Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (Full Version)

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



Message

Igard -> Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/14/2011 8:15:13 PM)

Discuss here the upcoming borders and territory feature for the next expansion.



lordxorn -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/14/2011 8:17:09 PM)

I personally like it, which happened to be the best thing about Rise of Nations. I wonder how it will all affect the AI, and if it can deal with the changes?



Igard -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/14/2011 8:21:11 PM)

I like it too. I think alot of Distant Worlders like the fact that they can colonise anywhere and enjoy the randomness of the galaxy, so perhaps a system with different settings (even an off switch) would be the best suited.




malisle -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/14/2011 8:23:29 PM)

Civilization did a good job implementing borders.
Hopefully DW will get something similar. Stealth component could finally get an important role in game.






Igard -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/14/2011 8:32:04 PM)

Here was my slightly complex idea for a border/territory system. Copied from a previous thread :-

It would create a penalty zone around your colonies. This would represent your area of influence or your border. The settings for the size of this region could be changed in the game setup options, 1 sector, 0.75 sector, 0.5 sector, 0.25 sector, or not at all (the way it is now).

If an alien race has exceptionally good relations with you, they can colonise withing these regions without penalty, just as any race can do now.

If an alien race has exceptionally bad relations with you, they will find that the colony has a 'can colonise but proximity to hostile race will reduce culture and development' warning, just like there was a hostile independant race on the planet but with some differences.

The more aggressive the alien race is, the more likely they are to attempt colonising within your borders.

Of course, colonies within these regions would appear in the diplomacy trade options. They would have to be priced according to how prosperous the planet is, so new colonies would be reasonably affordable, since they would have a low value/GDP.

It's basically to emulate the nature of a civilian population. Some more aggressive, maybe less intelligent, races may be amenable to the idea of living near a hostile empire, some more passive, would most likely be averse to moving to such a place with the realisation it Would be first to be conquered should both sides go to war.




ASHBERY76 -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/14/2011 8:38:19 PM)

I think the game needs forced borders for clear gameplay.I think the sectors like in Birth of the Fedaration is a good system.You colonize a sector and it's your unless Alien scum try to invade.The present sector squares in the game need to be cut into smaller squares.



Data -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/14/2011 8:44:42 PM)

Any beta testers in here? [:)]



crazyguy -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/14/2011 8:45:14 PM)

I like the concepts of borders. Think about all the diplomatic possibilities:

- Allow Civilian Trade
- Allow Military refuil
- Deny any of them
- Trade rights for settling
...



Data -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/14/2011 8:56:13 PM)

Hopefully it will come with more diplomacy after it



Haree78 -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/14/2011 9:54:30 PM)

I like the idea of your Empire policy affecting borders. So you can choose to not allow certain ships in with no reputation hit for taking out military ships that cross in to your borders when you have told them to keep out.

It would be nice to see other Empires policies within their own borders and set your Empire's ships behavior so that they don't cross in to hostile territories or perhaps you will ignore a specific Empire's border but not all.

Also invading a planet occupied within your own border should have less of a reputation hit.



MaxyGamer -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/14/2011 10:24:34 PM)

Indeed, it is quite a neat idea. As malisle noted, stealth would prove quite useful in this particular case. You could do lots and lots of stuff with the respective border concept.

However, I must note that it would be wrong to limit the border concept to the AI at its current state. Lots of stuff can be done with borders. The smarter the AI, more interesting the game would get. Treacherous or trustworthy...or both at some point... An easier option to invade or be invaded... Another idea is 'a transit cost' that may be implemented and agreed upon the two empires (cost/charge per ship or fixed cost on monthly/yearly basis) in order to cover additional empire expenses. Border Agreements don't have to be limited to simple 'agree to allow to enter/exit territory' concept. You can charge for it or be charged.

Multiple layers of agreements. Stage 1 would allow the entry of only civilian ships. Stage 2 would get one a wider access option. Why not have some specific agreement for a certain territory (whether that territory belongs to no empire or to one) agreed upon between all/some races to allow access to only civilian ships.

If you violate border agreements, you get some penalties, trade sanctions, reputation hits, etc. Huge concept to explore and play with. Just needs smarter AI to deal with it and all of fantastic opportunities that borders present.

Anyways, thats what I think :)

Maxy




Locarnus -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/14/2011 10:52:03 PM)

I like the concept of DW telling you, why you are liked/disliked (although I would shift some weights around...).
When mixed with the diplomatic possibilities of SE5, that would really be great.

Like different non aggression treaties:
you make a matrix, where you can select the fields
applies to | NAP in neutral space | NAP in home space
freighters
explorers
constructors
colony ships
small military (escort, frigate, destroyer - for patrol duties)
larger military (cruiser, capital, refueling ship - for offense)
troop transport
all mining ships
------all ships

existing stations/colonies in own space would not be recognized as enemies by your own military, but it would not break a treaty to attack those manually under any of the above options, if they are in neutral space (of course excludes colonies) or in your own space
for those another matrix can be made:

applies to | NAP in neutral space | NAP in home space | construction allowed in home space
mining stations
gas mining stations
research bases
resorts
-------all stations
colonies

of course in every case the more right you check a box, the boxes to the left will be auto-checked


For the trade flow it would be great to be able to specify space ports/stations to be "international trade ports", thus the vicinity around them (eg 1000 clicks radius) would be considered neutral space with respect to those treaty options



Simulation01 -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/14/2011 11:31:38 PM)

ABSOLUTELY  NO MORE STEALING PLANETS WHERE I HAVE MINING FACILITIES!!!  I will be apoplectic if that tactic of expansion is still possible.  I may even be beside myself.[;)]


http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2658283



MaxyGamer -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/14/2011 11:43:52 PM)

I think only planets would actually define borders since it is much easier to build a base and mine stuff than to find a colonisable planet and reproduce... I mean live long and prosper. Borders defined by planets would ensure that you or others don't own a planet or two and have half of the galaxy in red, blue or purple.

However, I think perhaps some agreement between the empires must be reached in order to avoid loosing those precious bases to bugs, reptiles, etc. As I noted earlier, concept of borders present more options for ....everything really.. not just diplomacy [8D]



Data -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/15/2011 7:06:48 AM)

I'd be curious if that implies some kind of influence victory condition....I would uncheck that.



J HG T -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/15/2011 7:39:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Igard

Here was my slightly complex idea for a border/territory system. Copied from a previous thread :-

It would create a penalty zone around your colonies. This would represent your area of influence or your border. The settings for the size of this region could be changed in the game setup options, 1 sector, 0.75 sector, 0.5 sector, 0.25 sector, or not at all (the way it is now).

If an alien race has exceptionally good relations with you, they can colonise withing these regions without penalty, just as any race can do now.

If an alien race has exceptionally bad relations with you, they will find that the colony has a 'can colonise but proximity to hostile race will reduce culture and development' warning, just like there was a hostile independant race on the planet but with some differences.

The more aggressive the alien race is, the more likely they are to attempt colonising within your borders.

Of course, colonies within these regions would appear in the diplomacy trade options. They would have to be priced according to how prosperous the planet is, so new colonies would be reasonably affordable, since they would have a low value/GDP.

It's basically to emulate the nature of a civilian population. Some more aggressive, maybe less intelligent, races may be amenable to the idea of living near a hostile empire, some more passive, would most likely be averse to moving to such a place with the realisation it Would be first to be conquered should both sides go to war.




We concur.

In addition, if enemy race is similar enough to yours, the planets in your influence zone could switch sides if you have high enough rep, and vice versa.

The only thing I really hope that border system still allows to grab distant worlds (PUN!), but at the same time would encourage more compact, secure empires.

@Data
I would probably too. More options for peaceful play would still be welcome TBH.

@Locarnus
Good ideas. +1 from me.



Data -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/15/2011 7:50:57 AM)

quote:

More options for peaceful play would still be welcome TBH.


I entirely agree and want them too, I just don't want to win the game without realizing it by mear expansion.



oxenshtrudel -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/17/2011 12:51:37 PM)

Here is my initial thoughts about how borders territories should be implemented

Purpose of borders
The purpose of borders should be keep unwanted ships, construction and colonization out. I think it can be tied together with diplomatic status rather easily. It could work like this with the current relation types:
1 War
2 Trade Sanctions
3 No relationship
4 Subjugated Dominion
5 Free Trade
6 Protectorate
7 Mutual Defense Pact

Civilian ships don't enter territories with relationship of Trade Sanctions or worse and pay toll fee when entering No relationship or subjugating empires territories.

Constructing and colonization in territories of Trade sanctions to Free trade gives negative reputation and worse relationship.

Military ships entering no relationship or trade sanction territories gives worse relationship.

Exploration ships don't enter war territories.

You should also have an obligation to exterminate pirates and space monsters within your borders. Each pirate base within your border could give a reputation hit each year and the same for each ship eaten within your borders.

Border establishment and growth
I propose that border should grow from permanent installations and colonies. They should start with a small border around them and grow slowly over time with degrading efficiency over distance from origin. The strength of the growth could be like this:
1 Civilian structure (mines, research stations, resort locations)
2 Monitoring stations
3 Defensive base and small spaceport
5 Medium Space port
10 Large Space port
10 Small colony
30 Average colony
50 Large colony

For colonies with spaceports the strength is the sum of both.

I'm not sure if there should be a minimum range for installations and colonies or if they should be allowed to be completely swallowed by other empires.

Territory strength
Depending on the empires ability to enforce the borders the territory effect should be different. The base for strength should be military strength of military ships (not bases) divided by the area of the territory. Then we can add racial/leader/technology modifiers. Low strength gives less or no toll (smuggling) and less reputation/relationship hit. So colonizing in an widespread low defended empire is not so bad but colonizing a planet in The Guardians home system would be outrageous.



Mozo -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/17/2011 8:37:11 PM)

What about combat and/or movement bonus in your own border? Or perhaps something about the effects of your own leader in your own border (more effective, etc.) - assuming leaders get implemented?

Mozo



Data -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/18/2011 8:29:22 AM)

That is a good idea, I remember in GalCIv2 there is a race that has the super ability of slowing enemy movement within it's borders. It may be overpowered but having this influence leader abilities is a great idea.



J HG T -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/18/2011 9:04:12 AM)

+1 from me to leaders (or race statistics) affecting bonuses inside your borders.

Oxenshtrudel makes a good point about border growth. I'm quite sure the devs have something similar in mind.

@Data
If I'm reading this correctly, it was the Yor collective. Machine race with super isolationists ability.





Data -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/18/2011 9:12:43 AM)

Spot on, J.



Seath -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/18/2011 10:15:47 AM)

@Data I think this slowing down was not overpowerd in CalCiv. The only OP super ability in the game was this super fast population growing by the race wich once was slaved by the Drengin ... i forgot the name of them -.-



Data -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/18/2011 10:28:13 AM)

Making extensive use of the warp inhibitor in MOO2, any type of similar tech / ability makes me think it's OP.....I guess it's a matter of taste but it's a minor point



ASHBERY76 -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/18/2011 11:04:39 AM)

Galciv just lobbed stuff like the Yor ablility into the game just for gameplay without actaully explaining why such a thing would happen,same with many aspects of that game.I do not like that type of design in space 4X games.



Data -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/18/2011 7:36:05 PM)

iirc i think you can configure the game so that no one can use this ability (or any other ability) if you'd like.
My question now is how much do we have to derail this thread before Erik caves in and throws us some more bones to chew? [:)]



Evil Steve -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/26/2011 8:33:13 AM)

i was wondering whether sensor tech can define a boundary or border: in areas you dominate, your chatter is the one everyone needs to access (like flight control). If you take this a step further, free-trade agreements = access to commercial chatter (ie wherabouts of civilian craft etc), and mutual pact = access to civilian and military chatter (ie whereabouts of all craft)

advantages: adds a strategic angle to an often under-utilised tech. borders are 'tech-based' and competitive

battle of the sensors, as empires compete to control the chatter in open space? (assuming superior sensor tech can "push back" or neutralise the sensor tech of other empires)



Data -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/26/2011 9:00:15 AM)

What happens when a base remains without the power to supply the sensors and they go down. This is not as temporary as it seems given how freighters work atm.
The same applies to ships, we'd have moving borders and even no borders when a fuel shortage occurs.
Mind you, I'd like to see chatter in this game just as I like it in SR2 but maybe instead of sensors we'd need a new component for this; a command and comm thingy maybe.



AlPhi -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/26/2011 11:00:59 AM)

Then we get into a cypher and espionage element. Tech developments lead to improving military net encryption (even current military allies don't get to see all your military traffic) and then as a result improving decryption capabilities. Espionage is targetted on getting cypher keys, examining new communications materiel, or even comparing open comms with actual fleet movements. Abandoned ships and bases may result in new comms, cypher, and decryption technology. New roles for cheap decoy ships passing false fleet composition and intention information. All very devious - I like it!



Data -> RE: Expansion Discussion - Borders/Territory (6/26/2011 11:25:55 AM)

Excellent ideas, this should go on the wishlist AlPhi.
+1



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.09375