Yea, 3.0.5

posted on March 11th, 2009, 5:24 pm

Adam, with credits, in some circumstances the game would have been imbalanced. For example, without credits some races would not be able to build some ships or buildings, but borg couldn't research and much of the borg strength comes from the special weapons.

posted on March 11th, 2009, 5:33 pm

then make borg research exempt  from credits

i dont get the counter argument   

posted on March 11th, 2009, 6:06 pm

I don't get limitations. Lets think about it. Why would you have a limited number of ships you could build while other ships don't have limits. Same applies to stations. You can build hundreds of space stations and turrets, but you can only build 3 perimeters and one intel center/stealth generator. Given the amount of resources they cost and the fact that resource gathering is not exactly a fast thing, i see no point in limitations. It's something i never enjoy in games. If you managed to create a powerfull economy and you can create more than 2 Tavaras you should be allowed to do so because you deserve it. If your enemy plays like shit and he barely builds a few ships, you shouldn't have to suffer game limitations for his skills limitations. Again if both players are highly skilled and all i really don't think you can see 100 tavaras against 100 phalanxes. Maybe there should be an option to toggle limits on/off if others still feel that they are needed.

posted on March 11th, 2009, 6:38 pm

the ships and stations limited are usually giving you "more than you pay for" or there that you have to decide what to build. it sure makes a difference if you can for example build an unlimited number of repairships opposed to a limited number, same goes for the tavara with the marines special ability.

posted on March 11th, 2009, 6:43 pm

yea but dont u think there should be a choice about how u want to play fo?

instead of this generic locked  gametype

posted on March 11th, 2009, 6:58 pm

Sure, Im all for it. Calculate credits cost into dil and tri cost so 1 tavara would come out about 5000 dil and 3000 tri and then lets remove the limitations 

However only removing the credit costs and keeping dil and tri costs the same is out of the question IMO.

This system with huge costs for special stations/ships would make them even more precious to the players IMO as they would be hit harder when these ships are lost.

There is only 1 problem I see with this though and that is that the AI is going to spam them because they cheat. Other than that, Im all for these ships costing absurd ammounts of resources and not being limited

[Dircome]

posted on March 11th, 2009, 7:00 pm

Last edited by Dircome on March 12th, 2009, 6:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

maybe in the future they will change the credit amount picker to change the number of special ships we can build.

Edit: i was just throwing it out there i think it works fine

posted on March 11th, 2009, 7:17 pm

we can argue about an option to allow more units per limitation, but thats for the far future as not every limitation group may be scaled the same. But limitations will definitely stay

posted on March 11th, 2009, 7:25 pm

there is zero code yet to allow scaling of the limitations anyway and implementing that would take a while too. so for now it stays as it is anyway, but yea, a scaling option wouldn't be wrong, but in general i am against removing those limitations.

posted on March 11th, 2009, 7:51 pm

it was an interesting question one which i didnt know the answer. 

thanks for debating this. 

posted on March 12th, 2009, 3:23 am

Wondering about a new balancing system for formerly "credit-types": Possibly, every *blank* number of *blank* type of ships, you would get access to one more Tavara, or 1 more warp in or... you get the idea. Essentially, I realized that although a single Tavara may be balanced when you have only 2 fleets and your opposing side has the equivalent firepower/defense, once you get 6,7, or even 8 fleets, the Tavara no longer matters: in essence, there are too MANY ships on the field of battle, to make a single ship... or a few ships ... matter. However, this is more a problem about figuring out some way of making it harder to amass large fleets, than anything else. In long games (over an hour) it seems that even with constant skirmishing, a player can get at least 3 fleets as any species but Borg... and games even longer than that... I don't want to even think about. Maybe scaling up the cost of ships as one amasses a larger fleet would be good... or something else like making the resource collectors gather slower over time. Whatever it is, however, I just think it gets to a point where there are simply too many ships and the micromanagement aspect is lost 

posted on March 12th, 2009, 5:57 am

It would be cool to have a different kind of limitations. One of my all time favorite games is Warcraft 3. It this game had a good ideea of a low population limitation. This way you were limited to a maxium of 2 armies and every unit started to count as verry important when the battles started. For Fleet Ops we can have the old Armada/Armada 2 officer limit. Each ship costs a number of officers ( depending on overall ofesive/defensive amount ) and you can have a limited number of officers per game ( for example limit officers to 500 and make every ship station cost officers. This way the player can be limited by a better strategiccal otion the a number of buildable ships limit. If the tavara would cost 15 or 20 officers and other ships would cost 10-15 officers you wouldn't exactly see alot of armies at one time. Plus every station would also require a number of ofiicers to actually function ( but not upgrades as it was in the old games ). Personaly i think this would be alot better than being able to build just 1/2 tavaras at a time or 5 carrier ships. If you have the money, build ships, but think about what you build cause you cannot have 1000 ships at a time and you don't need only big ones.

posted on March 12th, 2009, 6:59 am

i hated the officer system from armada 2

posted on March 12th, 2009, 7:27 am

That's I've been saying too, Anubis, a limited number of ships, this would make the game more strategical, but no, people wants thousands ships at the same time so this is out of the question. Personally, I think the supply system is wrong, serves no purpose, only adds to the cost of ships/stations. I'm all for reintroducing officer system. Let there be strategy...

[tom]

posted on March 12th, 2009, 12:07 pm

Last edited by tom on March 12th, 2009, 12:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

if anybody played company of heroes then he/she knows 'doctine system'.
basicly expirience gaind by units is also added to a 'global' expirience pool. then u can buy stuff like an ability to call reinforcements, or some special units, etc for accumulated exp points. this special units also cost res of course. in coh for ex u can choose between infantry/armor/airborn doctine, and u dont need to do it at the beginning of the game.
personally i think this is a brillint idea that would be gr8 for FO.