Ooops, I did it again..

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Ooops, I did it again..

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> Ooops, I did it again..

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/10/2010 9:00:12 PM

Krelos

Posts: 39
Joined: 4/10/2010
Status: offline

I broke the game balance in perhaps the worst way possible.

I'll let this image explain.

It seems that there needs to be some limits on what resupply ships can have....
I suspect the same could be done with any ship class built at a planet.

< Message edited by Krelos -- 4/10/2010 9:02:21 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/10/2010 9:12:17 PM

Conflictx

Posts: 42
Joined: 4/8/2010
From: Belgium
Status: offline

Hahaha, hilarious.. I've got to try that one. How much is the maintenance on that thing?

_____________________________

BSG Colonial - Ship and Base Set
DW - New HQ Shield Effect

(in reply to Krelos)

Post #: 2

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/10/2010 9:30:36 PM

HsojVvad

Posts: 1036
Joined: 3/24/2010
Status: offline

You did it again? When did you do it the first time?

How did you make it? Being size 8082, where and how can you build something like that?

(in reply to Conflictx)

Post #: 3

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/10/2010 9:46:55 PM

Krelos

Posts: 39
Joined: 4/10/2010
Status: offline

The maintenance cost is about 30k

I did it by making it a resupply ship, which are built at a planet and so have no size limits.

It has, for example, 175 engines and 50 reactors...�

I love refueling it. It takes a couple months and can suck 2 planetary shipyards dry before it's full.

< Message edited by Krelos -- 4/10/2010 9:50:56 PM >

(in reply to HsojVvad)

Post #: 4

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/10/2010 9:55:15 PM

Wade1000

Posts: 771
Joined: 10/27/2009
From: California, USA
Status: offline

That's beautiful! Bravo.
I hope that the developers do not remove this ability. I like world/base ships. I like that we can place as many components as we like and the ship image grows to match. The balance part is build time and cost, maintenance cost, and refuel/repair time/cost.

OF course, the AI should be able to design and build world/base ships at appropriate times also. The Ai should be able to design and use anything to some degree, that the player is capable of. The Ai should be able to competently use all new advances and features.

< Message edited by Wade1000 -- 4/11/2010 12:23:27 AM >

_____________________________

Wish list:population centers beyond planetary(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture):Ships,Ring Orbitals,Sphere Orbitals,Ringworlds,Sphereworlds;ability to create & destroy planets,population centers,stars;AI competently using all advances & features.

(in reply to Krelos)

Post #: 5

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/10/2010 10:14:30 PM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

Sorry Wade, but we are looking into this "feature" of the current resupply ship design. I expect there will be a few additional limits before long.

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Wade1000)

Post #: 6

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/10/2010 10:15:13 PM

mbar

Posts: 492
Joined: 3/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wade1000

That's beautiful! Bravo.
I hope that the developers do not remove this ability. I like world ships. I like that we can place as many components as we like and the ship image grows to match. The balance part is build time and cost, maintenance cost, and refuel/repair time/cost.

I agree this game is so flexable. You can make the game, the galaxy and ships what you want. I like the design of ships and how flexable it is. You're not locked in to anything. This is a great game.

(in reply to Wade1000)

Post #: 7

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/10/2010 10:42:39 PM

Krelos

Posts: 39
Joined: 4/10/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Sorry Wade, but we are looking into this "feature" of the current resupply ship design. I expect there will be a few additional limits before long.

If I might suggest, instead of outright removing the ability to make ridiculously huge ships, making it even more expensive. Like, over a certain size, the cost and maintenance begin to rise faster, until the point where you could spend millions on a ship like what I made, with hundreds of thousands for maintenance.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 8

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/10/2010 10:47:43 PM

Wade1000

Posts: 771
Joined: 10/27/2009
From: California, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Sorry Wade, but we are looking into this "feature" of the current resupply ship design. I expect there will be a few additional limits before long.

So... we have the ability to make world/base ships in this great game and is it that the developers want to remove the ability?
Instead of removing it, if you feel that it is overpowering, try increasing those varying balance costs and setting the AI to sometimes make them too.

The balance part is build time and cost, maintenance cost, and refuel/repair time/cost.

Huge world/base ships in a game like this remind me of some ground war games that have the ability to create expensive and huge robots that tower over the battlefield. They are often a great selling point to such games.
-----

quote:

ORIGINAL: mbar

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wade1000

That's beautiful! Bravo.
I hope that the developers do not remove this ability. I like world ships. I like that we can place as many components as we like and the ship image grows to match. The balance part is build time and cost, maintenance cost, and refuel/repair time/cost.

I agree this game is so flexable. You can make the game, the galaxy and ships what you want. I like the design of ships and how flexable it is. You're not locked in to anything. This is a great game.

I agree.
-----

quote:

ORIGINAL: Krelos

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Sorry Wade, but we are looking into this "feature" of the current resupply ship design. I expect there will be a few additional limits before long.

If I might suggest, instead of outright removing the ability to make ridiculously huge ships, making it even more expensive. Like, over a certain size, the cost and maintenance begin to rise faster, until the point where you could spend millions on a ship like what I made, with hundreds of thousands for maintenance.

I agree; but maybe not so expensive.

< Message edited by Wade1000 -- 4/11/2010 12:24:06 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 9

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/10/2010 10:51:31 PM

HsojVvad

Posts: 1036
Joined: 3/24/2010
Status: offline

I would say keep it in. It`s a single player game after all. So how can nerfing this desgin benifit the person who bought the game. (damn, when I try to use a quesiton mark I get this � freaking annoying.)

(in reply to Wade1000)

Post #: 10

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/10/2010 10:53:35 PM

Grotius

Posts: 5798
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: The Imperial Palace.
Status: offline

I agree, keep it in, or maybe make it an option. Jack up the cost (or vulnerability) in some way, if need be. It's fun. :)

_____________________________

(in reply to HsojVvad)

Post #: 11

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/10/2010 11:21:23 PM

Wade1000

Posts: 771
Joined: 10/27/2009
From: California, USA
Status: offline

Yeah, fun elements that can be balanced, fit into the game, and AI capable,�should not be removed. That is, basically, removing some fun.

I suppose, if the developers planned an expansion to have a version of world/base ships then they might want to remove this current version of it only to later announce a version of them returning in an expansion.

Not that that is an obvious scenario of what might be happening. I'm only considering a possible explanation of possible actions regarding the resupply ship-world/base ship.

Perhaps this type of world/base ship, along with a fleet of smaller ships, could be the counter to an empire that has "turtled up"/gone extremly defensive with many super defense bases.
A fleet with a world/base ship or more could act as a possible "base breaker".

< Message edited by Wade1000 -- 4/11/2010 12:22:54 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Grotius)

Post #: 12

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 12:06:35 AM

PDiFolco

Posts: 1200
Joined: 10/11/2004
Status: offline

The trick here is that the devs thought that in order to have big enough resupply ships they should be considered as bases regarding size limits. They didn't expect exploiting that hole to build uberwarships instead !
There's not really a rationale to allow "resupply" or whatever ship to exceed the standard size limits- after all large freighters use this limit ...Unless the game features distinct "military" and "civilian" hulls (as done for bases vs ship hulls), allowing bigger civilian ships in exchange for some weapon/shield/engine limitations.

(in reply to Wade1000)

Post #: 13

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 6:45:03 AM

martok

Posts: 837
Joined: 8/30/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Sorry Wade, but we are looking into this "feature" of the current resupply ship design. I expect there will be a few additional limits before long.

Good. Being able to construct "worldships" just feels too gimmicky.

_____________________________

"Evil is easy, and has infinite forms." -- Pascal

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 14

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 7:58:07 AM

Wade1000

Posts: 771
Joined: 10/27/2009
From: California, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: martok

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Sorry Wade, but we are looking into this "feature" of the current resupply ship design. I expect there will be a few additional limits before long.

Good. Being able to construct "worldships" just feels too gimmicky.

Only if you are thinking of this futuristic science fiction game as a World War 2 game.

So, to you, a super lare ship is gimmicky while many of the other various technologies are okay? What more advanced technologies would you expect in updates that are not too gimmicky?

There's are ships in the game that can blow up planets... We can not even research that weapon ourselves; same thing with the governments. SOMEONE in the past researched them.

I dislike the idea of lost, unatainable advances. I dislike artificial limitations. They make a game less... epic then it could be.

Besides, that world/base ship design is size 8082. That doesn't seem so big compared to other ships that can be size 4000 and bases that can be size 12000.

Check out this site related to starship sizes: http://www.merzo.net/index.html (STARSHIP DIMENSIONS) Note: You can click and drag the ship pictures.
Maybe this will inspire some people to accept the world/base ship design via the resupply ship and convince the developers to adjust the AI to design and build it some times also.
Maybe balance it more, if need be, by adjusting the build time and cost, maintenance cost, and refuel/repair time/cost.

< Message edited by Wade1000 -- 4/11/2010 12:49:24 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to martok)

Post #: 15

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 3:58:03 PM

BigWolfChris

Posts: 634
Joined: 3/31/2010
Status: offline

Personally, I think having the World Ship using the role "Resupply Ship" is the problem
Obviously it is now being used outside of it's role
Of course, surely you could still do the same with Construction Ships as well, but now able to build bases at the same time

If people really want these type of designs, it might be worth adding a new role we can design them

_____________________________

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X 8 Core @3.7GHz
2x16 GB Vengeance LPX 2666MHz RAM
MSI RTX 2070 Armor 8G
SSD Drive

(in reply to Wade1000)

Post #: 16

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 4:22:19 PM

FerretStyle

Posts: 157
Joined: 3/30/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Krelos
If I might suggest, instead of outright removing the ability to make ridiculously huge ships, making it even more expensive. Like, over a certain size, the cost and maintenance begin to rise faster, until the point where you could spend millions on a ship like what I made, with hundreds of thousands for maintenance.

What difference does it make if your economy tanks if you can go insta-kill any empire instantly with an invulnerable ship? With enough energy collectors the thing doesn't even need fuel.

Just because it's a single player game doesn't mean it shouldn't be balanced or ignore all rationale. If there was a god-cannon would that be cool just cause players could choose not to use it? Can you give a good reason that these things can bypass normal ship size limitations even? That doesn't make sense at all...

Of course there's nothing wrong with people "playing how they want" or whatever, but this is the kind of thing (ie: cheating) you should be able to mod into the game, not something that's provided in the core game. It removes any kind of challenge and devalues the experience in general.

Not that this affects me really, I'm not gonna build one, the AI isn't gonna build one. But the core game should be reasonably balanced. Let them balance it. I'm sure you will find plenty of other ways to exploit and dominate the AI.

(in reply to Krelos)

Post #: 17

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 4:40:34 PM

LitFuel

Posts: 272
Joined: 10/21/2006
From: Syracuse, NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FerretStyle

quote:

ORIGINAL: Krelos
If I might suggest, instead of outright removing the ability to make ridiculously huge ships, making it even more expensive. Like, over a certain size, the cost and maintenance begin to rise faster, until the point where you could spend millions on a ship like what I made, with hundreds of thousands for maintenance.

What difference does it make if your economy tanks if you can go insta-kill any empire instantly with an invulnerable ship? With enough energy collectors the thing doesn't even need fuel.

Just because it's a single player game doesn't mean it shouldn't be balanced or ignore all rationale. If there was a god-cannon would that be cool just cause players could choose not to use it? Can you give a good reason that these things can bypass normal ship size limitations even? That doesn't make sense at all...

Of course there's nothing wrong with people "playing how they want" or whatever, but this is the kind of thing (ie: cheating) you should be able to mod into the game, not something that's provided in the core game. It removes any kind of challenge and devalues the experience in general.

Not that this affects me really, I'm not gonna build one, the AI isn't gonna build one. But the core game should be reasonably balanced. Let them balance it. I'm sure you will find plenty of other ways to exploit and dominate the AI.

So your saying it really doesn't matter but I don't want anyone having fun that I don't get or am not having myself. If it was a multiplayer game I would say yes fix it but if people are having fun goofing around experimenting then why not. It's not hurting anyone and it's fun for people...yes this is the world we live in now...suck the joy out if we don't understand it. I personally won't be doing it for now but later on when the game gets boring I would like the option to play around with it. And don't bring up the modding thing...some of us are just not good at modding or want to deal with that. Besides so far I haven't seen how this game is as moddable as other 4X's I've seen. Live and let live I say...power to the people and all that...lol

(in reply to FerretStyle)

Post #: 18

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 4:55:58 PM

FerretStyle

Posts: 157
Joined: 3/30/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LitFuel
So your saying it really doesn't matter but I don't want anyone having fun that I don't get or am not having myself. If it was a multiplayer game I would say yes fix it but if people are having fun goofing around experimenting then why not. It's not hurting anyone and it's fun for people...yes this is the world we live in now...suck the joy out if we don't understand it. I personally won't be doing it for now but later on when the game gets boring I would like the option to play around with it. And don't bring up the modding thing...some of us are just not good at modding or want to deal with that. Besides so far I haven't seen how this game is as moddable as other 4X's I've seen. Live and let live I say...power to the people and all that...lol

I don't think you really "get" what I was saying at all.

quote:

Just because it's a single player game doesn't mean it shouldn't be balanced or ignore all rationale.

Clearly they made a mistake with the resupply ships having no size limitations and it's led to unintended ship designs that the game isn't programmed to be able to deal with. It's an exploit/loophole which should be "fixed" in the core game for future players.

Like I said already, this kind of cheating should be modded into the game for those that choose to, but not part of the base game. I have no problem with people doing this at all, just from a game development perspective it would seem silly for them to not fix something that is broken in their game.

(in reply to LitFuel)

Post #: 19

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 6:18:27 PM

Kushan04

Posts: 683
Joined: 6/29/2005
Status: offline

Thats awesome Krelos. Personally I think they should keep it in. If DW had multilayer then sure fix it, but since it doesn't its not hurting anyone. But the same people that build monsters like that shouldn't turn around later and complain about the game being to easy either.

Kushan

_____________________________

Twitch
Discord
Community Scenario Pack
Community Scenario Pack (Steam)

(in reply to FerretStyle)

Post #: 20

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 6:33:51 PM

Jaimoe_MatrixForum

Posts: 59
Joined: 2/25/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LitFuel

So your saying it really doesn't matter but I don't want anyone having fun that I don't get or am not having myself. If it was a multiplayer game I would say yes fix it but if people are having fun goofing around experimenting then why not. It's not hurting anyone and it's fun for people...yes this is the world we live in now...suck the joy out if we don't understand it. I personally won't be doing it for now but later on when the game gets boring I would like the option to play around with it. And don't bring up the modding thing...some of us are just not good at modding or want to deal with that. Besides so far I haven't seen how this game is as moddable as other 4X's I've seen. Live and let live I say...power to the people and all that...lol

Sure but we also live in a world where you can control and conquer a living galaxy with up to 50,000 moons and planets from your laptop or PC! How many lives could have been saved over the years if some of the old tyrants and conquerers of the past had had games such as this at their disposal? OK so probably not all that many, but it's still pretty cool.....

(in reply to LitFuel)

Post #: 21

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 7:33:44 PM

Wade1000

Posts: 771
Joined: 10/27/2009
From: California, USA
Status: offline

To clarify my opinion,(everyone's opinion matters) :) I agree with points to both sides of this issue. The super large resupply ship(world/base ship) IS a single player exploit since the AI does not build them. I'm sure that the developers want their game to be well refined and not have such inconsistencies in their product. Even though Distant Worlds is single player, thus situations with multi player exploits don't matter, it's still a game and games have RULES that are defined by the game designers.

Either:

I prefer this: Add them in with a new functionality. I like the idea of such ships but I prefer them to be a seperate design(function) then as "resupply ship". Maybe "Base Ships". It sounds good after Capital Ships. The Base Ships could be a major factor in breaking through super, uber defense bases; they could be nick named "Base Breakers". Also, the AI should sometimes build them. Adjust any parameters regarding ship yard technology to be able to construct them.

Or:

If the above addtions are not likeable to the developers then remove the current resupply ship anomaly.

< Message edited by Wade1000 -- 4/11/2010 7:43:45 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Jaimoe_MatrixForum)

Post #: 22

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 7:34:12 PM

Cindar

Posts: 101
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline

Actually, you can do this with any ship class by retrofitting any normal ship up to something bigger. It's probably also a lot faster, since shipyards can have so many more manufacturing facilities, but I haven't specifically timed it.

You can also retrofit up to tech you don't have yet. Like, say, the world destroyer's super laser cannon

I would love if there was a special, mothership type design that could simultaneously act as a mobile shipyard, colony (with its own population/economy and being able to colonize other worlds by using some of its population), and warship.

< Message edited by Cindar -- 4/11/2010 7:48:23 PM >

(in reply to Jaimoe_MatrixForum)

Post #: 23

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 7:41:01 PM

Wade1000

Posts: 771
Joined: 10/27/2009
From: California, USA
Status: offline

I suppose that that is NOT working as designed or intended.

(WaDoI?)

_____________________________

(in reply to Cindar)

Post #: 24

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 9:17:29 PM

FerretStyle

Posts: 157
Joined: 3/30/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cindar

Actually, you can do this with any ship class by retrofitting any normal ship up to something bigger. It's probably also a lot faster, since shipyards can have so many more manufacturing facilities, but I haven't specifically timed it.

You can also retrofit up to tech you don't have yet. Like, say, the world destroyer's super laser cannon

I would love if there was a special, mothership type design that could simultaneously act as a mobile shipyard, colony (with its own population/economy and being able to colonize other worlds by using some of its population), and warship.

I thought it was kinda strange that ships you discover are added to your design list. Why scrap it for a tech boost when you can just build dozens or replicas without the needed technology? (which I assume you can do?)

(in reply to Cindar)

Post #: 25

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 9:33:41 PM

HsojVvad

Posts: 1036
Joined: 3/24/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FerretStyle

quote:

ORIGINAL: LitFuel
So your saying it really doesn't matter but I don't want anyone having fun that I don't get or am not having myself. If it was a multiplayer game I would say yes fix it but if people are having fun goofing around experimenting then why not. It's not hurting anyone and it's fun for people...yes this is the world we live in now...suck the joy out if we don't understand it. I personally won't be doing it for now but later on when the game gets boring I would like the option to play around with it. And don't bring up the modding thing...some of us are just not good at modding or want to deal with that. Besides so far I haven't seen how this game is as moddable as other 4X's I've seen. Live and let live I say...power to the people and all that...lol

I don't think you really "get" what I was saying at all.

quote:

Just because it's a single player game doesn't mean it shouldn't be balanced or ignore all rationale.

Clearly they made a mistake with the resupply ships having no size limitations and it's led to unintended ship designs that the game isn't programmed to be able to deal with. It's an exploit/loophole which should be "fixed" in the core game for future players.

Like I said already, this kind of cheating should be modded into the game for those that choose to, but not part of the base game. I have no problem with people doing this at all, just from a game development perspective it would seem silly for them to not fix something that is broken in their game.

I don't really get what you are trying to say. Again, this is a single player game. Why should my enjoyment be gone just because YOU say it shouldn't be in there. If you don't want to use it FINE. Do not use it, but why take it away from me? Now I can build the Battlestar Galactica if I want. So now because of YOU, that can be taken away in patch 1.04 because YOU feel it shouldn't be in there?

Either I am reading your post wrong, or you are not explaining what your point is. Don't forget, we all read english very different around the world.

So can you please explain what you mean. All I get is you want to take out what I like in the game. How can it harm you if I make a Battlestar Galactica ( the 80's version I didn't see the remake yet

). How is this taking your fun away? It will be taking my fun away if that is how I want to play the game.

Remember one of the ways to play this game is put everything on automation and I become a captian of a ship. What if I make my ship the Galactica? Now because you feel this is wrong, I can't play the game like it. I can't understand for the life of me, why you think the developers have to limit the size of the ship. Again if you don't like it, don't use it. Don't make anyone else not be able to use it.

What is next? Oh I know. CF should take out all lazers out of the game because there is no way light should be able to damage a ship in space. So maybe CF should take out all lazers in the game then. See what I mean, just because you don't agree with something dosn't mean it has to be done. There could be something you love in the game, that someone else thinks should not be in the game. So should we take that out then?

(in reply to FerretStyle)

Post #: 26

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 9:42:06 PM

Flaviusx

Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

Keep it in. It's not a cost effective design anyways; a player would be much better off building larger numbers of smaller ships. It's self limiting for economy of force reasons.

(in reply to HsojVvad)

Post #: 27

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 9:48:51 PM

HsojVvad

Posts: 1036
Joined: 3/24/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FerretStyle

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cindar

Actually, you can do this with any ship class by retrofitting any normal ship up to something bigger. It's probably also a lot faster, since shipyards can have so many more manufacturing facilities, but I haven't specifically timed it.

You can also retrofit up to tech you don't have yet. Like, say, the world destroyer's super laser cannon

I would love if there was a special, mothership type design that could simultaneously act as a mobile shipyard, colony (with its own population/economy and being able to colonize other worlds by using some of its population), and warship.

I thought it was kinda strange that ships you discover are added to your design list. Why scrap it for a tech boost when you can just build dozens or replicas without the needed technology? (which I assume you can do?)

I missed this post. I didn't know you can build something that you don't have the tech for. I just found a ship. I should see if I can build more of these without having the tech for. Interesting. (not the forum member here

) it would be wierd if you can build ships that you don't have tech for.

(in reply to FerretStyle)

Post #: 28

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 10:07:06 PM

Wade1000

Posts: 771
Joined: 10/27/2009
From: California, USA
Status: offline

http://www.merzo.net/index.html�(Starship Dimensions) Note: You can click and drag the starship images.

Some examples to show to people that might have misperceived some popular starship sizes:

The Battlestar Galactica is only 610m. That's not very big compared to other science fiction starships. I imagine even my smaller ships larger than Battlestar Galactica. I imagine my CAPITAL ships at around 1000km... kilometers!
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2434936�('Starship Dimensions' thread)

1 meter = 1.0936133 yards
1 kilometer equals about .62 mile
1 kilometer = 1000 meters

Moya of Farscape is 650m.
Galaxy class of Star Trek is 643m.
Sovereign class of Star Trek is 685m.
Andromeda of Andromeda is 1301m.
Romulan D'deridex of Star Trek dwarfs Battlestar Galactica.
Imperial Star Destoyer of Star Wars dwarfs Battlestar Galactica.
Super Star Destoyer of Star Wars is 19km... kilometers. Battlestar Galactica fits in its thrusters with room to spare. Super Star Destroyer is even bigger than a Federation Star Base of Star trek.

< Message edited by Wade1000 -- 4/11/2010 10:44:26 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 29

RE: Ooops, I did it again.. - 4/11/2010 10:14:10 PM

Cindar

Posts: 101
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Keep it in. It's not a cost effective design anyways; a player would be much better off building larger numbers of smaller ships. It's self limiting for economy of force reasons.

Not really, if anything its more cost effective in most cases. In terms of pure combat capability, the single ship will win since the small ships will lose by attrition while the larger ship stays at full strength until destroyed. In terms of efficiency, the larger ship wins because there is less duplicated and wasted tech (IE, a large ship with 10 reactors that uses 9.5 of them is better then 10 ships with 1 reactor each that use .5 of them). Not to mention that single ships become drastically better as soon as you start including the area effect weapons, and are much easier to micromanage.

The only time large numbers of smaller ships are better is if you aren't using fleets and are relying on the AI to auto defend for you. Which you are always doing to some extent of course, but enemies are generally passive enough that the majority of money should be spent on the largest, strongest vessels you can make.

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 30