New Patch Info Thread

dmm · #1 February 20th, 2001, 10:03 PM

quote:
Originally posted by raynor:
Could you perhaps explain yourself a little better?

In the threads discussing colonization of planetary types, people were complaining that it was unrealistic to think that rock dwellers could ever colonize ice or gas, that gas dwellers could ever colonize rock or ice, or that ice dwellers could ever colonize rock or gas. But the argument was not empire-based, it was species-based. So if an empire of rock dwellers captures a gas planet full of gas dwellers from another empire, there is no logical reason why those gas dwellers can't be used to colonize other gas planets (provided the empire has the Gas Colonization tech).

My point is this:
An option implementing the species-based restriction was asked for but what is (apparently) being given instead is an empire-based restriction. Many people were hoping for the former. The latter is not as useful and is totally arbitrary -- there's no logical basis for it.

The same arguments can be made regarding the new option to restrict colonization to homeworld atmospheres.

If the idea was simply to reduce the number of colonies to manage, then you've already pointed out the obvious (and logically consistent) solution -- reduce the average number of planets per system. Or just play in an ancient galaxy.

raynor · #2 February 20th, 2001, 10:07 PM

Thanks!

I completely forgot about conquering a species whose home planet type is different from yours.

Nitram Draw · #3 February 20th, 2001, 11:25 PM

I love the idea of only being able to colonize one type of planet.
This could go a long way toward creating some valuable systems.

Talenn · #4 February 20th, 2001, 11:53 PM

On the subject of changing prototypes etc...

I, for one, would like to see some sort of added cost for the first ship in a class. Maybe a 'design fee' or 'prototype penalty' or somesuch. Not a huge cost, but something to encourage (and reward) a bit of preplanning and forethought. It would also help reduce some tedium as it wouldnt always be the optimum to redesign all of your ship as soon as you get one new component the way it is now.

It might make some financial sense to keep a class in production until a few changes are in order instead of for each new gadget. In fact, the cost wouldnt even have to be a resources cost (although that is certainly not a bad option) but perhaps a time cost...ie prototypes take 50% more time to construct or somesuch.

As far as a resource cost? Maybe 15-20%? I'm not sure if that would be enough to encourage some standardization or not. Perhapss a combo of the two?

Anyways, bottom line is that IMO, it should not always be in a player's best interest to constantly redesign their ships. It should go in cycles and not incessantly. This would definately reduce micromanagement and would prolly be adding some 'realism' to game as the same time.

Anyone else?

Thanx,
Talenn

SunDevil · #5 February 21st, 2001, 12:04 AM

Talenn,

You would then have to make the ai not upgrade and update their design every chance that they get. As it stands right now, the ai tries every turn to update and retrofit their ships.

But I like your idea.

Sinapus · #6 February 21st, 2001, 12:14 AM

quote:
Originally posted by SunDevil:
Talenn,

You would then have to make the ai not upgrade and update their design every chance that they get. As it stands right now, the ai tries every turn to update and retrofit their ships.

But I like your idea.

Actually, one of the things I find irksome is that the AI doesn't jettison and rebuild new weapon platforms and satellites, so if you hit their earlier systems, all they have are a bunch of obsolete platforms and satellites.

Well, maybe they can keep the satellites, since they can still do a little damage, but I think that the AI should jettison the old WPs every so often and build new ones if there are no enemy units detected in that system or maybe one system away. Since those ones with large-mount DUC I's aren't as nasty as the High-Energy Discharge or other heavy weapons. Especially if you use the mod that increases range on mounts used for weapon platforms.

------------------
--
"What do -you- want?" "I'd like to live -just- long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some favors come with too high a price. I would look up into your lifeless eyes and wave like this..." *waggle* "...can you and your associates arrange that for me, Mr. Morden?"

[This message has been edited by Sinapus (edited 20 February 2001).]

klausD · #7 February 21st, 2001, 12:39 AM

I for my part do like the new colonization possibility. There are IMO several advantages for it.

1. If you play a rock race for example the competition among other rock races is much greater, because of lack of availabie planets. This differentiates the races a lot more and makes their origin interesting.

2. Remote mining becomes more important

3. Troop invasion is a lot more interesting, because you need every planet with population, especially if this planet has another type than yours. In this case, the beloved genocide from outer space tactics which several people prefers is not very profiable, because you cannot resettle the planet.

bye
Klaus

Important:
It should be possible to erect several special buildings at a planet which have no colony on it. For example: Cargo facilities, scanning stations or whatever. there should be a line included with the buildings editor which allows the modder to decide if a building needs a colony or not. In the latter, just landing a troop or having a ship in the orbit should be enough to buy such a building.