didnt i saw a super ship on the trailer???
that one that was making a really big turnado on the planet, out of the gravity wells.
or has that feature been deleted?

no that wasnt it. that was a vasari capital ship, sucks resources out of planets.

Superweapons are good but games that don't need them are even better.


Most games that have super weapons use them as a means to fix a broken element of the game play. Typically defensive structures can't be countered effectively by attacking units... or something of that nature...


games that don't need super weapons are those where precise control of your units allows you to take advantage of the one thing defensive structures can't do... maneuver. I can move my forces around the defensive structure can't.


That should be all the advantage you need to crush the defenses.

That's a somewhat circular logic.

Games that have feature A as a counter to feature B are broken, since they don't have feature C (which I like more then feature A) which would also be a counter for feature B.

Huh?

Except when you use super weapons to fix the broken game element it means the game always climaxes with an exchange of super weapons or people making desperate raids on a super weapon to stop it.


it's predictable and boring. if you base the game on tactics and a series of UNIT based weapons systems instead of big ol nukes or whatever then it's more interesting. especially if the units are not themselves super unkillable death machines. Because again there's no real tactics to using those... they're big and mean and there is really only one way to use them. MOst of such units don't really have good counters but instead require an equal number or more of super units or a huge mass of lesser units.


Ideally unit balance should force the player to do just that... have a balanced set of units that make up for the weaknesses of other units.


That's the way real battles work. There is no perfect unit. Tanks can be taken down by two soldiers with a rocket launcher... or some guy hiding with a sticky bomb... or some mine you hid under the road... The tank is powerful when used in mass and with infantry and air cover....


The problem I have with super weapons is that they're like "one tank" rolling down the field killing everything no matter what it is... it's stupid.

you've obviously never played supcom.

supcom NAILED superweapons, they are a waste of money for when you have more resource income than you need to pump out units, but they also have their severe weaknesses.

most importantly: they're damn cool.

Everyone here keeps saying balance this and balance that, but you can never really achieve a good state of balance without completly removing all desire for anyone to use a super weapon. What I am saying is that the amount of destruction has to be equal to the cost of building/firing the thing; for the weapon to really be balanced. That means, number 1, that the cost of firing is relative to the target, meaning that the cost comes after the destruction, which is of course no true. Or secondly, that you need a target worth firing at. What if you aren't presented with one? Then there is no reason to build the weapon, and therefore no desire to.

I personally don't want super weapons because I don't want to see stardock's attempt at political consequences of firing such a weapon. Only because no one knows how an interstallar community will react to super weapons being present.

As for super-ships, I think the idea is relativly sound. As long as this ship doesn't have any crazy new power. It's just really big, very well armed, and armoured. The Bismark is a good example or the Kursk.

I think you're missing my point. Superweapons are a problem because they tend to have no intelligent counter. They're stupid weapons. that is, an idiot can win with them. There's no savvy defense against them and no savvy offense with them. It's a giant hammer that you drop on some spot of hte map and everything dies.


Games are supposed to build in layers of skill, tactics, and strategy.


For super weapons to get approved in my book they have to make the strategy and/or tactic BETTER.


Typically this is not the case, including in Subcom. What both super weapons and super units in that game do is make up for existing falures in the game design. It's very easy to turtle for example... there's no real skill in it but once you do it you've built a pretty solid base. Super units can break through those lines... again without much tactics.. The only thing that makes super units tolerable is that masses of fighters or bombers can usually kill them all pretty quickly. however, masses of fighters and bombers can usually kill just about anything. Which is a problem.

karma, do you have supcom?

because if you did you would realize that it is not nearly as easy to turtle as you are thinking, there are so many layers upon layers of counters to all sorts of defenses that turtling it only seriously possible through the early parts of the game.

yea it is and i think the super wep sounds good you have changed my mind as long as it is balanced and still like the idea of on,off switch.  

schem minus the tier three super weapons (artillery primarily as the nukes have a powerful counter) and experimental units beyond tier three it is very easy to turtle.

Tier 2 weapons especially with shielding are effective against most attacks... even if you launch a big attack they can have multiple layers of shielding and task engineers to the shields to extend their life.


Furthermore, with a good airforce it's hard to get anything really nasty close to a base. Battleships, all ground based experimentals, and all but the eier 2 AA ships are very vulnerable to tier 3 bombers... and tier 3 fighters knock most air units out of the sky very quickly.



Is it impossible to break through? Of course not... I'm not saying it's impossible... i'm just saying it's easier to build an effective turtle then to crack it. And that's just a fact.

If it's not made to be a mobile superweapon that would have to actually go to the grav well of the planet that it's going to bomb (somewhat like the death star), then I would like a multiplayer and skirmish "No Superweapons" setting, something like out of C&C's Red Alert 2. I wouldn't mind this weapon being part of the game as long as I could disable it when I play skirmish or a multiplayer game if I wanted. I feel it is a great solution because those who want to use them can and those who don't can simply turn them off. Everyone's happy, right?

T2 arty base, T2 TMLs, T2 combined force approaches

going around back

bombing runs

Mercies, if you're advent (the horror, the horror)


yes, T3 is the easiest ones to crack defenses with, but to say that the superweapons are there because the ability to turtle is a broken part of gameplay? I think you should get your head checked.
I mean, I should still list the T3 possibilitites

bombers, siege bots, T3 arty bases, nukes dont count whatsoever, but coastal bombardment

the super weapons (artillery is not a superweapon) are there because at the end of the game it can easily default to a war of battle attrition, they're meant as a cleansweap at the end of a game.

supcom's turtling is more than under control, unless you outproduce your enemy and shield and place T2 arties zealously on Isis, but thats an extreme case.

as a general rule if you can do any damage as the attacker in supplement to hitting your enemies forces you've gained a massive upper hand

taking down turtles is as easy as choosing the right side to hit with a few dozen tanks or a bomber run, of course its not the instant-win that the T4s are, but its definately garunteed to crack a turtle

as for shielding and T2 weapons: use mobile artillery, or a close by T2 firing base. if you're having difficulty cracking a turtle in supcom its because you arent going about it correctly, or they've developed some miracle system that to date I've never heard of.

the dev's have a problem with this, because they claim then they would have to balance both games

hopefully they can do that anyhow.

Schem: Blah blah blah

Everyone else stares at schem.

my general point being: superweapons (while commonly used to balance out broken game elements) do not need to be used in this fashion, and work best as just a role of their own.

hmm...superweapons in this game? looks funny...
i just complete my scripting work on a modified shieldgenerator.
Every 3 minutes it fires a large beam like in "Stargate - Atlantis" u know this big old satellites?!
The range is within the gravitywell and it destroys everything in line...except friendlies...the beam is firing for 5 sekonds at one point.
the price is very very high for that cannon, but it dont need any tactical or logistic slots...
i show u some pics tomorrow...today im to tired^^

greetz

PS: sry my english...

oh, sounds cool!

A mix of tier 2 and teir 3 AA makes them pretty pointless...

Mercies are very effective but only on poorly defended targets unless used in huge numbers which is hard because they die shortly after construction.




Bombers are very good but cannot penetrate very deeply into a defended zone...

They can make a suicide run on the outer defenses but those will be easier to replace in most cases then whatever you spent on bombers.

Siege bots don't survive against a well fortified position... they're completely useless with T2 arty and T2 point defense... Yes you do need about 8 to 10 of each but that allows you kill wave after wave of T3 siege bots.


You just proved me right.


That battle of attrition is caused by the two turtles that form. I mean, you're making if anything MORE resources then you ever did at any pervious point in the game as no resources run out.


So why do you need super weapons to break a battle of attrition?


point, set, match.


T3 Mobile artillery doesn't survive against T2 fixed artillery.

As to someone building a T2 arty base right outside of your own... how the hell do you expect to get away with that? Only a moron would let you do that. First, it's too easy for them to just shell you back with their own T2 artillery long before you're set up. They have more engineers in the area and likely more defenses up to begin with... beyond that if they make even a minor attack they can disrupt your action long enough to give themselves enough time to start shelling the bajesus out of you.

karma if you want me to prove you wrong, make another thread for it. for right now stick to the topic, and quit with the childish taunts.

Oh man now its...

Karma: Blah Blah Blah... I am copying what Schem says cause I am too busy to read the posts above me.

TGE and Schod look at him like he is stupid and walk away.

I think this is sorta becoming a dead horse in stasis issue. Untill we actually get to see the cannon and what it can do we cant really recommend how to balance it. We dont even know if there are any other super weapons.

yah, i said that a bagillion threads ago

I'm not the all knowing one, thats Schod.

Its called a firebase... and it works well enough people gave a name to the strategy.

Just bring some mobile shield emitters and get a shield up ASAP -- works wonders. Or, if your Cybran, the mobile stealth generator really works well.

that doesn't even make sense... how can I be copying him if I'm contradicting him in detail?


Sounds like YOU are the one not reading posts... typically hypocritical.
================================================================

I'm aware of the tactic, I just find it incredibly easy to defeat. It relies upon the notion that you have better mobile defenses and offenses then the base defenses you're building next to and a better army then that base.


really, it only works if the other player sucks. I mean, you're marching "some" of your engineers over to build along with some mobile forces... while I can quickly use most if not all my engineers to counter build or deploy my army to fight you even more effectively because it can be supported by my base... which is much closer.


Again, I've seen the tactic and am aware of it... it's just that it only works the other player doesn't notice you building right next to his base and or somehow you can build a better base then them right next to their base with fewer units and less time.


The odds are against it working. That point is obvious to even the meanest of intelligences.

Schem

Id like to battle you in supcom... you may even have lordkosc on your side