Menu Content/Inhalt
Home arrow Forum arrow Fleet Operationsarrow Feature Requestarrow New Resource Model And Weapon Systems?

December 03, 2008, 12:20:45 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Overview   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Send this topic  |  Print  
Author Topic: New Resource Model And Weapon Systems?  (Read 429 times)
coolhandab

Offline Offline

Posts: 528



WWW
« on: August 24, 2004, 09:11:17 PM »

Hi guys. I'm new to Fleet Ops, I've played Armada II for a while and love the ST Universe. I'm also an engineering student, so some thoughts came to mind when I analyzed the cost/performance of the Fleet Ops Beta 2 ships, tell me what you think:

The two resource system, dilithium and tritanium, seems to be supported by the canon, but in reverse. What I mean is Tritanium is needed for bigger ships, and Dilithium is needed for bigger engineering plants and weapon structures. For the purpose of this thread I'll leave them the way they are in FleetOps, tritanium for weapons and dilithium for bigger ships (generally).

Which brings us to the question of weapon power versus ship size (and therefore dilithium cost). I've noticed that the build time for ships is often neglected in the discussions of balance in the forums here, but long build times for cheap, powerful ships is not only realistic but could add a new dimension to the balance equation. Basically, remove the infrastructure requirements for the Defiant but make the build time 2 minutes for example. The high tritanium cost accounts for the massive weaponry.

To summarize bigger ships cost more dilithium but mount superior shields, while small ships may have massive weaponry if the tritanium costs are high. If build time is linked to tritanium cost, it would be acceptable to build "realistic fleets" which in the canon in my opinion were mostly cruiser (Akira or Griffen or Vorcha) and battlecruiser (Defiant, something like a Norexan with half the sheilds and hull) with very few capital ships which according to one source could cost as much as 10 times an Akira in "dilithium."

Thoughts?
Logged

"Centurion, ready plasma torpedos. We shall show these meddling humans how the Star Empire conducts negotiations."
--nemo me impune lacessit
PREATOR DEFIANT

Offline Offline

Posts: 4518



WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 24, 2004, 09:24:12 PM »

An interesting concept but seems like since we are all adjusted to the current fleet ops economic system, we should just leave it. Do like the idea of switching tritanium and dilithium tho.
Logged

*^*
coolhandab

Offline Offline

Posts: 528



WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2004, 09:33:55 PM »

Yeah I realize it would be a major modification, but I'm trying to figure out a way to make the fleets look a little more realistic ... it seems like most fleets are all battleship with support fleets of destroyers, and nothing in the middle. Seems kind of goofy. I really like the rationale behind the defiant: very expensive in dilithium (in canon) but low crew, very powerful, and although long to build many can build simultaneously in war production yards. No one would waste the resources in peace when they could build 3 or 4 cruisers with science staffs and exploration teams and whatnot, but at war cheap, fairly expendable and very powerful ships would be extremely important, along with fleet flagships like Galaxys or Sovereigns. It seems like this would be extensible to other races too, especially Roms with their limited crew pool in wartime and massive resource bases.
Logged

"Centurion, ready plasma torpedos. We shall show these meddling humans how the Star Empire conducts negotiations."
--nemo me impune lacessit
DOCa Cola
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2603



« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2004, 10:02:01 PM »

i think the idea is good and we will consider it before we work on resources and vessel cost next time. we have met something very similar with resource management for upcoming version 3.0 with which we have tended more to 'realism' again. so what i can tell is that resource system is quite different in 3.0 to 2.0 and as i like your idea it may inspire us even more (after we know v3 res managent is liked by players or not) what we do for 4.0.

DOCa Cola
« Last Edit: August 24, 2004, 10:02:39 PM by DOCa Cola » Logged

-=B!G=-The Black Baron

Offline Offline

Posts: 3062



« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2004, 11:05:55 PM »

Yeah I like the idea too cool  
Logged

*^*
"My power is discombobulatingly devastating I could feel his muscle tissues collapse under my force. It's ludicrous these mortals even attempt to enter my realm."~Mike Tyson

R.I.P. Legend Sad

NCC1701Z

Offline Offline

Posts: 428



WWW
« Reply #5 on: August 25, 2004, 06:05:28 PM »

Love the idea..
Logged

"No matter where you go, there you are..." -USS Excelsior NCC-2000 motto.
TanEdos
FO daddy!

Offline Offline

Posts: 162


Where's the n00b?


WWW
« Reply #6 on: August 25, 2004, 08:09:11 PM »

Sound like a fundimental bases for an overhaul on how resources are managed. Kool!
Logged

Conservative?? Don't you mean selfish? You poured enough water for you and your friend but not the rest of us and you call it conserving water? We're in the middle of the desert you prick!
Sound familiar? Vote NO for republicans. Only you can prevent retarded, inbred, selfish rich people. Nuke DC.
Saijen
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 113



« Reply #7 on: August 26, 2004, 03:50:18 PM »

The more realistic and canon this gets, the better.  I'm not really all that fond of the fast build times and smaller ships being stronger than some of the bigger ones, because that's not really realistic.  But I'm not saying that ships like the Defiant are weaklings mind you.   cheesy

Anyhoo, like the idea.  Might actually let me stand a chance, cuz when it comes down to speed in builing my units and gathering resources, I totally suck.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2004, 03:51:17 PM by BlackFalcon » Logged
Pages: [1]
  Send this topic  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  

© 2003-2008 DOCa Cola. All rights reserved.
Star Trek and related marks are trademarks of Paramount Pictures.
Powered by Joomla
Powered by SMF 1.1.6 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC
Joomla Bridge by JoomlaHacks.com