New property for units: Number of turns to complete

  • In order to make multi-stage units it is necessary to have 2 or more interim-stage units (e.g. Battleship hull, battleship), each purchased separately and placed separately. If a unit property for number of turns to complete were added, the unit could be purchased and placed but it would not become operational until the correct number of turns had passed. A stage counter displayed on the unit would be nice, too. This has more uses than just capital ships, such as structures requiring more time to complete, possibly 4-5 turns.

    If a unit has several stages it is difficult to remember to buy the next stage each turn, but this property would handle that automatically. It would solve some of the TUV issues, too, for units that consume others.

  • Admin

    @beornthebold Its an interesting thought and I wonder what @Hepps thinks about it since he's probably used the existing upgrade function the most.

    TUV shouldn't be an issue anymore now that TUV takes into account consumed units and that you can manually set tuv for units in the XML.

  • @beornthebold With the resource system, a resource could be assigned to the different stages. So when the time came to make a purchase, the new stage would be available to purchase because the resource form the prior stage would be present.

    Just a thought on this.


  • Moderators

    @beornthebold I can see something like this being convenient for many types of units.

  • I see the potential in this idea and support it as a conceptual idea. That being said, I feel as though there are some tough questions we need to ask about how precisely this would operate.

    Are costs up front?

    If there are running costs turn over turn... how and when would the resources be removed?

    What if you run short on resources during its progress?

    Would there be a prompt to continue a current project? Or put it on hold? Or abandon?

    Could you cancel a project?

    Lots to consider.

  • Admin

    @heppsisuarus My gut says just do the costs up front as if you want incremental costs then use units that consume. That keeps the concept simple.

  • @redrum Sure and that's fine. But what about the other parts of the equation?

  • Admin

    @heppsisuarus I'd say probably no to just about all of the options. I think you pay up front and it just takes a few turns to build. No options to cancel or abandon. Only way it doesn't complete is if you lose control of the factory.

  • @redrum sounds good then... limiting.... but a good stand alone feature.

Log in to reply