Put a resource limit on tri and dilith moons <--game will be

posted on May 27th, 2011, 7:29 pm

Hi all, whats your thoughts about each dilith and tri moon has a resource limit? For example each has 10,000 or whatever. Once its used up you have to expand. This would prevent people from turtling.

Many strategy games like Age of Empires, Starcraft 2 have things like this. What do you all think???

posted on May 27th, 2011, 7:36 pm

IIRC, In vanilla A1&A2 it was that way.

posted on May 27th, 2011, 7:38 pm

Yes, the devs said they didn't like it though.

posted on May 27th, 2011, 7:41 pm

I dont like it either.

posted on May 27th, 2011, 8:33 pm

yea it sucks when people turtle but having a resource limit really hurts the late game

posted on May 27th, 2011, 9:01 pm

As stated this was used in stock Armada 1 and 2.  For fleet operations in its current state, this is not a viable option, as the maps are built for unlimited moons.  However, i think with some adjustments this could at least be implemented, and with experimentation and testing, maps could be designed that successfully used limited resources.  This could provide a good alternative to the current unlimited resource maps.

posted on May 27th, 2011, 9:39 pm

Don't forget the Infinte moons that existed back then. At least 1 per player (probably the main base) would ensure at least some permenant income.

posted on May 27th, 2011, 10:37 pm

I think maps could easily be made for moons with limited resources and I think it would make the game even more strategic. I mean you could copy a map like Lost Temple from Starcraft 2 in which there is a expansion close by but if you fast expo, you have to be very good on your micro to fend off an opponent that doesn't fast expo.

I love fleet ops and think this would be great for it!

posted on May 28th, 2011, 1:33 am

Another option if dooable would be to treat them like old Starcraft vespine gas sites; when exhausted they only provide 10-20% payout.

posted on May 28th, 2011, 1:37 am

Since A2 Planets did the same, FO should be capable of it.

posted on May 28th, 2011, 1:59 am

i think moons should regenerate resources over time

posted on May 28th, 2011, 2:19 am

Guys its hard to make a game like flops into sc2 they are very different

[Anonymous]

posted on May 28th, 2011, 2:25 am

Last edited by Anonymous on May 28th, 2011, 2:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

Sadly, this would actually entice more turtling.   Consider this:  There are 5 moon pairs on a map.  Player A rushes to get 3 moons.  He builds yards at each of them so that his smaller, but better protected fleet can hold off a larger force by simply cycling his ships into the yard.  Player B with two moons will now spend resources banging his head against the turtle that Player A has created.  Player A waits until all resources have been depleted.  The investment cost of the yards and maybe a turret or two will be small compared to the gain in resources by turtling up.  Once all the resources are gone, Player B has no way to come back.  Even if Player B harasses mining, the finite resources are still there, and can eventually be claimed by Player A.   Even if you were to still suggest a vast increase in moon pairs, the player who turtles the most with shipyards and a few turrets will still win.

Now, take FO as it stands with infinite moons.  Player A still has 3 moon pairs, but Player B can harass mining and make real gains!  This is because Player B's moons are infinite as well.  Which means every minute Player A is not taking full advantage of his 3 moons, Player B is catching up in the resource race.  Before, Player A could always just send miners back up and claim those finite resources.  But as it stands now with infinite moons, any resources you are not mining are lost to time.  Time, not resource amount of the moons you hold, becomes the determining factor as to how many resources are collected.  I know this isn't the easiest concept to understand if you're not familiar, but it is vital aspect of Fleet Operation's core game mechanics that is invisible to most people.  It ties together with how shipyards repair ships so quickly, how miners are weak and slow moving (unlike the fast gatherers in SC2), and defenses are relatively cheap.

This makes FO different from games like SC2, where resources are finite.  But remember, defenses in SC2 are REALLY expensive, and generally more easy to overcome, due to the implementation of the hard counter system they employ.  FO has very few hard counters.  To get over this, the devs have made sure that each race has a turtle buster at the top of the tech tree:  Teutoberg, Dominion HSA, Klingon Bortas, Romulan Serkas/Tavara, and Tac cube with nanites.

And blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.... yeah, yeah, I know.  "Shut up, Mal!  Stop making sense!"

Edit:  I would also like to point out that I am not against having special moons that are finite, but mine at a faster rate or whatever, but making them the staple of game play wouldn't work very well for the reasons mentioned above.

posted on May 28th, 2011, 5:12 am

I personally think that this should be an option via the game set-up menu, majority voted or something. This way players can choose what they want.

But I personally think this wouldn't work well in online games, but against the AI or in a single player campaign for mods and eventually FO it would be a great move. As it will force the player to not waste resources and to continually progress, scouting and capturing new moons.

posted on May 28th, 2011, 1:21 pm

aye, i could think of some special candy on maps that is finite, but the actual moons - as mal explained quite well - will stay infinite, because Fleet Operations uses a different way of gameplay compared to similar titles with finite resources. And we dont have any intentions to change that