likes Received:
    618
    I don't like priority systems that I have no control over.

    I vote no on ground AA auto targeting Gunships over fighters.
  10. gunshin

    gunshin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    790
    Likes Received:
    417
    If they do it right, the priority lists will be moddable. Its all up to you. However, priority systems will ALWAYS be better than no priority system. I however do not understand the reasoning behind targetting fighters before gunships. If there are units that require immediate attention, i have the ability to manually tell my army to attack them.
    stuart98 likes this.
  11. chronosoul

    chronosoul Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    941
    Likes Received:
    618
    I disagree again. Priority systems will not always be better then no priority systems. We are looking at an edge case of Gunships and peregrines combined. What about bombers and Fighters mobile AA priority. mobile AA and Stationary AA for bomber priority. I don't like the idea of a predetermined attack pattern added into the game for an edge case like fighters and gun ships. If this was an issue for every unit in the game. Then maybe, but since this one example is being presented, I don't see the merit in putting in time to add into the game.
  12. Geers

    Geers Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,946
    Likes Received:
    6,820
    What do you think of letting players set their own priorities?
  13. chronosoul

    chronosoul Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    941
    Likes Received:
    618
    I don't think that should be allowed in the base game, but if added as a mod, I'm sure it will do fine. Targeting priorities are minimal to just a few units, I don't think it warrants a full game wide need for it.
  14. Geers

    Geers Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,946
    Likes Received:
    6,820
  15. chronosoul

    chronosoul Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    941
    Likes Received:
    618
    Geers, I'm willing to argue my point. I've made concessions saying target priorities can be mod work that isn't in the base game that affects everyone but only those who want to try it.

    EDIT: If you want to argue, i'll argue, but if not i'll stay out of this thread.
  16. Geers

    Geers Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,946
    Likes Received:
    6,820
    I just don't understand why you're against it when it seems to be exactly what you want.
  17. stormingkiwi

    stormingkiwi Post Master General

    Messages:
    3,266
    Likes Received:
    1,355
    Priority system


    What about AI War's swarm mind? Essentially target selection is done for the AI's units by sorting the list of targets based on different criteria. The top choice is chosen, but in order to create a non-exploitable system there's fuzzy logic in the target selection process.


    Also, units are aware of what their fellows are shooting and sort their target priorities to suit.

    There's a blog post somewhere about this.
  18. chronosoul

    chronosoul Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    941
    Likes Received:
    618
    I don't want it in the base game. I'm okay with it being a mod that people can choose to have it in or not.
  19. Raevn

    Raevn Moderator Alumni

    Messages:
    4,226
    Likes Received:
    4,324
    FYI; targeting priorities are already implemented and heavily used in PA - pretty much every unit has them.

    For example, the Ant's priorities are:
    1. Mobile units other than aircraft
    2. Naval units
    3. Structures other than walls
    4. Walls
    5. Aircraft (not that they can target them)
    Code:
      "target_priorities": [
        "Mobile - Air",
        "Naval",
        "Structure - Wall",
        "Wall",
        "Air"
      ], 
    nlaush and wondible like this.
  20. Geers

    Geers Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,946
    Likes Received:
    6,820
    Yes, but why?

Share This Page