Suggest - Features and Improvements

A forum for chatting about in-development game features.

Moderator: luciderous

zolobolo
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Mon Jul 29, 2019 7:51 pm

Arioch wrote:
gaerzi wrote:Image

The problem here is that turning the icon into a meter really reduces it's value as an icon; a new user may not recognize this outline as a factory, much less understand the meaning of the partial fill.

They can always click on the for now unknown icon and read the existing summary (they also have to click if there is a warning sign)

The color is still recognisable and the original icon is also right next to the outline to make the connection for starting players

I would advise against the warning sign as it is somewhat unnerving (as a warning sign should be :)) and having to use the little people meter makes for much visual noise (redundancy)

Maybe if you would only display the icon to buildings that are affected, the redundancy could be cut but the warning sign would still against the relaxed nature of the GUI: my first instinct is to think it is an acutal system error within the game (or maybe I just did too much Windows troubleshooting in my life :))

Or look at it like this: by "filling" up the buildings (with workers) you get a natural progression feeling going on, whereas getting rid of a warning sing eliminates the feeling of pressure but is not that gradual and satisfying. There is a reason peaople enjoy progress bars and the concept in its essence is just that: it informs and pacifies at the same time

zolobolo
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Mon Jul 29, 2019 8:14 pm

Would it be feasable to tie the pirate raid events back into the game via Human Refugee colony diplomacy options?
Could be a Human faction trait or available to all factions: the idea would be to have the raiding event be a diplomacy trade exchange between the faction and the colony: paying money for the pirates to raid a particular system

The existing colonies might serve this purpose, rneamed to pirate havens or their type copy pasted, renamed and the merc/pirate leader images used for their diplomatic interactions

zolobolo
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Thu Aug 01, 2019 7:34 am

What if energy torpedoes could not be countered by PD?

Technically it would make sense as they are more or less pure energy (plasma - which cannot be "shot down") + Gremak ships would instantly become more dangerous with their Viper Launcers and the faction more competitive when controlled by AI - I have never seen Gremak AI be the final enemy yet (likely due to their ship designs and faction benefits that do not sit ideally with the AI)

Since they always already have limited range compared to missiles and torpedoes, their slightly higher damage output compared to early to mid tier missiles would not even need to be re-balanced especially as missiles can be upgraded considerably while this weapon only gets a single range extension. Their advantage of not requiring ammo is already offset by the fact that they require valuable energy, have increased cost thereof and would use less ammo anyhow due to range AND fire-arc limitation

It would also not interfere with Gremak Cloaking tactics as due to the limited range their ships are still motivated to get in close before they fire in the early to mid-game. Once longer range is researched for Viper Launcher, this may change but at that point their damage output is not that valuable anymore. Also consider: currently, the longer range research has little value due to the the projectile being countered on the way and unable to overwhelm a generic PD screen due to low burst amount (1 launcher per ship)

This way the researchable tech would also become a valuable option for non-Gremak factions as well as even in mid-game, Pulson Launcher might be a valid alternative to torpedoes and missiles

Also, also: the salvageable plasma torpedo tech would get competition as well
Last edited by zolobolo on Thu Aug 01, 2019 4:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
PrivateHudson
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:59 am
Location: Chelyabinsk, Russia

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby PrivateHudson » Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:56 am

zolobolo wrote:What if energy torpedoes could not be countered by PD?

+1. Again on the topic of outsmarting MoO 2.

gaerzi
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2019 1:30 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby gaerzi » Thu Aug 01, 2019 10:34 am

The Space Harpies are referred to as an empire sometimes. Maybe different strings should be used for space harpies (and the super dreadnaught at Enphelos, and any other space monster that may come in the future)?

Image

Dragar
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:20 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby Dragar » Thu Aug 01, 2019 12:38 pm

PrivateHudson wrote:
zolobolo wrote:What if energy torpedoes could not be countered by PD?

+1. Again on the topic of outsmarting MoO 2.


Good call.

User avatar
sven
Site Admin
Posts: 1514
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 10:24 pm
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Contact:

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby sven » Thu Aug 01, 2019 7:40 pm

Dragar wrote:
PrivateHudson wrote:
zolobolo wrote:What if energy torpedoes could not be countered by PD?

+1. Again on the topic of outsmarting MoO 2.

Good call.


So I think the biggest impact of making this change is that the Harpies plasma spitter attack (which is also classified as an energy torpedo weapon) would end up being immune to PD interception. That's a huge change to the early game balance, and I suspect not a good one.

If what we want is to make Vipers and Pulson Launchers stronger, we could consider giving them a unique trait or tech-unlockable mod that would make them uninterceptable. I'm not quite sure what I think of that idea -- but given the Harpy balance issues, if we were to explore a change of this type, I think that's probably the best way to approach it.

User avatar
Arioch
Posts: 1198
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2015 12:56 am
Location: San Jose, California
Contact:

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby Arioch » Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:00 pm

Removing the only counter to a weapon (interception for a missile) is the most drastic, unbalancing thing you can do. There are much more effective ways of improving a weapon if the need is felt for it to be improved.

zolobolo
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:38 pm

sven wrote:So I think the biggest impact of making this change is that the Harpies plasma spitter attack (which is also classified as an energy torpedo weapon) would end up being immune to PD interception. That's a huge change to the early game balance, and I suspect not a good one.

Good point, but Harpy engagements are quite one sided in nature: either they get a shot at the enemy or they die before doing so. This actually also shows why this type of weapon would need a re-balance: due to their short range they cannot engage, and if countered with simple rockets they will loose 3:1 easily. They only really become a threat to a missile load out when there is beam monster among them

The mod idea seems fine, but like I said above, the Harpy balance would not change much in my opinion. When countered with missiles, they will still likely loose a 2:1 engagement in their favor but would at least deal some damage. When not countered with missiles, they already wipe the floor with early player ships unless railgun has been prematurely unlocked

The change would alter early game balance for sure in favor of Gremak ships which they sorely need though and make the normal tech available to everyone worthwhile to research

zolobolo
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:52 pm

Arioch wrote:Removing the only counter to a weapon (interception for a missile) is the most drastic, unbalancing thing you can do. There are much more effective ways of improving a weapon if the need is felt for it to be improved.

Increasing the damage output of the weapon would not hell here as the main problem is that they cannot reach their target due to their limitations:
- Range
- Harpoint able to host them is very rare (even rarer then rocket hardpoints while their base power is on par with tier 1 rocket tech)
- Fire-Arc limitation

In exchange of these pretty harsh negatives, they:
- Do not consume ammo (which is negated by the effect that they cannot fire anyhow in like 50% of the cases)

We could also argue from Physics side: Conventional torps and rockets aim tor trigger an explosion when the target is reached. Plasma is a state of matter where it is basically the explosion itself being hurdled towards the enemy. There is no mechanical structure in it which can be countered with bullets or streams of energy shot at it - all these measures would be as useful as trying to blow up the sun (credit goes to American Dad for coming up with this one :))

But in reality, the reason I would prefer this balance change is due to the fact that
1. Gremak are under powered and regularly end up in the lower quadrant of AI empires
2. When I was thinking on what weapons I did not use in the game (and classify as useless) I could only think of Ion guns and Energy Torps the only exception to the latter being the salvageable plasma torp which is of course due to its nature of being able to largely avoid counters

Thus I think that for energy torps to make sense (and buff the Gremak), it would fit perfectly to have a balance like this:
1. Rockets and conventional torps for maximum damage (overall, shield or system) output but most counters (as is)
2. Plasma torp with mid-range damage and few counters (as is)
3. Energy torps (bisally also plasma :)) with low damage but no counter (they would basically be laser guns with higher damage and cheaper but lower accuracy, limited fire-arc and shorter range which I think is fair trade-off)
Last edited by zolobolo on Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.

nweismuller
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 2:33 am

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby nweismuller » Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:53 pm

zolobolo wrote:
sven wrote:So I think the biggest impact of making this change is that the Harpies plasma spitter attack (which is also classified as an energy torpedo weapon) would end up being immune to PD interception. That's a huge change to the early game balance, and I suspect not a good one.

Good point, but Harpy engagements are quite one sided in nature: either they get a shot at the enemy or they die before doing so. This actually also shows why this type of weapon would need a re-balance: due to their short range they cannot engage, and if countered with simple rockets they will loose 3:1 easily. They only really become a threat to a missile load out when there is beam monster among them

The mod idea seems fine, but like I said above, the Harpy balance would not change much in my opinion. When countered with missiles, they will still likely loose a 2:1 engagement in their favor but would at least deal some damage. When not countered with missiles, they already wipe the floor with early player ships unless railgun has been prematurely unlocked

The change would alter early game balance for sure in favor of Gremak ships which they sorely need though and make the normal tech available to everyone worthwhile to research


I can attest from experience that eight destroyers with long-range coilguns can wipe out standard harpy groups of more or less arbitrary size. (Adding Mediators or Wardens makes them significantly tougher, but harpies won't wipe the floor with direct-fire groups by a long shot.) Removing the ability of point defense to screen against harpy attacks would remove the final backstop from that fleet composition, and mean it would start taking losses against harpies.

Dragar
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:20 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby Dragar » Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:44 pm

Arioch wrote:Removing the only counter to a weapon (interception for a missile) is the most drastic, unbalancing thing you can do.


I agree, but I'm not sure energy torpedoes function much like a missile. They are more like a beam in every respect (ammunition, range, arc, direct fire rather than projectile that lingers on the battlefield) except for its interaction with PD.

User avatar
PrivateHudson
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:59 am
Location: Chelyabinsk, Russia

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby PrivateHudson » Fri Aug 02, 2019 4:52 am

Arioch wrote:Removing the only counter to a weapon (interception for a missile) is the most drastic, unbalancing thing you can do. There are much more effective ways of improving a weapon if the need is felt for it to be improved.

Too bad we can't use evasion and/or jamming as counter. But shield and armor as counters remain.
I will sign under each zolobolo's argument. However, it is not only a matter of balance, but also of weapons diversity, the aspect that is feeling underdeveloped in SiS. To this cause goes and my suggestion to reclassify Ions as counter-shield weapon.

akkamaddi
Posts: 146
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2017 5:11 am

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby akkamaddi » Fri Aug 02, 2019 5:20 am

PrivateHudson wrote: To this cause goes and my suggestion to reclassify Ions as counter-shield weapon.


I recognize your icon as one of the MOO2 leaders. :)

I did a bit of mod content for MOO3 late in the game. Some got folded into the Strawberry bundle. Several people played with weapons. One of the ideas that went around was a "shield popper" weapon. Basically, you manipulate the damage and armor and shield piercing so that you had a weapon that was devastating to shields, but absolutely sucked against armor and did moderate damage to the ship system.

Ion weapons are used in most games as a disabling weapon, so they would make a good shield popper. You increase the shield damage by x2 or even x4, but then reduce armor damage to .1 or .2. Having a few ships with heavy ion weapons could peel the shields off capital ships, but a ship with armor fortification and a Repair Module or Tinkers Forge would make exclusive reliance on them foolish. A few ships with heavy ion weapons would be a strong strategic asset, but the ion ships would not be able to defend themselves well.

Of course, the issue is how the AI handles it. The AI could see "Ooh! x4 damage! Gimmie!Gimmie!" But, then, the shields pop and then wave after wave sloooooowly chips at the enemy's armor.

AMX
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2017 10:41 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby AMX » Fri Aug 02, 2019 4:55 pm

Arioch wrote:Removing the only counter to a weapon (interception for a missile) is the most drastic, unbalancing thing you can do. There are much more effective ways of improving a weapon if the need is felt for it to be improved.

Maybe instead of making them uninterceptable just give them more health so they can survive more PD fire?
Not sure... :|


Return to “Testing”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests