minerals, a game design decision
 

I always wondered why in SE IV there were 3 kind of resources, but with an enormous inbalance toward the consumption of minerals. After 3 patches which never reequilibrated, even slightly, the usage proportion, one can think that this is a voluntary game design decision from Malfador.

So why 3 resources if in 95% of the situations only minerals is really relevant as a limiting factor?

Also, why no modders tried to put more equilibrium, like using radioactive massively for all engines and supply storages? Or more organic for troops? Anything really is feasible.

Re: minerals, a game design decision
 

Nearly all mods increase org and rads usage. Look at P&N for a very good example of resource balancing.

Re: minerals, a game design decision
 

Opinions vary on this issue. I can see the point that the game is skewed toward minerals, but I kind of like the imbalance. I feel that if they all were balanced, then why have 3? If all things in the game were adjusted to cost equal amounts of all 3 resources, then having different resources would be unnecessary and 1 type of resource would suffice. In real life, there are many resources, but some are used much more than others.

Slick.

Re: minerals, a game design decision
 

Rads are dangerous to ignore... i once did...
Organics are for the organic races. I have actually ran into organic defecit several times already!

the game is balanced there.

Re: minerals, a game design decision
 

Maybe a solution could be to mod several "normal" tech branches (not race related) which use rad and organics more than other type of resources (at least there is similar try in standard null space weaponry which is equal in minerals and rads AFAIC remember) Before a player choose to research those alternative branches he has to check to have enough rad or organics to build the items of these branches.

klausD

Re: minerals, a game design decision
 

I could see the logic behind including rads in tech research, but I'd think more minerals would be used rather than organics.

In regards to the imbalance tho, I really like that it's skewed, as later on in the game, especially if its been modded with the likes of Proportions because its more realistic that way, it tends to be more rad usage than mineral. I'm sure a bare bones spaceship wouldnt require THAT much rads to make, while one with a quatum generator and a cloaking field would be much more epxensive.

[ April 27, 2003, 10:48: Message edited by: Xiodos ]

Re: minerals, a game design decision
 

Mineral planets are the best! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

On a serious note, the more balanced the resource usage is, the more likely it is that the AI will get 'resource screwed', because it misses one resource and will be stalled for a time.

Rollo

Re: minerals, a game design decision
 

Slick:
Actually, P&N (and other mods) makes different types of weapons and components coist different types of resources, not jsut make them all equal. You have to make design decisions based off of available resources, not just techs. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Check out Adamant Mod. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: minerals, a game design decision
 

Slick: Not speaking of putting the same amount of resources for each components. This would be equal to having one resource.

I wondered why you dont have to make design / research decision based on the variable availability in the 3 resources, and not on the quantity of minerals you have at hand.

For example (I dont master the tech tree, so my examples wont be totally relevant to the SE IV tech tree) :

a player is not able to extract many radioactive. If choose to not develop say quantum reactors because they ask for much rad, and instead use solar sails and ramscoop engines.

A player possesses a lot of organic. He chooses to give a strong emphasize in troops and boarding partie ships.

Or you lack in the minerals department. You cease to build minerals hungry 'solid' missiles and build photon torpedoes.

just some thoughts. There is a whole new set of design decisions that could have come from this. As of now minerals rulez http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: minerals, a game design decision
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Like the AI says... "Mineral planets are the best!" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: minerals, a game design decision
 

Imp fyron,
thanks for the tip. Is it possible to play adamant mod SP and classic turn based? (I can remember I read somewhere that its just for MP or so)
klausD

Re: minerals, a game design decision
 

Remember too that this imbalance can be an advantage in itself, especially when it comes to organic races. Having much of your design based on organic components can cut a few turns off of your build time and that can make a big difference.