 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Vesayen
|
|
I NEVER use spies, but after reading this post, I decided to try using them for once....
I am in the middle of a "tough" conquer the world campaing, im France.
Right now im fighthing greece.... didnt build any military, but got 10 spies.
I positioned them in a line where I had seen the enemy come from and....
Enemy runs, gets stuck on the invisible wall(my spies) and they loose 10 units..... I gain 10 units-I loose 3 in the struggle, but kill the rest of theirs-I repeated this several times....... then used those forces I captured to take out the enemy-LOL!
I might play russians more from now on, Spies are god like!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lazarous
|
|
they're a little TOO godlike...i can't really think of any workable counter to them if they're used in the middle of a battle. Alone against troops with scouting they're dead normally, but in the chaos of battle its a different story.
Laz
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lazarous
|
|
2 problems with simply bringing along scouts.
1. you *have* to manually target spies if there are any enemy combat units in the near vicinity (in my experience, at least). Manually targetting 5+ spies who are all simultaneously bribing different units is rather hard...not least of which because spies are fairly small and easy to misclick.
2.Lag issues in multiplayer - the bribing time is so short with even a single upgrade to spy power that its very likely that the unit will be turned before the spy is attacked.
actually, heres a third problem - scouts die easily and if the person is spy heavy they may simply target these units first when armies meet.
if scouts had some sort of 'auto-counterintel' AI setting i'd be happy, since then it would be a matter of who planned the best when they designed their army, but as it stands now the defender in a spy war is at a severe disadvantage.
Laz
|
|
| |
|
|
|
jpinard
|
|
I agree, spies are too powerful. The computer AI has used them many times to utterly mess up my overwheming force. It gets frustrating, I have 14 cites, he has 1, and I cannot kill him off...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Leaper
|
|
Hey Lazarous -
You are pointing out what many of us have already come to accept as a 'weak' part of a fantastic game. I have also suggested that targeting priority be increased on spies, because, as is, (and you spy supporters can argue all you want), these spies bribe WAY too fast to stop them from doing unrealistic harm to your army. And I'm not even sure increasing the priority is the answer, but it's got to help.
I have played some pretty good players on MP that use spies like towers. They just sit these girls places and wait. (not saying this will always work, but you get the point).
And this bs about "oh, golly, just bring along scouts" is getting so old. Not all games are played with small groups on small maps where you can micro-manage the targeting. Scouts, as more advanced players are starting to see, are not the answer to this problem.... oh god, there's that word again. And yes, spies ARE a problem.
But don't count your chickens on a fix here. There are so many that voice "just bring along scouts", that I think we're stuck with it.
Peace.
~ Leaper
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Calanor
|
|
Uppsala, Sweden
Nov 2001
time: 05:28
|
|
*nods* I agree - increased targeting priority vs spies is something I'd like to see in a patch (although I'd like to see similar changes when generals and supply wagons are concerned as well).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
albiedamned
|
|
Ellicott City, MD
Sep 2001
time: 00:28
|
|
I don't think that's extreme at all. It makes perfect sense to me. Regular military units attack on their own when enemies come in range (unless on hold fire stance). Why not have scouts attack spies on their own with counterintelligence? The key is to have the scouts near your army - if you've done that, you shouldn't have to do additional micromanagement. Reducing micromanagement is a recurring theme in the game, so it makes sense here too.
BTW, I agree that Spies used in the heat of an ongoing battle are a gameplay problem right now. But I don't think any other aspect of spies are a problem. If you let the enemy plant informers, that's your own fault. Observation posts and towers can prevent that from happening. And if you let the enemy bribe your units when you are not fighting, then again it's your fault because scouts (or observation posts) will solve that problem. There's nothing funnier then a spy coming across the border towards my idle army when I have scouts - they all see her and open fire at once since there are no other targets!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Vesayen
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lazarous
they're a little TOO godlike...i can't really think of any workable counter to them if they're used in the middle of a battle. Alone against troops with scouting they're dead normally, but in the chaos of battle its a different story.
Laz |
I ALWAYS send 5 or 6 scouts with my army from med-evil on(for sniping)-if you see spies, pause and just take em out with snipers.
Scouts are VERY cheap-no reason not to use alot of em.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
solo
|
|
Lowell, MA USA
Jan 2001
time: 05:28
|
|
In addition to allowing scouts to auto-target spies, I think another way of dealing with the problem would be to make it cost some gold for each bribery attempt. Make the first attempt cost 100 gold and successive attempts would cost 10% more gold and so on. Doing this would limit overuse of bribery and would lessen the amount of micro-management of spying and counter-spying, but still retain a realistic role for spies in the game.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Red Scorpion
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by albiedamned
There's nothing funnier then a spy coming across the border towards my idle army when I have scouts - they all see her and open fire at once since there are no other targets! |
Too true. I had the Chat come up with warning about spies constantly in same place, (where I'd set the rally-point for all my Scholar/Minutemen ). When I got there to check, I could only see her dead body, as they'd opened fire on her, after half a dozen or so warnings, if I saw it was in the same place I'd just ignore it.
The most Comical Spy-Event was when she 'bribed' & converted on of my DECOYS!
quote:
Originally posted by Vesayen I ALWAYS send 5 or 6 scouts with my army from med-evil on(for sniping)-if you see spies, pause and just take em out with snipers. |
You can't 'snipe' spies unfortunately, (as far as I'm aware ), the scout/commando approaches her & kills her with a 'Throwing-Knife'.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
niDe
|
|
I think that the time it takes a Spy to bribe a unit should just be increased.
This would make it easier to eliminate the Spies because you could find them before they finished their bribe.
Making Scouts auto-CounterIntelligence is a bad idea.
CI kills the Spy pretty much instantly and costs only 500 craft.
In the later stages of the game Scouts can have up to 2000 craft, meaning one Scout could kill 4 Spies very quickly and that would overpower them.
Basically it would mean the end for Spies, which add a nice tactical feature to combat, as a useful unit.
Increasing Spy bribe time IS the answer, not giving Scouts auto-CI.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
albiedamned
|
|
Ellicott City, MD
Sep 2001
time: 00:28
|
|
I don't think it would mean the end for spies. If your opponent didn't have scouts, then the spies would still be effective. And if the opponent did have scouts and you wanted to use a spy strategy, you would have to try to kill his scouts first.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Leaper
|
|
Maybe this topic won't die as quickly as usual, which is good. I am enjoying the different ideas being put forth here. And, yes, I should clarify regarding my earlier rant. Spies, in general, are fantastic units, and serve to add alot to the game. It is in the heat of battle when they get real irritating, real fast.
The idea of autocast: I thought about this also. If done, we would really need to come up with a way to make this not become too powerful a counter. Idea is cool, but I'm not sure that's the answer.
Inceasing the time it takes to bribe: Not a bad idea at all. Not sure if this is the best answer, but it may certainly go a long way to helping the issue.
Increased Priority of Spies: My initial idea when I thought about this problem when the game was first released. I'm not sure if it's the best answer either, as multiple spies could still cause lots of damage to you.
Have it cost money to bribe: Definately the single best idea, as the skill IS called "Bribe" . How to implement it though.... tough one! Money means alot more in the earlier part of the game than at the end, when it is coming in hand over fist most of the time. How would you deal with that.... not sure. But, in my opinion, a very creative and 'makes alot of sense' type of solution.
Great thread, with very little hostility.... amazing!
~ Leaper 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Nacht
|
|
Amsterdam
May 2002
time: 06:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Leaper
But don't count your chickens on a fix here. There are so many that voice "just bring along scouts", that I think we're stuck with it.
|
As I remember in the TSN interview the development team said they would seriously rethink the way spies were inplemented in the game.
On a sidenote: why are spies in civgames always female? Do developers think of women as so much more sneakier than men?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lazarous
|
|
The reason i thought spies were not that great initially was that I believed bribe DID cost resources. It seemed logical enough at the time  . At any rate, one of the reasons bribe is so powerful is that it gives the bribing player effectively double the resources that the defending player used to create the unit - the briber gets the unit, but at the same time takes it away from the enemy. From a pure resource standpoint, bribing is by FAR the most cost effective solution to making an army. As such, I was considering the possibility that bribing simply took a % of the units base cost to function. For example, a 60 food/60 wood unit would cost the briber 20 food/20 wood to convert...or whatever % would seem most balanced. This % would increase with each unit bribed, just like creating a unit. As such, bribing would eventually cost MORE than making the unit, which is as it should be...but it would maintain the utility of spies early on as a rush breaker.
Personally, i feel the higher targetting priority is enough to make spies non-lethal but still usable. As someone noted, scouts die fast if they're directly targetted (or even if they're in the AOE of artillery fire in later ages). Further,the most efffective bribe units i've seen are cavalry, which up to industrial era generally leave the safety of the scouts sight radius to attack...and thus become succeptible to spies in the rear of a formation.
A close second to this would be an auto-counterintel setting...but i'd balance this with an auto-bribe setting to spies as well.
Laz
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hendrik
|
|
Personally I think the entire point of using spies/stopping them is to increase the level of micromanagement required in a battle. A player with superior resources and/or tech can generally win a battle with a small amount of micromanagement, unless spies are used by the enemy. A weaker play can force the stronger play to spend more time watching his army and less time working on his economy or building units.
I generally use spies defensively and don't bring them along with attacking armies, but I will have to give using them offensively a try.
One note: pressing the select scout key twice will select all of your scouts, and it only takes one right click to instantly kill an enemy spy for 500 craft. In the later ages scouts cloak when they are not using abilities... meaning that if your enemy is going to kill your scouts, he has to have scouts of his own. The "scouts are easy to kill" argument goes both ways.
If you are having problems with scouts then use more air units, helicopters have all the functionality of ground units but are immune to bribe and most ground attackers. Of course this does not apply until the industrial age, but it isn't too difficult to reduce your army's vulnerability to spies with minimal micromanagement.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lazarous
|
|
There are a bunch of interface goodies that allow a player to barely watch their economy at all and still keep it near maxed. Add that you can hotkey production buildings as well as infinite queues, and i generally spend most of my time watching the battles without any significant loss of resources. Microing battles isn't the problem, the problem is that when a mass of spies comes after you and the enemy has already picked off most - it doesn't even have to be all - of your scouts, you're doomed. Even if you try to micro your army to attack the spies, they'll take over units so quickly that you're not going to be able to stop them all (by micro i mean focus fire on the various spies as they appear). To my knowledge, counterintel has a timer just like bribe.
Further, most of your suggestions are only really applicable in industrial+, and it has been my experience that an agressive spy user will finish the game well before then, or at least have built up an overwhelming advantage and no longer have to rely on their spies.
Laz
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28.
Apolyton Time is 00:28. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-06-2003 04:09
. 
Had my first 'run-in' with Spies when I moved up from Easiest to Moderate. I was fighting on 3 fronts & the chat stated a spy was trying to bribe my units, on all 3 fronts! Panic set in & I was routed on all but one of my fronts. Now I ensute I have at least 2 of the scout line with each force, sometimes 3 plus I'll get my Civ support teams to build Observation Towers behind each front line, I don't take any chances anymore. They're evil!
|