"We will not tolerate the presence of your forces in our territory. "

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

"We will not tolerate the presence of your forces in our territory. "

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] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> Tech Support >> "We will not tolerate the presence of your forces in our territory. "

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

"We will not tolerate the presence of your forces ... - 4/5/2010 11:47:38 PM

Interesting

Posts: 120
Joined: 4/4/2010
Status: offline

"We will not tolerate the presence of your forces in our territory. Remove your military ships from the system at once!"

I keep getting this message by each race, one after another, identical messages, every few minutes.

The thing is, I dont have any Military Ship in their territory. What happens is that I equipped a freighter with a beam weapon for it to protect itself against pirates. It is a "Private" ship. I cannot control it and use it to attack a target.

Why do I keep getting this annoying message. I dont have Military Ships (escort, frigate, destroyer, cruiser, capital ships) there.

The AI is bugged into thinking a freighter with a beam weapon is a military ship when its not and therefore keeps giving me these messages. One for each race. All the time. Why? Because my freighters trade with those nations all the time.

There is absolutelly not way any race should even reasonably complain against a freighter with a beam weapon, or a weak passanger ship with a beam weapon. Everyone knows freighters and passangers are "Private", a.k.a. civilian ships.

Ah, and another thing. My relation with those races gets reduced because of this bug.

How to fix it? Simple: Make the AI check if the ship in question is controled by "Private". If it is controled by private, it toogle that message.

Post #: 1

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/5/2010 11:55:19 PM

ASHBERY76

Posts: 2136
Joined: 10/10/2001
From: England
Status: offline

The state is ment to protect the private ships from pirates and empires,it is part of the gameplay.

_____________________________

(in reply to Interesting)

Post #: 2

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/5/2010 11:55:54 PM

BigWolfChris

Posts: 634
Joined: 3/31/2010
Status: offline

But, it's still a vessel that has the ability to cause harm There have been countless discussions on both sides of the fence with this, tbh, I think some input from Elliot might be needed on this matter Would he prefer the current system stays, or allow room to have private ships having "defensive abilities"

_____________________________

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X 8 Core @3.7GHz
2x16 GB Vengeance LPX 2666MHz RAM
MSI RTX 2070 Armor 8G
SSD Drive

(in reply to Interesting)

Post #: 3

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 12:13:36 AM

VarekRaith

Posts: 138
Joined: 2/21/2010
From: Manassas, Virginia
Status: offline

Civilian freighters today can't roam the oceans with 5" deck guns... Instead of weapons, add more defenses.

(in reply to BigWolfChris)

Post #: 4

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 12:20:15 AM

JosEPhII

Posts: 173
Joined: 1/17/2010
From: Cornfields of Western IL. USA
Status: offline

When an AI ship (of any kind private or state) is in your system give the same warning to that empire and see how it responds. Most of the Time it will be," we don't have any ships there.

" (wink added by me cause They Do know they have a ship or base or even a colony there.)

But they're gonna raise a fuss about yours anyway. Even if you did colonize the 1st plane/moon there!

If it's an Ally I'll pay a little attention to it. If they're indifferent/cautious to me I Ignore them. If they're an Enemy I sic the "dog" on them!

JosEPh

_____________________________

"old and slow.....Watch out!"

(in reply to BigWolfChris)

Post #: 5

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 1:33:54 AM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

I think that they should at least change their whine if they're going to complain about private freighters being armed, and not all races should react similarly, simply because they are NOT military.

In fact, I think that the private/state thing should be expanded, so we can design and build privateers, private armed warships that go forth and pirate the freighters of enemy nations and give you a cut of the booty. YARR!

Because let's face it, space is a far more interesting place when you treat it like it's the 17th century...in SPACE!

< Message edited by Fishman -- 4/6/2010 1:34:44 AM >

(in reply to JosEPhII)

Post #: 6

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 2:09:42 AM

Interesting

Posts: 120
Joined: 4/4/2010
Status: offline

I wont accept it as part of the gameplay. To me its a bug.

Ive been playing these games for years now.

Since Elite. Freelancer. X Universe series. In all those games wich defined its subgenres IS COMMON SENSE THAT FREIGHTERS HAVE WEAPONS. Turrets or whatever.

Even discussing this seriously is stupid. Off course its one of those things the developers didnt thought foreseen.

developer 1 "Hey, we need a trigger for when the player invades an AI faction's territory"

developer 2 "What about weapons?"

developer 1 "That will do."

Arguments about "but then the players will abuse the private budget and make death star freighters!" NOT MY F*CKING PROBLEM. If that is another unintended effect, fix that too.

< Message edited by Interesting -- 4/6/2010 2:16:42 AM >

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 7

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 3:14:06 AM

BigWolfChris

Posts: 634
Joined: 3/31/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Interesting

Arguments about "but then the players will abuse the private budget and make death star freighters!" NOT MY F*CKING PROBLEM. If that is another unintended effect, fix that too.

But what suggestions would you propose in order to fix a potential exploit? The only one I can think of, is too limit a number of offensive weapons allowed to be installed... but then people will complain about such a limit

_____________________________

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X 8 Core @3.7GHz
2x16 GB Vengeance LPX 2666MHz RAM
MSI RTX 2070 Armor 8G
SSD Drive

(in reply to Interesting)

Post #: 8

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 4:26:48 AM

richieelias

Posts: 52
Joined: 3/26/2010
Status: offline

I cant imagine how even making a super deathstar frieghter would be any sort of exploit. First off it would rapidly drain your economy as the AI pumps them out by the hundreds. Second, you have zero control over these ships, and they certainly arent going to be assaulting any planets on their own. Third, they would only fire on things that were firing on them first.

(in reply to BigWolfChris)

Post #: 9

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 5:17:42 AM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigWolf But what suggestions would you propose in order to fix a potential exploit?

What exploit? That you have armed merchant cruisers? How is that an exploit? Back in the 16th century, they put cannons on merchantmen all the time. I'm not entirely sure how arming merchant cruisers would create an exploit. If anything, privately owned warships is something that should be expanded on as part of the gameplay.

< Message edited by Fishman -- 4/6/2010 5:19:10 AM >

(in reply to BigWolfChris)

Post #: 10

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 5:34:00 AM

Sarissofoi

Posts: 329
Joined: 2/1/2010
Status: offline

Something like that? At last xxx% of cargo containers?

< Message edited by Sarissofoi -- 4/6/2010 5:43:52 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 11

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 6:52:13 AM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

The reason SEV imposes limitations like this is because the hull sizes are all fixed, and if you give someone a 900-point hull when their best warships are only 450-point, they may very well decide to make a battleship out of it. DW has no such rules, because everything is procedural: The size of the hull is purely a factor of how crap you stuck on it. There are no fixed classifications of hulls. If you produce a very large, very expensive ship, it just becomes very large, very expensive, and very cumbersome.

In SEV, any ship with "max" engines on it goes the same speed, regardless of size. Although some hulls make a token effort to approximate mass-to-thrust by making so they take more engines to move, they also enforce the slowness of those ships by then capping how many engines you are allowed to stick on it in the first place. DW has no such rules, because the speed of a ship is determined by its mass-to-thrust ratio. If you want to build a battleship capable of a speed of 80, you CAN, but you're going to have a ship where a huge portion of it is devoted to engines, exactly as if you were doing the same thing to an escort.

So that brings us back to armed merchantmen: You know, in SEV, those rules do not, in ANY way, prevent you from creating heavily armed, highly deadly transports. There is, frankly, no real problem with armed merchantmen in DW, because they are still private, and do not go about attacking things...and in any event, because there are no arbitrarily determined hulls, there is nothing that specifically makes a freighter better off than any other ship. Thus, ship requirements only include the prerequisites needed to function as a ship and perform the designated role: They do not require that the ship perform the role WELL, nor do they require that the ship be incapable of doing anything else.

(in reply to Sarissofoi)

Post #: 12

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 2:34:21 PM

BigWolfChris

Posts: 634
Joined: 3/31/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishman

So that brings us back to armed merchantmen: You know, in SEV, those rules do not, in ANY way, prevent you from creating heavily armed, highly deadly transports.

But, I do remember that transports were only used within your own borders in Space Empires, trading with other empires was automatic and instant, no trade lanes to disrupt

Re: Exploit, I believe the concern is, if war is declared, you may already have some serious firepower already in place, don't forget, the AI will automatically attack nearest targets... which would be your heavily armed freighters

As said by some, you would only need a fleet for defence and specific attack locations, let your freighters handle the rest

Maybe the problem is more in how the AI moves ships around... afterall, why would your merchants go and trade at planets that are at war with you? Because I'm pretty sure they still do, as freighters will trade at any planet regardless of treaty status

So, sure, only hand out warnings if the ships are military, but at the sametime, if war is declared, these ships should be getting the hell out dodge asap, and not return while you're enemies

< Message edited by BigWolf -- 4/6/2010 2:35:53 PM >

_____________________________

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X 8 Core @3.7GHz
2x16 GB Vengeance LPX 2666MHz RAM
MSI RTX 2070 Armor 8G
SSD Drive

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 13

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 4:03:00 PM

Interesting

Posts: 120
Joined: 4/4/2010
Status: offline

As I said, any "possibly unintended side effects" aside have nothing to do with the fact Im getting annoying messages by many factions at all times because my freighters have 1 beam weapon.

Look, Im not discussing it. This is going to have to get fixed.

The whole STATE vs PRIVATE distinction is prone to a hundred "exploits".�

Im talking about going from 0 reputation to -34 in a matter of minutes with any faction just because my freigher has 1 beam weapon, really?! Also, the messages are identical for all factions. Its like the factions dont have any personality taken into account! How do they know my freighters have 1 beam weapon? And if they have cargo scanner, why would they be so touchy about it to the point of DECLARING A WAR OVER IT.

"Oh, I can see your freighter came to refuel at our Colony, but it has a weapon, therefore this is BAD, you are trying to conquer us with your 1 beam freighter military ship in deep cover" Uh hu.

How is it possible that in the year 2760, all races, are so stupid and have prejudices against freighters with 1 beam weapon?

Knowing there are pirates and giant interspacial worms out there, how did all these races developed to a point where they wouldnt be smart enough to add weapons to their freighters? Really?

If its a "gameplay" thing, then FIX THE 15 IDENTICAL ANNOYING MESSAGES EVERY 2 MINUTES. Tell you about break of immersion. I try hard to get into the game lore and setting, I read races description, I download their concept art screenshot, I try to imagine how they are like and how they behave and YET ALL THOSE RACES ARE SO STUPID THEY WANT TO GO AT WAR WITH ME BECAUSE MY FREIGHTER WITH 1 BEAM IS IN THEIR SYSTEM?

This is a bug. I can understand that the developer must have used an unfortunate trigger to get that desired effect (a military fleet aproaches and prepares for war, oh, great! the game AI aknowledges that, but from that to a freighter with self protection weapons?! In what galaxy are we living?)

I can talk about this all day long.

There is a simple fix:� Just make the AI to check if the race present in their system is PRIVATE or STATE. If It is STATE, then it acts normal. If its PRIVATE, then it ignores them.

I played a game with multiple races and after many in game years players will have so many freighters, that players will end up getting these annoying messages all the time, its completelly annoying, unrealistic and causes a really bad effect on game mechanics, because it reduces reputation unjustifiedly.

I also dont accept being "forced" to use escorts, instead of using my freedom of design on Private ships. I like to play full manual, and if I cant add weapons to Private ships (because the other races are stupid about it), then their protection would require my manual attention as well, baby sitting them, and I refuse to babysit a hundred freighters manually.

< Message edited by Interesting -- 4/6/2010 4:08:21 PM >

(in reply to BigWolfChris)

Post #: 14

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 4:35:44 PM

VarekRaith

Posts: 138
Joined: 2/21/2010
From: Manassas, Virginia
Status: offline

Gee, if I were an interstellar "nation", I'd sure as heck would not want armed alien freighters roaming about my systems.

< Message edited by VarekRaith -- 4/6/2010 5:04:10 PM >

(in reply to Interesting)

Post #: 15

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 4:54:56 PM

Barthheart

Posts: 3194
Joined: 7/20/2004
From: Nepean, Ontario
Status: offline

Mr. Interesting,

Strong language and YELLING aren't going to win you any converts to your point of view. In fact the mods will probably warn then ban you. This is a very family friendly site.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion but that does not make the only one nor the correct one.

I'm pretty sure lots of us here have been playing 4x games since the "beginning", you are not the only one with experience here.

The developer desided to make the game this way. I happen to agree with this method, you don't that's fine.

If you can't live with the way the game is Designed, then game is probably not for you and you should move on to a different game.

Have a great day!

_____________________________

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"

(in reply to VarekRaith)

Post #: 16

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 5:06:08 PM

VarekRaith

Posts: 138
Joined: 2/21/2010
From: Manassas, Virginia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Barthheart

This is a very family friendly site.

Good point, my post has been edited accordingly.

(in reply to Barthheart)

Post #: 17

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 9:58:00 PM

D.W.O.H

Posts: 49
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline

I would think if we are dealing with future technologies and the ability of scanners and what not a race could determine the probability of an attack based on what they would get back in a scan, If you scan a freighter that has minimal ( protection type weaponry ) A race wouldnt be inclined to get all fussy then say if they detect powerful warships coming in force.

and in all reality even though protecting these private ships is part of the game it doesnt break down realistically because is the private sector "paying" you to trek a ship across the galaxy to protect their interests so it arrives safely?, I havnt seen anywere to indicate that to me so why do I get stuck with this task.

A private ship imo should be able to have minimal ( 2 or less laser weapons ) to protect itself from scirmish attacks from pirates on its own ,OR the private sector should up me more money for basically what boils down to pirate protection fees.

On a side note, I have messed up and attacked a race that was cool with me on accident when they approached one of my new colonies cause i thought they were pirates,lol. they are angry with me now and how do I improve this so we can get back on good terms cause their one of the potential few allies I have in my galaxy.

_____________________________

Democratic Worlds Of Humanity.

(in reply to VarekRaith)

Post #: 18

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 10:18:53 PM

FerretStyle

Posts: 157
Joined: 3/30/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: D.W.O.H

I would think if we are dealing with future technologies and the ability of scanners and what not a race could determine the probability of an attack based on what they would get back in a scan, If you scan a freighter that has minimal ( protection type weaponry ) A race wouldnt be inclined to get all fussy then say if they detect powerful warships coming in force.

Obviously anything that's armed is considered a military unit in DW. Don't see it as a problem, myself, and certainly don't see it as a bug like the OP is screaming about.

quote:

and in all reality even though protecting these private ships is part of the game it doesnt break down realistically because is the private sector "paying" you to trek a ship across the galaxy to protect their interests so it arrives safely?, I havnt seen anywere to indicate that to me so why do I get stuck with this task.

Taxes? I think pretty much all of your income comes from there...

quote:

A private ship imo should be able to have minimal ( 2 or less laser weapons ) to protect itself from scirmish attacks from pirates on its own ,OR the private sector should up me more money for basically what boils down to pirate protection fees.

See above... the premise of DW is that you are there to protect (also colonize and explore, etc, but protection is supposed to be one of your major concerns). Allowing armed merchants is exploitable (doesn't seem to be any "safety period" after initiating a war, or requirement of withdrawing of your forces from their systems (which in the case of private ships, you can't)), so where do they draw the line? 2 guns, 10 guns?

quote:

On a side note, I have messed up and attacked a race that was cool with me on accident when they approached one of my new colonies cause i thought they were pirates,lol. they are angry with me now and how do I improve this so we can get back on good terms cause their one of the potential few allies I have in my galaxy.

You should be able to request the war end through the diplomacy screen. Or just wait a bit and they will request you end the war.

(in reply to D.W.O.H)

Post #: 19

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/6/2010 11:34:04 PM

D.W.O.H

Posts: 49
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline

im not at war with them as i just fired on their ships doing minimal damage, they have since sent more ships to my planet which is close to their system but their attitude towards me is gone from angry to annoyed so it seems i got it up but im not sure how i did it

_____________________________

Democratic Worlds Of Humanity.

(in reply to FerretStyle)

Post #: 20

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/7/2010 12:33:53 AM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: D.W.O.H A private ship imo should be able to have minimal ( 2 or less laser weapons ) to protect itself from scirmish attacks from pirates on its own ,OR the private sector should up me more money for basically what boils down to pirate protection fees.

No, that would be silly. How are two laser cannons going to stop anything? I put at least 5-10 missile launchers on them. How else are they going to defend themselves from giant kaltors and hostile cruisers? Obviously, everyone should be armed to the teeth and the right to do so be enshrined in the national constitution. Anything else is simply infeasible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: VarekRaith

Gee, if I were an interstellar "nation", I'd sure as heck would not want armed alien freighters roaming about my systems.

I would be perfectly happy for them NOT to go there, myself, but we don't really get to tell them where to go, and they seem intent on going there even if trade sanctions are imposed or war breaks out. Plus, it's amusing how every race in the galaxy now has a "Nasty" reputation because they repeatedly fire on my freighters, only to get destroyed by them.

(in reply to VarekRaith)

Post #: 21

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/7/2010 1:09:06 AM

Joram

Posts: 3198
Joined: 7/15/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Interesting

As I said, any "possibly unintended side effects" aside have nothing to do with the fact Im getting annoying messages by many factions at all times because my freighters have 1 beam weapon.

Look, Im not discussing it. This is going to have to get fixed.

The whole STATE vs PRIVATE distinction is prone to a hundred "exploits".�

Im talking about going from 0 reputation to -34 in a matter of minutes with any faction just because my freigher has 1 beam weapon, really?! Also, the messages are identical for all factions. Its like the factions dont have any personality taken into account! How do they know my freighters have 1 beam weapon? And if they have cargo scanner, why would they be so touchy about it to the point of DECLARING A WAR OVER IT.

"Oh, I can see your freighter came to refuel at our Colony, but it has a weapon, therefore this is BAD, you are trying to conquer us with your 1 beam freighter military ship in deep cover" Uh hu.

How is it possible that in the year 2760, all races, are so stupid and have prejudices against freighters with 1 beam weapon?

Knowing there are pirates and giant interspacial worms out there, how did all these races developed to a point where they wouldnt be smart enough to add weapons to their freighters? Really?

If its a "gameplay" thing, then FIX THE 15 IDENTICAL ANNOYING MESSAGES EVERY 2 MINUTES. Tell you about break of immersion. I try hard to get into the game lore and setting, I read races description, I download their concept art screenshot, I try to imagine how they are like and how they behave and YET ALL THOSE RACES ARE SO STUPID THEY WANT TO GO AT WAR WITH ME BECAUSE MY FREIGHTER WITH 1 BEAM IS IN THEIR SYSTEM?

This is a bug. I can understand that the developer must have used an unfortunate trigger to get that desired effect (a military fleet aproaches and prepares for war, oh, great! the game AI aknowledges that, but from that to a freighter with self protection weapons?! In what galaxy are we living?)

I can talk about this all day long.

There is a simple fix:� Just make the AI to check if the race present in their system is PRIVATE or STATE. If It is STATE, then it acts normal. If its PRIVATE, then it ignores them.

I played a game with multiple races and after many in game years players will have so many freighters, that players will end up getting these annoying messages all the time, its completelly annoying, unrealistic and causes a really bad effect on game mechanics, because it reduces reputation unjustifiedly.

I also dont accept being "forced" to use escorts, instead of using my freedom of design on Private ships. I like to play full manual, and if I cant add weapons to Private ships (because the other races are stupid about it), then their protection would require my manual attention as well, baby sitting them, and I refuse to babysit a hundred freighters manually.

Dude, what are you, 12? I've never seen such whining before. If you disagree with the design philosophy, that's fine, that's your right. But to throw a temper tantrum ...

The easy solution is simply not to put a weapon on a freighter. The alternative solution that would require some developer input would be to have to have a treaty with the empire your trading with to allow armed freighters just like in the real world.

(in reply to Interesting)

Post #: 22

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/7/2010 4:29:17 AM

D.W.O.H

Posts: 49
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline

could implement a simple civ4 negotiation of Open Borders

_____________________________

Democratic Worlds Of Humanity.

(in reply to Joram)

Post #: 23

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/7/2010 5:01:07 AM

Malevolence

Posts: 1781
Joined: 4/3/2010
Status: offline

I actually think it could go either way. Based on this design, I can understand this use of "innocent passage".

I do have two problems, however, with the WAD... the assigned escorts that create these diplomatic incidents and the fact that empires immediately destroy civilian ships at the start hostilities.

Given the design goal of unarmed merchants, the AI should have been designed to have escorts wait outside the territory of the other empire until the merchant completes its mission -- the escorts should then rejoin their sheep. Also, the AI (or via player command) should also be capable of ordering merchant vessels to leave another empire's territory and restrict travel to their territory. This is particularly important as diplomacy begins to fail and the relationship quickly falls to hostility and war.

Based on my limited play thus far, that's what I see.

(in reply to D.W.O.H)

Post #: 24

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/7/2010 9:13:22 AM

aVoided

Posts: 14
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline

I agree with a lot said here on both sides.

What it boils down to imo is lack of control of the private sector (If I rule the empire should I not be alowed to issue edicts regarding the private sector) I'm not saying give us full private sector control... that takes AWAY from the game if you ask me. There is a lot of future potential for expansion with this State / Private system. I think it is a very unique style and should not be degraded in the least !

I think THE BEST (just my lowly opinion) way to solve this is have weapons restrictions on ALL private sector ship designs. Say small freighters 2 weapons, medium 3, large 4. Just as an example. This way even in war your private sector does have minimal defense but not the ability to defend your empire in the least. You could say its a Galactic Nations Edict or something. To think in the 28th century in deep space that any ship would be 100% unarmed is just stupid (to be blunt). No less a freighter carrying millions of credits worth of X resource or components.

Long post short : Limited weapons on private sector designs that all empires would be mutaly agreed to (from the devs ultimate decision and view point regarding balance and available tech in the late game) and the ability to edict *no fly zones / empires* (Anyone who disagrees with limited weapons in the private sector is basicly out to exploit or abuse the style and can go download a mod I'm sure someone would make that would break the system anyway)

I definatly agree though this needs to be addressed. One way or the other...

Edit : I will be the first to admit that I have weapons on my freighters in my current game. 6 Beams on large 5 on Medium and 4 on Small freighters. I'll just say that my freighters solo space monsters when set to stand off (stay at max weapons range with stronger opponents) ... it is a bit game breaking to a point.. Maybe space monsters need a buff

Edit x2 : also if any never noticed in the game options there is the option to not colonize or build mining in another empire claimed system. Maybe an option could be added here to restrict freighters from neutral / warring empires. Naturaly that would not include empires with trade agreements. Obviously once cancelled would be considered nuetral and all freighters would get out of thier systems.

< Message edited by aVoided -- 4/7/2010 9:27:41 AM >

(in reply to Malevolence)

Post #: 25

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/7/2010 10:07:16 AM

sbach2o

Posts: 378
Joined: 3/26/2010
Status: offline

I never tried to put weapons on my freighters, so this may be a stupid question:

Does the designer warn about that? If not it should probably do just that. Maybe weapons on freighters could be forbidden outright, but that would be too restricting.

Having diplomatic repercussions from sending armed ships, including merchants, to other empires' colonies is perfectly okay with me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Interesting

The AI is bugged into thinking a freighter with a beam weapon is a military ship when its not and therefore keeps giving me these messages. One for each race. All the time. Why? Because my freighters trade with those nations all the time.

In my view the bug isn't in the AI, it is a design-flaw in the ship designer, if it lets you construct such ships without a clear warning. But (if no such warning exists) there is a very real issue here.

quote:

ORINGINAL: Malevolence

Given the design goal of unarmed merchants, the AI should have been designed to have escorts wait outside the territory of the other empire until the merchant completes its mission -- the escorts should then rejoin their sheep. Also, the AI (or via player command) should also be capable of ordering merchant vessels to leave another empire's territory and restrict travel to their territory. This is particularly important as diplomacy begins to fail and the relationship quickly falls to hostility and war.

Agreed about the need for special handling of escorts around other empires' colonies.

I don't think the player needs any ability to issue direct commands to the merchant fleet. Any outbreak of war should, without player interaction, lead to an immediate withdrawal of all civil crafts from enemy controlled systems. This should go without saying. Maybe what we are seeing in war with all these merchants getting attacked around enemy spaceports is that the AI just reacts slowly, as in 'the poor captains of those ships weren't informed and are just trying to carry out their orders'?

Bad pre-war relations could and probably should automatically reflect on the trade relations. Maybe the set of available relational states (defense pact, free trade, ..., blockade) is a bit thin at the moment and should be expanded to include something that warns about conducting trade but doesn't forbid it? (note: I haven't played with this much yet, apart from trying to get free trade arrangements). There should be a trade-off between different options (in some way there already is): Under bad relations, the existence of trade relations may be that what is keeping the factions from war. If a boycot is imposed, that will send the relationship further down the drain. Note, how trade actually factors into how the empires think about each other currently, although it has relatively small weight.

< Message edited by sbach2o -- 4/7/2010 10:11:14 AM >

(in reply to aVoided)

Post #: 26

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/7/2010 11:45:17 AM

aVoided

Posts: 14
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline

if they wont put a (reasonable) restriction on weapons or the likes on the private sector (which I think they should but within reason, as I stated before 100% undefended ships in deep space is just silly. Seriously should a full blown fleet or even a station be scared of a laser or 2 from a freighter? ) It's not like our private sectors are co-ordinated to become a fighting force. It would only be sheer luck to have a bunch of them in one place at the right time and even they wouldn't make a real war effort difference (unless as mentioned above said player has 20 lasers and 20 torps loaded on a freighter in which case thier private sector will bankrupt anyway much less even get to that point

With that said NO private sector ship should EVER enter another empire unless I have free trade or a defenseive pact with them PERIOD ! With or without weapons ! Should that pact end said private ships should vacate those systems immediatly. There is also absolutly no reason other empires (or mine) should be refueling outside thier own empire as well unless free trade or defense pact is in place. If you don't have free trade with an empire anyway what the heck are privates doing out there anyway is my question...

(in reply to sbach2o)

Post #: 27

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/7/2010 12:49:33 PM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

I don't think ANY restriction on the number of weapons a private ship is allowed to have would be "reasonable", simply because there are only two levels of armament that matter: None at all, and to-the-teeth. However, the AI's reaction to this at present is clearly a bug: It addresses those ships as "military", which they are not, and asks you to remove them, without offering you any means of agreeing, so even if you wanted to agree to such a thing, there is no button you can click to accept it.

Of course, the question then becomes, "Why are those ships there in the FIRST place, given the lack of a trade agreement?". If trade appears to occur regardless of whether you have agreed to trade, or even if there is a WAR on, what is the point?

(in reply to aVoided)

Post #: 28

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/7/2010 1:04:43 PM

Joram

Posts: 3198
Joined: 7/15/2005
Status: offline

I disagree with you completely Fishman, any armed ship should be considered military. Think of your home, would it make a difference to you if a person came in with one gun or twenty. Not me, I would be just as dead either way. And regarding trade agreements, you can pick examples out of any time and any place where there is no formal trade agreement and trade happens.

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 29

RE: "We will not tolerate the presence of your for... - 4/7/2010 1:14:21 PM

taltamir

Posts: 1290
Joined: 4/2/2010
Status: offline

regardless of whether the AI thinks a freighter with a laser is a military ship (laughable... an armed freighter is an armed freighter, nothing more, nothing less), there needs to be an option to disable such a notification because its annoying as hell and we keep on getting them...

Actually, it would be nice if you could also auto refuse certain types of deals (aka, auto refuse map trades).

_____________________________

I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman.

(in reply to Joram)

Post #: 30

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> Tech Support >> "We will not tolerate the presence of your forces in our territory. "

Page: [1] 2 next > >>