[dumbluck]

Originally posted by geoschmo:
Dumbluck, I think more clearly people's impressions of the patch changes (I won't even call them fixes anymore) are reflected in their feelings about whether or not there was a problem. For example you make the case the OA changes are balanced and have been asked for for a long time. By contrast you seem to imply that the AS change was some sort of unilateral plan by Malfador and infer that you haven't heard much call for this change.

I am not sure if that's what you are saying, but if it is I can tell you that is just not the case. The AS has been complained about just as often, and for just as long as the OA one. Human nature however is that we tend to minimize or forget alltogether arguments that run counter to our own established perceptions.

I think your (and others) proposed final solution does make sense however. If a ship were built with MC and crew quarters (I would prefer bridge, but I guess it doesn't really matter) then the AS should probably be able to convert it once the MC is destroyed.

Geoschmo

After re-reading my post, I can see how you read in that I thought the AS changes was "some sort of unilateral plan by Malfador and infer that you haven't heard much call for this change." I do not think that. I know that the AS issue has been around for a long time as well. I was simply stating that I think (hope) that this is just MM's first step in re-balancing the AS. Similar to the OA's 2 step fix (not accumulating regen points before hit, and all OA fixed after combat).

The way I see it, MM could do 2 things to finish the AS.
1. (my favorite) is the boolean test stated previously.
2. Make the MC and Crew Q/Life S/Bridge incompatble (ie. you can only mount one or the other) This way, a Crewed ship isn't immune from the AS.

Just my overpriced $0.02.

PS. Did anyone find out if the OA will regen after combat if all of it was destroyed in combat?

[ October 17, 2002, 10:10: Message edited by: dumbluck ]