I Did It.

[Fyron]

Originally posted by Atrocities:

quote:

---

Intel should not do things like destroying planets...

In a day an age where a race has the ability to destroy stars and planets, why should it not then have the ability to use covert action to destroy an enemies world. A weapon of ultimate mass destruction. This is where you will seriously want some counter intel to prevent it from happening to one of your worlds.

---

I was posting from a balance perspective. Being able to use intel to destroy planets whole-sale will create a much worse situation than the ummodded SE4 intel system.

[Atrocities]

I know what you were posting, I was just being demigodic about it.

I agree, that it would be a balance issue, but no more than any other catostophic event.

Make the cost of the project very expensive, and the requirements the same. If you set up a game that does not allow stellar manipulation, then the project would not work. IE its availablity is directly tighed into stellar manipulation.

No stellar Manipulation, no Doomsday Intel Project.

[Fyron]

You can not in any way shape or form compare events to intel projects. Intel projects from a single empire can destroy up to 12 planets in a single turn (though more likely 11 or fewer, as the attacker will need at least 1 CI), and then 12 planets in each subsequent turn, turn after turn. Events could never do that. I think there is a limit of 1 event per turn.

Also, more expensive means harder to defend against as well. So, those planet busters become even more of a problem if you make them really expensive.

[spoon]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Intel projects from a single empire can destroy up to 12 planets in a single turn

Like he said, though, it can be balanced through cost. If it takes, say, 5,000,000 pts to blow up a planet, you aren't likely to see 11 of these in a single turn.

Also, more expensive means harder to defend against as well. So, those planet busters become even more of a problem if you make them really expensive.

This is technically true, but is also a misleading statement. Generally, you won't see the projects become "harder to defend against" except in a few circumstances since, generally, you put the projects you want to succeed late in the queue, and will have either sapped all the CI points by the time they are attempted, or all your projects will fail anyway.

[Fyron]

5,000,000 is rather excessive, and guarantees that the project will succeed when you finish it.

I was talking about a 100k project compared to a 50k project (for example), so the price difference does indeed directly translate to harder to defend against there. Also, I never said se4's intel system was any good (in fact, it is about as bad as an intel system can be).

[spoon]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
5,000,000 is rather excessive, and guarantees that the project will succeed when you finish it.

5,000,000 isn't as much as it seems - it's not uncommon to have 500k intel points available, so a 5M project would only take 10 turns... Also, can't you mod the size of the CI projects to cost more that 5,000,000? What is the max value you can set those things to, anyway?

[spoon]

I was talking about a 100k project compared to a 50k project (for example), so the price difference does indeed directly translate to harder to defend against there.

Not really, though. With the example you give above, you could just do the 50k project twice -- and there is little difference between defending against two 50k projects and one 100k project.