|
| Re: Why unlimited counter-design is bad? |
Wed, 18 June 2014 09:15   |
|
 skoormit |
 | Lieutenant |
Messages: 665
Registered: July 2008
Location: Alabama | |
|
I can't imagine Stars without a design limit. Design management adds a significant layer to the grand campaign strategy.
I hate to go literary (on internet posts about 4x strategy games), but I can do no better than to reiterate William Wordsworth:
Nuns fret not at their convent's narrow room;
And hermits are contented with their cells;
And students with their pensive citadels;
Maids at the wheel, the weaver at his loom,
Sit blithe and happy; bees that soar for bloom,
High as the highest Peak of Furness-fells,
Will murmur by the hour in foxglove bells:
In truth the prison, into which we doom
Ourselves, no prison is: and hence for me,
In sundry moods, 'twas pastime to be bound
Within the Sonnet's scanty plot of ground;
Pleased if some Souls (for such there needs must be)
Who have felt the weight of too much liberty,
Should find brief solace there, as I have found.
A poem two centuries old, relevant in a discussion about a game two decades old. Yay, culture.
What we need's a few good taters.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Why unlimited counter-design is bad? |
Wed, 18 June 2014 10:11 |
|
| mrvan |
 | Officer Cadet 1st Year |
Messages: 220
Registered: May 2014 | |
|
Quote:
What I'd really like to do is build some ships, then add extra features later (i.e. upgrade or replace components in a slot)
That would allow me to upgrade the engines of transferred ships - and then upgrade shields etc as well...
You can, it is called "ultimate recycling" 
I agree that in real life there is room for ~infinite designs and especially variations. Each fighter jet comes in different configurations and they get upgrades all the time to incorporate new technologies. However, many different base designs also bring costs in terms of logisitcal and training complexity; and for older models the cost of maintaining can become so high that building new hardware is more cost efficient.
In a game, however, it would be very complicated to add ship decay, maintenance, upgrading, etc, especially since Stars! is already quite complex. The modern computer can certainly handle it, but we as players didn't evolve so much and adding extra complexity without offering more real strategic choices is not good.
What I think we all admire in stars! is how a relatively simple game with many choices born out of computing necessity as much as of game design (such as the 16 ship limit) creates such a well balanced game with so many interesting choices and options. In real life, a private soldier that crosses the battle line doesn't automatically turn into a general, either. ..
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Why unlimited counter-design is bad? |
Wed, 18 June 2014 10:32 |
|
|
|
He's referring to the 10% Healing boost by SFX ships.
I know my minefields.. but I'm a chaff sweeper.
I used to curse when I got stuck in traffic... till I realised I AM traffic.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Why unlimited counter-design is bad? |
Wed, 18 June 2014 16:10 |
|
|
|
skoormit wrote on Wed, 18 June 2014 15:15I can't imagine Stars without a design limit. Design management adds a significant layer to the grand campaign strategy.
I absolutely agree.
Apart from that a well developed Stars game comes with all problems of a 4x game already: with every turn more orders, more ships, more planets etc. The 16-ship-limit together with the ship-filter-display-options keeps me sane and the workload somehow managable.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Why unlimited counter-design is bad?
Nice idea to implement for a remake as in the stars3 thread btw.