Last edited:
- 17
- 1
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- 3
- 1
Thanks... did not notice that mod.
Our ideas seem rather similar so hopefully we can help each other with ideas and concepts.
I figure it will take some time to iron out all the concepts and release something to the community to play test for balance, I also think we all need more experience with the actual game first.
Our ideas seem rather similar so hopefully we can help each other with ideas and concepts.
I figure it will take some time to iron out all the concepts and release something to the community to play test for balance, I also think we all need more experience with the actual game first.
- 2
I like most of the things you have. I really would also like to idea number 4. The other I have thought of things to do to slow down the pace. I plan on have development time for colonies take 10 years before the cost goes down. I may cut the cost in half, but I think 6 months or whatever it takes is too soon for the development time to end. Are you planning on modding the event times for crisis to take longer? Are you planning on taking a out at fractions as well at one point?
I would like to work together help each other's mod take shape and if you both have the same ideas work together on the same mod.
I would like to work together help each other's mod take shape and if you both have the same ideas work together on the same mod.
- 1
Jorgen, when you say more research options, do you mean adding more techs into the research card deck?
And I agree with this 100%. It's always frustrating to have to choose between multiple mods. Especially mods of this type.
I'd be ecstatic to see a comprehensive overhaul mod like this that brings all the best modding talent together.
And I agree with this 100%. It's always frustrating to have to choose between multiple mods. Especially mods of this type.
I'd be ecstatic to see a comprehensive overhaul mod like this that brings all the best modding talent together.
I think that we definitely should share our ideas and experiences.. I intend to get about a weeks experience with the game and the mechanics before I do any serious modding. I will likely do some minor thing to experiment but nothing substantial.
My thought about colonies were that they are developed in stages... so first you have a couple of thousand individuals preparing and setting up the infrastructure of a working colony... once it is finished worlds would represent a few millions inhabitants... once the colony is upgraded to a the administration centre worlds would represent hundreds of millions of individuals... when upgraded to capital then worlds are in the billions. The last step would then be at Galactic Metropolis and worlds would represent tens of billions of not hundreds of billions of people. These are just abstract reflections of my ideas around these mechanics.
During the upgrade of the capital the colony would gradually cost less influence to maintain while the capital cost nothing and a metropolis would give you a very slight amount of influence (but require 20 pop to build).
Pops are basically your ability to work resources on the planet, which can easily be done with a relatively small amount of people.
I could also see that beginning with the capital you actually gain some positive ethos divergence, the more densely packed a planet are the harder it will be to keep ethoses in check while the starting colony will give some negative... this could lead to factions being stronger on less developed worlds if they decide to move there while people diverge more on planets with huge population numbers.
Planetary invasions should become harder and harder the more upgraded the planetary capital is... so some mechanic should be tied in with this as well.
I think there are many possibilities to add interesting mechanics to this with events, factions and ethoses going forward. But getting something set up and look on the files what is possible is the first step.
Last edited:
- 1
Yes... I mean adding more cards into the deck... fleshing out the current tech tree with more stuff not just make research take more time. There will need to be some balancing on the fact that your population count will rise more slowly while resources will be on average higher in comparison. This will lead to faster tech progression as an effect of that. So increasing the tech cost will most certainly be necessary just to offset that fact.
Last edited:
- 2
- 1
Greetings!
1. I would advocate doing both: research should take longer in general(esp. the early techs, later ones might be fine -- requires testing).
2. I think you're right on target here with pop. growth.
3/4/5. All look pretty good at this point.
6. From what I've seen the size of the weapon mount already makes a bigger difference than you seem to think. Obviously this will require observation with the actual game and changes made as necessary.
7. Like the thinking here as well.
8. Not necessarily opposed, but I think the system size and number of things in them is actually pretty good right now.
Hopefully I'll have time to test this stuff!
1. I would advocate doing both: research should take longer in general(esp. the early techs, later ones might be fine -- requires testing).
2. I think you're right on target here with pop. growth.
3/4/5. All look pretty good at this point.
6. From what I've seen the size of the weapon mount already makes a bigger difference than you seem to think. Obviously this will require observation with the actual game and changes made as necessary.
7. Like the thinking here as well.
8. Not necessarily opposed, but I think the system size and number of things in them is actually pretty good right now.
Hopefully I'll have time to test this stuff!
Yes... nothing is written in stone yet... everything is subject to change and if something does not work it should be tossed out or rethought.
I'm not certain exactly how I like to change the combat but I definitely want to make range really matter a bit more... but it will of course require some heavy testing and more experience with the actual game first.
That is...not very logical. As Armor would likly be a dense material it will block radiation extremly good.
- 3
I think it has more to do about abstraction and the relation between different system being more or less effected by shields or armour in different ways.
In space a nuclear blast will behave very different than in an atmosphere and certain radiation that is absorbed by the atmosphere will be hard to stop with armour and destroy biological life very fast. So I would say it is an abstraction and a relation between the capabilities between shields/armour and other weapon types.
In any way shape or form you do it, in the end, you just need to go with something and try to balance it with differerat weapon types.
I'm also not saying that what I said in my example are something that are in any way final.
So would any other type of weapon damage, that is not the point I was trying to convey. I also don't think I originally stated it would nullify armour (only about 20% reduction), I also don't think any weapon should get the ability to bypass armour by 100%.
It would rather be a comparison of different weapons types and their different ability to penetrate armour in relation to each other, not whether armour is useless or not.
What I basically said with my example was that shields are better at absorbing the radiation from a nuclear blast than physical armour is and that radiation is better at penetrating armour than a ballistic weapon.
Some very solid sounding ideas and I look forward to seeing what eventually comes out of it.
I'd have to agree with GrayCarlyle about the nukes though. Think of it this way, radiation is already a massive hazard that has to be taken into consideration when building a starship to begin with right? Add to that the fact that these are specifically military ships and one would imagine that extra radiation mitigation would already be built in.
One way to have the armor penetration make sense (and it may make sense to even step it up a bit possibly) is for the nuclear missiles to have bomb pumped x-ray laser warheads or shaped nuclear charges. They would detonate fairly close to the intended target and concentrate the energy of the detonation, which is being almost completely wasted (after all, only a small fraction of the energy from a standard nuclear detonation is actually going to interact with the target spacecraft) otherwise. Might give you a few more techs to play around with.
I'd have to agree with GrayCarlyle about the nukes though. Think of it this way, radiation is already a massive hazard that has to be taken into consideration when building a starship to begin with right? Add to that the fact that these are specifically military ships and one would imagine that extra radiation mitigation would already be built in.
One way to have the armor penetration make sense (and it may make sense to even step it up a bit possibly) is for the nuclear missiles to have bomb pumped x-ray laser warheads or shaped nuclear charges. They would detonate fairly close to the intended target and concentrate the energy of the detonation, which is being almost completely wasted (after all, only a small fraction of the energy from a standard nuclear detonation is actually going to interact with the target spacecraft) otherwise. Might give you a few more techs to play around with.
As with hyme's mode, I fully support this one. If you two agree enough so to join forces, all the better.
As small comment on 1: Increasing tech options over slowing down research is a nice thought, but completely infeasible in practice. If you want the overal game to last 3 or 5 times longer (as is your plans for pop growth), then you will need 3 or 5 times more tech, witch is a huge amount and would probably devolve into a bunch of boring generic techs that exist just to fill space.
Adding more tech is probably a good idea so you will get them at a reasonable pace instead of waiting ages for each one. But as Zorromorph suggested you need to have slower speed overall as well.https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?members/zorromorph.632827/
As small comment on 1: Increasing tech options over slowing down research is a nice thought, but completely infeasible in practice. If you want the overal game to last 3 or 5 times longer (as is your plans for pop growth), then you will need 3 or 5 times more tech, witch is a huge amount and would probably devolve into a bunch of boring generic techs that exist just to fill space.
Adding more tech is probably a good idea so you will get them at a reasonable pace instead of waiting ages for each one. But as Zorromorph suggested you need to have slower speed overall as well.https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?members/zorromorph.632827/
Thanks for your input, I would like to clarify my point one last time... this is not a choice of what the armour can protect against or its overall efficiency. It would be a choice between, are the armour better designed to protect against that type of radiation or the kinetic impact of a ballistic projectile.
My thought here was that armour would be foremost designed to protect against kinetic impacts (and shields against high energy) and less against heat and other forms of high energy radiation, thus lasers and other high energy sources are more effective against armour than say a ballistic projectile (in relative terms) or even a ball of plasma which are both kinetic and high energy (or could be thought of being both).It doesn't mean armour are ineffective against nukes, just less effective than against a projectile. It is a relation thing, not the inefficiency of the armour.
But anyway... that does not even have to be what it will be... it is first and foremost a question of balance before anything else.
Yes, this is my hope and play-testing will obviously be important to make sure everything is progressing in a good tempo. My goal would probably be to make a standard game about 4-500 years until you reach the end of the technology deck.
- 1
I don't know if you were interested in this, but I did some testing with galaxies that are beyond Huge. So far, at least on my computer, the max. possible(with increased star density of course) is at least 10k in a generated galaxy, less than 50k(which made it crash). Dunno how it would play with that money, but I think it's pretty cool that's it's even possible.
Well I like your ideas. It sounds more like a reasonable slowdown trough mechanics idea. The other slowdown mods soundso more like the civ approach simply make everything more expensive and slower to build. But that's not really a good way to slow down this game
Sounds like a 16 bits integer is used to address the star systems. In that case the likely max. number is 32.767.