Just weapon type in designs

[Szunti]

As I see the different levels of the weapons (laser I, laser II) cost the same. I don't see why to use the lesser ones, when I already researched the stronger ones. If it will remain that way, it would be nice to have only the weapon type in design and use the highest level at built time.

[Dilvish]

Deselect the 'Redundant' button to control what shows. But you'll still have to make a new design for the more advanced versions. We've had some discussion (which you can do a board search for) about various ways that auto-upgrading of designs and ships could work, but we haven't reached a consensus yet.

[Damiac]

Why is the redundant button on by default, or for that matter, even available? Why would I ever want to install a laser 2 if I have laser 4 unlocked?

Similarly, it would be nice when designing a new ship if I just selected "laser" and whenever I built one, the latest model laser would be used, so I don't have to modify the design every time I research an upgrade. I think this is what the OP was requesting.


Expanding on that, although this is less simple, it would be really handy if there was a 'best available' option, so you could design a ship with the best available weapons, shield, engines, and armor, and then whenever you actually build one, it uses the best parts for each of those slots. You would still want the option to directly specify a part, but most of the time, you want to use the best possible item in each slot, even though the cost goes up. Currently, there aren't any parts that make a tradeoff in one stat vs another, so it's easy to determine which is better. I suppose if you had two armors with the same strength, but one is cheaper, you'd want it to automatically use the cheaper one when available, for example, the asteroid line of armors.

Also, the game could just auto-generate those designs whenever you unlock a hull. Instead of making "Robocruiser 1, Robocruiser 2, etc, you'd just have "Generic Robocruiser" or whatever, and it would be the same as a robocruiser 1-4, except with the 'best available' option selected for each slot, instead of a specific part. The player might want to still design their own ships, because they might want a different balance of weapons and armor, but at least the auto-generated ones might be of some use, rather than just cluttering up the build list. Also, it would probably help the AI, since they seem to be locked to those premade designs, which may not take full advantage of whatever techs they've researched.

TLDR: Easy(ish) change: Remove redundant button and function, it's useless(or at least make it default to off).
More complicated change: Allow designs to specify parts more generically, ideally including a "best possible" option for each type, that wouldn't actually be picked until you build a ship of this design.

[Kassiopeija]

Remove redundant button and function, it's useless(or at least make it default to off).

Isn't it defaulted to off?

[MatGB]

No, and the reason is when it was introduced we were getting too many complains from people researching either Laser1 or Plasma1 when they had MD4 or Laser4 and not seeing their new kit, so Geoff put the button in and defaulted it to show everything.

It did stop people complaining the tech trees weren't working, instead we get these complaints instead. I don't, genuinely, know the right answer here except perhaps better in game text. but I really hope we move towards refinements applying to all parts soon(ish) anyway.

(I'd rather it defaulted to off, I need to check if there/s a config/persistent config setting for it when I remember.

[defaultuser]

The obvious answer would be to have Plasma 1 be more powerful than Laser 4 and so on.

[MatGB]

Well, an obvious answer, the maths for the current system makes sense, researching refinements can get you a better gun faster but the next tier refinements are substantially better.

I like the current maths, but I would like a bigger mix of weapon choices at some point with different advantages and disadvantages.

[Damiac]

I like the idea that it's cheaper and quicker to advance existing weapon tech than to always just research the newest tech. It creates a choice between a quick small gain in power or a longer term investment at various points in the game. I like the fact that mass driver 4 is better than laser 1.

I wasn't suggesting the game should hide mass driver 4 when you have laser 1, or vice versa, just that there is never a reason to put laser 3 on a ship when you have laser 4 researched. And there's no reason to ever build a ship with mass driver 1 when you have researched mass driver 2.

It would be better to just design a ship with mass driver, laser, plasma, or death rays, and the ship gets the most current version of that weapon when you start building it. So when you build a ship with a mass driver, and you have researched mass driver 3, that's what you get on that ship. Later you research mass driver 4, now when you build those ships they have that. No need to make a new design.

[MatGB]

It would be better to just design a ship with mass driver, laser, plasma, or death rays, and the ship gets the most current version of that weapon when you start building it. So when you build a ship with a mass driver, and you have researched mass driver 3, that's what you get on that ship. Later you research mass driver 4, now when you build those ships they have that. No need to make a new design.

I agree completely. But we don't have full agreement within the Dev team and certainly don't have an agreed implementation, there was another thread about it a few months back with some interesting ideas including having weapon strength as a meter that could only go up if in supply (so no free upgrades deep behind the lines). I want it, so do several other contributors, but the question is how and there are some serious balance concerns.

[AndrewW]

I like the current maths, but I would like a bigger mix of weapon choices at some point with different advantages and disadvantages.

Mix of weapon types. Where some armor and shields are better against different types.

That core slot meson cannon is good at getting past armor, but not so great if they have a meson screen.

[Kassiopeija]

tbh I don't evaluate most of the mentioned problems to be problematic... foremostly because the game will store your own design(s)... the time in shipeditor I just spend deleting redundant shipdesigns to keep the queue short

as for different weapons/defenses or shipstypes/roles etc go for it! and GL with balancing^^^^^^
IMO you either have it really simplistic & balanced (like now) or you have some enormous complicated system where smart players will find an obscene strong design which will be exploited & become mandatory... and the AI won't be able to act against it or use what he has to in response to what the player can do etc

[Crius]

As mentioned above, a quick improvement here would be to have the Redundant setting off by default so that redundant weapons aren't shown. I'm always turning it off.

Regarding the ship upgrades, I disagree that if a higher tech is researched while building the ship then it should get that new tech. However, I would much prefer an upgrade to option, where the hull can be changed to any other setup of the same hull - for a cost and a certain amount of turns. Cost should be something like Upgrade Cost = (cost of new items) - 0.5*(cost of old items). This is just to reflect the cost reduction of "recycling" old tech. Perhaps even some research opportunities to reduce this further.

[Vezzra]

The problem with the various ways an "upgrading" of existing ships could be done isn't so much the implementation - that's (in this case at least) probably the easiest part. The challenge here is to design this game mechanic in a way that it doesn't lead to too much micromanagement.