View Single Post
  #1134  
Old October 1st, 2007, 06:58 PM
Saber Cherry's Avatar

Saber Cherry Saber Cherry is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Crystal Tokyo
Posts: 2,453
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Saber Cherry is on a distinguished road
Default A few observations

Hi!

I finally bought SE:V, hoping it was ready for prime-time. And I started out with the Balance mod... because it seemed to have generally positive feedback. And while I like the mod a lot, I have some feedback of my own. Let me clarify - I like the mod a lot, and have a lot of positive feedback about it, but I don't have time to waste praising you, so the positive feedback should be understood, and I will only address items that I think can be improved. So, please don't feel that this is criticism.


1) Bugs.
There are a lot of cases when the expected results of the next level of a technology includes something like "Small Fighter 4" and "Medium Fighter 1". When you research it, you get only the medium version, not the upgraded light version. True also for Satellites, and IIRC unit weapon mounts.

2) Trade and Resources.
Trade at max 30% is just too high... and, I think, resource extractor output is too high, as well. Even with units and buildings requiring maintenance, I cannot spend all my resources. I have a large empire of 50 colonies, 4 of which build colony ships nonstop, and several others of which build satellites and fighters nonstop. I trade with 4 other empires, at 30%. I have never researched any extractor technologies. And yet - 75% of my minerals, 50% of my organics, and 30% of my radioactives all come from my homeworld... in last 40 colonies I settled, I did not build a single extractor. Yet I run at an immense surplus! I have never felt any resource pressure, like I did constantly in SEIV, and I was only able to drop my minerals below 100k for a single turn when I upgraded all my research centers to level 3. I don't even care about resource %'s on new planets I find, since I'm only going to build resupply depots, shipyards, and research centers anyway... even on planets that are 150% across the board. Overall, aside from my homeworld, I have 1 mineral colony, 2 organic colonies, and 2 radioactive colonies... all (IIRC) unbreathable. And I've never felt any pressure at all.
I think 20% is a very good cap on maximum trade. And level 1 Extractors should extract maybe 800 resources... certainly not 2000.

3) Fighters, Fighter Armor, and Rocket Pods.
These are 10% the size of capital ship missiles and 50% as strong... and direct fire (with a fighter's inherent accuracy boost), so they cannot be stopped by point-defense. That seems way too strong for my taste, and logically inconsistent. I would suggest making them weaker, greatly increasing the ordinance use, and considering making them seekers.
I'd also be happier with fighters if they retained their high combat speed, but were REALLY SLOW in map movement. For example, currently, a small fighter with 4x ion engine 1 has 10 normal speed and 15 combat speed. And it does not really need a carrier. If that same fighter had 15 combat speed but only 5 normal speed, carriers would start to make a lot more sense... and I generally think of fighters as things with a high top speed, but insufficient fuel volume to maintain that high speed over long distances.
As for small armor... why is it (initially) twice as strong per Kt as ship armor? It is really, really good. I would still use it routinely if it was equivalent to ship armor. Fighter emissive armor, on the other hand, is worthless. Small Emissive Armor 1 is twice as big as normal Small Armor for the same protection... and sheds 1 damage per hit, which is worthless. You are ALWAYS better with 2 normal armor. Same with Small Emissive Armor 2. It is only at Small Emissive Armor 3 that you will break-even with the normal armor, versus fighter-size weapons. But versus point defense and normal-size weapons, Small Emissive Armor is always just junk. I suggest it be made 1 KT, like Small Armor, with the same protection as Small Armor, but twice as expensive... just like with ship armor.

4) Colony Modules.
I routinely scout with colony ships instead of scouts, because they are so similar in price - which, conceptually, is mind-boggling. The initial game is just a mad land-grab, pumping out a colony every 2-3 turns per shipyard... and landing on everything, even unbreathable tiny planets, because the cost is so trivial. I think colony modules should be perhaps 10x as expensive, and hold fewer colonists (say, 200k storage). But, at a bare minimum, you could probably make colony modules 2x or 3x as expensive - say, 5000m, 8000o, 2000r, without anyone complaining.

5) Ship Sizes.
I really like the QNP. However... I think it may be a little too extreme. I find that the next generation of ship is generally WORSE than the previous generation! For example, level-3 Frigates are 300Kt, and level-1 Destroyers are 350Kt. At max engines and minimal required components (life support, bridge, crew quarters), they have 170Kt and 180Kt free. Yet the frigate is much cheaper, uses less supply to move, and has a better defensive bonus... so... I would never build Destroyers! The same is true for Small Fighter 3 vs Medium Fighter 1, Light Carrier vs Carrier, and Small Transport vs Medium Transport. There is no incentive to increase shipbuilding technology when, given a choice, I build the older version anyway. I designed a Medium Transport 2... and noticed that it cost almost twice as much as a Light Transport 3, used twice as much supply (making supply modules inefficient), but only carried 50% more cargo! And, of course, could not go through small warp points.
So, I suggest you reduce the ramp in engine requirements. For example, medium fighters could use 5 rather than 6 engines, with a movement divisor of 5, and then they would at least have more room than small fighters, instead of the same amount of room with a higher cost and worse defense. Medium freighters should have 200 crew and maybe 7 engines. Light carriers and frigates should be a little smaller - say, 250 and 700 at level 3, with the required engines and crew for a light carrier perhaps reduced a little. Large Satellite Mount should perhaps require 110 Kt (medium) instead of 100 Kt (small), or else the defense bonus makes small satellites strictly better. Right now, the only non-minimal-sized vehicles I care about are the Light Cruiser, since it can use large ship mounts, and Medium Platform, since it can use heavy mounts. Otherwise... there is no reason to advance beyond level-3 of Frigate, Light Carrier, Small Transport, Small Satellite, and Small Fighter, since you spend precious research money but don't really get any advantages.

6) Anti-Proton Beams.
These are just way too good. Compared to DUCs, they consume no ordinance... have a +25% or so to hit at max range... AND do 30% more damage at max range... and 120% more at min range. I mean, outclassing DUCs is fine, but at least the damage at max range should be less, I think. If they had -40% damage at all ranges, so that they were 35% better than DUCs at range 1 and 20% worse at range 9, I would still always use them for the hit% and ordinance advantages. Especially considering that Meson Blasters have the same prereq as Anti-Proton Beams... there is just no comparison, APBs are vastly better. Meson Blasters are roughly as good as DUCs, though I prefer DUCs due to the better range. So - Meson Blasters have no reason to exist. Perhaps they could do 20% less damage, use 2 supplies, but have a 1.5 second reload? That might make them interesting against fighters, at least.

7) Sensors.
This seems to be the no-brainer to research from turn 1. They ramp so quickly - and not only give you a huge exploration boost, but even a good combat boost! I suggest making Sensor research slightly more expensive, say +25%. Or else, making the initial sensor range higher - say, 5 for Sensors 1 - and gaining +1 per level. Considering that engines get a 5% boost in speed per level, going from level 1 sensors to level 2 sensors increases the combat bonus by 100% and increases the sensor area by perhaps 150%. That is really incredible.
I think that range 5 for sensors 1 and +1 range per level would be best.

8) Ship Capture.
These start out so good, at 200 marines, that +20 per level is just too slow; there is little point in researching it past level 1. Starting them out at 100 marines, with +20 per level and the same research costs, would feel much better to me.

9) Resupply, Cargo, Storage.
These increase too slowly with research to bother with. It might be worthwhile to research a single level of resupply and cargo, because they are cheap... but at +10% per level, that is as far as I would go. +20% per level - with levels that are all 50% more expensive - seems more reasonable. And I don't really understand the logic of separating cargo from storage. They are both logically the same thing, and there is little incentive to research either of them, so why not put them together? I would never even consider researching storage as it is now.

10) Armor and Shields.
Armor starts at 60Kt/10Kt, has no prereqs, and gains +10Kt per level. That's a ratio of 6, +1/lv.
Shields have Physics prereq and (including the structure of the generator) start at 230Kt/30Kt, +20 per level. That's a ratio of 7, +.66/lv.
If you spend an equal amount of research, armor will be WAY better than shields. And considering that armor protects versus damaging warps and mines, while shields protect versus boarding and crystal shard guns, it is a tossup as to which is better. But generally... armor seems too strong, and to ramp too fast, while shields seem about right, but to ramp too slowly. Personally, I think armor should start at 50Kt/10Kt and gain +5Kt per level. Armor in SEIV was a bit weak, but this stuff is beastly... at level 12, armor is still only 65k to research a new level, but already gives an incredible 170Kt in a 10Kt slot!
Also: Scattering Armor 1, 2, and 3 are worthless (probably higher levels, too, but I have not really thought much about it yet). +3% evade on a 1000Kt structure ship, for example, gives... +30Kt. Whereas you get 120Kt of armor instead of 2 normal armors, which would have given 340Kt combined. So you lose 220Kt of armor to gain 30Kt of evasion, and pay a lot more for it!
At size 20Kt, I would give Scattering Armor an absolute minimum base armor of 200, +10 per level, or it will just be strictly worse than normal armor. And even then it would only be useful when combined with very good ECM versus very bad combat sensors, at long range.
And as I mentioned in the Fighters section, Small Armor is much too good compared to ship armor, and Small Emissive Armor is pretty much useless. Having them simply be 10% as strong as the ship versions, at 20% the price, and with Small Emissive retaining the 1, 2, ... absorbtion progression, makes more sense to me.


11) Engines, Afterburners, and Solar Sails.
Engines generate a large amount of movement that is then divided by some modifier. Solar Sails and Afterburners generate movement that is NOT divided by a modifier, which is confusing. Especially considering that fighter movement seems to be multiplied by 1.5 to determine combat speed in kps, it is hard to figure out how fast things will go. I suggest that you mention in the descriptions of Afterburners and Sails that movement points will not be divided by the modifier, and also (in fighter engine descriptions) how they affect combat speed. And furthermore, there is no indication of how much supply engines, sails, and afterburners gobble... adding that to the descriptions would be very useful. Ideally, the design description window would mention the ship's combat speed and supply usage per move, but since it doesn't, it needs to be in the component descriptions.
Also, as far as engines go, it seems to me that they start out too powerful, with too much storage, and ramp up in speed too (relatively) slowly. There is little incentive to research engine technology... personally, I would start Ion Engines 1 at about 500 supply and 80 movement, with +20 supply and +5 movement per level. I realize that
Lastly, I don't know if this is possible in a mod - probably not - but it would be nice if there was some relationship between acceleration and turn rate and engines. Or at least, components that affected them, like attitude thrusters and inertial compensators. It is odd for a ship with 0 engines to have the same accel as a ship with 5 engines.
__________________
Cherry
Reply With Quote