Supply I component is too ineffective.

LGM · #1 March 19th, 2002, 07:57 PM

Two Engines (20KTs) store twice as much supply as one Supply I component (20KTs). The Supply components should be twice as effective as they are today or engines should store less than they do today. The way the standard components work today, it only makes sense to add Supply components after you have maximized the number of Engines. It would be nice to see more trade off in early ship design with longer range versus faster speed.

I know it is rather easy to modify these things, but I tend to play all my games with the standard components. I would suggest any modders that have not tweaked the supply comp/engine comps do so.

PvK · #2 March 19th, 2002, 09:09 PM

Yep. See Proportions mod, for example.

However, I think there is an abstract rationale that can be applied to make sense of the basic set. That is, engines can be thought of as _producing_ energy as they burn fuel. As such, they are a power source. Or, the engines can be seen to reduce the ship class' ability to include other components by 10kT, but in actuality they themselves are still larger than the supply storage units - it's just that increasing engines doesn't reduce the size class' potential as much. Also, there is the game balance rationale that extending operating range should be somewhat expensive. All told though, I agree with you, hence my mod.

PvK

Skulky · #3 March 22nd, 2002, 07:29 PM

Actually for all you people that are Organics minded the supply component is useful when engines are too expensive for those one turn ships. If an engine costs 160 and a supply component is cheaper (like half or less) then it is better because you can make the ship in one turn instead of two (much much better)

sorry im kind aoutof it

Suicide Junkie · #4 March 22nd, 2002, 07:36 PM

Another point:
Adding engines does NOT increase your ship's range, it just makes you burn fuel faster, and get there quicker.
No matter how many engines you add, your ships will have a maximum range of 50 squares, at which point you're outta fuel.
Solar panel and supply bays do increase your range.

That said, I quartered the size of supply bays for P&N in order to make them useful.

LGM · #5 March 22nd, 2002, 07:40 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Skulky:
Actually for all you people that are Organics minded the supply component is useful when engines are too expensive for those one turn ships. If an engine costs 160 and a supply component is cheaper (like half or less) then it is better because you can make the ship in one turn instead of two (much much better)

sorry im kind aoutof it

Are you taking about a Mod? In the standard game, Cargo I and Ion Engine I both cost 200 Metal and both store 500 units of supply? However, Ion Engine takes 10KT of space and Cargo I takes 20KT.

LGM · #6 March 22nd, 2002, 07:50 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Suicide Junkie:
Another point:
Adding engines does NOT increase your ship's range, it just makes you burn fuel faster, and get there quicker.
No matter how many engines you add, your ships will have a maximum range of 50 squares, at which point you're outta fuel.
Solar panel and supply bays do increase your range.

That said, I quartered the size of supply bays for P&N in order to make them useful.

True, but speed is usually of the essense, especially in the early land rush stage of the game. The difference in range between a colonizer with one Supply Bay and 5 Engines and one with 2 Supply Bays and 3 Engines is something like 60 squares versus 83 squares. The different in range just is not worth it. 60% speed for 140% range.

Quartering the size of Supply Bays in the Mod seems like a good pricing point. Then the issue is pay more for the ship with the two Supply Bays or leave them off. Did you leave the metal cost alone?

[ 22 March 2002: Message edited by: LGM ]

PvK · #7 March 22nd, 2002, 07:58 PM

quote:
Originally posted by LGM:
Are you taking about a Mod? In the standard game, Cargo I and Ion Engine I both cost 200 Metal and both store 500 units of supply? However, Ion Engine takes 10KT of space and Cargo I takes 20KT.

I think he's talking about higher tech in the standard game. Ion Engines are cheap compared to higher tech engines, which are more expensive than supply components.

PvK

Suicide Junkie · #8 March 22nd, 2002, 08:02 PM

P&N does leave the price at $200. However, engines cost much more rads than minerals, so the two components can coexist without creating horrible build times.

LGM · #9 March 22nd, 2002, 08:09 PM

quote:
Originally posted by PvK:

I think he's talking about higher tech in the standard game. Ion Engines are cheap compared to higher tech engines, which are more expensive than supply components.

PvK

In a Higher Tech game, I can see that they would be cheaper than the advanced engines. I seldom start with elevated starting tech. I myself seldom use anthing better than Ion III unless I am maxing out engines and what to exceed the speed I can get with Ion III. Given higher tech, I would be using a Solar Sail instead of a Supply Bay. With Max Tech, a Quantum Reactor is the way to go, but they are pricy early in the game at 1000 KT of Metal to manufactor, but they take a mere 20KT of Tonnage.

PvK · #10 March 22nd, 2002, 11:23 PM

Yes, well I entirely agree with you. Notice too that supply components are also more expensive by size than most weapons and equipment! Build a supply tanker design, and it will cost more than most maxed-out warships! This only makes sense if you buy into some rationalizations and balance arguments, which are ok, but for those of us who think "an empty fuel tank" should be cheap, there are mods!

See Proportions for a mod that makes supply components cheap and useful.

PvK