I do find micromanaging reactors one of the least fun bits of the game, still a bit fun though... But it would be nice to have the option to spend a little knowledge to be released from doing it.
So if one removes the "least fun" parts of the game they should be punished?
Lets take a step back, and bring this debate back to it's roots of abilities vs interface. We need to take a more methodical approach.
Consider the plant known as "Squash" (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squash_%28plant%29) which contrary to what I would have initially thought is a fruit. Why is it a fruit? Is it because of a lengthy debate over what squash itself should be classified? No. It's because a fruit is defined as "the part of the plant which contains seeds is the fruit." There is no debate after a standard is defined. "A squash is a part which contains seeds, it is a fruit." End of discussion, no room for debate.
So define your standard. Once defined there will be no more debate over specific issue such as control nodes.
I'll repeat my standard which I have based all my opinions on, and take us back onto the broader subject of abilities vs interface.
If a specific ability allows you to accomplish an action, and that same action can be performed without possessing that specific ability, then that specific ability should be free. If a specific ability allows you to accomplish something which cannot be achieved without possessing that ability, then it
may have a cost associated with it. A basic set of abilities should always be available free of cost to establish the game and facilitate fun gameplay.
I classify abilities which allow you to achieve that which
can otherwise be achieved as "interface elements."
I classify abilities which allow you to achieve that which
cannot otherwise be achieved as "game elements."
This my standard, and now I will apply my standard to various components in the game:
- Fighters, Bombers, Frigates - These are game elements. They are free as part of a basic set of abilities which establish the game.
- The pause feature - An interface element. Frantic clicking or the use of macros can achieve the same which can more easily be achieved by using the pause.
- FRD mode for units - An interface element. Pausing frequently and issuing orders to each individual unit can achieve the same thing, without using FRD mode.
- Group selection - An interface element. You could otherwise issue specific orders to each individual unit, with lots of pausing no doubt.
- Control nodes - An interface element. Any ability offered by control nodes (at least, the current set) can be achieved without using control nodes and instead frequently using pause and lots of "checking up" on your units.
- A power management control node - The same effect can be achieved without the control node by frequent use of pause and lots of "checking up" on things.
- The ability to build Fortresses - A game element. You cannot build a fortress with the pause and lots of clicking no matter how hard you try, unless you have researched it first.
- Other unlockable ships - A game element. You cannot build them at your regular construction bays without researching them. No amount of pausing and clicking, or "checking up on things" will allow you to do this without researching them.
- The default behavior of scouts which causes them to move to the edge of the planet/sector - An interface element. The same can be achieved by issuing specific orders and lost of "checking up" on your units.
So that is my dividing line, it's consistent and it makes sense.
I can respect any standard, so long as it is consistently applied. The closest thing I've seen to a standard defined by anyone else is along the lines of "if it might have a large effect on the outcome of the game, it should have some cost associated with it." If this is applied consistently then pause will have a control nodes would have a cost, and so would pause and FRD mode in general, as well as group selection. I can respect the idea "control nodes should have a cost, and so should pausing" far more than I can respect "control nodes should have a cost, but pause should be free," because it's consistent.
So for those who's opinion differs from my own, I challenge you to define your standard, and then apply it to the list I have here. This way we aren't only talking about control nodes but establishing a way by which all new feature may be measured.
