Quote:
Imperator Fyron said:
Wasn't the idea to make the ships take a while and a lot of resources to build, but not be insanely expensive to maintain?
|
[/b] yes, but when one doesn't need to expand resources at all to support all the ships one could want, the balance is not "insane' in the direction of expensive. I think the first Version of the mod went to far in the direction of believing that a turn really represented one tenth of a year. While the game could survive the idea, it proved too slow in testing. If you really want to spend 30 turns building a battleship, you can adjust all the values, of course.
Quote:
It was quite coherent and valid... another way to look at it would be a statistical representation of more shots missing at longer ranges. Combat bonuses are far, far too powerful in SE4 for them to be a very good way to try and balance weapons out... Even something as small as a 10% penalty to hit is not really a 10% penalty to hit. It often ends up being more like a 40% penalty to hit, or more, depending on the exact circumstances. 
|
I would accept "valid" but not "coherent." We are not talking, in actual combat representations, about "statistical representations." Shots hit or miss. They do discrete damage or not. They impact the next tactical turn or they do not. Combat in the game is mechanistic, not statistical.
I understand the desire to avoid the accumulation of unrealistic modifiers, and the point of the "point of diminishing returns" representation of armor, ECM, and sensors.
However, I don't like the representation of game effects that are frankly counter-intuitive as "subtle effects" that only make sense to the initiated.