Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Nerf envirosuits

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire >> Suggestions and Feedback >> Nerf envirosuits Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Nerf envirosuits - 6/23/2020 6:31:57 AM   
LordAldrich

 

Posts: 82
Joined: 9/30/2014
Status: offline
Envirosuits are too good. They are available with no research, have only a nominal material cost, and completely negate all environmental hazards. This means that there is effectively no difference between the various planet types, mechanically or thematically - it all plays and feels the same.

This is a shame! The planet generation is really cool, and it would be good if the environments had more impact on the gameplay. Here's a few suggestions:

- Right now armor provides both combat protection and environmental protection. Split these functions apart so that you can design them separately.

- You could make advanced protections require an energy supply. Spacesuits need power to heat or cool things. This would make power a (much) more important resource on uninhabitable planets.

- You could add combat penalties to the more advanced environmental protections. This would give a reason (beyond resource cost) to use filters / thermal suits / no armor at all. Morale or readiness penalties makes sense - MOPP/HAZMAT gear and spacesuits are uncomfortable, bulky gear that no-one wears unless they have to.
Post #: 1
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/23/2020 6:51:18 AM   
UmpaLumpa


Posts: 18
Joined: 6/2/2014
From: Chulak
Status: offline
I feel that way too and like your ideas

(in reply to LordAldrich)
Post #: 2
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/23/2020 7:30:23 AM   
Lovenought

 

Posts: 176
Joined: 8/21/2017
Status: offline
It's also a bit strange. Right now i'm playing on a Medusa world that is an almost carbon copy of Earth, complete with 20% oxygen 70% nitrogen. The only problem is the native pollen and such being toxic. So why are my guys at the start running around in full environment suits? You'd think that just some kind of gas mask filter would work. Right now infantry on an earthlike planet with just one or two incorrect conditions fight and operate the same as a formation fighting on an airless moon.

(in reply to UmpaLumpa)
Post #: 3
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/23/2020 9:27:44 AM   
ramnblam

 

Posts: 197
Joined: 6/9/2020
From: Australia
Status: offline
I disagree about the cost being nominal, if you're playing on a nice Siwa class you can cheap out on the Armour and put out more troops on the field.

(in reply to Lovenought)
Post #: 4
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/23/2020 10:49:46 AM   
Tchey


Posts: 59
Joined: 6/17/2020
Status: offline
It’s already quite slow to produce new units, if they are dying because of lack of enviro-protect-stuff, it’s gonna be weird to play.
However i do agree with the other part : planets actually all feel pretty much the same.
That part should be adressed, maybe not the enviro-suit one.

(in reply to ramnblam)
Post #: 5
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/23/2020 11:27:43 AM   
YppY

 

Posts: 44
Joined: 8/4/2014
Status: offline
I really can't agree more. Right now there are no real choice in personal armor. You always go for the best armor you have, even if that is padded envirosuits suits on a planet with perfect atmos (with maybe an exception very early on if you don't have a metal supply). Simply because how much more survivable your troops are with armor, it is well worth the price. This is unlike most other design choices in the game where you have to weigh a lot of competing option.

(in reply to Tchey)
Post #: 6
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/23/2020 1:53:41 PM   
zgrssd

 

Posts: 1492
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline
The one thing that annoys me teh most about Environmental Suit, is that Soldiers on breathable planets do not wear them as minimum armor.
I want to at least see a armor that is same tech level, same cost, but stronger.

Seperating Armor and Environmental proteciton would make sense.
Just give the Environmental Suite option -50HP - to simualte one rupture being potentially dealdy - and call it a day. Yes, that means without armor Infantry has 0 HP. It turns out using your personal atmosphere as armor is a really bad idea! But we also got something like Light Armor (+50 HP) then, so we could at least avoid the 0 HP case.

< Message edited by zgrssd -- 6/23/2020 1:54:32 PM >

(in reply to YppY)
Post #: 7
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/23/2020 1:56:15 PM   
Ekaton


Posts: 203
Joined: 9/30/2013
From: The War Room
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zgrssd

The one thing that annoys me teh most about Environmental Suit, is that Soldiers on breathable planets do not wear them as minimum armor.
I want to at least see a armor that is same tech level, same cost, but stronger.

Seperating Armor and Environmental proteciton would make sense.
Just give the Environmental Suite option -50HP - to simualte one rupture being potentially dealdy - and call it a day. Yes, that means without armor Infantry has 0 HP. It turns out using your personal atmosphere as armor is a really bad idea! But we also got something like Light Armor (+50 HP) then, so we could at least avoid the 0 HP case.


That's a great idea! I would love to see fights in a completely inhospitable environment being a lot deadlier, especially on lower tech. One good shot, especially with biohazards, and you're most likely done for. I would also love if AI could then be more careful on such planets - it can easily lose a lot of precious manpower really quickly.

< Message edited by Ekaton -- 6/23/2020 1:57:42 PM >


_____________________________

I need ten females for each male...

(in reply to zgrssd)
Post #: 8
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/23/2020 2:22:40 PM   
76mm


Posts: 4165
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
I've been playing on Siwa planets with breathable atmospheres, so have never used Envirosuits...is there any reason to do so? I didn't realize that they include armor as well?

(in reply to Ekaton)
Post #: 9
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/23/2020 2:50:30 PM   
zgrssd

 

Posts: 1492
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

I've been playing on Siwa planets with breathable atmospheres, so have never used Envirosuits...is there any reason to do so? I didn't realize that they include armor as well?

Reason?
Armor/extra HP and all previous protections combined. You have a hard time running into any Temperature or Rad issue with those.

Starting with combat armor, that level of Enivronmental Protection seems implied.

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 10
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/23/2020 4:36:09 PM   
Destragon

 

Posts: 231
Joined: 6/8/2020
Status: offline
I agree with the general ideas in this thread.
It's kinda sad that all factors like biohazards, temperature, radiation get pretty much nullified by basic infantry armor.

(in reply to zgrssd)
Post #: 11
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/23/2020 8:12:42 PM   
MatthewVilter


Posts: 71
Joined: 4/4/2019
Status: offline
I see basically three factors in play:

1) Basic life support which everyone needs* but varies from planet to planet like atmosphere filters or condensers and pressure suits.

2) Specialist protection for conditions that vary geographically like temperature and radiation.

3) Armor to protect in combat.


I can see (1) setting a baseline minimum "encumbrance" for infantry and like @zgrssd suggests giving a defense penalty on planets where the atmosphere is aggressively hostile. Technology could offer improvements here over time.

(2) would be customizable so that the player can create specialist troops to deal with e.g. arctic or irradiated conditions. Depending on planetary conditions some of the options here might be redundant (and removed from the list) e.g. if everybody's already wearing pressure suits and carrying oxygen you don't need to issue radiological respirators.

By the time the player gets to customizing (3) on a hostile planet they should be making tough choices about encumbrance.


*As @Tchey points out it would be weird if your infantry just start dying from what your citizens probably consider normal conditions.

(in reply to Destragon)
Post #: 12
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/25/2020 4:23:11 AM   
EuchreJack

 

Posts: 45
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline
Perhaps the problems aren't that envirosuits provide too much protection (they had to keep people from dying for 200 years as they tried to kill one another, so they should be decent), but that the problems fighting in envirosuits aren't reflected. I mean, shouldn't the guys in big bulky suits be a little less deadly and whole lot slower?

(in reply to MatthewVilter)
Post #: 13
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/25/2020 5:45:08 AM   
Elver

 

Posts: 21
Joined: 6/25/2020
Status: offline
I do agree with the above comments that it would be nice if environmental protection was separate from armor. Some encumbrance making comprehensive environmental protection vs. armor a tradeoff in unpowered armor would feel right, and help cut down on all worlds blending together. Environmental protection bulk reduction actually seems like a very good candidate for a linear tech...

One other small thing that arises from the ubiquity of full envirosuits is that the chemical weapons stratagem is worthless against everything but animals on many planets from turn 1 onwards.

(in reply to EuchreJack)
Post #: 14
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/25/2020 10:06:17 AM   
FAA

 

Posts: 80
Joined: 12/10/2019
Status: offline
It would be great if Vic told us how he imagined them, lore-wise. Is it one-hit and you lose the air completely, or are they more robust. If they can be pierced easily, the game must take atmosphere, bio hazards, temperature and radiation into account when calculating losses. Medical tech for field hospitals is also necessary.

(in reply to Elver)
Post #: 15
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/25/2020 1:48:33 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4228
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline
Yes, it is kind of pointless to have all these rich planet generation options, all these environmental hazards if at the end of the day all play exactly the same (or with some minor differences like having to spend a little more for getting water or farming)





_____________________________


(in reply to FAA)
Post #: 16
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/25/2020 2:12:02 PM   
76mm


Posts: 4165
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury
Yes, it is kind of pointless to have all these rich planet generation options, all these environmental hazards if at the end of the day all play exactly the same (or with some minor differences like having to spend a little more for getting water or farming)

+1. Any difference for low-gravity planets, for instance? Perhaps some types of vehicles could only be built on low-gravity planets, with special movement characteristics.


(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 17
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/25/2020 2:24:38 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4228
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline
I would prefer to have 3 options for planet generation: earth-like, mars-like, moon-like with deep consequences, with significantly differences in play style and combat strategies than to have 10+ planet options that play exactly the same, with some minor building constructions but otherwise cosmetic differences like lakes water or lava

< Message edited by Jorge_Stanbury -- 6/25/2020 2:25:42 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 18
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/25/2020 3:11:55 PM   
Ekaton


Posts: 203
Joined: 9/30/2013
From: The War Room
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

I would prefer to have 3 options for planet generation: earth-like, mars-like, moon-like with deep consequences, with significantly differences in play style and combat strategies than to have 10+ planet options that play exactly the same, with some minor building constructions but otherwise cosmetic differences like lakes water or lava


Couldn't agree more. It's great that we have such a robust world gen, but we definitely need them to be more unique. Gravity is an excellent example.

_____________________________

I need ten females for each male...

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 19
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/25/2020 9:44:08 PM   
Destragon

 

Posts: 231
Joined: 6/8/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

I would prefer to have 3 options for planet generation: earth-like, mars-like, moon-like with deep consequences, with significantly differences in play style and combat strategies than to have 10+ planet options that play exactly the same, with some minor building constructions but otherwise cosmetic differences like lakes water or lava

The resource availability and terrain differences seem pretty significant to me.
What kinda deep consequences do you actually mean?

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 20
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/26/2020 7:23:44 AM   
LordAldrich

 

Posts: 82
Joined: 9/30/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Destragon


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

I would prefer to have 3 options for planet generation: earth-like, mars-like, moon-like with deep consequences, with significantly differences in play style and combat strategies than to have 10+ planet options that play exactly the same, with some minor building constructions but otherwise cosmetic differences like lakes water or lava

The resource availability and terrain differences seem pretty significant to me.
What kinda deep consequences do you actually mean?


I think OP is just expressing that they'd prefer fewer and more noticeable differences than more and less noticeable differences.

As to your question, this thread has highlighted a few categories that just don't feel any different regardless of world right now:

Temperature - envirosuits negate it entirely
Atmospheric hazards - envirosuits negate them entirely
Gravity - not really used for anything yet, but I can see it (plus atmo density) becoming a big deal when Vic gets around to adding air/space forces

You're right, we see secondary effects of these things reflected in the terrain (cold worlds have glaciers, lava rivers are way harder to cross than water rivers, etc.), but these things should have direct, noticeable, primary effects that set the worlds apart.

(in reply to Destragon)
Post #: 21
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/26/2020 2:48:14 PM   
Mitigan

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 6/15/2020
Status: offline
I was thinking, instead of just adding penalties to envirosuits and armor (afterall they are there to negate those same penalties from rad poisoning and stuff.) just add engine and weight to the equation? like with vehicles? there would be a choice for weapon, envirohazard, armor and "engine".

enviro choices would be the around the same as the choices from turn 1, from filters to envirosuits, and later mark II, III... to make up for the increase in enviroprotection from the armors you currently research. it would increase weight and cost mainly IP.

armor would go from basic armor (the 50 armor protection the envirosuit already offers), "padded armor", combat armor, etc. it would increase weight and cost mainly metals.

engine would start at servomotors, then advanced servomotors, these would cost no fuel or energy as they would be "negligible", then "jetpacks" (which could be renamed propulsion engine, to imply they don't necessarily fly) which would cost fuel or energy (by then you would have ways of generating infinite fuel and energy from deep core mining and stuff.), "advanced propulsion engine" and so forwards.

basically by default if you put the heaviest stuff , best engine and engine design 100 it would offer a small penalty in move speed but negligible or no penalty in combat. if your engine design is worse the penalties start getting noticeable and if they are better they negate, and if your put light armor and overpowered engine they start offering bonuses in move speed and combat eventually becoming + 40% move modifier and the same combat bonuses as the current jetpack with the propulsion engine and light armor.

the problem would be redesigning the "jetpack infantry", anti-tank and artillery, which already have big weight modifiers from they're guns. but if they use lighter armor that wouldn't be a problem i guess.

(in reply to LordAldrich)
Post #: 22
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/26/2020 6:32:38 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4228
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Destragon


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

I would prefer to have 3 options for planet generation: earth-like, mars-like, moon-like with deep consequences, with significantly differences in play style and combat strategies than to have 10+ planet options that play exactly the same, with some minor building constructions but otherwise cosmetic differences like lakes water or lava

The resource availability and terrain differences seem pretty significant to me.
What kinda deep consequences do you actually mean?



To what had already being said about gravity, temperature and hazards
I would had preferred less options, but each of these options coming with different unit types or at least variations that make sense to the hostile environment they are used on
examples: maybe a buggy or a truck or a dirt road on a lava planet makes little sense



_____________________________


(in reply to Destragon)
Post #: 23
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/26/2020 10:07:10 PM   
Destragon

 

Posts: 231
Joined: 6/8/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LordAldrich

I think OP is just expressing that they'd prefer fewer and more noticeable differences than more and less noticeable differences.

As to your question, this thread has highlighted a few categories that just don't feel any different regardless of world right now

I didn't express myself clearly enough. I wanted to hear some actual suggestions for how these differences should affect gameplay.

quote:

... but these things should have direct, noticeable, primary effects that set the worlds apart.

Like this. What would be direct, noticeable, primary effects?

I agree that gravity and atmosphere could probably make air units more expensive or prevent the use of certain types of air units alltogether, but we're still many months away from even having air units, so this is still mostly speculation and depends on how they actually end up getting implemented.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury
To what had already being said about gravity, temperature and hazards
I would had preferred less options, but each of these options coming with different unit types or at least variations that make sense to the hostile environment they are used on
examples: maybe a buggy or a truck or a dirt road on a lava planet makes little sense

What would make sense on a lava planet? In what way would these hostile environment units be different from the normal ones? Would it just be visual difference?
You said you want less differences, but more impactful ones, but you didn't say what an actually impactful difference would be.

(in reply to LordAldrich)
Post #: 24
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/26/2020 10:58:52 PM   
MatthewVilter


Posts: 71
Joined: 4/4/2019
Status: offline
(temperature:)
I can see an argument that vehicles with soft tires make less sense than treads on burning hot planets.

More so I think vehicles on such planets would require heavy and expensive heat dispersal equipment (even more burdensome on hot planets with little or no atmosphere).

Insulation/electric heating on cold planets is not such a huge problem but might still impact infantry loadouts significantly.

(atmosphere toxicity and pressure:)
Aside from the impact on atmospheric survivability (and corresponding effects on unit survivability that we have discussed) atmospheric pressure might impact the costs/availability of heat dispersal equipment and should eventually have a major effect on aircraft design.

(radiation:)
I'm not an expert but I suppose that after hundreds of years filters or other breathing apparatus should provide decent protection against radioactive fallout. In highly saturated areas or on worlds subject to high levels of radiation from their star or, say, the Van Allen belt of their gas giant parent radiation shielding might be necessary. Such shielding might not be much of a burden for a vehicle but the high surface area to volume ratio of infantry means they would be disproportionately impacted.

(in reply to Destragon)
Post #: 25
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/27/2020 12:29:57 AM   
zgrssd

 

Posts: 1492
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MatthewVilter

(temperature:)
I can see an argument that vehicles with soft tires make less sense than treads on burning hot planets.

More so I think vehicles on such planets would require heavy and expensive heat dispersal equipment (even more burdensome on hot planets with little or no atmosphere).

Insulation/electric heating on cold planets is not such a huge problem but might still impact infantry loadouts significantly.

(atmosphere toxicity and pressure:)
Aside from the impact on atmospheric survivability (and corresponding effects on unit survivability that we have discussed) atmospheric pressure might impact the costs/availability of heat dispersal equipment and should eventually have a major effect on aircraft design.

(radiation:)
I'm not an expert but I suppose that after hundreds of years filters or other breathing apparatus should provide decent protection against radioactive fallout. In highly saturated areas or on worlds subject to high levels of radiation from their star or, say, the Van Allen belt of their gas giant parent radiation shielding might be necessary. Such shielding might not be much of a burden for a vehicle but the high surface area to volume ratio of infantry means they would be disproportionately impacted.

Thermal:
Keeping something warm is relatively easy, compared to keeping it cold. We know how to keep stuff warm since we tamed the fire. But keeping something purposefully cold? 1850's for Commercial uses. 1920 for Residential uses
In fact, the game currently ignores heat as a source for Hazard/Issues for anything but open air farming.
I would not worry about tires too much. They are Polymer. A "designable crafting material". We make Rubber for -60°C to +300°C on earth. And the Volcano planet is only ~87°C on the surface.

For Airpressure, again: The Game currently does not track overheating at all.

Radiation is not to be underestimated for Hardware!
In nuclear reactors it is such a huge issue, they can not do direct measurement of stuff like the water level.
Our Mars Rovers use redundant computers, made from radiationa shielded variants of designs that were 10-20 years old when the Rover was launched. And Radiation Degradation of the Solar Panels is a actuall concern (not a big one, but still needed consideration).

If we had realistic Lava Planets or Desert planets with overheating considerd, chances are we would be unable to run anything but APC, Tanks and Battledress there. Even the Environmental Suit seems to be lighter then a NASA Spacesuit. While those are rated for 150-250°C, that asumes only heating and cooling via thermal radiation (wich means they can happen into different directions). And not for more then a few hours on end.
The suite would have to overcome a temperature gradient of 50°C just on the 87°C planet. That is a massive temperature gradient to overcome, even for a stationary, top loading freezer. Wich are damn efficient.

(in reply to MatthewVilter)
Post #: 26
RE: Nerf envirosuits - 6/27/2020 3:40:27 AM   
TheSquid

 

Posts: 37
Joined: 5/5/2019
Status: offline
What would be awesome is if a planet's environmental conditions affected choice of armour and enviro-suit - as others have stated.

I'd envisage it as:
- armour protects against enemy fire, adds weight
- enviro protection protects against the atmosphere and/or temperature, also adds weight.

Then possibly some kind of DEGREE of enviro protection, similar to armour. So, if the atmosphere is barely breathable and also freezing cold, you'd likely require more weight in enviro protection, leaving less weight for armor (or you could have both and just be really slow).

Potentially you could possibly choose heavier armour over better enviro even if you needed it, but IMO that would be a bit fiddly and wouldn't be that realistic - if you NEEDED a minimum level of enviro protection I'm pretty sure the researchers would factor that in first (unless Hitler is in charge and wants to motivate the troops to win before the end of summer or something).

Planets with breathable air would therefore allow for heavier armour earlier, while planets that are more toxic may require more research to get the weight down first (e.g. due to the enviro stuff), or just simply end up with lower-than-average armour values across the board due to the environment (the latter in particular would provide more varied gameplay and make the different atmospheric conditions actually mean something).

(in reply to zgrssd)
Post #: 27
Some questions regarding hostile planets - 6/27/2020 10:12:25 AM   
FAA

 

Posts: 80
Joined: 12/10/2019
Status: offline
There are so many questions it would be great to have answers for:
1) How did people survive following such a disaster on a terribly inhospitable planet. Were they recycling envirosuits for generations? Can they make their own? If so, how, seeing that it must be a highly advanced piece of equipment, likely using very advanced materials and components. How much of the population relies on envirosuits and how many rely on structures and their systems. What about raiders and nomads, do they all have envirosuits?
2) If farming requires huge agri-domes what do nomads eat without cities of their own? What about free folk?
3) How fail-proof is the suit? Are suits used for generations more prone to fail? What happens when it gets pierced in combat, or a stray bullet damages its internal systems? Can it be reusable after that?
4) How come it doesn’t require anything to work - energy, fuel or anything?
5) How were they so well-made they survive in working conditions for centuries?

(in reply to TheSquid)
Post #: 28
RE: Some questions regarding hostile planets - 6/27/2020 10:13:43 AM   
FAA

 

Posts: 80
Joined: 12/10/2019
Status: offline
Accidental double post

< Message edited by FAA -- 6/27/2020 10:14:16 AM >

(in reply to FAA)
Post #: 29
RE: Some questions regarding hostile planets - 6/27/2020 11:07:54 AM   
zgrssd

 

Posts: 1492
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FAA

There are so many questions it would be great to have answers for:
1) How did people survive following such a disaster on a terribly inhospitable planet. Were they recycling envirosuits for generations? Can they make their own? If so, how, seeing that it must be a highly advanced piece of equipment, likely using very advanced materials and components. How much of the population relies on envirosuits and how many rely on structures and their systems. What about raiders and nomads, do they all have envirosuits?
2) If farming requires huge agri-domes what do nomads eat without cities of their own? What about free folk?
3) How fail-proof is the suit? Are suits used for generations more prone to fail? What happens when it gets pierced in combat, or a stray bullet damages its internal systems? Can it be reusable after that?
4) How come it doesn’t require anything to work - energy, fuel or anything?
5) How were they so well-made they survive in working conditions for centuries?

1) Clearly they can make more. They got the tech to make more. It is a starter tech. Most Citizens however life in domes, no need for Enviro Suits
2) Small agri domes that are useless for feeding a whole city? Unless you wanted to force a "non Cityless Minors" game, I see no reason to even bother with that
3) The answer is teh same as all other piece of the technology. Do however remember that they can build new ones.
4) It does require stuff to work, but such small amounts of stuff that travels for free anyway, modelling it would not mater.
5) Again, it is a starting tech. They never forgot how to make them. If you can not remember how to make a Environmetnal suit, you do not survive to be part of the "post Apokalypse" population.

< Message edited by zgrssd -- 6/27/2020 11:08:36 AM >

(in reply to FAA)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire >> Suggestions and Feedback >> Nerf envirosuits Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.181