newest beta patch?

[Taera]

Re: AS and Talisman.

I've thought about this lately and i think i know what is needed. The problem is that AS and Talisman are 100% weapons. AS has a base of almost 100% convert chance, and when mounted it is 100% at any range. Talisman is also 100% component. It eliminates the chances of players to miss.

AS must be either disallowed to be used with mounts or have the chance decreased that Large mount would not take them to about 100%, only Massive would. This way it would not be 100% sure convert. Also a smart counter to this weapon is simply destroying it, but the large tonnage means large damage resistance, which is doubled when mounted. Again, disallowing mounts to be applied on AS seems to be the answer for me.

Talisman should be given something like +200% or so bonus so it would be *almost* sure yet with the same 1% or more to miss.

[TerranC]

Originally posted by Taera:
Re: AS and Talisman.

I've thought about this lately and i think i know what is needed. The problem is that AS and Talisman are 100% weapons. AS has a base of almost 100% convert chance, and when mounted it is 100% at any range. Talisman is also 100% component. It eliminates the chances of players to miss.

AS must be either disallowed to be used with mounts or have the chance decreased that Large mount would not take them to about 100%, only Massive would. This way it would not be 100% sure convert. Also a smart counter to this weapon is simply destroying it, but the large tonnage means large damage resistance, which is doubled when mounted. Again, disallowing mounts to be applied on AS seems to be the answer for me.

Talisman should be given something like +200% or so bonus so it would be *almost* sure yet with the same 1% or more to miss.

Or, just stay out of it's range... that could work... I guess... since almost all weapons outrange it... just a suggestion... ya know...

[ October 12, 2002, 19:11: Message edited by: TerranC ]

[Captain Kwok]

Here are some ideas I think would work well and not take away from the game:

• Allegiance Subverters should be able to convert only vehicles with life support components on them.
• The Talisman should have about 90-95% chance to hit, rather than 100% or as Mephisto suggested, have the Talisman recharge every other turn or so.
  

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
That's 3000 racial points and a LOT of research. Could very well use the overwhelming numbers strategy.

Well, you can easily get 3k of racial points. Just take away some of your repair ability and ground combat. Or, for the religious, take away your aggressiveness. You will gain lots and lots of points and you really don't need this skill as you hit the enemy anyway.
Overwhelming numbers are fine but you need at least a ratio of 2:1 and that’s hard against a religious player as you get very fine system wide facilities that increase your economy. I easily out produce and outgun every empire in my PBEM game and if I'm not VERY mistaken I really could take them on all.
Further, research cost is very relative. My Empire has around 100 planets and I produce 800k research points. You name the tech, I get it in no time. Seriously, if you really want, you can have the Talisman after round about 40 turns. Even if you only have DUC or PPB, you will smash the enemy as you hit with every weapon every time. Combine this with large weapon platforms (quite cheap to research) and your are in deep trouble to attack my worlds.
I'm not whining because I loose a game against a religious player but all my enemies are at the receiving end bad times!
In fact as was stated, the "all or nothing" concept behind the talisman and the AS are what is crippling the game balance. If you would hit with the AS 50% of the time, no change would be needed.
Regarding bases: The history.txt in unclear/wrong on this. You can still take over bases, just no units.

[capnq]

People aren't being square with me on why these are needed.

People have explained why they think &ltpick a component/facility/trait&gt needs to be changed, in excruciating detail, and people who disagree have made exhaustive counterarguments.

Ultimately, the "problem" is that there are so many possibilities that there's very little consensus on either the problems or the solutions.

[ October 13, 2002, 23:04: Message edited by: capnq ]

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by Q:
I strongly ask all people with some influence on MM: ask him to make such changes only as an option or in a way that can be modded back and not in an irreversible way.

Contray to popular myth, there are no people with any special connection to Malfador. Even among the beta team members, we have all the same discussions that occur in the general forum. We throw around ideas, and have debtes that sometimes degenerate into arguments. And in the end ANYONE can email Malfador if they have a suggestion or a complaint. Nobody's emails get any more notice than anyone elses.

Geoschmo

[Master Belisarius]

I agree in part with Q.
Think MM is removing things from SE4, that some people considered "features" and others "bugs".
After 2 years, lots of people love or hate these features/bugs, and lots of mods where based on these features/bugs.
Without doubts, these changes will strongly modify the game balance (for good or for bad will depend of each one!), then, think that an optional setting should be included, instead change these things in a compulsive way.
IMHO, of course.