| slow tech advances |
Thu, 17 July 2003 06:18  |
|
 kaylord |
 | Crewman 3rd Class |
Messages: 6
Registered: July 2003
Location: Germany | |
|
I like playing with that option turned on. Makes the pre-jihad-phase a more interesting times. I wonder how the cheap/expensive-tech choices of your race translate when u use this option. IOW, is exp tech even more difficult to overcome? Does cheap tech become more important?
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: slow tech advances |
Thu, 17 July 2003 06:35  |
|
| Micha | 
 | |
Messages: 2342
Registered: November 2002
Location: Belgium GMT +1 | |
|
| kaylord wrote on Thu, 17 July 2003 12:18 |
I like playing with that option turned on. Makes the pre-jihad-phase a more interesting times. I wonder how the cheap/expensive-tech choices of your race translate when u use this option. IOW, is exp tech even more difficult to overcome? Does cheap tech become more important?
|
Personally I hate the games where everybody is happy and making friends while researching to arma nubs before starting a war.
Therefore in my Penta team game I'm using Slower Tech, combined with the fact that the game will end in 2500 (if one team has enough of the target planets conquered) and that every other team is your enemy this resulted in some nice and early DD/FF battles so far.  Much more interesting than just building up your economy till 2480. This was a war from the get go, very intense fighting and planning strategy, I love it!
I wonder if anyone is going for nubs anyway. 
As for tech, twice the cost is really really hard, cheap techs become much more important IMHO, in other games you can rather easily overcome the expensive techs if you use the RW points to boost your economy, with Slower Tech it gets twice as hard. 
Non NRSE races will have a HARD time to get to their warp10 engine ...
mch
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: slow tech advances |
Thu, 17 July 2003 07:50 |
|
| kaylord |
| Crewman 3rd Class |
Messages: 6
Registered: July 2003
Location: Germany | |
|
IMO, the aim should be to disable or lessen that resource-to-tech translation. That could be achieved by a disproportional increase of the exp. research costs in relation to the cheap-tech. With that option turned on, one couldnīt buy points for exp. tech and boost economy AND get tech as quickly as someone who did not boost economy but chose cheaper tech.
My impression currently is, that slower tech is only a proportional increase. That means spending points for cheap tech does not become more important; the research duration is longer for both an economy monster and a wanna-be-researcher-race. The resource monster thus wins anyway.
Boosting economy is still the key to getting tech early. Perhaps one could change the ratio with the option turned on: Say if now only the required res-points to attain a given tech was doubled, you could instead triple it for exp. tech ONLY (that is, in addition/independently from the +75% which is there anyway). I donīt know if that sounds clear enough?
The result should be a game where there are ARmageddon BBs, but very few ones as the researcher races wouldnīt have enough economy to build that many. The resource race has low tech, but in overwhelming numbers. Both sides could compete with different *economic* styles.
[Updated on: Thu, 17 July 2003 07:54] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: slow tech advances |
Thu, 17 July 2003 14:16 |
|
|
|
Yeah. factoryless is screwed in Slow Tech, as they can't get good warfighting tech before the QS races have ramped.
OTOH, a qs SD can be vicious, as their mines are a serious threat to enemy ships for a lot longer, meaning they can overrun territory and hold it against essentially infinite numbers of frigates. It's not like they'd be easy pickings in a non-STA game though.
[Updated on: Thu, 17 July 2003 14:18] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
