View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0001872 | AI War 1 / Classic | Suggestion - Game Mechanics | Dec 7, 2010 1:27 am | Jan 3, 2011 11:44 am | |
| Reporter | Fleet | Assigned To | Chris_McElligottPark | ||
| Status | closed | Resolution | won't fix | ||
| Product Version | 4.046 | ||||
| Summary | 0001872: Loading Spirecraft into transports | ||||
| Description | I wanted to request that spirecraft (and other non-spacedock built ships) be allowed to enter transports. On large maps, where I inevitability planet hop, barring the spirecraft from entering transports reduces their functionality because I feel I can't bring them to new fronts. Maybe they should just work in the new spirecraft jumpship? | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Internal Weight | |||||
| related to | 0001908 | considering | Chris_McElligottPark | Spire super-heavy transport |
|
|
In my opinion, spirecraft ships have it's own advantage, it's strength. If spirecraft ships could be carried in transport ship, they would be more effective, but too strong(almost as good as a golem). Spirecarft would just become overpowered. |
|
|
I'm going to have to side with kezziny as that would be overpowered from my prospective, as humorously as 200 seige towers exiting a transport would be (they haven't scaled the transport with unit types, but perhaps if they did). :p |
|
|
Well, as powerful as they are, I don't like the idea of risking them by sending them as part of a convoy through a Mk IV planet that is too strong for me to deal with at the moment. Maybe they could be prevented from unloading from transports on non-controlled planets? |
|
|
Personally I think it'd be fine to have a spirecraft the sole point of which is to transport other spirecraft. That way you have to spend a non-replaceable resource to get the extra utility and it has its own risk, etc. You mentioned the jumpship so maybe it's already suited to that; I honestly haven't looked at the stats there :) |
|
|
The jumpship has an tiny capacity, and cannot stay in enemy planets due to high self-attrition. They also use an asteroid and a good amount of resources. I think the jumpship is a good fit for a spirecraft transportation mechanic. |
|
|
Jumpship might be an interesting and flavorful way, other than that I would vote against it. |
|
|
After reading this I've created 0001908 I'm against loading spirecraft onto normal transports, but this might work. |
|
|
I am borderline on the issue; transported cloaked attritioners on a planet would be hilarious; not that I haven't bothered to try that yet in a tradition sense, but it would be enhanced by them being free from entry problems. |
|
|
On this one, both spirecraft and golems (and other way-oversized units) can't go in transports because of size restrictions. However, most of of them are so large that you can sneak them through where you want. Or, for that matter, you can always use cloaker starships if you REALLY can't get them where you want any better way. |
|
|
x4000, sorry to bother you by reopening this topic. I wanted to address your last remark that cloaker starships could be used. Because the Spirecraft cannot be paused, the cloaker starships are in fact of little use. If there are enemies present, the spirecraft will automatically open fire, uncloaking themselves. If there are no enemies present (due to you already clearing out the planet), than the cloaker starship serves little purpose. I'll take your next response as the final word on the subject. I see you are also considering a transport Mk III for a future release, so this topic may be moot anyhow; if thats the case, my apologies. I just wanted to stress that options for moving the craft through enemy territory seems limited, as although they are powerful, the right guardian or ship type can pick them apart. |
|
|
I would support a transport MkIII or Jumpship solution. |
|
|
Tabled for now. There's the spire super heavy transport that supplants this, but it's not something for the short term either. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 7, 2010 1:27 am | Fleet | New Issue | |
| Dec 7, 2010 1:05 pm | kezziny | Note Added: 0005523 | |
| Dec 7, 2010 1:14 pm | Spikey00 | Note Added: 0005524 | |
| Dec 7, 2010 2:04 pm | Fleet | Note Added: 0005528 | |
| Dec 7, 2010 2:08 pm | keith.lamothe | Note Added: 0005529 | |
| Dec 7, 2010 2:15 pm | Fleet | Note Added: 0005531 | |
| Dec 7, 2010 4:04 pm | shugyosha | Note Added: 0005544 | |
| Dec 8, 2010 12:49 am | PineappleSam | Relationship added | related to 0001908 |
| Dec 8, 2010 12:51 am | PineappleSam | Note Added: 0005583 | |
| Dec 8, 2010 12:51 am | PineappleSam | Note Edited: 0005583 | |
| Dec 8, 2010 1:01 am | Spikey00 | Note Added: 0005584 | |
| Dec 8, 2010 11:29 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0005623 | |
| Dec 8, 2010 11:29 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Status | new => resolved |
| Dec 8, 2010 11:29 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Resolution | open => won't fix |
| Dec 8, 2010 11:29 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Assigned To | => Chris_McElligottPark |
| Dec 9, 2010 12:25 am | Fleet | Note Added: 0005749 | |
| Dec 9, 2010 12:25 am | Fleet | Status | resolved => feedback |
| Dec 9, 2010 12:25 am | Fleet | Resolution | won't fix => reopened |
| Dec 9, 2010 12:27 am | Fleet | Note Edited: 0005749 | |
| Dec 11, 2010 12:17 am | Winter Born | Note Added: 0005938 | |
| Dec 22, 2010 9:03 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0006796 | |
| Dec 22, 2010 9:03 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Status | feedback => resolved |
| Dec 22, 2010 9:03 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Resolution | reopened => won't fix |
| Jan 3, 2011 11:44 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Status | resolved => closed |
