Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Bar » Revival of an interesting idea? (Game Concept: Larger Map with Less MM)
Re: Revival of an interesting idea? |
Sun, 20 April 2014 15:14 |
|
skoormit | | Lieutenant | Messages: 665
Registered: July 2008 Location: Alabama | |
|
XAPBob wrote on Sun, 20 April 2014 13:13It generally takea far more effort to drag bombers around than warships...
I can't work out whether armed stations are sufficiently equivalent to planetary defenses (both cost minerals/resources and make a planet harder to kill, neither can initiate offense).
Without chaff around the attack SB order might not be as bad for AR? I generally don't like it that much, you can't target any other token...
The effort required to bring bombers along is very high in the early game, but tends to drop pretty far by the midgame when warp9+ engines and the SFX make the fuel problem easily manageable.
You still have to build the bombers, though, and that's non-trivial. But attacking a fully armed AR death star requires many more warships than attacking an unarmed one.
The attack SB order is still bad for AR, regardless of chaff, since the attacker can in many cases attack an AR planet with 100% confidence that he will destroy the base, even if he can't defeat the AR's fleet.
With this rule set (in particular, imposing a limit to orbitals for non-AR) it seems like AR is a square peg we are trying to jam into a round hole.
[Updated on: Sun, 20 April 2014 15:15]
What we need's a few good taters.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: skoormit on Fri, 18 April 2014 14:56
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: craebild on Sat, 19 April 2014 04:52
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: skoormit on Sun, 20 April 2014 13:35
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: XAPBob on Sat, 19 April 2014 13:34
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: craebild on Sat, 19 April 2014 23:43
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: XAPBob on Sun, 20 April 2014 03:29
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: craebild on Sun, 20 April 2014 03:38
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: XAPBob on Sun, 20 April 2014 03:49
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: skoormit on Sun, 20 April 2014 13:26
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: XAPBob on Sun, 20 April 2014 13:32
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: skoormit on Sun, 20 April 2014 13:43
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: XAPBob on Sun, 20 April 2014 14:13
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: skoormit on Sun, 20 April 2014 15:14
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: XAPBob on Mon, 21 April 2014 13:07
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: skoormit on Mon, 21 April 2014 15:25
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: Asmodai on Fri, 16 May 2014 09:22
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: Asmodai on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:15
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: Asmodai on Thu, 22 May 2014 04:07
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: nmid on Thu, 22 May 2014 05:15
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: nmid on Thu, 22 May 2014 05:19
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: XAPBob on Thu, 22 May 2014 05:31
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
|
|
|
Re: Revival of an interesting idea?
By: theval on Sat, 24 May 2014 07:50
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 23 08:53:15 EDT 2024
|