[C6 Voting] Ship Changes

Post a reply

Confirmation code
Enter the code exactly as it appears. All letters are case insensitive.
Smilies
:) :rolleyes: :cool: :eek: :mad: :D :confused: ;) :( :p :O :love: :Pistols: :dbounce: :happy: :ak47: :awm: :badass: :ban: :banana: :bawling: :cheers: :grinangel :grinflip: :gringift: :invasion: :Party: :dthumbs: :grinok: :birthday: :bouncy1: :bouncy2: :bouncy3: :borg: :burger: :comeon: :confusion :shades: :cry: :cuss: :deal: :eviltail: :disapprov :doh: :bond: :bzb: :drool: :duel: :jaw:
View more smilies

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: [C6 Voting] Ship Changes

by Edge_28 » Fri Aug 12, 2005 11:39 pm

Marker

by Turgidson » Mon Aug 11, 2003 5:02 pm

Originally posted by nickersonm:
I would have no problem exchanging the TA for the V38 in the IP shipset. Also, it would also be acceptable for the SCMTR to have shields, if that is accepted by the players.
The problem is that IP shipset will have a direct edge over RB shipset in terms of fighters (V38 was a matter of skill, TA is just fire and forget), AND in terms of capital ships (since RB doesn't have MC90 and Home One). Whereas IP and RB were supposed to be roughly equivalent, with RB better in terms of fighters, and IP better in terms of capital ships.

I'd rather beef the SVPR a bit up, to avoid redundancies (and still have the hierarchy with TA and EW equivalent, and SVPR slightly behind).

by insecttoid3 » Mon Aug 11, 2003 6:34 am

Originally posted by nickersonm:
However, it would be fine by me if it was changed to a Dominator-class Interdictor instead, if someone can find a model.
i have it, just like all other models that have ever been in swnr

by nickersonm » Mon Aug 11, 2003 3:49 am

Hello, everybody! Sorry I've been away for so long, I was on two vacations and now I'm ill. However, now I will be home for a while.

It appears that most people have approved everything, but there are several dicussion points: the IP shipset, and the PEN.

I would have no problem exchanging the TA for the V38 in the IP shipset. Also, it would also be acceptable for the SCMTR to have shields, if that is accepted by the players.

I designed the PEN as a large AA ship for the Imperials. However, it would be fine by me if it was changed to a Dominator-class Interdictor instead, if someone can find a model.

In reply to some other points:

I will consider increasing the prices of the carriers; their prices were decided before the fighter hyperspeed decrease.
Note : "Overall Price Changes: All ship prices increased by a factor of 2" would mean that, in fact, the Eclipse would cost 65000 vps, although price indicated in topic is 32500 (same for other ships) ? Cuz, for instance, it wouldn't make sense to have ISD at 1290 vps (price in topic), and MC75 at 730*2 = 1460 vps (price not indicated in topic, thus taking the old value).
Correct.

I agree that the RFNRY, SUPX, and all other noncombat craft should retain their current price. However, I am not sure of lowering the CRG's price. I will discuss it with the other GMs. I will also discuss the partial increase of the PSHLD and FRTs, which I agree with (moreso for the PSHLD).

Hopefully we can soon come to a consensus on all of this, and get the mod finished. Once that is done, only the map remains - I have already completed most of the in-app changes.

- nickersonm

by bob_2010 » Sun Jul 27, 2003 2:21 am

that does sound fun, supx and troops

by Edge_28 » Sun Jul 27, 2003 2:01 am

supx wars..... sounds fun yes it does......

by CurseUppl » Sat Jul 26, 2003 8:57 pm

increasing shipyard prizes?

increasing everything would make the game boring, at some point we would end up have supx wars because that is the only cheap ship

by Turgidson » Fri Jul 25, 2003 2:27 pm

An addy (thus, no edit, so people know there's a new port) :

- first, current SOV model isn't scaled properly. SOV currently looks like half the size of an SSD? it should be quite bigger.

- second :
There are two parts in the pricing of the available units : the military part, and the economic part. I'm OK to double the prices of the military part, however, IMHO, doubling the economic part would highly change the game's mechanisms, by changing the return of investments (don't forget that planets will stay the same, since hard-coded). Most important, Refies, SUPXs and CRGs are part of the economic units, not of the military units. Their prices should stay unchanged, unless people want extremely long returns on investment (ROI)... and since EvR ain't extremely fast on that part already, an even longer ROI might kill the game (25 turns to have ROI on a trading refinery (and that's extrafaction trade) ? Who would ever rebuild a planet ?).

Basically, I think these units should keep their price :
- Refinery
- SUPX
- any other trader

This unit should have reduced price, because it is often used with FORTs, and FORTs price will increase :
- CRG

These units might have a lower price increase (maybe +50%), I'm not that sure :
- PSHIELD
- Shipyard (coud even double, since it's more used for military than economy)
- FORTs : the problem is that they also have production... maybe we should tone their weapons down, so the increase is slightly less too (in the +50% increase, not double). But, even with a small increase, I still think CRGs prices should be reduced - currently, the return on investment of CRGs is quite long, if FORT prices are increased it'll be even worse.


Other units (which are purely military, like troops, IONs, fighters, capital ships, and such...) can have doubled price without problem of game mechanisms balance (since they just mean less ships/more scattered fleets, and not slower investments).

That's a balance issue, after all we want an interesting game, with economics that can pay, not a game with no eco cuz any investment would need way too much time before we see the benefits (camp won't last 300 turns IMHO).

Off 'til Monday night, now.

[ 25. July 2003, 02:29 PM: Message edited by: Turgidson ]

by Turgidson » Thu Jul 24, 2003 6:07 pm

If you haven't noticed, Felth, I've said that having the V38 unavailable for IPs had been debated too, and I would agree it (means no V38 nor TA for you).

And I've written it an awful lot of times, you have the StarViper, it's a good fighter. If you have StarViper and TA, we'll have a redundancy, but apparently, a good fighter that ain't a TIE design ain't good anymore.

Second part : calling me an "idiot" won't make this debate any better. Anyway, I'll be off from tomorrow morning 'til monday night, so you won't have to read my replies during that time.

Third part : even Knights of the Round Table has some roots in the real world, and, BTW, SW is closer to our world than this medieval-fantasy tale. Take the Force out (and, anyway, the Force ain't in EvR, excepted for the JKII part), and you have a situation that ain't that far from a real-world situation (excepted that good guys are always incredibly lucky, but it's the case in most movies, even those based on "real world"). Basically : big bad authoritarian power, smaller group of Rebels wanting democracy, doesn't that remind you of the US Revolution, or perhaps even the French one ? Plus, the starfighter combats come directly from WWII "dogfight" movies, and so on...

by Darth1o9 » Thu Jul 24, 2003 5:56 pm

well it makes more sense than a V38 if you had a brain in your head, but to be fair the real reason the v38 is choosen over the TA is because tne TA is a better fighter, with less weakness, and puts the indies at a disadvantage, even more so than than they are now, shipset to shipset, size to size, and really, based on the real world, erm, based on a age old story of good vs evil, like space knights of the round table, not US vs the world, or whatever, and a sim that had been butchered by people like you turg, it wasnt that bad in c2, if Bern had of said no to certain things first, and perhaps put up more restrictions in teh first place, but he didnt, cos he put to much trust in idiots like you :D

Selective reading is great, then again i put the whole thing up of what it said, not a small part, like you turg, enjoy

[ 24. July 2003, 05:57 PM: Message edited by: Darth1o9 ]

Top