Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops?

Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (Full Version)

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

Message

unclean -> Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/18/2012 2:14:05 AM)
Right now they seem like free colonies more than of actual independents, since they're really easy to conquer and the reputation hit is easily gained back just by destroying pirate bases. Considering you can only build about 1 colony ship a year early on, and independents not only give territory but huge amounts of population, shouldn't they be much harder to conquer or have a bigger reputation hit? They just seem really broken.

feelotraveller -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/18/2012 6:58:04 AM)
Totally agree. The other thing which could be done is to massively increase to the bonuses you get when colonising them - so that there is some sort of trade off/decision to be made.

Beag -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/18/2012 1:24:27 PM)
No they shouln´t have more troops (they are small), and no you shouldn´t get more bonuses (above all because it makes no sense unless they are friendly). Problems as already discussed are: 1- AI doesn´t prioritize said colonies as much as the player; 2- Colonization with said independants is way too easy thus allowing you to seize territory that would therefore be much harder to get (for example you start as the oceanic Wekkarus and get desertic Dhayuts - there you go, desert colonies sometimes decades before you would otherwise be able) 3- Above all, too passive populations, thus really giving too few incentive not to conquer independents ASAP and make them spread everywhere, while in realistic terms you should have to worry about them gaining too much power and rebelling or trying to become an independent nation.

Bebop Cola -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/18/2012 2:55:59 PM)
Honestly, small or not, they are still a planetary population. Unless we're talking about a population of only a few million, there should be more than a handful of basic militia troops. Even 200-500million people is a lot and enough to field a substantive military presence. That's not to say that a galactic empire wouldn't have a decided advantage, but it shouldn't be a simple job to conquer them. On the other hand, one could propose that instead of clustering the majority of those 200-500 million into one fairly substantive nation-state they could be distributed around the planet in smaller communities. In that case, I would argue that there should be some fairly substantive planetary development penalties representing the lack of a basic transportation and economic infrastructure for the new colonial overlords to exploit as they modernize their new conquest. Population growth should be penalized as well for a decade or so as a result of low population densities.

Shark7 -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/18/2012 3:10:03 PM)
Actually, invading them should reduce the population by at least half, if not more. If they fight off the invasion, they are fighting for their homes, so every man, woman and...thing...would be fighting for its survival. If you can peacefully colonize it, then you get the full population.

Bebop Cola -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/18/2012 4:00:57 PM)
Considering that milita troops are relatively weak compared to the trained solders of the galactic empires, I'd argue that a greater emphasis be placed on them for independent worlds. Off the top of my head I'd suggest a ratio of one militia unit per 25 million population that the independent world starts with and maintains as the population grows or militia is lost to invasion attempts. The longer an independent world is left alone the harder it gets to conquer, though the superior troops of a galactic empire can still do so if the empire in question cares to devote the resources to it.

Jeeves -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/18/2012 5:33:06 PM)
You're gonna RUIN my empire expansion policy LOL. If you don't want to conquer them - don't. Just let it be for players like me who enjoy taking over the independents as a means to train troops... Lonnie Courtney Clay

Bebop Cola -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/18/2012 6:52:38 PM)
It's not so much a matter of if I want to conquer them. If I do, then I will if they have 2 militia units or 200. It just seems reasonable to me that a planetary civilization, which is what the independents are, would have a more substantive military present. They're still not much competition for a determined galactic empire, but it shouldn't be a trivial matter to conquer several hundred million people. The game doesn't have any partisan or insurrection mechanic, so the simplest solution would be to ratchet up the militia units they train to something more reasonable. Those troops should still be substandard to just about anything even a starting empire could train, so all it should really do if force you to land more than just the initial troops on your starting destroyer and likely take longer to actually conquer. Moreover, it prevents the AI from trivially acquiring a new planet type to colonize. In any case, a 1:25 ratio would not translate to huge numbers of troops unless the colony has been left alone long enough that it's just about to spark into a full-blown empire, which kind of makes sense. Capital worlds should have a solid number of troops, even if they're just militia to begin with.

ASHBERY76 -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/18/2012 7:36:51 PM)
Independents were given a token army unit in a DW vanilla patch.I think they are ment to be free beer by design.

Bebop Cola -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/18/2012 7:46:27 PM)
Seems like it. It's just a personal preference thing, I guess. I suppose I could just turn them off if it was really a big deal to me. Sleeping Chamber ruins would still be an annoyance, but those are rare enough I guess.

feelotraveller -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/18/2012 8:39:48 PM)
Yeah, it would ruin my expansion policy too. [:D] I usually have 3 or 4, and I think once 8, independents conquered before my first colony ship lands. To be honest it almost makes it game over. I think part of the story is that when the speed of expansion by building colony ships was slowed, again, the means to expand quickly by independent invasions were not considered as part of that mix. This means that it is more than ever a given in (just about?) all situations to immediately invade any independent world. I could be wrong but it seems to me that the original intention of independent worlds was not merely as a goodies basket means to out expand the computer but rather as trade partners, potentially friendly non-opponent elements, even allies, in the game. But hey, maybe they could be if I ever let them live long enough... [;)]

Bebop Cola -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/18/2012 9:00:39 PM)
The biggest problem I have with them is their ability to open up non-native worlds for colonization. Sure, the colonizer likely builds slowly, but I want to push out the ability to colonize non-native planets by 100 years. I have the same concern when two full empires start conquering each others' worlds, but at least in those cases they can conquer them back. From a tech standpoint I could even accept that the conquering empire is capturing enough tech to replicate their opponent's colonizers at those planets even if they can't build them for their own people. I reckon the Mortalen could easily enough build a Keterov colonizer to take Keterov colonizers out under the Mortalen banner, but still be unable to build a Mortalen colonizer that can make a marsh world livable for themselves. Quite frankly, if either the ability to build a non-native colonizer was removed when a non-native world was conquered or migration would not occur to non-native planet types until that colonization tech was discovered, most of my objections would evaporate.

Jim D Burns -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/27/2012 9:32:14 PM)
I agree neutral planets should be much harder to take, but why not simply add a game setup slider that allows you to specify how well defended they are. That way everyone gets to play how they want to. In addition to this, I’d like neutral planets to each have an orbital defense base or small starport in orbit, as pirates pretty much blockade them as soon as they appear and that takes their resources and their neutral shipping out of the games economy. I would also like to see a severe unhappiness modifier to conquered planets that takes years to slowly wear off. This would mean a large military garrison would need to be left on planet for a prolonged period of time to fight the rebels that should continue to spawn in attempts to wrest control away from you. Right now it’s kind of silly how easy it is to conquer one planet after the next with the same troops due to the fact you can take them all off planet the second you gain control of it. Finally I think pirates should be forced to leave at least 2/3rds of their ships on defense orbiting their home bases, so they are harder to take out. That or substantially beef up the pirates home bases, so it takes a decent sized fleet to take one down. Again all this should be controlled via sliders in game setups, so players can customize how they wish to play.

Bebop Cola -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/28/2012 4:06:59 AM)
At a certain point, the number of sliders becomes overwhelming. Everyone wants to have the game their way, but having a slider for every tweak becomes excessive at a certain point.

jpwrunyan -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/28/2012 8:10:10 AM)
I would like a slider to control how many sliders there are.

tjhkkr -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/28/2012 12:50:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jpwrunyan I would like a slider to control how many sliders there are. Laughing... very, very funny. [:D][sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000280.gif] I personally like all the control we have in creating the game... but this was very good. As to troops at colonies... I would think there may be a small contingent, depending on circumstances. I look at our world, and in the days of colonization -- whether moral or immoral, I am not saying it is a good thing... but often times there was an armed contingent. And I agree with Asherby76... every man, woman, and child would have a stake in defending the colony.

Data -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/28/2012 2:18:45 PM)
But if we have a slider to control how many sliders there are wouldn't it dissapear if we set it to a lower value? We obviously need a backup slider for this.

Fishers of Men -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/28/2012 10:17:13 PM)
Good idea! But then I would want a box to check in the setup options to allow activation of the backup slider. [:D]

tjhkkr -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/28/2012 11:45:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fishers of Men Good idea! But then I would want a box to check in the setup options to allow activation of the backup slider. [:D] Yeah, but then we would have a design problem: because the ability to see the check box would be controlled by the first slider, and if we need the backup slider, we might not be able to see the check box because of the settings of the first slider. So we need an auxillary slider to control the checkbox so we can use the backup slider... [:'(] Actually, I think just confused myself. [:D] And I am scared that Elliot will see this and be concerned about it: Because I am VERY happy with the ability to control things and set up the universe I want to build... But about that auxillary slider... [;)]

Bebop Cola -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/29/2012 1:53:50 AM)
In all seriousness, one could set up a series of "common" game value sliders and hide the rest in an advanced menu under an appropriately named button. Those who don't care to tweak the multitude of options would be free from clutter and confusion, and those that do could go to town. That said, it would potentially equate a fair bit of effort to program and balance while relatively few players would take advantage of it. In other words, it's often a waste of time on the developer's part. In my opinion, a better use of time is to provide hooks for mods to tweak those settings as mods can extend the lifetime of a game by granting the customers the ability to create new content. That new content can later be used by the developer as inspiration for future expansions or at least as a gauge for what the fans want to see in future products. Fallout 3's fan-made weapon mod kits resurfacing as a standard component of Fallout: New Vegas comes to mind.

tjhkkr -> RE: Shouldn't independent colonies start with a lot more troops? (6/29/2012 3:37:14 AM)
You absolutely do make a valid point Bebop. You really do. But I like turning off monsters, and cranking up pirates and stuff like that... And you are correct, his time is better spent else where... But I would hate to loose the functionality sliders we have right now... I really would. But I also do not see a need for more either... [:)]

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.734375