|
|
|
 |

July 25th, 2003, 01:32 AM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Southern CA, USA
Posts: 18,394
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
Quote:
I agree with you to a point, but I think by making smaller changes to them
|
Such as?
|

July 25th, 2003, 01:37 AM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,450
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
Quote:
Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
quote: I agree with you to a point, but I think by making smaller changes to them
|
Such as? Such as what I suggested earlier in this thread, and what others have suggested as well. Increasing the research costs somewhat. Smoothing out the giant jumps between level 1 and 2 for starters. Perhaps decreasing the range in the earlier levels and making the weapon a bit more expensive. And perhaps even a small overall decrease in power at every level. Not suggesting all of those, but any two or three would do a lot to make give the other weapons more of a shot of being decent choices in comparison.
Geoschmo
__________________
I used to be somebody but now I am somebody else
Who I'll be tomorrow is anybody's guess
|

July 25th, 2003, 01:37 AM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,451
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
From what I've seen and heard here, ISTM that most of the weapons are actually quite reasonably balanced. The ones being discussed, at least.
The adjustments to low-level PPB in particular, are minor changes I think we can agree on, have little overall effect, but are nice to have.
Perhaps a small weakening of APB would be good as well, but very small changes.
Now, what do we do with GHB, torpedoes and High Energy Discharge weapons?
Once the weapons are out of the way, we can move to concentrate on other things.
---
One interesting idea from IRC is to reduce the cost of the Quantum reactor to a trivial amount.
The idea being that we should embrace the reactor as part of SE3 and 4, and make things fairer between Humans and AIs... with less cost, the AI won't suffer as much, and the Humans will be encouraged to use it more like the AIs do on many if not all ships.
----------
Summary
Unsorted Issues
- Massive Planetary shields much too weak and expensive
- Hyper Optics too easy/cheap to get vs other options.
- One-resource bonus facilities have no advantage over All-three bonus facilities.
- Fighters & Missiles too weak / PDC to powerful
- Climate Control Facilities too weak
- Medical Lab plague prevention effect too low
- Talisman too powerful
- Quantum Reactors too powerful
- PDC, PPB too powerful
- Torpedoes, Graviton Hellbore, Incinerator, too weak.
- Ship Training too powerful
- Not enough room for Weapon Platforms
- High level Intel ops too effective
- All of the new damage types not used
- Fighter Rocket pods -> Seekers?
- Supply Storage should count as Cargo for ship restrictions.
Trivial Changes:
- Move Standard Armor to below Stealth, scattering and emissive for the benefit of AI.
- Reduce Price of Quantum reactor to benefit AI
Minor Changes:
- Move Standard Armor to below Stealth, scattering and emissive , and add SA components with tech requirements of up to 6 (either identical to SA3, or reduced cost) for the benefit of AI.
- Smoothing of low level PPB improvements as below.
Moderate Changes:
- Increase in PPB research cost as below.
- Make standard Training Facilities System-wide for the benefit of AIs. Psychic Trait Version trains 2x as fast to keep it worthwhile.
Suggestions of note:
- Phased Polaron Beam Average Adjustment
code:
Research Cost: 15k
Weapon Damage At Rng := 30 25 25 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Weapon Damage At Rng := 35 30 30 25 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Weapon Damage At Rng := 45 40 40 35 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Weapon Damage At Rng := 50 45 45 40 40 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Weapon Damage At Rng := 60 55 55 55 50 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
[ July 25, 2003, 00:41: Message edited by: Suicide Junkie ]
__________________
Things you want:
|

July 25th, 2003, 01:38 AM
|
 |
Brigadier General
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Kiel, Germany
Posts: 1,896
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
Quote:
Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
quote: I agree with you to a point, but I think by making smaller changes to them
|
Such as? Such as the ones that he already proposed.
EDIT: /me is just too slow...
[ July 25, 2003, 00:38: Message edited by: Rollo ]
|

July 25th, 2003, 01:40 AM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,450
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
How bad would it be if we just give the torps a ROF of 1? I am too tired to do the math right now, but would that make them an uber weapon or something?
Geoschmo
__________________
I used to be somebody but now I am somebody else
Who I'll be tomorrow is anybody's guess
|

July 25th, 2003, 01:46 AM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,451
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
2.5 damage per kt per turn. Yes, they would be uberweapons at that point.
They have been ROF 2 since SE3, so I'm quite sure they should stay that way.
Perhaps if the damage was brought up to 1.4 or 1.5, then they would be good for the one-shot pulse damage... 50% more damage than close range APB, but 100% longer reload time.
Adding 20 damage per torpedo would do it.
AMT 1 has only 30 damage/2 range, while Quantum V has 100 damage/6 range. All are 40kt in size, and reload of 2 turns.
__________________
Things you want:
|

July 25th, 2003, 01:49 AM
|
 |
Brigadier General
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Kiel, Germany
Posts: 1,896
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
Quote:
Originally posted by geoschmo:
How bad would it be if we just give the torps a ROF of 1? I am too tired to do the math right now, but would that make them an uber weapon or something?
Geoschmo
|
hmm, yes I think they would become too powerful then (also without doing the math)
one thing I don't like about this is that will give us 'yet another ROF 1" weapon.
Torpedoes don't need much tweaking either methinks. They are a good niche weapon and underestimated by most, I think.
The good thing about them is that they don't target units. Many people are using dedicated PD ships vs. units and seeker. Well, Torpedo ships are dedicated ship killers. None of their shots will be wasted on lesser targets. This can actually swing a battle in their favor.
Rollo
[ July 25, 2003, 00:53: Message edited by: Rollo ]
|
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
|
|
|
|
|