This combination makes me shudder. It will end up in a refit slugfest. In my opinion what will happen is: one player will send cheap ship at his enemy to see what weapon configuration he has, refit his battlegroup and just wipe out the enemy fleet because he will counter it. Which in turn will lead to the fact that the other player refits his next battlegroup to what he needs hopefully before the other player refits it back or sth..

that doesnt sound like much fun and it makes the defense of frontline systems next to impossible.



I really think that the RPS combat can not be the answer for a playable multiplayer turn-based 4X game or take the instant refit out of the game, but I feel something has to be done about this before the game goes multiplayer.

There's also the possibilty of multiple fleets of different setups. So one player might have a missile/shield fleet, a beam/kinetic fleet, a beam/flak fleet... There's an improvement about 1/3rd up the tech tree that lets you see what enemy fleets have while they're in transit. Combine this with different fleet setups, and you could easily crush anyone who tries to "out guess" you.



The instant refit costs an enormous amount of dust (100+ per CP). They also have to be at their own system to refit.



Personally I like the RPS idea. It's a similar to systems like Civ 4 but much simpler and less arbitrary. Also lets you surprise enemies with designs they weren't expecting.

I imagine it will end up in an entirely omni-tanked fleet with all three damage types.

ArrowLance wrote:
I imagine it will end up in an entirely omni-tanked fleet with all three damage types.

This would lose to a tri-armor mono-weapon fleet. Preferably missiles. ;]

The secret is in the cards, there will be a point where the ships mean nothing and the fate of a fight will be decided by the cards you play. This is even true when in the early game, if you manage to counter some cards you gain a great boost. Sometimes it only takes one to change everything.



And don't forget the hero, it adds a lot to a fight.



"Trust in the heart of the cards"

liq3 wrote:
This would lose to a tri-armor mono-weapon fleet. Preferably missiles. ;]

A mono weapon fleet is countered by playing the mono-resist boost card. Technologies also develop uneven. Also the cost of not omni-tanking is losing all your ships to destroyers.

I'm glad someone brought this up because it is a concern of mine as well. I don't want to have to spend the whole game micromanaging my retrofits. At the same time, I realize that they are an integral part of the game mechanics and thus SHOULD be pretty darn important. I think cost, and maybe even time (maybe a few turns to retrofit a fleet based upon size?) would help alleviate this tendency to retrofit to death. In the end, well-balanced fleets should reign and overall galactic strategy should remain king.



Another thing that might help is reducing the tendency of counters to be so "hard". Defense modules only defend against their specialized weapon counter. What if they also provided a small base amount of defense as well? It would make the rock/paper/scissors aspect less overpowering and encourage intelligent, balanced fleet designs while still allowing specialized fleets to play a big part in the game.



Edit: I also just remembered that there is a cap on 10 ship designs. This might contribute to reducing retrofit rage a bit more than it currently does in single player, but idk if it will reduce it enough....

ArrowLance wrote:
A mono weapon fleet is countered by playing the mono-resist boost card. Technologies also develop uneven. Also the cost of not omni-tanking is losing all your ships to destroyers.

If you play that predictably it'd be easy to play a counter your card (either a direct counter, or a damage boosting one). Also tri = 3, omni = all, thus in this omni = tri.

Mesthione wrote:
Another thing that might help is reducing the tendency of counters to be so "hard". Defense modules only defend against their specialized weapon counter. What if they also provided a small base amount of defense as well? It would make the rock/paper/scissors aspect less overpowering and encourage intelligent, balanced fleet designs while still allowing specialized fleets to play a big part in the game.

I've gotta agree with this; some overlap would be nice.



Perhaps later on in the tree, Flak could provide some defence against Kinetics (Advanced Targeting?) Armor against Beams (Absorption?) and Shields against Missiles (Short Circuit?)

Krisko wrote:
I've gotta agree with this; some overlap would be nice.



Perhaps later on in the tree, Flak could provide some defence against Kinetics (Advanced Targeting?) Armor against Beams (Absorption?) and Shields against Missiles (Short Circuit?)

Armor increases the HP of the ship, so in a way it does protect from all damage, what it doesn't do is reduce the damage received from beams.

Krisko wrote:
Perhaps later on in the tree, Flak could provide some defence against Kinetics (Advanced Targeting?) Armor against Beams (Absorption?) and Shields against Missiles (Short Circuit?)

I agree with some overlap, maybe have the ones not currently functioning serve 1/3 or 1/4 their intended purpose but on another defensive slot. Like if you had 300 to deflectors but their not using kinetics get about 75 or so to one that needs it?

StK wrote:
This combination makes me shudder. It will end up in a refit slugfest. In my opinion what will happen is: one player will send cheap ship at his enemy to see what weapon configuration he has, refit his battlegroup and just wipe out the enemy fleet because he will counter it. Which in turn will lead to the fact that the other player refits his next battlegroup to what he needs hopefully before the other player refits it back or sth..

that doesnt sound like much fun and it makes the defense of frontline systems next to impossible.



I really think that the RPS combat can not be the answer for a playable multiplayer turn-based 4X game or take the instant refit out of the game, but I feel something has to be done about this before the game goes multiplayer.

I'm not sure such a refitting fit would be possible without an endless supply of dust.

And that is why a multi player game with the battle-system in its current state will end up with the most dust blessed player winning. because he has the ressouces to adapt very fast and allways to the new ship designs of the enemy play.



which is not really fun and cool. but i would change this RPS system anyway. i hope they do this. ....

quastebec wrote:
And that is why a multi player game with the battle-system in its current state will end up with the most dust blessed player winning. because he has the ressouces to adapt very fast and allways to the new ship designs of the enemy play.



which is not really fun and cool. but i would change this RPS system anyway. i hope they do this. ....

Obviously, because science, industry and food are useless!