View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0008629 | AI War 1 / Classic | Suggestion - New Unit Ideas - Economic and Utility Units | Jun 19, 2012 10:27 am | Jul 17, 2013 8:43 am | |
| Reporter | Kronic | Assigned To | |||
| Severity | feature | ||||
| Status | considering | Resolution | open | ||
| Product Version | 5.035 | ||||
| Summary | 0008629: Beachhead Supply Station | ||||
| Description | As it stands, with the current supply mechanic, beachheads are pretty much a nice thought, but impractical. In order to create one, you need a planet adjacent anyway, which does beget the question as to why you don't just stage there instead. Therefore I was considering the benefits of a new unit similar to the knowledge and ship hacking stations, which essentially works as follows: "Supply Hacker" Takes 5 to 10 minutes to deploy, cannot move etc. Low health and ship cap (5?) When deployed, grants supply within the system (syphoning off the AI routines) Probably best that it generates a small to medium retaliatory wave while setting up. Only works within non-deepstrike range | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Internal Weight | Feature Suggestion | ||||
| related to | 0001579 | considering | Chris_McElligottPark | New Unit Suggestion: Military Builder |
|
|
I'd just like to pitch in my 2 cents here that I think this is an excellent idea. Beachheads are hard to setup and at best, demand more micromanagement than I'd like. It would be REALLY nice if auto-build engineer/remains rebuilder worked on planets in supply, if nothing else. This sounds like a step in the right direction, and being able to extend supply lines (at cost of course) could be a neat idea for frequent planet hoppers like myself. |
|
|
Related to the now attached issue in the sense that they both will allow you to build with some "sidestepping" of the normal supply rules, but in two very different ways. |
|
|
Bumping this for consideration - or at least discussion and awareness - as I'm getting a decent way into my first proper crosshatch style map, and some form of device to allow me to form a functional Beachhead would be of great use, as I have to be far more careful than I'm used to for planets I take, due to it being simply cost inefficient to Gate Raid enough to protect all the planned staging points. Yes, I realise crosshatch is supposed to be hard, but throw me a bone here. :P |
|
|
Actually, bumping this back up for consideration now that hacking is being reworked entirely - a "Supply hack" to establish a beachhead on an enemy system would be - in my opinion - an excellent addition to the new system. |
|
|
Now that knowledge does not require supply I (currently) see no reason for a device that gives supply outside of the players influence. Since putting up a beachhead is more of a give-take in the way of available turrets this gives more of a tactical option than a straight advantage to the player. As such, does the AI really need a hacking response to the player getting supply in their system, cant the time waiting for it be enough. [After thinking about it a response would make sense in all except for balance and player incentive] |
|
|
S beachead, from my experience, is usually set up only if a system is too tough to take head on, so as to have a fallback position, or rather a position of power, where you set up turrets to handle large enemy attacks... Having to hack on that specific planet before the beachhead seems like it wouldn't be very useful, because you have to have had a beachhead, or equivilent, before you can hack it effectively. So long as it lets you then deploy a structure, preferably extremely durable/permacloaked, that gives supply to that and adjacent planets, I can see it as acceptable. ~If it just allowed you to build a supply node afterwards in this and all adjacent system, that would work as well. |
|
|
I realized that I don't use beachead much for offensive. I use the mostly to neutralize a system without killing the command station. (Even if energy troubles tend to limit the use of that method. "hacking supply" I am not sure about that. A structure might be more like it. Could be an idea for another minor faction, who can't help much militarily but that can offer supply. |
|
|
I was thinking of it mostly for interaction with other factions, and similar - a full rpair depot for Champions just outside of Nebulas, Forcefield and turret coverage during Spire Shard Retrieval; as well as some other roles I had planned for it originally - staging/refleeting areas (Warp gates or factories with turret protection) one hop outside deep strike range, schenanigans involving transports (I realize these may be one reason why supply extension could be a problem), and similar. Overall, I feel it'd be one of the more specialized hackings - it's not something you'd do every game, but sometimes you just get some map synergy that works really well with it. |
|
|
Actually one thing which I realized bother me with Hacking supply is the SuperTerminal. If you've points to spend to get a Supply on a planet, why not simply hack the Super-Terminal and get the AIP reduction to take the system you want instead? Haven't really tried the ST since the hacking update, but I believe my point stand. |
|
|
Honestly, I hadn't considered that. I guess in my own internal ticker the penalty for supply hacking was a bit less than the penalty for 20AIP reduction from the ST, as you don't get the resources and the like. Furthermore, I guess you might not always have the ST, or you may have been grinding on it too much (I personally have never actually used the ST, I'll admit. >.>). |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 19, 2012 10:27 am | Kronic | New Issue | |
| Jun 19, 2012 1:25 pm | SNAFU | Note Added: 0025963 | |
| Jun 19, 2012 1:37 pm | TechSY730 | Relationship added | related to 0001579 |
| Jun 19, 2012 1:38 pm | TechSY730 | Note Added: 0025964 | |
| Jun 19, 2012 3:17 pm | tigersfan | Internal Weight | => Feature Suggestion |
| Jun 19, 2012 3:17 pm | tigersfan | Status | new => considering |
| Jun 19, 2012 6:01 pm | TechSY730 | Note Edited: 0025964 | |
| Mar 27, 2013 2:52 am | Kronic | Note Added: 0031408 | |
| Jul 9, 2013 3:11 pm | Kronic | Note Added: 0033098 | |
| Jul 9, 2013 3:22 pm | ArcDM | Note Added: 0033099 | |
| Jul 9, 2013 3:23 pm | ArcDM | Note Edited: 0033099 | |
| Jul 9, 2013 10:26 pm | Ranakastrasz | Note Added: 0033102 | |
| Jul 10, 2013 4:29 am | ArnaudB | Note Added: 0033104 | |
| Jul 10, 2013 6:00 pm | Kronic | Note Added: 0033108 | |
| Jul 12, 2013 9:04 am | ArnaudB | Note Added: 0033109 | |
| Jul 17, 2013 8:43 am | Kronic | Note Added: 0033137 |
