Boosting Efficiency

Discuss Supreme Ruler 2020 here.

Moderators: Legend, Balthagor, Moderators

Message
Author
Jan
Captain
Posts: 122
Joined: May 15 2007
Location: Belgium

#16 Post by Jan » Jun 06 2007

even if player is not qualified enough or too dumb to understand the indepth game mechanisms, it may be interisting to have more infos about what's going on, at least to allow him/her to master a bit the elements under his/her control.

In other words, the "Supreme Guesser" need more "Supreme Advisors" to really become a Supreme Ruler ;)

cheers,

Jan

nghtmre15
Major
Posts: 157
Joined: Jun 26 2006
Location: USA

#17 Post by nghtmre15 » Jun 06 2007

Jan wrote:even if player is not qualified enough or too dumb to understand the indepth game mechanisms, it may be interisting to have more infos about what's going on, at least to allow him/her to master a bit the elements under his/her control.
It would definitely help to smooth out the game's extremely painful learning curve, that's for sure.

I don't think that we need exact information (i.e. 'Time Remaining to Full Efficiency: 27 days, 4 hours), but to have a dialog or a pop-up that gives a very general timeframe for how long an effect like this would take should be sufficient. I would think that most leaders would be able to know roughly (emphasis on 'roughly') how long it would take to get to full readiness. Why shouldn't the player get the same rough estimate?
In a world without sound, dancing... falling... I was snow.

Gurzit
Sergeant
Posts: 10
Joined: Jun 15 2006
Location: Zagreb Croatia

#18 Post by Gurzit » Jun 06 2007

To learn game faster there chould be at the bottom of screen textbox that would give brief info about icon, item, building and other ingame stuff.

As for efficiency, is there possibility that it could be removed? So units have only xp that could work as efficiency.
It would look like this:

a.)All units have base power of 40% when in base (reserve), when active it would slowly rise up to 70%
b.)now comes part with xp - based on your budget investment in training and equipment, unit xp would rise (1,2,3) xp per month up to maximum 10. and this xp bonus would rise its efficiency by 10%
c.)to get xp of 10+ (up to maximum of 30 xp = 30% efficiency) unit has to go to combat

Any thoughts about this idea?
Give me a stick, enough funds and i'll win war for you. - SR 2010 reality

nghtmre15
Major
Posts: 157
Joined: Jun 26 2006
Location: USA

#19 Post by nghtmre15 » Jun 06 2007

Personally, I really like the idea of efficiency. I would hate to see it taken out. It just needs a little streamlining and it will be perfect. It helps to keep all of the armies of the world from becoming too homogenous. The countries that have a little extra spending money should be able to pour it into their armies and get some results out of it.
In a world without sound, dancing... falling... I was snow.

Gurzit
Sergeant
Posts: 10
Joined: Jun 15 2006
Location: Zagreb Croatia

#20 Post by Gurzit » Jun 07 2007

nghtmre15 wrote:Personally, I really like the idea of efficiency. I would hate to see it taken out. It just needs a little streamlining and it will be perfect. It helps to keep all of the armies of the world from becoming too homogenous. The countries that have a little extra spending money should be able to pour it into their armies and get some results out of it.
Ok, but efficiency removes technological edge you have ingame. It makes me no sense when army with outdated equipment beat highly advanced army without any unit lost. (i.e. Egypt (me) 2 units lost - Israel 169 units lost !) In SR 2010 equipment had little effect on outcome of any battle.

EDIT:
I talked only about technological advantage for conventional war (i.e. USA invasion of Iraq, Israel-Arab wars etc.) around which SR revolves, asimetrical warfare on other hand has little with technological advantage of each opponent and it didn't have major role in SR 2010 so i haven't mentioned it.
Give me a stick, enough funds and i'll win war for you. - SR 2010 reality

Jan
Captain
Posts: 122
Joined: May 15 2007
Location: Belgium

#21 Post by Jan » Jun 07 2007

Gurzit wrote:
nghtmre15 wrote:(...)In SR 2010 equipment had little effect on outcome of any battle.
(...)
Will it have more effects in SR2020?

In my humble opinion, the problem is that units with low tech level have often a bigger strength than units with higher tech level (for exemple light infantry with 70 squad per "battalion" versus mechanized infantry with 54 squads per "battalion").

The result is, for exemple, that light infantry riding jeeps are more powerfull in close combat than mechanized infantry (infantry combined with AIFV) wich is a totally unbanlanced, irrealistic by far, and don't give the player any motivation to enjoy the versatility of the bestiary, in other words the time consumed in working on all units handicaped by a bad balancing is wasted.

Off course, you have to had other factors like efficiency, specific training, terrain, etc. but basically, any tech advantage is shadowed by strength.


cheers,

Jan

User avatar
Lightbringer
General
Posts: 2973
Joined: May 23 2006
Location: Texas

#22 Post by Lightbringer » Jun 07 2007

mechanized infantry with 54 squads per "battalion").
You can always slide the build size up to maximum and equalize this. I haven't noticed any of my Mech Inf getting slaughtered by light Inf lately though. :P

Also, I can see Experience playing some limiting factor in efficiency, but not completely replacing it. Perhaps instead of higher EXP units having more efficiency, lower EXP units might suffer an Efficiency drop until they have "seen the Elephant"?

All in all, you have to agree. An Army with plenty of money spent properly on supplies and communication equipment. New uniforms, good food, etc. , all will play a part in keeping forces operating more efficiently than if they are starving and feel like their superiors are mistreating them or not supplying them properly.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” -Winston Churchill

User avatar
tkobo
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 11833
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: In a vast zionist plot ...RIGHT BEHIND YOU ! Oh Noes !

#23 Post by tkobo » Jun 07 2007

Gurzit wrote:
In SR 2010 equipment had little effect on outcome of any battle.
This is extremely incorrect.So i have to wonder if you simply mean it in a way i didnt follow.

If this is the way you think because of battles with the AI, than you have to take into account that the AI under funds its unit efficiency.
It does this as a cost saving measure and it usaully increases the under funding as it gets more units.

So that the more units an AI has,the more likely it is they will be paying less money to those units efficiency.

AI:More units = lower efficiency for all of those units
lower efficiency = lower performance for said units.

If you have 2 computers,play a multi-player with you as both sides and use the funding the same for both sides.
BUT use vastly different tech units and you'll see,that for the most part higher tech equals higher attack and defense values which have a very large effect on the combat.
This post approved by Tkobo:Official Rabble Rouser of the United Yahoos
Chuckle TM

Gurzit
Sergeant
Posts: 10
Joined: Jun 15 2006
Location: Zagreb Croatia

#24 Post by Gurzit » Jun 07 2007

I've taken it from that point that you mentioned (underfunding) but still you have to admit that army cant become near invincible overnight as in SR 2010. I can only tell that there should be in new SR greater interaction between xp, efficiency/equipment funding, and military funding.
Give me a stick, enough funds and i'll win war for you. - SR 2010 reality

User avatar
Lightbringer
General
Posts: 2973
Joined: May 23 2006
Location: Texas

#25 Post by Lightbringer » Jun 07 2007

Gurzit,

If you mean me, then yes, I agree. Combat efficiency should be a healthy mix of funding and EXP, and good funding should not bestow combat greatness overnight like putting on a new uniform.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” -Winston Churchill

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion - 2020”