![Reply](STYLES/Planetarion2/buttons/reply.gif) |
8 Sep 2010, 00:24
|
#1
|
Always MadcowS
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 439
|
PDS against SKs
I'd like to suggest a solution to a very annoying element of the game - Structure Killing.
As it is now either you have defense and fight or you run your fleet and get SKed.
That's why I suggest the reintroduction of Planetary Defense Systems with a little restriction:
- PDS only has SK units as Target
- SK Units are the only ones that can hit PDS (T1 for SKs= PDS, T2=Planet structures)
This way people would have a real chance to defend themselves against annoying 1k SKs in fleets.
SKing should be a hate tool and should need a little more effort than just buying 1k ships and send them along with a doom teamup and bomb the planet. You should have to knock out and actually risk your own SKs being destroyed even if the target defense fleet runs.
__________________
[Flash][Madcows][Howling Rain][Vision][Osiris][horde][xVx]
And...
Relation Change Ascendancy and the Horde are now at war with each other.
|
|
|
8 Sep 2010, 00:37
|
#2
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: PDS against SKs
I actually really like this. Could do with some reconsideration of the implementation but overall I'd be pro this being brought in in some fashion.
Edit: Unfortunately it'll be extremely difficult to implement. I know from talking to pateam previously on stats that there are a lot of problems involved in introducing new classes of ships, which sks and pds would have to become really.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
8 Sep 2010, 02:21
|
#3
|
Commander in Briefs!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 783
|
Re: PDS against SKs
or perhaps just remove sk's all together?
Killing structures need a new direction anyway.
Perhaps using your own population.
#1. Population Education - Train part of your population to be soldiers (and spies too).
#2. New ship added, (Military Transport). Moves your soldiers.
#3. Once at planet its soldiers v soldiers.
__________________
<Kila> WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH MY PRECIOUS FORUMS
<Zeyi> 24h forum closure
<Zeyi> all posts recalled
"he's got a proven track record when it comes to showy art composition" - Tommy
<Sigi> Light: can I ask u how many open internet-windows u always have?
<MrLobster|PM> i have 2, the pa page, and the website for naked light pictures
<Ave> both has bad gfx
|
|
|
8 Sep 2010, 08:07
|
#4
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: PDS against SKs
I am an avowed enemy of PDS and thus, unsurprisingly, I do not like this idea. I am also not in favour of adding an additional layer of combat, as suggested by MrB, which in my opinion adds an unacceptable degree of complexity for (as far as I can see) little to no practical gains.
SKs are already a hate tool. In my experience people rarely send them on normal raids. That said, I do agree SKing is a little bit too easy (despite SKs being off-class, with low armor) once you get in the later fases of the game. There is an opportunity for abuse, though right now it isn't taken.
I would make SKs take priority over roiders. Make people choose, rather than just giving them the option of doing damage or doing more damage. You want to SK someone? Fine, but your roid cap will suffer. Killing 10% structures = -10% roid cap. Simple and effective.
(And while we're at it, whoever thought it'd be a good idea for structures to only give 200 value should be locked up)
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
Last edited by Mzyxptlk; 8 Sep 2010 at 08:14.
|
|
|
8 Sep 2010, 21:01
|
#5
|
Planetarion Forum Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,289
|
Re: PDS against SKs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk
(And while we're at it, whoever thought it'd be a good idea for structures to only give 200 value should be locked up)
|
Why? The way it was before the first 50 structures of any one type that you built were worth more value then the same amount of resources spent on ships. All that was done was normalized things to better reflect that construction types are now independent of each other, whereas the old value for constructions was based on the assumption that construction types are not independent of each other. I think the current valuation is fair, as long as you aren't building massive amounts of a single construction. Otherwise then yes, it sucks.
__________________
Romans 10:9-10
#strategy
|
|
|
8 Sep 2010, 21:59
|
#6
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: PDS against SKs
I'll make a post with my complaints about the construction system at round end. If I remember and can be arsed, anyway.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
9 Sep 2010, 01:10
|
#7
|
Doh!
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit
Posts: 1,720
|
Re: PDS against SKs
I have never been a fan of SK's, although in regular play it is fair to say they are not used that much (in my experience) however when they are used it is often during overkill team ups and they have a devastating effect on the target.
Havoc and Speed rounds are plagued with people using SK's simply because they can. There use is endemic and it has a disproportionate effect on the game play.
I like the idea that using them would reduce the Cap, as opposed to a PDS type option.
__________________
Spinner: Kudos to Judge for having big cohones!
|
|
|
9 Sep 2010, 01:25
|
#8
|
This Space for Rent
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 583
|
Re: PDS against SKs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monroe
Why? The way it was before the first 50 structures of any one type that you built were worth more value then the same amount of resources spent on ships. All that was done was normalized things to better reflect that construction types are now independent of each other, whereas the old value for constructions was based on the assumption that construction types are not independent of each other. I think the current valuation is fair, as long as you aren't building massive amounts of a single construction. Otherwise then yes, it sucks.
|
to my understanding it was changed because people qq'd at terrans value spamming factories because they were the cheapest structures and were the fastest to build. can you please explain to me how paying obscene amounts of resources for a construction worth 200 value is worth it past 100 or so cons? its almost worth it to just sit on the resources then to build more than a few of each con.
(i'm honestly asking here, not being a smartass as i haven't been around a whole lot this round except to covert op and click the 'donate' button.)
@the OP: yeah, sk's suck. they're also really awesome. adding more complexity and resource sinks into the game isn't the way to go though, imo. i'm surprised mz hasn't said KISS yet, so i'll take this time to do so.
__________________
When in doubt, blame Ascendancy.
#pastats
|
|
|
9 Sep 2010, 05:09
|
#9
|
Planetarion Forum Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,289
|
Re: PDS against SKs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaejii
can you please explain to me how paying obscene amounts of resources for a construction worth 200 value is worth it past 100 or so cons? .
.
|
For ships to provide 200 value you need to spend 20000 resources to build those ships. Therefore each construction that you build that costs less then 20000 resources is a better deal then spending the same resources on ships. Prior to each construction type being broken out to it's own cost basis the value formula was such that the 50th construction you built provided the same amount of value as the equivalent amount of resources spent on ships. Remember the cost of the next construction was always related to the total number of constructions you had built, not the number of that particular type.
When the change was made a couple of rounds back to constructions, the value formula was not updated, which meant that any construction you built that cost less then 150000 resources was a better value deal than spending the same resources on ships. This led to terrans and others spamming out factories late in the round, simply because it was a better use of resources than building ships. By changing the formula this round it is now no where near as cost effective to do this, therefore the system is more balanced given the way that construction costs now work.
__________________
Romans 10:9-10
#strategy
|
|
|
9 Sep 2010, 05:19
|
#10
|
Arrogant Fck
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 1,031
|
Re: PDS against SKs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk
I am an avowed enemy of PDS and thus, unsurprisingly, I do not like this idea. I am also not in favour of adding an additional layer of combat, as suggested by MrB, which in my opinion adds an unacceptable degree of complexity for (as far as I can see) little to no practical gains.
|
Unsurprisingly, I agree.
__________________
[OLMIT] / [TreKronor]
|
|
|
9 Sep 2010, 07:56
|
#11
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: PDS against SKs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaejii
i'm surprised mz hasn't said KISS yet, so i'll take this time to do so.
|
I thought I'd try something a little different this time, so I said "simple and effective".
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
19 Sep 2010, 18:09
|
#12
|
God King Emperor of Dune
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 7
|
Re: PDS against SKs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Korsan
I'd like to suggest a solution to a very annoying element of the game - Structure Killing.
SKing should be a hate tool and should need a little more effort than just buying 1k ships and send them along with a doom teamup and bomb the planet. You should have to knock out and actually risk your own SKs being destroyed even if the target defense fleet runs.
|
This doesn't really make sense - all SK's get targeted by one or more ship type. If you include them in a fleet then they are just as likely to get killed as any other ship of the same class. I use them a lot as they are cheaper than my astropods and soak up the emp so that I can steal more roids. Getting structures killed is a consequence if you chose to run your fleet.
|
|
|
19 Sep 2010, 23:21
|
#13
|
You've Seen The Light
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,152
|
Re: PDS against SKs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chulain
This doesn't really make sense - all SK's get targeted by one or more ship type. If you include them in a fleet then they are just as likely to get killed as any other ship of the same class. I use them a lot as they are cheaper than my astropods and soak up the emp so that I can steal more roids. Getting structures killed is a consequence if you chose to run your fleet.
|
Obviously he meant that SK's would be in a class of their own with only PDS targetting that class.
However, i hate SK's and i hate PDS, so if SK's are a problem.. i'd just say delete SK's.
__________________
First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin. Then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it.
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:42.
| |