View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0002125 | AI War 1 / Classic | Suggestion - Balance Tweaks | Dec 23, 2010 5:53 pm | Jan 3, 2011 11:44 am | |
| Reporter | Suzera | Assigned To | Chris_McElligottPark | ||
| Status | closed | Resolution | won't fix | ||
| Summary | 0002125: Scout rebalance idea - Make them like transports | ||||
| Description | Give them all permacloaking and have them all lose a different % of health for each non-owned planet they cross. This would make the depth of scouting much easier to control AND keep it consistent across difficulties so you don't have people on difficult 7 scouting the entire map with ease with mk 3 scouts just to keep them viable for difficulty 8. Mk 1 could lose 50% per planet and thus scout out 2 hops Mk 2 could lose 25% per planet and thus scout out up to 4 hops Mk 3 could lose 13% per planet and thus scout out up to 8 hops Mk 4 could be as it is now Give them no regen. Put them all at the current mk 1 cap level in ship count. This will make it more useful to use the lower tier scout ships for constant info on close planets, and the upper marks for farther away. Give counterspies the ability to blow up permacloaked ships, or specifically scouts mk1-3 if you want to leave mk 4 scouts open. If they aren't made immune to repair as well, the scouting range per mk could be pushed by militarily going out with engineers to repair them so they can get a few more hops. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Internal Weight | |||||
|
|
This would also make it less player-time intensive since you wouldn't have to go through the timesink of rebuilding a full ship cap over and over and over again. You could just send one down each lane and then position them where you want constant information. |
|
|
Possibly, but it would remove a lot of the nuances and art of scouting, which some players really appreciate. I've got a few other nerfs to scouts in for the next version already, so lets see how that does. |
|
|
Yes, but then what about all the hard work they put into balancing tachyon guardians with scouts explicitly in mind? |
|
|
Should this be marked as feedback instead of considering? |
|
|
Well, that's sunk costs -- past work is irrelevant for future decisions. |
|
|
Oh duh, I was trying to induce a sunk costs fallacy. My bad. :D |
|
|
I'm soliciting feedback on scouts elsewhere. This sort of structure had occurred to me before, but I view it as a last resort, mainly. I'd rather get scouts balanced in a different way, but if nothing else works eventually I'd do something like this. |
|
|
Really not a fan of putting a hard limit on scout ranges. |
|
|
I'd already thought of doing exactly this with the attrit-per-wormhole, but decided it would devolve into an endless stream of player requests for improving the logic it uses to choose a path from point A to point B, and auto-explore would probably just have to be ditched altogether. Also, I think a lot of players would just not like it. I'd be more likely to advocate a removal of scouts and simply have command stations automatically provide scout intel on all planets within 2 hops (with a tech line with steps that increase that to 3, 4, 5, whatever, and some massively expensive tech that just gives full-vis). But I don't think that's a good way to go either. |
|
|
Good point, I had not even gotten to thinking of those other complications. |
|
|
Automatic scouting from command stations would be cool with me. That's even less busywork. And actually this would potentially add a lot more nuance to scouting than there is now since you would have to choose where you put your precious few scouts. You have 50 planets within 8 hops and you have a maximum of 18 scouts with mk 1+2+3. What do you want to look at and where will you be blind? Right now it is just building a full ship cap and sending them out over and over again until you're done. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 23, 2010 5:53 pm | Suzera | New Issue | |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:02 pm | Suzera | Note Added: 0006959 | |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:04 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0006962 | |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:04 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Assigned To | => Chris_McElligottPark |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:04 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Status | new => considering |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:05 pm | TechSY730 | Note Added: 0006963 | |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:05 pm | TechSY730 | Note Added: 0006964 | |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:05 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0006965 | |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:06 pm | TechSY730 | Note Added: 0006966 | |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:06 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0006967 | |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:08 pm | MaxAstro | Note Added: 0006969 | |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:41 pm | keith.lamothe | Note Added: 0006977 | |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:43 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0006980 | |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:43 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Status | considering => resolved |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:43 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Resolution | open => won't fix |
| Dec 23, 2010 6:58 pm | Suzera | Note Added: 0006981 | |
| Jan 3, 2011 11:44 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Status | resolved => closed |
