Proportions....

[dogscoff]

are we doing proportions wish lists? OK, here's mine for the next Version:

-Hive cities/ hive cultural centres/ hive components, as previously suggested.

-Planet,SW & RW creation techs should require tech level 7,8 & 9 respectively in planet utilisation. Just to make those technologies even more of an overpriced ego trip=-)

-The larger cities (metropolis and above) should require research in psychology - that tech area is currently only good for the urban pacification centre. It makes sense to flesh it out a little, and urban planning does require understanding of psychology.

-More city/ settlement types! How about a college/ universtity/campus facility family? They could have high research output, some intel and maybe a little resource production. They could also have a (very limited) ship/ fleet training ability and perhaps some effects on population growth/ happiness. The first level would be immediately available but subsequent facilities would require the Research & urban development tech trees.

-Convert the religious shrines into families of city-like facilities: for example the fate shrine would be a bit like a colonial community or minor city but with the fate shrine ability attached to it, representing a whole religious community. Then you could upgrade it to a fate temple, fate monastary (or something), and the same for the other shrines.

[ January 26, 2003, 22:34: Message edited by: dogscoff ]

[PvK]

PTF, LOL, thanks for testing that.

leo1434, thanks! If you like (you or anyone), email me your suggested components or other changes, and I will consider adding something like them.

For fighters, I think I will add some more "stuff" (missiles, PD, etc) eventually when time allows, however the main change I would make for the next major Version would be for them to start out like crummy SE3 fighters - slow, weak, easy to kill, and unable to move out of the sector they are launched in. The other abilities would still be available, but would require specific research to get fast, hard-to-hit, powerful, able-to-zoom-around-a-system-for-months Versions. The engines would be the source of most of the combat bonuses, and would probably come in different sizes as well, so fast fighters would be the hard ones to hit. They would all take even less damage to kill than currently, and anti-fighter weapons would do less damage, while fighter-against-ship weapons would mostly be too inaccurate to hit other fighters. (i.e., like it is now, but more extreme, and requiring much more specific research).

dogscoff, your suggestions are mostly in line with my Foundations mod design, and some can appear in 3.0, though not in 2.5.x because folks like Fryon don't want the tech tree to change.

This weekend I more or less finished 2.5.3, although I am tempted to add an anonymous ship tech area (builds ships using the generic shipset, so enemies can't easily tell the origin of gifted ships) and maybe some fun eccentric nonsense like World Ships (oh, and maybe some other evil cloaking components) before release, and I haven't really tested it much. Also I haven't done 2.5.2, which will be 2.5.3 minus the fixes to remote mining, so existing games using lots of remote mining won't be unbalanced.

So, 2.5.3 is a stab at a Last Version to be compatible with existing games, and then 3.0 would (when I get time) come stomp on the nonsense that is creeping in from trying to keep things compatible, and do some larger revisions and changes.

Here's the preview feature list:

Version 2.5.3:

--------------------------
Remote Mining Adjustments:
--------------------------
* Added restriction on remote miner components per unit to two, halved
structure, and doubled size of ship/base Versions. This prevents
massively productive mining bases, which were possible before but
were unintentionally overproductive. It also presents interesting
choices between ship, base and satellite miner designs. Pre-existing
bases in upgraded games will retain their former abilities (except
structure).

Version 2.5.2:

-------------------------------------------------------------
Changes for smoother upgrades for existing games using 2.4.2:
-------------------------------------------------------------
* The Fighter Carriers tech added in 2.5 now costs more, is expanded in
both directions to five levels (using the Tiny and Massive carrier images
from the SE4 Image Neo-Standard) and provides improved classes compared
to the standard carriers. Existing carriers have their costs and to-hit
penalties somewhat increased. The five new carrier classes are Escort
Carrier, Advanced Light Carrier, Advanced Carrier, Advanced Heavy Carrier,
and Super-Heavy Carrier.
* Pre-existing special armors downgraded to compensate for their
ability compared to the new armors that require specialized research, and
to compensate for changes to Emissive Armor from Gold patch Version 1.78.
Unlike 2.5 & 2.5.1, they can now continue to be deployed, and may be good
choices for large ships (since they don't use Scale mounts and so will be
smaller on large ships).
---------
Gameplay:
---------
* Added six levels to the new Stealth Armor tech area, allowing eventual
(expensive) blocking of all Active and Passive EM scans.
------
Fixes:
------
* Fixed crippling Sergetti design bug - thanks to Oleg again!
---------
Cosmetic:
---------
* Changed the Large Starliner to use the "Barge" image from the SE4 Image
Neo-Standard, if it is provided.
* Fixed minor typo in to-hit description of some ships (said "base").

PvK

[PsychoTechFreak]

Starliners, I mostly do not use them unless I have not researched medium transports because of maintenance costs, to be hit chances and speed. Maybe I am missing something about them, but do they need to be balanced? Similar thoughts about starliner modules compared with the respective cargo components.

Fighters, I am still thinking about some smaller Versions, maybe 5kT or 10kT drone-like types. Anyone reading P.F.Hamiltons Armageddon series? I like the idea of combat wasps.

Facility upgrade button in production queue is a problem. I know, we should be careful about it, savegame before.Is it possible to do some fine tuning about the facility families? E.g. I would like to strictly build Distribution Centers or just a space port at some planets, but with the use of the upgrade button it changes often to something else during building, like spaceport+resupply or such. Maybe you could put all of the really different things into different families?

Just some thoughts to one of my favorite mods,
PTF

[PvK]

Small Starliners are just there to provide the ability to move population without researching up to Med Transport. Since Med Transport is fairly quick to get, this may make them too inefficient to be a worthwhile choice, with no way to retrofit them into something efficient. In a way this makes sense, but it would be more interesting if they could be retrofit into something more efficient, although I haven't found an easy way to do so when I thought about it before. There's probably something, though.

What are you thinking about Starliner Modules? They are intended to allow the maximum population capacity per ship, as was requested by players. They're especially good in those situations where you need to get the maximum number of people off a planet in a relatively short time. They're supposed to be attractive choices for population transports, and unattractive for other transport types.

As for the auto-upgrade button, I think it's a hopeless cause, because of how inflexible upgrades are in SE4. I've chosen to use them to make it possible to do some logical transformation of facilities, as requested by some players, for expensive facilities, allowing planetary development without so much scrapping. Because there are some interesting choices involved, it will almost never make sense to issue empire-wide "upgrade facilities" orders. Even in unmodded SE4, I almost always find that button to be more of a booby trap than a help. As for morphing projects in progress, I've only ever seen that when somehow the ministers seize control of the empire, through deliberate or forgetful player minister settings. I don't think the "Upgrade All Facilities" button will do that - will it?

PvK

[steveh11]

Originally posted by PvK:

As for the auto-upgrade button, I think it's a hopeless cause, because of how inflexible upgrades are in SE4. I've chosen to use them to make it possible to do some logical transformation of facilities, as requested by some players, for expensive facilities, allowing planetary development without so much scrapping. Because there are some interesting choices involved, it will almost never make sense to issue empire-wide "upgrade facilities" orders. Even in unmodded SE4, I almost always find that button to be more of a booby trap than a help.
PvK

Well, YMMV (and it obviously does) but I always used to use the empire-wide "upgrade facilities" button in vanilla SE4, and miss it's use in Proportions. Not enough to stop playing Proportions mind, but I do wonder why you can't upgrade smoothly from one type of facility to the next.

Steve.

[Suicide Junkie]

Not enough to stop playing Proportions mind, but I do wonder why you can't upgrade smoothly from one type of facility to the next.

Because you're only allowed to upgrade to the Last Version of the facility you've researched.
His point is that you will not always want to do that in proportions, and it may even be a bad move.

[steveh11]

Originally posted by Suicide Junkie:

quote:

---

Not enough to stop playing Proportions mind, but I do wonder why you can't upgrade smoothly from one type of facility to the next.

Because you're only allowed to upgrade to the Last Version of the facility you've researched.
His point is that you will not always want to do that in proportions, and it may even be a bad move.

---

Why shouldn't I be able to promote my Research Centres, eventually, into Research Megaplexes? Instead I have to knock down the Centres, build Complexes, promote those, then knockthem down to build Megaplexes. It's this kind of thing that feels counter-intuitive, and it's the one big thing in Proportions that I don't like.

Steve