Matrix Games Forums

arvcran2 wrote: Fri Oct 14, 2022 8:25 pm
I think it is fair to say that the AI will, when it's logic engine determines the need for a feet, address the need by providing a solution within the empire's means at that time.

Erik's response, if I have interpreted it correctly, was on that line of thinking.

No, I understood Erik's responses.


The problem with the design philosophy is that it assumes that the human player is more stupid than the AI and therefore needs the AI to override decisions that the human player is making. That is not the way the hierarchy of the relationship should work. The AI is subordinate to the human player, not the other way around.

The fleet template has an option for 0. 0 is a number, and means zero. If I, as the human player, have said that I want 0 ships of a particular hull type in a fleet, then that decision should be respected.

The ship assignment issue is particularly irritating because it undermines the ship component design system. A ship designed for interstellar fleet operations has a different fuel requirement for one not designed for this. Likewise, if having multiple designs per role is ever implemented (by which I mean Command-Cruiser, Combat-Cruiser, etc) then this design philosophy of override player's decisions in favour of whatever the AI deems to be appropriate means that the AI will just reshuffle your fleets without rhyme or reason. In your cruiser fleet, whose template stipulates 1 command cruiser and 10 combat cruisers, expect to see 11 command cruisers.

With respect to the ship design, here is the description of the Destroyer hull from the manual (Destroyers are one class up from Frigates)

Destroyers range from Size 600 to 675 and are the smallest military ships that are well-suited to offensive operations.

Frigates are smaller than Destroyers and therefore are not well-suited to offensive operations. They are not a direct substitute for those larger ships in my fleets, because they cannot perform their function in the fleet.
They should not be in my fleets. It is better for a fleet to be displayed as under strength, as that indicates that it needs to be reinforced, rather than being displayed at full strength but being impotent because it is corrupted by the AI substituting destroyers with (e.g.) frigates.

StormingKiwi wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 6:45 am

Erik Rutins wrote: Fri Mar 18, 2022 9:32 pm Fall-back to lower roles is correct when enough ships of the desired roles in the template are not available. Not a bug unless you have plenty of the desired ships.

Can you see how this kind of second-guessing of the player's intention by the game's automation setting, so that the player and the automation are fighting one another, is a frustrating system to interact with on the player's behalf?

Working as designed but design is poor

How would you have designed it then?!?

Keep in mind this is under AI automation. It also have to work under full automation as well...

Also remember that if you want to fill fleets in perfect fit of the template you will have to build them yourself. The AI build ships in according to a ratio overall... this is why there can be a mismatch between template that a player create and what ships the AI will produce if left on automation.

If the AI is left on full automation the AI use a pre made template that is general... so it have to fill the fleets with something.

StormingKiwi wrote: Fri Oct 14, 2022 11:56 pm
...
The problem with the design philosophy is that it assumes that the human player is more stupid than the AI and therefore needs the AI to override decisions that the human player is making. That is not the way the hierarchy of the relationship should work. The AI is subordinate to the human player, not the other way around.

The fleet template has an option for 0. 0 is a number, and means zero. If I, as the human player, have said that I want 0 ships of a particular hull type in a fleet, then that decision should be respected.

I agree in principle with some of what you are conveying.

However, in the early stages of the game, based on what the policies defined by the player, or defaulted by the game, affecting game logic that, wither correct or not, is of the decision to build some kind of military presence with less resources that is available. It is not that the game AI is necessarily being a bully, or disregarding player policy, in fact it is the opposite, and the AI is attempting to work within the policy constraints and the reality of a situation that exists, and based on the games engine, it acts accordingly. If this is happening in other more advanced times in the game, it may also be related to similar conditions, where assets are on important assignment, but there is a need to address other issues.

The ship assignment issue is particularly irritating because it undermines the ship component design system. A ship designed for interstellar fleet operations has a different fuel requirement for one not designed for this. Likewise, if having multiple designs per role is ever implemented (by which I mean Command-Cruiser, Combat-Cruiser, etc) then this design philosophy of override player's decisions in favour of whatever the AI deems to be appropriate means that the AI will just reshuffle your fleets without rhyme or reason. In your cruiser fleet, whose template stipulates 1 command cruiser and 10 combat cruisers, expect to see 11 command cruisers.

Some good observations, though you are suggesting problems will not be addressed by future game implementations, I hope you are wrong on the later.

Fleet Templates are a DW2 new concept added on to a previous system which has somewhat remained the same. I would have thought the level 0 hulls would be defaulted to solo duty while the other hull levels were referenced in the defaulted Fleet Templates. Removing the crystal ball hail Mary guestimates of ship build and commissioned, role weights. Presumably, pressure to go to market and provide something workable won over having the time to properly implement any use of all the hulls.

The main issue, as I hope to understand your interesting rant , is that the player is attempting to create designs and automation policies based on what they believe the AI is implemented to accomplish, *absurd notion* while the AI is not able to ask what the reasons for the player's designs and configurations are it in turn is also not convey to the player why it is either asking the player for permission to effectuate action, nor divulge plans as to why actions are being done. Sorry for the long-winded sentence. Add to this mix, that they player can alter policy, at any time. These things add up to the probable frustration, based on the player's expectations, of the difficulty of mixing automated decisions in with human decisions (Elon Musk, I feel your pain).

I think, also that the AI only works with the latest Fleet Template of a role. This also might need some clarification and also a UIX for the player to assign which of the multiple definitions is 'the one and only one' the AI will utilize. The remedy, I think, is to remove ambiguity, to make clear what the AI, or game, expects of the player and also, what the player can expect from the AI.

Having said all the above, in the real world, policy implementation and plans do not always materialize as intended. Having the game simulate this some of the time is not terrible, especially if the game's story, documentation, or event engine explains and sets expectations and context.

StormingKiwi wrote: Fri Oct 14, 2022 7:35 pm This is still an issue in the 1.0.7.9 version of the game, unaddressed in patch notes for 1.0.8.0

I don't have this issue because I always create a new fleet template consisting only of classes that I already researched.

Jorgen_CAB wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 12:33 am How would you have designed it then?!?

Keep in mind this is under AI automation. It also have to work under full automation as well...

Also remember that if you want to fill fleets in perfect fit of the template you will have to build them yourself. The AI build ships in according to a ratio overall... this is why there can be a mismatch between template that a player create and what ships the AI will produce if left on automation.

If the AI is left on full automation the AI use a pre made template that is general... so it have to fill the fleets with something.

I think my later posts in this topic make it clear how I think it should have been designed. You are welcome to read them.

So according to you, the options are binary - you either play Full Auto (in which case "Where is the game?") or Full Manual, with no middle expanse of Partial Automation, where the automation is used as a tool by the player.

arvcran2 wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 2:35 am I agree in principle with some of what you are conveying.

However, in the early stages of the game, based on what the policies defined by the player, or defaulted by the game, affecting game logic that, wither correct or not, is of the decision to build some kind of military presence with less resources that is available. It is not that the game AI is necessarily being a bully, or disregarding player policy, in fact it is the opposite, and the AI is attempting to work within the policy constraints and the reality of a situation that exists, and based on the games engine, it acts accordingly. If this is happening in other more advanced times in the game, it may also be related to similar conditions, where assets are on important assignment, but there is a need to address other issues.

The ship assignment issue is particularly irritating because it undermines the ship component design system. A ship designed for interstellar fleet operations has a different fuel requirement for one not designed for this. Likewise, if having multiple designs per role is ever implemented (by which I mean Command-Cruiser, Combat-Cruiser, etc) then this design philosophy of override player's decisions in favour of whatever the AI deems to be appropriate means that the AI will just reshuffle your fleets without rhyme or reason. In your cruiser fleet, whose template stipulates 1 command cruiser and 10 combat cruisers, expect to see 11 command cruisers.

Some good observations, though you are suggesting problems will not be addressed by future game implementations, I hope you are wrong on the later.

Fleet Templates are a DW2 new concept added on to a previous system which has somewhat remained the same. I would have thought the level 0 hulls would be defaulted to solo duty while the other hull levels were referenced in the defaulted Fleet Templates. Removing the crystal ball hail Mary guestimates of ship build and commissioned, role weights. Presumably, pressure to go to market and provide something workable won over having the time to properly implement any use of all the hulls.

The main issue, as I hope to understand your interesting rant , is that the player is attempting to create designs and automation policies based on what they believe the AI is implemented to accomplish, *absurd notion* while the AI is not able to ask what the reasons for the player's designs and configurations are it in turn is also not convey to the player why it is either asking the player for permission to effectuate action, nor divulge plans as to why actions are being done. Sorry for the long-winded sentence. Add to this mix, that they player can alter policy, at any time. These things add up to the probable frustration, based on the player's expectations, of the difficulty of mixing automated decisions in with human decisions (Elon Musk, I feel your pain).

I think, also that the AI only works with the latest Fleet Template of a role. This also might need some clarification and also a UIX for the player to assign which of the multiple definitions is 'the one and only one' the AI will utilize. The remedy, I think, is to remove ambiguity, to make clear what the AI, or game, expects of the player and also, what the player can expect from the AI.

Having said all the above, in the real world, policy implementation and plans do not always materialize as intended. Having the game simulate this some of the time is not terrible, especially if the game's story, documentation, or event engine explains and sets expectations and context.

This is not just applicable in the earlier stages of the game. I have destroyer tech. I'm not talking about a situation where destroyers are not available and frigates are being substituted then.

What should happen is that ships in the non-fleet pool are unassigned to fleets demanding destroyers (because they are not destroyers).

The UI does not say "This template wants a total of 10 ships in this fleet". It says "this template wants 10 destroyers in this fleet". If the UI means the former, then it should say the former. The UI should be explicitly clear about what you are telling the program to do.

The automation is being a bully. The automation is overriding my decisions. Furthermore, the automation is stupid. It, fundamentally, does not have the ability to understand the environment in which it operates or to strategise and plan for the future.

I just don't understand your comment that the automation is doing the opposite of disregarding player policy. The player policy is zero frigates in the fleet. Putting any frigate in the fleet contravenes that policy.

Regarding future improvements, I hope so too. However, I am pessimistic about the likelihood of this happening. Command-Cruiser being treated as equivalent to Combat-Cruiser is one example. Another example is CloseEscort-Frigate being treated as equivalent to Core-Destroyer. Both of those examples are the same, just one has been implemented in-game, and the other is yet to be implemented. The fundamental problem is that a ship design is being assigned to a role it either cannot perform or will not effectively perform, because the automation takes precedence over the player it is overriding.

This situation is completely irrational. No real-world military would have a system in place where a patrol ship without the capability to deploy aircraft would replace an aircraft carrier. To some extent, DW2 even recognises this - I have not ever noticed any class of hull replacing the fuel-tanker ships in the templates.

DW2 is not the only game in the world. There are other games that have similar fleet templates features. Fleet templates in DW2 aren't innovative in that sense. Those other games generally have a clear user-friendly UI, and the game works as expected - it does what it says on the tin without doing the unnecessary solution to optimisation problem stuff.

I am not adjusting policies on the fly. I am keeping them constant.

In the real world, inanimate objects used as tools do not try and outsmart their users. We're not talking about a simulation of policy resistance. That function would be more appropriately represented by characters. It is bad UX design.

zebanovich wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 5:53 am

StormingKiwi wrote: Fri Oct 14, 2022 7:35 pm This is still an issue in the 1.0.7.9 version of the game, unaddressed in patch notes for 1.0.8.0

I don't have this issue because I always create a new fleet template consisting only of classes that I already researched.

In my current game (1.0.8.0), there are 0 escorts in fleet templates.

Nonetheless, I noticed there were escorts in a fleet. So I manually removed them and unpaused the game.

A couple of seconds later, the automation put them back into fleets and they disappeared off the ships not in fleets list.

In this case, I have not researched anything higher than destroyers, and I have not removed the cruisers and higher from the template. Maybe if I did that this would not happen. I will find out what ship in the template is being replaced by escorts. Now I'm pretty sure it is an attack fleet template (2 fuel tankers, 2 capitals, 6 cruisers, 8 destroyers, 12 frigates), with 22 ships actually deployed, including the escorts, and no cruisers or capitals researched, so I am confident saying the escort is replacing a ship that could have been built.

Of course, I could be wrong, and perhaps the game is saying "These escorts are equivalent to Cruisers and Capital ships". Best case scenario, it would respect the value of 0. Worst case scenario, it would replace the Cruiser/Capital ship by using a more appropriate ship than the most basic ship in the game.

(Note that Capitals are Battleships and Carriers)

StormingKiwi wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 8:58 am In this case, I have not researched anything higher than destroyers, and I have not removed the cruisers and higher from the template. Maybe if I did that this would not happen. I will find out what ship in the template is being replaced by escorts. Now I'm pretty sure it is an attack fleet template (2 fuel tankers, 2 capitals, 6 cruisers, 8 destroyers, 12 frigates), with 22 ships actually deployed, including the escorts, and no cruisers or capitals researched, so I am confident saying the escort is replacing a ship that could have been built.

that is very likely, I never use default fleet template which mentions carries and battleships early game,
create a brand new template and specifiy only what you exactly want, and it will work.

StormingKiwi wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 8:58 am
...

arvcran2 wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 2:35 am I agree in principle with some of what you are conveying.

However, in the early stages of the game, based on what the policies defined by the player, or defaulted by the game, affecting game logic that, wither correct or not, is of the decision to build some kind of military presence with less resources that is available. It is not that the game AI is necessarily being a bully, or disregarding player policy, in fact it is the opposite, and the AI is attempting to work within the policy constraints and the reality of a situation that exists, and based on the games engine, it acts accordingly. If this is happening in other more advanced times in the game, it may also be related to similar conditions, where assets are on important assignment, but there is a need to address other issues.

The ship assignment issue is particularly irritating because it undermines the ship component design system. A ship designed for interstellar fleet operations has a different fuel requirement for one not designed for this. Likewise, if having multiple designs per role is ever implemented (by which I mean Command-Cruiser, Combat-Cruiser, etc) then this design philosophy of override player's decisions in favour of whatever the AI deems to be appropriate means that the AI will just reshuffle your fleets without rhyme or reason. In your cruiser fleet, whose template stipulates 1 command cruiser and 10 combat cruisers, expect to see 11 command cruisers.

Some good observations, though you are suggesting problems will not be addressed by future game implementations, I hope you are wrong on the later.

Fleet Templates are a DW2 new concept added on to a previous system which has somewhat remained the same. I would have thought the level 0 hulls would be defaulted to solo duty while the other hull levels were referenced in the defaulted Fleet Templates. Removing the crystal ball hail Mary guestimates of ship build and commissioned, role weights. Presumably, pressure to go to market and provide something workable won over having the time to properly implement any use of all the hulls.

The main issue, as I hope to understand your interesting rant , is that the player is attempting to create designs and automation policies based on what they believe the AI is implemented to accomplish, *absurd notion* while the AI is not able to ask what the reasons for the player's designs and configurations are it in turn is also not convey to the player why it is either asking the player for permission to effectuate action, nor divulge plans as to why actions are being done. Sorry for the long-winded sentence. Add to this mix, that they player can alter policy, at any time. These things add up to the probable frustration, based on the player's expectations, of the difficulty of mixing automated decisions in with human decisions (Elon Musk, I feel your pain).

I think, also that the AI only works with the latest Fleet Template of a role. This also might need some clarification and also a UIX for the player to assign which of the multiple definitions is 'the one and only one' the AI will utilize. The remedy, I think, is to remove ambiguity, to make clear what the AI, or game, expects of the player and also, what the player can expect from the AI.

Having said all the above, in the real world, policy implementation and plans do not always materialize as intended. Having the game simulate this some of the time is not terrible, especially if the game's story, documentation, or event engine explains and sets expectations and context.

This is not just applicable in the earlier stages of the game. I have destroyer tech. I'm not talking about a situation where destroyers are not available and frigates are being substituted then.

What should happen is that ships in the non-fleet pool are unassigned to fleets demanding destroyers (because they are not destroyers).

The UI does not say "This template wants a total of 10 ships in this fleet". It says "this template wants 10 destroyers in this fleet". If the UI means the former, then it should say the former. The UI should be explicitly clear about what you are telling the program to do.

The automation is being a bully. The automation is overriding my decisions. Furthermore, the automation is stupid. It, fundamentally, does not have the ability to understand the environment in which it operates or to strategise and plan for the future.

I just don't understand your comment that the automation is doing the opposite of disregarding player policy. The player policy is zero frigates in the fleet. Putting any frigate in the fleet contravenes that policy.

Regarding future improvements, I hope so too. However, I am pessimistic about the likelihood of this happening. Command-Cruiser being treated as equivalent to Combat-Cruiser is one example. Another example is CloseEscort-Frigate being treated as equivalent to Core-Destroyer. Both of those examples are the same, just one has been implemented in-game, and the other is yet to be implemented. The fundamental problem is that a ship design is being assigned to a role it either cannot perform or will not effectively perform, because the automation takes precedence over the player it is overriding.

This situation is completely irrational. No real-world military would have a system in place where a patrol ship without the capability to deploy aircraft would replace an aircraft carrier. To some extent, DW2 even recognises this - I have not ever noticed any class of hull replacing the fuel-tanker ships in the templates.

DW2 is not the only game in the world. There are other games that have similar fleet templates features. Fleet templates in DW2 aren't innovative in that sense. Those other games generally have a clear user-friendly UI, and the game works as expected - it does what it says on the tin without doing the unnecessary solution to optimisation problem stuff.

I am not adjusting policies on the fly. I am keeping them constant.

In the real world, inanimate objects used as tools do not try and outsmart their users. We're not talking about a simulation of policy resistance. That function would be more appropriately represented by characters. It is bad UX design.

...

I have to admit I am not sure I understand the context of what you are trying to convey anymore. Can you be very specific?

Perhaps if you could tell us what polices you have for fleets (there are 4 settings), wither you design your ships manually or let the AI design them, the military policies related to automatically retrofitting fleets for automated ones and manual ones, and how you create your fleets that the problems you are referring to happen.

And include a save file 'before' the problem happens and describe what happens specifically to what fleet and when it occurs.

zebanovich wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 11:34 am

StormingKiwi wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 8:58 am In this case, I have not researched anything higher than destroyers, and I have not removed the cruisers and higher from the template. Maybe if I did that this would not happen. I will find out what ship in the template is being replaced by escorts. Now I'm pretty sure it is an attack fleet template (2 fuel tankers, 2 capitals, 6 cruisers, 8 destroyers, 12 frigates), with 22 ships actually deployed, including the escorts, and no cruisers or capitals researched, so I am confident saying the escort is replacing a ship that could have been built.

that is very likely, I never use default fleet template which mentions carries and battleships early game,
create a brand new template and specifiy only what you exactly want, and it will work.

Exactly. I've never had a problem with unwanted ships....GP

arvcran2 wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 7:54 pm
I have to admit I am not sure I understand the context of what you are trying to convey anymore. Can you be very specific?

Perhaps if you could tell us what polices you have for fleets (there are 4 settings), wither you design your ships manually or let the AI design them, the military policies related to automatically retrofitting fleets for automated ones and manual ones, and how you create your fleets that the problems you are referring to happen.

And include a save file 'before' the problem happens and describe what happens specifically to what fleet and when it occurs.

I'm unsure how this communication breakdown has occurred or how much more clear I can be.

I am referring to the ship fleet assignment, and the player's ability to influence the composition of those fleets via the fleet templates. How ship design occurs, how the fleet is created and how retrofitting ships occurs are not relevant to this discussion.

I'm pretty sure that the relevant policy setting is Fleet Ship Management.

The (general) problem is that the AI will assign ships to fleets resulting in a fleet composition different to the fleet template.

The Fleet Template defines the composition of a Fleet
(e.g. Attack Fleet: 0 escorts, 10 frigates, 8 destroyers, 6 cruisers, 2 battleships, 2 carriers, 2 fuel tankers)

In my last game, I noticed that Attack Fleet 2 had 13 escorts assigned to it, and Attack Fleet 4 had 9 escorts assigned to it. Neither fleet had had escorts on construction.

Interestingly, I have just noticed that one of my fleets has been assigned ships that are a higher class than that specified. It should have 5 destroyers in the fleet. Instead of 5 destroyers, it has 4 cruisers + 1 destroyer.

StormingKiwi wrote: Sun Oct 16, 2022 4:33 am

arvcran2 wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 7:54 pm
I have to admit I am not sure I understand the context of what you are trying to convey anymore. Can you be very specific?

Perhaps if you could tell us what polices you have for fleets (there are 4 settings), wither you design your ships manually or let the AI design them, the military policies related to automatically retrofitting fleets for automated ones and manual ones, and how you create your fleets that the problems you are referring to happen.

And include a save file 'before' the problem happens and describe what happens specifically to what fleet and when it occurs.

I'm unsure how this communication breakdown has occurred or how much more clear I can be.

I am referring to the ship fleet assignment, and the player's ability to influence the composition of those fleets via the fleet templates. How ship design occurs, how the fleet is created and how retrofitting ships occurs are not relevant to this discussion.

I'm pretty sure that the relevant policy setting is Fleet Ship Management.

The (general) problem is that the AI will assign ships to fleets resulting in a fleet composition different to the fleet template.

The Fleet Template defines the composition of a Fleet
(e.g. Attack Fleet: 0 escorts, 10 frigates, 8 destroyers, 6 cruisers, 2 battleships, 2 carriers, 2 fuel tankers)

In my last game, I noticed that Attack Fleet 2 had 13 escorts assigned to it, and Attack Fleet 4 had 9 escorts assigned to it. Neither fleet had had escorts on construction.

Interestingly, I have just noticed that one of my fleets has been assigned ships that are a higher class than that specified. It should have 5 destroyers in the fleet. Instead of 5 destroyers, it has 4 cruisers + 1 destroyer.

Great answer! (though, a save file would have made it Golden )

I am assuming you are seeing this in 1080?

I have not had any trouble with any of my previous sessions as you are describing, except for the early game when one's economy does not allow for filling the requirements. In those cases, I do see cheaper, smaller class roles, replacing requested ones via Fleet Template.

I would assume that the Cruisers were already built and hence were used to fill a need that could not be met by purchasing build orders for the proper ships. Could that be what happened?

The game has always eventually corrected it's fleets to the proper sets described by the fleet templates for me.

I do understand your argument about the AI following orders rather than taking preemptive measures on your behalf.

StormingKiwi wrote: Sun Oct 16, 2022 4:33 am

arvcran2 wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 7:54 pm
I have to admit I am not sure I understand the context of what you are trying to convey anymore. Can you be very specific?

Perhaps if you could tell us what polices you have for fleets (there are 4 settings), wither you design your ships manually or let the AI design them, the military policies related to automatically retrofitting fleets for automated ones and manual ones, and how you create your fleets that the problems you are referring to happen.

And include a save file 'before' the problem happens and describe what happens specifically to what fleet and when it occurs.

I'm unsure how this communication breakdown has occurred or how much more clear I can be.

I am referring to the ship fleet assignment, and the player's ability to influence the composition of those fleets via the fleet templates. How ship design occurs, how the fleet is created and how retrofitting ships occurs are not relevant to this discussion.

I'm pretty sure that the relevant policy setting is Fleet Ship Management.

The (general) problem is that the AI will assign ships to fleets resulting in a fleet composition different to the fleet template.

The Fleet Template defines the composition of a Fleet
(e.g. Attack Fleet: 0 escorts, 10 frigates, 8 destroyers, 6 cruisers, 2 battleships, 2 carriers, 2 fuel tankers)

In my last game, I noticed that Attack Fleet 2 had 13 escorts assigned to it, and Attack Fleet 4 had 9 escorts assigned to it. Neither fleet had had escorts on construction.

Interestingly, I have just noticed that one of my fleets has been assigned ships that are a higher class than that specified. It should have 5 destroyers in the fleet. Instead of 5 destroyers, it has 4 cruisers + 1 destroyer.

I think it comes down to that you don't know how it works... there are several tools to control what the AI builds and what ships get assigned to your fleets.

1. there is a tool where you tell the AI how many ships of each role it should build... you have to set this so it builds enough of the type of ships that want to have. If you tell the AI to build 15% escorts you will get that many escorts built. But remember it only a ratio of the total number of ships, so if you can't build any battleships the AI will ignore that ratio. So in the early game 15% escorts are likely to mean 100% in real terms as that is the only ship it can build. This should be quite self explanatory in my opinion.

2. You can set how many ships the AI will save for ships NOT assigned to fleets, this means that AI will never assign this amount of ships to any fleet, even if there is a need for them. The AI will generally also put smaller ships into this area before larger ships... but it also depends on the fleet templates that you define... if you have defined too many escorts to the fleet templates it might still assign larger ships to patrol and escort duty.

3. If a template have a ship role that you don't' have enough ship of... either because they are reserved for escort/patrol or you simply have not built enough of them the AI will always try to fill the template with alternative ships, but it will do so at last resort.

Now... it is up to you how much automation you allow the AI to do... it is also your responsibility to make sure the ratio of ships that the AI build will match the fleet templates that you have. The AI is not a mind reader and know what you want unless you tell it.

We could have a different system where the AI would always build ships based on the templates, but that assumes the player constantly change the templates as an empire evolves and the needs. So no matter how you do it there will be a time you as a player will need to step on and guide the system. It will be very difficult to make every player happy in this regard.

Currently the AI will fill your templates properly if you guide the automation with the correct ratios of ships and have the proper templates for those ratios.

arvcran2 wrote: Sun Oct 16, 2022 12:00 pm
Great answer! (though, a save file would have made it Golden )

I am assuming you are seeing this in 1080?

I have not had any trouble with any of my previous sessions as you are describing, except for the early game when one's economy does not allow for filling the requirements. In those cases, I do see cheaper, smaller class roles, replacing requested ones via Fleet Template.

I would assume that the Cruisers were already built and hence were used to fill a need that could not be met by purchasing build orders for the proper ships. Could that be what happened?

The game has always eventually corrected it's fleets to the proper sets described by the fleet templates for me.

I do understand your argument about the AI following orders rather than taking preemptive measures on your behalf.

I don't think a save would have added any value to that answer.

I am seeing it in version 1.0.8.0.

Thank you for your assistance.

Jorgen_CAB wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 12:36 am

StormingKiwi wrote: Sun Oct 16, 2022 4:33 am

arvcran2 wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 7:54 pm
I have to admit I am not sure I understand the context of what you are trying to convey anymore. Can you be very specific?

Perhaps if you could tell us what polices you have for fleets (there are 4 settings), wither you design your ships manually or let the AI design them, the military policies related to automatically retrofitting fleets for automated ones and manual ones, and how you create your fleets that the problems you are referring to happen.

And include a save file 'before' the problem happens and describe what happens specifically to what fleet and when it occurs.

I'm unsure how this communication breakdown has occurred or how much more clear I can be.

I am referring to the ship fleet assignment, and the player's ability to influence the composition of those fleets via the fleet templates. How ship design occurs, how the fleet is created and how retrofitting ships occurs are not relevant to this discussion.

I'm pretty sure that the relevant policy setting is Fleet Ship Management.

The (general) problem is that the AI will assign ships to fleets resulting in a fleet composition different to the fleet template.

The Fleet Template defines the composition of a Fleet
(e.g. Attack Fleet: 0 escorts, 10 frigates, 8 destroyers, 6 cruisers, 2 battleships, 2 carriers, 2 fuel tankers)

In my last game, I noticed that Attack Fleet 2 had 13 escorts assigned to it, and Attack Fleet 4 had 9 escorts assigned to it. Neither fleet had had escorts on construction.

Interestingly, I have just noticed that one of my fleets has been assigned ships that are a higher class than that specified. It should have 5 destroyers in the fleet. Instead of 5 destroyers, it has 4 cruisers + 1 destroyer.

I think it comes down to that you don't know how it works... there are several tools to control what the AI builds and what ships get assigned to your fleets.

1. there is a tool where you tell the AI how many ships of each role it should build... you have to set this so it builds enough of the type of ships that want to have. If you tell the AI to build 15% escorts you will get that many escorts built. But remember it only a ratio of the total number of ships, so if you can't build any battleships the AI will ignore that ratio. So in the early game 15% escorts are likely to mean 100% in real terms as that is the only ship it can build. This should be quite self explanatory in my opinion.

2. You can set how many ships the AI will save for ships NOT assigned to fleets, this means that AI will never assign this amount of ships to any fleet, even if there is a need for them. The AI will generally also put smaller ships into this area before larger ships... but it also depends on the fleet templates that you define... if you have defined too many escorts to the fleet templates it might still assign larger ships to patrol and escort duty.

3. If a template have a ship role that you don't' have enough ship of... either because they are reserved for escort/patrol or you simply have not built enough of them the AI will always try to fill the template with alternative ships, but it will do so at last resort.

Now... it is up to you how much automation you allow the AI to do... it is also your responsibility to make sure the ratio of ships that the AI build will match the fleet templates that you have. The AI is not a mind reader and know what you want unless you tell it.

We could have a different system where the AI would always build ships based on the templates, but that assumes the player constantly change the templates as an empire evolves and the needs. So no matter how you do it there will be a time you as a player will need to step on and guide the system. It will be very difficult to make every player happy in this regard.

Currently the AI will fill your templates properly if you guide the automation with the correct ratios of ships and have the proper templates for those ratios.

I absolutely disagree; I do know how it works. This quoted reply indicates that you do not know what specific system is being discussed, as you conflate it with the rest of the automation and the non-player AI.

1) is not the system we are talking about. I am not talking about ship construction.

2) is not the system we are talking about.

3) is the system we are talking about, and you get so close to understanding what is being discussed before performing an astonishing set of mental gymnastics.

The fleet management automation has been told explicitly to put zero ships of a particular type in fleets of a certain template and has put ships of that type in that fleet regardless. The AI does know what I want because I have told it explicitly. Do you understand?

The fleet management automation should not make substitutions. It does not make those substitutions for troop transports and fuel tankers, so why does it for the other ships?

The automation should be subordinate to the player.

StormingKiwi wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 9:23 am
The automation should be subordinate to the player.

That is your main beef and topic of the thread.

I think part of the problem may be that the automation for the player is the same system as the AI player's automation system; at least that is my observation and assumption.

In that context one can understand that the Automation may be biased toward overriding or disregarding templates and policy settings, as it's procedural side of things needs to accomplish goals.
Also, the game is HUGE in what is being accomplished. The game is attempting to facilitate empowering the player who is new and novice to the UIX, and hence, as a result, may interfere with giving the player more control. The player ought to have an expectation of a transition period after changing policy, template, and designs.

StormingKiwi wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 9:23 am I absolutely disagree; I do know how it works. This quoted reply indicates that you do not know what specific system is being discussed, as you conflate it with the rest of the automation and the non-player AI.

1) is not the system we are talking about. I am not talking about ship construction.

2) is not the system we are talking about.

3) is the system we are talking about, and you get so close to understanding what is being discussed before performing an astonishing set of mental gymnastics.

The fleet management automation has been told explicitly to put zero ships of a particular type in fleets of a certain template and has put ships of that type in that fleet regardless. The AI does know what I want because I have told it explicitly. Do you understand?

The fleet management automation should not make substitutions. It does not make those substitutions for troop transports and fuel tankers, so why does it for the other ships?

The automation should be subordinate to the player.

I just described how it worked and you said I did something else, this makes zero sense.

1. This IS part of the problem you are having, you need to tweak this to get the proper ships into your fleets. Don't work against the system.

2. This IS also part of the puzzle, if you fail to grasp this you need to take a second look how this impact the ships the AI assign to fleets.

3. You need to understand how this work so you get the proper ships in the fleet.

You need to work WITH the system not against the system. The AI WILL put the correct ships in the fleet if they are available.

What you don't understand is that the AI will add other ships if the correct ones are not available. This is why you need to understand how step 1 and 2 work.

I have had zero issues getting the proper ships using AI automation using the AI automation tools properly. So you need to learn to use them properly.

Can it be improved, certainly it can, but does it work as is, yes it does if you use it properly.

Jorgen_CAB wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 9:20 pm

StormingKiwi wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 9:23 am I absolutely disagree; I do know how it works. This quoted reply indicates that you do not know what specific system is being discussed, as you conflate it with the rest of the automation and the non-player AI.

1) is not the system we are talking about. I am not talking about ship construction.

2) is not the system we are talking about.

3) is the system we are talking about, and you get so close to understanding what is being discussed before performing an astonishing set of mental gymnastics.

The fleet management automation has been told explicitly to put zero ships of a particular type in fleets of a certain template and has put ships of that type in that fleet regardless. The AI does know what I want because I have told it explicitly. Do you understand?

The fleet management automation should not make substitutions. It does not make those substitutions for troop transports and fuel tankers, so why does it for the other ships?

The automation should be subordinate to the player.

I just described how it worked and you said I did something else, this makes zero sense.

1. This IS part of the problem you are having, you need to tweak this to get the proper ships into your fleets. Don't work against the system.

2. This IS also part of the puzzle, if you fail to grasp this you need to take a second look how this impact the ships the AI assign to fleets.

3. You need to understand how this work so you get the proper ships in the fleet.

You need to work WITH the system not against the system. The AI WILL put the correct ships in the fleet if they are available.

What you don't understand is that the AI will add other ships if the correct ones are not available. This is why you need to understand how step 1 and 2 work.

I have had zero issues getting the proper ships using AI automation using the AI automation tools properly. So you need to learn to use them properly.

Can it be improved, certainly it can, but does it work as is, yes it does if you use it properly.

I agree, ... not seen anything yet in 1080 that has change that.

I do have to agree it is rather counter intuitive unless you happen to read that specific explanation in the in-game guide, since I also ran into the same problem.

I can tell you from experience as someone who organizes Stellaris multiplayer sessions that the average casual player won't infer any deeper meaning when faced with such a situation and is more likely to assume a bug with the fleet management.

I think a better approach would be to add a switch in the fleet management policies for whether you want the automation to momentarily substitute missing ship classes with other ship class types, and maybe leave it off by default.

Arthanis wrote: Thu Oct 20, 2022 10:44 pm ...

I think a better approach would be to add a switch in the fleet management policies for whether you want the automation to momentarily substitute missing ship classes with other ship class types, and maybe leave it off by default.

Seconded, though the DW2 target audience ... I mean player ... may be to promote interest and to delve deeper into the why and how.

I'm sure the system will be in many respect improved upon with time.

But overall... Stellaris is a much more casual game than DW series is. So they play in different leagues already from the start. We have to expect a bit more involvement in terms of mental investment when playing DW than Stellaris.

For me... Stellaris is a nice game to play when you want that 4x feeling without having to invest so much mental energy into what you are doing. I play DW for when I want a more mental challenge and need to delve into the details and think logically.

But that is just my opinion in the matter. There is no shame in a game being more casual, they give different enjoyments that is fitting for different people or situations.

Jorgen_CAB wrote: Fri Oct 21, 2022 5:28 pm I'm sure the system will be in many respect improved upon with time.

But overall... Stellaris is a much more casual game than DW series is. So they play in different leagues already from the start. We have to expect a bit more involvement in terms of mental investment when playing DW than Stellaris.

For me... Stellaris is a nice game to play when you want that 4x feeling without having to invest so much mental energy into what you are doing. I play DW for when I want a more mental challenge and need to delve into the details and think logically.

But that is just my opinion in the matter. There is no shame in a game being more casual, they give different enjoyments that is fitting for different people or situations.

Amended (rephrased): Seconded, In my opinion the DW2 target audience ... I mean player ... is given the opportunity of depth of experience, engagement, and to delve deeper into the why and how.