PDA

View Full Version : Death star limit


popcorn2008
09-11-2005, 12:43 PM
I was thinking the other day if they will limit how many death stars you can make . I know in the movies we only see one at a time, but I remember reading in various locations (cant remember where) that no one really knew how many were planned to be built as part of the Tarkin doctrine (rule by fear). I know it would cost you a huge heap of cash but I wonder if they will limit how many you can make. Intereasting thought, no?

:coffee:

p.s. forgive me if we already know... i dont think we do.

Snafu7
09-11-2005, 01:22 PM
I'm not sure whether they've said anything about it, but I'm guessing that they'll limit it to one.

Jmaster3265
09-11-2005, 04:57 PM
Yeah i agree, i think the limit is one.

cardif
09-11-2005, 05:11 PM
sry for off-topic, but...
M203-users suck :D

--

there shouldnt be a limit... i mean.. your recources should limit the construction(s) of (a) deathstar(s).

either build a bigger fleet with loads of fighters, but no deathstar... or build (another) one deathstar, but less capital ships and fighters. you should be able to decide.

that means different types of gameplay.. how to counter different tactics.
ie: if you know your opponent likes to use deathstars, you'll have to build either loads of starfighters (which cost way less than a deathstar and its equipment) or other objects that can *easily* destroy a deathstar.

lukeiamyourdad
09-11-2005, 05:23 PM
Or you could do it the easy way and limit it to one. Death Star spamming would be lame.

popcorn2008
09-11-2005, 07:05 PM
It would make more realistic gameplay if they didnt limit it to one, and your resources would limit you like cardif said. But I could see people abusing that.

EDIT: This is off topic but something else about the death star that is intereasting is that when the super laser hits the planet there is a slight delay to it being blown up, but in ep. 4 it immediately kills alderan. I kinda like the delay...

Snafu7
09-11-2005, 07:15 PM
sry for off-topic, but...
M203-users suck :D

can't say I didn't see that coming :lol:

Jan Gaarni
09-12-2005, 02:59 AM
It would make more realistic gameplay if they didnt limit it to one, and your resources would limit you like cardif said. But I could see people abusing that.

EDIT: This is off topic but something else about the death star that is intereasting is that when the super laser hits the planet there is a slight delay to it being blown up, but in ep. 4 it immediately kills alderan. I kinda like the delay...
Actually, there was a slight delay before Alderaan blew, indicating the planetary shields holding for a split second. :)

But you're right though, it shouldn't be in the game, cause not all planets have this kind of shield. Tatooine, which was the planet being blown up in the trailer, wouldn't for instance.

popcorn2008
09-12-2005, 03:19 PM
Yeah that makes sense, I never really thought as to why there is a delay. I guess you could say since Tatooine is such a big planet it took a slight second to explode.

DK_Viceroy
09-13-2005, 03:50 PM
Definetly Put a limit on the Death Star it's a case of Gameplay + Realism > Lame Strategies

Honestly though if anyone thinks for a second that by some freak of nature someone manages to get the resources to spam death stars it would be game over.

Nevets1112
09-13-2005, 04:55 PM
Definetly Put a limit on the Death Star it's a case of Gameplay + Realism > Lame Strategies

Honestly though if anyone thinks for a second that by some freak of nature someone manages to get the resources to spam death stars it would be game over.

wouldn't being able to create more than one death stars be more realistic? The only restraint should be economic restraints, because that is how it would really be. The Empire didn't have some invisible field telling them the could only build one.

lukeiamyourdad
09-13-2005, 09:18 PM
The Empire didn't have "the Broadside" either and the Rebels didn't have the AT-AP.

Gameplay>Realism.

Besides, how can you actually balance such a powerful weapon based only on cost? People will ask for higher costs or nerfing as soon as it's going to come out.

And that's with a limit to the number of Death Star you can build.

Sithmaster_821
09-14-2005, 09:22 AM
This is why I am not too keen on the Death Star being used outside of the "Conquer the Galaxy"-type campaign. I guess it could be seen as a way to end stalemated games, but it just feels cheap to me, like the Titans in AoT. And the Rebels need a game ender too (aside from killing the Death Star a la the movies).

popcorn2008
09-14-2005, 09:26 AM
I can see the argument both ways, but like Nevets said the real empire didnt have some all powerful limitation. But again sometimes you have to sacrafice realism for gameplay and this may be one of those sometimes.

DK_Viceroy
09-14-2005, 05:26 PM
I doubt the empire would build Death Stars and use them on every planet imaginable even the Empire wouldn't destroy the galaxy thus Gameplay + Realism = Death Star Limit

Nevets1112
09-14-2005, 06:51 PM
I doubt the empire would build Death Stars and use them on every planet imaginable even the Empire wouldn't destroy the galaxy thus Gameplay + Realism = Death Star Limit

The point of the Death Star is not to destroy planets, it was to rule through fear (the Tarkin Doctrine). By destroying Alderaan the empire hoped to stop rebellions through "fear" that their planets could be destroyed. No one knows how many Death Stars the empire had planned, but the second death star had to be under construction at the same time as the first. (logic being that ROTS showed the skeleton of the death star and assuming it was newly finished in ANH, it took 18 some years to complete. Lets say the imperials did improve their construction methods on the second, it was still bigger, and no way it could be that far constructed in 3 years.)

So Realism =/= Death Star Limit

FroZticles
09-14-2005, 08:48 PM
Whats the point in having more than one anyways you can only attack one planet at once.

popcorn2008
09-14-2005, 09:09 PM
The point of the Death Star is not to destroy planets, it was to rule through fear (the Tarkin Doctrine). By destroying Alderaan the empire hoped to stop rebellions through "fear" that their planets could be destroyed. No one knows how many Death Stars the empire had planned, but the second death star had to be under construction at the same time as the first. (logic being that ROTS showed the skeleton of the death star and assuming it was newly finished in ANH, it took 18 some years to complete. Lets say the imperials did improve their construction methods on the second, it was still bigger, and no way it could be that far constructed in 3 years.)

So Realism =/= Death Star Limit
Exactly, the Death Star's main goal isnt to destroy every planet in the galaxy, but to make hostile systems bow to imperial power, because if they didnt they may be the target of the super weapon. The point of more than one would be increased fear because you would have less travel time between planets. Now im not saying its a good idea in this game but that is the idea. I mean if you had the resources and the evil intent anyone would do it.

Also, I have located the origin of this thread in the first place. If you start a game of Rebellion, look in the Encylopedia section under Death Star. It gives a brief history and states, it was never known how many were originally planned to be made.

Now multiple death stars would be an advantage in EaW, because it could be used to stop the rebel player from assaulting too much or boom. Of corse their would be reprecutions toward the imperial player, i.e. losing popularity (now that isnt confirmed but is reasonable).

My stance is it would be nice to have realism, but I dont think it's possible without making the game way off balance. Now Im not saying it couldnt be down, because it would be perfectly possible to balance everything out. But it makes the game super macromanaged and thats not what everyone wants, so I think a limit is just fine.

Whew, sorry 'bout that. I just wanted to get my opinion across.

lukeiamyourdad
09-14-2005, 10:41 PM
Look, we have what? 20 planets?

2 Death Stars? Really?

It would seriously be a massive game ender for the Rebels with virtually no hope of surviving through any kind of strategy. All you'd eventually have left after the Death Star wipes out all of the Rebel planets (and their production points) is a fleet without a homebase. In other words, utter doom in a very unbalanced way.

Like I said, the second it come out, even with a limit to only one Death Star, you'll have people asking for nerfing. Having more then one, you'd have a lot more.

Nevets1112
09-14-2005, 10:56 PM
Yea, and I'm sure weeks after it comes out there we be a realism mod, correcting all the balancing issues for those that like to play realistically.

lukeiamyourdad
09-14-2005, 11:00 PM
As long as it's called mod, nobody has a problem with it :D

GhOsT-Jedi
10-19-2005, 05:30 PM
I think it should be two, from what I understand the second DS was being built when the first one was finished. Lets not forget this is a superweapon, not a onetime weapon, just think of them as big nukes :P

popcorn2008
10-19-2005, 09:23 PM
I think it should be two, from what I understand the second DS was being built when the first one was finished. Lets not forget this is a superweapon, not a onetime weapon, just think of them as big nukes :P
It has already been confirmed pretty much that their will be a one limit. This was an old topic.... lol