Is it, or is it not, rock-paper-scissors?

from GalCiv2 Forums
Let me start out by saying, no, this is not a semantic debate about the order of rock-paper-scissors, scissors-rock-paper, paper-rock-scissors, etc etc.

I want to know if people really think that the weapon system has a rock-paper-scissors effect. Personally, it is my belief that it *does not*. Yes, it is a three tiered weapon system, but it's not like missiles beat mass drivers, mass drivers beat laser, and laser beats missiles.

When i think of a fancied up version of rock-paper-scissors, the first example that comes to mind is the kiddy game pokemon. Fire monsters have an advantage over grass monsters who have an advantage over water monsters who have an advantage over fire monsters (and this pattern is repeated throughout the game types).


Oh, and just for the record, it's rock-paper-scissors, because we all know that, in reality, even if my opponent has paper to cover my rock, i have a rock to smash in his forehead.
12,430 views 18 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

It's not rock paper scissors.

Not in the slighest.

Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I know, but I've seen so many people call it that. It drives me nuts!
Star Control: Origins
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I agree it is more complex than rock-paper-scissors.
However, I do prefer the more complex weapon and defense tech tree of Space Empires IV(I have not tried SEV). The reason I'm playing GalCiv2 and not SEV, is SEIV's AI played very poorly. It failed to adapt to my ship designs, whereas, the AI in GalCiv2 will try to counter my combat ship designs.
My hope is GalCiv3 will have a combat system more like SE (although I can live without tactical combat) but be backed by an intelligent AI that will make effective use of those techs.
Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I think that as long as the AI can give me a good fight, I can get along with many game design choices that I normally would like (I agree, tactical combat would be nice).

Frog\Brad\Drag, seriously, keep up the amazing AI work. This is one of my favorite games to replay because the AI is much better than many other games.
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
You can know what kind of defense your opponent(s) has, and choose an attack type accordingly. On the AI side, this is pretty easy to code (barring a human player's cunning of course), hence GC having a better AI than other games (on this particular issue). The fact is, how come armor has a lesser effect against missiles or beams than vs mass drivers? Doesn't really make sense, even in a game. Tactical combat, IMO, is a must.
Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Tactical combat, IMO, is a must.


Keep the bs topics that are dead horses out of my posts kthnx
Reply #7 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
It's *kind of* like rock-paper-scissor, but when you get to the big hulls, you can have all three!
Reply #8 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
how come armor has a lesser effect against missiles or beams than vs mass drivers?


Even our primitive lasers can cut through hardened steel like butter. The ultimate evolution of armor currently is on the M1A2 Abrams tank, and it is designed to withstand projectile weapons, (mass drivers), while being less able to withstand shaped charge weapons, (missles), which use a different mechanism to penetrate.
Reply #9 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Oh, and just for the record, it's rock-paper-scissors, because we all know that, in reality, even if my opponent has paper to cover my rock, i have a rock to smash in his forehead.


by that logic, shouldn't it be scissor-rock-paper, since scissors could be used to shank a person and are lighter and thus easier to work with? rocks, though dangerous, are harder to use in a fight due to their bulk.

at any rate, it's certainly not rock paper scissor. for starters you can chose multiple weapons or defense systems trading off for increased power in a single one. though on the whole comprable, there are differences in cost, size, power, and cost to research the technologies associated with the weapons and defenses. a more apt comparison would be rock-paper-scissor squared.

However, I do prefer the more complex weapon and defense tech tree of Space Empires IV(I have not tried SEV). The reason I'm playing GalCiv2 and not SEV, is SEIV's AI played very poorly.


I agree on both points. The AI in SE4 was horrible. I also prefer other models for weapons and defense, though I actually like the MoO paradigm better. I guess i think it's more sensical to me (and I like swarms of fighters). Still, I'd prefer GalCiv2 over either simply because the AI is so much more on the ball.
Reply #10 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
by that logic, shouldn't it be scissor-rock-paper, since scissors could be used to shank a person and are lighter and thus easier to work with? rocks, though dangerous, are harder to use in a fight due to their bulk.


Clearly there's only one way to solve this. Meet up with me with your pair of scissors, and I'll have my rock. We'll get some third stooge to try to paper cut us, and have a battle royal to the death.
Reply #11 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
People think that because there are 3 varieties, it is automatically a rock-paper-scissors system.

FOOLS.
Reply #12 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Yeah, I don't think its rock paper scissors at all. However, I do agree that the weapon/defense systems need a little improvement. I kinda think that it shouldn't matter what size ship you use for combat; only the weapon and defense should matter. Afterall, a small jet fighter can deal a huge amount of damage to a big ship like aircraft carriers, so why can't it be the same here.
Reply #13 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Afterall, a small jet fighter can deal a huge amount of damage to a big ship like aircraft carriers, so why can't it be the same here.


On-board power source perhaps? A fighter isn't necessarily going to have the same amount of firepower as an **rcr*ft c*rr**r.
Reply #14 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I know it won't have the same amount of firepower, but the missiles they carry can still do alot of damage, especially if it hits something critical.
Reply #15 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
They also attack in groups too, so the damage adds up
Reply #16 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
know it won't have the same amount of firepower, but the missiles they carry can still do alot of damage, especially if it hits something critical.


This would be the point. "If" the fighter hit something critical it "could" do a massive amount of damage to the Aircraft Carrier, or any other ship for that matter. If the weapons of a Carrier, Destroyer, or any other ship that has that kind of fire power retaliates and hits the fighter, 99.9 % of the time it "will" result in the complete destruction of said aircraft.

No I do not believe the game is " Rock, Paper, Scissors". Not even close, mostly due to the reasons stated above in other posts.
Reply #17 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
No it's not RPS. It's not designed that way. I believe what was said above, because there's 3 main choices on weapons and defenses people may think that. Problem is, there's more than 3 choices... You CAN have all 3 weapon types on and all 3 defense types (this is a hypothetical to prove a point) space permitting of course.

Even if you have the wrong defence type VS a weapon, you still get the square root of it to defend with
Reply #18 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Yeah, which makes a lot of sense, shields affecting missiles and PD affecting energy weapons
It's not about there being *3* attacks/defenses, that's just a confortable excuse. It's about being able to detect and exploit the opponents' weakness(es) in a way that doesn't feel natural, that feels like a system of counters instead of a solid, "logic" system. I think they tried to go for a different system (just for being different), which isn't always a good thing.
Sure you CAN have all 3 attacks/defenses, just like in any other space game, but that doesn't really remove the extreme "compartimentalization" of attack vs proper defense feeling - rps.