Your Game statistics

[Daybreak]

Trying to understand what is happening with my own games and was hoping people would help me understand what is their experience. There is so much tech I don't seem to use, so maybe if my statisics are way off than others that may be my problem.

What percentage of games do you win when playing
Typical:
Aggressive:
Maniacal:

and how many times do you abandon a game when -
I have clearly won:
I have clearly lost:

I will start however I don't have some numbers

Win?
Typical: I assume about 80% as have not played this level as much.
Aggressive: 50% guesstimate
Maniacal: 10% guesstimate

Abandon game?
I have clearly won: 100%
I have clearly lost: 100%


The above is without going back and restarting sections.

Thank you

[Oberlus]

There is so much tech I don't seem to use, so maybe if my statisics are way off than others that may be my problem.

You could tell us what is your normal tech progression to compare.
In my games, the backbone of research is nascent artificial intelligence (+2 RP per planet regardless focus and species) and adaptive automation (+5 PP per planet regardless focus and species).
I may get planetary ecology fast if that allows me to get some early adequate planets. And I will usually get laser and military robotic control (for robo hulls) before adaptive automation, except in galaxy settings with more than 30 systems per empire (which I don't play anymore 'cause it's a sure win).
If my species is good at production and bad at research, I will get first than anything else physical brain (+5 RP at homeworld after building it) and robotic production unless I have started close to an enemy AI or interesting natives that I will try to conquer before turn 20 (so instead of producing the physical brain building I'll be producing a frigate and some troopers).

What percentage of games do you win when playing
Typical/Aggressive/Maniacal: I haven't lost a single player game in my last 30 or so games, so I could say 96% (80% if I only consider my firs 20 games; BTW I don't see differences in game difficulty for these three AI settings).
That is counting each restarted game as a different one. However, I haven't restarted a game in my last 30 or so games.

and how many times do you abandon a game when -
I have clearly won: 100% (this is usually around turn 100-150, if I get to turn 200+ it is because there is at least one AI empire that I haven't met yet and has similar PP and RP stats).
I have clearly lost: 0% (when I'm losing is when I get the most fun, so I keep trying; once my defeat is obvious, huge enemy stack at the gates, I restart the game with same settings to try something different).

[Daybreak]

Well your statistics are telling

You could tell us what is your normal tech progression to compare.
In my games, the backbone of research is nascent artificial intelligence (+2 RP per planet regardless focus and species) and adaptive automation (+5 PP per planet regardless focus and species).

I can't find it now but someone here put down a post with some starting tech and yes Nacent Artificial Intelligence and Adaptive Automation are high on the list

but then I find it all stalls, and the AI's are both beating me in production and tech.

Do you build many ships first off or go for expansion - I go for the latter in both texh and ships, but even though I may have more systems, the AI's production and tech outstrip me. I was putting it down to luck, that they were just lucky in surrounding planets and natives.

What species are you starting with?

[Ophiuchus]

If you go for expansion the biggest playing advice is: don't colonize something you cant defend.

You could try and play a game of Sly to see how you fare with a species which does not have that problem.

[Oberlus]

Bear me if I tell you obvious things.

What species are you starting with?

Any. The one I use most is Human, but not for much. I like variety.

Do you build many ships first off or go for expansion

It depends on several factors.
For the very first turns:
- In maps with more than 25 systems per empire I tend to assume that I can try to build two or three colonisers/outposters before needing military ships for defense, but sometimes that can backfire.
- In maps with less than 15 systems per empire I know I will need extra military strength from the start.
- For maps around 20 systems per empire, first I'll usually build two scouts and a frigate, unless I see before turn 2 that I'll have 2+ readily colonisable planets, and then I'll build a colony ship before the first frigate.

In general, I will try to put my PPs into what will get me the most reward sooner.
If I have something else to colonise, I'll build colonisers (for out of supply colonisation) or outposts.
But I won't colonise planets that I can't defend from nearby enemies.
Regarding military ships, I won't build outdated ships unless I have nothing else better to invest my PPs. Therefore, with low research and high production species, I will be building several frigates before I get my first robo hull ship (just because I can't do anything else with those PPs), while with high research species I may have built one or no frigates before my first good robo hull gets out of the drydock.

Exception cases:
- For species with planetary stealth I know that AI won't try to conquer my planets until mid game so I can choose to completely neglect military production on early game until I get a nice bunch of military techs (so that I my first built military ship is a robotic hull with laser cannon, laser fighters and xentronium armour).
- If you see a native planet that complements very well your starting species you can go directly for an early invasion squad. What complements you well? Usually, a good research (production) native for your bad research (production) species, or a native species that has many readily colonisable planets around you while your starting species has few or no colonisation opportunities.

I go for the latter in both texh and ships, but even though I may have more systems, the AI's production and tech outstrip me

This puzzles me. I mean, until mid game, when you have several planets with sizeable populations, most of your points (research or production) will come from your homeworld and the flat bonuses (NAI and AA). And therefore, if you have more colonies than your enemies, you should have more points than them.

Please, let me know in which turn you usually get NAI and AA, to compare with my results. You can do this easily by loading your last game and disabling all sitreps but "Tech Researched".

I was putting it down to luck, that they were just lucky in surrounding planets and natives.

This does happens. But not consistently. If you have this happening more than 30% of the time then something else is to be blamed (probably you choices in research and production).

[defaultuser]

These days my starting species is the last one defeated in the previous game unless it's the same one I'm playing. Then I go with second place.

My starting tech is:

Physical Brain (build History Analyzer)
Planetary Ecology for most species except Egassem
Adaptive Automation, but nudge up Nascent AI

If early military is needed, get Military Robotic. I never build warships until I get that. I try not to build more than one of that basic (to take out Sentries) unless absolutely necessary. Prefer to get shields and Zortium. Exception might be with Etty and robotic shields.

[Daybreak]

I go for the latter in both texh and ships, but even though I may have more systems, the AI's production and tech outstrip me

This puzzles me. I mean, until mid game, when you have several planets with sizeable populations, most of your points (research or production) will come from your homeworld and the flat bonuses (NAI and AA). And therefore, if you have more colonies than your enemies, you should have more points than them.
Please, let me know in which turn you usually get NAI and AA, to compare with my results. You can do this easily by loading your last game and disabling all sitreps but "Tech Researched".

Aplogise for delay, I thought I would test some of the stuff and my Adaptive Automation had been further down the list.

I have found by adding it earlier I did do better than before. Thank you for that.

Occasionally I keep on trying to expand too early.

Q: What do you call mid game in approximate "Turns"?

My starting tech is:
Physical Brain (build History Analyzer)
Planetary Ecology for most species except Egassem
Adaptive Automation, but nudge up Nascent AI
If early military is needed, get Military Robotic. I never build warships until I get that. I try not to build more than one of that basic (to take out Sentries) unless absolutely necessary. Prefer to get shields and Zortium. Exception might be with Etty and robotic shields.

This also helped alot, thank you.

[EricF]

I would say Mid Game is when I get Self Gravitating Hull.
Hard to say what turn that is because I have made Nano Robotic
a prerequisite for SG in my games. With my mod I usually get
SG hulls around turn 150 with a bad tech species like Eggasm,
but it was around turn 190 also with Eggasm last time I played
because of a not so ideal start. To me this still seems a bit too
fast to get SG hulls considering how powerful they are.

[Ophiuchus]

For me mid game means the time that i think my empire has basically won the game (playing solo, AI wont catch up), something between turns 60 and 120 usually. And then i quit.

But didnt have much time to play, so AI might handle itself better.