Give XP value other than just score
 

My suggestion is to make XP some kind of currency. Besides contributing to your score as XP gained during the round, XP could be used as currency to gain some "special" (temporary) abilities or upgrades. A couple of ideas spring to mind, e.g.:
500 XP = Mining Specialist. Enhances the mining output of up to 500 roids by let's say 5% for 5 ticks.
3000 XP = Research specialist. Gives your research a 10% bump for 5 ticks.
5000 XP = Defensive specialist. Gives your home and defense fleets a 10% bump in armor
5000 XP = Roiding specialist. Gives your pods a 10% armor bump.
And so on... Offensive specialist = extra firepower, Construction specialist = gives you a free construction, etc.

The specific numbers would need to be tweaked, and their outcome on battles should never turn a sure landing into a defnite recall, but i think this option would give the gameplay a bit of a more personalized experience.

Re: Give XP value other than just score
 

I didnt think much of any negative outcomes when i read it, but i must say id love such thing !!

Re: Give XP value other than just score
 

I would agree with making the game less predictable in general, but I am very concerned for the impact it'll have. This is dangerous ground.

Re: Give XP value other than just score
 

YAY, I am up for it!

Re: Give XP value other than just score
 

It's not more dangerous than say using your bonus to get 500k extra resources, or get your research done in time to launch with -1 eta. Or at least, the benefit of these "specialists" should never be more noticeable than that, hence the lifetime restriction: You get your bonus for 5 (or more, or less) ticks and then your specialist has been used. You can further restrict the actions to activating say max 2 specialists at any given time.

Re: Give XP value other than just score
 

Visible on scans.

Pre-launch conditions not relevant.

By lifetime restriction you mean that each advantage only lasts x ticks?

While restrictions make this suggestion less dangerous, they only do so by making it have less impact.


Another major issue with this suggestion (besides the Seagal ground) is that people who can afford to get escorted to big targets (the same people in top3 alliances who get nice sheltered late signup spots in top gals) can get massive amounts of XP in short periods of time, while the average Joe does not. This is a problem because you're using constant prices to give multiplicative bonuses; a Bad Thing.

If you instead used a percentual cost (say, 5% of your XP for a 5% mining bonus for x ticks), then you're essentially removing XP in its original capacity from the game altogether. See why I think this is a dangerous suggestion?

Re: Give XP value other than just score
 

Specialists should also be visible on scans. Like Agents and Security Guards

Yes, any specialist you use only gives you an advantage for x ticks
The idea is that they don't have big impact on the gameplay, but provide a little extra random variance in it.

If you'd explain the Seagal ground thingie i'd be able to understand you better. I am not really in the mood to go on a google search sprint.
By far the biggest effect for XP players is the XP they gain itself. The advantages gained by the specialist should not outbalance the gameplay in favor of XP whoring. I really don't see how a one time spending of 5K XP for 5 ticks of extra income or so makes this feature so dangerous. Again, any bonus should be balanced so that it does not alter the result of a battle in a big way.

I don't see a need to make the cost percentage based. By restricting the use of specialist such that you cannot use more than 2 at a given time, and you cannot use the same specialist more than once, you keep the capability to exploit the feature in check. And you would not be removing XP in it's original form, since any XP you gained during the game would reflect on your score, regardless of whether you spend it on specialists or not.

Re: Give XP value other than just score
 

Maybe specialists could be quest rewards instead?