Prev: Re: GMS/P vs. IAVR Next: Re: GMS/P vs. IAVR

Re: DS2 Balance and stuff.

From: "Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@t...>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 20:52:51 +0200
Subject: Re: DS2 Balance and stuff.

Brian Bilderback wrote:

>>I can't see why Hi tech's need an advantage such as this more shots
>>or move-shoot-move.
> 
>Because some of us feel that, given the difference in cost for a
>Superior system over a Basic system, the advantage should be a little
>greater than just a slight increase in the odds of hitting. You should
>get what you pay for.

Bad example. Upgrading from a Basic to a Superior FCS is quite probably
the *best* investment you can make in the current DSII points system -
the cost of the vehicle usually increases by somewhere between 5% and
10% (unless it is a very small, very cheap vehicle with a very big
gun), but its hit rate goes up by somewhere around 70% (boosting the
combat power of the vehicle by about 30% compared to if it had had
Basic FCS).

Because of this, Superior FCs are very much *under*priced - if you
really want to pay for what you actually get, they should cost about
three times as much as they currently do! *Reducing* them in cost will
do virtually nothing to correct the hi/low balance problem - even if
you got them for free you won't save much more than 5% the cost of your
high-tech tank.

It's all those other fancy gadgets - advanced power packs and mobility
types in particular - that make high-tech vehicles so overpriced...

I agree with the rest of your comments to Graeme's post <g>

Regards,

Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Hen3ry

Prev: Re: GMS/P vs. IAVR Next: Re: GMS/P vs. IAVR