.
.... A not so rambling muse...
- The way trucks are implemented in WZ is an example of K.I.S.S game design like having only one resource, oil. If there are no substantive trade-offs then the design is elegant. If there are valuable trade-offs in K.I.S.S.-ing then there's room to re-think what is.
-
Construction types, aka Trucks, must be second in the category of "least variations" (ECM's are first; Repair & Commanders are third).
- The question becomes are the trade-offs really more a loss of valuable tac & strat opportunities than elegant K.I.S.S. in the service of reduced complexity as manifested in minimal micro-management.
- I'm not sure what the answer is but here is an alternative outside the current box.
- There are basically four elements to a construction unit:
-
Cost: How much time & energy is required to make the constructor ?
-
Weight: How much does it weigh the unit down ?
-
Durability: How much damage can it sustain ?
-
Efficiency: How quickly does it build stuff ?
- Let's look at a handful of possible
new construction units in this thought experiment..
*
Group Constructor - This baby is cheap, very fast, and can make a great scout unit. Moderately durable, but suffers from some efficiency problems; it works best in groups.
*
Defense Constructor - Blindingly efficient; capable of perfmorning a workload equivalent to 3 standard trucks. However, it's somewhat costlier, noticeably heavier, and not as durable; these guys are best used in your own base, safe from attack and where distances are short.
*
Army Constructor - A great thing to take along for your away missions. Noticeably more durable than typical trucks, but its also costlier.
*
Pre-Fab Constructor - Basically, a "defense Constructor Mk3"; its strengths are better but its weaknesses are worse.
*
Blitz Constructor - Carries raw, pre-fabricated materials to its site for near-instantaneous construction rates. Both fast and efficient, but is a bit fragile and carries a high price.
.