Petrosian
Giant Breadbug
The Fishman
Posts: 1,560
|
Post by Petrosian on Dec 6, 2008 6:34:53 GMT -5
Everyone keep their tempers down. Now is not the time to argue, but we need to look at something from all angles. I do agree that the old Pikmin 1 resources were hard to manage, but we do have the power to control this AND make it accurate enough. I'd suggest that we make each piece of resource be worth 1/10 of the value we now have, and have the Universal Store sell it in 10s. Also, by the way, where is the Universal Store exactly?
|
|
Meowzer
Waterwraith
The Picker of the 'Min
Pffffffffff
Posts: 2,249
|
Post by Meowzer on Dec 6, 2008 8:34:43 GMT -5
Trade section. I don't think they should be sold in tens.
|
|
Meowzer
Waterwraith
The Picker of the 'Min
Pffffffffff
Posts: 2,249
|
Post by Meowzer on Dec 6, 2008 8:35:54 GMT -5
There's no doubt about that- it's just that sometimes each army gets so bogged down with all the different numbers and rules they need to follow, it's hard to have an idea of what you're doing. That doesn't really happen here. Just try to play and then judge.
|
|
|
Post by THE GODDAMN BATMAN on Dec 6, 2008 9:30:12 GMT -5
Everyone keep their tempers down. Now is not the time to argue, but we need to look at something from all angles. I do agree that the old Pikmin 1 resources were hard to manage, but we do have the power to control this AND make it accurate enough. I'd suggest that we make each piece of resource be worth 1/10 of the value we now have, and have the Universal Store sell it in 10s. Also, by the way, where is the Universal Store exactly? No, definitely not. I like the system we have now, plus we've already added a whole bunch of stuff that woud be complicated to a new member, we need to keep something simple. The way we have the materials system now works, and I don't want it to change just because it doesn't seem realistic. Think of it this way, since pikmin, bulborbs, etc. are so small, it would make sense that building materials would be huge in comparison. I seriously think that we shouldn't make the game any more complicated than we already have it.
|
|
|
Post by tinfoilman on Dec 6, 2008 10:03:03 GMT -5
Everyone keep their tempers down. Now is not the time to argue, but we need to look at something from all angles. I do agree that the old Pikmin 1 resources were hard to manage, but we do have the power to control this AND make it accurate enough. I'd suggest that we make each piece of resource be worth 1/10 of the value we now have, and have the Universal Store sell it in 10s. I seriously think that we shouldn't make the game any more complicated than we already have it. Agreed. Also, in here we should be looking at the rules that are in place, not suggesting new ones.
|
|
|
Post by Water Dumple on Dec 6, 2008 10:33:06 GMT -5
There's no doubt about that- it's just that sometimes each army gets so bogged down with all the different numbers and rules they need to follow, it's hard to have an idea of what you're doing. That doesn't really happen here. Just try to play and then judge. Well, he's never played either Pikmin game, so that can't be happening, but I do wish he wouldn't comment like that so much. I've never had a problem "Knowing what I'm doing" before, and although these three bases could make it harder to manage, I doubt that will change. Especially since the number of factories and troops per base is a great deal lower than your single base got last version--Which means that by the time you get your third base, you might not even be getting more troops at the first. I agree with Cannibal Joe as well, I think we're fine as-is. It's got flaws, but every system has 'em. The question is how to balance out those bonuses, and I think the +20% with a limit of a 20-day bonus will fix it. I...I think...
|
|
Planet9
Ranging Bloyster
Former Power Poster[A:0]
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by Planet9 on Dec 6, 2008 16:02:43 GMT -5
Wait, why do we even need %?
|
|
|
Post by Water Dumple on Dec 6, 2008 16:35:14 GMT -5
Wait, why do we even need %? Well, if it was something like a 5-day bonus, it would be easy to make 1-day machines and stuff. So I thought that we could just have the limit not apply to machines under 20 days, but then that's not good enough when you're making big 60-day ones, so I think a percent bonus is best, as Petrosian suggested.
|
|
Orangutan
Waterwraith
Kaw Kaw Bird
Posts: 2,294
|
Post by Orangutan on Dec 6, 2008 16:50:16 GMT -5
I just think we should take out the bonuses. They're really not needed and take a lot of time to figure out.
|
|
|
Post by norbertk19 on Dec 6, 2008 17:05:41 GMT -5
I agree with kaka. Although cool they're relativly useless.
|
|
|
Post by THE GODDAMN BATMAN on Dec 6, 2008 17:18:33 GMT -5
I'm with Kaka too. Let's just start the game without them.
|
|
|
Post by tinfoilman on Dec 6, 2008 17:23:15 GMT -5
I'm fine either way.
|
|
Planet9
Ranging Bloyster
Former Power Poster[A:0]
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by Planet9 on Dec 6, 2008 18:12:34 GMT -5
Wait, why do we even need %? Well, if it was something like a 5-day bonus, it would be easy to make 1-day machines and stuff. So I thought that we could just have the limit not apply to machines under 20 days, but then that's not good enough when you're making big 60-day ones, so I think a percent bonus is best, as Petrosian suggested. How is it not good enough? If you make a 20 day machine and a 60 day machine, you're 5 days off a project slot. However, if you had a 10% bonus, then you would save more and more time off project slots the longer the machine, which can make it unbalanced compared to the other non-day bonus ones like Scavenger.
|
|
Waffle-SS
Gatling Groink
The Administrator[A:0]
This means WAR, MAGGOTS!
Posts: 997
|
Post by Waffle-SS on Dec 6, 2008 18:26:33 GMT -5
That doesn't really happen here. Just try to play and then judge. Well, he's never played either Pikmin game, so that can't be happening, but I do wish he wouldn't comment like that so much. I've never had a problem "Knowing what I'm doing" before, and although these three bases could make it harder to manage, I doubt that will change. Especially since the number of factories and troops per base is a great deal lower than your single base got last version--Which means that by the time you get your third base, you might not even be getting more troops at the first. I agree with Cannibal Joe as well, I think we're fine as-is. It's got flaws, but every system has 'em. The question is how to balance out those bonuses, and I think the +20% with a limit of a 20-day bonus will fix it. I...I think... Yay, my idea! I think we should keep the bonuses. It gives each base flavor, and a focus.
|
|
Petrosian
Giant Breadbug
The Fishman
Posts: 1,560
|
Post by Petrosian on Dec 6, 2008 18:47:37 GMT -5
Well, if it was something like a 5-day bonus, it would be easy to make 1-day machines and stuff. So I thought that we could just have the limit not apply to machines under 20 days, but then that's not good enough when you're making big 60-day ones, so I think a percent bonus is best, as Petrosian suggested. How is it not good enough? If you make a 20 day machine and a 60 day machine, you're 5 days off a project slot. However, if you had a 10% bonus, then you would save more and more time off project slots the longer the machine, which can make it unbalanced compared to the other non-day bonus ones like Scavenger. If you think about it in another way, it's actually fair. IF it is 10%: If I make a 100-day machine, I get 10 extra days of strength off it. If I make 10 10-day machines, I get 1 extra day of strength off it. There are 10 machines, which amounts to 10 extra days total, exactly breaking even. IF it is 5 extra days: If I make a 100-day machine, I get 5 extra days of strength off it. If I make 10 10-day machines, I get 5 days of strength off each, I have 10, so that is 50 extra days in total, compared to a measly 5 of the 100-day machine.
|
|