The stun chance was too high, so it was an issue irrespective if the AI used it or not. The AI could look formidable with this weapon but only because it was broken. If you did the same exploit you would see that it would be a walk in the park for you if you equipped all your ships with phasors, irrespective of what the AI would bring, they would not play once. So, we need to decrease the chance of stunning. As for the AI not being formidable enough in combat, well, that's something that needs to be improved as we go.
I agree completely with all of this. Also, 5% per shot, at least statistically, feels like a better solution that doesn't encourage tons of single weapon slots to game the odds.
This is now implemented. Each phasor that hits now has a 5% chance of stunning the target. I made a few tests and it felt right to me, and this should avoid exploits while still being a good tool to give you an edge and help create dynamic elements in combat, as 1 Titan skipping a turn can be huge.
I think I better clarify my position as I may be sending mixed signals The player defending from a phasor stun becomes an acute problem if the player sends a single ship against the AI… and it should be a problem. For example, if the player sends a single titan to engage hostile forces, that Titan is, and should be more vulnerable than if it had escorts. Historically this is what happened to the Kriegsmarine in WW II when it sent some of its all too few capital ships out alone as commerce raiders. Today, any admiral that sent out a single carrier without its supporting battle group would be cashiered. In ISG, a single ship means the AI has a single target to focus on, if that target gets stunned the player is screwed. If we nerfed the stun solely to accommodate that type of player, I am vehemently against it, but the truth is that it would only be a matter of time before players started exploiting the stun against the AI. In light of that, a fix is needed. I lament the fact though that this has broader consequences. Yesterday I described a battle I lost because of the AI’s use of the phasor stun, with our fix now, it means I would have won that battle… In short, I support the fix but for different reasons, I support the fix as it can become an exploit that unbalances the game. I support the fix to correct a broken system. I do not support the fix as a way to make the game easier for a player that prefers to use a single large ship in combat. MoO2 suffered from the end game being Titans only, and the poll I referenced yesterday may indicate that a lot of players didn’t care for that…but that is a matter of taste and subjective. What isn’t subjective is that we need to have proper motivation for adjusting systems and weapons. If we are redressing an imbalance or an error, I am for fixes. If on the other hand, we fix or nerf systems because the AI is giving the player a hard time… then battles will become nothing more than target practice, that I can’t support.
All is clear Konstantine. We are fixing a design flaw and exploit, not nerfing a system because the AI is giving a hard time to players. We all want the AI to give a hard time to players, especially in the higher difficulties. The AI seems competent now, and I'm sure it will be even better as we go forward. Stunning is still there, and can be used effectively if you plan around that. However, I believe it should not be exploitative at this stage, or at least much harder to do so and ultimately not worth the trouble. In other words, it should be fair and working as intended now. We can continue tweaking it along the way if we feel that is required. Thanks a lot for your detailed input on this matter.
I agree with the statement from Konstantine. But however we try to control the stun solution, I also agree the mentioning of impatient young people who will walk away from this game if it is not properly balanced. But as our wise Konstatine says if you walk into a battle with a single ship then you should be punished. If you make a proper fleet to fight with then it shouldn't be a big issue.
I dont know if its true but Ive read somewhere else that in general, Total War games with fire weapons tend to be worse to play custom battles against AI since AI handle badly fire weapons, for example in Empire Total War. Well, what I actually read is that in general terms, Total War with melee battles are better to play against AI in custom battles since AI play better with melee weapons, this is more or less the idea I have read. Anyway, which is then the best Total War for custom battles against AI?
For balance, I think that we should have a situation where the stun probability is a lot lower with larger ships and perhaps the duration a lot shorter. Otherwise, we end up in a situation where once Phasors are deployed, they become a mechanic that makes ships larger in size uncompetitive.
