|
|
|
|
January 26th, 2001, 10:31 PM
|
Private
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Butler, Pa
Posts: 36
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Ship size vs. weapons
Wouldn't be nice to have different levels of improvement for each ship size.
Let me explain, you research from escort I to dreadnought I ,then go to the next ship level escort II to dreadnought II , and so forth.
Each level of ship development will improve the ship's basic structure allowing the ship to carry heavier armour, improved weapons, improved sensors, shields, etc.
This way there will not always be a tendency that bigger is better. The reasearch of the components and ships go hand in hand in most cases. You never see later in the game a new race come along suprise you with their technology and blow your dreadnought off the map with a much smaller ship.
|
January 26th, 2001, 10:43 PM
|
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Randallstown, Maryland, USA
Posts: 779
Thanks: 8
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Ship size vs. weapons
I like that idea!
Wouldn't it be a shock to see your BC destroyed by a frigate
|
January 26th, 2001, 10:51 PM
|
|
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: california
Posts: 2,961
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Ship size vs. weapons
i like that alot. what would probably be more effective and achieve the same thing though, is if we could research different types of mounts, instead of having all available. that way you could have an escort mount that would reduce mass of components by 25% or something. which would be rather slick with that 50% defensive bonus. im not sure you can have mounts be technology dependant though.
however, with entire new hull sizes you could do something like, allow more engines on a hull. maybe you could make a super basehip hull, tripple the number of engines and double the engines required per move. it could go ***3*** spaces, not including bonus move points.
__________________
...the green, sticky spawn of the stars
(with apologies to H.P.L.)
|
January 26th, 2001, 11:23 PM
|
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Randallstown, Maryland, USA
Posts: 779
Thanks: 8
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Ship size vs. weapons
Another great idea puke.
You may go for developing a big level 4 ship with level 1 weapons and I may go for the opposite. Think of the combinations. You would really have to adapt your strategy and tactics throughout the game!
I also like the idea of more prerequisite technologies being needed for some of the more powerful weapons/ships. Give me a reason to research Menson BLasters!
|
January 27th, 2001, 12:01 AM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 93
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Ship size vs. weapons
I love that idea man!! Email that to Aaron, he can probably figure out the best balance for improved hull types.
|
January 27th, 2001, 01:24 AM
|
Private
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: boiling springs, PA
Posts: 11
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Ship size vs. weapons
Concur .. like idea, was attempting similar approach but went via materials/construction route, i.e discovered new materials that allowed you to build new Versions of the ships with better specs. only thing didn't finish was AI usage mod'ng and new weapons wanted to bring in. ofcourse had to add in the large classes also, deathstar, assault wedge, battle stars, and planetoid sized ships and bases. did all this cause i hated running out of things to research. still haven't got it all working right (nor all the graphics done either) though in terms of play balance, weeks away from that if work allows. just a way to fill the void with more garbage ..
jsnider
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|