|
|
|
 |

March 6th, 2003, 11:05 PM
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: RI. USA
Posts: 1,470
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Slowing Down AI Expansion
|

March 7th, 2003, 12:11 AM
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: RI. USA
Posts: 1,470
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Slowing Down AI Expansion
OK, it is on my CD gold, a bLast from the past...
I remember I played the Nomads....
I am playing 3.0. I got from your from your Web. Just now...
This is a fun Mod.
|

March 7th, 2003, 01:00 PM
|
 |
Brigadier General
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Kiel, Germany
Posts: 1,896
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Slowing Down AI Expansion
|

March 7th, 2003, 01:17 PM
|
 |
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 2,592
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Slowing Down AI Expansion
Yes, indeed. As long as more massive ships need more engines to get the same speed - it is QNP. This is my defenition of QNP. Restriction on number of engines simply reflects the lack of "structure indurance" in SE. What I mean is that in real life, if you put too many engines on car/airplane/rocket, it will simply fall apart. Thus, the must be some reasonable restriction on number of engines, say 10% of hull mass. Otherwise it just becomes silly, IMHO.
__________________
It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets. - Voltaire
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|