For a cost, we should be able to destroy...

[jmpveg22]

During warfare we should have the option to destroy structures for a cost...

Eg:
-500 energy credits to destroy an Outpost
-2500 energy credits to destroy a citadel.
-5000 energy credits to destroy gateway, or hyper lane relay (they revert to a ruined state, and can be rebuilt)
-10000 energy credits to destroy a megastructure (they revert to a ruined state), habitats, orbital rings

 

[jmpveg22]

You sadly cannot disband outposts and citadels during wartime...

Otherwise I agree

 

[GhostDanny]

You sadly cannot disband outposts and citadels during wartime...

Well unless you become the crisis ^^

 

[RhysTheT00n]

Well unless you become the crisis ^^

Unless it's a bug, I still can't, just double checked as I went through this thread.

Anyway, on top of being able to deconstruct functional megastructures (while we're here, what do we think about them having their own defenses and fleet power? Think of a Dyson Sphere firing back at an attacking fleet until disabled.), I think we should be able to deconstruct/repair "irreparable" megastructures, because they stop you from building other structures and you can't get any use from them. I suggest that it requires a starbase building on a Citadel that's called something along the lines of "Megastructure Processing Plant", the idea being that it's being used to collect and remove the vast amounts of material from a Ring World.

Ruined Sentry Arrays are not irreparable, look at those things, a couple of panels missing from the top but otherwise intact. C'mon man, we build these things from scratch!

 

[fourteenfour]

You can destroy an outpost/citadel by disbanding it. You need a collosus to destroy a habitat. Maybe let collosi ruin megastructures? Like they can with ring worlds.

well duh... everyone knows that. hence the request to expand on what we can do.

This game is full of things that you can't do that make very little sense; I still find it silly that improved bases just change hands... like my specie is going to know how to use the controls of another specie let alone the difference between a waste disposal tube and feeding tube...

 

[RhysTheT00n]

well duh... everyone knows that. hence the request to expand on what we can do.

This game is full of things that you can't do that make very little sense; I still find it silly that improved bases just change hands... like my specie is going to know how to use the controls of another specie let alone the difference between a waste disposal tube and feeding tube...

Yeah, it really annoys me how we can't really change our starbase's loadout. I don't need Kinetics against the Prethoryn.

Anyway, that part about taking control of alien starbases could be worked into the Intel system, in that there's a type of archaeology project for learning another species' technology and control schemes. I think conquering a starbase should be more difficult than just destroying the whole thing. What do you reckon?

 

[NotAYakk]

I mean, world crackers exist...

Yes.

And maybe it is harder to destroy megastructures than it is to destroy planets.

 

[jmpveg22]

Yes.

And maybe it is harder to destroy megastructures than it is to destroy planets.

Are you being serious??? This has got to be a troll attempt...

Or at least I hope so.

 

[NotAYakk]

Are you being serious??? This has got to be a troll attempt...

Or at least I hope so.

Dyson Spheres are bigger than planets by multiple orders of magnitude; they envelop STARS. Same for ring worlds.

The other megastructures are (in theory) on the same scale. They are *megastructures*. They are really, really big.

The energy required to move the material for a megastructure into position is less than the energy required to knock a planet out of its orbit. Again, by orders of magnitude, based on ring worlds and dyson spheres. Ditto for literally disassembling planets into pieces; easier than building a dyson sphere by orders of magnitude.

So yes, I'm serious; megastructures being harder to destroy than planets is plausible. I mean, today we could poison the planet earth to the point that it would be a toxic world using modern tech, we'd have no chance against destroying a ring world.

I mean, rendering them inoperable or otherwise damaged? Easy. Turning them into rubble? Could easily be extremely hard.

What you'd end up with after a period of extensive damage would be the "damaged X" megastructures that are in game already, which are far easier to restore than building a new one.

 

[CometBliss]

think about it like this... You can just disable what is holding the station up "Energy upkeep." and let it fall into the sun. blackhole or whatever is nearby cuz of gravity and stuff.

 

[jmpveg22]

Or just any other baseline understanding of physics:

If a weapon can overcome gravity to literally crack a planet... it's fairly easy to destroy much less matter that is assembled often counter to gravity.

There is zero sense to the fact that planets are destructable, but somehow structures of steel/alloy that are literally at most 1/100th the matter are invincible.

Its absurd...

 

[jmpveg22]

Or even the fact that their are "ruined megastructures " in the game to begin with....

 

[RhysTheT00n]

Or even the fact that their are "ruined megastructures " in the game to begin with....

On that topic, I really hate that angle they go for that there are civilisations that came before us that are so incomprehensibly strong that they reach levels of strength we never could, with the ability to destroy the indestructible.

 

[jmpveg22]

No matter how you slice it... indestructible anything in a game where you can literally destroy stars is ridiculous.

 

[RhysTheT00n]

No matter how you slice it... indestructible anything in a game where you can literally destroy stars is ridiculous.

But what if we build something stronger than a star!

 

[CometBliss]

Oh wait, destroying the star will destroy the mega structure!

 

[jmpveg22]

I'm gonna add orbital rings to the list... no structure should be indestructible!!!

 

[GOLANX]

Sounds like a recipe for toxic behavior, the AIs may not care but multiplayer this would be a problem.

 

[jmpveg22]

Sounds like a recipe for toxic behavior, the AIs may not care but multiplayer this would be a problem.

Destroying assets and structures in warfare is toxic behavoir???

Not sure i follow your reasoning

 

[GOLANX]

Destroying assets and structures in warfare is toxic behavoir???

Not sure i follow your reasoning

your paying to do it, its not warfare its economics. in this case you would be doing so out of spite, which is toxic behavior.

Say i was a mod on this forum and deleted this thread, i paid Paradox to look the other way while i did it, you should be quite upset, because that would be a toxic action, yeah you can make a new one but that doesn't mean the original act wasn't toxic, and that i wont come back and do this to you repeatedly. this is exactly what i imagine would come from this proposal, and if thats another player on the other end they would be mad. If the AI did it to you, you wouldn't be chuckling either.

 

[jmpveg22]

your paying to do it, its not warfare its economics. in this case you would be doing so out of spite, which is toxic behavior.

Say i was a mod on this forum and deleted this thread, i paid Paradox to look the other way while i did it, you should be quite upset, because that would be a toxic action, yeah you can make a new one but that doesn't mean the original act wasn't toxic, and that i wont come back and do this to you repeatedly. this is exactly what i imagine would come from this proposal, and if thats another player on the other end they would be mad. If the AI did it to you, you wouldn't be chuckling either.

I believe you misunderstood the intention...

If you read the posts it stated that in warfare once you occupy enemy structures, they can be destroyed for a cost.