Things that should be added that JUST MAKE SENSE

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  Things that should be added that JUST MAKE SENSE

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Things that should be added that JUST MAKE SENSE

Ravenloff posted 09-13-99 12:01 PM ET
From the original Civ, MOO and Pax Emperia, to MOOII, CIV Gold and SMAC, I've played a LOT of turn-based strategy. I would argue that SMAC is absolutely one of, if not THE, best games in the genre. However, given the strides in technology that SMAC assumes, there are a couple of things should be part of the game, NO BRAINERS, in my opinion. Why Sid and Brian, gaming gods that they are, choose to omit them are beyond me.
1. Cruise missiles. Even with current technology, we can fire missiles that will hit a small target at great distance with a very high degree of success. When you launch it (at a target within range) a pop-up menu asks you for a target. You would be able to target individual base facilities (knock out rec commons and cause drone riots etc), you could target individual units, base perimeters. Secondly, you could target production in progress, destroying x number of minerals. Target secret projects. It would take a lot to destroy these and after taking say 66% damage all effects are nullified until they are repaired (as a production project).
2. Game balance is everything so permanent AAA batteries are next. These would be built by formers, just like bunkers. Instead of only defending when struck they would protect the surrounding eight squares. Depending on the type of AAA battery built, it would have a given percentage to destroy airborne targets. The upgrades would be projectile weapons, missiles, energy etc. The tracking system, i.e. the increase in "to hit" would come with better computer tech. Armor would remain SMAC standard for upgrades. Thus, you could protect a city, a coast, or anything with a network of AAA batteries. This is not only more realistic, but adds a signifigant extra layer of strategy in defence and attacks.
I've not seen these features in any game. When SMAC makes it's next leap, I would like to see them included.
Ravenloff
ForcePacifist posted 09-14-99 12:53 PM ET
In addition, id like to see the ability to name continents and land masses on the scenario editor, that could then be veiwed in the 'T' cycle, just to add that bit more- personality to the game world and its 'regions', subcontinents & 'theatres', instead of nameless landmasses. And, you should be able to name military groups once assembled which could take on special group flags or something, imagin crushing fanatical Beleivers between 'Spartan 9th Division' and '7th Army Spartan Brigade'.
just a suggestion, v5 perhaps )
Beta1 posted 09-14-99 01:14 PM ET
Not so sure about your cruise missiles - I suspect the only thing ever targetted would be perimeter defenses and unless they were made VERY hard to destroy or cruise missiles were made Very expensive it would unbalance the game. At the moment the bonuses given to defending bases are the only chance builders (esp AI) get - if you take these away it will make mid-late game wars to easy for the aggressive factions. The only other point is that if you put the prerequisite tech late in the game to negate these problems it becomes irrelevant as blink technology arrives
Beta-1
Beta1 posted 09-14-99 01:16 PM ET
Oh yeah and if you want your AA battery try a missile or better speeder with air superiority ability. And there even mobile as well.
Beta-1
Wonders if interceptor v ground based AAA is calculated attack v attack or attack v armour?
JAMstillAM posted 09-14-99 02:41 PM ET
Ravenloff,
I respectfully disagree, on the subject of the targetting capability of "cruise missiles" in SMAC. Keep in mind that the bases are completely sealed, from the environment. Therefore, until a missile tore through the base's outside walls, it would not be able to distinguish what lay beneath. Of course, then it would explode, and thus not be able to target particular facilities within the base. Hence, the "target" destroyed would be completely random.
Also, the Aerospace Complexes serve the purpose of AAA protection, though IMHO, they should extend that protection to units that are within their protection radius (2 tiles) so that it is consistent with their ability to prevent airdrops.
JAMiAM
Darkstar posted 09-14-99 02:54 PM ET
Jam,
You reasoning of sealed bases seems flawed by SMAC's lack of consistancy. Example: Sealed bases would be immune to Nerve Gas attacks.
Your reasoning has only the Hive immune to cruise missiles.
I think what is actually missing is the ability to selectively TARGET facilities in a base. This could be a good thing when I am doing it. It would be a bad thing when it was done to me.
In free sociaties, I should not have to tell them to build Children Creche's and Fusion Labs, and all those other things that serve the community. I should only have to order Military concerns, and change what it is that the Contractors are working on. While this might not be an appropriate model for Yang, any Free Market or Democracy would certainly seem to qualify as operating under these principles. Bonuses? I get extra work and simu facilities/production. Drawback? If they want it, they are going to make it... I can only delay it. Costs... if I need to use that facility (such as building a Jet at a people built Aerospace complex that was automatically built to take full advantage of orbitting facilities), it costs me more to use THAT FACILITY (having to buy it's time during the period of use.) Otherwise, costs me less to nothing as the corporate sectors and its own economic system sustains it.
There are just certain models where the Socialistic model (Government owned and ran) fit well, and others in which it doesn't.
-Darkstar
SMACTrek posted 09-14-99 03:00 PM ET
Probes can already be used to sabotage specific base facilities. Maybe allow the missile to use the probe payload as a one-shot deal? Seeing how I try to stop the computer from even getting Orbital Spaceflight, this shouldn't hurt me
JAMstillAM posted 09-14-99 03:01 PM ET
Darkstar,
Actually, the nerve gas can be easily inserted into the sealed bases, when the shell is breached. The atmosphere of Chiron is not immediately poisonous (overly nitrogen rich IIRC) but not breathable, long term. So it's not too much of a stretch to assume that the internal architecture would be fairly open and not requiring of an extensive airlock system. Oxygenators scattered throughout the base could take care of the normal breathing needs and offset leakage from the outside, but be incapable of protecting against nerve gas which was carried in by projectiles, or inserted after a hull breach.
JAMiAM
Darkstar posted 09-14-99 03:31 PM ET
See, I don't think that the bases WOULD be open. Why? Accidents and self-preservation. The bases might not be as comparmentalized as SUBS, but certainly near the level of ships near and below possible water lines. Why? A large breeched area would lose it's O2, making any and all in it die.
Plus, Nerve gas would be USELESS against Yang, whose people are the only sensible builders in a non-friendly atmosphere (underground). Why? Base compartmentalization would prevent 02 loss and a simple gas detection system (required for detecting blow outs) to shut down or seal ventilation systems would prevent the spread to the general populous. So, no loss.
Shall we continue to debate this pointless batch? I don't see a working colony in a non-breathable atmosphere not taking the simple precautions to compartmentilize themselves. Certain construction styles would lend themselves even MORE to compartmentalization than others. You seem to feel that one giant dome covers the whole base, in which case blowing it up would kill the vast majority, rather than just a small group of them.
Where does your compartmentalization begin? Natural accidents, let alone hostile actions, would dictate a sectioning (and better to submarine level) to prevent the loss of the base. Not only from blow outs and gassing, but fires, health, and other reasons...
Nerve gas should be useless on anything that has complete cover from it, such as military units (which serve long periods in the field). Instead of gaining 50% bonus. Unlike EARTH troops, those guys are already in life support suits, so nasty things in the atmosphere won't bother them without eating through...
-Darkstar
JAMstillAM posted 09-14-99 04:54 PM ET
Darkstar,
Pointless? With you? Never, my dark-hearted and thick-skinned friend
No doubt, there would be a degree of compartmentalization in base design. But, remember that we are talking about Human societies, which would probably dictate some level of openness in the base designs, for aesthetic and psychological purposes. I do agree that Yang's bases would be severely less pleasing, though.
Also, though some breathing apparatus would be necessary for troops in the field, the suits themselves are not necessarily airtight, nor pressurized. So, residual nerve toxins, in the battlezone would be able to penetrate any breaches in combat apparel, whether the breaches are by design or by combat stresses (wear and tear, puncture, etc.) You know full well that most modern day nerve agents are designed to work transdermally.
JAMiAM
The Firaxian Psychophant
Bird1970 posted 09-16-99 02:54 AM ET
The biggest problem I have with the game is with the Planet Gov. I mainly play multiplayer at home on my network. I have found that The Gov. ability to look into other factions bases, that you are at war with is unfair. This gives a huge advantage to the player who is gov. when it comes to human vs. human or human vs. computer combat. Lets face it, in real live you could never look into someone's base, that you where at war with, unless you had spys(Probes) in there bases.
I propose that the gov. can only look into bases of factions that he has a Pact or Treaty with and not the factions that he has a Truce or Vendetta with. Lets leave the ability to look into enemy bases up to Probe Team.
I have a more detailed opinion of exactly how it should work, but figure I should keep it simple. I understand how difficult it is to program.
This message board was a really good Idea. The game designers get new ideas for thier next game and don't even have to pay for them. But as long as I get to see some of the ideas in the next Firaxis game I buy, I don't care.
Bird1970
Natguy posted 09-16-99 04:34 PM ET
But when you're elected governor you HAVE an informant in every faction (like the probe teams) It tells you that when you're elected!
Also, why don't I see the pressure dome? Wouldn't a big, thick bubble over an entire city be rather noticeable?
Darkstar posted 09-16-99 08:47 PM ET
Jam!
Well, I think I will just have to offer to agree to disagree. But since these people get Secrets of the Human Brain pretty quickly, I'd think they'd be able to overcome any bad psych effects of close living.
And each faction is going to have it's own way of doing things. I imagine Morgan has large parks and what not that one must book ahead and pay for the privalege.
Miriam's would have these Grandious Temples and Cathedrals, and by being the only BIG or open things, would be much grander by comparison.
Spartans? Nope. Compartmentalization = Fortress. One Man or Woman able to hold off large amounts of attackers/invaders.
Yang? He'd WANT them in safe cozy homes and what not. You don't want an environment teaching them to look beyond their reach, or giving them wild ideas. And Defense strikes me as a concern of theirs, but maybe that's just the auto perimeter they get.
University? They strike me as a mis-mash... large open areas and small hydro-parks... no consistant plan.
Peace Keepers? Mostly small with common large areas for all to benefit...
Gaians? A mixture, but more in keeping with a natural look and feel... just look at their bases!
So, for base design, I'd say a large part would be up to your target. I just can't imagine gas being effective in the SLIGHTEST against the Spartans or Hive. Spartans because they are just gun toting paranoid survivalist. Hive cause it's Yang, and he'd be paranoid of rebels using it on his own people...
As far as troops go, that's a matter of style and opinion, but I would think it's a bit more complex than a breathing tube up their nose...
But yes, certainly many Gases would be effective with just dermal exposure. But I still don't see the troops working like that... and wouldn't the gases be useless versus anything but Infantry (presuming that Infantry aren't suitably sealed)? Since 02 has to be supplied in the first place, that makes it easier to just seal them and rule out gas problems.
-Darkstar
epocat posted 09-17-99 12:26 PM ET
I agree with Ravenloff in regards to being able to choose specific targets when firing a missile. It definetly makes sence.
In addition, given the fact that there are vast oceans I believe there is room for a few seasonal tropical storms/ hurricanes at sea which may affect shipping and tropical coastal cities ie . destroying solar collectors, roads etc, and even delay the extraction of minerals and nutrints for a number of turns.
Darkman posted 09-17-99 12:43 PM ET
I think the missile idea would be neat, but would have to have some counter balance.
I would like to see the option for better sensors. I like that they were added, but I want to line my coast with radar to spot incoming ships. The 2 range of the sensors is useless for spotting an invasion. Greater tech should increase your sighting too.
Raging Mouse posted 09-17-99 03:27 PM ET
Umm, I'm not sure if someone has suggested something like this already, but here goes..
How about an EMP-missile? We have conventional and nukes, so how �bout EMP? It could do a lot of stuff; Strike bases, and all energy- and minerals (surplus) production is negated for one turn, OR, strike a square of your choice to immobilize all units within a certain area of effect for one turn (potentially lethal for air-units, BTW). This area of effect could be dependent on your reactor, just like the nuke.
Y posted 09-18-99 11:39 AM ET
Think....., if they had all that fancy stuff. WHAT IF THE AI USED IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If it hit one of your bases with a missile that had a really good secret project, you would be screaming at your computer for hours yelling about how unfair it is for the AI to blow up a secret project. THINK!!!
Ravenloff posted 09-18-99 06:21 PM ET
I seem to remember a certain rocket program the Germans had going in WWII. We bombed the hell out of it. It happens in war, you know. The key here is that you have to be up on your base security. You must protect your base with probe units, keep your probe level up, etc. Also, A conventional cruise missile would only do a percentage of damage, not totally wipe out a project. The amount would be based on the type of reactor. Completed projects would be EXTREMELY hard to destroy (high hit points).
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: Things that should be added that JUST MAKE SENSE
Ravenloff	posted 09-13-99 12:01 PM ET From the original Civ, MOO and Pax Emperia, to MOOII, CIV Gold and SMAC, I've played a LOT of turn-based strategy. I would argue that SMAC is absolutely one of, if not THE, best games in the genre. However, given the strides in technology that SMAC assumes, there are a couple of things should be part of the game, NO BRAINERS, in my opinion. Why Sid and Brian, gaming gods that they are, choose to omit them are beyond me. 1. Cruise missiles. Even with current technology, we can fire missiles that will hit a small target at great distance with a very high degree of success. When you launch it (at a target within range) a pop-up menu asks you for a target. You would be able to target individual base facilities (knock out rec commons and cause drone riots etc), you could target individual units, base perimeters. Secondly, you could target production in progress, destroying x number of minerals. Target secret projects. It would take a lot to destroy these and after taking say 66% damage all effects are nullified until they are repaired (as a production project). 2. Game balance is everything so permanent AAA batteries are next. These would be built by formers, just like bunkers. Instead of only defending when struck they would protect the surrounding eight squares. Depending on the type of AAA battery built, it would have a given percentage to destroy airborne targets. The upgrades would be projectile weapons, missiles, energy etc. The tracking system, i.e. the increase in "to hit" would come with better computer tech. Armor would remain SMAC standard for upgrades. Thus, you could protect a city, a coast, or anything with a network of AAA batteries. This is not only more realistic, but adds a signifigant extra layer of strategy in defence and attacks. I've not seen these features in any game. When SMAC makes it's next leap, I would like to see them included. Ravenloff
ForcePacifist	posted 09-14-99 12:53 PM ET In addition, id like to see the ability to name continents and land masses on the scenario editor, that could then be veiwed in the 'T' cycle, just to add that bit more- personality to the game world and its 'regions', subcontinents & 'theatres', instead of nameless landmasses. And, you should be able to name military groups once assembled which could take on special group flags or something, imagin crushing fanatical Beleivers between 'Spartan 9th Division' and '7th Army Spartan Brigade'. just a suggestion, v5 perhaps )
Beta1	posted 09-14-99 01:14 PM ET Not so sure about your cruise missiles - I suspect the only thing ever targetted would be perimeter defenses and unless they were made VERY hard to destroy or cruise missiles were made Very expensive it would unbalance the game. At the moment the bonuses given to defending bases are the only chance builders (esp AI) get - if you take these away it will make mid-late game wars to easy for the aggressive factions. The only other point is that if you put the prerequisite tech late in the game to negate these problems it becomes irrelevant as blink technology arrives Beta-1
Beta1	posted 09-14-99 01:16 PM ET Oh yeah and if you want your AA battery try a missile or better speeder with air superiority ability. And there even mobile as well. Beta-1 Wonders if interceptor v ground based AAA is calculated attack v attack or attack v armour?
JAMstillAM	posted 09-14-99 02:41 PM ET Ravenloff, I respectfully disagree, on the subject of the targetting capability of "cruise missiles" in SMAC. Keep in mind that the bases are completely sealed, from the environment. Therefore, until a missile tore through the base's outside walls, it would not be able to distinguish what lay beneath. Of course, then it would explode, and thus not be able to target particular facilities within the base. Hence, the "target" destroyed would be completely random. Also, the Aerospace Complexes serve the purpose of AAA protection, though IMHO, they should extend that protection to units that are within their protection radius (2 tiles) so that it is consistent with their ability to prevent airdrops. JAMiAM
Darkstar	posted 09-14-99 02:54 PM ET Jam, You reasoning of sealed bases seems flawed by SMAC's lack of consistancy. Example: Sealed bases would be immune to Nerve Gas attacks. Your reasoning has only the Hive immune to cruise missiles. I think what is actually missing is the ability to selectively TARGET facilities in a base. This could be a good thing when I am doing it. It would be a bad thing when it was done to me. In free sociaties, I should not have to tell them to build Children Creche's and Fusion Labs, and all those other things that serve the community. I should only have to order Military concerns, and change what it is that the Contractors are working on. While this might not be an appropriate model for Yang, any Free Market or Democracy would certainly seem to qualify as operating under these principles. Bonuses? I get extra work and simu facilities/production. Drawback? If they want it, they are going to make it... I can only delay it. Costs... if I need to use that facility (such as building a Jet at a people built Aerospace complex that was automatically built to take full advantage of orbitting facilities), it costs me more to use THAT FACILITY (having to buy it's time during the period of use.) Otherwise, costs me less to nothing as the corporate sectors and its own economic system sustains it. There are just certain models where the Socialistic model (Government owned and ran) fit well, and others in which it doesn't. -Darkstar
SMACTrek	posted 09-14-99 03:00 PM ET Probes can already be used to sabotage specific base facilities. Maybe allow the missile to use the probe payload as a one-shot deal? Seeing how I try to stop the computer from even getting Orbital Spaceflight, this shouldn't hurt me
JAMstillAM	posted 09-14-99 03:01 PM ET Darkstar, Actually, the nerve gas can be easily inserted into the sealed bases, when the shell is breached. The atmosphere of Chiron is not immediately poisonous (overly nitrogen rich IIRC) but not breathable, long term. So it's not too much of a stretch to assume that the internal architecture would be fairly open and not requiring of an extensive airlock system. Oxygenators scattered throughout the base could take care of the normal breathing needs and offset leakage from the outside, but be incapable of protecting against nerve gas which was carried in by projectiles, or inserted after a hull breach. JAMiAM
Darkstar	posted 09-14-99 03:31 PM ET See, I don't think that the bases WOULD be open. Why? Accidents and self-preservation. The bases might not be as comparmentalized as SUBS, but certainly near the level of ships near and below possible water lines. Why? A large breeched area would lose it's O2, making any and all in it die. Plus, Nerve gas would be USELESS against Yang, whose people are the only sensible builders in a non-friendly atmosphere (underground). Why? Base compartmentalization would prevent 02 loss and a simple gas detection system (required for detecting blow outs) to shut down or seal ventilation systems would prevent the spread to the general populous. So, no loss. Shall we continue to debate this pointless batch? I don't see a working colony in a non-breathable atmosphere not taking the simple precautions to compartmentilize themselves. Certain construction styles would lend themselves even MORE to compartmentalization than others. You seem to feel that one giant dome covers the whole base, in which case blowing it up would kill the vast majority, rather than just a small group of them. Where does your compartmentalization begin? Natural accidents, let alone hostile actions, would dictate a sectioning (and better to submarine level) to prevent the loss of the base. Not only from blow outs and gassing, but fires, health, and other reasons... Nerve gas should be useless on anything that has complete cover from it, such as military units (which serve long periods in the field). Instead of gaining 50% bonus. Unlike EARTH troops, those guys are already in life support suits, so nasty things in the atmosphere won't bother them without eating through... -Darkstar
JAMstillAM	posted 09-14-99 04:54 PM ET Darkstar, Pointless? With you? Never, my dark-hearted and thick-skinned friend No doubt, there would be a degree of compartmentalization in base design. But, remember that we are talking about Human societies, which would probably dictate some level of openness in the base designs, for aesthetic and psychological purposes. I do agree that Yang's bases would be severely less pleasing, though. Also, though some breathing apparatus would be necessary for troops in the field, the suits themselves are not necessarily airtight, nor pressurized. So, residual nerve toxins, in the battlezone would be able to penetrate any breaches in combat apparel, whether the breaches are by design or by combat stresses (wear and tear, puncture, etc.) You know full well that most modern day nerve agents are designed to work transdermally. JAMiAM The Firaxian Psychophant
Bird1970	posted 09-16-99 02:54 AM ET The biggest problem I have with the game is with the Planet Gov. I mainly play multiplayer at home on my network. I have found that The Gov. ability to look into other factions bases, that you are at war with is unfair. This gives a huge advantage to the player who is gov. when it comes to human vs. human or human vs. computer combat. Lets face it, in real live you could never look into someone's base, that you where at war with, unless you had spys(Probes) in there bases. I propose that the gov. can only look into bases of factions that he has a Pact or Treaty with and not the factions that he has a Truce or Vendetta with. Lets leave the ability to look into enemy bases up to Probe Team. I have a more detailed opinion of exactly how it should work, but figure I should keep it simple. I understand how difficult it is to program. This message board was a really good Idea. The game designers get new ideas for thier next game and don't even have to pay for them. But as long as I get to see some of the ideas in the next Firaxis game I buy, I don't care. Bird1970
Natguy	posted 09-16-99 04:34 PM ET But when you're elected governor you HAVE an informant in every faction (like the probe teams) It tells you that when you're elected! Also, why don't I see the pressure dome? Wouldn't a big, thick bubble over an entire city be rather noticeable?
Darkstar	posted 09-16-99 08:47 PM ET Jam! Well, I think I will just have to offer to agree to disagree. But since these people get Secrets of the Human Brain pretty quickly, I'd think they'd be able to overcome any bad psych effects of close living. And each faction is going to have it's own way of doing things. I imagine Morgan has large parks and what not that one must book ahead and pay for the privalege. Miriam's would have these Grandious Temples and Cathedrals, and by being the only BIG or open things, would be much grander by comparison. Spartans? Nope. Compartmentalization = Fortress. One Man or Woman able to hold off large amounts of attackers/invaders. Yang? He'd WANT them in safe cozy homes and what not. You don't want an environment teaching them to look beyond their reach, or giving them wild ideas. And Defense strikes me as a concern of theirs, but maybe that's just the auto perimeter they get. University? They strike me as a mis-mash... large open areas and small hydro-parks... no consistant plan. Peace Keepers? Mostly small with common large areas for all to benefit... Gaians? A mixture, but more in keeping with a natural look and feel... just look at their bases! So, for base design, I'd say a large part would be up to your target. I just can't imagine gas being effective in the SLIGHTEST against the Spartans or Hive. Spartans because they are just gun toting paranoid survivalist. Hive cause it's Yang, and he'd be paranoid of rebels using it on his own people... As far as troops go, that's a matter of style and opinion, but I would think it's a bit more complex than a breathing tube up their nose... But yes, certainly many Gases would be effective with just dermal exposure. But I still don't see the troops working like that... and wouldn't the gases be useless versus anything but Infantry (presuming that Infantry aren't suitably sealed)? Since 02 has to be supplied in the first place, that makes it easier to just seal them and rule out gas problems. -Darkstar
epocat	posted 09-17-99 12:26 PM ET I agree with Ravenloff in regards to being able to choose specific targets when firing a missile. It definetly makes sence. In addition, given the fact that there are vast oceans I believe there is room for a few seasonal tropical storms/ hurricanes at sea which may affect shipping and tropical coastal cities ie . destroying solar collectors, roads etc, and even delay the extraction of minerals and nutrints for a number of turns.
Darkman	posted 09-17-99 12:43 PM ET I think the missile idea would be neat, but would have to have some counter balance. I would like to see the option for better sensors. I like that they were added, but I want to line my coast with radar to spot incoming ships. The 2 range of the sensors is useless for spotting an invasion. Greater tech should increase your sighting too.
Raging Mouse	posted 09-17-99 03:27 PM ET Umm, I'm not sure if someone has suggested something like this already, but here goes.. How about an EMP-missile? We have conventional and nukes, so how �bout EMP? It could do a lot of stuff; Strike bases, and all energy- and minerals (surplus) production is negated for one turn, OR, strike a square of your choice to immobilize all units within a certain area of effect for one turn (potentially lethal for air-units, BTW). This area of effect could be dependent on your reactor, just like the nuke.
Y	posted 09-18-99 11:39 AM ET Think....., if they had all that fancy stuff. WHAT IF THE AI USED IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If it hit one of your bases with a missile that had a really good secret project, you would be screaming at your computer for hours yelling about how unfair it is for the AI to blow up a secret project. THINK!!!
Ravenloff	posted 09-18-99 06:21 PM ET I seem to remember a certain rocket program the Germans had going in WWII. We bombed the hell out of it. It happens in war, you know. The key here is that you have to be up on your base security. You must protect your base with probe units, keep your probe level up, etc. Also, A conventional cruise missile would only do a percentage of damage, not totally wipe out a project. The amount would be based on the type of reactor. Completed projects would be EXTREMELY hard to destroy (high hit points).