New Fleet Cap Method Idea

posted on November 1st, 2010, 5:14 pm

This idea involves removing the physical limit on all units and making the limit on how many units you can build based on resource costs and time.  For example, with this method, you can potentially build unlimited starfleet command stations, but they will be more expensive to build, require more time, and calling in a warp-in will cost a lot of resources.  So even if a player builds say five starfleet command stations, calling in five warp-ins at once will drain that player's resources extremely quickly.  If the player has enough resources in the first place to call in all five at once.

For the Borg, the first recycling center should not be modified in terms of cost or build time, but building a second, third, fourth, etc, will be very expensive and will require more supplies to generate the same amount of Dilithium and Tritanium.  Also, the collective features would now cost a lot of resources, but you would be able to research every one of them.  Researching them all at once would deplete your resources very quickly.

So the new cap limit would be based on resource cost rather than a physical barrier.  Stations ans ships would be rare simply because players can not afford to build very many of them.  Even if they could, the cost of using more than a few would outweigh the benefit.  It would also make special stations and ships a more valuable target to defend because of the expense of building it.

[naphack]

posted on November 1st, 2010, 7:03 pm

Last edited by naphack on November 1st, 2010, 7:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

we need concrete numbers or at least relative numbers/an idea of whats going on...

I mean, I can also suggest: make some units more expensive, others less expensive and scrap the rest alltogether!
What do you hope to achieve with that suggestion, why do you suggest it, which are the problems, you try to respond to by suggesting this and why do you think, this idea is worth the time and work of implementing it?

So in other words, if im willing to invest about 5k dil and 2k tri, I can have a bunch of 5 hyper arties? woot?

posted on November 1st, 2010, 7:25 pm

Hard caps will not exist in FO ever the devs dont like them the cap in FO is supply.

posted on November 1st, 2010, 7:28 pm

Except for the special unit caps... those caps ain't too soft.

posted on November 1st, 2010, 7:28 pm

So in other words, if im willing to invest about 5k dil and 2k tri, I can have a bunch of 5 hyper arties? woot?

Bad example, hyper artilleries are not worth the effort at all.  All it does is buy you a little bit of time to retreat an already doomed fleet.

For something like the starfleet command, a cost and time increase of about 10% should do the trick, then make say an 800 dilithium/800 tritanium/20 supply cost for standard warp-in, then add about 15% of the cost for the special warp-in.  Add a 500/300/15 resource cost for upgrading to veteran or something like that so that player's won't be able to promote an entire fleet at once.

For the recycler, add about a 150% supply cost to generate the resources and increase the cost of the station by about 10%.

posted on November 2nd, 2010, 5:03 am

Except for the special unit caps... those caps ain't too soft.

Yeah i ment to mention that but i forgot.

posted on November 2nd, 2010, 6:07 am

F@ck Caps.

posted on November 2nd, 2010, 7:08 am

still don't see a reason for this lore wise, gameplay wise and by the use of logic...

[Elim]

posted on November 2nd, 2010, 10:41 am

Last edited by Elim on November 2nd, 2010, 11:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

Bad example, hyper artilleries are not worth the effort at all.  All it does is buy you a little bit of time to retreat an already doomed fleet.

HA-HA

Btw, to not only to troll here: I guess you are playing mostly very long skirmish games aginst the AI. The ideas would be nice for those games, but this kind of spamfests are pretty rare in online gaming. I don't think that the devs should put too much effort to balance 2+ hour AI games.... 

posted on November 2nd, 2010, 12:30 pm

I almost always win against AI.

---

The idea behind using resources to limit what you can build instead of a physical limit, is so that you can keep building as long as you have resources.  The special units will require more resources to build and some will require resources just to use their weapons, but the idea is, if you have enough expansions, then build and fire away.

posted on November 2nd, 2010, 1:10 pm

i dont like this idea. Games arent meant to last that long

And direct cost for warpin flies in the face of the entire idea of a distress call.

posted on November 2nd, 2010, 3:01 pm

HA-HA

Btw, to not only to troll here: I guess you are playing mostly very long skirmish games aginst the AI. The ideas would be nice for those games, but this kind of spamfests are pretty rare in online gaming. I don't think that the devs should put too much effort to balance 2+ hour AI games.... 

Yes they should, but only for max resource cost/build time AI games. Quite fun to play long matches were it takes ages to get even a basic shipyard built up, forces you to be VERY careful especially in the beginning.

posted on November 2nd, 2010, 3:55 pm

Well i dont think they should either as long as we are voting.

posted on November 2nd, 2010, 4:43 pm

Creating a game that only supports online play is one of the reasons I won't support iRacing.  But that's irrelevant right now.  Besides, I almost always win against the AI anyways.  Also irrelevant.

I don't like the physical limits.  I would rather the limits be based on resource costs.

posted on November 2nd, 2010, 5:03 pm

It's only multipler-specific until it's finished, then the campaign work begins.

I don't like the physical limits.  I would rather the limits be based on resource costs.

While the Devs prefer soft caps and special unit limits.