Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

Even if we don't modify the supply storage component the balance mod has to be tested carefully before sending it to Aaron.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

Geo - what you mean is the effect when you half the size of supply storage as well as the supplies they carry. When engines carry more supplies than the storages, the AI will use extra illegal engines when the design calls for 'supply storage' ability.

re: changing supply storage - I do not agree with that.
Firstly changing the size of the storage can have unintended foul effects with the AI (I am talking custom AI here).
Secondly I think that the reality reason is a bad one. Neither of us is a spaceship engineer and knows how engines store their supplies and how supply storage works. There can be many points and explanations made this way or other. All of them totally hypothetic and moot. I will not go into such a discussion.
Thirdly, arbitrarily rasing the values for supply storage (as well as allowing them to count as cargo on transport hulls) will have profound effects on the game. The range of fleets will be raised and overall play balance effected. I am not aware of a balance issue that said: 'Fleets donn't have enough range.'

For these reasons I think it is better the leave supply storage alone.

Rollo

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

And this is exactly why there need to be polls made for most of the suggestions... to see what a lot more than just a few people think of a change.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

I think a poll for a stock change is a bad idea. It will mostly only reflect the opinions of those that frequent the forums. Which as a group tend to be a little more involved in modding in general and likely have less of a tendancy to object to stock changes then the general population of SE4 players.

Geoschmo

[ August 01, 2003, 20:28: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

Oh, so going by what an even smaller number of people think is a better idea? Hardly. Is not the goal to make it acceptable to the largest number of people possible?

[ August 01, 2003, 21:15: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Umm? Doesn't this thread and the suggestions in it already represent those who visit the forum? How would those people who never drop by here even know that there is an attempt to balance the stock files in the first place? In that case, what's wrong with using polls to decide on different matters?

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I did not suggest that a group of four or five people is more representative of the wider SE4 audience then a forum poll would be, but you cannot claim that it is less so. Just because a poll would get a larger result does not mean it would be a more accurate result. The fact is that statistically the difference between a small handful of people and a slightly larger handful that would answer a forum poll question is insignificant when compared to the wider Se4 audience. And when you consider that the personality of a player that frequents the forum is very likely different then the average Se4 player, the results are not likely to be representative at all for either handfull.

Since we cannot get an accurate sampling of the wider Se4 audience we must make assumptions. By the level of sales, the relative lack of complaint and widespread and generally positive feedback about the game we can assume that the general attitude among the wider Se4 audience is a positive one. Making radical changes to the stock game late in it's life without a compelling basis in customer disatisfaction is not wise.

Some changes can be done without risking a general backlash among the players. That is what we are trying to accomplish. Moving the game more towards what we in the forum believe is a point of balence in the game, without tipping it so far that we tick off the larger population of players that doesn't have a big problem with the game as it is now.

I don't disagree with all of your ideas. Many of them are ones I wish had been done in Se4 from the begining and are on my personal list of wishes for Se5. But I believe many of them are too large of changes to make this late in the stock Se4. That is what user mods are for.

Geoschmo

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

Supply is kinda weird in that it looks less efficient in terms of space than engines, and also in that it costs more than most weapons do. A tanker ship tends to be more expensive than a warship, at least before the final most expensive weapons are developed, and sometimes even then.

However those are not really balance issues. They are perception issues and "does it make sense" issues.

There is sort-of a balance issue in that it doesn't get you much to choose supply storage instead of engines, but since there is a max number of engines per design, it doesn't keep supply from being useful.

In fact, I suspect the reason supply components are as limited and expensive as they are, is an intentional balance design so that fleet range can only be extended at significant expense.

PvK

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

After reading many Posts about the supply storage component I've to say it wasn't good suggestion to make it bigger. As stated it isn't a balance problem. However I think supply storage should count as cargo. If I'm going to build a tanker ship a transport ship sounds the most obvious choice.

Would it be too big change to give some bonuses to transports? At this time the only advantages to choose a transport instead of normal ship is the fact that it's few hudreds cheaper than corresponding normal ship and sometimes the transport is the biggest ship you have.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

Regarding supply storage as cargo - airplanes don't carry our luggage in the fuel tank do they?