| 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: |
| Technology Analysis Proposal; Read the post! | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 12 2013, 07:52 AM (395 Views) | |
| Hobbeebia | Oct 12 2013, 07:52 AM Post #1 |
![]()
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. |
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| Wandering Argonians | Oct 24 2013, 04:23 PM Post #21 |
|
I agree with this completely. ![]() Story first, victory second. |
![]() |
|
| Hobbeebia | Oct 24 2013, 07:07 PM Post #22 |
![]()
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. |
![]() |
|
| Wandering Argonians | Oct 25 2013, 12:19 AM Post #23 |
|
Also my point. I'll be more descriptive in the future. Expect a chart of sme sort from me soon as well.
|
![]() |
|
| Terraburg | Oct 25 2013, 02:18 AM Post #24 |
|
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 | |
![]() |
|
| Hobbeebia | Nov 7 2013, 05:52 AM Post #25 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Well the tech chart is not mean to gauge the power of ones custome tech only tech of established canons and such. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Rules and Administration Development · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
2:13 PM Jul 11
|








2:13 PM Jul 11