Feeding the colony rush

Feeding the colony rush (Full Version)

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

Message

Shark7 -> Feeding the colony rush (2/14/2011 9:07:28 PM)
We all know it, we all do it, and we all hate it...the dreaded colony rush. That burning need to grab every possible livable planet before some one else can get it. This is the one single thing that dominates almost every 4X game out there...how to grow as fast as possible, and it completely limits strategy. The problem is that most 4X games simply assume that if you colonize a planet, it can produce enough food for your species...despite the fact that its as desolate as the Mars and hotter than Mercury. Sure our technology might allow us to build hydroponic facilities, but these will never produce enough food to support billions of people. Very simply put, you need fields of rich soil, plenty of water, and just the right temperature to grow enough food to feed an entire planets population. And colonies on less than ideal worlds would rely heavily on food imports. Of course there are caveats. As the population of an ideal planet grows, its ability to produce food is diminished. The very land we need for housing is also essential for growing the food we need, be it grain or beef. Simply put, the larger the population grows, the more it compounds food shortage problems. Growing population has the double effect of reducing the amount of arable land to grow the food, and increasing the demand on the land that is available. None of this is taken into consideration in any 4X game, at least not to the extent it should be. But I have an idea of how to do it. 1. We need a new resource type known as food. Not a general food category, but a number of different resources that all qualify. For examples: Grain Meat Fish Vegetation Fungus Bacteria 2. Each race would have to have a defined food need. Even mechanoids require energy and lubricants...IE they need 'food'. Carnivore Herbivore Omnivore 3. Each race would have an ideal, acceptable and poor planet type for farming their food. For Shandar this would be a volcanic planet, while Humans need conitnental etc. This would require a simple table showing the colonizable planet types along with a 0 = ideal, 1 = acceptable and 2 = poor rating, example follows: Race--------Continental---- Marshy----Desert----Ocean----Ice----Volcanic Human..........0..............1.........2.........1.......2.........2 Securan........1..............1.........0.........2.......2.........2 Shandar........1..............2.........1.........2.......2.........0 etc As you can see, I basically make 1 ideal, 2 acceptable, and 3 poor for each race in this example. 4. Planet productivity: This is going to be dependant on several factors. One thing I want to point out is that while some planets come with natural food sources (IE fauna), some of them require development. Also, not all the land of a planet is going to be farmable. At best, 50-60% of the land will be arable...more likely less, and the more population you have on the planet, the lower that percentage goes I'm going to break this down into several parts to explain my ideas: A. Natural food sources: These exist on the planet at discovery. Planets can have 1 or all. These show up just like current resources do, and are gatherable via mining ships and stations. Examples per planet type. Continental: Grains, Vegetation, Meats, Bacterial, Fungus, Fish Marshy Swamp: Meats, Fish, Vegetation, Bacteria, Fungus Ocean: Fish, Vegetation, Bacteria, Fungus Desert: Meats, Fungus, Bacteria Ice: Meats, Fish, Bacteria Volcanic: Meats, Bacteria, Fungus B. The food sources your race can develop. These are farms that develop much as the population growth does. Requiring time and I suggest it grow slowly. This is based on home planet type as well. Using the same table above, you get the idea....just because a planet does not have it at discovery, it can and will still develop the resource as your planet develops. C. A check box on each planet that allows the player (and a set of default settings for the AI based on planet type, quality and size) that tells the game that this planet is designated an agrarian world to supply food to my population and capes the population at 33-40% of default max. So if a planet could support 10 billion population normally, then with it designated as agrarian it would max out at no more than 4 billion people. There also needs to be a policy that allows the player to set the parameters and have the AI auto-designate planets on colonization. This could depend on the arable land available: IE if arable land >= X units, then designate an agrarian world. D. The arable land formula: Arable land = ((Planet size/2) * Quality) - (25 * Planet type modifier per species (0 for ideal, 1 for acceptable 2 for poor). Example 1 Planet Eden is a 400 size 100% quality continental colonized by the humans. So ((400/2) * 1) - (25 * 0) = 200 units of arable land. Example 2: Planet Oceana is a size 240 ocean planet of 80% quality colonized by the Shandar, so ((240 / 2) * .8) - (25 * 2) = 46 arable units. This planet can not produce a great amount of food and will likely need imports. Example 3: Planet Dystopia is a size 150 volcanic world of 30% quality colonized by the Sluken (for this example we will call it an acceptable planet), so ((150 / 2) * .3) - (25 * 1 ) = -2.5...since we can't have a negative, we simply call this 0. This planet will completely rely on food imports. E. Population effects on arable land available. Too keep it simple, every 1 billion population would reduce the arable land by 5 units. So planets would see a reduction in food produced as their populations grow...and can get to the point where even a 100 quality large planet can require food imports due to using up all its arable land. IE a 100 quality, 400 size ideal planet that grows to 20 billion population looses 100 units (50%) of its food production capacity...this on top of an increased demand. F. Food production and use. While those wiser than I would set the levels I will give you some quick examples (and how this ends up balancing in the end). Lets say each unit of arable land can produce 10 units of food. So a planet marked as agrarian that has 200 units of food (and will not grow about 40% of its population and is currently at 4 billion) will produce 2000 food units per unit of time (to be determined). Each 1 billion population requires 150 units of food per unit of time. The planet in the example produces more than it needs...it produces 2000 but only needs to use 600) so it can ship to other planets. Now lets say the population continues to grow...to 10 billion. Now this planet needs 1500 units of food per unit of time to feed the populace...reducing its exports to 500 units of food per unit of time. This is all well and good, but we also have the capital planet that had only 170 arable units to begin with, and grew to 25 billion population, losing 125 of its arable units...leaving a total food growing capacity of 45 units or 450 units of food per unit of time...unfortunately it needs 3750 food, meaning it has to import 3300 food. So you need 2 agrarian worlds of limited population to support this one. G. Obviously, technology would increase food production over time. A whole high tech tree could be developed for this. 5. If you run low on food for your populace they riot and rebel. The also begin to die off if it continues. In this way, it behooves you to develop your agriculture before trying to colonize non ideal worlds or to rush colonization. You are probably wondering how this actually slows the colony rush. If done wrong, it doesn't, it just adds more complexity. If done right, where the arable land is developed into producing land is done at a very, very slow place it would. Basically, the speed of agricultural development needs to be at a rate that it takes years to fully develop the land and reach max production. The extremely slow farm development speed is key, if that is not present there is no point at all in implementing a system such as this. In other words, the availability of food would be the colony rush limiting factor. Also, it doesn't have to be this in depth, it could be a simple 'food' resource and abstract it. Still the key is keeping food production development slow to limit the ability to grab additional colonies. One would need to develop farms before taking new planets. AI would limit by seeing if enough food is on hand. And just because you have enough food for everyone, it doesn't mean you have it where you need it, you would have to devote more merchant ships to moving food. Logistics would act as a secondary limiting factor. Hungry colonist rebel, so going too far or too fast would result in losing control of the colony due to lack of food production or deliveries. Its something to think about and discuss.

Data -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/14/2011 9:41:20 PM)
you had me at hello..so to speak this is the most detailed proposal I've seen on this and I think 4x games would benefit greatly by implementing all of it. Some of them have some parts but none all the parts so I'm sold. Just as a sidenote, even if grabing planets were not that important I would still do it because I love to expand but I agree that more refinement is greatly needed in this area.

Kayoz -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 2:04:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shark7 3. Each race would have an ideal, acceptable and poor planet type for farming their food. For Shandar this would be a volcanic planet, while Humans need conitnental etc. This would require a simple table showing the colonizable planet types along with a 0 = ideal, 1 = acceptable and 2 = poor rating, example follows: Race--------Continental---- Marshy----Desert----Ocean----Ice----Volcanic Human..........0..............1.........2.........1.......2.........2 Securan........1..............1.........0.........2.......2.........2 Shandar........1..............2.........1.........2.......2.........0 etc As you can see, I basically make 1 ideal, 2 acceptable, and 3 poor for each race in this example. Umm... no, I can't see. Where's the "3 poor" in your table? Let me get this straight - you want to add another class of resource to the game, and make it a requirement to sustaining your empire? You can't control the freighters' shipping as it is, so you can expect colonies to rebel rather regularly as their needs fall behind your freighter's AI controlled distribution. And what about planetary blockades? You can blockade and that doesn't qualify as an act of war. With your model, I can see a blockade being more effective in tearing apart someone's empire, than invasions. It's an idea, but it requires that the player be able to take control of the civilian fleets - to force resupply of planets. Without this ability, it's just another problem to balance in the game. Not to mention the AI behaviour - which is already rather weak. Maybe something for a future version - but short of reworking the whole civilian shipping mechanics and the testing and development that would be necessary to work it into the AI - it's bound to cause more problems than benefit.

Igard -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 3:10:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kayoz Umm... no, I can't see. Where's the "3 poor" in your table? It means there are a total of 3 planet types with poor quality for each race. If you look along the line you can count the value '2' (poor quality) on each. Well explained and brilliant, if ambitious, idea Shark. I would be extremely surprised if Elliot were to implement all of this. I think he would probably rather pick and choose a few ideas here and there, but whether or not it would be to meet the intended goal of limiting colony rush, I don't know. I don't like the thought of abstracting the food resources, but if that's the only way to see something like this, then so be it. I'd much prefer to see the food being transported by the freighters, but it would have to be done properly. Kayoz makes a good point about putting our trust in the AI, especially when there are colonists lives at stake. It could get messy. Planetary blockades would need to be re-thought. They would become death sentences for planets. Using an abstracted food resource would solve this, but again, not sure I like the thought of that. Food shouldn't get through a blockade. My thoughts in summary; I like the idea of seeing a new food resource type. The more we have going on in our empire the better. I like the thought of having aggricultural worlds or breadbaskets. I admit I didn't pay too much attention to the figures you posted as they probably will be tweaked anyway if any of this goes ahead. I think that, as long as the player is made aware (assuming the player doesn't have the whole thing automated) of the amount of food available in the empire, then it shouldn't be too hard to keep track of things. When we go to colonise a new world, we would be given a report about the available food and how this planet will be affected. I'm not too fond on the idea of races preferring the food on one planet type and disliking the food on another. I prefer to think of planets as each having their own unique properties. For example, Humans may find a type of bacteria on a volcanic world that would actually benefit their diet. Perhaps simply making it so that Humans can only designate a continental planet as an agrarian colony, Shandar would only designate volcanic, Securan would only designate marsh etc. I like the idea, though I'm concerned about supplying this food to our colonies via freight. This would be tricky to implement for the AI to properly function and not start killing my citizens. It would be amazing to see this working though as the rest of the resources are transported along with the food. A fully functional empire in every way truly would be a beautiful thing. I'm indifferent to the idea of making the food resources an abstracted value. This would probably be much easier to handle for the AI.

Shark7 -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 3:32:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Igard quote: ORIGINAL: Kayoz Umm... no, I can't see. Where's the "3 poor" in your table? It means there are a total of 3 planet types with poor quality for each race. If you look along the line you can count the value '2' (poor quality) on each. Well explained and brilliant, if ambitious, idea Shark. I would be extremely surprised if Elliot were to implement all of this. I think he would probably rather pick and choose a few ideas here and there, but whether or not it would be to meet the intended goal of limiting colony rush, I don't know. I don't like the thought of abstracting the food resources, but if that's the only way to see something like this, then so be it. I'd much prefer to see the food being transported by the freighters, but it would have to be done properly. Kayoz makes a good point about putting our trust in the AI, especially when there are colonists lives at stake. It could get messy. Planetary blockades would need to be re-thought. They would become death sentences for planets. Using an abstracted food resource would solve this, but again, not sure I like the thought of that. Food shouldn't get through a blockade. My thoughts in summary; I like the idea of seeing a new food resource type. The more we have going on in our empire the better. I like the thought of having aggricultural worlds or breadbaskets. I admit I didn't pay too much attention to the figures you posted as they probably will be tweaked anyway if any of this goes ahead. I think that, as long as the player is made aware (assuming the player doesn't have the whole thing automated) of the amount of food available in the empire, then it shouldn't be too hard to keep track of things. When we go to colonise a new world, we would be given a report about the available food and how this planet will be affected. I'm not too fond on the idea of races preferring the food on one planet type and disliking the food on another. I prefer to think of planets as each having their own unique properties. For example, Humans may find a type of bacteria on a volcanic world that would actually benefit their diet. Perhaps simply making it so that Humans can only designate a continental planet as an agrarian colony, Shandar would only designate volcanic, Securan would only designate marsh etc. I like the idea, though I'm concerned about supplying this food to our colonies via freight. This would be tricky to implement for the AI to properly function and not start killing my citizens. It would be amazing to see this working though as the rest of the resources are transported along with the food. A fully functional empire in every way truly would be a beautiful thing. I'm indifferent to the idea of making the food resources an abstracted value. This would probably be much easier to handle for the AI. I think that food would have to be a priority cargo above all others, and obviously older and larger colonies would have to be in line before smaller ones. I just threw out some numbers for examples, as I pointed out, people wiser than I will actually tweak it and make it work. Blockades starving out the population of a planet is not only a viable tactic, it is very realistic. However, I think there should be a surrender/revolt routine that would kick in before the population starved to death. Given the choice of surrender the planet without a fight, or die of hunger...I'm guessing most races would choose the former, not the latter. The blockade tactic would also only work if the planet had no ability to produce any food of its own. Also, a planet should build up a stockpile if possible, that is have a 6 months supply of food in reserve etc. I see your point on food preferences which is why I pointed out there are some 'naturally occuring' food sources while others 'develop'. Let's say that my human empire stumbles upon the Volcanic planet Bacterium Paradise...which has a natural resource of Bacteria that is harvestable just like a regular lead, gold, caslon, etc resource. Its an edible food source for whoever finds it. Simply send a mining ship or build a mining station and start gathering. This is also why I wanted more than just a generic 'food' resource...really just more stuff to find and mine. [:)] The food sources that develop are basically generated based on planet type and based on the arable land units available. Each planet type would generate the type of food your race needs, or all of them (to me, this detail is irrelevant). As the Arable Land becomes developed farms, then any or all of the food type resources would be produced in amounts equal to the arable land units times the 'food modifier' (10 units in my example) and start to stock up on the planet awaiting transport or use. This is a discussion thread, and I definitely don't have all the answers or a perfect system...just a system I'd like to see, even if modified from my original idea.

feygan -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 3:35:01 AM)
quote: I like the idea, though I'm concerned about supplying this food to our colonies via freight. This would be tricky to implement for the AI to properly function and not start killing my citizens. It would be amazing to see this working though as the rest of the resources are transported along with the food. A fully functional empire in every way truly would be a beautiful thing. I'm indifferent to the idea of making the food resources an abstracted value. This would probably be much easier to handle for the AI. Not sure exactly on this but it does seem like the freighters seem to value fuel above other goods currently, as they always seem to be shifting the stuff around providing you have enough sources nothing runs dry. So I can only guess it has some value attatched that gives it priority over other goods, if so then the food good would just need something similar to this. As for blockades I'm all for starvation. If you have a 5 billion industrial world suddenly cut off from its supply routes then at least some of the populace will die out until it reaches a level where they can sustain themselves. Of course this then brings into play reputation as no one would be happy that you hung about shooting down food transports.

Texashawk -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 4:43:56 AM)
You know, for all that MOO3 did poorly, they did something like this pretty well. Each planet had up to 12 zones that were rated for minerals and arability, and you used more zones as you added more population. Not exactly the same thing, but it was a great design IMO and this expands on it further.

Bingeling -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 8:41:51 AM)
This smells of disaster, how could they possibly implement this? About starving off planets. Do you really think any planets live by imported foods? Then why is there a population cap on the planet. It seems that good planets can support some 25B people (is that a B in the english standard?), or about 4 times earth a few years ago. Give us some of that fancy starter tech. Give us proper fusion/fission reactors that don't blow up and have no pollution downsides. True free energy. And if you got unlimited free energy what happens then? One option is that the planet population dies because you have so much excess heat from all that nice, free energy used that you can't vent and it cooks the planet and its inhabitants into oblivion. Energy is heat... But maybe they can also make some fans into space too, that remove more heat than they produce themselves. Or some fancy heat duct out of the atmosphere. If you don't make disaster, you can move and desalinate water at a grand scale. Do you think a green Sahara with enough water could feed a lot? I do. Sibir? Betcha. It is not like we use all of this planet. We are of course nowhere near that point, but it for sure is easier to make that happen than to send colonists to another star system. So we have max population by planet quality/size, and we got colonization tech. Nice abstractions above "getting food". Planets sustain themselves. If not, there is merely a mining base at the planet. And we have all seen how easy it is to blow those up... Also, have you noticed population drop after invasions? It may be that WWII style city flattening will go out of fashion in the space age, and maybe they are not all taken into basements or shot by the millions. Maybe it is about crops, ecodomes, whatever being destroyed by the fighting and they starve? [X(] I mean... today we struggle with putting another guy on the moon. Or maybe Mars. 10s of years goes by, it is more than 40 years since the first moon landing, and almost as many since the last moon landing... It is 17 or so years since AOL launched as the first major, public internet service (1993), the world wide web is from 1993 or 1994. The electric light bulb was first tested in 1879, some 130 years ago, television is for civilian use at least post WWII. Technology moves fast, and it does not slow down. Is interstellar travel coming anytime soon? Nah. We need some fancy new tech first, some revolution. Like steam. Or like electricity. Or like the combustion engine. Brand new, that we have not et invented, so we don't know what it is. Science breakthroughs can not be predicted. One could not predict steam or electricity 100 years before their discovery. If humans ever travel to another star, it will look very little like what took us to the moon. And the earth that sends people there will look very different by the one from 1969. The earth is already very different based on technology, and we are not any significant amount of distance closer to making that trip happen. And when that happens? 25000M on earth? Easy peasy. Will we ever get there? I am far from sure, but 25000M should be doable unless a new ice age is coming. And that it could merely be a temporary setback of some 10000 years.

Sabin Stargem -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 9:00:21 AM)
I would say that Interstellar travel would occur sometime within 1,000 years, considering the speed of technology. However, Solar travel and light colonization is certainly possible within the century. For example, an Ion engine is fuel-efficient and provides very nice acceleration, which is what is being used in the latest long-range probes. Colonizing the planet Mars can be done with modular housing that is dropped onto the planet for every trip we make, along with a rocket that refuels itself for liftoff via combining chemicals with Martian air. Many interesting possibilities, and I am certainly hoping that the Moon and beyond starts to be terraformed within 50 years...because, really, I like the idea of humanity and other sentients to begin colonizing the galaxy.

Bingeling -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 9:17:27 AM)
As long as we progress, we are moving in that direction. Nasty stuff may of course happen to prevent that. But as you say 1000 years. 1000 years ago is the Norman invasion of England (more like 950 actually...), and it is still 500 or so years until they start seeing a gleam of light in the renaissance. And doesn't technological improvements show signs of being exponential? We are currently quite good at combustion and electricity. We dabble in nano, and we lack a powerful energy source with little drawback. Nano could transform the world, and some better energy source will be found at some time (as long as none of the scenarios classified as "very bad" happens too soon). I believe someone may have an idea on how to terraform mars. And if we can do that we can probably control the temperature on Earth too (as long as we get that far...). How we could jump to distant stars we only have fantasies about, and guess that "it may be something hidden over there -->". Star jumping is so hard that food issues on continental/marshy planets seems a bit irrelevant :)

Sabin Stargem -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 10:06:21 AM)
There are some options for terraforming Mars. Forgive me if I already mentioned them in other threads, but here they are... 1: Melt the polar icecaps via dumping a black material, probably similar to asphalt onto the ice. Materials that are black in color tend to absorb and hold heat better than other colors, hence the asphalt would use sunlight to produce heat. This melts the ice, creating oceans. 2: Use lasers from orbit to melt the ice. 3: There may be water sealed beneath the surface, so releasing it and placing it onto the surface may work. However, this probably takes more effort when compared to #1 & #2, and these bodies of water may have pre-existing life. This may prove troublesome if mixed with human-engineered lifeforms. The next step would be to create an proper atmosphere for Mars. This in part to prevent water from dissipating due to a lack of pressure, and to lock in some heat for Mars, in order to be compatible for Earth-derived lifeforms. Creating the atmosphere might require a large body of water and to grow algae in it, along with a couple other tricks in order to create a cycle for making the atmosphere. My guess is that building something like a dome over large lakes and the like might be required, since plant life on a large scale would need protection from solar rays, which tends to mutate things. Mutation can be good and bad, but too much mutation in a short timeframe would most likely result in cancer. To say the least, the terraforming of Mars would be very difficult. Might be easier to terraform the Moon, if only because it is so close to Earth. Perhaps we can create an oversized Space Elevator for moving stuff to Luna, though that would definitely be a megaproject. Hm. Create an actual pipeline for moving air, liquid, and algae plantlife to the Moon, and then place them in domed 'pools', and expanding outward from the dropoff point over the decades? Hm. An Ridiculous concept, but it amuses me. [:'(]

Bingeling -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 10:22:29 AM)
I say "let's research nano tech a bit more first" ;-) Self replicated building projects could be cool. Send some smaller (or huge) nano bots to mars to build an outpost. Collect materials, replicate themselves. It may be safer to test on mars anyways, in case it goes too well and forgets to stop [:D]. I understand that lifting stuff into space is expensive. So until that brilliant energy source is found (think your own little nuclear reactor on the size and scare level of a modern mobile phone battery, on a power output that far exceeds the most powerful car engines... How it would not be glowing hot is beyond me to imagine... Well, until this is found, jumping into space is hard. So some fancy lift and a giant space port to launch from is required. I don't think the ISS resembles a giant space port much at all. And this one has to be built as well, and I have not noticed that lift into space being operational. And we would probably need a new mountain under which to hide the nuclear waste from the power source to drive that lift... Not in my lifetime. And I am not that old...

Data -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 10:43:26 AM)
wow, you guys make me go back to the days I was reading AC Clarke (for the orbital lift) and Mars trilogy (by Robinson I think)

Sabin Stargem -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 10:46:35 AM)
As I understand it, something like Nuclear Fusion would be very safe and produce a large amount of energy from hydrogen, which is in every drop of water we have on Earth, and other sources like Lithium, which could last us about 3000+ years. Current power through Nuclear means - Nuclear Fission, is much less efficient and unsafe, mostly because it doesn't effectively consume fuel. However, initiating Fusion is much harder to pull off. Keep in mind, Nuclear Fusion is what is going on in our Sun, and has been going on for a VERY long time, and the byproducts of that reaction is what makes life possible on Earth. To gain direct access to that kind of power would open up many roads for humanity to follow. I am fairly certain that it is within our grasp, and would be obtained within our lifetime. However, Nuclear Fusion isn't without caveats, namely when it comes to weaponization. Unlike the Nuclear Fission weapons we use, Nuclear Fusion is relatively clean of radiation. This means that someone could use them like a traditional explosive weapon, with no nuclear fallout. It is hard to say if the current standoff with nuclear weapons has to do with the long term environmental effects, or their city-busting potential. I am hoping it is the latter, because that would prevent people from throwing them around. However, if it is the former terror, I may just experience the Cold War II. I never could relate to the Cold War due to not living in that era, so I have no genuine fear of Nuclear weaponry...it would be unfortunate if things changed so that they posed a genuine threat. Data: Might I suggest some reading material? There is a piece of Megaman fanfiction that covers how the technologies that feature in the games have come about and why, which I have found very interesting. I know fanfiction isn't considered legitimate among most readers, but I would argue that there is a number of diamonds in the rough. Megaman - Guiding Rainbow's Light

Data -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 10:53:38 AM)
will check it, thx Stargem [:)]

Bingeling -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 11:15:57 AM)
Fusion is a potential energy source that could change a lot, yes. And as a guy I know said years ago. If we got hold of that the world would get hotter due to the ending state of any energy - heat [:D]. Thus, game over. And I don't really think terror balance of nuclear weapons is just due to fallout and radiation. If everyone could level any city of anyone, I would think city leveling would be either a too common occurrence, or a never happening one. It works the same as nuclear balance. I have a faint, distant hope that war will go out of fashion anyways. It is nice living ignorantly in a fantasy bubble. But I'd think we are generally seeing that trend. I think there are states which leadership would just love to take a cool ship and lob a torpedo or four at a US carrier. They may or may not be able to pull it off, I think maybe US carriers are prepared for the scenario. But no state would provoke the US military as of today. Why? Maybe they don't really want to after all. Or maybe they know that the US can kill off all their communication hubs, power plants/grids, government institutions without putting a single solider on the ground. I don't think the nuclear deterrent today is a real threat against anything but a nuclear strike on them. Those that do that kind of stuff are small NGOs that can hide in some remote caves and are hard to hit and got little to lose :)

Sabin Stargem -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 11:52:59 AM)
Personally, I think one of the major deterrents against war is the intermingling of trade between nations. Everyone depends on everyone else for something, and a fair bit of it crosses beyond borders. China gets food from the US, and the USA in return gets cheap furnitures and electronics. However, the parts for electronics probably come from Europe or perhaps Russia, and those places get things from Africa and New Zealand. I know that I am making many completely wrong connections here, but the main thing is that trade is becoming an ever-increasingly complex spider web, so ending trade means changing the rules for society on a huge level, to the point that it most likely could cause revolution or result in unexpected resource shortages, even if nations tried to figure them out beforehand. Furthermore, migration and tourism between nations would also give people a sense of brotherhood. Not that actually prevents people from killing each other, but if you get enough people to say "hey, is it really worth fighting over?", war could be averted or shifted to some other conflict, like economic competition or technology. When you can't kill the other guy for something, then you must rely on trickery or persuasion to get it. As typical of me, it is theorycraft, thus total speculation. [8D]

Bingeling -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 12:22:51 PM)
I think you are correct in your observation, though not necessarily in the exact links. There is also a matter of "why bother". Conflicts are mostly in poor areas today, grabbing resources and hating each other for some reason, reasons that may be quite understandable in some cases...

diablo1 -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 1:28:20 PM)
I think the better and more simple move to slow down colony rush is to do like Civilization III-IV did it with the more colonies you own the higher maint cost you have until you research things that will reduce maint costs which would be research breakthrus throughout the game. In Civ I-II you could get 30 colonies in no time at all, but, when Civ III came along those maint cost prevented you from expanding beyond 5 very early in the game. Also "distance" should play a role in maint costs until once again research breakthru's reduce the time it takes to get supplies to the outlying colonies.

Wreck -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 3:32:51 PM)
quote: I think the better and more simple move to slow down colony rush is to do like Civilization III-IV did it with the more colonies you own the higher maint cost you have until you research things that will reduce maint costs which would be research breakthrus throughout the game. In Civ I-II you could get 30 colonies in no time at all, but, when Civ III came along those maint cost prevented you from expanding beyond 5 very early in the game. Also "distance" should play a role in maint costs until once again research breakthru's reduce the time it takes to get supplies to the outlying colonies. This is a reasonable system from the gameplay perspective, but it is very unintuitive for the player. How many Civ players were burnt by overexpansion in III and IV? Almost all of them, I'd wager. It doesn't make sense. And in any case, what are these "maintenance" costs for cities supposed to represent? It must be something the overall civ is doing for that colony, and what would that be? Sending it supplies of some sort! But the actual sending part is not modeled in Civ. Well, in DW it is -- moving supplies is already modeled in the game. And it's cool. Why not use it? As for "food" as an actual supply -- well, that is reasonable to me, but not really necessary. (DW certainly does model moving bulk goods between planets, so food is not unreasonable. And we have Trantor as an ideal to shoot for.) As folks are pointing out, a high-tech colony does not need just food; it needs complex goods of all sorts that it cannot yet manufacture on its own. So one way to approach this would be to simply create a new "good" called "colony goods" or whatever, which is not found as a natural resource but rather is created by manufacturing plants. Each colony needs some amount of "colony goods" proportionate to its population just to survive, and it needs an additional (relatively large) amount to expand. Developed planets would create more "colony goods" than they consume, thus creating the surplus needed to sustain and expand colonies. Again, using "colony goods" instead of food is mostly a labeling shift -- the underlying idea is the same: "realism" -- colonies need imports (of some sort) to sustain themselves and/or expand game mechanic to limit expansion use the existing DW transport mechanism to implement this

gmot -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 4:56:15 PM)
I like this colony goods approach - historically most colonies have needed support from the motherland before they are able to stand on their own. The game balance consideration would be to determine at which point a colony shifts from needing more imported goods than it produces to becoming an exporting. Too low and it doesn't significantly affect the colony rush, which is point of the suggestion. Too high and it cripples expansion in what is, after all, an expansion oriented game.

Bingeling -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 5:27:17 PM)
There is something way strange with travel speed in DW that does not fit the image I have of space travel. Gameplay wise it is fine though. Like responding for an attack from a neighbor system. How long does that frigate take to blast down that shield, anyways? It feels like weeks, months and years. If you can swallow the pill that travel is as fast as it is, you can maybe live with the thought that food is moved between colonies like oranges are moved between continents today. Think of a planet like the earth? How much do we need from the outside? Would we require to bring along food for a trip to mars? Sure, but we for sure would base the mars colony to sustain itself with food, deliveries can not be trusted. Nor can they in distant worlds. Imagine the power of blockades... Food is nicely abstracted away with starting population sizes and colony caps. And who knows how food is made in 200 years anyways, the bulk of it it is not necessarily produced in anything resembling a garden or a wheat field...

Kayoz -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 5:29:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sabin Stargem Unlike the Nuclear Fission weapons we use, Nuclear Fusion is relatively clean of radiation. This means that someone could use them like a traditional explosive weapon, with no nuclear fallout. Uh? We -HAVE- fusion bombs. It's called a "hydrogen bomb". They're not "safe", nor are they anywhere near "radiation-free". Your statements are in complete opposition to all documentation on hydrogen bomb effects.

Shark7 -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 5:33:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gmot I like this colony goods approach - historically most colonies have needed support from the motherland before they are able to stand on their own. The game balance consideration would be to determine at which point a colony shifts from needing more imported goods than it produces to becoming an exporting. Too low and it doesn't significantly affect the colony rush, which is point of the suggestion. Too high and it cripples expansion in what is, after all, an expansion oriented game. Perhaps a better system is to allow development of the arable land on all colonies to the max, without regard to the population size. As it slowly expands (just like the population slowly expands now) then it eventually gets self-sufficient (in the case of ideal planets) and even produce slightly more than is needed on those ideal worlds. Also don't forget the tech tree. Some further thought and suggestions: Keep the Arable Land formula, with the same idea that it develops over time. Keep the naturally occurring food source idea with the ability to harvest from non-inhabitable planets. Keep the need for the 'food' type resources for colony happiness and growth. This helps to slow the opening colony rush...which is the point I'm trying to get to...followed by a quickening of colonization as technology increases. And for that we add a tech tree for farming that allows the food produced to increase per tech Opening at start tech to end level tech: Farming - the opening tech, all races can do it. Large Scale Farming - second tech that increases food produced per arable land unit by %20. Hydroponic Farms - Station module that allows for the production of a small amount of food on space stations. Terraced Farming - increases food production by an additional 10%. Atmospheric Conditioning - (Pollution Scrubbers) increases food production by an additional 10%. Climate Stabilization - Increases Food production by an additional 10%. Master Farming - Increases food production by an additional 25%. At the end of the tech tree, you get 175% production of food per arable land unit and the ability to make a small amount of food on stations (say 10-20 units of food per unit of time). Additionally, one of the more farming suitable races could have a special tech: Minor Terraforming - 10% boost to farm production (opening tech) Major Terraforming - decreases the non-ideal production penalty by 1 (or 25 in the original formula) in other words, acceptable are treated as ideal, and poor are treated as acceptable. Massive Terraforming - removes all food production planet penalties (all are treated as ideal for the production of food). These techs would affect food production only, not population supported. And I'm sure Elliot won't go this in depth into any system he implements, but it would be nice if the game were open enough for modding that the community could implement it. Make it a mod instead of a default option. [;)]

Shark7 -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 5:37:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bingeling There is something way strange with travel speed in DW that does not fit the image I have of space travel. Gameplay wise it is fine though. Like responding for an attack from a neighbor system. How long does that frigate take to blast down that shield, anyways? It feels like weeks, months and years. If you can swallow the pill that travel is as fast as it is, you can maybe live with the thought that food is moved between colonies like oranges are moved between continents today. Think of a planet like the earth? How much do we need from the outside? Would we require to bring along food for a trip to mars? Sure, but we for sure would base the mars colony to sustain itself with food, deliveries can not be trusted. Nor can they in distant worlds. Imagine the power of blockades... Food is nicely abstracted away with starting population sizes and colony caps. And who knows how food is made in 200 years anyways, the bulk of it it is not necessarily produced in anything resembling a garden or a wheat field... Basically what I was getting at. When you start the colony, you almost require food and building supplies be transported from a larger 'home' colony. Once the colony is established, then it will start becoming more and more self-sufficient to a point. Also there are no doubt some planets that simply cannot not support food production (there are places on Earth that are completely unsuitable to growing food), and while you can produce small amounts of food via technology or by exploiting a natural source, you are not going to go plow a field and grow tons of grain...just won't happen.

Data -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 5:38:59 PM)
ok, so this should go to the modders wishlist as well as the general wishlist I'd like to see how a Shark mod would look like

Kayoz -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 5:41:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: feygan If you have a 5 billion industrial world suddenly cut off from its supply routes then at least some of the populace will die out until it reaches a level where they can sustain themselves. Considering that we have well over 5 billion here on Earth - and are nowhere near being able to traipse through the stars, nor do we have any problems generating sufficient food - I really wonder how you explain the "reasonableness" of this option. The limits to our food production are more economic than physical. Hydroponics, for example, requires a lot of energy - and where electricity has a significant economic cost, it's a barrier to mass production. But given a society that has mastered fusion and can generate energy efficiently and cheap enough that transporting bulk materials such as steel and silicon between stars is economic - well, the sky is the limit. Not to mention the potential production gains from genetic tinkering. We've only BEGUN to experiment with GM foods, and the production increase looks to be on par with the development of the heavy plough in European agriculture.

Shark7 -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 5:43:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Data ok, so this should go to the modders wishlist as well as the general wishlist I'd like to see how a Shark mod would look like Probably unplayable by anyone but me...haha. [;)] I'd like a full production/logistics system ala WiTP-AE on steroids. But then I am a WiTP player...I just like the fact that the DW economic AI seems to be up to the task, where most games fail miserably. DW is very close to my perfect game...it just needs a more robust production and logistics model... IE Grain goes in, bread comes out, etc....though slightly more abstracted. If I had my way the resources would need to be refined into a finished product (food)...but I've already added that to my wishlist/modders wishlist...er ... list.

cmdrnarrain -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 5:51:05 PM)
Colony rush is part of the fun of the game. If you don't want to rush start with a large empire. I do like the idea of food, however.

Sabin Stargem -> RE: Feeding the colony rush (2/15/2011 7:26:41 PM)
I stand corrected, Kayoz.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.921875