Happycat Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 I am curious about what the consensus is among players of SCPT regarding "soft build limits". On or off? My own opinion tends towards having it enabled, because the additional units can make it more interesting, without disturbing the game balance. The reason I think that the game balance is unaffected is because the stronger economies of the Allies will ensure that they can always outbuild Japan, regardless. What do you think, however? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 The hard build limits and production delays were introduced in SC2 to provide more realism for players who want that in a wargame. These can be disabled to still allow for fun and exciting games if that's what players want. Having the force pool limits enabled represents manpower and resource limitations to some degree, which was a complaint from many SC1 players. It's not perfect in SC2, but helps to make games more historically accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 I always play with them ON, but honestly I think I prefer to have it OFF. I find OFF still works because once you go over the limit you start to pay a heavy price for those units which in turn limits your MPPs and thus prevents you from buying other units, so I feel there is a still a force pool because of this BUT if Japan went nuts on tanks then that possibility is there, although they will be weak in other areas. The same for USA, if it built 12 TAC bombers it would be limited in other areas because those TAC bombers would cost a fortune. But most players do not see it the way I see it so they prefer having it disabled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 Different strokes for different folks. Actually sounds like an interesting game to toggle that build switch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 This is one of the features that turns SC from a more historical aspect to a "what if" one, from our visionary developer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottsmm Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 Yep, another one would be production delay, but there are many more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The K Man Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Most games are played with it on. But don't have a problem playing with it off. Agree that with it off, the price will get steep if you try to build a ton of Tac bombers. But it is nice to have the option of getting that "extra" unit you would like. Extra AA always helps Germany and Russia in PDE & WAW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottsmm Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Guys if you think Tac bombers are expensive after awhile just try carriers. You'll be blown away pretty quick as it gets to 800 MPP's pretty quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Scotty, since there's a new patch out & you haven't returned the turns, should we start over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottsmm Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Well JJR I'm glad to hear that you've sent me your turns, but I haven't received them. You have to send them to scottmmoore@verizon.net, or if it turns out for whatever reason that Verizon blocks your emails you can send them to scottm826@gmail.com. I have recently downloaded the new patch so I guess we will have to start over. It shouldn't be that big of a deal though, because we only got one turn in a piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Alright Scott, turn sent to both e-mails using new patch 1.01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottsmm Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Okay JJR, let the games begin . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Back @ you Dinty. (turns sent) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happycat Posted February 8, 2009 Author Share Posted February 8, 2009 The last six posts are off-topic. There is this thing we have now; it's called email. Why don't you guys try that to communicate about re-starting your game, rather than boosting your post count with stuff that I am sure the rest of us don't need or want to read. (and no, JJR, I am not the "voice of the people" as you earlier accused me of being---I am just tired of reading your pointless posts. Of the 6831 posts you have made, I wager that perhaps 31 of them might contain a point that anyone cares about. It would be really nice if the Battlefront people would moderate these forums in some truly meaningful way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Happycat, or should you be called Sourpussy....yes, you are being a Sourpussy. This Forum is so dead, no threads are in danger. Far as post count, who cares? Now if you'd like to compare W-2 forms. Lets keep this on topic. Soft or hard builds. This isn't debate material. Don't think Homeland Security is at risk here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Happycat, agreed and we've discussed this internally and as you can see the issue has been dealt with: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1121475&postcount=82 Hubert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abukede Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 I much prefer the force limit off as it gives the player a bit more flexibility as to crafting your strategy, which if implemented properly can surprise the enemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 FYI and related to this discussion, there was a considerable improvement to the first patch when it came to games with the Soft Build Limits option turned off... expect a much better game and challenge with v1.01. Hubert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happycat Posted February 9, 2009 Author Share Posted February 9, 2009 FYI and related to this discussion, there was a considerable improvement to the first patch when it came to games with the Soft Build Limits option turned off... expect a much better game and challenge with v1.01. Hubert Does your comment pertain more to pbem or games vs AI? Or perhaps both? What specifically do you see as the major benefits for either side of playing with historical limits? I can speculate as to a couple, but nothin' better than hearing it from the horse's mouth, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Good question and this has more to do with the AI. Essentially the AI will do a much better job playing with Soft Build Limits turned off wrt its purchases and deployment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happycat Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 Good question and this has more to do with the AI. Essentially the AI will do a much better job playing with Soft Build Limits turned off wrt its purchases and deployment. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts