[Discussion] Refitting to completely new designs should be restricted - Endless Space

[Discussion] Refitting to completely new designs should be restricted

Copied to clipboard!

Deirdre

Newcomer

Deirdre

Newcomer

13 years ago

Jul 20, 2012, 10:25:02 AM

How did this went from "limited retrofit option" which defeats the purpose of retrofit totally to enable early built ships to be useful late game

into micro standalone weapon / defence / support module production ...

the term "makes sense" in reality and physics is not really applicable in a "game" ...

since a 4x has to begin with being "imaginative"

0badgesSend private message

suth2436

Newcomer

suth2436

Newcomer

13 years ago

Jul 21, 2012, 3:31:44 AM

gameshoes wrote:
I guess this would help encourage players to make multiple versions of a ship.

Yes, but the arbitrary 30% increase in cost is dopey. Simply not allowing retrofitting to effect ship models that change chassis' is enough.

0badgesSend private message

gameshoes

Newcomer

gameshoes

Newcomer

13 years ago

Jul 21, 2012, 1:44:08 AM

I guess this would help encourage players to make multiple versions of a ship.

0badgesSend private message

Igncom1

Craver

Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery win wars.

Igncom1

Craver

13 years ago

Jul 20, 2012, 10:10:20 PM

Nosferatiel wrote:
Since the original plan was to fill the aircraft top to bottom with explosives and make a Kamikaze-attack on the panama canal, I doubt it.

The problem is still, that it is so far not possible to land on such a thing. So you'd have to make an airplane capable of landing on water or at the very least a VTOL.

So it was originally a basic cruise missile carrier? nice.

I will admit, crazier things have been accomplished.

0badgesSend private message

MODNosferatiel

Informer

"God's in his heaven, all's right with the world." Nerv Motto, Neon Genesis Evangelion

MODNosferatiel

Informer

13 years ago

Jul 20, 2012, 10:00:30 PM

Igncom1 wrote:
Well they were designed specifically that way, i mean by refitting one into another.

And i doubt the Japanese are the only nation to develop such an idea.....just saying.

Since the original plan was to fill the aircraft top to bottom with explosives and make a Kamikaze-attack on the panama canal, I doubt it.

The problem is still, that it is so far not possible to land on such a thing. So you'd have to make an airplane capable of landing on water or at the very least a VTOL.

0badgesSend private message

Igncom1

Craver

Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery win wars.

Igncom1

Craver

13 years ago

Jul 20, 2012, 9:58:33 PM

Well they were designed specifically that way, i mean by refitting one into another.

And i doubt the Japanese are the only nation to develop such an idea.....just saying.

0badgesSend private message

MODNosferatiel

Informer

"God's in his heaven, all's right with the world." Nerv Motto, Neon Genesis Evangelion

MODNosferatiel

Informer

13 years ago

Jul 20, 2012, 9:55:32 PM

Igncom1 wrote:
Its not like replacing a 16 inch gun with a tomahawk, a better comparison is changing a submarine into a carrier, it can be done but not by much.

Ever heard of the famous japanese subcarriers in WWII? They were so fearsome, that the US sunk all of them somewhere around Hawaii.

smiley: biggrin

Beware the I-400 class submarines!

On another note, I liked to build something alike in Alpha Centauri.

0badgesSend private message

Igncom1

Craver

Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery win wars.

Igncom1

Craver

13 years ago

Jul 20, 2012, 1:55:11 PM

Its not like replacing a 16 inch gun with a tomahawk, a better comparison is changing a submarine into a carrier, it can be done but not by much.

Besides that's not even the point, the point is to prevent people from changing their ships so differently with dust that they can undo the choices of the last ships design, undoing any point to balance from when people can turn a single line of ship into any part of the fleet.

The costs or refitting are already stupidly low.

(ow and the point of the number is due to the fact that people complained that i would suggest something yet have no actual number to be put into the game.)

0badgesSend private message

fourteenfour

Newcomer

fourteenfour

Newcomer

13 years ago

Jul 20, 2012, 1:44:11 PM

Lets see, in the good old days, if times around WW1 and WW2 could be considered good old days, they did exactly that. They converted ships from one role to another, would change out guns for larger ones, remove others completely, and more. Now I know, changing out barrel sizes isn't the same as changing from missiles to beam weapons or whatnot, but in practice it was for the most part. Handling of different size shells and powder meant turret changes could be expensive because of the supporting mechanisms. Ships have had boilers wholesale ripped out and replaced with modern ones. Even triple reciprocating engines replaced with turbines. Why? Because the guts of the ship were the easy part. Getting the hull built and the supporting structure was the difficult part. With the change in naval technology between the wars many cruisers and even larger ships were converted to carriers. That is a pretty big change. America put missile launchers onto later generation battleships, go figure which weapons were more capable in a modern world, the old 16 inch guns or the tomahawk launchers.

I still never understand your fixation with arbitrary numbers, like 30% and such. I disagree that one missile system is much like another, as one beam is not like another. Ships have hard points, what goes there is for the most part interchangeable. I would like to get away from the magic dust model of just buying upgrades - however restrictions like this are nonsensical. We are dealing with space faring races, who operate, build, and fight in a vacuum, I doubt refitting ships is difficult.

0badgesSend private message

suth2436

Newcomer

suth2436

Newcomer

13 years ago

Jul 20, 2012, 12:37:53 PM

Honestly, I see no problems with the current retrofit mechanic. It does seem odd to be able to switch chassis, but that's my only complaint - and that is easily remedied by simply adjusting retrofitting to not allow switches in chassis, only equipment. The 30% difference mechanic just seems too complicated a solution for such a small issue.

0badgesSend private message

Igncom1

Craver

Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery win wars.

Igncom1

Craver

13 years ago

Jul 17, 2012, 7:25:36 PM

I find it really really stupid that ships can refit to a completely different class, defensive ships becoming glass cannons, support ships becoming missile carriers.

I fell like a ships should not be able to refit if the newer version is more then 30% different to the original.

Battleships cant be turned into cruisers, that is full on loopy.

0badgesSend private message

MNOne

Newcomer

MNOne

Newcomer

13 years ago

Jul 20, 2012, 10:14:54 AM

Efyian wrote:
Honestly, by definition, retrofiting should be a change in equipment, not a complete overhaul of the chassis.

In this case, it's not so much a matter of whether it's game-breaking or not, as whether it makes sense.

Ditto that.

Draco18s wrote:
Figure out which components are different, by how much, and charge based on that.

That way a missile ship that's getting an upgrade in its missile system is going to be cheaper than retrofitting in beams or kinetics.

That seems like an eminantly sensible suggestion, and for a while I just assumed that was what was happening until I looked closer at the costs I was being charged.

0badgesSend private message

Igncom1

Craver

Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery win wars.

Igncom1

Craver

13 years ago

Jul 19, 2012, 4:13:11 AM

Yep, that was exactly what i had in mind.

0badgesSend private message

Draco18s

Newcomer

Draco18s

Newcomer

13 years ago

Jul 19, 2012, 4:07:08 AM

I'd like to see it done the way Space Empires did it. Figure out which components are different, by how much, and charge based on that.

That way a missile ship that's getting an upgrade in its missile system is going to be cheaper than retrofitting in beams or kinetics.

SE forced the ship to go in for repairs; every changed component was marked as "destroyed" and production had to be spent in order to repair those parts.

0badgesSend private message

Nitroglycerine

Survivor

- Nitro https://www.youtube.com/c/Nitroglycerine

Nitroglycerine

Survivor

13 years ago

Jul 19, 2012, 1:12:31 AM

I would definitely second Igncom1's suggestion.

Honestly, by definition, retrofiting should be a change in equipment, not a complete overhaul of the chassis.

In this case, it's not so much a matter of whether it's game-breaking or not, as whether it makes sense.

The way I see it, it's kind of like what you would do with a mothballed/reserve fleet.

0badgesSend private message

MODNosferatiel

Informer

"God's in his heaven, all's right with the world." Nerv Motto, Neon Genesis Evangelion

MODNosferatiel

Informer

13 years ago

Jul 18, 2012, 2:25:11 AM

Renamed the title.

0badgesSend private message

Igncom1

Craver

Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery win wars.

Igncom1

Craver

13 years ago

Jul 17, 2012, 9:12:54 PM

Yes it is, because your spending far too much money to refit that fleet.

0badgesSend private message

Deirdre

Newcomer

Deirdre

Newcomer

13 years ago

Jul 17, 2012, 9:09:17 PM

but , anyway , the 30% thing is not going to solve anything

say u have a 300MP ship , you simply modify it to 390 , upgrade it , and then to 507 , and then 659 ...

instead of 300 to 659 in 1 click ...

so whether the issue exist is one thing (a mere stupid is not really self-explanatory)

the solution is clearly not working

0badgesSend private message

Igncom1

Craver

Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery win wars.

Igncom1

Craver

13 years ago

Jul 17, 2012, 8:56:34 PM

You can buy ships and improvements...and if you generate enough dust over a game you can win that way, sooooo.

But the Civ comparison has no ground because you don't upgrade spear-men into cavalry. Spear-men - modern mechanized infantry is still infantry, infantry armed with IFV's.

0badgesSend private message

Deirdre

Newcomer

Deirdre

Newcomer

13 years ago

Jul 17, 2012, 8:52:37 PM

well some other 4X games would allow you to even improve the ship into the next / bigger class ... from a scout to dread with enough $ (eg : spearmen to morden mech [civ4])

its just like wearing different outfit on you going for different occasions , how "stupid" is that ?

the ship "class" remained its just the way you fit it makes the difference

if refit doesn't exist then everyone is forced to be industrial and expansionists since $$$ cannot win a war for you

then the game will come down to "who builds faster = win"

0badgesSend private message

?

Click here to login

Reply

Comment

Characters : 0

0badgesSend private message

PostCancel