| Author |
[Locked] Old Improvements Thread (1.481) |
MrSparkle
Marshal
Joined: August 13, 2001
Posts: 1912
From: mrsparkle
|  Posted: 2004-02-18 19:17
Hmm that might be true for the generators. Still, 5 workers for 50 power is pretty steep. 3 for 40 is a better deal when you start dealing with multiple generators.
I don't like the idea of relying on another planet for food either, especially with the autotrading and the potential loss or revolt of the supplying planet. And, so far it seems that I can get away with just two food buildings (on a barren planet with no shipyard and needing 90 tech for defense III). So food isn't the big problem.
Seems 60 pop on a barren planet will get me 9 level III defense bases and at least 3 barracks, and only 1 mine. That only requires 1 bio and 1 auto farm. The amount of defense bases is adjusted depending on if I want sensor bases or a depot or something.
So far can't get more than 9 level III bases on a barren planet, unless I want to sacrifice barracks or mines and that's not worth it.
_________________
 "My father taught me many things ... keep your friends close, but your enemies closer" -Michael Corleone
[ This Message was edited by: MrSparkle on 2004-02-18 20:25 ]
_________________
|
_x$witchBladex_ [1.480 Fanboy]
Grand Admiral
Joined: February 26, 2003
Posts: 849
From: Upstate New York
| Posted: 2004-02-18 20:32
This is a thing ALL ds players m ust hate. Can the option of shift+space to turn PD on be REMOVED. this is very annoying because when youu detonate your torps and such but dont want to turn pd on so you can beam your enemies is VERY annoying.
-Switch
_________________
* [=TB=]Enterprise @39933 sent to Clan: "Thats a lie Switch, you'd never let anyone else drink rum if it were right there. You'd slip teh roofies in and start drinking it yourself and not even realize it."
|
Sandals
Fleet Admiral
Agents
Joined: January 21, 2002
Posts: 2001
From: Redmond,WA,USA
| Posted: 2004-02-19 00:09
Orbit rings should be visible from a longer distance. (<---Important!)
Structures whose tech level is above the planet's current tech level should have their performance degrade slightly, or require more workers?
Giving an order to the top Infantry in a stack should give the order to all infantry in the stack. (<---Important!) That way you can still order individual inf if you so desire, while gaining the ability to manipulate the whole stack easily.
Population should expand so long as there is food available, regardless of the food production of the planet.
Warehouse caps- They would be nice. Even a MV this young already has humongous stockpiles of minerals.
Infantry move speed and train speed should, I think, be lower.
Cruiser required tech should move down to 70. *shrug*
Variance generator build speed is too fast.
_________________
|
Wyldkat
Cadet
Joined: September 14, 2003
Posts: 82
| Posted: 2004-02-20 11:17
I wanna take the time to second MrSparkle, the generators and Research are a bit silly right now. the Idea was to do less with more, so that Starport planets were not near defensless. and that still hasn't changed.
Currently you can get a decent amount of research from the various upgraded buildings, however the worker cost ends up negating the benifit, since you end up having to replace the original research buildings with Domes and Food processing. The same goes for the power generators.
It dosen't do us any good to be able to scrap a few buildings for a more effecient one, just to build more of another building to cover the operating cost.
_________________
|
Wyldkat
Cadet
Joined: September 14, 2003
Posts: 82
| Posted: 2004-02-20 11:38
A possible solution just occured to me. Could we have upgraded Domes, that had 15 and 20 population respectivly? This would solve our population poblems, without making other buildings rediculously over powered.
_________________
|
Koda
Marshal
Fatal Squadron
Joined: August 29, 2002
Posts: 1384
| Posted: 2004-02-20 11:58
*log screen sometimes cuts off letters
*hitting enter twice doesnt toggle the chat, and requires you to use the mouse to close the chat window.
*the J not working in the nav screen.. hehe im putting my 2nd or 3rd vote in for that with everyone else whos mentiond it.
*Bob wrote about haveing a Mini window and Raiders asked for some kind of quick ability to find the planet/s that are attacked/invaded. What if these two ideas could be combined into a F6 mini window that would flash the general direction of "hot spots".
*the only other thing that needs some polish is when exiting Gates/wormholes.. the trun radius seems to have a mind of its own.
*the new turning system would be better IMHO if i didnt have to let up on the keys before it would Initiate the turn.
all in all good stuff
_________________
|
JackSwift
Cadet
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: October 30, 2002
Posts: 1806
From: Where the Sun dont Shine (Seattle-ish)
| Posted: 2004-02-20 13:19
Dang, Char beat me to the turning system. I can't stand either one of them. Every time I try to practice moving around I either end up going in circles or making a wavy line. Every key around my arrow keys has a purpose, so I dont have to move my hand around unless for something I can't change, such as detonating torps.
The old arrow system is so nice, but I also heard it was the cause of most of the sync issues between clients. I guess there's no hope for bringing that back... I guess I'll have to use apostrophe or something for "stop turn". Bleh.
_________________
(too lazy to rehost that old sig)
\"Errare Human Est.\"
|
Gideon
Cadet
Joined: September 14, 2001
Posts: 4604
From: Oregon, USA
| Posted: 2004-02-20 13:44
You people should know, that Faustus has stated that using the "j" key on the nav screen, as well as changing the arrow keys to work as they do in release, are both on the list for v1.481.
They're just a ways down the list, when compaired to more important issues. So, they arn't incorporated into the beta code yet.
_________________
...and lo, He looked upon His creation, and said, "Fo shizzle."
|
Wyke {ThorsHammer}
Cadet
Joined: February 22, 2003
Posts: 416
| Posted: 2004-02-21 16:03
Increase survivability, particularly for smaller ships.
New players in small ships are to easy to kill. The low survivability is very frustrating for new players judging from the number of complaints it generates in chat. I'm sure we lose a lot of players because of this frustration.
One way this could be achieved would be to increase the speed differential between small and large ships. At the moment we see to many Dreadnoughts chasing small ships and relying on the smaller ships evasive manouvours to keep the gap constant or even close it. Small ships should be able to disengage larger ships relatively easily, for balance. We should have Frigates fighting Frigates, Cruiser vs. Cruisers and Dreadnoughts vs. Dreadnoughts, and less of the combat between ships of different classes.
We should seek to avoid Dreadnoughts p-jumping small ships alpha striking them and chalking up yet another kill. Introduce of a small 'circular-error-probability' on jumps would achieve this.
Rethink Dictors.
Dictors are too powerful and need a rethink, in the hands of a senior players they are deadly for newbies. I'm very close to believing they should be removed from ships completely and only allowed as a planet improvement. If they kept for ships I think their range should be greatly reduced, to something of the order of 250cu. The idea that a ship can generate the a dictor field of the same strength and range as a planet is IMHO just absurd. I think ground based dictors could be replaced by a having all gravity wells (planets, moons, stars etc.) generate a dictor field in relation to their size, and gravity.
Slow down Ship-to-Ship Combat.
This would have the effect of increasing the survivability for new players and making the game more strategically demanding (and therefore rewarding) for senior players. Gaining a kill against a senior player should require team work and be a memorable event instead of something that can happen several times a game. This could be achieved by increasing hull/armour/shield values relative to weapon strikes.
Increase the penalty for death and SD.
There is to much throw-away use of ships trying suicidal things against impossible odds. Ships are expensive assets that are time consuming to construct and crew. They should be valued not treated the like disposable razors. These ships are crewed by free crews of regular military not mindless fanatics. All this is because the penalty for death is to low.
There are too many examples of players SD'ing a ship for little good reason. It denies the winning combatant what should be a legitimate kill, and the offending player suffers no penalty, indeed it replaces a killed with an SD in their profile. The profile should display killed as actual deaths plus SD. Increase the penalty for an SD on a sliding scale based the amount of hull left. i.e. An SD of a ship with 100% hull suffers a 100% death penalty+100% SD penalty. An SD of a ship at 1% hull suffers 100% death penalty+1% SD penalty.
Remove sub-light speed planet collisions.
The majority of planet collisions are caused by lag. When considered in game terms the idea that highly trained crews aided by advanced avionics/nav system that can navigate from one star system to another cannot a achieve a safe orbit is frankly absurd. This would also avoid the issue of beaten players deliberative crashing into planets to avoid a kill when beaten.
Combine ECCM and ECM
These should be replaced with a slider, that represents power, computing and crew resources dedicated to either reducing the signature or searching for the enemy. I see little reason for these to be separate devices.
Slow down strategic building massively
To have any planet built up to 32 structures from scratch in 25 mins. really stretches my imagination. It should take time and dedication to achieve this. I think it should take at least a days dedicated building to build a planet, they should be worth defending now if attacked, rather than forcing the attitude, we can always recap it later. There should be planets that are not built, because they are simple not worth building, because nobody would want to live there, and they have no strategic or material value. one way to achieve this would be to grow the population so slowly it would take weeks to reach a full population. Planet type should effect Population growth.
Engineers
When somebody remote builds a planet improvement it should create a build mission for an engineer instead of building the structure slowly. Engineers should should be able to repair damaged structures.
_________________
Various edits for clarity.
[ This Message was edited by: Wyke on 2004-02-21 19:42 ]
_________________
|
Sopwith Camel
Grand Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 07, 2002
Posts: 651
From: Toronto
| Posted: 2004-02-21 16:50
I think that the R33 system should be nearer to UGTO space in the newest MV map, it is way over in K'Luth territory.
_________________
Fleet Commander, Galactic Navy
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2004-02-21 18:27
wyke..some of these are in the new beta...but some of those ideas are far from going to happen
Building points would be WAY TO HARD to get for noobs in the game to get press
the dicor being 250 gu??? thats just crazy...the interdictor is a hard ship to skilfuly use against enemys and a vitaly instrament in well organised fleets...and it also stops enemy ships from jumping into planets your trying to cap back....
Engineers damaging structures...??they are claled Engineers for a reason and not bombers you know...
the rest i sort of aggree and disagree on
like SD'ing YES it should be more punishable
NO kills should not be more punishable...
Jumping into planets....there should be a early warning system like...Heading Warning poping up on the screen
Combine ECCM and ECM
good idea this...saves ships extra slots, and it can multi role sometimes for icc, kluth and ugto senarios....but if it is going to happen they need to be a bit more expensive to buy....
Slow down Ship-to-Ship Combat.
already to slow as it is
Increase survivability, particularly for smaller ships.
if anything dreads need to be more powerfull....
_________________
|
Octurion
Grand Admiral
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: November 03, 2001
Posts: 357
From: Upstate New York, USA
| Posted: 2004-02-21 21:22
when a planet is locked can it be made so that starports and factorys arent? It seems to me not to help the team when a Grand Amiral locks a planets and now everyone under him cant use it to mod their ships for combat.
_________________
|
Therax Anrak
1st Rear Admiral
Joined: February 07, 2004
Posts: 11
| Posted: 2004-02-21 21:43
At the moment it's extremely difficult when refitting armor/shields to figure out exactly which system is being replaced. I spent 20 minutes earlier trying to figure out which of my five slots was my full armor slot!
Can the tooltip when refitting be changed to indicate location, i.e. to something like "Refit Reactive Shields (LEFT) with Heavy Armor"?
_________________
|
-Baron Von Virtu
Cadet
Joined: December 21, 2002
Posts: 411
| Posted: 2004-02-22 00:44
Please add a mininum distance from where you can launch infantry, its too easy to just get close up to a planet and launch the inf without fear of def PD.
_________________
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\r\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n
Site Director - The Darkspace Connection - http://www.3dap.com/darkspace
|
Wyke {ThorsHammer}
Cadet
Joined: February 22, 2003
Posts: 416
| Posted: 2004-02-22 07:14
Add a mini map window of the Nav screen to tactical display.
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
