I think if it's a passive research such as armour 1 / 2 / 3 or carapace should remain but active things like flamers should be tired to the weap module thus if the armoury is lost (after all the umbra and fury not available if there is no whip / crag nearby)
If upgrades are tied to specific armory, the armory should be harder to take down as you add upgrades. There are no like expansion parts that come out that you can take out like SC, so this would be the compromise.
I don't know about passive upgrades being lost though... it would essentially make the armory nearly as important as the CC. Your would be back to square one if you lost your main armory.
Speaking of structures on a side note it would be nice to have a upgrade to increase structure health. Infantry portals are pretty chomp friendly.
<!--quoteo(post=1814984:date=Dec 11 2010, 08:50 AM:name=bl1tz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bl1tz @ Dec 11 2010, 08:50 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1814984"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Definitely. the game will not be as interesting if it is not so. you get an upgrade and you get it for the rest of the game.
ns1 was a beautiful game because it was surprisingly simple yet complex at the same time.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
something to keep in mind. losing upgrades should be part of the game as it always has, it creates interesting tactics and keeps ns1 gameplay alive - something everyone remembers enjoying.
It's a quite simple solution, at least for marines: upgrades stay, but tie the weapons to the Advanced Armory. You wouldn't have to re-research flamethrowers for example, but you need to rebuild an Advanced Armory to get one. This would also change the dynamic of setting a forward base.
(pretty much the same as in Starcraft 2, where upgrades stay, but units can only be built if you have a specific building; e.g. you have siege mode for tanks, but you lose factory; if you rebuild it , you still have siege mode, no need to research it again)
Comments
ns1 was a beautiful game because it was surprisingly simple yet complex at the same time.
Once again; teamwork, strategy and tactics :D
<!--quoteo(post=1814577:date=Dec 9 2010, 05:28 PM:name=Racer1)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Racer1 @ Dec 9 2010, 05:28 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1814577"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Lost? No.
Unavailable to purchase? Yes.
Also, if you rebuild the structure, you should again have to upgrade it (if necessary).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This.
Although having to research it again might be a little too harsh...but it should definately be tested :D
I don't know about passive upgrades being lost though... it would essentially make the armory nearly as important as the CC. Your would be back to square one if you lost your main armory.
Speaking of structures on a side note it would be nice to have a upgrade to increase structure health. Infantry portals are pretty chomp friendly.
ns1 was a beautiful game because it was surprisingly simple yet complex at the same time.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
something to keep in mind. losing upgrades should be part of the game as it always has, it creates interesting tactics and keeps ns1 gameplay alive - something everyone remembers enjoying.
(pretty much the same as in Starcraft 2, where upgrades stay, but units can only be built if you have a specific building; e.g. you have siege mode for tanks, but you lose factory; if you rebuild it , you still have siege mode, no need to research it again)
Agreed.