24-01-2003 12:39									#1
	No Ship Refit Not Such A Bad Thing Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

While I like upgrading as much as the next guy it's loss is not such a bad thing.
Look at it like this: not being able to upgrade should force you to consider your timing when building new designs and scrapping old ones. Is the old ship mkII too old to cut it? or can it last a few more cycles? Has our tech advanced enough to justify the cost of a new fleet? or should we research the next big missle? Strategic decisions in a game about strategy.
Also consider that upgrading can and usually does contribute to micromanagement hell. No upgrade no worries about finding every little old ship and docking it for upgrades

	24-01-2003 12:50									#2
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Also with the task-force system, older ships are not so bad to have. They can always "soak up the fire" for your newer ships. Or you can scrap them to get the resources back to build new ones, at 50% it think, which is good for this kind of game.

-Jam

	24-01-2003 13:16									#3
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I agree, not having refits sounds like a good cure to the micromanagement hell a moo2 endgame was.

I don't think you can point your finger at *any* feature (or lack thereof) and claim it is bad without seeing the big picture, i.e. playing the game.

	24-01-2003 13:28									#4
	Got spare money?

The dynamic of old ships and new ships could work similarly to that in the original Moo... though the class-limit in the original Moo was rather annoying, the dynamic of having your old ships eventually grow obsolete is relatively realistic and could be interesting compared to the rather unrealistic UBER-refit capability of Moo2 ships

That said, it's a GAME and it would have been nice to upgrade ships with anything you want, but it's not an enormous loss to lose it.

	24-01-2003 16:29									#5
	disagreed Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Personally this is a huge loss for me. I really like the strategic component of being able to upgrade existing designs to maximize longevity. What I hate is to be stuck with a bunch of outdated ships draining away maintanance resources and that alone discourages me from building new ones, although I do agree it does take away a large chunk of micromanagement. But what the heck - it's turned based and I get all the time I need each turn!

IG/QS - Pls! Pls! Please put this feature back!! Or at least in future patches!

	24-01-2003 16:48									#6
	Suffering from ads?

It would indeed be nice to have refits in some form. But, like many here it seems, I’m not too bothered if they're not there.

It is, after all, a lot more realistic to have a fleet of ships of varying ages and capabilities. And while, of course, ships in reality are refitted and upgraded, the effectively limitless capacity to do this in MOOII was totally beyond credibility.

My ideal would be a more realistic, limited upgrade capability. Constrained to minor upgrades and replacements of smaller systems. For instance new fire control system, additional point defence weapons, that kind of thing... which is what happens with "real" ships (the wet kind, obviously. but the analogy holds I think).

But the kind of refit where all the weapon systems and engines and, basically, everything except the hull is replaced is what annoys me. Now, obviously this isn't *impossible* in real life either, just prohibitively expensive. You may as well build a whole new ship! In an ideal world (or game!) it would be the same. You *could* do it. But why would you *want* to do it?

(and on the point of crew experience that you lose with scrapping an old ship - a moot point now anyway. why does the crew have to be inextricably attached to the ship? just separate crew and ship in the game. then you can assign your hardy veteran crews to new ships. it would be nice to train your crews too)

But anyway, as someone mentioned before, the lack of refitting actually adds a layer of strategic decision, and also adds at tactical level too. And cuts MM. overall, good I think.

	24-01-2003 17:42									#7
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Well, the beta testers don't seem too unhappy about it, remember one of them saying something like: "At first I was sad it wasn't possible, but now I don't know what I'd do WITH it."

So I'm not terribly worried, besides, everyone is talking about how it will be coming in a patch, so I don't think it's such a big tragedy.

Last edited by Nightingale on 24-01-2003 at 21:10

	24-01-2003 19:37									#8
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: everyone is talking about how it will be coming in a patch

Everyone except the devs... I really wouldn't take it as a forgone conclusion. I hope it is in the patch, tho'.

	24-01-2003 20:16									#9
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: It is, after all, a lot more realistic to have a fleet of ships of varying ages and capabilities. And while, of course, ships in reality are refitted and upgraded, the effectively limitless capacity to do this in MOOII was totally beyond credibility.

No its not. The US navy updates its ships. The only tottally out of date vessel we got is the USS Constitution. And we keep her around cause she's a beautiful frigate.

That said, while I would like refitting, its certainly not a very big deal to me. I think everyone has thouroughly over reacted.

And I believe it was either rantz or chantz who said refiting might make it into the game through a patch. I think its probably a rather high probability. Of course, the game has to be released first.

	24-01-2003 21:03									#10
	Put an end to popups!

Unless they add crew experience in the patch as well, I doubt they'll see the need to add refitting. With unlimited ship design, the experience quandry, and large scrapping bonuses, I don't really see the need either. It'd definitely ease my conscience about the no refit if they lifted the restrictions on fleet size in a patch.

	24-01-2003 21:25									#11
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Kc7mxo No its not. The US navy updates its ships. The only tottally out of date vessel we got is the USS Constitution.

Most navies upgrade their ships. but the fact remains that an older ship upgraded with newer technology, will not be as good as a new ship, built with it from the outset.

An example would be the US Midway class carriers... two of which were in service till the early nineties. the Midway herself wasn't actually stricken from the lists untill 97. But she was commisioned in 45! now, even with upgrades, these carriers were not the equals of their successors, hence their eventual retirement. but in MOOII, you could have gone on refitting them and keeping them as cutting edge, first line ships into infinity.

Jon...

	24-01-2003 21:33									#12
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Fascinating opinion. I concur...

	24-01-2003 23:19									#13
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: An example would be the US Midway class carriers... two of which were in service till the early nineties. the Midway herself wasn't actually stricken from the lists untill 97. But she was commisioned in 45! now, even with upgrades, these carriers were not the equals of their successors, hence their eventual retirement. but in MOOII, you could have gone on refitting them and keeping them as cutting edge, first line ships into infinity.

Yes, we eventually dump ships. But then you don't scuttle a destroyer just because a new type of cruise missle comes out, do you? No, you stick the ship in port and slap those shiny new missles on. In most situations its cheaper to and more efficient to add new subsystems to a ship than to scuttle the dang thing and build a new multi billion dollar ship.

But ships do have a lifetime. The best way to simulate that would be to not allow refits to change armor/structural technology, but only the weapons and other subsystems.

	25-01-2003 00:14									#14
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Kc7mxo The best way to simulate that would be to not allow refits to change armor/structural technology, but only the weapons and other subsystems.

I agree. That actually sounds like a really good idea to me. Too bad it probably won`t ever be in.

	25-01-2003 08:04									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

It's not the lack of refit that annoys me so much (since the way the game sounds like it will play the scrap-outdated-ship, build-updated-ship-for-less sounds like it will work the same way) but the fact that its alternative is so much less obvious. I would think of refitting before I thought of keeping things from scrapped ships to use in my new ships (which is how MOO3 seems to handle it.)
I do agree that refitting in MOO2 was overpowered though.

	25-01-2003 10:43									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Yes, refitting in MOO2 was too powerfull. It was too easy to build an empty hull (no weapons, no specials, no shields, no computer) cheaply and sit in a system with a Space Academy and rack up experience points and then outfit it later using advanced tech.

IMO some limited upgrades should be available for ships as was suggeted by Kc7mxo... you should be able to change/upgrade some ship systems but not others. Either that, or allow total refitting but make it so that one reaches a point where upgrading an old ship so outweighs the cost of building a brand new one that no one would do it.

Of course this may be very difficult to implement in a game and may only add unecessary complication. That's no fun.

I have read much grumbling and complaing on the IGMOO boards and some here as well regarding the cutting of features. I think what it all boils down to is that everyone has their own idea of the perfect game and everyone is going to wish something was different about the game. When they finally get a chance to play it (which is soon, thankfully) that is. But the developers are in this to make money and you have to produce a game that will sell well and have mass appeal.

This is NOT a dig on the developers at all. I think IG and QS care a great deal about gamers, from what I have seen and read, especially over the past few months. Seriously, these people have done a great job and made some gutsy decisions which left them open to lots of ridicule. I thought these people were insane when they didn't release the game last year and instead decided that the game just wasn't working as well as it should and proceeded to make a bunch of changes. But they pulled through and I'm confident that we'll have a great game on our hands.

Anyway, the point I was getting at is that everyone has their own perception of the perfect game and there is no way that the developers could have made MOO3 without people complaining about some feature or another. Impossible. Some people like refits... some don't... no worries. If the game is fun, that's all that really matters.

Maybe if I won the lottery I could afford to hire a team to build the "perfect game." It would be perfect for me, but probably everyone else would say it stinks!

For the record, the perfect game (TBS game, that is) right now would be a cross between MOO, Pacific War, MULE, SMAC, and Third Reich. But that's just me.

	25-01-2003 11:15									#17
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Imperator Max My ideal would be a more realistic, limited upgrade capability. Constrained to minor upgrades and replacements of smaller systems. For instance new fire control system, additional point defence weapons, that kind of thing... which is what happens with "real" ships

Now that would be ideal as it is compleatly realistic. The Navy did something of the sort with the Iowa class destroyers for the gulf war. New electronics, new nav, new targeting but same guns and same engine (just a little shinier). No new nuclear powered engine, no tomahawk missles (I think) just the old made much better. 'Course, simple upgrading procedures would be needed.

	25-01-2003 11:51									#18
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I think it comes down to this

1) Ship casualties tend to be high
2) Pirates can be handled by obsolete vessels
3) Crew experience no longer is a factor
4) No longer have command points. ( which was the number one factor in Moo2 for refitting ships IMHO )
5) Some reports indicate that it takes longer for ships to be rendered obsolete.

The practice of refitting ships may have just been rendered obsolete.

	25-01-2003 15:56									#19
	Tired of ads?

I love you guys, I'm at my wits end on the IG forums arguing with people whining about lack of a refit and how its ruined the game.
Its nice to see some intellegent discussion about it for a change.

	25-01-2003 17:30									#20
	Suffering from ads?

Id agree with ShivaX i until recently have been a IG forum person, but the complaining has driven me out.

Although the point about the US constantly upgrading their fleet is true, but not all countries have the same amount of money. Their are some really old ships in Australia navy, but then again they just get assigned to chase boat people (equivilent of pirates you could say). Refitting ships would be even more unlikly is some of the poored mations around the world.

ahhhhh it's good to see a intelligent discussion

	25-01-2003 21:47									#21
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Hey Noone,

What? The ESP isn't an intelligent discussion?

=P


but yeah i had left those forums for a bit too, mainly because of the whining-antiwhining whining thing going on..


and on the refit ships bit

i think you can just keep your old ships as system ships and cut down on pirating and stuff.

not sure thogh..

	25-01-2003 23:05									#22
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

My analogy about naval ship upgrades is older but I think more to the point...Recall WW2:

- US "4-stack" WW1 era destroyers were not used on the line but were relegated to convoy escort...they did not get "upgraded" to Fletchers and Summners.

- Elder WW1 BB's for the most part were relegated to shore bombardment (unless they were unhappily thrust into ship-to-ship battle such as happened on occasion.)

- Early CV's were for the most part left to ferry aircraft or train pilots

My point is, there is plenty of precedent to prohibit unlimited "upgrading" of obsolescent systems, including tanks, planes and ships. Systems are ultimately limited by the technology of the day. Just because you can launch cruise missles from a WW2 BB doesn't necessarily mean it is the best platform for the job.

MOO2's upgrade system was fun but after a while it became a pain for the anal-retentive amonst us (your's truly included) because one just HAD to track down all those obsolete ships and upgrade them...heaven forbid you went to battle with a doomstar that had last year's shields and missles!

I'm going to like MOO3 a lot more, I think...

	26-01-2003 01:01									#23
	Get a bigger avatar today!

It was never all that difficult for me to track out-of-date ships in MoO2 because I used a "series" number in the design name. e.g. CG Mk IV, etc. Probably wouldn't be such a good idea in MP (unless I started using deceptive names, like BBG for a direct-fire ship, Mk II for a seventh-generate ship, etc.).

	26-01-2003 04:43									#24
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: MOO2's upgrade system was fun but after a while it became a pain for the anal-retentive amonst us (your's truly included) because one just HAD to track down all those obsolete ships and upgrade them...heaven forbid you went to battle with a doomstar that had last year's shields and missles!

So, you didn't like moo2's upgrade system because you were irritating by your own use of it?

	26-01-2003 04:45									#25
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Kc7mxo But ships do have a lifetime. The best way to simulate that would be to not allow refits to change armor/structural technology, but only the weapons and other subsystems.

I think this is closest to the way I would have done refits. Some things can be changed, some things cannot.

• Armor and structure is an integral part of the ship and changing it would be impossible. When these become hopelessly outdated, scrapping the ship is better.
  
• There is no equivalent to shield technology on a modern naval vessel, so some speculation is necessary. It's not unreasonable to assume for gameplay purposes that a shield generator is a device that's an integral part of the hull that cannot be changed, thus giving an incentive to scrap a ship rather than refit it. Alternatively, it's just as easy to assume that a shield generator is a little box that can be changed easily.
  
• Weapons can be easily changed over, but it's probably okay to assume that there would be limits. A ship that was originally constructed as a missile ship with 8 missile slots would be far easier to convert into a missile ship with 8 slots of a newer class of missile than a beamer with 8 slots of the newest energy weapons. Generally, a refit should only change one weapon for another of the same class.
  

	26-01-2003 21:05									#26
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

The bottom line is that there is a trend in game design to make games more simple for the following reasons:

1. Easier to produce, i.e. cheaper.
2. More attractive to the mass market. (dumb down)
3. Makes the game less satisfying in the long run, therefore gamer is ready to buy another game sooner.

The last is the centerpiece of Infrogrames business strategy.

So, absent evidence to the contrary I assume Moo3 will suck in comparison to Moo2.

	26-01-2003 23:17									#27
	Put an end to popups!

quote: The bottom line is that there is a trend in game design to make games more simple for the following reasons: 1. Easier to produce, i.e. cheaper. 2. More attractive to the mass market. (dumb down) 3. Makes the game less satisfying in the long run, therefore gamer is ready to buy another game sooner.

Um. I somehow doubt number 1 applies to moo3.

	27-01-2003 02:25									#28
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

jimmytrick, there is plenty of evidence to the contrary that MOO3 is simple, unfun, or will suck compared to MOO2. That evidence is in the form of beta testers, previews, data dumps and the sheer amount of work involved in the game.

I'm not going to go over every detail of all the things that have been changed or improved, but the one thing that stands out in my mind is this: many of the beta testers say that they simply cannot go back to playing Moo2 for all sorts of reasons after they've played Moo3.

That alone makes me believe that it's a superior game. The analogy I would use is a mousewheel-enabled mouse. Before it existed I seemed to do fine. Now that it does exist, I can't go back to a wheeless mouse.

	27-01-2003 02:33									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Kc7mxo So, you didn't like moo2's upgrade system because you were irritating by your own use of it?

Well, my sarcastic eyerolling laddie, if you'd bothered to read my post, you'd see what my point was. Upgrades are not going to make or break a game, but they should at least add positively to the experience. Their deletion from MOO3 does not at all disappoint me for that reason.

My experience with MOO2 was that the upgrade system was an unnecessary complication, especially in the latter stages of gameplay where there were numerous planetary systems and ships to manage.

Before you flame, read, boyo.

Oh yes, your use of "irritating" is in the wrong tense. It's correct use is as in the sentence: "I find it irritating when ignorance is disguised as annoyance."

Have a nice day.

	27-01-2003 03:05									#30
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Well, my sarcastic eyerolling laddie, if you'd bothered to read my post, you'd see what my point was. Upgrades are not going to make or break a game, but they should at least add positively to the experience. Their deletion from MOO3 does not at all disappoint me for that reason.

Well, I did read your post. And I didn't flame you. I was merely teasing you. . .

Because your basic reasoning for not liking refits in moo2, was that you felt this uncontrollable urge to use it all the time.

quote: Oh yes, your use of "irritating" is in the wrong tense. It's correct use is as in the sentence: "I find it irritating when ignorance is disguised as annoyance."

O dear" u is flamin me gramir und me spiling! i is deviastoted!