Welcome to Near Ft. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3
Technology Analysis Proposal; Read the post!
Topic Started: Oct 12 2013, 07:52 AM (395 Views)
Hobbeebia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Ok,

So we all have a forvite type of tech, and lets face it we are all paritial to its ability to kick the other guys ass fairly easily., but do we really give the other tech's due credit? In this thread we will be building, discussing, dismantling, reorganizing and then build once more a proper, if somewhat daunting, Comparison Chart which can be used to explore the strengths and weaknesses of technologies which can and probably will, be employed within the Universe of NEAR.

First order of business... Establish a tech tree of various types of tech- i.e.- Forerunner, Precurser, Star trek, Star Wars, Mass Effect, Warhammer, Etc...
Second order of Business... List pros and cons to common tech types- Ballistic VS Beam VS Hybrid VS Plasma- ETC...
Third Order of business... Sit down and logically talk about each tech type and how it compars to others in a fair manner and in a way that shows they IMPLIED strengths and UNDERSTOOD weaknesses of those tech. i.e.- A star Wars blaster Rife has the same effect of killing a person as a Star Trek Phaser. Both can kill, both have a limited ammo supply, both are mass produced. Phaser is better against unarmored flesh while Blaster Rifle carries more punch per shot, while the Phaser has less stopping power, it is often times smaller and less cumbersome.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Wandering Argonians

The 44th Independent Legion
Oct 24 2013, 12:57 PM
The_River
Oct 24 2013, 05:16 AM
While this admittedly WOULD detract from the whole "creativity" aspect, it probably is a good safeguard against newer or less experienced people, and helps us all relate and avoid OOC bickering about the effects of certain weapons; after all, if we all agree on certain figures, who can possibly argue? We might also, however, need to develop an economic system and such to ensure that one nation doesn't have 10 billion ships or whatever...so it might cause a lot of trouble, but I feel that it is an idea worth looking into.
I think that qualitative descriptions of their attributes is more appropriate than a quantitative description precisely because it allows for flexibility. Numbers, in the case of military tech, will only tie you down in a multi-author medium. It is in fact likely to backfire rather than safeguard when new players are concerned and a "closed" community (that is, we're not on the actual NS forums) like this a very good place to AVOID the competative streak many NSG threads tend to gain. Fleet battles should be for the purpose of storytelling and plot, and they should not be some pen-and-paper strategy game.
I agree with this completely. :)

Story first, victory second.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hobbeebia
Member Avatar
Administrator
The idea of the tech comparison chart is not to facilitate victory but to explore and accurately describe what each type of tech is capable of. More or less so players can plan on how to react to types of attacks and plan defenses.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wandering Argonians

Hobbeebia
Oct 24 2013, 07:07 PM
The idea of the tech comparison chart is not to facilitate victory but to explore and accurately describe what each type of tech is capable of. More or less so players can plan on how to react to types of attacks and plan defenses.
Also my point. I'll be more descriptive in the future. Expect a chart of sme sort from me soon as well. :)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Terraburg
Member Avatar

The 44th Independent Legion
Oct 24 2013, 12:57 PM
The_River
Oct 24 2013, 05:16 AM
While this admittedly WOULD detract from the whole "creativity" aspect, it probably is a good safeguard against newer or less experienced people, and helps us all relate and avoid OOC bickering about the effects of certain weapons; after all, if we all agree on certain figures, who can possibly argue? We might also, however, need to develop an economic system and such to ensure that one nation doesn't have 10 billion ships or whatever...so it might cause a lot of trouble, but I feel that it is an idea worth looking into.
I think that qualitative descriptions of their attributes is more appropriate than a quantitative description precisely because it allows for flexibility. Numbers, in the case of military tech, will only tie you down in a multi-author medium. It is in fact likely to backfire rather than safeguard when new players are concerned and a "closed" community (that is, we're not on the actual NS forums) like this a very good place to AVOID the competative streak many NSG threads tend to gain. Fleet battles should be for the purpose of storytelling and plot, and they should not be some pen-and-paper strategy game.
Agreed.

Too much Analytics tend to take away from the RP aspect and turn threads into competitions. For now we should just stick with each nation describing what their stuff does.

As for my Tech, all of my advanced items are in my Factbook which leaves Railguns (That people already know about).
"We move yet are still, deaf yet listen, dead yet alive." - C
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hobbeebia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Well the tech chart is not mean to gauge the power of ones custome tech only tech of established canons and such.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Rules and Administration Development · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3