The Deleted Technologies?

[ete]

I wonder if it's possible to have negative ability costs without major changes to the code, if so that would be something to explore.. especially if Slow Unit could make infantry unable to move. Fun for scenarios.

@Techstag: I actually play with significantly boosted research rates usually, because otherwise I often finish games before I've got to reach a lot of the interesting tech.

[BFG]

I wonder if it's possible to have negative ability costs without major changes to the code, if so that would be something to explore.. especially if Slow Unit could make infantry unable to move. Fun for scenarios.

Agreed.  In fact, it could even lead (potentially) to a whole new unit type: fixed emplacements.  I could see adding stationary artillery or AAA units throughout one's territory, stationary police or defensive Probe Teams at a base, etc.

[Green1]

I wonder if it's possible to have negative ability costs without major changes to the code, if so that would be something to explore.. especially if Slow Unit could make infantry unable to move. Fun for scenarios.

Agreed.  In fact, it could even lead (potentially) to a whole new unit type: fixed emplacements.  I could see adding stationary artillery or AAA units throughout one's territory, stationary police or defensive Probe Teams at a base, etc.

Some of that would be better served by base facilities.

Still, the whole stationary thing brings to mind an obscure trick with Wargame Construction Set for the Commodore 64 in the 80s. One of the scenarios was a fantasy scenario where the ultimate goal was to get into a shrine gaurded by stationary rock-throwning golems. They edited the unit to have zero movement. You had to destroy the golems which were tough and blocked all path to the shrine while they were artillery bombarding you.

Oh god... I feel old.

[BFG]

Heh, you've got me beat.  My first game was Dragon Warrior (aka Dragon Quest) for the NES

Still, I prefer the idea of units over base facilities, simply because it would play into the game's existing maintenance requirements, would allow unit customization, etc.
It may be possible to set up a duplicate of the Infantry chassis in alphax.txt, and give it zero movement.  I'll have to give that a try...

[Yitzi]

I wonder if it's possible to have negative ability costs without major changes to the code

It might be possible to do it with minor changes, but it would definitely need changes to the code.

[BFG]

It might be possible to do it with minor changes, but it would definitely need changes to the code.

Would it be as simple as adding a new Special Ability Cost Code?  Current defined codes are -7 ... +1; perhaps a +2 could be added that is defined as "reduce cost by 25%" and then assigned to Slow Unit.

Of course, if a person's going to go to that trouble, then it would make sense to explore the addition of new special abilities entirely.

[Buster's Uncle]

This might be educational - Darsnan knows what he's doing.  Zero movement unit seem to be impossible, sans some code tweaking.

[BFG]

This might be educational - Darsnan knows what he's doing.  Zero movement unit seem to be impossible, sans some code tweaking.

Well, that's unfortunate.  He already tried all 3 approaches I'd thought of.  (I considered modding fungal towers too.)

EDIT: I may still try some things that are unlikely to work, like setting the Triad (ground/sea/air) value to 3 or -1 - when valid values are 0, 1, 2.

[Green1]

Well... there is one thing in SMAX that WOULD be pretty cool that is a zero movement "unit" - fungal towers just like BFG mentioned.

Imagine being able to "place" these for extreme green factions like Planet Cult, or my new favorite monster the Antimind. Imagine the AI being able to use this.

Something tells me our resident friendly Cult of Assembly Code high priests Yitzi and Kyrub would probably rule that out, though.

Sweet Jesus mindworm that would be awesome.

[Lord Avalon]

If slow units are cheaper, that could open the door for upgrade abuse.  Personally, the only use I would have for a slow unit would be for a cheaper naval unit intended primarily for coastal defense.  As far as base defense units, would zero movement mean they can't attack?  Because once you get reactor upgrades, you can have better minimal weapons on a defensive unit at no additional min cost, and maybe you want the option of attacking weakened/low defense units besieging your base.

[Yitzi]

Well... there is one thing in SMAX that WOULD be pretty cool that is a zero movement "unit" - fungal towers just like BFG mentioned.

Imagine being able to "place" these for extreme green factions like Planet Cult, or my new favorite monster the Antimind. Imagine the AI being able to use this.

Something tells me our resident friendly Cult of Assembly Code high priests Yitzi and Kyrub would probably rule that out, though.

Sweet Jesus mindworm that would be awesome.

A zero-movement unit seems like it might be doable (if a bit tricky), via a special Chassis code (you'd have to set the cost manually, though).  Keep it in mind for when I start taking requests.  Teaching the AI how to use it would be Kyrub's department, no idea if he'd be able to do it.

I suspect that fungal towers themselves can be made possible right now; just move the tech from Disable to whatever you want it to be.

If slow units are cheaper, that could open the door for upgrade abuse.

Upgrade abuse is already a wide-open door, but with my patch version 1.2 you'll be able to close it if you want.

As far as base defense units, would zero movement mean they can't attack?

Yes; immobile units with movement points would be quite a bit more difficult, and for multiplayer it might be easiest just to make a cheap unit and make a rule that it can't move outside a base square..

[Kilkakon]

From memory, Fungal Towers revert to native ownership after 1 turn. Can still be used to defend a base I suppose.

An immobile base defender could still be ordered to hold in a base square.

[Green1]

From memory, Fungal Towers revert to native ownership after 1 turn. Can still be used to defend a base I suppose.

An immobile base defender could still be ordered to hold in a base square.

Precisely! It would be not fun to have to cycle through a fungal tower. Fungal Towers already are a formidable obstacle and have the special ability to grow and spawn worms if surrounded by fungus.

Key is... letting the AI know this is something cool it can do if it has this ability as a "merit". Also, proper placement of something like this. If it is MP only, it will not fly.

However, we are already having issues with placement of boreholes that has Kyrub's undivided attention and a higher priority.

[gwillybj]

Unity Foils come with the ability Slow Unit

You're right; I should have phrased that better.  I meant that Heavy Transport and Slow Unit are the only known programmed-in technologies that are not selectable by the player.  (Not that I could imagine anyone WANTING Slow Unit...unless it reduced production cost, I suppose.)

Heavy Transport,        1, Disable,  Heavy,     000100100111, +50% transport capacity

Slow Unit,              0, Disable,  Slow,      000000111111, -1 moves

You need only replace the word Disable in each line with a logical tech (I used Super Tensile Solids for Heavy Transport and Doctrine: Mobility for Slow Unit).

[Earthmichael]

Tech stagnation and other things that slow down research have the effect in most multiplayer games of the game being over before much more than 1/3 of the tech tree has been discovered.  I have played a couple of games, and it is OK if you want to keep things low tech, but it is not my prefered type of game.