POLL - Are some weapons techs too cheap
 

I've often though many weapons techs were too cheap. All those 5000 point ones. Actaully any tech for 5000 pts seems to cheap to me. I'm thinking about bumping these up in a scenario I'm making. What do you think

Re: POLL - Are some weapons techs too cheap
 

I think most people here agree that SEIV is not well balanced. PPB issue has been discussed much more thoroughly than Irag war http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
Still, it is MM' opinion only that trully matter.
No poll can change it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: POLL - Are some weapons techs too cheap
 

Actually the poll can change it... if it becomes a MOD! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

The best thing about SE4 is that it isn't just MM's opinion that matters. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: POLL - Are some weapons techs too cheap
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Sure, that' why I did't play unmoded (one way or another) SE for well, .. all 3 years
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: POLL - Are some weapons techs too cheap
 

Actually it's the research cost progression that's a problem.

Your initial research for APB I should be quite pricey, but once your have the initial design, improvement to APB II, APB III should be comparatively cheap. You could address this by putting an intermediate prerequisite between the theoretical sciences and the weaponry.

For instance:

Physics I (50000) > Basic Energy Stream Weapon Design (100000) > Energy Stream Weapons (10000)

Physics would remain the same. Basic ESW Design would give you APB I. Energy Stream Weapons would give you APB II and beyond.

Correction! : Physics would change in that researching it would not give you ESW, but instead, Basic ESW Design.

[ November 01, 2003, 16:45: Message edited by: Grandpa Kim ]

Re: POLL - Are some weapons techs too cheap
 

The biggest problem with that is you'll never use PPB2.
Once you've gotten over that 100k barrier, you'll fly through the levels http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

It wouldn't be as much a problem if all the weapon tech areas ran out to 20 or 30 levels with diminishing returns, though http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: POLL - Are some weapons techs too cheap
 

Some 5000 point techs should remain at 5000, like the ones that require no prereqs or even those that just require one level of a 50k prereq. But those that require more than that should be more expensive, though not all to the same degree. Phased Energy Weapons might stand to cost 10-15k, while Null-Space might stand to cost 20-25k. It all depends on how much theoretical tech research must be done first. The more of it, the more likely you can just max out the weapon (or other) tech quickly.

Re: POLL - Are some weapons techs too cheap
 

I already rarely use PPBs because of the rads cost anyway - so making them more expensive would makes me even less likely to use them. The cost to research PPBs is better used to get shields IMO.

In a one on one game PPBs are even a strategic liability - I welcome any player that goes for them because that means they've had to neglect other avenues of research.

Also - If anything APBs are too expensive to research.

[ November 01, 2003, 19:47: Message edited by: rextorres ]

Re: POLL - Are some weapons techs too cheap
 

Being the uber weapon that they are, APBs don't seem to expensive too me...

[ November 01, 2003, 19:46: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: POLL - Are some weapons techs too cheap
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The only reason I say this is that when two fleets approach each other I have had situations where APBs fire at longer ranges so they miss more.

Tactically speaking they are at a disadvantage to PPBs because PPBs guy will hit more with the same damages.

They are disadvantaged against someone with DUCs because of the research involved.