RE: Planet Outposts (Full Version)

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



Message

Igard -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/30/2010 10:23:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL:  elliotg

Hi all. I tend to agree that some form of territory and borders would help the game, though I don't think 'claiming' planets as described in the post is a good way to do this.

Down the track we'll be looking further at this. I personally would prefer to see some kind of empire territory - I think this would make the game more understandable. Especially late-game the 'borders' can get pretty ragged and ill-defined. In ROTS the AI pays more attention to distance when evaluating targets, so it'll attack and colonize nearer planets, but still things can get fairly messy.

Of course, with a free-roaming space game like DW, territory is a pretty hard concept to enforce [:)]  So any ideas on this are most welcome.


Here's Elliot's post from the first page for anyone who missed it.

It seems that you're correct, Hal9000. A territory system would seem to be preferred to a claim system. That's not to say Elliot won't change his mind. There are alot of good posts here that argue their point very well.



hal9000 -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/30/2010 10:49:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Igard

It seems that you're correct, Hal9000. A territory system would seem to be preferred to a claim system. That's not to say Elliot won't change his mind. There are alot of good posts here that argue their point very well.



yeah, I was remembering elliot's post too [:)]
even if I like the idea of a claim system, I don't think it adds that much to the game that it's worth the effort.






Igard -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/30/2010 11:26:36 AM)

Agreed. I think it would be difficult to automate and may become laborious after a while, the player can only do so much. So, it might seem like a good idea and a realistic solution, but it wouldn't really work IMO.



nammafia -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/30/2010 11:36:17 PM)

I'd like to add my two cents to the border thing.

With the advent of the regional capitals in the expansion ROTS, now we have a total of 4 capitals.  Should the sphere/circle of influence of capitals be reduced such that colonies outside the influence circle tend to go independent quicker and refuse to pay tax or defect to nearest empire ?  In the expansion planner, distance from capital worlds is also considered as a negative indicator.  Combined distance and planet quality might put a planet from favorable to not so favorable.  Private freighters only want to travel between and within the cores of the empire.  Far-out colonies are not well supplied.  In the end, we will have clusters of colonies.

One problem with this is that it might be difficult to conquer other empires which are far away in late game.  Maybe we can have more than 4 capitals or maybe we can build propaganda/broadcasting agency on conquered and far-out planets to keep the colonies from defecting or going independent.  Maybe we have governors/leaders who can be trained and have influence over a region of space like a capital.




Puzzlemaker -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/31/2010 4:19:34 AM)

There already is a claim system built in, sort of.  Just build something on the planet, like mining station or monitoring station.  Of course, when a colonizing ship comes it just gets rid of it, which is rather annoying.

Colony ship: OH HAI MINING STATION, WE ARE GOING TO LAND ON THE PLANET NOW.
Mining station:  Uhh, hey, uh, I am sort of here already.
Colony ship:  HEY TOO BAD BITCH
Mining station:  OH GOD I AM MELTING, HELP ME

So yeah, mining stations should do something in terms of colonization.

Pretty Flower Utopia:  Hey, so the colony you just made uh... we have a mining station on that planet.
Evil Boogs:  So?
Pretty Flower Utopia:  Well, I mean, having your colony is making our mining station less efficient.  I mean, your colony is sitting on top of a deposit of gold.  It would be real nice if...
Evil Boogs:  Hey now!  Your mining station is making our colony unhappy, blocking the construction of our spaceport, AND it's not letting us access all of the gold deposits!
Pretty Flower Utopia:  Well, yes, I mean, we are mining them.  So uh, would it be possible to... you know... move your colony?
Evil Boogs:  I have the perfect solution to this problem of ours.
Pretty Flower Utopia:  Really?  What is it?
Evil Boogs:  Plasma!

Anyway, that's how I think it should go down.

Also a system should be considered yours when the following happens:

When you have a colony in it
When all the planets have some sort of structure built on them
When the majority of the planets have some sort of structure built on them and it is near/on a trade route or other colonies
When it has at least one structure in it, and is surrounded by your colonies

Easy enough, eh?

It would also be really cool if contended facilities that are privately owned by another empire be purchased by your private enterprises, or at least have a chance of being purchased. 

So what do ya'll think?



BigWolfChris -> RE: Planet Outposts (12/31/2010 1:41:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Puzzlemaker

There already is a claim system built in, sort of.  Just build something on the planet, like mining station or monitoring station.  Of course, when a colonizing ship comes it just gets rid of it, which is rather annoying.




Even more so when you are mining one of the valuables resources, and it's a planet you can't colonize

I get that a mining just can't simply deny colonization, since you could easily embark on a area of denial missions (place mining stations everywhere)
Maybe the only compromise is, if a mining station is in a system already with a colony, then the planet is denied to other races
But if the station has no colony in its system, it still acts like the current system



Puzzlemaker -> RE: Planet Outposts (1/1/2011 6:57:20 AM)

I dunno, I just hope they make it so having a station on a planet means SOMETHING in terms of control.



Simulation01 -> RE: Planet Outposts (1/1/2011 7:17:16 AM)

It astonishes me that an unarmed colony ship simply causes a mining station to vanish into thin air...er....the void of space. 

DANGER WILL ROBINSON!! DANGER!!  A COLONY SHIP IS APPROACHING!!  DANGER!!

HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!  Another Auld Lang Syne!!!![sm=character0272.gif][sm=character0272.gif][sm=happy0065.gif][sm=happy0005.gif][sm=love0059.gif]



tofudog -> RE: Planet Outposts (1/1/2011 12:33:15 PM)

Pheewww, awesome thread here.
Just read the whole 5 pages of it and:

Thanks people, for your thoughts :).

Now my 2 cents:
The only thing I am missing is the option to automate shooting at incoming non-enemy ships, so I donīt have to constantly monitor the area in person.

Like patroling a debris field with ancient shakturi dreadnoughts (drool...) and wanting to keep out ANYONE (Really sorry, but the commander must have mistaken you for boskīns. Of course he was dishonorably discharged (in a comfy villa by the sea, with My-Thais and Blondes (erm)). How about a gift of 10 credits for your spacemenīs widows fund? We good again? No?).

Otherwise I am happy as is and recommend SotS for a look at the "colonies cost to establish" system.




gmot -> RE: Planet Outposts (1/1/2011 7:28:21 PM)

I would prefer a territory system as mentioned by Elliot with diplomatic consequences if other empires do anything (e.g. mining, colonization) in your territory. Based on influence etc from your systems (e.g. most for capitals). I'm not against an outpost system so long as it doesn't lead to cherry-picking of systems that aren't that useful for you, just to prevent the AI from colonizing a planet there. It would be a little ridiculous that a mining installation could prevent a planet from being settled.

Just my 2 credits...



the1sean -> RE: Planet Outposts (1/2/2011 8:13:25 AM)

Wow, this is an amazingly heated discussion, and I think that it is heated because it touches on some of the core concepts of Distant Worlds, and the unique aspects of it's game play that make it so much fun. I would like to chime in with my two bits worth [:D]


quote:

ORIGINAL: elliotg

Hi all. I tend to agree that some form of territory and borders would help the game, though I don't think 'claiming' planets as described in the post is a good way to do this.

...Of course, with a free-roaming space game like DW, territory is a pretty hard concept to enforce [:)] So any ideas on this are most welcome.


First off I want to note that I am of the opinion that DW already has some great mechanisms in place to deal with the outpost/border issues. I just want to make suggestions to help refine the simple yet powerful system to deal with some of the more common areas of friction.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Duckfang

As WoodMan said, I don't think there should be a hard line actually -stopping- anyone from settling in "your" systems, but they should certainly face diplomatic repercussions.



I totally agree that there need not be colored borders. DW already has borders, star systems are each their own bordered entity once colonized. My suggestion is that colonizing or mining in an already "settled" system should be met with immediate diplomatic statements giving the player the choice of whether to cancel the action, or not. Failure to comply should result in an IMMEDIATE relations hit (this could as usual lead to unpleasantries like war). Also, a massive devaluation of those "squatter" colonys/stations in trade negotiations should ensue.




quote:

ORIGINAL: Duckfang

While I like the idea of our planets projecting a sphere of influence, I'd like to add that perhaps we could "claim" planets near to our borders that have valuable resources? Or, for example, that World Annihilator wreckage. My idea for the implementation of this though is effectively what I've already been doing -- building a starbase on top of it and shooting anyone who comes close. I just want a way to automate that.


This is the heart of how the issue should be handled. DW supports combat outside of wartime, and it's a great way to deal with this issue. There needs to be some sort of command that can be given to ships and starbases that will set them to violently stop other empires from capitalizing on resources/planets. Currently I usually do this manually, which is a real pain. Some way to automate this would be great, I want to be able to "fire a shot across their bow", and send the offending colony or constructor running. I dont mind the possible tensions it will cause relations, maybe a "advisor suggest" sort of popup could be implemented...




quote:

ORIGINAL: Duckfang

EDIT: Actually, perhaps the easiest way to implement that last thing would just be to give us a Relations screen where we check boxes to determine how our ships react to other empires. This would also solve the problem of neutrals refueling at your starbases -- you could check a box to prevent that.


Another great suggestion. There should be some sort of explicit "right of passage" treaty that can be negotiated with AI empires, that way it would be possible to negotiate the right for a player's ships to be able to get the same kind of privileges at AI ports. I also would like to see settings/treaties that will effect things like tourism and immigration. Personally I dont like a non-trade-treaty empire emigrating to my colonies or having my citizens emigrate to them. Emigration between allies should be enhanced. (as a side note, although emigration rates have been increased in RoTS, they need to be increased quite a bit more still)

Lastly, I suggest that Declaration of War and End of War negotiations be fleshed out more. A great game series to emulate here is the Europa Universalis series. "Causus Belli", "Cease Fire" negotiations and many other concepts could be adopted in DW to really push the diplomatic system in the right directions without the need for a new artificial border system. (another note: it should be possible to negotiate for embargoes and declaration of war from any empire to any other empire, regardless of whether you are at war with the target or not, it will lead to more proxy wars; dont implement this until the AI will make use of it too)





Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.90625