Reward Programmer class for using less parts. Or punish for using more.

[Super Powered]

Currently the programmer class feels a little to "easy" on "destroy x" missions in particular. 

Since there isn't any restrictions on how many parts you can add, and there is no deploy cost, you can basically make a single robot with an amount of weapons and a bunch of spinning lasers and fuel tanks and it can pretty much handle 90% of the destroy missions from the first to the last. 

Would be nice to give incentive to build smaller "meets the purpose" robots that use as few parts as possible. Maybe a pool of red ore that diminishes with every part added? Could likely exclude logic parts from this count. 

 

The inverse is to re add the deploy cost, but put it at a notably higher number. (and once again, could likely exclude logic parts from the count)

[garr890354839]

You are distinctly forgetting about collector missions and the few edge-location missions that exist, which are not as simple as screw the planet over and win. Although, yes, there are enough destroy missions to get to the end anyway, you cannot use that thing for a mission that is not that. The final mission is also a collector mission, so you have to come up with a collector drone.
For example: Collect Fossil. You need to 1) get to the underground fossil, 2) collect it, 3) get to the container, and 4) release it into the container.

[Super Powered]

1 minute ago, garr890354839 said:

You are distinctly forgetting about collector missions and the few edge-location missions that exist, which are not as simple as screw the planet over and win. Although, yes, there are enough destroy missions to get to the end anyway, you cannot use that thing for a mission that is not that. The final mission is also a collector mission, so you have to come up with a collector drone.

Yeah, that's specifically why I called the "destroy x" missions out. You can currently get all the way to the last mission in the game by doing destroy missions. 

Also why making it an incentive would likely work better than a punishment.

The reward / punishment would need to scale with the type of the mission, allowing collection missions & fetch missions to allow for more parts.

[garr890354839]

4 minutes ago, Super Powered said:

Yeah, that's specifically why I called the "destroy x" missions out. You can currently get all the way to the last mission in the game by doing destroy missions. 

Also why making it an incentive would likely work better than a punishment.

The reward / punishment would need to scale with the type of the mission, allowing collection missions & fetch missions to allow for more parts.

The last mission CANNOT be done by simple gun overproduction. It will certainly help doing it, but will not get it done.

[Super Powered]

3 minutes ago, garr890354839 said:

The last mission CANNOT be done by simple gun overproduction. It will certainly help doing it, but will not get it done.

Fully aware. Not arguing that that is the case.

[garr890354839]

One thing that could happen is that collection missions could have a higher chance of spawning, to the point where you HAVE to complete at least one collection mission to go to the next area.

[Super Powered]

Just now, garr890354839 said:

One thing that could happen is that collection missions could have a higher chance of spawning, to the point where you HAVE to complete at least one collection mission to go to the next area.

This is also a good idea. Just in general the fact that you can make it so far in the campaign without touching fetch missions is a problem in itself.