RE: Weapon balance for the future

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Weapon balance for the future

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 >> RE: Weapon balance for the future

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 3:03:05 AM

Rustyallan

Posts: 193
Joined: 4/27/2010
Status: offline

Well, there's the "ultimate" torpedo and the "ultimate" beam at the end of the tech tree... or maybe only on world destroyers.

(in reply to Shark7)

Post #: 121

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 4:23:28 AM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

I would add to this list that I want some system to keep me from completely over-powering the AI with my designs and I would actually be whole set against the 'ultimate weapon in a certain role' addition (that is too much like rock paper scissors).

The obvious answer to avoid having the AI be overpowered by user-made designs is for the AI to create his own knockoffs of them if they kick his ass, just like in real life: When a country comes out with an awesome piece of military hardware, other countries go and make knockoff versions of it. So the AI should design his own version, using the best versions of the parts he has.

(in reply to Shark7)

Post #: 122

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 4:28:34 AM

lordxorn

Posts: 768
Joined: 12/6/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishman

Rather than adding more weapons or humongous changes to the design system, the easy solution is just to increase the competitiveness of beams: Double the projectile speed, because honestly, they're ridiculously slow right now, double the rate of fire, and cut the energy consumption to about 75%. Voila: Now it's competitive again. The main thing is simply that the shorter ranged weapon needs to have better DPS than its counterpart, otherwise it's pointless.

This can be remedied by simply allowing the mod community access to these attributes.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Star Wars Mod

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 123

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 10:01:31 AM

Bartje

Posts: 308
Joined: 4/27/2010
From: Netherlands
Status: offline

What I mean with "best weapon for a certain role" is not to create a rock paper scizors effect

What I would like it to do is to demonstrate the advantages as well as disadvantages of certain weapons in certain roles.

Allowing enough room for strategy and freedom.

For example:

Torpedoes are useful against slow moving or stationary objects.

Lasers work too but they are less effective because you'l have to "expose" yourself (risk) and they may pack less of a punch. (though the station may have enough point defense to pick off your torpedoes; forcing a close confrontation anyway)

(in reply to lordxorn)

Post #: 124

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 2:47:44 PM

Canute0

Posts: 616
Joined: 4/30/2010
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

For example:

Torpedoes are useful against slow moving or stationary objects.

Lasers work too but they are less effective because you'l have to "expose" yourself (risk) and they may pack less of a punch. (though the station may have enough point defense to pick off your torpedoes; forcing a close confrontation anyway)

It allways depend on the Tech the game/universe use.
When the battlefield is just a few 100 km big, Torpedos are slow, Laser are superior.
When the battlefield are millions of KM, ships move with 10-50% of lightspeed, torpedos are the 1.choise weapon and fly with 40-80% lightspeed. Laser become limited to close range fight below 1 lightsecond (300.000 km).

Befor you all discuss what weapons are better, you should discuss about what tech does DW use.

(in reply to Bartje)

Post #: 125

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 2:59:38 PM

Bartje

Posts: 308
Joined: 4/27/2010
From: Netherlands
Status: offline

Yes that is true but it is also true that the tech can be made plausible for whatever situation benefits gameplay (the famous fun factor!!) most.

Finding that awnser is up to us. What do we think will benefit gameplay ?

One ultimate weapon (torpedoes as it stands now)

Or a mix of interactions and situational contexts that results in superior weapons for given critera in a given situation. (sort of semi-role bound weaponry)

Right now it would benefit gameplay if Lasers can destroy incoming torpedoes (with a chance to miss etc..)

That way you'll need to overpower (numbers or muchas tech) in order to exclusively use torps.

Otherwise you'll have to get in close and dirty with lasers or use some new weapon that may be added. (fighters? Long range beam weapons? Missiles? (-a torpedo variation with different image))

Thats how I see it; this is a formula that offers both variety and can be made plausible (immersion) within the DW universe.

In short: This is what "I" think would be fun. Do you also think it would be fun? Is there something that would me more fun?

Another reason: Point Defense sort of draws a paralel to Missile Interception systems the navy & army use. It provides something of a familiarity which helps make the DW universe seem more "natural". (since it draws on reality; even if not real per se)

Other Concerns:

What I'm curious about is whether or not Point Defense and such is possible in DW.

I suppose it depends on whether or not the program treats torpedoes as objects (for impact event) or if it just draws them and calculates impact time and then applies damage at that time.

Otherwise we'll probably have to balance lasers and torps the way other people here suggested. Upping laser damage. (If memory serves)

< Message edited by Bartje -- 5/9/2010 3:14:31 PM >

(in reply to Canute0)

Post #: 126

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 4:48:53 PM

Rustyallan

Posts: 193
Joined: 4/27/2010
Status: offline

quote:

Yes that is true but it is also true that the tech can be made plausible for whatever situation benefits gameplay (the famous fun factor!!) most.

I think that something we should keep in mind, myself included, is that the weapons and such need to be plausible and consistent with the rules of physics within the game universe.

But there definitely needs to be some balance so that we players have less desire/need to customize our ships and totally ignore the AI's designs.

I'm seeing 7 different roles at the moment
Short-range blaster (fast refire, heavy damage, fast speed, low range, larger size, less energy)
Long-range beam (slow refire, lighter damage, slower speed, long range, smaller size, much more energy)
Heavy torpedo (slow refire, heavy damage, low speed, shorter range, larger size, less energy)
Fast torpedo (faster refire, lighter damage, fast speed, longer range, smaller size, more energy)
Bombs (very slow refire, low damage, short range, low speed bombard ability, much larger size, more energy)
Superweapons (they blow up planets and miss most ships that they fire at)
Area waves (the damage everything around you, use with caution or malice)

So aside from specialty weapons, there are currently FOUR main weapon types, not two. LR/SR beams and torpedoes alternate in the tech tree so it's interesting what mix you'll get using autodesign or upgrade selected for ships. I've said before they they need to be broken out in the design screen so that they're seen and used.

That or we need to have a linear progression on the damage/range/speed if they remain in the same research lines.

I actually like how they're split into LR/SR versions of each, but they're not used that way by the game. There's only two types in the designer, beam and torpedo. And that's all we've been caring about while the weapons give us the ability to make some designs with flavor. But reality is all you need is to load your ship full of the longest-range torpedo you've got.

(in reply to Bartje)

Post #: 127

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 4:53:13 PM

Bartje

Posts: 308
Joined: 4/27/2010
From: Netherlands
Status: offline

Exactly!

Which woudn't make sense anymore if said torpedo would be picked off by a ship with adequate laser protection.

Unprotected capital ships would be sitting ducks against torpedo attacks. Especially if such torpedoes were to be launched by swarms of fighters. Just to give an example.

I'd like such strategies and situations. I'd like it especially if the AI uses this.

As for consistency; You are correct it needs to make sense within the DW Universe.

Whatever makes sense however is determined by what the DW Universe is

Its not ours; though it has similarities.

I suppose we want to see a fun but plausible (in that order; it's a game) Distant Worlds Universe.

But it certainly has to be consistent!

< Message edited by Bartje -- 5/9/2010 4:54:58 PM >

(in reply to Rustyallan)

Post #: 128

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 5:45:00 PM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rustyallan

But reality is all you need is to load your ship full of the longest-range torpedo you've got.

All LR torp loadouts have distinct weaknesses: They can only kill one thing at a time, because the weapon director will fire all weapons at a single target, the first thing that comes into range, and blow it to smithereens in a grossly excessive display of gratuitous carnage, and then you won't have anything to throw at anyone else for a good second or so. While this drawback is not significant on a ship, it's a major problem in a spaceport which renders an all-LR-torp spaceport largely ineffective at preventing enemy landings. You will want a mix of weapons, even though lazors are currently inferior as of 1.03/4, simply for close-range rapid-fire defense, as lazors are less prone to mass-waste because of their lower individual damage and range and and faster refire and projectile speed. At long range, two entire volleys of torps can go to waste on a target that will die in half of one, simply because it's not dead by the time you can fire again. Waves are also important, simply because they can mass-sweep many attackers, but their slow-reload renders them vulnerable. However, waves can destroy your merchant ships. You may or may not consider this a drawback. I don't. Worthless cowards deserve their deaths.

(in reply to Rustyallan)

Post #: 129

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 5:53:03 PM

Bartje

Posts: 308
Joined: 4/27/2010
From: Netherlands
Status: offline

It would be nice if they would have a secondary target. Perhaps as a tech upgrade.

That would enhance torpedo effectiveness once lasers or other weapons have been fine tuned.

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 130

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 5:53:34 PM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

Torpedoes don't NEED more effectiveness!

(in reply to Bartje)

Post #: 131

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 5:55:21 PM

Bartje

Posts: 308
Joined: 4/27/2010
From: Netherlands
Status: offline

They may once the new patch has arrived

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 132

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 5:57:25 PM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bartje

They may once the new patch has arrived

Look, you could quadruple the firepower on lazors, and I'd still be building torpships simply because range and speed are king. I'd just also take to building lazorships. Torps simply do not need to be better. In a traditional-balance system, lazorships get quick, speedy kills on things, but when it really hits the fan, they die. Torpships live forever. You can see this effect in SOTS: Heavy beam and cannon ships tear up the opponent, but when **** really hits the fan, high-speed missile ships are all but unkillable, simply because they can outrun and outshoot anything trying to kill them, and rack up ridiculous kill ratios as a result.

Too bad they're completely worthless at defending anything.

< Message edited by Fishman -- 5/9/2010 5:59:56 PM >

(in reply to Bartje)

Post #: 133

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 6:04:04 PM

Bartje

Posts: 308
Joined: 4/27/2010
From: Netherlands
Status: offline

Now imagine torpedoes being picked off by Laser point defenses. (which can hopefully be introduced

)

Will you still build fleets of those vs opponents that use all lasers to swat your torpedoes to death ?

You can't really use them to defend your empire nor can you effectively use them to kill the enemy.

They would be flying maintentance costs in essence

You'd have to concentrate torps on one target; hope they get through the Point Defense Screen and if they do *Boom*.

It'd suck if they all focussed on just that target though. Waste of killing power.

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 134

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/9/2010 6:48:52 PM

Rustyallan

Posts: 193
Joined: 4/27/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishman

All LR torp loadouts have distinct weaknesses: They can only kill one thing at a time, because the weapon director will fire all weapons at a single target, the first thing that comes into range, and blow it to smithereens in a grossly excessive display of gratuitous carnage, and then you won't have anything to throw at anyone else for a good second or so. While this drawback is not significant on a ship, it's a major problem in a spaceport which renders an all-LR-torp spaceport largely ineffective at preventing enemy landings. You will want a mix of weapons, even though lazors are currently inferior as of 1.03/4, simply for close-range rapid-fire defense, as lazors are less prone to mass-waste because of their lower individual damage and range and and faster refire and projectile speed. At long range, two entire volleys of torps can go to waste on a target that will die in half of one, simply because it's not dead by the time you can fire again. Waves are also important, simply because they can mass-sweep many attackers, but their slow-reload renders them vulnerable. However, waves can destroy your merchant ships. You may or may not consider this a drawback. I don't. Worthless cowards deserve their deaths.

And the part in bold is bad?

A agree with your reasoning and that's pretty much what I do already. Torpedo only spaceports are extremely vulnerable. Of course, any spaceport is easily bypassed when I invade.
I usually have a few torpedo-laden cruisers bombarding them as I fly a troopship in to take over. The only defense I've found against an invasion is enough troops on the planet. Orbitals are near-worthless if they're distracted and they're easily distracted.
As for the second bold... As I said, use with care or malice. ;)

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 135

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/10/2010 6:51:09 AM

Dadekster

Posts: 141
Joined: 4/18/2010
Status: offline

Speaking of which, would be nice if orbitals has some programming that would force it to fire on ships that have troop mods. As it is I have to use a house rule where I force myself to blow up the orbital defenses before landing troops as I find just keep orbitals distracted long enough to do a quickie invasion is sort of cheap. But that doesn't have much to do with weapon balancing.

I'd take even the whole torp ships are great at attacking but lousy at defense as at least it gives a credible reason as to why I should bother building different types of ships for military functions. Not counting that you have to have a troop mod to invade a planet and a military ship has guns, I find I can make about 3 designs crank out a bunch of them and do everything needed with just those.

(in reply to Rustyallan)

Post #: 136

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/10/2010 11:07:11 AM

Bartje

Posts: 308
Joined: 4/27/2010
From: Netherlands
Status: offline

True True; Can't wait till 1.05!

(in reply to Dadekster)

Post #: 137

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/10/2010 12:16:43 PM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bartje

Now imagine torpedoes being picked off by Laser point defenses. (which can hopefully be introduced )

Interesting. Wouldn't change much, though...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bartje

Will you still build fleets of those vs opponents that use all lasers to swat your torpedoes to death ?

Yes! They can't fire at me if they're shooting at my torps. Shoot this!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bartje

You'd have to concentrate torps on one target; hope they get through the Point Defense Screen and if they do *Boom*.

It'd suck if they all focussed on just that target though. Waste of killing power.

Wouldn't be a waste if it was NECESSARY to accomplish the kill. And as each one falls, the point defense net weakens and the rest die faster.

(in reply to Bartje)

Post #: 138

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/10/2010 12:19:53 PM

Bartje

Posts: 308
Joined: 4/27/2010
From: Netherlands
Status: offline

ergo the tech advancement;

What do you think about point defense though?

You like?? You will bless the idea??? Or will you shoot it down (pun intended)

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 139

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/10/2010 12:24:02 PM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bartje

What do you think about point defense though?

I have no opinion. The game has bigger issues that render it unplayable than the presence or lack of point-defense. The feasibility of shooting down plasma balls could go either way, really, since such things don't really exist.

(in reply to Bartje)

Post #: 140

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/10/2010 12:28:17 PM

Bartje

Posts: 308
Joined: 4/27/2010
From: Netherlands
Status: offline

You refer to corruption or other problems?

I agree corruption needs to be looked at again.

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 141

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/10/2010 9:50:17 PM

Dadekster

Posts: 141
Joined: 4/18/2010
Status: offline

We got a thread for that fella's let's not get distracted from the purpose of this thread

lot of good ideas in here and don't want to see this derailed.

(in reply to Bartje)

Post #: 142

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/11/2010 1:13:29 PM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rustyallan

And the part in bold is bad?

Not to me, but other people may believe differently. Personally, I think they're delusional, but eh.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rustyallan

Of course, any spaceport is easily bypassed when I invade.

That's because the only thing you'll ever face yourself is an AI spaceport. My latest CSP design featured over half a million firepower in waves, enabling it to instantly destroy anything that came within range while raining torpedo death upon anyone standing by, and because I intentionally kept the power of the reactors below that which was needed to simultaneously operate the waves, it would ripple-fire the waves, creating a continuous wave of CERTAIN 3D DOOM the moment anything entered wave range, as anything that came within range immediately took over 60K damage and died instantly. I know this because I had a thing that could withstand 60K damage, and it died instantly.

< Message edited by Fishman -- 5/11/2010 1:14:21 PM >

(in reply to Rustyallan)

Post #: 143

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/11/2010 1:24:57 PM

taltamir

Posts: 1290
Joined: 4/2/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishman

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rustyallan

But reality is all you need is to load your ship full of the longest-range torpedo you've got.
All LR torp loadouts have distinct weaknesses: They can only kill one thing at a time, because the weapon director will fire all weapons at a single target, the first thing that comes into range, and blow it to smithereens in a grossly excessive display of gratuitous carnage, and then you won't have anything to throw at anyone else for a good second or so. While this drawback is not significant on a ship, it's a major problem in a spaceport which renders an all-LR-torp spaceport largely ineffective at preventing enemy landings. You will want a mix of weapons, even though lazors are currently inferior as of 1.03/4, simply for close-range rapid-fire defense, as lazors are less prone to mass-waste because of their lower individual damage and range and and faster refire and projectile speed. At long range, two entire volleys of torps can go to waste on a target that will die in half of one, simply because it's not dead by the time you can fire again. Waves are also important, simply because they can mass-sweep many attackers, but their slow-reload renders them vulnerable. However, waves can destroy your merchant ships. You may or may not consider this a drawback. I don't. Worthless cowards deserve their deaths.

I don't know what game YOU are playing, but lasers are worthless on a spaceport, and due to energy fluctuations it will soon get a good alternating rhythem with torpedo fire where it annihilates everything in range. Lasers are not as effective because they deal less damage and have shorter range.
I have never seen my planets successfully invaded when under the protection of a torpedo spaceport.

_____________________________

I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman.

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 144

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/11/2010 1:37:04 PM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

No, lasers are not as effective because they have shorter range, period. Lesser damage and poor efficiency is kind of a nonfactor on a spaceport, because you have no size constraints. However, their superior refire rate will give you something for close-in panic defense if something breaks through your torpedo net, because those weapons will be unfired and thus able to immediately lock and fire while your torp launchers are sidetracked.

On the other hand, Wave Armageddon works pretty well here, too, but you need an enormous number of them to get an instant death wave. Like a Colossal Space Port. Although haven't actually BUILT this design for real, it was a plop for testing, since at this point the game isn't really playable and I just plop a bunch of stuff down for laughs to see the carnage, like "1 CSP vs. 500 AI cruisers".

(in reply to taltamir)

Post #: 145

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/11/2010 5:15:07 PM

Stardog

Posts: 93
Joined: 1/17/2006
From: Hickory N.C.
Status: offline

Great Post Guys!

This game really needs this..!

Rustyallan maybe right about Hardpoints it might be the way to go.

How about different kinds of weapons

Torpedoes: Anti Shield (standard DW balls of energy that deplete shields)

Missiles: Anti Hull (can home on target but is generally useless against shielded targets. ) (maybe proximity explosion to damage shields?)

Beams: Both (standard DW laster thingies)

Projectiles / Mass-Drivers / Kinetic Cannons: Anti Hull, far longer range (the empty void.... / easily deflected by shields)
From Bartje's Post.........

Orbital Defense Bases/Star Bases: I tried to read all posts,If this is in here Forgive me. Most AI Bases Sux! So was thinking .? Could there be Heavy Weapon's for Bases only (Because Orbitals are so large).

Ship Blaster does like 4? points damage Range of 100?<(Sorry guys can't remember the right #'s) But Say a Heavy Star Base Blaster does X2 damage & X2 Range & Star base could have a given extra energy banks & coolant systems that would allow Base Blasters to fire at near the same recharge rate as ships?

The Star Base Only Torp's would work the same way. There might have to be a cap in the later weapons tech as you could have attack ranges of 1000 + & Damage rates of 100+ from only one weapon.

Someone/Alot of Folks said this AI Star Bases should defend Planet against Troop Ships & Bombardment first.! Right now its just to easy to invade the AI.

I hope they read these post!!

WM

< Message edited by Stardog -- 5/12/2010 7:06:27 PM >

_____________________________

Diplomacy without arms is like music without instruments.

Frederick the Great

(in reply to Rustyallan)

Post #: 146

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/14/2010 2:46:39 AM

Pipewrench

Posts: 453
Joined: 1/5/2010
Status: offline

This has been a fantastic post and a great read. It makes my day peaking in every day or two. Congratulations to all for throwing out ideas.

For my 2 cents,

Torpedoes are overpowered and I do like some of the suggestions but what about adding a simple but ugly fuel hit for every volley fired. The torpedo's fired are now limited to fuel storage which would in-effect balance some things as the slower torpedo laden ship would have to watch inventory. It might force a player to create a beam ship just to cover the torpedo firing ships escape when it needs to reload. This also might limit the range of the torpedo ships as too much travel makes combat limited. Players now would have to bring refuelling ships on long distances and protect these treasures with all their might. Imagine 6 capital ships with tarp�s using 1/2 their fuel to get to an invasion point only to have the supply ship wiped out leaving them sitting ducks as fast beam ships dart in and out waiting for the last torpedo to strand them in space.

It believe it would change torpedo and beam thinking overnight and only require a simple tax on fuel per torpedo.

Just an idea...thoughts?

< Message edited by pipewrench -- 5/14/2010 2:50:06 AM >

(in reply to Stardog)

Post #: 147

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/14/2010 3:56:15 AM

taltamir

Posts: 1290
Joined: 4/2/2010
Status: offline

this has several problems..
1. spaceports don't have to worry about fuel.
2. you could just put more fuel cells on your ships, and with late game reactors (very efficient) you will still have no fuel issues.
3. if you win the battle, having to go refuel afterwards is no big deal, you still won, the enemy is dead and you just need to refuel.

_____________________________

I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman.

(in reply to Pipewrench)

Post #: 148

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/14/2010 8:17:12 AM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pipewrench

Torpedoes are overpowered and I do like some of the suggestions but what about adding a simple but ugly fuel hit for every volley fired.

This alreay happens. Torpedoes consume energy. Energy is generated by fuel. Of course, increasing the energy cost of a torpedo launch won't change anything. It remains a point that a design based around range + speed cannot be beaten by anything that has inferiority in both. If you want to defeat a range+speed design, you need to beat either their range or their speed, or else you have already lost. No matter how much firepower you can pack into a ship otherwise, if you have neither range nor speed, the best outcome you can hope for is a stalemate.

< Message edited by Fishman -- 5/14/2010 8:18:11 AM >

(in reply to Pipewrench)

Post #: 149

RE: Weapon balance for the future - 5/14/2010 12:00:56 PM

Pipewrench

Posts: 453
Joined: 1/5/2010
Status: offline

taltamir & Fishman thanks for the feedback and you both have exellent counters to my suggestion which I do appreciate.

What I am trying to get to is make the torpedo a limited weapon that needs replenishment much, much faster than a beam weapon. The only thing I could see is fuel as a tax that would be easy to code in comparison to lets say a new strategic resource that you would need to stockpile. Fishman you are correct as that already happens but what happens if you increase the usage for each volley fired and at the same time increase the size of the fuel cell needed in the ship. Torpedo ships would be now limited in range and firepower and be unable to match speed and turning power of the same size beam ship.

to your points Fishman,
1. I agree so if they want torpedo's they now must have fuel cells. I have not really thought out the fact that putting a platform above a gas planet would create permanent supply.
2. I agree again so what about limiting fuel inventory to a point where it would not tax a beam weapon heavy empire but would restrict a torpedo carrying empire to strategic assaults instead of a broad front.
3. If you won you won which is pretty simple and straightforward. What I was talking about is a way to create a targeted base of operations in a supply ship that could turn a battle instantly as denying supply to a stronger opponent would change the tactical situation. Putting torps on the supply ship would be the workaround and I am still thinking about that obvious route.

Thanks again for the feedback and keep throwing out things. Both of you have ideas I can agree with. I am just trying to think outside the box a little in the hopes there is an idea so easy to implement that could limit the torpedo's obvious advantage and keep the AI from shooting itself by creating too many options.

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 150