Suggested Fixes to Tech Tree - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  Suggested Fixes to Tech Tree

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Suggested Fixes to Tech Tree

StargazerBC posted 05-28-99 11:11 AM ET
Yes. Everything about it. A while ago, there was a slight mention about the faults in SMAC tech tree: not enough engrossing explanations of tech (someone gave an example of chaos cannon: weapon with eight damage, etc.). Tech tree's aren't well thought out as to attack/defend ratio. Not enough technology. Need. . .more. . .variety. Anyone else?
Darkstar posted 05-28-99 12:41 PM ET
I'd second that thought. The way certain techs are rated for their Blind Research quotient seem to favor the 4-1 attacker strength to defender armor odds overall makes for less interesting play than when one has to build a Normandy Beach style invasion force to successfully take a beachhead city. For me it more like a commando raid of just 2 to 4 units most of the time (depending if I bother putting in a defender or two). What is this? SMAC or EMPIRE?
-Darkstar
K posted 05-28-99 02:22 PM ET
Sure, I enjoy psuedoscience as much the the next SF fan. Let's see an expanded info section.
But more tech would really just screw up the game.
What I really want to do is to slow up the late-tech progression. I tend to do a mandatory tech upgrade for my garrison and anti-invasion troops that progresses from Impact to Missile, Missle to Shard, and Shard to Singularity, but most of the time I'm done with the heavy combat portion of my game by the Time I've got Impact, and anything else is just repelling invasions.
And if you don't like the Attack/Defence ratio, then just go into the alpha.txt with a text editor and change the attack of defence values for the different weapons. It'll take you less then two minutes.
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: Suggested Fixes to Tech Tree
StargazerBC	posted 05-28-99 11:11 AM ET Yes. Everything about it. A while ago, there was a slight mention about the faults in SMAC tech tree: not enough engrossing explanations of tech (someone gave an example of chaos cannon: weapon with eight damage, etc.). Tech tree's aren't well thought out as to attack/defend ratio. Not enough technology. Need. . .more. . .variety. Anyone else?
Darkstar	posted 05-28-99 12:41 PM ET I'd second that thought. The way certain techs are rated for their Blind Research quotient seem to favor the 4-1 attacker strength to defender armor odds overall makes for less interesting play than when one has to build a Normandy Beach style invasion force to successfully take a beachhead city. For me it more like a commando raid of just 2 to 4 units most of the time (depending if I bother putting in a defender or two). What is this? SMAC or EMPIRE? -Darkstar
K	posted 05-28-99 02:22 PM ET Sure, I enjoy psuedoscience as much the the next SF fan. Let's see an expanded info section. But more tech would really just screw up the game. What I really want to do is to slow up the late-tech progression. I tend to do a mandatory tech upgrade for my garrison and anti-invasion troops that progresses from Impact to Missile, Missle to Shard, and Shard to Singularity, but most of the time I'm done with the heavy combat portion of my game by the Time I've got Impact, and anything else is just repelling invasions. And if you don't like the Attack/Defence ratio, then just go into the alpha.txt with a text editor and change the attack of defence values for the different weapons. It'll take you less then two minutes.