KEWs and Orbital Gameplay

Discussion in 'Support!' started by mered4, November 16, 2013.

?

How do you want the process for planet smashing to feel?

  1. Long, arduous and hard-earned (CURRENT SYSTEM)

    61.5%
  2. Cheap Halley, lots of them, and lower eco cost total

    15.4%
  3. Just Cheaper on Economy. Works fine now.

    23.1%
  4. I will only do this if there is Bacon and cute cats there.

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. mered4

    mered4 Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,083
    Likes Received:
    3,149
    I think everyone agrees: KEWs are straight awesome. The words AAAAAHH THATS A MOON IN MY FACE are so satisfying :)


    As it stands, KEWs are always ALWAYS a tense race of economy vs economy. Its almost like a bullet sponge from some MMOs...you just stand there and wait, and wait......and wait.....

    Even with a massive economy, in my latest 2v2 moon war, it took me almost 2 hours to build the 25 halleys necessary to move a single moon.

    I dont think I would stick around for that if I wasnt testing it :(

    So, given all the cool stuff coming for orbital gameplay (unit cannons and the like), I'd like to give a few suggestions for orbital and KEWs:

    For Halley's: Can we make them 1) smaller (literally smaller, fitting 25 on a planet is annoying for real estate), 2) cheaper, and 3) more of them! AND (BONUS) 4) more halleys on a moon for it to launch, but less eco to spend on them. This should make them easier to build, and an actual option in the endgame instead of a desperate hail mary by a losing player. and also so we can make it look like it should be moving the moon, instead of just like, eh. we have three engines. it works - sort of.

    For orbital: Can we get some unit variety? A space Station factory? That produces, say frigates and transports and stuff, instead of *just* fighters. Also, can we get some way to block/obscure the ground while focused on orbital? Something like the shell we have now, but more defined so you can see through it if necessary.

    In addition, will we get the option to build orbital space stations that orbit the sun independently like a planet? :D
  2. Daveydude

    Daveydude New Member

    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'd just like to note, in this game once the moon was actually ordered to engage the other moon, it took something like 15 minutes for it to actually start moving to collide. I'm assuming that is planned to be fixed later.

    Regardless, building the engines took far too space and resources.

    My personal belief as that the corrections are as follows:

    1: Engines become cheaper, smaller, and resultantly faster to build.
    2: The maximum size of a planet that can be launched is increased, and a current 25 engine planet should be around 10 at the upper limit.
    3: Damage should be proportional to the size of the projectile. A small 3 engine moon shouldn't remove everything from a scale 3 planet, but still cause significant damage to the majority of it. If a planet is that small, it should be easily flung around.

    Players don't really feel threatened by even a 3 engine moon in orbit, and they should. They know they have all the time in the world to deal with it. I feel that should be fixed.
    rockhawk likes this.
  3. Xagar

    Xagar Active Member

    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    117
    This is another thing that will be vastly improved by the full unit roster. It's almost not worth talking about until then.
  4. mered4

    mered4 Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,083
    Likes Received:
    3,149
    ....but it is.....

    Unit cannons might change things, but not so much that this will be completely invalidate current eco balance for halley's, or even a future eco balance. I think it should be tested before those other parts of the game are added. That way only small adjustments will be necessary after the new orbital mechanics/units are added.

Share This Page