View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryLast Update
0002222AI War 1 / ClassicSuggestion - New FeaturesAug 26, 2014 10:25 am
Reporterorzelek Assigned ToChris_McElligottPark  
Status resolvedResolutionfixed 
Product Version4.059 
Summary0002222: Turret cap modification
DescriptionCurrently we have an option to spread turrets in any way we want - this leads to uber-fortified systems that may contain all of your available turrets. This also promotes reducing number of choke-points.

Please consider adding per-planet turret cap. This would allow nice increase to overall turret caps and give us ability to create more defensive fortifications on few planets = more diversity in game play possibilities.
TagsNo tags attached.
Internal WeightNew

Activities

RogueThunder

Dec 31, 2010 7:02 am

reporter   ~0007291

Honeslty? I find this to be part of the charm of AI wars.

... Seriously. The AI will punish you if you rely on said too much. Well. Sometimes it does anyway xD And x4000 has been working on better ways for it to do so too.

Chris_McElligottPark

Jan 3, 2011 12:43 pm

administrator   ~0007367

This is a possibility, but not for right now. It's an interesting idea, but I can see both sides of it.

soMe_RandoM

Jan 8, 2011 7:25 am

reporter   ~0007969

how about partial ship cap. where u have global ship cap, then u have planet wide ship cap.

global 100 basic turret, planet wide +25 basic turret
when u have more than 25 turrets on planet it starts taking it away from global.
thus u have 50 turrets u have have left for global is 75.

Red Spot

Jan 8, 2011 8:57 am

reporter   ~0007972

Last edited: Jan 8, 2011 8:58 am

I am somewhat against this. What you end up with is that you can no longer effectivly play snake-style maps with a massive front (why else would you play that map-style). And if it goes together with an increase of turret-cap you just replace your front-line defence with a deeper defence and effectivly get the same thing, but now you always lose x planets before you are able to stop the AI.

I like my strat/thought/playingstyle to decide how I set up my planets, not caps.
Just my 2 cents.

soMe_RandoM

Jan 8, 2011 9:00 am

reporter   ~0007974

Last edited: Jan 8, 2011 9:02 am

well it could have separate technology unlock, at 5x - 2x knowledge increase u can get more turrets. or something similar. i would like to some how defend planets without use of turrets without need of mobile fleet. mind u having less than 100 AIP solves this problem but hard to come by.

Sunshine

Jan 8, 2011 9:45 am

reporter   ~0007982

I will agree that it is problematic to defend a dispersed grouping of planets given the current constraints on turrets and ships (if you have more than 7 planets, and you haven't managed to cluster them, you're going to have problems even from border aggression and the like), but I don't think this is the solution.

Making mk2 and mk3 turrets a little cheaper could work okay, because it's (excluding Basic Turrets and Lightning Turrets) 2000 to 3000 knowledge for just one turret unlock at mk2, and having just one turret unlock at mk2 isn't going to help with the defenses. Knowledge costs for mk2 turrets should probably be reduced by 1/4, or maybe even halved (excluding lightning and basic turrets) because you really need combinations of them for them to be effective, and you're less likely to "blob" them given a broad front (in fact, you can only really blob them if you have a choke point), and in the competition between ships and turrets for knowledge, ships are always going to win because they are more versatile (mobile) and actually allow you to advance (mk3 ships also being exceedingly expensive, yet necessary, to advance, whereas turrets are not usually *absolutely necessary* to upgrade).

Red Spot

Jan 8, 2011 10:37 am

reporter   ~0007984

Perhaps a sort of secondary basic-turret could be added that works like a CC. You can only build x on each planet.
That will keep the game as it is but does allow you to leave some static defenses behind without comprimising how people choose to play their game.

Lowering the knowlegde-cost for higher mk-turrets (much) will just result in everyone having so many turrets available that border hostilities need to be redone to allow them to be and remain a threat.

Ozymandiaz

Feb 2, 2011 9:38 am

reporter   ~0009947

I am not in favour of this. I already find that I have to consider my expansion and my avalaible resources and territory (e.g. ships and turrets). Expand too much and you water out defences too much. With more defences as I expand I think it will offset some of this nice strategic value choise I need to make.

motai

Feb 12, 2011 2:04 am

reporter   ~0010286

Last edited: Feb 12, 2011 2:05 am

my feedback acutally is that we might have a game setting to test a soft cap on units/turrets. each unit after a ship cap not necessarily the current one would multiply the cost and time required to build. i would recommend that turning this flag on would halve the unit cap initially and double costs for each multiple of unit numbers. would allow people to have variety and see why or why not to do this.

kingisaaclinksr

Feb 12, 2011 3:14 am

reporter   ~0010295

Disagree, current caps are fine imo, and expanding them more will lead to more turtling. As much as you should be able to advance you must also be able to defend a number of planets. CPAs also help reinforce this notion.

King

KDR_11k

Feb 12, 2011 6:02 am

reporter   ~0010301

If you build too much of a chokepoint beware of AI Beachheads.

Winter Born

Feb 23, 2011 12:04 pm

reporter   ~0010683

Support as an option not as a fundimental design change. Hard caps are a fundimental part of the game - requiring the unlocking of higher tiers to get more. The main exception being the sniper/spider path with no 3rd tier

malkiel

May 31, 2014 2:42 am

reporter   ~0038395

I question how this is under "considering" when the current test build has it at the time of my writing. (mk1-3 per planet, mk4 galaxy capped but at old values)

since I rarely built the super deathball world of doom (whipping boy) and gateraided to set it up, I rather like this idea, although the per planet caps seem a bit excessive to me at 50% of the old galaxy wide caps.

I think the split cap suggestion offered by soMe RandoM would be the ideal way to go with this, but barring that(which could be a technical nightmare) I honestly feel the current per planet cap is a bit excessive- I don't unlock mark 2 for more cap, I unlock it for radar damp.

just my 2 cents.

corfe83

Aug 25, 2014 3:40 pm

reporter   ~0039104

This has been implemented and should be closed.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
Dec 31, 2010 6:11 am orzelek New Issue
Dec 31, 2010 7:02 am RogueThunder Note Added: 0007291
Jan 3, 2011 12:43 pm Chris_McElligottPark Note Added: 0007367
Jan 3, 2011 12:43 pm Chris_McElligottPark Assigned To => Chris_McElligottPark
Jan 3, 2011 12:43 pm Chris_McElligottPark Status new => considering
Jan 8, 2011 7:25 am soMe_RandoM Note Added: 0007969
Jan 8, 2011 8:57 am Red Spot Note Added: 0007972
Jan 8, 2011 8:58 am Red Spot Note Edited: 0007972
Jan 8, 2011 9:00 am soMe_RandoM Note Added: 0007974
Jan 8, 2011 9:02 am soMe_RandoM Note Edited: 0007974
Jan 8, 2011 9:45 am Sunshine Note Added: 0007982
Jan 8, 2011 10:37 am Red Spot Note Added: 0007984
Feb 2, 2011 9:38 am Ozymandiaz Note Added: 0009947
Feb 12, 2011 2:04 am motai Note Added: 0010286
Feb 12, 2011 2:05 am motai Note Edited: 0010286
Feb 12, 2011 3:14 am kingisaaclinksr Note Added: 0010295
Feb 12, 2011 6:02 am KDR_11k Note Added: 0010301
Feb 23, 2011 12:04 pm Winter Born Note Added: 0010683
May 31, 2014 2:42 am malkiel Note Added: 0038395
Aug 25, 2014 3:40 pm corfe83 Note Added: 0039104
Aug 26, 2014 10:25 am keith.lamothe Internal Weight => New
Aug 26, 2014 10:25 am keith.lamothe Status considering => resolved
Aug 26, 2014 10:25 am keith.lamothe Resolution open => fixed