Page 17 of 17

Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2003 2:27 pm
by Turgidson
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 ]

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

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2003 2:01 am
by Edge_28
supx wars..... sounds fun yes it does......

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2003 2:21 am
by bob_2010
that does sound fun, supx and troops

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

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

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2003 5:02 pm
by Turgidson
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).

Posted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 11:39 pm
by Edge_28
Marker