🚀 go-pugleaf

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic Brad Wardell <bwar...@stardock.com> wrote:
> "mcv" <mcv...@xs4all.nl> wrote in message 
> news:43ddf513$0$11076$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
>> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic Brad Wardell <bwar...@stardock.com> 
>> wrote:
>>> "mcv" <mcv...@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
>>> news:43d66ff8$0$11067$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
>>>>
>>>> Ofcourse if players tend to specialise extremely in different weapon
>>>> technologies, this may not be much of a problem, but with more than
>>>> two players, I may be able to trade my advanced mass drivers against
>>>> an ally's advanced beams, and surprise my enemy who has just put a
>>>> lot of effort into a mass driver resistent fleet.
>>>
>>> It'll be very tough for players to be jack of all trades and win.  One
>>> change we did to the game is that techs get more expensive based on the # 
>>> y
>>> ou've researched.  So going up through the railguns and such to get good
>>> mass driver based weapons is good but it'll be tougher to go back and 
>>> start
>>> with missiles or phasers or whatever.  So you end up commiting, to a 
>>> certian
>>> extent.  You can switch, and players will need to in many cases, but it's
>>> not trivial to just crank out a fleet of dreadnoughts using the state of 
>>> the
>>> art beam weapons and then turn around with another group of dreadnoughts
>>> with the best missiles.
>>
>> But consider the following scenario: I'm specialising in mass drivers,
>> while my buddies the Altarians are specialising in beam weapons. I
>> get into a war with the Drengin, and because of my mass drivers, he
>> specialises in armour. We go on for a while, and I end up with Mass
>> Drivers XXI while he has Armour XXIII. So I talk to the Altarians,
>> whom I happen to be on pretty good terms with (although he hasn't
>> joined the war yet), and trade my Mass Drivers I-XXI for his
>> Beam weapons XVII, and start shooting the crap out of my shieldless
>> adversary. And I only have 1 more tech than I had before, so it's
>> not even slowing down my research much (although the Altarians may
>> suffer). The only way to prevent this is to prevent tech trade
>> altogether.
> 
> But this is a good thing IMO.  However, weapons technologies are treated 
> differently by the AI than other techs.  The AI will evaluate things a lot 
> differently and actually say "We fear you too much to give you such advanced 
> weapons" so you would have to be on VERY good terms.

Can I get it when taking a planet? And even if I can't, I am already
willing to pay through the nose for tech when I'm playing GC1AP. If
there's any way at all I can get an advantage out of this, I will.

>> But even if you don't allow tech trade, the Altarians can still join
>> the war, and start shooting the crap out of those poor, shieldless
>> Drengin.
> 
> Good! ;)

Well, it works the other way too, you know? I can fight one opponent,
but after that, I'll be stuck with the wrong weapons and armour to
fight my next opponent. I'll have to see how it works out in the
game, but if there's any way at all I can switch weapons tech to
surprise my opponent, I will.

>> Although I like the idea, I'm afraid that forced specialisation in
>> technology may give close allies and/or tech traders a big advantage
>> over players in a more isolated position. (This may actually be
>> realistic, but it's also a bit unbalancing.) Instead, I think
>> encouraging specialisation in ships while allowing diversification
>> in research would be better.
> 
> It is hard to say.  Once the game is released, we will see how different 
> strategies unfold. :-D

Looking forward to it.


mcv.
-- 
"Serenity is a very personal work with political resonance and a
heartfelt message about the human condition and stuff blowing up.
'Cause let's face it, nobody cares about that 'human condition'
stuff... in fact if you notice it, try to keep it to yourself."
                                        -- Joss Whedon on his new film