Sub graphics and other stuff.. - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  Sub graphics and other stuff..

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Sub graphics and other stuff..

Calanor posted 03-02-99 06:31 AM ET
Just a few points/suggestions:
1. IMHO, a sub should look eh like a sub. Right now, adding a Deep Compression Hull won't affect the graphical representation of the unit at all - in fact, the only way I could tell the difference between my Cruiser and my sub (using a Cruiser chassis) was the fact that they had different names, heh. Really, it would have been neat if the sub would have used slightly different graphics than their surface-based brethren.
2. This has been mentioned before, yet I'd like to bring up the subject again - the 'Copters should be tweaked! Right now, they are far too powerful, IMO making units like Artilleries somewhat pointless.
3. Different chassises (sp?) should have more varied attributes. For instance, I see no reason to why they can't have varying hit point capacity. As an example, a Foil could have higher moves yet lower hit points than a Cruiser (right now, the Cruiser's got the better moves and hits are identical, meaning that it's relatively pointless to build Foils). This would also allow the 'Copter to be tweaked, by lowering its hit point radically (e.g. half of those of a needlejet?)
4. Could someone explain to me how a former, equipped with former device and plasma armour, would be able to actually destroy an attacking enemy unit? After all, they do not possess any weapon at all to retaliate with..? Overall, the way attack / defense is handled strikes me as somewhat odd - when dealing with combat unit, things could have been smoothed out a bit by, as an example, using 100% Attack rating + 50% Defense rating when attacking units were concerned, and 100% Defense + 50% Attack when calculating the defender's capabilities. This would not really solve the former dilemma, but IMHO it would be a step in the right direction.
Regards,
Calanor

Calanor posted 03-02-99 06:42 AM ET
Oh, btw, a way to make subs more "sub-like", apart from changing the graphics, could be to somewhat tweak the Attack / Defense stats of units equipped with a Deep Compression Hull. For instance, add +25% attack and subtract 25% (or even 50!) defense, thus creating a unit that is strong on attack but somewhat weak on defense - this fits the typical image of a sub fairly well. Furthermore, it surprised me a bit that no enhancement was available for detecting subs - a shame, as sub-hunters tend to be useful.
Regards,
Calanor
MoSe posted 03-02-99 07:14 AM ET
Other stuff:
4. (3. too) Alas, this only reminds us, with great sadness, that combat is not and has never been an advanced feature in Civ and now in SMAC.
Ok, it did evolve, it is not now as rudimental as it was before, furthermore I think it can do as it is coz the focus of such games must not be tactical combat, but then we must refrain from complaining about it.
The aforementioned sadness referred to MoM combat management (not to shooters).
That was indeed detailed and realistic! When engaged in close combat, each unit hit with its melee strenght and defended with its shields, the results being considrered simultaneously, apart from special features like 'First Strike', 'Fiery Breath', 'Stone Gaze' to be taken into account for pre-melee damage in favour of the attacker.
Saluti
MariOne
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Sub graphics and other stuff..
Calanor	posted 03-02-99 06:31 AM ET Just a few points/suggestions: 1. IMHO, a sub should look eh like a sub. Right now, adding a Deep Compression Hull won't affect the graphical representation of the unit at all - in fact, the only way I could tell the difference between my Cruiser and my sub (using a Cruiser chassis) was the fact that they had different names, heh. Really, it would have been neat if the sub would have used slightly different graphics than their surface-based brethren. 2. This has been mentioned before, yet I'd like to bring up the subject again - the 'Copters should be tweaked! Right now, they are far too powerful, IMO making units like Artilleries somewhat pointless. 3. Different chassises (sp?) should have more varied attributes. For instance, I see no reason to why they can't have varying hit point capacity. As an example, a Foil could have higher moves yet lower hit points than a Cruiser (right now, the Cruiser's got the better moves and hits are identical, meaning that it's relatively pointless to build Foils). This would also allow the 'Copter to be tweaked, by lowering its hit point radically (e.g. half of those of a needlejet?) 4. Could someone explain to me how a former, equipped with former device and plasma armour, would be able to actually destroy an attacking enemy unit? After all, they do not possess any weapon at all to retaliate with..? Overall, the way attack / defense is handled strikes me as somewhat odd - when dealing with combat unit, things could have been smoothed out a bit by, as an example, using 100% Attack rating + 50% Defense rating when attacking units were concerned, and 100% Defense + 50% Attack when calculating the defender's capabilities. This would not really solve the former dilemma, but IMHO it would be a step in the right direction. Regards, Calanor
Calanor	posted 03-02-99 06:42 AM ET Oh, btw, a way to make subs more "sub-like", apart from changing the graphics, could be to somewhat tweak the Attack / Defense stats of units equipped with a Deep Compression Hull. For instance, add +25% attack and subtract 25% (or even 50!) defense, thus creating a unit that is strong on attack but somewhat weak on defense - this fits the typical image of a sub fairly well. Furthermore, it surprised me a bit that no enhancement was available for detecting subs - a shame, as sub-hunters tend to be useful. Regards, Calanor
MoSe	posted 03-02-99 07:14 AM ET Other stuff: 4. (3. too) Alas, this only reminds us, with great sadness, that combat is not and has never been an advanced feature in Civ and now in SMAC. Ok, it did evolve, it is not now as rudimental as it was before, furthermore I think it can do as it is coz the focus of such games must not be tactical combat, but then we must refrain from complaining about it. The aforementioned sadness referred to MoM combat management (not to shooters). That was indeed detailed and realistic! When engaged in close combat, each unit hit with its melee strenght and defended with its shields, the results being considrered simultaneously, apart from special features like 'First Strike', 'Fiery Breath', 'Stone Gaze' to be taken into account for pre-melee damage in favour of the attacker. Saluti MariOne