RE: Planet Outposts (Full Version)

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



Message

lordxorn -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 5:48:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: elmo3

The idea of projecting influence or having "territory" sounds more like Galactic Civ than DW.  I like the mechanics the way they are now.  Just my 2 credits.


Elmo3 makes alot of sense to me because I am a Heavy Border advocate until you think about the real world where borders are nothing more than a line on a map. What enforces those borders are military ships.

It would just be a nightmare to micromanage a border fleet though to destroy any marauding colony ships.



Aures -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 5:58:21 AM)

Yeah, but if someone trespasses on your property and you take justified action to remove them they are the ones who will get arrested and not you. DW does not recongise your right to enforce your borders with military ships.



Dannyboy99 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 8:17:23 AM)

A simple option when controlling a fleet could be "claim system" this could also be expanded to "claim sector". This would allow you to send a fleet out to patrol an area and to turn away any other empire's ships, possibly set to that empire's settings for when they fight so if they are set to 2:1 and don't have twice the firepower of your fleet they will retreat, if they do you could receive a pop-up asking whether you wish to fight or withdraw. The empire could react in different ways depending on their relations with you, friendly empires staying out, neutral ones letting you withdraw and hostile ones driving your ships away. It would be easily balanced because your ships would need to refuel, if they are set to "claim sector" they would travel from system to system, expending a large amount of fuel and having to refuel often, fleets set to "patrol system" would obviously expend less fuel. This would also make it too costly to try claiming any space that is far away from your own empire and stop you from claiming too much as you would need a number of fleets. Would also make refuelling ships even more valuable as these would allow your fleets to remain on station.



forsaken1111 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 8:54:55 AM)

I like the 'patrol sector' idea. We could also utilize the existing map grid sectors and color them based on sovereignty, and any sector with more than one race's colonies is considered 'contested'. A sovreign sector would count as enemy systems to the AI so if their racial stats indicate that they wouldn't colonize within an enemy system, they will stay out of your sector unless their need is great enough.

This is a soft approach with no arbitrary limits, just gives the AI some semblance of recognizing rough borders.



Dannyboy99 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 9:50:56 AM)

I dont think owning a whole sector is a great idea, it just gives you the option to "claim" territory whilst requiring a large amount of effort and limiting the amount of territory you can claim like this



forsaken1111 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 9:53:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannyboy99

I dont think owning a whole sector is a great idea, it just gives you the option to "claim" territory whilst requiring a large amount of effort and limiting the amount of territory you can claim like this

It would just be a political thing as I said, a soft claim. To enforce it you'd need to bring in a fleet to patrol as you suggested.

Just an idea anyway.



Dannyboy99 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 10:01:54 AM)

I think everyone has their own ideas about this but to me it should be based around military strength in the area you want to control



forsaken1111 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 10:03:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannyboy99

I think everyone has their own ideas about this but to me it should be based around military strength in the area you want to control

I would accept a system like that too if it my fleet could turn away colony ships and enemy fleets without resorting to blowing them away.



Dannyboy99 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 10:07:40 AM)

Yeah, I'm sure navies are supposed to be about deterrence and providing a show of force as well as just smashing other fleets



PaulP -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 3:55:57 PM)

All that really needs to be done IMO is not allowing colony ships to plant colonies on planets with existing bases. I've had to go to war and lose reputation several times just to reclaim my own planets that the AI stole by colonizing out from under me, and the player can exploit the exact same thing against the AIs.

It doesn't make any sense. Having a mining base should be just as much claim on that planet as a colony - if they want to colonize it let them bring a military and shoot down the station first, not just sneak in with an unarmed colonization ship and steal it. Even if I have a fleet there guarding it I have to take a hit from shooting it down even when its obviously flying in to steal one of my planets.



Aures -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 3:59:23 PM)

Certainly much simpler than my suggestion.



elmo3 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 6:12:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaulP

...Having a mining base should be just as much claim on that planet as a colony - if they want to colonize it let them bring a military and shoot down the station first, not just sneak in with an unarmed colonization ship and steal it. Even if I have a fleet there guarding it I have to take a hit from shooting it down even when its obviously flying in to steal one of my planets.


Disagree. If you want a colony there then put one there. Otherwise it's not "your" planet. To me a mining station doesn't confer any control over the planet and the game design confirms that by allowing another empire to colonize the planet. You should not be able to lock down planets from colonization just by putting a mining base there. You do so by putting a colony there.



Simulation01 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 6:26:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: elmo3


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaulP

...Having a mining base should be just as much claim on that planet as a colony - if they want to colonize it let them bring a military and shoot down the station first, not just sneak in with an unarmed colonization ship and steal it. Even if I have a fleet there guarding it I have to take a hit from shooting it down even when its obviously flying in to steal one of my planets.


Disagree. If you want a colony there then put one there. Otherwise it's not "your" planet. To me a mining station doesn't confer any control over the planet and the game design confirms that by allowing another empire to colonize the planet. You should not be able to lock down planets from colonization just by putting a mining base there. You do so by putting a colony there.




Elmo,

I disagree completely and emphatically. A mining facility implies ownership.



Shark7 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 6:28:24 PM)

Honestly, to 'claim' a planet/system, then perhaps we need a new facility or troop called the 'colonial garrison'.

Colonial Garrison:

-Cheaper than a colony ship
-Very Expensive to maintain (after all it requires you to support it)
-Unlimited by colony tech (that is you can go claim any potentially habitable planet for future colonization).
-Built as a ship that converts to a garrison outpost/troop upon arrival.
-The Colonial Garrison 'claims' the planet and prevents colony ships from landing.
-The Colonial Garrison can be removed via enemy attack or bombardment.
-Attacking or Bombarding a Colonial Garrison will have only a very small hit to reputation (no more than attacking an independent).



forsaken1111 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 7:11:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: elmo3


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaulP

...Having a mining base should be just as much claim on that planet as a colony - if they want to colonize it let them bring a military and shoot down the station first, not just sneak in with an unarmed colonization ship and steal it. Even if I have a fleet there guarding it I have to take a hit from shooting it down even when its obviously flying in to steal one of my planets.


Disagree. If you want a colony there then put one there. Otherwise it's not "your" planet. To me a mining station doesn't confer any control over the planet and the game design confirms that by allowing another empire to colonize the planet. You should not be able to lock down planets from colonization just by putting a mining base there. You do so by putting a colony there.


This is like saying it's okay to wander into someone else's oil field, plant a flag and build a city. Don't you think they would get just a bit pissed off at you dismantling all of their oil rigs and taking the oil for yourself?

They don't own it, they didn't have a city sitting on the oil field, so it's okay right?



elmo3 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 7:30:06 PM)

We're talking about a whole planet here.  An oilfield in Texas on an otherwise vacant Earth should not mean I "own" Earth.  I'm opposed to civilian installations conferring ownership of a whole planet.  The colonizing empire could take it's relations with the base owner by colonizing but it should not be prohibited from doing so altogether.  The game mechanics are simple, i.e. if you want a planet then colonize it.  I could see a military base possibly being enough to discourage colonization but even that should be an expensive proposition, otherwise people will be running around plunking down military bases just to deny the AI a nice planet.

Anyway it's just my 2 credits and obviously people will disagree.



forsaken1111 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 7:34:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: elmo3

We're talking about a whole planet here.  An oilfield in Texas on an otherwise vacant Earth should not mean I "own" Earth.  I'm opposed to civilian installations conferring ownership of a whole planet.  The colonizing empire could take it's relations with the base owner by colonizing but it should not be prohibited from doing so altogether.  The game mechanics are simple, i.e. if you want a planet then colonize it.  I could see a military base possibly being enough to discourage colonization but even that should be an expensive proposition, otherwise people will be running around plunking down military bases just to deny the AI a nice planet.

Anyway it's just my 2 credits and obviously people will disagree.


You aren't getting the scale. This is a mining station which is mining THE PLANET. It is an extensive and expensive installation which you have put in place and paid for in credits and resources. Why should I be able to wipe it out and steal your resources just by sending in an unarmed colony ship?

And why isn't an oil field in the middle of Texas a good example? You didn't colonize that bit of land by building a city there, so I am going to build one and all your oil belongs to me. Why should I care that you have another city nearby? Just because you have a city doesn't mean you own the whole state, that would be a TERRITORY system with BORDERS which we do not have. See?



elmo3 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 8:14:16 PM)

You used the example of an oilfield so I just piggybacked on that for my example.

You can wipe out my planet wide mining station and put up your colony because those are the game rules.  I don't think they should be changed to allow mining stations to prevent colonization is all I'm saying.  Others are lobbying for putting down a flag and thus owning a planet.  By that logic the United States owns the Moon since not only did we plant a flag but we left a golf cart there too.  Nobody in their right mind would agree with that so why should we have it in the game?

quote:

Just because you have a city doesn't mean you own the whole state, that would be a TERRITORY system with BORDERS which we do not have.


If by city here you mean a colony then yes I own the whole planet according to the game rules.  I have no problem with allowing multiple empires to colonize the same planet but that is another discussion and I don't expect to see it ever happen in DW.

Anyway I guess we can agree to disagree on the subject.  Peace.



Simulation01 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 8:27:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: elmo3

You used the example of an oilfield so I just piggybacked on that for my example.

You can wipe out my planet wide mining station and put up your colony because those are the game rules.  I don't think they should be changed to allow mining stations to prevent colonization is all I'm saying.  Others are lobbying for putting down a flag and thus owning a planet.  By that logic the United States owns the Moon since not only did we plant a flag but we left a golf cart there too.  Nobody in their right mind would agree with that so why should we have it in the game?

quote:

Just because you have a city doesn't mean you own the whole state, that would be a TERRITORY system with BORDERS which we do not have.


If by city here you mean a colony then yes I own the whole planet according to the game rules.  I have no problem with allowing multiple empires to colonize the same planet but that is another discussion and I don't expect to see it ever happen in DW.

Anyway I guess we can agree to disagree on the subject.  Peace.




Actually I would posit that we are the only ones that have demonstrated any sovereignty over the moon ( our manned landings ) and hence we would have a better legal claim to owning the moon than anyone else. I would in fact be in favor of the US and it's allies claiming the Moon or large portions of it's surface.



forsaken1111 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 8:27:52 PM)

You don't really understand analogy do you?



frugaldude -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 9:49:45 PM)

Well here's my two cents.

I suggest colony ships have another function.  In addition to colonization they would be able to "deploy".  ALL planets would have the option to be colonized.  If it is currently colonizable, it would be colonized as normal.  If it is not colonizable then the colony ship sent there would have the status of "deployed".

Once "deployed" at a planet the colony ship will
   a)become a mining station under civilian control.
   b)retain the high colony ship maintenance fees.
   c)not be able to redeploy.  
   d)automatically colonize the planet and retire the ship/station when required colonization technology is acquired.
   e)will not allow colonization of the planet unless the ship/station is destroyed in battle or is scrapped.

In addition to their normal component requirements, all colony ships to should be required to have mining components, commercial center, and whatever other components needed to function as a mining station.  IMO requiring mining components on colony ships should be a requirement.  Do the colonists dig up resourses with hand tools?

The higher cost of colony ship maintenance would make one more selective of what planets to colonize and slow colonization spam.  The decision to deploy a colony ship would require careful deliberation considering the prolonged maintenance costs while waiting for the needed colonization tech.  I write this from the point of view of starting on harsh planets.

I would hope this could be implemented without disrupting the game play too much.  

If this could be implemented it would easily allow for the tools to add terraforming to the game.  That is another post.






PaulP -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 10:11:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: elmo3

Disagree. If you want a colony there then put one there. Otherwise it's not "your" planet. To me a mining station doesn't confer any control over the planet and the game design confirms that by allowing another empire to colonize the planet. You should not be able to lock down planets from colonization just by putting a mining base there. You do so by putting a colony there.



It's hardly locking down the planet. It would just prevent a lone, unarmed colony ship from coming along and destroying the mining station without any recourse or political consequences. In that case the colony ship is more effective than a fleet, since the mining station gets destroyed and you immediately claim the planet to boot - all without reputation hit, the need for war, or threat of consequences from the other party.

If you want the planet, send a military ship with the colony ship. Bam, same result as you get now with just a colony ship. Oh, you took a reputation hit for attacking your neighbor unprovoked and angered him? Well gee, you shouldn't have destroyed his mining station.

The result of both is the same - the planet is yours and the mining station is destroyed. The only difference is if you have to physically destroy the station first I actually have a chance to stop you and a claim against you for doing it.



Zakhal -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/22/2010 10:14:41 PM)

If any neighbour tresspasses on my space I always thank him for colonizing and land my storm troopers on his new colony.



forsaken1111 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/23/2010 6:21:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zakhal

If any neighbour tresspasses on my space I always thank him for colonizing and land my storm troopers on his new colony.

That is the crux of this debate. Why should I get the reputation hit for an 'unprovoked' attack when that race destroyed my mining station and took my resources?

Not only did I lose the money put into the mining station, I lost all of the resources it had mined and he has disrupted my resource network as now I have to find a new source to replace the lost one. And what if I didn't want a colony there? Now I'm forced to invade to get it back, take a reputation hit and risk a war when the risk and rep hit should have gone to the enemy.



Starfry -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/23/2010 11:22:15 AM)

Its Imperialism in space, may the Shakturi rot in the dark. The mining station is a civilian structure and only claims the material taken from the planet. If a foriegn government colonize and claims the planet, that mining station cannot take any more material from the planet and must shut down. Since the station is controlled by the private sector, the materials is dumped, probably near the settlement to annoy them, because nobody is going to pay for long term storage for a million tons of material.

In regard for the oilfield example, private sector ran around amok on unclaimed lands in the past until certain governments jumped in and demanded tax on the recently governement owned land the materials are harvested.



Simulation01 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/23/2010 1:43:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Starfry

Its Imperialism in space, may the Shakturi rot in the dark. The mining station is a civilian structure and only claims the material taken from the planet. If a foriegn government colonize and claims the planet, that mining station cannot take any more material from the planet and must shut down. Since the station is controlled by the private sector, the materials is dumped, probably near the settlement to annoy them, because nobody is going to pay for long term storage for a million tons of material.

In regard for the oilfield example, private sector ran around amok on unclaimed lands in the past until certain governments jumped in and demanded tax on the recently governement owned land the materials are harvested.



The mining station is built by the state sector. Also, one cannot simply mine from space. There has to be infrastructure on the planet which mines the material and sends it to the station. So, the state that has a mining structure there has ppl or sovereign equipment on that planet, which represents a claim there.

If you want the planet then you should be compelled to take it by force....I am not in the business of surrendering planets and the mechanics of the game should not force that cowardly notion upon me.



forsaken1111 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/23/2010 2:12:00 PM)

At the very least we should be able to arm our mining stations and tell them to fire on incoming colony ships automatically.



Aures -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/23/2010 2:25:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: forsaken1111
At the very least we should be able to arm our mining stations and tell them to fire on incoming colony ships automatically.


That and/or maybe the don't allow colonization on planets with mining stations thing combined with some system of taking ships/bases with troops (or an entirely new category of toops called marines or something that might have different mechanics).



feygan -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/23/2010 3:40:03 PM)

After reading most of this with some interest something has become evidently clear, many of the arguments being put forward are using our own real world as an example, this will always fall face down since there are so many factors in the real world that you couldn't hope to emulate in the game, which does render comparing oil fields on earth with flags to giant gas planets 350 light years away a mute point.

However in the end it all does fall down to force, put as many civillian flags and oil fields down as you want, if you aren't sending the navy in when they get taken over by some hostile invasion then you will always loose them. This has happened numerous times in the past here on earth, and always it wasn't the civilians with their "but we own this land" cry that solved the issue, it always came down to guns.

I'm in the UK so a prime recent example would be the Falklands war, here you have a tiny island, with a big village worth of English population who are the subject of a hostile takeover, now had the UK not sent the navy there to start a war then the island would now be back as part of Argentina, not because someone came and took it but more importantly because someone "didn't" defend it. At the end of the day miners/villagers/rabbits&frogs do not defend anything thats why we have navies. So to have a simple (even if giant planet wide) mining station lay a claim seems somewhat odd, if you want to keep your resources then you have to show that they are yours and shout out "from my cold dead hands" whilst aiming a proton beam.

Some may cry that this then becaomes unfair because your take a rep hit, well again to use earth and the UK. England once held territory in every single part of the globe, we controlled most of the earths resources and so on. Why? because simply if anyone didn't like it we went to war with them and swiftly wiped them out, however this also meant that we don't now have a nice fluffy history of the entire world loving us as a nation because of our past.

So yes an opposing colony ship landing on the planet may seem annoying that they stole your shiny resource, but then did they really steal it, or did you just not defend it? PErsonally I think the game mechanics function well enough already without it becoming hugely complex and then encounter horrid balance issues. All I would like to see is perhaps an option on ships/stations to attack anything that comes near of X class vessel, so when I have a large empire I don't have to micromanage the destruction of rogue colony ships.



forsaken1111 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/23/2010 3:56:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: feygan

However in the end it all does fall down to force, put as many civillian flags and oil fields down as you want, if you aren't sending the navy in when they get taken over by some hostile invasion then you will always loose them. This has happened numerous times in the past here on earth, and always it wasn't the civilians with their "but we own this land" cry that solved the issue, it always came down to guns.



Nobody is arguing this. The issue, at least as I see it, is that the game allows no other option to denying the enemy a planet. You either have to put your own colony there, which is sometimes impossible and sometimes undesirable, or you have to murder civilians in a colony ship and take a reputation hit, or you choose to let them destroy your mining base and take your resources. There should be a choice OTHER than murder or theft in the cases you are unable or unwilling to plant a colony.

Also, its 'moot point' not mute.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.953125