Bigger isn't always better...

Without thought of whether this is possible... thinking back on web-browser based numerical strategy games (e.g. Earth 2025, Utopia, Archmage, Dust Settles:Survival Guide):

- Make Research and Intel be based in proportion to empire 'size' (whether this should be measured by systems, planets, facility space or population is up for debate). This way, bigger empires don't massively out-tech smaller empires. It simulates the fact that you're trying to send information light-years away in a short space of time - the bigger your empire the more there will be in delays of information. Hence, research and intel start suffering. Combine with Mega Evil reaction and you have a formidable problem.

- Combat 'Morale'. I've no idea what morale does. Let's assume it affects things like Hit chances and damage. Bigger empires don't feel so motivated 'walking over' easy targets, compared to smaller empires putting everything they got to overcome a big wall. Thus bigger empires need to deploy more ships of even-tech to win.

---Sig---
Playing Touhou games (Go here if interested . No, nobody else is that good/insane as that replay). No rush for SE V bug fixing.

"sized" research/intel/resources:

Lets say you lose 10% of each for each system distance to your homeworld. This way, in your homeworld system you get 100% production, 90% in colonies placed in systems next to your homesystem, 80% in colonies placed 2 systems away... the further the colony is, the lesser resources You get.

System Blockades:

If a system doesn´t have a clear path to your homeworld, you don´t get its resources (or only a 25%). This way, large spreaded empires can be "maimed", and the game gains more strategic depth. A big empire will have to spent more resources defending warpholes to maintian communication lines.

I think you're on to something really good, here!!! Currently, once a player has gained the upper hand - even slightly - their progress simply mushrooms.

Although I'm not a modder myself (never even looked at the files) I'm thankful for those that are and I believe this idea could probably be done without a tremendous amount of work.

Two immediate approaches come to mind. First, after reaching a certain amount of tech research, the cost for each additional step should rise very sharply. Second, the same could be done with ships. Beyond a specific minimum number of ships, the cost to construct AND maintain them should rise 50% for each individual ship added.

The result would be that players would have to become MUCH better at managing their resources because they would also have to develop true strategies and tactics instead of just relying on large numbers of ships as they do now.

In order for a game to be considered good/great, it should require the player to use some real brainpower instead of just building up numbers.

On the other hand, did Slovakia (Slovensky stat) won in second world war? No it was so small you probubly even don't know what it is and that is was on axi's side.
Did Finland beat Soviet union?
Who did pushed US from north Korea. North koreans or China?

Bigger IS better, but some kind of penalty for size is not bad thing, as long as axpanding is still viable. (Eg. if distance based "maintace" would go down when you research better enginse (what was 2 years away it is only one year away, so for practical reasons its closer).

(And it would made stelar manipulation (more exactly WP manipulation) much more important).

"Size Matters". However, that's not the same as "Bigger is Better". There are obvious advantages in being bigger. In reality, there are disadvantages to being bigger too, but SE V currently has no such disadvantages. It should be easier to win if you're bigger, but it should also be possible for a good player to have a chance at turning the tides.

I don't think making ship construction/maintenance greater for bigger empires is realistic or the right path. Making smaller empires more motivated at fighting evens it out more realistically. Or actually, the "easier to have unrest" is the most realistic in my view - huge gatherings will have dissent. You can't get to know everyone in the world, never mind the galactic empire.

Which is also why I think the "more vulnerable to intel" is a good path forwards. As really, even if they are battered by intel, a competent big empire will only see it as an extra nuisance and deal with it appropriately. Incompetent big empires will fall on its knees from the pressure, then become safe again once being reduced in size. Small empires can even out the tech level difference from stealing research, random unrest and bribed mutinies/turncoats will force big empire fleets to consider leaving some military presence in the far back reaches of their empire, etc.

---Sig---
Playing Touhou games (Go here if interested . No, nobody else is that good/insane as that replay). No rush for SE V bug fixing.

Hm... that reminds me a lot of the "corruption" concept from Civ. I agree with psieye; however we shouldn´t forget that diplomacy historically was one of the most important counters to agressive powers.

Like mylon said the endgame is always pretty boring in 4x games, but only because the AI allows the player to destroy rivals piecemeal. If someone is expanding too fast, or being too militaristic, every AI player should break its treaties with said power, as well as allying itself and making as much treaties as it could with nearby empires. And that should happen before the player reaches mega evil empire status because by then... it´s game over for the AI.

Historically the limitations on state size were based on communications speed and that is what the corruption level in CIV models. As does the tendency for large empires to be hard to govern in Medieval and Rome Total war try starting either of the Roman empires in Barbarian invasion not withstanding the barbarians you still have to spend a lot of time marching around putting down revolts. The Persians even had a word for it which translates as long handed as there most successful great kings spent a considerable time moving to deal with one internal or external threat. It would work in SEV but you would have to introduce some sort of political technology to control this and it would principally work by having outlying systems be less loyal and less productive generally than they might be. It would also have to effect the AI's so that might be a problem as they are already less nimble than human players.

A there is good potential mod in this I think

More relevantly, when Mega Evil is triggered, all the AI ought to ally with each other and cooperate to take the player down. I once did a "Humans vs AI" team game and found that the AI declared war on EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING every turn. That's pointless. I imagine it shouldn't be too hard to code this "ZOMG WE GOTTA ALL BUNCH UP AGAINST THIS MEGA EVIL" reaction among the AI players - best done by setting up a special Alliance with pre-coded 'treaty elements' which all AI will unconditionally accept.

Such a treaty would start with "no aggression between members", "share all intel and sensor information" and possibly also go up to "share all research". That's a point... any modder wish to implement this? Just this "united Mega Evil" feature, not all the rest of the interesting things we're discussing right now?

---Sig---
Playing Touhou games (Go here if interested . No, nobody else is that good/insane as that replay). No rush for SE V bug fixing.

I'd always taken the Mega Evil event to only be applicable for a 1 human player environment. There is code to target an AI as Mega Evil as well (though the requirements are higher) so presumably a new Mega Evil will replace the old and an Alliance invite is sent to the previous Mega Evil to go fight together against the New Mega Evil. Or at least... that's what I think ought to ideally happen with the Mega Evil system.

Of course, we must factor in what the victory conditions are. These days, my preferred one is "Destroy all Homeworlds" which makes it sudden death.

---Sig---
Playing Touhou games (Go here if interested . No, nobody else is that good/insane as that replay). No rush for SE V bug fixing.

is megaevil still a score threshold,
or is it relative scoring?

i thought the react-by-allying was a grand suggestion!

Both conditions are available in Settings.txt - an absolute and a relative score. Now that Get_Score works, let's hope Mega Evil is called too - then someone can code the Intelligent Mega Evil reaction.

---Sig---
Playing Touhou games (Go here if interested . No, nobody else is that good/insane as that replay). No rush for SE V bug fixing.

i'll have to look at it and make sure mine is relative.
I've said elsewhere i wish it was a more.. evaluation of you as a threat - but thats the tool we have for now.

"Intelligent Reaction" is the meat of tring to make the AI anything but independently functioning - and its quite a struggle.
Ai is a hot topic today, perhaps even more than usual...

by the way-
speaking of Revolts, etc in large empires-
check out the Whole Fleet revolts post!
now if whole sectors just revolt...

New structure : sector capital, converts planet to a homeworld status.
New feature: increased unhappiness by 5% per jump from a homeworld status planet.

The unhappiness reflects sentients inherent desire for "self rule" or at least to delegate people they can call locals to govern them. The sector capital
......................
I thunk therefore i wuz.

Requesting your permission to repost this in my ideas & suggestions forum?

doh pressed post button when i got distracted by something else.

sector capital reflects a local governance infrastructure where local people can pretend to govern the locals.

Probably requires hardcoded changes to the game unless there's already a distance unhappiness ratio in there.

Public forum, permission to repost is pretty much implied. Feel free.
.......................
I thunk therefore i wuz.

As much as I don't like the end game of most 4x games, I honestly believe you are digging yourself into a hole trying to put limits on large empires. I don't know about you guys, but in every game that tries to implement such a system, my strategy is:

1. Discover the "optimal" point of expansion, expand to that point.
2. Stop expanding, and build a ton of ships.
3. Glass all your enemies.

The optimal point is usually a point where further expansion is no longer effective. In the case with diminishing return for new planets, it will be a planet count, or a process of claiming the best huge worlds and abandoning smaller ones. In the case of diminishing returns per warp away from homeworlds, it will probably be 5-7 jumps away from the homeworld (depending on settings). Or in the case of Mega Evil Empire (IF that is changed into something useful), then it will be just enough points to NOT achieve that status.

In everycase, a player will find that point after a few experiment, and will then proceed to pump out a fleet of ships to bombard the AI into oblivion. Since they are not "expanding" they are no longer affected by the diminishing return process, while the AI is... well, dying. While the Mega Evil Empire thing will take a little more balancing on the player's part, it really isn't THAT hard for a player to keep one guy alive for last.

Either way, a player can do this pretty easily, while the AI will crash and burn wasting all their resources colonizing worthless worlds, or put themselves into a position that invites disaster (an AI Mega Evil Empire is just waiting to die). Even if you could script the AI to do exactly this, all it does is turn the game into a ship pumping game with both sides tossing waves and waves of ships at one another. While that might be fun once in a while, if everygame ends in a stalemate like this, it becomes boring really quick.

So as much as I would like for an end game to be more interesting, I honestly don't believe that punishing the big guy does much in the long run. All it really does is turn the end game into a repetive "clean-up" portion that is just as dull, and all your hard work is pretty much wasted. As it is, once you are able to wipe people out, the game is pretty much over... that is just a sad fact of every 4x game (or strategy game for that matter), and one that we just have to accept. Bigger is better, not more fun... just enjoy the process of getting there.

I tend to agree with Kalin. You don't get to be the big boy (or girl) on the block easily. And techincally speaking if you did get that big, the AI could form and alliance to be just as big. Personally I think if you built your empire that big you should have certain bonouses and setbacks...

Example: Larger empires get more revenue (obviously) (Bonous)

But... The revenue comes in slower or is lost to corruption (such as in Civ games)

From my experience in this game, once You get some advantage, You´ve won the game. No chances for the people who has less planets due to bad luck or bad strategy.

Currently I´m playing a game with other people, 13 players in total. Turn 25, still early game: I am first, with 140K research points, 2nd one with 70K... and a lot of players with 15-30K RP. I am starting building warships, and I know the war is won. And it has happened to me before several times.

Like Milon says:

This game REALLY needs some adjustments to large empires. Not heavy punishments, but it is logical to have more riots in distant planets and to receive less resources from them.

And a "System Blockade" rule, allowing players to cut communication lines between planets/systems is a must too.

If I block the only warp point between a system and the rest of his empire, that system should be left isolated, and his resources lost. This would add a new strategic level to the game, allowing small (and big) empire players to make Surgical attacks hitting hard an empire´s income. Of course, big empires will be more affected... But, tell me: Who needs more troops to defend his borders, USA or Switzerland?

There must be more strategic rules like "system blockades" to improve the game and solve this problem, not only the easy "bigger=more costs". Let´s think about them.

I was under the impression that system blockade = anti-space port bombs. If you think that the racial trait that doesn't require space port is overpowered, then you can always petition that to be removed for your games. Honestly, if you are twice as big as the next guy and they can somehow break through your warp fortresses to blockade you, then you're doing something wrong, unless of course, you're at the very end game with stellar manipulation readily available.

However, based upon your description on what happens, the problem isn't that bigger players are too powerful, but that the player placement on the maps isn't too great. While you start with nice empty neighboring systems, the other players are next to one another or blackholes, so of course they aren't doing very well and the game isn't too fun. What you really need is a map editor and some nicely designed maps that are fair but interesting for players to play on. I believe that is already in the works...

If you can become twice as big as the next guy in a fair environment, then you're just too good for the rest of them. I'm all for more strategic options, but chances are, if there are more strategic rules, you'd be the one who know how to get the most out of them anyways (being the more experienced/better player). Fact is, the bigger guys will be able to use those rules just as well as the little ones, if not even more so, due to their resource advantages, so it doesn't really help the bigger=better problem. The only thing you can do in this kind of situation is try giving the other players some handicaps.

IMO, the goal of the game is to try to become the biggest guy, not to avoid being the biggest guy and getting punished for it.

In my opinion there are already disadvantages to having a massive empire, but as it should be, they are generally outweighed by the advantages.

For example, having a large empire means there are more entrances to your empire (usually), and so you have to spread your ships over a wider area.

Sure, I'm tired and can't think of another immediately, but there are some disadvantages already present. One thing I think should be changed that already can be is that the size of your empire should influence how difficult it is to defend from intelligence attacks. 100,000 points of intelligence spread over 5 planets should be much more effective at defense compared to 100,000 spread over 50 planets. This could help smaller empires gain an upper hand against bigger empires, and help prevent a larger empire crushing a smaller empire into the ground with its spies.

I also think that it should be a general requirement to have an urban pacification center in every system. People are just too unhappy in general to explain the general tendency toward happiness with little effort, assuming the base values are based on humans somewhat. But this is a discussion for another time.

-----
Watch for my mod - codename: Dimensions - coming by Summer, 2007!

It depends. If I make an explosive colonization, I can get a lot of colonies fast... But I won´t be able to defend all warp points at the same time. That is the case in that game. A "System Blockade" rule would really hurt me in that situation.

Yes, the goal of the game is to become the biggest guy and exterminate the others, but it is too easy as soon as you get some advantage.

BTW, the weakness to intel attacks seems a very good option too.

---Sig---
Playing Touhou games (Go here if interested . No, nobody else is that good/insane as that replay). No rush for SE V bug fixing.

Kalin, Do you think that "natural merchants" trait is overpowered? Because I´m begining to think that it should cost 1500 points instead of 1000.

The combo "natural merchants" (no spaceports) + "Hardy Indstrialists" (+25% extra production) + "propulsion experts" (+1 extra movement point) is awesome with an explosive expansion strategy. You see the results, I am getting 2-3 times more resources than other players in the early game.

Wii "natural merchants" sidestep the blockade-planet effect?

I thought, and still do, the "propulsion experts" was a poor way of handling it- the race should start with engine technolgy advances-
just b/c they were experts shouldn't mean i can't catch up by research-

or by my preferred method of stealing their ships andd reverse-engineering...

but my point is, if its a technique, it can be copied.

Actually, yes, I do believe that natural merchants is overpowered. This is especially true in the initial expansion phase, when you first colonize new planets in another system. While most players will have to waste several turns in order to get that system to do anything, you will have managed to pull away and gain a large advantage in research or resource, or whatever else your strategy involves. Hardy industrialist and propulsion experts I'm not so concerned about, although I can see various combos to make them powerful. But because I can address all of this myself in a quick mod, I'm not too worried about it.

IMO, the main problem in the game is that there is an inherent steam roller effect built into the gameplay mechanics. Once you're able to get things going, things just get faster and faster. While, there's nothing particularly wrong with that by itself, if you add factors such as imbalance in start positions, you get some games where you're lucky and dominate, and some, where you can't get anything going in the first place. Some people finds this to be fun, others not so much. This is where map editors come into play, and once that is finished, I'm sure you'll find a lot less complaints in this department.

If there's one thing that I WOULD like worked on, it's the Finite Resource mode of the game. Which, incidentally, is suppose to be the solution to the steam roller effect, but realistically just leads to a ton of people grabbing crystaline tech. Which is a little, ill conceived, IMO. Even with crystaline tech taken out, the planet space ends up full of research/intel facilities, so it isn't too great.

That's why I've been working on some mod ideas since SEIV to try and balance resource generation using components which I might try to adapt for SEV. Basically it turns radioactive into a rare element that cannot be produced by any means except an invisble, immobile flag ship, given to every player. Since it is extremely limited in availability, this makes you have to think twice about what you use it for and because everyone receive the same amount throughout the game, it drastically cut down the steam roller effects for all the things that would require it (and right now, everything important does). Unfortunately, it will take sometime for me to come up with a playable version since I'm still messing with AI (which, admittedly I'm not that great at) and various other tweaks in combat trying to get a feel for what is available to me. Ship capture is especially of concern here, since capturing one of these flagships might be overpowering (although it might be fun to have that as a separate game type as well, we'll see...)

Oh, and if there are any hardworking modders (which I'm not) out there who wants to use the idea, by all means... go right ahead. I'd love to play it rather than work on it... XD

Nice, I agree with You. Natural merchants should be a more expensive trait.

An idea, and I am no modder so I'll probably get told this isn't possible in SEV, but - what if any technology becomes "common knowledge" and available to all other empires x turns after it is first discovered? Example: I develop the latest and greatest laser cannon, a weapon whose terrible might has never before been seen in this galaxy. After 1 year (10 turns), my enemies have seen this laser cannon in action, they've studied the rubble of my destroyed ships, they might have gotten a functional laser or two from the black market - and now they've learned how to build it too without any research. It makes sense by the same theory that we can 'analyze' captured enemy ships, except it automatically happens after a certain number of turns have passed, since we all know the AI isn't bright enough to capture and analyze ships.

Practically speaking, this means having 140k research points gives you a head start, you'll have the best technology a year or so ahead of your enemies - but those guys with 15k research points won't be so hopelessly outgunned that they can't fight back, they'll just be perpetually several tech levels behind you and still able to put up a fight. I just hate sending out my ships with tech 10 meson blasters, tech 8 nuclear missile, etc to find enemy ships with tech 3 DUC...

well - there is certainly reverse engineering adn iwas wondering about event-triggered research myself -
i mean after you see a beam used, you night start to copy it or make a defense for it.

maybe not "common" knowlegde - except amongst those that share lines of communication.

Yes, "reverse engineering" - I knew there was a fancy term for it I couldn't remember. Basically once you've done the initial, theoretical research, it's much easier for others to copy you now that they know it's possible and have seen your weapon in practical use. I would suggest a reduced research cost for every technology that has been researched once before by someone else, as a more realistic solution - but I really doubt the AI would be bright enough to take advantage of that opportunity, it seems more reliable to simply -give- them the technology after a reasonable amount of time has passed. The question is if this is possible to mod into SEV..

I would LIKE to see event-triggered research - sort of like ruins- that give you reserach points into specific areas (so the AI gets them regardless)- i'm hoping when they do that they remember your suggestion.
wish i could mod it myself.

Sounds like a secret "share ancient tech (10 levels ago)" 'treaty element' in some Alliance that everyone is implicitly in could (I've no idea if this is possible) be used to implement this. Ah but then an Alliance has restrictions (no other treaties) so... Mmm no clue if this is possible.

---Sig---
Playing Touhou games (Go here if interested . No, nobody else is that good/insane as that replay). No rush for SE V bug fixing.

Automatic reverse engineering is a double-sided sword though. A smart player would never bother researching common technologies because they will get it anyways, they would focus on obscure technologies that only they would bother using. Heck, since you're gonna end up with the techs anyways, I'm sure you can go along in a game without bothering to research anything at all. Just dominate the AI at ship pumping and fleet strategies.

proving you right:
in my first game, I coasted all the techs my allies kept researching and only researched the more exotic techs you mentioned.
It worked until the Alliance voted me back in.

Part of that issue, though, is that we are able to predict what its going to research - but it may become less linear / predictable as it gets improved and worked on.

My fondest hope is - has been - that the ai scripts will have several "way of doing things" templates, rather than the 1 startegy.

I miss one feature, that could make all this tech thing different:

Getting enemy techs if You capture an enemy colony.

I remember this in MOO and other similar games, and it´s quite logical that if You capture an enemy planet, you should be able to find data, schematics, facilities, scientists...

Right now, there is only one strategy: expand like mad at first, and research fast to outplay your enemies with superior techs. There is no point in spending resources in a heavy early combat force, since players doing that will find soon unable to catch other researcher players.

Allowing players to capture techs while capturing planets enforces a "warrior" strategy. I can spend my resources in warships and troop transports, and "research" by capturing enemy planets (not easy having in mind how powerful can be those CSM WP...), instead of the "one and only" common research strategy.

I´d like to see the game allowing several defined strategies:

- Researcher (current one, expand and research).

- Warrior: spend resources in warships, instead of research, and get techs by capturing enemy planets.

- Spy: Heavy spent in intel, attacking with sabotages and stealing enemy techs with intel.

- Trader/diplomat: use diplomacy and treaties to gain power, techs, etc...

This would make the game more interesting.

Hooray for Grendel!

I wonder if I'll advance in Banana tech when i cature your Democratically Elected Colonies...

I would think all that you said, all jokes aside, would be a logical advance in the game.

And i don't see why racial techs - except for psychic - can't be reverse-engineered from capture...

The strategy idea - well, i mentioned templates/personailities...

someone correct me if i'm wrong, the function exists to call different strategy / personailities, but so far the only real difference active is the racial preferences/ attitude breakpoints in the racial AI settings?

Personally I disliked the upkeep/corruption/unrest aspect of Civ4 and that largely kept me from playing the game. I enjoy the eXpansion aspect of 4x games too much to want to be punished for it

I would like to see much more work done on the AI diplomacy route. In GalCiv for example if one empire is becoming too much of a threat, other empires will gradually ramp up their oposition to it. One aspect which always impressed me was how the AI would actually give ships to an empire that was fighting an empire they disliked. If SEV's AI could be modded to do some very intelligent things like that it would go a long way towards improving the game.

i had forgotten the "assist you in your valiant war" spiel -

that was pretty impressive.

i will say this : perhaps it was coincidence, but when idid the "mad voyeur" (allhumans cheat) i was pretty impressed by how the AI empires were plotting against each other

it SEEmed like it was pretty machiavellian.

Do you REALLY think you will subvert System Vampyre before it subverts YOU?

I'd also like to see this sort of change implemented. The Warrior route is very interesting. With a few components added in I wonder if it would be possible to put together a whole 'raiding force' progression system. Research raiding tech (or take a warrior racial trait) to get a 'analyziation component', this allows you to get tech from attacking enemy ships and planets more frequently than just conquering planets or capturing/analyzing ships. A race could thus advance at the same rate as the others just by attacking them.

whoops, double post

The best part is that we already have an enormous number of diplomacy options. The AI could be designed to ramp up its actions in oposition to an empire gradually and logically. Starting with commiserating messages, 'those Terrans sure are brutes, we hope you beat them to a bloody pulp' all the way up to donating ships, technology, and even planets.

Ideally in my opinion at a certain point the AI should realize that the player is too much of a threat and they should all merge to form one opposition empire. Then, assuming it still cannot overcome you, after a certain number of lost planets/battles/systems it could send a 'We don't wish to be completely destroyed, we surrender to you' message. This would remove the typical end game fatigue that crops up when you know you can't be beaten, but to officially win you would have to commit a long process of taking each system.

Obviously these changes would make the most sense for a 1human kicking butt against multiple AI players game, but I imagine that is what most of us are encountering right now.

Hmm... I know the Spy path to 'Research' is viable but I want to know:

What is the formula for working out how many Intel projects are attempted, their success rates, and the chance that a "Sabotage Empire Wide" results in 'Steal Tech' as opposed to the myriad of other possibilities?

I once left a neutral empire with 1 planet full of research facilities and no space yard. Then I sat and constantly Empire Wide sabotaged them to get more research off of them. Didn't play that game long enough to see how effective it was though.

---Sig---
Playing Touhou games (Go here if interested . No, nobody else is that good/insane as that replay). No rush for SE V bug fixing.

So, I was looking through the intelligence scripting, when I discovered that the success and failure rate seems to be in the AI scripting, NOT hard-coded in the game engine.

This, in turn, reminded me of your post. I do believe that both the Politics and the Intelligence parts of your suggestion are quite do-able, and I am planning on working on the Intelligence aspect of this next.

Currently, if you spend more on defense than your enemies spend on offense, then you cannot be hurt by intelligence at all...ever. This seems a bit...bogus to me.

Sys_AI_Empire_Stats_Get_Colonies_Statistics_Real can be used to get the total population ammounts in an empire and Sys_Get_Player_Colonies_Count can be used to get the colony count. Together these can give you the average density of population, or either could be used as a simple total for "drag" on an empire's intell effectivness.

I cannot seem to find where I can check an empire's overall happiness and/or loyalty, or even how I can check this by planet. I can check whether a planet is rioting, and a simple for check through all a player's planets can be used to check for this stat, at least.

Similarly, I can check for Plague, which might affect planet happiness...but that would probably be best implemented through another file.

The politics part of your suggestion can also be calculated any number of ways...though I debate whether ALL races would be disposed towards that exact behaviour. Agressive races might look upon weaker empires as easy victims, and larger empires as something they are forced to cooperate with...at least until they are bigger than said empire... Other empires might seem advantages to "kissing up" to larger empires, to leech resources and technology.

Events percentage can be tweaked as well, but I'm not sure whether I would. I will have to look at the scripting for that.

Anyways, an excellent suggestion in all, and I plan to steal (borrow?) some of it in the next version of my mod (which I need to post RSN).

Finally someone who will be working on the Intel scripts... While you're at it, apply some sort of 'max accumulated points' limit so that you're completely invincible to intel attack if you haven't had contact for 100 turns and been pumping out intel all that time?

---Sig---
Playing Touhou games (Go here if interested . No, nobody else is that good/insane as that replay). No rush for SE V bug fixing.