Some things about moo2 have been slowly driving me up the wall.
The biggest one is that this game takes SOOO LONG to play. Much longer than a game of moo3 would have taken for the following two reasons. (and please don't start saying moo3 sucks. imho more ppl would be playing moo3 if the developer had an extension to make the combat engine work like the manual said it would).
So I think the following two items would greatly speed up play. These were in moo3 and I think the game was better off as a result.
1) Turn Timer. I would rather play more turns and feel a little rushed.
2) BAttle Timer. Some guys take forever. While it might be great for the guy taking all day, its not for everyone else in the game.
Another thing that seems really stupid and is annoying is that you have to choose between boosting your research and hitting stuff with beam weapons.
How about letting us have the option to stack battlescanners? LB is that something that can be done without too much work? Most of the weapons available are direct fire weapons. But if you take reslabs/supers good luck. Sure you can hit stuff with certain weapons that offer the CO mod but please, that is the only way? Why couldn't you just fill up more hullspace with electronics. Another ship design from this change would be an AWACS like ship. Take a cruiser and fill it with nothing but battlescanners. It would be able to pierce the darkness of space and allow you to scan for enemy ships. I think it would be fun.
Budee
Improvements to the Game (Such as Stacking Battlescanners)
I agree with the timer idea. But I disagree with your battlescanner idea. I still think that missiles will be too easily shot down then.
Nevertheless, I looked into the OCL area of the save. You can use the OCL editor and actually edit that the battlescanner is no longer greyed out after you have chosen the first one. But when you choose the 2nd BS the red error message still appears.
Nevertheless, I looked into the OCL area of the save. You can use the OCL editor and actually edit that the battlescanner is no longer greyed out after you have chosen the first one. But when you choose the 2nd BS the red error message still appears.
I like the Battle timer idea. What about having a battle stretch out over a few game turns? For example, You enter into a battle and the timer runs out before the battle is resolved. You and the other players play another full game turn then continue the battle from where you left off in previous turn. This way the other players are not waiting for a long battle to be resolved. You would still have adequate time to resolve battles.
I like the timer ideas. That was one of a few changes I did like in moo3,
along with some of the combat too.
The stacking Battlescanners on a ship sounds interesting. However, I would be concerned about stacking all specials. If it is changed in the code so that every special that was greyed out could be added multiple times, then what would prevent someone from stacking Automated Damage Control, or Reinforced Hull? or Battle Pods?
It may be possible to find some other specials that could be stacked as well (Security Stations, Scout Lab come to mind as possible good choices too). Some would not make sence (Shield Capacitor, Stealth Field, Warp Dissipator). And, some would drastically change the game (Structural Analyzer, Time Warp Facilitator, Displacement Device and others above).
If a way is found to accomplish this change, I hope it is a balanced one.
I for one look forward to further upgrade versions.
Keep up the good work.
along with some of the combat too.
The stacking Battlescanners on a ship sounds interesting. However, I would be concerned about stacking all specials. If it is changed in the code so that every special that was greyed out could be added multiple times, then what would prevent someone from stacking Automated Damage Control, or Reinforced Hull? or Battle Pods?
It may be possible to find some other specials that could be stacked as well (Security Stations, Scout Lab come to mind as possible good choices too). Some would not make sence (Shield Capacitor, Stealth Field, Warp Dissipator). And, some would drastically change the game (Structural Analyzer, Time Warp Facilitator, Displacement Device and others above).
If a way is found to accomplish this change, I hope it is a balanced one.
I for one look forward to further upgrade versions.
Keep up the good work.
MOO1 Fan, MOO2 Fan, MOO3 needed too many changes = hopeless, getting older waiting for a MOO4 (still).
Sorry, I forgot to mention...
Some have mentioned rearranging some of the techs in the tech tree.
You may have found one that would be a good one to move.
I know I don't choose Cybertronic Computer over Autolab, lol.
That's one that could be moved to one earlier or later imho.
Some have mentioned rearranging some of the techs in the tech tree.
You may have found one that would be a good one to move.
I know I don't choose Cybertronic Computer over Autolab, lol.
That's one that could be moved to one earlier or later imho.
MOO1 Fan, MOO2 Fan, MOO3 needed too many changes = hopeless, getting older waiting for a MOO4 (still).
-
- Posts:10
- Joined:Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:13 am
- Location:Frankfurt/Main - Germany
I don't think, adding multiple battlescanners is a good choice.
Let's say you have Scout Labs on your ship. It is not useful to have more than 1/3 of your ship space filled with labs. Likewise, it isn't useful to have more than 1/3 of your crew work on labs. Just remember, that any ship represents a combat ship. Anything else is included in planetary research points (such as probes, research ships, and so on)...
Battlescanners represent a tactical scanning device. It's not possible to get the bonus twice. I could imagine, that this devices analyses possible movements of the enemy ship as well as any unseen galactical effects (gravitation), that could deflect the beam. So if you include this into your computer calculation, you can't add it twice. You ALREADY know anything about it. Adding something else would mean, that you have do get new data as with structural analyser. Battle scanners scan for galactical effects as well as combat position/movement, but don't include weak armor points on this calculation.
If you want to add multiple battlescanners to increase scanning range, it's simple impossible to do so. It's the same with putting your ship into space between two planets, to be in range of both planets and getting scanning range from this point.
Let's say you have Scout Labs on your ship. It is not useful to have more than 1/3 of your ship space filled with labs. Likewise, it isn't useful to have more than 1/3 of your crew work on labs. Just remember, that any ship represents a combat ship. Anything else is included in planetary research points (such as probes, research ships, and so on)...
Battlescanners represent a tactical scanning device. It's not possible to get the bonus twice. I could imagine, that this devices analyses possible movements of the enemy ship as well as any unseen galactical effects (gravitation), that could deflect the beam. So if you include this into your computer calculation, you can't add it twice. You ALREADY know anything about it. Adding something else would mean, that you have do get new data as with structural analyser. Battle scanners scan for galactical effects as well as combat position/movement, but don't include weak armor points on this calculation.
If you want to add multiple battlescanners to increase scanning range, it's simple impossible to do so. It's the same with putting your ship into space between two planets, to be in range of both planets and getting scanning range from this point.
hmmm interesting .......
but have you ever heard of AWAC?
carrier battle groups have smaller versions of them that can take off. In case you aren't aware, they are really big planes. much bigger than fighters and can scan very vast distances. more than the fighters can.
of course i could argue your point, that the fighters see everything, and doubling up on the scanners would be pointless.
phht
but have you ever heard of AWAC?
carrier battle groups have smaller versions of them that can take off. In case you aren't aware, they are really big planes. much bigger than fighters and can scan very vast distances. more than the fighters can.
of course i could argue your point, that the fighters see everything, and doubling up on the scanners would be pointless.
phht
bundee, I see your point, and have used such a unit in single player games. It is a frigate, with only a battlescanner (for the +2 scanning range) extendend range fuel cells, and later stealth field, or cloaking device. Great for a spy scout. No weapons, but great for leaving in star systems (that have no useful planets) to spy on neighbors. They can't see it, but, I can track their movements. It's like the Observer from Starcraft.
MOO1 Fan, MOO2 Fan, MOO3 needed too many changes = hopeless, getting older waiting for a MOO4 (still).
-
- Posts:10
- Joined:Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:13 am
- Location:Frankfurt/Main - Germany
A solution to what you said might be that players can't SCAN enemy ships during combat, except they have a battlescanner installed.but have you ever heard of AWAC?
carrier battle groups have smaller versions of them that can take off. In case you aren't aware, they are really big planes. much bigger than fighters and can scan very vast distances. more than the fighters can.
-
- Posts:15
- Joined:Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:32 am
- Contact:
Only if turned to weapons. Anyway, why it should use different space on different hulls while retaining the same effect ?..How about letting us have the option to stack battlescanners?
It should not be linear stacking of % bonuses, of course. And as Weapon, it's more flexible: you could make single unit small and inefficient, but stackable to greater effect while eating more space. Then add initial variant of detection system (puny, but stackable too).I still think that missiles will be too easily shot down then.
Even i can tell: not with BS as Special and data structures intact. Specials are 1-bit flags and all are used. But if it will be known where Specials are checked and how references to weapons table are made, this could be done via conversion to Weapon.LB is that something that can be done without too much work?
2 LB: any results in this area ?
SWACS. Precisely. And un-arcade ECM as well. And supply ships with Repair Shuttles. Maybe we move to normal fleet structure ?..Another ship design from this change would be an AWACS like ship.
But of course it's in context of mods with drastical changes not only "patch".
To do it we should know where Special is checked and so being able to control effect (applied in next few commands) anyway. If you can make ARU stackable, you can make it repair fixed Dam value per unit. But it's not likely to make all Specials stackable at once.I would be concerned about stacking all specials.
Yes, but our lists differs. Various shield helpers could give fixed bonuses to shield strength or regeneration. Even using arc — after all, AI's reluctance to use wide arcs is lesser flaw if it makes fore shield much stronger.some other specials that could be stacked as well (Security Stations, Scout Lab come to mind as possible good choices too). Some would not make sence (Shield Capacitor, Stealth Field, Warp Dissipator).
Stealth Field — if it works via gradually adjusting probability and/or range of detection.
Warp Dissipator — if there will be check "Ships drive vs. power/range to dissipator". It's good idea anyway, allowing Doomstar with advanced drive to mostly ignore Frigates' small and cheap dissipators (though maybe damaged drives could have chance to break ship in process).
Speaking of new "weapons", i like idea of repair boats - "fighters" repairing some fixed damage (depending of construction level, corresponding to their own miniaturisation) to friendly ship — at least, Armor part. As another alternative to ADC/ARU.
Depends on situation. Perhaps that Feudal bonus should not extend to non-combat features, but otherwise it's players problem to figure out whether it will be advantageous or not to do it.It is not useful to have more than 1/3 of your ship space filled with labs. Likewise, it isn't useful to have more than 1/3 of your crew work on labs.
BTW, if old Specials will be turned to Weapons, we'll have free bits for new specials. Hence...
Civil Hull: less cost, more space, but less armor, structure, speed and evasion. Lower HPs of systems. So you can pack big ugly barge full with missiles, and it will be useful in combat. But it's still an ugly barge.
Let's say system just bigger. Antennae, mirrors, detectors, whatever. And arrays of all this. For known detection systems size usually matters, and number of parallel system frequently matters too.If you want to add multiple battlescanners to increase scanning range, it's simple impossible to do so.
I can imagine Spelljammer MoO2 mod, but... Anything can be "theologized" on or off, but IMO it will be ultimately up to specific mod's author what to pick and what to drop, depending on conception anyway.Battlescanners represent a tactical scanning device.
I could imagine, that this devices analyses possible movements of the enemy ship as well as any unseen galactical effects (gravitation), that could deflect the beam.
I agree, it's best way to handle SCAN. Perhaps either Battlescanner or Structural Analyzer, though. And may depend of range (especially if stackable ).A solution to what you said might be that players can't SCAN enemy ships during combat, except they have a battlescanner installed.
"Two Eyes Good, Eleven Eyes Better."
- Michele Carter
- Michele Carter
Here is something that has bugged me for a long, long time now: if your race is NOT creative you can ONLY research ONE topic withn a tech field. The others are NOT available to research by you. CREATIVE races researches ALL of them at once. I think the races who do not have creative as a special ability should be allowed to research ALL of the item within a tech field....ONE AT A TIME!!!!! This gives them the choice of "moving on" to the next highest tech field OR to continue in the same field and download whatever other techs the player wants. Either way, they will NOT be able to keep up with the creative races and still have some hard choices to make. UNCREATIVE races should be the ones who can only research ONE item in a tech field.
Let me know what you think. It may not be possible to do this withoout a complete re-write of the source code. Maybe someone can use the idea in a game they are creating from scratch. Thanks
Let me know what you think. It may not be possible to do this withoout a complete re-write of the source code. Maybe someone can use the idea in a game they are creating from scratch. Thanks
continuing to learn
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests