Core Shield Generators- time sink

[HitmanN]

1. It must require that players take a certain number of planets, at least probably 8 on the low side (on a 40/80 planet map), but more likely 10-12.  

And there you have your solution.

Player captures X number of planets, AI homeworlds' shields go down. No CSG's or whatever needed. Simple, straightforward, doesn't force choosing specific planets, simple to code, etc, etc. It matches all the criteria.

Perhaps the AI decides to convert the invincibility into dynamic forces (reinforcements) instead, turning off the invincibility, and ramping up reinforcements. You'd get a nice boost of difficulty along with the gates to the AI home opening up.

The only thing this solution lacks is making ARS's a mandatory capture, but I still think that should be a choice anyway. For instance, if you want to take high-resource planets instead of an ARS planet, then that should be up to you to decide.

[x4000]

Actually, I guess I missed one other criteria -- I'll add it.  Players shouldn't be able to just turtle up in one corner with all their planets next to one another.  Perhaps it might seem like I keep making up rules, but to some extent my conscious and subconscious understanding of the problem work together, and not everything registers in a way I can express at the start.

[Lancefighter]

"And, hey, it's thematically valid.  The rebels didn't have to go to Endor's moon "because I say so."  It's because that's where the shield generators were. "

to be fair, the writer said 'they must go to Endor's moon(to kill the shields)', so they did  

edit:
Yes, however I see your points - and like i said, I am not sure it is a bad thing until I see it in action

[x4000]

HitmanN -- I added significantly more detail for my position in the original post of mine up there.

Lancefighter -- Okay, true about the writers.  And really, the writers should have had them go to Kashyyyk.  But I digress.

[HitmanN]

HitmanN -- I added significantly more detail for my position in the original post of mine up there.

Shall read, but in the meantime...

Players shouldn't be able to just turtle up in one corner with all their planets next to one another.  Perhaps it might seem like I keep making up rules, but to some extent my conscious and subconscious understanding of the problem work together, and not everything registers in a way I can express at the start.

The primary CSG's would be enough to cover that. Secondaries are not needed for any of this. They're boring, confusing, unfun appendixes that could very well be cut off and something more interesting and fun made to replace them (if there really is need to add anything there in the first place. I think the primary CSG's solve the whole problem of low-planet-count-turtling alone.)

[x4000]

Have you actually played with them?  You keep calling them confusing, which really surprises me given the caliber of your suggestions, etc.  You're no dolt, but you're the main one complaining about how confusing they are.  I'm not sure if that's a comment of "they seem semantically messy," or "I'm worried others won't understand them," or "I actually don't understand them."  I don't mean that in a mean way at all, I'm legitimately puzzled.  Perhaps my wall of text in the release notes was not particularly clear, particularly if one skims.  But in-game it seems simple enough, in the main, really.

As for it being enough to just have the primaries without the secondaries: yes, that would be true if there were 9 ARSes.  But there are 5.  An additional 4 planets is not enough for my purposes.  And, even if there were 9 ARSes (which I'm not saying there would be -- there won't), that would be strategically pretty lame because it would take away the decision of which planets to take in the main.  Again: the ARS planets are important because most players want to take them, anyway.  But then beyond that it gives a bit more flexibility.

At any rate, arguments of "it's confusing" aren't swaying me on this one as yet.  That makes me worry I might not have explained it clearly, not that the design is without merit.  By the time players at all approach the endgame on this one, they'll be able to figure it out pretty easily, I'm quite confident.  And for at least 5 of the 8 they have to kill, if they just play the way the tutorial advises them they will kill those just as a matter of due course.

[Lancefighter]

I assume, of course, they are suitably represented in the objectives screen?

[x4000]

Not yet, but they will be soon.  I've updated the core guard posts to refer to them, though.  And of course the core shield generators have their own tooltip descriptions like any other ship.  I expect they'll be seen in the normal course of capturing things like an ARS, when the player finds this random thing that they want to kill and read about its powers.

[wyvern83]

The new Core Shields seem just fine to me.  A-C will take care of themselves through regular game-play goals and taking two extra planets for one D,E each is bound to be logical from their location anyway. It's not really any extra work at all, imo.

[HitmanN]

Admittedly, I haven't played with them yet, and I'm reluctant to update anyways, because I don't like the idea of the secondary networks, and don't want to 'ruin' my ongoing game with them just yet. 'Confusing' may not be the word I was looking for, but I'm referring to the fact that there are multiple types of nodes, instead of there just being one kind of node.

I got the impression that you need to take down multiple networks (basically meaning more than one) in order to breach the AI home. It doesn't matter how many exactly, but I got the impression that one node from each B,C,D,E. Plus all A (minus one).

I LOVE the idea of a SINGLE primary network that needs to be taken down, with one kind of nodes contributing to it. But that really should be it. You kick the butt of X number of Y unit, and the AI home can be breached. The secondaries just seem like a pointless inclusion. They're like an extra chore (compared to what the primary network requires) that could be something more fun instead. That's really all I can say. I just simply don't like the concept. They just seem to be repeating the same solution (primary CSG's) over and over again in a lesser, more brittle form. I'd much rather have the chore made part of the main network instead, so that it's a streamlined, more easy to follow process. You have one specific kind of thing you keep killing until the AI shields go down, without needing to worry about what letter of the alphabet the thing represents and whether you've killed one of those alphabet yet. If those things are littered across the galaxy, then spreading out is already a requirement.

Granted, I'm half-asleep as I'm typing this, so I may come off as cranky and even ignorant, so sorry if it seems that way. Heck, maybe I DID understand something wrong even. (I'm off to bed after I finish typing this. ) In any case, after having not heard a single convincing  reason why secondaries need to exist in the first place, during the entire day, I'm quite sure they're not entirely a necessary addition in their current form.

I just want to make it clear that I have no qualms with the primary network. Only the secondaries. The secondaries just simply make me think "why do these exist when we already have the primary network that solves the problem at hand quite adequately?". Can't help but get that reaction based on what I've read so far.

That's all. And now I shall sleep and come back later to find what kind of replies I've been hammered down with.

[x4000]

I gotcha.  And your understanding is correct, in what the ramifications of these are gameplay-wise.  I think we just fundamentally disagree about the secondaries at the moment, though, and there's not much I can do about that, unfortunately.  Anyway, get some good sleep, and talk to you later on.

[PineappleSam]

Fleeting thought for the day... rather than have the shields render the AI command station invulnerable, the shields instead stop human forces from entering the AI homeworld all together. It's a nice and obvious indication that there are still AI shields active somewhere, although how an AI homeworld wormhole and normal wormhole would be differentiated I'm not too sure of. Doesn't tackle the issue of whether they're a good thing or not though

To use a previous analogy, it means you have to take out all the generators to enter the AI's castle instead of taking on the AI and finding that Bowser the command stations are invulnerable.

[x4000]

Fleeting thought for the day... rather than have the shields render the AI command station invulnerable, the shields instead stop human forces from entering the AI homeworld all together.

We thought that sort of direction in the past for some ship designs, but it causes innumerable paradoxes that can make a game unwinnable right from the start of a campaign, but you might not find out until untold hours in.  Frustrating if that happens!

[KingIsaacLinksr]

Fleeting thought for the day... rather than have the shields render the AI command station invulnerable, the shields instead stop human forces from entering the AI homeworld all together.

We thought that sort of direction in the past for some ship designs, but it causes innumerable paradoxes that can make a game unwinnable right from the start of a campaign, but you might not find out until untold hours in.  Frustrating if that happens!

I'd say for the moment, just give us a checklist of some sort that tells us we've killed the networks without having to remember.  That will make me happy anyway.

Or is that objectives.  Yeah, probably.  (Brain-dead)

King

[x4000]

It gives you that already in the new galaxy map filters (assuming you've scouted), and will be giving you that in objectives coming up.