Planetary Warfare (Full Version)

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



Message

cmdrnarrain -> Planetary Warfare (1/18/2011 8:10:39 PM)

Changes to Planetary Warfare I would like to see,

1. Blockade: Appears to have zero impact on the planet as the population still seems to grow at the normal rate. What Blockade should do is reduce the planets population to the point where you could bombarded it without seriously reducing it quality. Blockading however should take a long time. It should also destroy planetary facilities and reduce troop readiness making the planet ripe for invasion.

2. World Destroyer: Currently, if you do it wholesale it is a death sentence for your own empire which is really stupid. It should be the other way around. Destroy a world your population should get a big moral bonus because you are winning the war and would think twice about rebelling. Now I fully agree that rest of the empires should dislike you but they shouldn't automatically declare war for destroying 2+ worlds unless you completely wipe out an empire. Basically, they would buy time to get their own defenses in order.

Also, once the World Destroyer destroys a world, all other races should get a huge advantage to research and the ability to research their own world destroyers. Nothing focuses the mind like the possibility of extinction. Battles should really get apocalyptic once the decision to use this ancient weapon is made.

3. Bombardment: Buggy. Bombardment should have zero impact on anything. It should be the normal coinage of war instead of being a death sentence for empire as is the world destroyer. Their should be two types of bombardment, 1) which is aimed at turning the planet into a radioactive hellhole with permanent quality reductions, and 2) a less destructive version which doesn't impact quality as much and allows the planet quickly to recover back to a slightly reduced quality. Heck, one of the flowery races should have eco-friendly bombardment tech and evil races should a single bomb which slowly kills the planet or turns into a volcanic world or something.

Bombardment should destroy planetary shields, ruins, and facilities.

4. Invasion: Currently the only way to wage war and not have your empire split in two immediately. The worlds you invade will still rebel however due to high alien population and there doesn't appear to be anything you can do about it.

Question has anyone ever prevented a world from rebelling? I usually get the message they refused to pay taxes immediately followed by rebellion. Troops were suppose to prevent rebellion, but I'm not sure if this was ever implemented or not.

With the 1.05.2 update facilities and orbital's cause damage to invaders which is good. I do agree invaders shouldn't be able to exterminate the population, that is what bombardment is for, but troops should put down rebellions for a corresponding cost in population and troops. There should be more time between the warning message and the actually rebellion too, a lot more time.



kenata -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/18/2011 9:43:07 PM)

I disagree with most of this post. I find myself only agree that there should probably be more than one type of bombardment, but even here I disagree with the above poster on how this should be implemented. To this end, I will address each point directly.

1. In reality, the blockading of a port does not mean the direct destruction of that port or any other particular facet of the port. To extend this do a planetary blockade, the idea here is simply to deny a planet from getting additional resources from the galaxy at large. If you want to bombard a planet, blockading the world first makes limited sense as you have already gotten to the point where you are already destroying their star ports and attacking ships entering the area.

2. The World Destroyer should never be usable with impunity, which is what you are suggesting your OP. Why in the world would your people be some how happy that you are wholesale slaughtering civilians? They don't even like you being at war in the first place. Personally, I only use this ship as an attack vessel and never use it to destroy planets. There really is no good reason to do so, since invasion is a much better rout anyways. As for your desire to see the game get apocalyptic after using the world destroyer, well it does. The whole universe super hates you for using it on them and will basically start a galactic war with you.

3. Here I do not completely disagree with you, but I think your ideas are just not good. Pin point bombardment is not exactly an easy affair, and one should not simply be able to bombard off a population while keeping the planet's quality in tact. This would completely remove any need for troops as one would then simply build colony ships which wait to recolonize these worlds. That said, I think bombardment should come in three varieties, Total Devastation, Minor Devastation, and Toxic Devastation. Total Devastation would be the current bombardment scheme where you totally destroy the world to a wasteland. Minor Devastation would be similar to total devastation, but would simply order your troops to stop bombarding when the quality hit a certain percentage reduction, like 10% of its former quality. Toxic Devastation would be where instead of bombarding with WMDs, you send down bio weapons designed ravage the world. The idea here would be to introduce infectious warfare to DW.

4. While invasion could be expanded, I have never had a significant problem with invaded worlds simply rebelling immediately. The trick to successful invasions is multifaceted. Make sure the new worlds are not being overly taxed, as they keep their old tax rate when you invade. Make a special star base which is carries recreational and medical facilities to give your newly invaded colony a quick boost. Keep some troops around to watch for rebellion.



Data -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/18/2011 10:06:29 PM)

i entirely agree with kenata on this though i'd like to see some pinpoint bombardment options (for diversity sake and a richer tactical combat)



Sabin Stargem -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/18/2011 10:23:42 PM)

Personally, I think that bombarding worlds with any weapon should be possible, but actual bombardment weapons do not reduce the quality of the world as much, being designed with taking over worlds in mind. It would be terribly easy to destroy things in real-life space warfare, just by throwing tubes of metal in space.

Bombardment thread



Webbco -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/18/2011 10:57:56 PM)

Some interesting points, while I don't necessarily agree with them I can also be hugely frustrated my the "empire death sentence" as cmdrnarrain put it regarding the world destroyer and bombardment.

I find by mid-late game my empire is relying heavily on intergalactic trade and a high rep. If these are disturbed, I can almost guarantee I'm up poop creek, whatever race I play. I currently have a shiny world destroyer that I haven't used (and can't) + a whole bombardment research tree I can't use without it being a suicide move.

Yet if these things changed, I believe it would probably wreck the gameplay and role-playing immersion let alone balance...it's a lose-lose situation for me! [:(]



ehsumrell1 -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/19/2011 12:53:34 AM)

Wow.....so far it looks like there is no real 'satisfactory' groundwork
for bombardment that pleases the majority. Guess we just need to see what
Elliot decides to do after digesting all the wishlist suggestions concerning
this matter and deal with the game as it stands.
Just an opinion from one of the test team members. [&:]



lordxorn -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/19/2011 6:15:21 AM)

Regarding the World Destroyer point, maybe the negative consequences should depend more on what type of race you are playing kind of like GALCIV2. If you are an evil race, and you destroy a whole planet then you should get diplomatic bonus from other evil races you are friendly with. Then all the good races will hate you.

This is a good compromise, and works in a nice game mechanic. There is already the two different type of ultimate government types.



Sabin Stargem -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/19/2011 6:49:52 AM)

In the case of world destruction, I think that evil races would look on jealously, which isn't quite a state of happiness nor a road to friendship. They probably would try to take over, or at least destroy, the World Smasher. What would make more sense is the traits of each species influencing how they react to the continued existence of a World Killer and its activity - or lack of such. (Aggression/Caution/Intelligence/ect) Someone who isn't aggressive nor cautious would probably let things go on, even though it is clear that the Destroyer is in the wrong hands.



Webbco -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/19/2011 9:54:32 AM)

A quick question - is the player guaranteed a unique new tech when disassembling the world destroyer? If not, this should definitely be the case otherwise the world destroyer in the "right hands" is almost worthless.

I repaired a WD mid-late game (playing as humans) but by this time I had researched all weapon tech on the research tree so didn't want to run the risk of disassembling it to find out it was pointless to do so!



Data -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/19/2011 9:57:11 AM)

truth is in details, i like lordxorn and sabin's ideas on this - a good compromise



Setekh -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/19/2011 11:01:26 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: lordxorn

Regarding the World Destroyer point, maybe the negative consequences should depend more on what type of race you are playing kind of like GALCIV2. If you are an evil race, and you destroy a whole planet then you should get diplomatic bonus from other evil races you are friendly with. Then all the good races will hate you.

This is a good compromise, and works in a nice game mechanic. There is already the two different type of ultimate government types.


I like this. Evil races get a bonus for annihilating their enemies whereas good races get a bonus if they dismantle these nasty weapons.



cmdrnarrain -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/19/2011 4:09:40 PM)

Hmmm, interesting points Kenata.  Lets examine them,

1. Don't like the idea of improving Blockade as it already denies a planet the ability to get additional resources from the galaxy at large. Hmmm, preventing those resources is important why?  So the planet can't rebuild that starbase you just destroyed or can't build ships on that world as opposed to 50+ other worlds in its empire?  Planetary Shields prevent bombardment, so wouldn't it be nice to have some method of getting rid of the shield?  I think we both can agree that currently blockading is pointless.  I think it could be useful if it destroyed facilities and killed population.

2.  The World Destroyer is in the game so you should be able to use it.  I can guarantee that MY people love war, slaughtering civilians, and destroying planets.  I would prefer that you keep your bigoted opinions about what my people want or don't want out of it.  I would love it if you could play this game in which everyone was at war with you, but you can't because your empire will split, and keep on splitting until their is nothing left of the outstanding war machine you built.  I think the way it currently works is frustrating and frankly stupid.  

3.  "Pin point bombardment isn't exactly an easy affair". True but neither is interstellar space travel but all of the races seem to have mastered it.  Not that you have to be that pin point to hit say a city.   Maybe a player might want the planet and not all of the filthy bugged eyed aliens which go with it?  That might be reason to bombard and keep the quality somewhat intact?  What again is the difference between Total Devastation and Toxic Devastation?  They seem to have identical results.  Minor Devastation is just plain cruel, if not pointless.  Lets see, I'm going to bombard your planet just enough to lower the quality of life and then invade so that my newly acquired citizens can live in the hellhole I just created.  Sweet.

4.  So I take you believe troops should be able to exterminate the planetary population because you disagree with everything in my post?  Do you also feel there should be less time between the warning message and the actual rebellion as well?  Lets just say that I have tried everything you suggest and more for the same results.  

I'm  opposed to stereo types in general "cats good, bugs bad".  To quote a Ash from the movie Army of Darkness - "Good, evil, I'm the guy with the gun" or in this case the world destroyer.



Simulation01 -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/19/2011 5:34:41 PM)

My thoughts on taking planets:

quote:

I think that you should be able to decide what you want to target on the planet. You could decide to target only military facilities and forces and/or you could decide to bomb everything indiscriminately. Depending on that choice you should receive a reputation hit.

Also, it's been mentioned by several before, but a planet should simply put up more resistance all by itself. That is to say that a planet should be able to host more defenses on it's surface like fighters/bomber, missile battery's, laser battery's and a militia that would rise up to resist any invader depending on the degree to which the population dislikes the invading species. Taking a well defended planet should be a major effort.

Also, something I have been wanting to mention is the possibility to introduce space mines into the game. Obviously one of the strategy's here is that you place a minefield around key planets..together withe the hyperdeny..I think that would create a much more interesting challenge for many players. Obviously that would require mine layer and sweeper ships, but counter measures for the sweeper could be a system first seen in DS9....a cloaked minefield.

What do you fellas think?






I think that rebellions should take a similar path as pirates.  Once rebellion occurs in your empire a few rebel bases should pop-up on the frontiers of your empire.  These rebel/pirates would draw support from the unhappy populace of your empire in the form of money and supplies being funneled to them.  Also, a few ships should defect to them.. the rest they have to build.  The initial rebel bases ( space stations located at uninhabited worlds ) should be heavily fortified so to make them more difficult to quash.

When a rebellion takes place half the planets in your empire should not join them ( maybe a few sparsely populated worlds ).  Rebellions should also be more of a process.  A single event should not lead to an immediate rebellion.  There should be plenty of warnings and opportunity's to redress the grievances of the malcontents.  Eventually if things improve enough the rebelling faction should be able to be convinced to rejoin your empire or lay down their arms.



Sabin Stargem -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/19/2011 6:14:28 PM)

That sounds good to me. Sudden "gotchas" where you lose most of your stuff with no chance to compensate just...well, sucks.



gmot -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/19/2011 8:24:40 PM)

Some interesting points and planet bombardment/invasion seem to be one of the most discussed areas on this forum.

I like the suggestion about reputation for world destroying/bombardment being affected differently for "bad" vs "good" government types. To carry that further, I always liked the ethical choices you were supposed to make in GalCiv2 - gave it more character. Perhaps that wouldn't work very well for DW, but I would like to see more of the different races/government types react differently to the same actions. E.g. a rodent race should be outraged that I am allied with a bug race, and vice versa, or a Hive Mind government wouldn't care if I wiped a population out.



Data -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/19/2011 9:57:04 PM)

i think all these things will come in time, there's a lot to be done still..and Elliot always embraced good ideas like these



Lord_Astraios -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/20/2011 12:29:55 PM)

1 Blockade will prevent everything coming out and in.  Whatever happens inside the planet is the populations problem,  if they get,  erm,  you know what i mean.

2- I think it should depend what kind of people you have,  if its a military power and love wars,  yes,  they should love it to have that in the arsenal.  I think how you get the tech is fine by me,  once i recieved the super beam weapon that the ship uses,  it was inside a planet or a base with the plans to build one equipment.

3- Depends,  once the game have a better system of facilities,  i think the devs should implement the Smart Weapons,  meaning,  like you say,  less effect on other things,  i have a game that uses this,  bombs against populations and against facilities,  and for that facilities should have Hull integrity.  But bombs actually will have some effect in the ground,  radiations,  fires,  explosions,  holes in the ground,  etc etc...

4- Set the tax at 0%  ,  it will take time but you have to do it fast right after you invaded a planet or you will have that red face that once appeared to me because i forgot to set the taxes.  Lucky up to now i haven't had any problems in rebelion.





cmdrnarrain -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/20/2011 6:43:21 PM)

Setting the taxes to zero does butkiss.  After a planet rebelled I reloaded the game and set that planets taxes to zero before they rebelled, landed additional troops and put a fleet in orbit.  I still got the message my citizens refused to pay taxes, which were zero, immediately followed by them rebelling.

My reputation was pretty low at the time do to using the Planet Destroyer on some aliens home world.  Maybe the game need to types of reputation, your peoples opinion of you, and the rest of the galaxies.  



Data -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/20/2011 7:33:07 PM)

i think unhapiness add over time so lowering the taxes or putting additional forces, while good ideas, may have come too late in your case
it's just a speculation, i'm not sure



Lord_Astraios -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/20/2011 8:44:04 PM)

Check the list of the planet morale,  when i invaded planets,  apart of having the planets war weariness low  at -70% because of the race that is in it,  The species also hate you attacking their people which it gives you an average of -15,  then there is that point,  the planet destroyer,  and your reputation in the galaxy,  that also affects the people you have in the colony,  maybe im lucky because i have my reputation at Noble Level,  so the people will like that and you will see it in the colony morale list And im at War with one empire up to date



kenata -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/20/2011 10:27:55 PM)



I have played an evil game, and allied with the shakturi to destroy goodness in the galaxy with my world destroyer. While I might agree with certain points concerning being able to start wars with all peoples, I completely disagree with any kind of impunity for the world destroyer. When I think back on how many worlds I have destroyed via Stellar Converter in MOO2, I still find it funny that I was able to completely destroy almost every planet in the galaxy without any of my people caring. Looking at DW, I think that it makes little sense for players to be able to start destroying the galaxy without any real recourse either from other factions or your own people. That said, I do think that the world destroy should not have all negative effects. I think that mere ownership of this weapon should have a positive effect on your people, in the form of fear of it use on them if they rebel, and a positive effect on your relationships with other factions for similar reasons. This would be similar to the way nuclear weapons have effected diplomacy since WWII, where smaller, weaker powers were forced to make alliances while large more powerful races waged a cold war. Honestly, this aspect of a cold war is one thing that is missing from DW. I would love it if I could push a weaker race to break declare war or impose trade sanctions without myself having to do so first. This would open up avenues for indirect warfare as one could tie up minor factions in meaningless war instead of supporting larger, more powerful factions.



Data -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/20/2011 11:14:38 PM)

good ideas kenata and they were all touched in a couple of other threads also so you should wishlist them....there are more of us that want the same thing



corbon -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/21/2011 6:37:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cmdrnarrain

4. Invasion: Currently the only way to wage war and not have your empire split in two immediately. The worlds you invade will still rebel however due to high alien population and there doesn't appear to be anything you can do about it.

Question has anyone ever prevented a world from rebelling? I usually get the message they refused to pay taxes immediately followed by rebellion. Troops were suppose to prevent rebellion, but I'm not sure if this was ever implemented or not.


Did they change this for the Shakturi expansion?
I haven't been playing for the last month or so, so only the base game 1.06, but I very rarely had rebellions. In fact I had more rebellions in my favour from enemy worlds that I hadn't yet invaded* than worlds I had invaded rebelling against me.
EDIT: Oh, and that is playing with the generally disliked Boskarans. It's all about how your empire conducts itself and how happy your people are.

It sounds to me (unless there have been changes) like you are simply the neighbourhood galactic bad guy - so everyone hates you when you take them over, enough to rebel.
In which case, the resulting rebellions are a symptom of your playstyle (in that game), not a flaw of the game engine.

*Once you take over a homeworld, colony worlds in the same system get a big negative because the enemy (you) have a powerful world within the same system. Often the colonies will rebel against their founders and join you - especially if you have good rep and happy people and they don't.




Simulation01 -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/21/2011 1:00:23 PM)

I think there should be more buildings you can construct to affect planet moods.  Things like stadiums and theaters and such.  Also you could maybe build something like a mood controlling device which would not completely nullify unhappy people but would take it down a notch or two.  I don't know...I just think there should be more options to control your people than simply bending over backwards to other Ahole empires.



cmdrnarrain -> RE: Planetary Warfare (1/25/2011 5:42:54 PM)

Well said.

I like war.  I just wish I could wage it.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.984375