I have a small ship I made in previous game with 2 sensor modules. It now "sees" everything 11 hexes from itself. I don't recall this from Beta 5, where I made this ship design.
Bug or WAD? I wonder what would happen if I added 2 more... 22 hex range from my ship?
Then we are back to the "hypothetical" idea with the missile.
If they added a second missile tech identical to the one we have with the only difference the new missiles do twice the damage. You would be OK with that because it is a choice whether you use it or not.
Comon... you don't balance game feature like that... you simply don't.
Missiles and sensors are two different things. That's comparing apples to oranges. Your analogy is flawed.
It is a similar problem... thus "hypothetical"
Oh... and please give a serious answer to one of two options.
1. Why should there not be a good game balance between ship and station sensors?
2. How do you balance ship and station sensors?
With that I rest my case and turn the judgement over to Stardock development team to decide for themselves. As I said... I can live with restricting my own game play for my own enjoyment.
1. Sensor are not broken. Who in the hell needs a sensor ship on the smaller maps? On the bigger maps it is much more plausible. That is where the argument against limits comes from and you fail to understand
2. I still use star bases to extend the range of my combat ships because I don't over load them with sensors , nor do I ever start a game building a pure sensor ship but I want the choice to do so if I want to. Another thing you fail to understand.
1/2 There should be, the station should have much more powerful sensors than ship sensors, like 5 or 6 times the range and I would probably use starbase sensors at that point.
Regarding your last statement if you can play the way you want without any issue, why are you arguing so hard to change the way everyone else does?
Because it is all fantasy physics in the first place. People seem willing to posit FTL travel and doom rays, but not additive sensors based on an unspecified technique. And then they argue about it passionately. I heard my kids arguing the old Superman battling Batman concept, when one of them yelled out, "But that's not real!" I could not stop laughing.
This is a discussion of gameplay elements. Reality has little or nothing to do with it. Reaity has little or nothing to do with the game in general. Stardock has never said otherwise. Why do you have the impression that it is so important to the design of this particular game? Seriously, can someone tell me how you can look at the Battle Viewer and claim realism is important to this game? It's meant to look good and be fun.
Debating what is fun or fair makes sense, citing realism does not.
1/2 There should be, the station should have much more powerful sensors than ship sensors, like 5 or 6 times the range and I would probably use starbase sensors at that point. Regarding your last statement if you can play the way you want without any issue, why are you arguing so hard to change the way everyone else does?
If you are exploring out of range of your starbases it makes perfect sense to have a few ships stacked with a few sensor modules.
Because the choice is up to the player, not the damned Nazi Gestapo Gamers!
Perhaps because planets are spheres, not squares, and they orbit stars due to gravity. The point: the game is built within a universe that mirrors core fundamentals of our own universe. Realism is part of this deal; to what extent is subjective. Projectile cannons shooting unicorn horns or laser beams shooting candy canes might score a 0 on the realism factor and a 10 on the fun factor, completely subjective depending upon the player of course. Inconsistent believability is the way I would articulate my point. The fact that a ship can have multiple sensors on it and see far away yet a station or planet cannot feels contradictory and strange (not to mention I was asking an honest question on how an array extends range vs. merely improving resolution). This issue affects the believability of the situation which, in turn, affects my fun factor. I realize this is only my opinion and respect the opinion of others within this debate.
The sensors arguably fall into the realm of believability when you consider that the tech they are using is 300 years in the future. It does not break any laws of physics that I am aware of. It is just beyond our ability to do it today.
It is a science fiction game and we are always asked to turn off our denial of believability to some extent. The very premise of the game, the hyperdrive, breaks laws of physics more than the possibility of long range scanning. When you consider that we are in the process of cataloging every comet and asteroid in the solar system at this moment, who is to say what is possible in the future. We already know more about surrounding stars and their planets than we are allowed to know in the game.
Never mind all that, the devs will tell you quick that they value game play over reality every time and the sensors are about game play.
The most important thing, and my, by god, last word on the subject:
If they choose to leave the game as is, you will not be forced to play our way, you will just have an option.
If they change it, those of us who prefer to use the sensors will have an element of our enjoyment taken away. We will be forced to play the game your way, and there will be no option.
That's just wrong.
1. Sensor are not broken. Who in the hell needs a sensor ship on the smaller maps? On the bigger maps it is much more plausible. That is where the argument against limits comes from and you fail to understand 2. I still use star bases to extend the range of my combat ships because I don't over load them with sensors , nor do I ever start a game building a pure sensor ship but I want the choice to do so if I want to. Another thing you fail to understand.
I'm sorry... but you actually failed to answer any of the questions truthfully, is it so hard to give a constructive answer to the actual question?
Please elaborate on how sensors ARE or ARE NOT balanced between ships and stations in the current game, give me numbers and hard math please?
These arguments "they are options" and "nazi gestapo gamer" things are just evading the real question, the latter is also a perfect example of an AD Hominem attack or Red Herring!!!
It is my opinion that sensors on stations should be at least 1.5 to 2 times better than sensors on ships to be useful to build from a game mechanics perspective, but that is just my opinion. This has NOTHING to do with reality or whether I believe sensor ranges should in general be smaller or larger. Just a ratio of usefulness set between ships and stations. Let's ignore the range of the sensors for a while, that can be another discussion what is fair in regards to making scouting interesting in general.
Actually I think it's just a bit over powered at the start on bigger maps, really helps you find those important first colonies.
This. Any argument about "realism" is inherently flawed by the simple premise of the game and all the physics defying things that are already there.
And personally I'm fine with sensors as is.
Let me start by saying I enjoy the larger map sizes and I like Sensor ships because scouts are just too inefficient when you've got so many star to explore it's highly frustrating and if you think micromanaging constructors is bad then doing so with 50 odd scouts that need manual routing for efficiency is a whole new ball game I assure you.
However I sat back and though I know what would not only keep sensor ships in the game for fast exploration but also bring Starbase sensors up to par which would be levels of stealth tech that hide ships from classes of sensor. I can't imagine it would be too hard implement even different grades of tech that provide cover against levels of sensor. That way you could simply increase the potency of Star base sensors automatically but require ship sensors a lot of room and research to counter the various stealth techs. This gets even more interesting if you start having holographic false image techs as well as it could cast false readings to where the enemy fleet is and thus allow them to sidestep an intercepting fleet to hit something more juicy. Obviously this is in the realms of expansion of DLC but its a huge area that could really sort these worries out while actively providing more choice and more depth to the core game.
I'm fairly sure that most other players that like sensor buoys for larger map sizes are much like myself its about getting a decent overview of the map so you don't waste 2 hours on a false start because you couldn't find habitable planets or resources in those first 15 systems you explored because you went the wrong way. The extra level of stealth and having layers of effective cover would only add to the game and its strategies while even better not having to use a system of invisible ships constantly, as the ships are fully uncovered by a couple of Star base sensor upgrades at each tech level.
Food for though anyway. Thanks for reading
crimsonsun
I will provide you with numbers because you asked, but I will not endorse any particular balance argument. It is my opinion that sensor ships are perhaps a bit on the strong side but not an issue of the proportions which you and several others in this thread appear to believe. Targeted exploration with fast scouts is still a viable alternative to wide-area exploration with sensor ships.
Now, algebra:
A ship with sensor range R can see a number of tiles N at the start of its turn, where
N = 3*R^2 + 3*R
not including the tile in which the ship resides. A ship with sensor range R can reveal a further number of tiles Q with each move action, where
Q = 2*R + 1
though it should be remembered that Q is not the same as the number of tiles for which the ship's movement has revealed new information. A ship with sensor range R and move actions per turn M can therefore provide you with current knowledge of up to T tiles per turn, where
T = N + Q*M
It should, however, be noted that the information thus obtained is not guaranteed to be unique, nor is it guaranteed to be new. Assuming a static map, the maximum amount of new information a ship with a sensor range of R can obtain per turn is Q*M. If you have two ships with sensor ranges R1 and R2 and movement per turn M1 and M2, then if N1 > N2 but M1*Q1 < M2*Q2, it will take t turns for ship 2 to surpass ship 1 in terms of number of tiles revealed, where
t = (N1 - N2) / (Q2*M2 - Q1*M1)
It should be remembered that this is not, strictly speaking, a good measure of how useful a ship is for exploratory purposes, as this doesn't evaulate whether or not the tiles revealed are tiles that you already had all the desired information about or not.
A ship (ship 1) with M1 moves per turn, R1 sensor range, and an x turn head start on some ship 2 with M2 moves per turn and R2 sensor range can begin exploring tiles that ship 2 cannot reach yet after y turns, where
y = (R1 - R2 - x*M2) / (M2 - M1)
under the assumption that both vessels are moving along the same path and started from the same point. To put this in perspective, the survey ship that you start with on turn 0 can by turn 8 or so begin exploring areas that a sensor ship which was rushed on turn 0 and became available on turn 1 cannot yet reach, while the scout ship you start with on turn 0 can do so by about turn 18, assuming that the scout/survey ship and the sensor ship both follow the same path. Movement bonuses can shift the time slightly in a way which favors the faster ships, and being smart and not sending your ships all out along the same path will also help out (a move-2 ship with 4 sensor range which you start with will begin to reveal areas which the sensor range 24 sensor ship you got on turn 1 didn't cover starting on turn 10 if the two ships are traveling on paths which are sufficiently different from one another, i.e. the scout is not paralleling the sensor ship from well within the sensor ship's sensor range; speed bonuses will improve this somewhat).
The big sensor ships are good at exploring lots of area quickly, but they're not necessarily that good at exploring the right areas quickly. You know roughly where the planets are because you know where the stars spawned, and if those stars are more than a certain distance away you'll find out what's there more rapidly by using a faster scout ship with more limited sensor range than you will by using a slower scout ship with a larger sensor range. Sensor ships are therefore good for exploring regions close to the shipyard rapidly and for efficiently searching large regions, whereas fast scout ships are of greater value for rapidly searching distant areas of limited size which are expected to contain something of value (e.g. the area around a known distant star).
Pretty interesting idea, I would support it.
I will provide you with numbers because you asked, but I will not endorse any particular balance argument. It is my opinion that sensor ships are perhaps a bit on the strong side but not an issue of the proportions which you and several others in this thread appear to believe. Targeted exploration with fast scouts is still a viable alternative to wide-area exploration with sensor ships.Now, algebra:A ship with sensor range R can see a number of tiles N at the start of its turn, where
N = 3*R^2 + 3*Rnot including the tile in which the ship resides. A ship with sensor range R can reveal a further number of tiles Q with each move action, where
Q = 2*R + 1though it should be remembered that Q is not the same as the number of tiles for which the ship's movement has revealed new information. A ship with sensor range R and move actions per turn M can therefore provide you with current knowledge of up to T tiles per turn, where
T = N + Q*MIt should, however, be noted that the information thus obtained is not guaranteed to be unique, nor is it guaranteed to be new. Assuming a static map, the maximum amount of new information a ship with a sensor range of R can obtain per turn is Q*M. If you have two ships with sensor ranges R1 and R2 and movement per turn M1 and M2, then if N1 > N2 but M1*Q1 < M2*Q2, it will take t turns for ship 2 to surpass ship 1 in terms of number of tiles revealed, where
t = (N1 - N2) / (Q2*M2 - Q1*M1)It should be remembered that this is not, strictly speaking, a good measure of how useful a ship is for exploratory purposes. A ship (ship 1) with M1 moves per turn, R1 sensor range, and an x turn head start on some ship 2 with M2 moves per turn and R2 sensor range can begin exploring tiles that ship 2 cannot reach yet on turn y where
y = (R1 - R2 - x*M2) / (M2 - M1)under the assumption that both vessels are moving along the same path and started from the same point. To put this in perspective, the survey ship that you start with on turn 0 can by turn 8 or so begin exploring areas that a sensor ship which was rushed on turn 0 and became available on turn 1 cannot yet reach, while the scout ship you start with on turn 0 can do so by about turn 18, assuming that the scout/survey ship and the sensor ship both follow the same path. Movement bonuses can shift the time slightly in a way which favors the faster ships, and being smart and not sending your ships all out along the same path will also help out (a move-2 ship with 4 sensor range which you start with will begin to reveal areas which the sensor range 24 sensor ship you got on turn 1 didn't cover starting on turn 10 if the two ships are traveling on paths which are sufficiently different from one another, i.e. the scout is not paralleling the sensor ship from well within the sensor ship's sensor range; speed bonuses will improve this somewhat).The big sensor ships are good at exploring lots of area quickly, but they're not necessarily that good at exploring the right areas quickly. You know roughly where the planets are because you know where the stars spawned, and if those stars are more than a certain distance away you'll find out what's there more rapidly by using a faster scout ship with more limited sensor range than you will by using a slower scout ship with a larger sensor range. Sensor ships are therefore good for exploring regions close to the shipyard rapidly and for efficiently searching large regions, whereas fast scout ships are of greater value for rapidly searching distant areas which are expected to contain something of value (e.g. the area around a known distant star).
Well, it was not quite the math I was asking for but, sure... a fast scout can reach stars further out faster that is a no brainier. But a transport can be both reasonable fast and have great sensor at the same time so that point is moot and I really are not arguing the scouting validity here. I can easily have a transport with 20-30 sensor range 6-10 speed and a good range in a few turns from start by quickly researching interstellar traveling. It makes scouting even on insane maps trivial for colonization purposes.
I was more asking about how to balance sensors of stations and ships so they both are an option to use.
Here is a more simple way to put it with numbers.
A tiny ship with just three basic navigational sensors cost 40 manufacturing points to build and have a maintenance of 0 and a scanning range 8, a basic station has 5 scanning range.
With interstellar traveling you get the perimeter module for bases that give them +3 sensor range of a total of 8 for the cost of a constructor at a manufacturing cost of about 80-120 (depends how you design them). At the same time you can now build tiny sensor ships with three sensors at 8-11 range for 40 manufacturing for no maintenance cost.
You now get a sensor platform that is cheaper, have better sensor performance AND is mobile?!?
This is the sort of balance I'm debating here...
IMO sensors should not stack. Only one per hull. Beef them up to compensate and/or have a large sensor array that takes up more space.
Each sensor tech would increase the range dramatically up to a pre set limit. Not including bonuses.
Sensors for star bases should have more range than the ship equivalent.
You could have a fleet module that would stack sensors, this would make more sense.
The easiest way of you like to mod in a diminishing return of sensors is to make each sensor a one per ship only. Then you can only place one of each category on a ship which essentially becomes a diminishing return of sensor strength. That and boosting the sensor strength of stations... pretty easy to do with a mod if you really like to. I have no doubt someone will make some kind of "realism" mod that make such a change in mechanics for both sensors and engines.
It does however not address the official game and the balance between station and ship sensors.
When exactly did surveillance become a primary function of a starbase? As far as I'm aware, surveillance has always been at best a secondary function of starbases, and the options you get for their sensor suites reflect that. Starbases have adequate sensors for their primary function; if you want better coverage, you can upgrade the starbase within limits, or get yourself a dedicated sensor platform. That a dedicated sensor platform offers superior sensor coverage to something for which wide-area surveillance is at best a secondary function doesn't bother me.
Also, as far as I know, the sensors installed on starbases don't affect the maintenance costs of that starbase. You're not paying for the sensors so much as you're paying for everything else that went with it - at minimum, whatever facilities allow the base to extend the range of your fleets, as well as a basic array of weapons and defenses. A starbase is a major piece of infrastructure whether or not you develop it beyond its initial state; if it were not, you would not be able to use it to extend the range of your fleets. That a major piece of infrastructure costs more than one of the cheapest possible dedicated sensor platforms does not strike me as being problematic. If I decide to put a radar station on some island so that I can monitor air and sea traffic nearby, it's unlikely that the manner in which I'll install it is by building a large naval base or airfield on the island; these are unnecessary for mere surveillance, and yet this is exactly what you're doing if you build a starbase for the purpose of monitoring a region of space - you're building a reasonably large base facility rather than a simple listening post or monitoring station.
Why does stacking fleet sensors make sense to you when stacking ship sensors doesn't?
Because ships in a fleet would have more than one sensor that would cover more space. Just like real life sensor arrays do.
When exactly did surveillance become a primary function of a starbase? As far as I'm aware, surveillance has always been at best a secondary function of starbases, and the options you get for their sensor suites reflect that. Starbases have adequate sensors for their primary function; if you want better coverage, you can upgrade the starbase within limits, or get yourself a dedicated sensor platform. That a dedicated sensor platform offers superior sensor coverage to something for which wide-area surveillance is at best a secondary function doesn't bother me.Also, as far as I know, the sensors installed on starbases don't affect the maintenance costs of that starbase. You're not paying for the sensors so much as you're paying for everything else that went with it - at minimum, whatever facilities allow the base to extend the range of your fleets, as well as a basic array of weapons and defenses. A starbase is a major piece of infrastructure whether or not you develop it beyond its initial state; if it were not, you would not be able to use it to extend the range of your fleets. That a major piece of infrastructure costs more than one of the cheapest possible dedicated sensor platforms does not strike me as being problematic. If I decide to put a radar station on some island so that I can monitor air and sea traffic nearby, it's unlikely that the manner in which I'll install it is by building a large naval base or airfield on the island; these are unnecessary for mere surveillance, and yet this is exactly what you're doing if you build a starbase for the purpose of monitoring a region of space - you're building a reasonably large base facility rather than a simple listening post or monitoring station.
Did you miss the fact that a tiny ship had better sensor range, was cheaper and maintenance free... that is better in ALL respect than using sensors on stations. Having sensor modules on stations are simply misleading to someone that don't stop to think for a while. All features in a game need to be balance against each other somehow.
I don't care if stations or ships are suppose to be for surveillance or whatever, this is completely irrelevant. The system need to be balanced and every choice need to be meaningful in some way.
Is this really so hard to understand, does it not have to be balanced at all... why are sensor modules for stations even in the game?
What I'm interested in is there being any reason to add the sensor modules at all, currently their are none what so ever... you build a tiny sensor ship and park it at a base and it basically is better than upgrading the base and much cheaper to upgrade with money later as well. You can also move the ship around if you like.
So what? An AWACS is cheaper than an airfield and generally offers better radar coverage than a ground-based installation. The only issue you bring up that bothers me at all is the lack of a maintenance cost, which I view as more a problem of tiny ships than of the sensor ships versus space station sensors question specifically.
Also, if you park a dedicated sensor vessel on a space station, you're reducing the size of the fleet you can park there by the logistical cost of that sensor ship. It's not much of a trade off against building constructors to upgrade the station's scanners, but it's there.
There are real-life sensor arrays which all get mounted on a single vessel, you know. They tend to be rather more common than the arrays mounted on several separate vessels all working together, too.
So what? An AWACS is cheaper than an airfield and generally offers better radar coverage than a ground-based installation. The only issue you bring up that bothers me at all is the lack of a maintenance cost, which I view as more a problem of tiny ships than of the sensor ships versus space station sensors question specifically.Also, if you park a dedicated sensor vessel on a space station, you're reducing the size of the fleet you can park there by the logistical cost of that sensor ship. It's not much of a trade off against building constructors to upgrade the station's scanners, but it's there.
First of all space are not curved like the earth which is a huge reason why an AWAC is better than a ground radar station, you have no such restrictions in space... second of all this has NO, ZIP... zilch relevance on game balance what so ever!?!
From a "realism" point of view stations should be able to mount much better and heavier sensor arrays than any ship due to many factors. In space you are hardly affected by gravitational interference so they could reach out further.. but... you can use whatever techno-babble you wish...
I also fail to understand why there are such resistance in acknowledge the fact that stations need to have better sensors than ships for them to be viable in the first place. They have a huge drawback in that they are immobile. They need to be balanced within the framework of the game mechanics, nothing else. Techno-babble can be applied after the fact anyway.
Also... two or one logistic point out of 60 will not matter at all, you can also remove it from the base if that would ever become an issue which it would not. The fact that you can move the sensor from base to base far outweigh this drawback.
One of the reasons to increase a space station's sensory range is to get alerted more sooner in the case of hostiles coming closer.
Now the problem here is that a ship can do this better in every single regard than what's offered by the space station module. And you don't have to park that ship directly onto the station, in many cases you can anticipate from where the enemy will near so your sensorship can move a few hexes into that direction further increasing your efficiency. Or you let it circle around that station. No logistical points taken away at all.
You can also withdraw that ship if the hostiles are too strong and will destroy that station, upgrade it to a better design etc... practically these ships only need to be placed at the border of your territory, and also, only if a threat could arise from there. If you're expanding these ships will move with you while modules on spacestations stay and have to be rebuild on new stations. The latter is much more expensive to do. If you factor that in you might as well build a sensorship based on a bigger vessel that totally outclasses any starbase module.
There's just so many additional possibilites, there simply is no reason why anyone would attach an inferior sensor module on a spacestation.....
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
