oooo aaron! - looks like moo3 is flopping... ;) do se5 faster?

[deccan]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
No, combat should definitely not be increased to 120 rounds... that completely defeats the entire point of slowing it down...

Sorry, IF, but I don't quite agree here. My idea is that ships should be able to take more pounding, so that a ship shouldn't be easily crippled or destroyed in a single attack pass by another equivalent tech / size ship the minute combat starts. I would then agree to increasing combat turns to prevent stalemates.

I do suppose that in terms of overall gameplay the effects would be similar. After all, if a ship is going to die at the end of combat anyway, then it's faster to have it die over 2 rounds instead of spreading the death over 10 rounds.

But for role-playing purposes, it really sucks for me to see ships go down like flies. At least then I can tell myself that the ship gave as good as it got, fought to the Last man, went down in a blaze of glory and so forth. But I do see that this applies primarily to tactical combat instead of strategic combat.

Also, I remember that big ships in MOO2 were bigger than big ships in stock SEIV. Ships in MOO2 could carry a LOT of weapons and lots of cool doohickeys.

[ August 10, 2003, 11:40: Message edited by: deccan ]

[oleg]

Originally posted by Ack:
..I remember playing MOO1 years ago and the game was based on fighting for a few planets. No warp points or sprawling galaxies with dozens of systems and hundres of planets. When you gained or lost a planet, it was a significant event. That is what I find most lacking about SE4. If I lose a planet, so what I have 50 more. The same with ships.

...

You may try Proportions or AIC mods. There, every colony is a significant investment and losing a single well developed planet is a tragedy worth writing a game story on this forum