Rustyallan -> RE: Weapon balance for the future (5/9/2010 4:48:53 PM)
|
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.
|
|
|
|