![]() |
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
[quote]Originally posted by Rollo:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Suicide Junkie: Quote:
2) once a resupply is built, the AI will ignore further calls in this system So yes, the AI treats Resupply Depots as a system wide ability. Not sure if it can be tricked into building more by adding a bogus ability. I never tried. Which begs the question, cybersol: Why would you like to have the AI build more than one depot in a system? Just curious.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why not combine the resupply depot function with the space yard itself? I always wondered why the space yards couldn't have a gas station built in, seems a bit silly to have a completely separate facility just to pump gas and reload weapons. |
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
That's more of a design issue...
Spaceyards and resupply depots were separate in SE3, too. |
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
Quote:
You could always adjust the cost of the space yard to make it take the same number of turns to construct as the facilities would have separately. |
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
He meant that having those abilities on separate facilities is how MM always intended it to be. It is not really a balance issue.
|
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
Proportions makes most Q-reactors mega-supply components. It also extends the tree a long ways - eventually you can get the infinite Q reactor, but it takes a huge amount or research and then is big and expensive. AI Campaign mod I haven't studied, but I gather it uses many things from Proportions and this is probably one of them.
LGM, you're incorrect that doing this drains supplies from fleeted ships. Supplies are shared on the basis of absolute numbers of supplies, not on a percentage basis. And yes, there is a neat effect in that if a "super-supply" Q Reactor gets destroyed, it has to return to a resupply depot before it will recharge. PvK Quote:
|
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
I like all of these ideas. Inability to dodge due to need to keep the shrine undisturbed makes some sense. Making Talisman a low-damage armor component so it tends to not work as soon as the ship is "violated" also seems appropriate. Reducing the effect to a unique to-hit bonus I also like, though it does remove the unique ability of the Talisman (which is an unbalancing ability, but maybe it makes more sense to balance it in other ways but preserve its effect).
Net suggestion: Give talisman a -20 defense penalty and make it 10kT "hit first/armor", explaining that it cannot be disturbed by damage or excessive maneuvering without damaging its holy balance and making it not work. Retain the unique "always hits" ability. PvK Quote:
In my mod, I made it 10KT armor, so that you can take it out with the first non shield hit. Temporary blessing. Otherwise, treat it as an improvement to Sensor III: Either Stackable + 20% or Nonstackable +85%. I think that this would make Religious still worth taking as you get a modifer no one else gets. Combine this with War and Death shrines and they will still be tough advesaries, but no longer untouchable. This would take away my biggest complaint with the Talisman: Range does not matter, which makes it a +1000% to hit and at least a +50% to defense by hanging out a long range.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> |
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
Those all sound like good ideas to me.
The HEM should have some improvement in order to keep it being somewhat better than the Torpedo, which presumably everyone agrees should be improved. PvK Quote:
And I still think the following mentioned earlier is a trivial change to help future AI's: Add a second dummy ability to Resupply Depots to enable them to be called for in both a system wide capacity and a individual planet capacity. Rollo, SJ, PvK, what do you think of this change?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> |
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
i like it.
to compensate perharps the talisman can function as a mid-tech security system http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif (as in boarding) |
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
Yes, I developed a system kind of like that for Proportions mod, although the math is a little more complicated there. In general though yes, it'd be good for balance to continue defense penaties based on size through the BC->DN sizes which currently have zero-modifiers.
PvK P.S. I don't know though that I think Q Reactors are unbalanced. I think they are just unpleasant (for my own tastes as a player) because they are so cheap that once they're developed, they practically remove the issue of supply from the game, which I think is less fun/interesting. Is the AI really hurt by the extra cost of putting them on everything? Surely it benefits a lot from having them, since it won't be stupidly running out of supplies like it often does. PvK Quote:
So a 300kT Destroyer would get a +10% or +20% ECM bonus; a 500kT Cruiser would get -10% or -20%. At the extreme ends, the Escort (150kT ... three mass incremetns underweight) gets a +15% to +30% defense bonus; the Dreadnought, at 1000kT, is 600kT "overweight", earnign it a -60% or -120% defense penalty, and the Baseship (at 1500kT) is 500kT evewn MORE overweight, giving it a -110% or -220% defense penalty. The benefits of this are that it's intuitive and follows a pattern. The actual modifier per mass-increment can be altered for certain classes of ship (i.e., all transports may have a worse ECM modifier ... all carriers may have a better ECMmodifier than their mass might otherwise indicate ... etc).</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> [ July 31, 2003, 22:44: Message edited by: PvK ] |
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
You should probably take the square root of those modifiers in order to account for the conVersion from mass to ship profile size. (well, square of the cube root, but you get the idea)
[ July 31, 2003, 22:47: Message edited by: Suicide Junkie ] |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:50 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.