Planetarion Forums - View Single Post

Aedolaws · 1 Sep 2007, 03:15

Well. The idea received a better reception than I thought.

Let us simplify.

[1] We should not start testing the concept with multiple commanders because it makes the whole thing way more complicated.

[2] I have thought about the XP v. Value formula and concluded that it should remain as it is.

[3] But, with the change that instead of the "player, "a SINGLE" commander accrues the XP.

[4] If the commander is not send to/or gets to fight, THERE WILL BE NO XP GAIN.

[5] The XP accrued by the commander can be traded (A) for greater rank, (B) for a "second trait"

[6] Each paid account begins with 1 commander with "X" fixed XP.

[7] Maybe we should start with 5 traits available to choose from, whatever they might be, one "typically associated with each race."

[8] However, any race can "train" for any of it (althought we may impose a penalty [e.g, extra XP cost] to do so).

[9] A player may choose from one of the traits available at tick 0 (which will require from 1 to X XP) or may choose to postpone the 'training' of the commander.

[10] The player will research and build and more traits will become available; the player also will send the commander to fight and will accrue more XP... result:

[11] Player "trains" the commander

[12] On another newly available and more costly (in terms of XP) doctrine(trait); or

[13] The player will want to choose to increase the rank of the Commander and obtain benefit of the single trait for a bigger fleet.

[14] However, some may opt to keep the score gain from the XP.

[15] 2nd trait and 3rd trait become prohibitely costly to attain, only XP whores will (mostly Ter and Cats I assume, maybe Xans), and then they will trade their XP for it and thus even the XP gap.

[16] I thought about "the single" commander dying. Indeed, it presents a bigger problem I originally foresaw. And I have concluded it should, to start with, never die.

[17] One scan

[18] One cov

[19] OFC, we get to name it

[20] We rank them

1 Sep 2007, 03:15	#20
Aedolaws Registered User Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 158	Re: Fleet commanders Well. The idea received a better reception than I thought. Let us simplify. [1] We should not start testing the concept with multiple commanders because it makes the whole thing way more complicated. [2] I have thought about the XP v. Value formula and concluded that it should remain as it is. [3] But, with the change that instead of the "player, "a SINGLE" commander accrues the XP. [4] If the commander is not send to/or gets to fight, THERE WILL BE NO XP GAIN. [5] The XP accrued by the commander can be traded (A) for greater rank, (B) for a "second trait" [6] Each paid account begins with 1 commander with "X" fixed XP. [7] Maybe we should start with 5 traits available to choose from, whatever they might be, one "typically associated with each race." [8] However, any race can "train" for any of it (althought we may impose a penalty [e.g, extra XP cost] to do so). [9] A player may choose from one of the traits available at tick 0 (which will require from 1 to X XP) or may choose to postpone the 'training' of the commander. [10] The player will research and build and more traits will become available; the player also will send the commander to fight and will accrue more XP... result: [11] Player "trains" the commander [12] On another newly available and more costly (in terms of XP) doctrine(trait); or [13] The player will want to choose to increase the rank of the Commander and obtain benefit of the single trait for a bigger fleet. [14] However, some may opt to keep the score gain from the XP. [15] 2nd trait and 3rd trait become prohibitely costly to attain, only XP whores will (mostly Ter and Cats I assume, maybe Xans), and then they will trade their XP for it and thus even the XP gap. [16] I thought about "the single" commander dying. Indeed, it presents a bigger problem I originally foresaw. And I have concluded it should, to start with, never die. [17] One scan [18] One cov [19] OFC, we get to name it [20] We rank them Last edited by Aedolaws; 1 Sep 2007 at 03:51.