Are battles always one sided?

[Puke]

i dont know if the 50% limit is coded in the settings file or something, but you can change the 20% limit that is attached to training facilities.

I think that experience should be kept as a contributing factor to a decisive victory. without it, the game would turn into the same trash you see on RTS games like dune2, warcraft, starcraft, C&C, AoE, and all the other lame clones. build a base, mass troops, charge. rinse, repeat.

taking the time to train a fleet, or keeping track of one as it progresses thru battles adds a valueable element to the game that sets it apart from the standard rabble.

------------------
"...the green, sticky spawn of the stars"
(with apologies to H.P.L.)

[Askan Nightbringer]

If the training facilities were modded to take it up closer to the 50% mark it could be alright.

That way you still get the enjoyment of spending years training your destroyers.

Askan

[Cyrus]

Spoo,
The way I've always looked at fleet experience is that its the experience of the Admirals commanding the fleet. Swapping ships around doesn't change the expereince of the command team. Now if you could tie fleet experience to the fleet leader you could have some serious consequenses if it gets blown away.

[Spoo]

quote:

---

Now if you could tie fleet experience to the fleet leader you could have some serious consequenses if it gets blown away.

---

Now there's an idea. Too bad that probably won't be showing up anytime soon. Oh well, we can dream.

What I think would be a neat idea is dynamic to-hit bonus for all weapons. Let me explain. Suppose no empires in a given game are using Meson BLasters. If you reseasrch them, then they get say a +20% to-hit bonus. But if another race researches them, then the bonus drops to 15% and so on. It makes sense that a weapon that has never been encountered is harder to dodge, plus it adds variety to the weapon mix in the game. If every empire has the weapon then give it a negative "bonus". Just a neat idea, but with hardcode changes that would be required I don't expect to see it anytime soon. But does anyone think it has merit?

------------------
Assume you have a 1kg squirrel
E=mc^2
E=1kg(3x10^8m/s)^2=9x10^16J
which, if I'm not mistaken, is equivilent to roughly a 50 megaton nuclear bomb.
Fear the squirrel.

[chewy027]

spoo i woulod think just the opposite. If many races are using it then the technology would be more perfected and thus the to hit should be higher. The more races that use it, the more potent the weapon must be, I guess from a perspactive of encouraging a wider spread of weapons though, then it would be a good idea .

[Rollo]

I am with Spoo on this one. If you have a weapon that is unknown to another race it should get a bonus or a partial shield/armor piercing ability. Good idea (for SE5, I suppose).

Rollo

edit: possible problem: racial tech weapons

[This message has been edited by Rollo (edited 19 October 2001).]

[Suicide Junkie]

quote:

---

I am with Spoo on this one. If you have a weapon that is unknown to another race it should get a bonus or a partial shield/armor piercing ability. Good idea (for SE5, I suppose).
Rollo
edit: possible problem: racial tech weapons

---

I like that better than the improved accuracy. It's still a "point, lead the target, and fire" situation, but the defenders don't know how, for example, antiprotons will affect their armor or shields.
Once you have researched the basic tech behind the weapon, you can figure out ways to mitigate some of the damage.

Note: If you are fighting racial tech weapons, theres nothing you can do. Modders can reduce the rated damage of the racial tech weapons, so they cancel out and have the normal effect on normal races. Using your racial tech weapons on other races with the same racial tech would have reduced effectiveness, so you'd pull out some non-racial weapons that they don't know about yet .

EDIT: easier to implement than partial defense skipping (which I would really like to see sometime), would just be a % damage increase.

[This message has been edited by suicide_junkie (edited 19 October 2001).]