RE: Diplomacy

RE: Diplomacy (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series

Message

Aures -> RE: Diplomacy (10/10/2010 12:57:28 AM)
Fair enough, as long as there is enough of a barrier to make it worthwhile if you really aren't going to use a ship for years (or at least a large portion of a year) but not worth doing all the time just to save a few coins. If the cost for mothballing and/or unmothballing was about the maintenance cost for a years operation that would make it counterproductive for shorter periods. If there is still a small but ongoing cost for mothballed ships that would also increase the amount of time it would have to be mothballed to actually save any money. I can see the argument for giving unmothballing a cost but making mothballing free. Currently if you are low on cash you have to scrap or retire ships to reduce maintenance costs. Giving mothballing an appreciable cost would make it hard to use when you are in financial difficulty, presumably when you would most like to use the function. I still think construction ships should be considered for inclusion in the mothballing idea. Rather than just right clicking on a ship and selecting "mothball" to instantly mothball it or introducing some sort of timer you would have to direct or queue up a construction ship to visit whatever you want to mothball/unmothball. Not essential for the idea to work but I think it adds to rather than detracts from it. I remember and have SEV, unfortunately I never really got into it. Never tried mothballing a ship in it.

Igard -> RE: Diplomacy (10/10/2010 4:21:13 AM)
I think mothballing should only really be practical for larger ships (cruisers, capitals, resupplies). Perhaps the option to mothball a fleet? I agree with Aures about the construction ships being used. Valuable materials, computers etc would probably be removed from the ship during the mothball process. Would the mothballed ships be included in the empires 'military strength' value? If you go to war with an empire that looks weaker than yours, but has several fleets of mothballed ships waiting to be activated, could produce some difficult situations.

Simulation01 -> RE: Diplomacy (10/10/2010 6:54:45 AM)
Well, in order to keep from having great huge armada's of mothballed ships waiting to be activated in a war....maybe you should be given a number of ships that could be mothballed without incurring a penalty, but if you go over that number...every ship afterward would cost a considerable percentage of what an active ship would cost to maintain. That, I think would deter/prevent you from having armada's just waiting to be called up....also, these ships would probably be obsolete any way, so they would only really be effective as a last ditch defense. You could also use this feature along with my idea for selling ships to other empires.....for instance you could sell ships out of your mothballed fleet. You could also conduct a 'lend/lease' effort to support your allly in battle by giving them some of your mothballed ships. The idea of the construction ships is interesting and I understand it, however the idea I have in my head is that the ships would be decommissioned at a large dedicated Starbase or Depot on a planet or moon ( like the Zackdorn Quartermaster episode of TNG....which I looked up and watched this afternoon on You Tube...Thanks Igard and martok ). These facilities would have the equipment to strip them of their useful or 'dangerous' components.

Igard -> RE: Diplomacy (10/10/2010 9:28:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Simulation01 The idea of the construction ships is interesting and I understand it, however the idea I have in my head is that the ships would be decommissioned at a large dedicated Starbase or Depot on a planet or moon ( like the Zackdorn Quartermaster episode of TNG....which I looked up and watched this afternoon on You Tube...Thanks Igard and martok ). These facilities would have the equipment to strip them of their useful or 'dangerous' components. That would work quite well I think. I agree with you about keeping the numbers of mothballed ships to a certain limit and having a dedicated starbase/depot with a limit to the number of ships it can maintain in mothball would certainly control the numbers. So there could be a new component for a starbase; It could be called 'Surplus Depot' or something similar. ; It would be quite large so as to limit the player from placing one on all starbases. ; It would be reasonably costly to build just so much as to limit the player from putting one in every system (We only want about 2 for a medium size empire am I correct?). ; The higher the tech the lower the maintenance cost. The cost of maintenance would be a small percentage of the ships full maintenance. ; The higher the tech the more ships can be placed in mothball. The ships themselves would simply move to a location within a certain range of the Depot. Any other values that could be added to this component?

Simulation01 -> RE: Diplomacy (10/12/2010 7:55:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Igard quote: ORIGINAL: Simulation01 The idea of the construction ships is interesting and I understand it, however the idea I have in my head is that the ships would be decommissioned at a large dedicated Starbase or Depot on a planet or moon ( like the Zackdorn Quartermaster episode of TNG....which I looked up and watched this afternoon on You Tube...Thanks Igard and martok ). These facilities would have the equipment to strip them of their useful or 'dangerous' components. That would work quite well I think. I agree with you about keeping the numbers of mothballed ships to a certain limit and having a dedicated starbase/depot with a limit to the number of ships it can maintain in mothball would certainly control the numbers. So there could be a new component for a starbase; It could be called 'Surplus Depot' or something similar. ; It would be quite large so as to limit the player from placing one on all starbases. ; It would be reasonably costly to build just so much as to limit the player from putting one in every system (We only want about 2 for a medium size empire am I correct?). ; The higher the tech the lower the maintenance cost. The cost of maintenance would be a small percentage of the ships full maintenance. ; The higher the tech the more ships can be placed in mothball. The ships themselves would simply move to a location within a certain range of the Depot. Any other values that could be added to this component? I think those are good idea's. The only thing I'm concerned about is having the number of ships able to be kept in the depot tied to tech level. I think the idea is to prevent a player from building massive armada's and placing them in the depot to call up whenever. Sorry it took me so long to reply.

Igard -> RE: Diplomacy (10/12/2010 11:36:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Simulation01 The only thing I'm concerned about is having the number of ships able to be kept in the depot tied to tech level. I see what you mean now, sorry I didn't read your above post properly[sm=dizzy.gif]. So the percentage of the upkeep could be raised incrementally as more ships are mothaballed. So maybe after about 12 ships, you find yourself paying around 50% of the maintenance. Would this be about right for a level 1 tech?

Simulation01 -> RE: Diplomacy (10/14/2010 1:28:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Igard quote: ORIGINAL: Simulation01 The only thing I'm concerned about is having the number of ships able to be kept in the depot tied to tech level. I see what you mean now, sorry I didn't read your above post properly[sm=dizzy.gif]. So the percentage of the upkeep could be raised incrementally as more ships are mothaballed. So maybe after about 12 ships, you find yourself paying around 50% of the maintenance. Would this be about right for a level 1 tech? Yeah, that's more like what I was thinking...though...the amount of increase in maintenance cost would be something to be worked out in testing to get it to an appropriate level to achieve the kind of effect we're looking for.

Igard -> RE: Diplomacy (10/14/2010 2:15:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Simulation01 the amount of increase in maintenance cost would be something to be worked out in testing to get it to an appropriate level to achieve the kind of effect we're looking for. I agree, I was just taking a wild stab in the dark.[sm=00000007.gif]

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.9528809