Quoting Illauna,

reply 23

Quoting JorgenCAB,

reply 21

This is the BS balance issues I see with min/max overall and sensors in particular...

Here is a screenshot in a game on an insane map after about 30 turns in.

Reduced 29%

Original 1920 x 1200

 

Through heavy min/max I have 9 colonized worlds and four star bases and seven more colony ship (and many constructors in the build ques) on their way to destinations within about five more turn I have four more colonies... is is just crazy how unbalanced things are if you even bother to abuse the system!?!

Earth shipyard  has over 100 production per turn and current research is over 50 points per turn and within about 10=15 turns that is over 200 research.

It is not even hard, this took less then twenty minutes to achieve... It is not entirely about sensors but it is a big part of it...

Jorgen up your difficulty and add more AI's. By turn 30 in my games the AI usually has as many colonies if not more then what you have in this screenshot. In most of my games the colonization phase is pretty much over between 30-50 and the AIs are usually pretty large. 

Please... get a reality check then... this is an insane map with 30 AI and almost hardest setting... I could have done the hardest but didn't for some reason. Does not matter much. Having almost 15 colonies by turn 30 is pretty unbalanced and require heavy min/max very boring play. The AI have no chance to compete at all... zero!!!  The AI that has the most are four colonies and no colony ships in transit.

The only thing you are up against on harder difficulties are the AI bonuses and still they can't compete.

I could churn out one colony ship per turn in this game and next step was invading the closest AI and take their planets by force... I was also playing this without any thought what so ever. 

I don't know if the AI know about ALL planets but I'm not so sure. The AI clearly did scout in this game and didn't seem to know about planets it hadn't visited... but I reserve judgement on that.

In any event... it is OP and stacking sensors is an UNFUN way to play not to mention make certain other choices pretty moot which is a very strange game decision to make. My next version of the sensor boat had 7 movement and 35 sensor range and about 30% more travel range.

ON an insane map I can keep spamming colonies until I hit the expansion roof at about 25-30 colonies, after this it become mathematically very pointless to get more planets with a -30% approval penalty. It is time to just build up and zip through the research tree like lightning on fire.

Did I mention it is boring to play like this and I hope most of the min/max and linear stacking is dealt with eventually. It is not balanced very well when you need to give the AI artificial bonuses to deal with players using OP methods which the AI cant use themselves. That is just a wheel of perpetuating gamyness...

Just wanted to drop in and vote for implementing a hard cap of either sensor range, amount of sensor modules on one ship or a diminishing returns which is probably harder to explain in game rules (unless its something like each additional sensor adds 1 less than the previous one)

Imho sensor stacking breaks the game. In MP you will be forced to build a sesnor ship right away to not be in disadvantage. It makes scouts and station sensors obsolete. It removes the fun of one of the best parts of the game: Exploration. You just build one cargo ship, fill it up with sensors and BAM, scouting finished. That's not a fun mechanic. 

I don't have a problem with scaling engines. A 1 ton car needs a lot less horsepower than a semi.  That said, perhaps stages of scaling would be best. There is a reason nuclear engines are rare on ships. 

This, IMO, has always been a weak point in GC games. A smaller version of a weapon SHOULD give less damage. Some weapons should not be able to be on a small vessel (coastal boat with a ICBM?, please) 

That said, a vulcan cannon can be placed on a smaller vessel. 

However, this is all grognard stuff. 

To keep it simple, don't scale anything. If you want to armor a capital ship, you need X amount of armor vs a tiny vessel. Shields, you need X amount of power + shield generators. Chaff you need much more for a large vessel than a small one. However, point defense is a fixed size. So tiny vessels can only knock down say one missile while a capital ships my knock down several. 

Again, just my opinion

<edit> oops, back to the original topic. This has come up other threads and I still believe stacking should not be allowed. I do like the idea of a long range vs short range sensor though! </edit>

In the real world, engines would also have diminishing returns - although to a lesser degree than sensors - so I wouldn't be opposed to those also being reworked in game.

Yes... I almost always go for Interstellar Travel as my first technology which mean I get sensor boats with 6-8 movement and about 30 sensor range, that is just too OP.

Just use the method I described before, each sensor you add above the first give you ONE less range, eventually you get 0 range for adding a new sensor. That give you a good middle of the road approach and keep sensors on stations as a viable option.

Why not give every race a free 'local space' reveal around the starting system at the start of the game, far enough to include the nearest neighbouring stars?  And then get rid of this daft gamey, linear additive sensor stacking BS.

  -1 cumulative for each module beyond the first I would support, with an possible exception for the first survey module.

   One of my problems with this is actually visual.  Once I build my 32 sensor range cargo ship, I have to zoom out really really far out to see everything it sees.  I find that decidedly odd, especially so early in the game.

Ah yes, the good ol' "I disagree with your opinion, therefore it is wrong", in pretty much those exact words!

I considered removing that part of my post but then decided not to because, well... they are.  I don't believe that they've exploited what sensor stacking does and instead defend the /notion/ of sensor stacking.  Nothing wrong with the notion of sensor stacking but this kind of linear stacking ruins the game, and it's not an isolated example of linear stacking breaking the game when taken to its limit.

I feel like we have beaten this horse enough, the devs sounds like they will try a diminishing return model, so I say we table until we see what they got.

Well, if they change it they change it, but no one has the right to declare what is fun and what is not.

For all we know the AI can see the entire map on any level. There is some evidence they can.

If you don't think sensor buoys are fun, don't build them. This is a fox and grapes issue IYAM.

First you get angry that it's possible to do so, and after several threads of it the devs finally give in*, and now you're complaining mere days from the dev stream that mentioned it, that they're doing it too slowly?

Talk about feeling entitled.

(*At which point, you've already won the argument)