Things you wish they kept from SE3

JDL · #1 January 16th, 2001, 08:48 PM

OK back from lunch,

I just went through the begining of a SE3 game and I realized, various things slow the pace of expansion in the beggining of the game.

-the fact that there were SIX different researchable colony types greatly reduced the # of planets you could access in the begining, yet made for more bloodthirstyness when youfinally did research a particular type.
-Basic indutry and research facilities took .5 years to build EACH.

Also

Partly built ships showed up in combat minus their incomplete components. (No Captain Kirk, the Enterprise B doesn't have a tractor beam, It'll be installed Tuesday)

you STARTED with beam and pulse weapons, which gave you a choice of weapon that you could gradually reasearch instead of the (ok now that i researched phys 1, phys 2 is right around the corner so ill just research that and be done with it.) The research setup should force you to stay in beam/pulse mode for a long time rather than rewarding the missiles, missiles, missiles >>> PHASED POLERON CRUISER syndrome. The beam/pulse weapons are the HEART of any scifi genre.

OK, here's one that should have stayed in SE ((4)) 1.0 let alone se3. There is NO incentive to get armor early in the game since they made chemistry cost the same as physics. armor is a fundamental, primative protectant, that should be early in the game, not just later when you are like (ok, well, I don't really NEED armor on my 1200 shield point dreadnought, but I could use the ECM value of the stealth and scattering armor, so ill just research the whole armor tree in 10 turns now that I have 10 giant planets and research 3).

More as I think.

JDL

JDL · #2 January 16th, 2001, 08:58 PM

Oh 2 more

1 - the reason why half completed ships appeared in battle is that on the 1st turn the basic shipframe was laid down. Then the components were 'repaired', this used up valuable 'components repaired per turn' resources of the construction facility. I think this made sense.

2 - They were constructed according to the very cool Repair Priorities

JDL

jfitz261 · #3 January 16th, 2001, 09:36 PM

2 - They were constructed according to the very cool Repair Priorities

Has anybody noticed that the changing repair priorities does not work. When you click on shield on the right hand side they disappear and don't come back. I'm using patch 1.19.

John

Mephisto · #4 January 16th, 2001, 11:34 PM

I don't know if this is abug. Are you sure you have shields researched already? I think only researched techs can be brought back but I'm absolutly not sure about this.

JDL · #5 January 17th, 2001, 03:36 AM

OK, I found my SE3 codes...

Found some more things

Hidden Galaxies - where you couldn't see where any of the systems were located, just where you had explored. How this worked with galaxies with not all warp points connected i don't know

Ship sizes

normal = 100% of normal kt limit per class
enlarged = 120%
Massive = 150%

Starting planets.

You could start each descrete race with a different # of starting planets, and start the random races with yet another # of starting planets

WHY did they get RID of these AWSOME options

Sinapus · #6 January 17th, 2001, 04:25 AM

quote:
Originally posted by jfitz261:
2 - They were constructed according to the very cool Repair Priorities

Has anybody noticed that the changing repair priorities does not work. When you click on shield on the right hand side they disappear and don't come back. I'm using patch 1.19.

John

I think you have to have the tech available for it to show up.

Which does remind me of something I liked from SE3: it was so much easier to set repair priorities. Just highlight and click, IIRC.

(I tend to make 'Construction' priority one in SE4 and did so in SE3 as well. In SE4, it speeds up any mass refits I make by bringing more space yards and repair bays Online. In SE3 it brought more space yards Online to build/repair ships and units.

------------------
--
"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?"

E. Albright · #7 January 18th, 2001, 07:04 PM

quote:
Originally posted by JDL:
The beam/pulse weapons are the HEART of any scifi genre.

Erm, I must beg to differ. Certainly they're the heart of MANY scifi settings, but by no means all. To wit: Joe Haldman's (sp?) classic The Forever War, Dan Simmon's Hyperion works, and the Honor Hartigan (sp?) series (at least, that's what I gather... I never managed to stomach more than 50 pages or so of it myself). I'm sure there are plenty of others, but these were what sprang to mind.

Frankly, it depends on your view of engagement ranges and ship speeds. If we take the engagement ranges to be the paltry things they appear to be, and the speeds to be as minute as the lack of concern about acceleration and turning implys them to be, your argument in favor of beams has some validity. However, if we assume longer ranges and/or closer to reletivistic speeds, beams become far less practical, as they can't correct their aim...