|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Here are the things I think se5 needs to truly make it a 'next generation' SE game. In no particular order:
-Galaxy wide and system-wide fog of war, range-dependent cloaking and ranged ship/planetary sensors to go with them. -If we are to keep the grid-based system maps (as recent statements from MM imply) then at least increase the resolution. -units, ships, bases and planets all programmed from the same 'stuff' to allow modders to blur the boundaries between these different items (ie planet-like ships with research and mineral production, ship-like planets that can move and fight etc) -Less forgetful AI. -By all accounts combat is in for a major overhaul anyway, so I won't bother listing my suggestions for tac combat, but more precise strategic combat commands would be nice. Oh, and we need a retreat option. -More complex plague system. -A few more variables and random factors thrown into the minesweeping process to make it a little less predictable. -Ditto for boarding combat. (why mix in ship experience & racial ground combat stats?) -Captured populations to maintain their racial characteristics, even if it was just their resource production bonuses. -Refine the "doming" system so that you can have a few million non-breathers living on your homeworld without such extreme penalties. -Overhaul of intel system. -More complex population modelling and involvement to provide a greater 'peacetime' empire-management challenge. -No limits (or extremely generous limits) on game size and number of players. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
I was just looking at the budget screen in SE4, and was hit by an idea.
Tariffs... In SE4, you only get them from empires under subjugation or a protectorate. What if you could charge tariffs for "allied" ships travelling through your territory? Crank the price high enough and they won't send ships through. Either that, or declare war on you http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
I second that! And let's have the rate be settable on an empire-by-empire or a system-by-system basis! (Both would be a bit too much to handle, don't you think? Though I wouldn't mind having the ability there for modders to fiddle with as they see fit http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) Five and a half minerals a sector per kiloton for you, my dear friend! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
I'd like to suggest a simple cosmetic change that wouldn't affect the game much but might add a bit to the suspension of disbelief in RP games... You know how you have an Empire Name and an Empire Type? Well, what about empires that don't classify quite so easily, such as the United Federation of Planets? I've seen games with "United Population" and "United Federation of Planets Population", both of which are kind of awkward... not to mention when the Klingons ask you to declare war on the dishonorable "United people"! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif So how about something a bit like Stars!, where you have a noun phrase that's the full empire name (e.g. "United Federation of Planets", "Xiati Empire", or "Star Empire of Romii"), and an adjective phrase that's used to describe the race or their possessions (e.g. "Federation", "Xiati", or "Romiian")? Perhaps there could also be an "Empire Type" so there can be Messages like "Your pathetic empire/republic/federation/whatever is repulsive to us! Prepare to die!" |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Even if I am a minority: I like the current mine system. If you allow mines without limit or make sweeping less predictable, mines will become too important. A few cheap units everywhere, and the biggest warfleets are nor problem any more. This will bog down any game infinitely after a certain stage of game where everyone has enough minelayers.
Stalemate games and games where the one who moves is the one who looses suck. The current system which allows you to gamble, but also to be absolutely sure that your minesweeper-protected uberfleet will reach its target undamaged is not realistic, but good for the game. If there will be minefields without limit, there must be an option like "sweep with care". Sweepers should be able, when encountering a field to big for them, to sweep as much as they can and then stop and continue sweeping next turn - instead of mindlessly ramming the remaining mines. Also, equipment for detecting minefields before actually impaling on them should be researchable. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Mines don't have to be as powerful as they are in SE4, though - when was the Last time your ships were damaged but not destroyed by a minefield? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif "A few cheap units", with the proper mine system (i.e. mines do less damage individually but you can have more in a sector, which incidentally can be modded in SE4 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ), would only serve to slow down a huge fleet, damaging a few ships here and there. (That's what we could really use with mines though - instead of all mines damaging one ship then the next, the damage should be allotted randomly so you end up with a bunch of moderately damaged ships most of the time!) It would only be large minefields that have the power to take out a large fleet.
And incidentally, you CAN mod mine-detecting sensors into SE4... just create a sensor with a detection level equal or greater to the mine's cloak level! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Here what I want to have in SE5.
1. Diplomacy that actually works 2. A turn-based space strategy game. 3. Keep the modability, but improve it, make it easlier to use/friendly user/print off the mod settings. Important is to keep SE5 moddable. 4. Firing and shield arcs Some weapon only fire straight ahead, other can only fire 90 deg. forward and point defense with 360 degree arcs. Show shield strenghts by color code per arc. Thus if the right side is drained down to 20%, it shows itself as red. 5. Change the combat map from a close square to a open ended circle. Allow ships to exits the combat map if they can out run they pursuiters. Allow planets/storms/ast belts/etc to hid ships that are behind them, block fire and sensors. 6. Have a ground map in hexs, size of map depending on planet size. Place population centers, facilities, shipyards, defense centers in different hexs. It should take longer than one turn to conquer a planet, unless its nuked from outer space. 7.Shipping lanes that appear as some dull race's color line that connects different sections together. Have the ability to blockade/raid/attack that shipping line and steal those resources. Thus empires will have to protect their freighters, form convoys with military escorts and fight to maintain lifeline of trade. 8.Sats should spread evenly around planets and warp-holes. 9. The Ability to export current tech levels in tech trades. 10.Better intelligence system 11. Save/printout begining game settings and map of on going game. Print from race settings, mod settings, etc from the game. That all I have for now, more latter LIGHTHORSE http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Quote:
Quote:
[ November 13, 2003, 04:30: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ] |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Hello. It is my first post here :-)
1. It would be nice to have special characters. 2. Borders: You can claim systems or planets to be yourse even if you dont have colony on them. 3. Diplomacy: It should be improved!!! - right of passage. - stronger alliance (when you ask your ally to make war with your enemy and he refuse, then alliance is broken) - possibility of making international organizations (such as UN, NATO, Landsrad "DUNE") |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Quote:
|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Actually... you can even claim a system you have not yet visited. It will not appear claimed on your map until you visit it, but others will see it as claimed (if they have visited the system). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Quote:
One militia for every 2M people, and the militia get 1 attack/30 defense points. Battles are commonly over a year long, and if the defending race is emotionless, they can continue to build reinforcement troops while they fight. (Non emotionless typically start rioting after a few turns) This provides plenty of time to counterattack the enemy, and drop reinforcement troops for either race's side. Small worlds and small numbers of attacking troops (5-20) can fight to a stalemate indefinitely under these rules. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
First time here, so I haven't had a chance to read through the 40 some pages of responses yet, so my one thought has probably come up already, but here it is. It's a little long read, since I tend to ramble and get down into a lot of detail, so bear with me.
The one big thing I'd like to see is crew/governors/characters within the game. There are a few parts of implementing this that would be rather easy, and also make it easily mod-able, and a few parts that might be a little more complicated. Since the game data is mostly based on txt files, which I think is great, you start with a text file that defines characters and or character types. Either every character would then have a skill level in all applicable areas (explained in a bit), or create types of characters, such as political, ground troops and space troops, who only have skills in the areas within their type. Political skills could things like increase/decrease production amounts, building speeds, research and intelligence bonuses and planet happiness modifiers. Ground commanders would be rather simple for bonuses to combat, space would be a little more detailed. Bonuses to ship travel speed, ship combat speed, damage, maintenance costs, supply costs and repair speeds for example. All should have some sort of loyalty and morale levels. Skills should probably start at 100 for no effect, that way you could have characters with less than 100 to have them be a detractor, but they might have high skills in other areas to make up for it. Then make a text file that defines various positions, such as ship captain, planetary/system governor, ship engineer, ship navigator, ship combat officer, mineral plant supervisor, etc. Each position then has fields for the abilities from the abilities text file that apply. For example, a mineral plant supervisor position would have it's Value1 as Resource Gen Modifier Planet - Minerals. When that position is occupied, then the amount of minerals generated by that planet would be increased by the skill of the character. Ship Engineer could have many applications, repair time, added propulsion, reduced supply costs for movement and reduced maintenance on the ship for example. Ship captains could increase the effect of all other crew in the ship based on a leadership skill. Admirals could increase the effect of all captains within an entire fleet. To implement this to the ships and planets, there are two methods. Add a line at the end of each planet size and vehicle size of Number of Crew types, simliar to number of abilities, for example 4. Then you'd have 4 triples of lines that would describe which position it is, how many of that position are allowed (max), and how many of that position are required (min). Perhaps also the skill and minimum level required for holding that position. For example on an escort: Number of Crew:= 4 Crew 1 Type := Captain Crew 1 Descr := Description Crew 1 Val 1 := 1 Crew 1 Val 2 := 1 Crew 1 Val 3 := Leadership Crew 1 Val 4 := 50 Crew 2 Type := Navigator Crew 2 Descr := Description Crew 2 Val 1 := 1 Crew 2 Val 2 := 1 Crew 2 Val 3 := Ship Piloting (as opposed to fighter piloting) Crew 2 Val 4 := 50 Crew 3 Type := Engineer Crew 3 Descr := Description Crew 3 Val 1 := 1 Crew 3 Val 2 := 0 Crew 3 Val 3 := Engineering Crew 3 Val 4 := 75 Crew 4 Type := Crew Crew 4 Descr := Description Crew 4 Val 1 := 50 Crew 4 Val 2 := 5 Crew 4 Val 3 := Ship Crewing Crew 4 Val 4 := 25 This could then be expanded as ships grow so that a Dreadnought could require a captain with a leadership skill of 120, and perhaps dozens of crew types to fill with crews in the thousands. The other option to applying this to planets and ships themselves is to put these lines within components and facilites instead. For example, a Bridge could require a captain and a navigator, while a research center could have 1 position available for a research scientist, but not required. This is probably the more versatile option of the two, since positions would only be required for running the various components of a ship you decide to put on them. The one big problem with this is it can get very complicated and overwhelming very fast for larger ships, but you could always mod it higher for more complexity, or mod it lower for less, by removing all requirements except a captain for example. Facilities like Academies and the Ship and Fleet Training sites could either train current characters to a certain level over time, or a higher Academy level could create a better default character on average at creation, which is something I haven't figured out how it should happen yet (character creation that is) Whew, long rambling idea, that's most of how far I've thought it out at this point. Putting in a basic character system might not be too hard to do, but I wouldn't know, and something like the above idea would allow those of us who like it more complex to mod to our hearts content to make it more detailed. Thoughts? |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
I personally think it's a cool idea, but probably a bit below the scope of this game... remember, you're going to have empires with hundreds or thousands of ships here, do you really want to track every single crewman on every single ship? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Now maybe if you could track different kinds of experience for each ship's crew, and transfer crews between ships... in other words, instead of "Executor 0001 is at 5% experience", you could have "Executor 0001 has 1562 crewmen with 10% in gunnery experience, 7% in tactical experience, 2% in scientific/exploration experience, 6% in engineering/repair experience, and 3% in medical experience. The ship requires 1500 crew to operate at optimal capacity and has quarters for up to 3000.", and if you wanted to transfer more experienced crew from the Eggsterminator 0002 (what a silly name for a ship http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif ) then the relative experience levels would change based on how many crew you transfer - if you transfer a lot of crew, the experience changes a lot, but if you only transfer a few, it only changes a little. (So it would require a lot of 60-man Escorts to replace the crew of a 3000-man Dreadnought http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) See the BBS game "Falcon's Eye" (not the Nethack front-end, the BBS multiplayer strategy game!) for a good example of handling aggregate experience; you have experience Ratings from 5 to 10, 5 being the default that people get when they change occupation. Let's say you have 100 builders, and you want to make them mages, but you already have 50 mages at rating 10. So your builders become mages with rating 5, but they're averaged in with the existing mages, so you have 100 * 5 = 500 XP from the builders, and 50 * 10 = 500 XP from the existing mages. You have a total of 1000 XP divided across 150 people, so you get a rating of 6.7 (the game rounds to 1 decimal). Now let's say you only made 10 of those builders into mages. Then you'd have 10 * 5 = 50 XP from the builders, and 500 XP from the mages, or 550 XP spread out across 60 people, or a rating of 9.2 for all the mages, old and new. And then every turn everyone's rating goes up by 0.5. Does that all make any sense? And does it sound any simpler than what you proposed? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
I would like an improved AI, e.g. improved AI decision making about locations for attack and colonisation. I see frequently in SE IV colony ships going to the other side of the quadrant while empty planets would be in the same system. And fleets moving one turn in one direction and the next turn coming back again without attacking an undefended enemy colony or ship within reach.
The AI seems an important point for the sales promotion of SE V because I think the majority of the people who bought SE IV play it solo. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
I want a game with all the great
Graphics Movement Size of maps Easy to use Map Editor But: Almost none of the Economics Politics Tech tree. (maybe just 20 - 40 items 3 levels deep each. I know this can be modded. I don't have what it takes. Just pare it down to something like the other game I play. Oh and a human or two to play it against. Maybe I want something on Par with SE III and CIV II but better. This is ambigous because I have not thought about it till now. Maybe more later. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Quote:
|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
has this been said?
the ability to take half a turn, save it, then come back to it later and finish the turn. how about this also be able to give engines .5 movement per turn (or whatever) so you will get 1 movement every two turns (or can this be done already) I was thinking of makeing a mod where the turns could be every copple of hrs, but everything would be slowed down, so althouh you get say a turn every six hrs, ships move aprox equivelent of running the turn every 24 hrs. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
I love edkolis' suggestion.
A similar system could be used to track the different abilities of different races on a planet: IE I have 30million Drukshocka with a +10% mineral production bonus, and 8million Fazrah with -2%, so my total mineral production for this planet will be... {insert maths here}. Also I love the idea of tracking the exact amount of crew on a ship, the amount needed for it to run effectively and the amount of ppl it can hold. For one thing it would be good to have to consider building extra cabin space for 'spare' crew members on your warships, and for another it would add a little meaning and challenge to the "fire on own ship" command- ie you have to have somewhere to transfer the doomed ship's crew to first (or fire anyway and take a morale hit). Finally, it would make boarding a really interesting part of combat. Should I smash the ship to pieces first so my boarding parties will encounter less reisitance, or should I try to take it intact? Maybe the old crew will surrender and turn into population for my cargo hold? This crewing malarky might add a little micromanagement, but maybe this could be switch on and offable, or a really good minister written..? Finally, I'd love planetary population to be monitored at higher resoltion than millions- ideally in individuals (ie planet X has population 12,853,022 instead of simply 13 million). Then, crewing ships could actually have a real (although very small, until you start building Death Stars anyway) effect on planetary populations. Damaged ships could crash-land and set up a tiny survivor colonies, watching the skies and waiting for rescuers... imagine the roleplay potential. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
A better manual... I know that Aaron personally wrote the manuals for SE4 and Starfury, and I hate to put his work down, but they do seem to be basically copied text out of the game screens with no further explanation... often even the useless filler text... look at the Starfury manual, there's half a page devoted to descriptions of the various "generic cargo" components, even though those descriptions mean nothing in the game! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Very misleading! Perhaps if the beta testers could have some input into the manual before it's finally printed? I'd certainly be glad to help http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
I would like to set the first "game Setup" screen to remember options set in the Last game, or have a standard setting you could make.
Something to the effect that if you always play "no intelligence", "huge map", ect. you would start a new game atleast from that base, then change it for any specialies you wished. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Facilities with a percentage factor for modders to self-destruct set Facilities when a planet is captured.
An optional pop-up. When one accidentally hits global [upgrade facilities] a confirmation Yes-No pops up. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
And please please please, pretty please.....mouse wheel support http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
The ablitity for an empire to secretly fund pirate ships. Ships that carry no flag and can freely attack and or pillage those juicy lightly defended ships in your neighbors system, even if you have a treaty. These of course should cost more than a regular ship (to pay for the high price of mercanaries) and carry no distinct empire design (neutral ship designs). To make them even more interesting, if they are captured there would be a small chance that the crew would talk and say what empire they are working for which leads to interesting repercussions for roleplay.
If the leader abilties like MOOII is entered into the equation, there could be some random pirates available for hire along side of clean cut moral boosting captains. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
All of those cool systems like black holes, nebulas, organic infestations, ect. need something to make them a benefit provided the right technology is researched.
Take for example the Chigs from "Space Above and Beyond". They were abable to exploit black holes and gain a strategic advantage and move about them freely. Or perhaps if pollution is factored into SEV, wouldn't this be a great dumping ground for all of that pollution. Or agian a place where limitless sources of energy are aquired. Organic Infestations could be a boon for those oraganic trait races. Birthplace for organically grown ships? Any planets in this system would have an added shipyard rate for organic races. All of these could have a seperate technology tree to expand the tech tree more and add more play style options. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Quote:
|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Colonies that have rebelled, could acquire some predetermined by modder and or random traits
|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Quote:
|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Maybe some more map editor support, text on the stategic map; you know so you can type things like "---Neutral Zone--" along with dash marks to define it. Maybe allow for Star name text only on unexplored stars... After all even if you have not explored it, you know what name it is. Here's a big one... Ability to randomize planetary systems within a map. What I mean is; I play on an accurate map of the local star group, my daughter goes in and changes the planets for me for replay value, The Sol system stays the same. I mostly play the Man Kzinti wars and the First Kafer war (from Space 2300)some times the first Thoilian war, but I use the near star map over and over with new starting locations for the aliens and new planetary systems so I don't know where the valuable planets are.
|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
On the main system map, instead of abbreviations that show where shipyards, resupply, ect. that seem to get jumbled and hard to read with the more stuff a planet has, how about a ring system that stacks. Red ring for ship yards, Green for resupply, yellow for training facility and on an on. If there happens to be a main planet and several colonizable moons that all have ship yards, then four red rings to signify four ship yards. Optional of course for those that don't want the visual distraction to clutter the aesthetics.
As far as visual significance, I for one beleive that one would just be able to look at the system map to determine where all of your specific priority planets are. See and Immediatly know everything you need to know from a strategic standpoint about your planetary system. Instead of relying on memory, there is eye candy right in your face telling you what want to know without clicking on anything. This could work with intelligence too, discover something about a specific enemy planet and wham, nice little ring and a potential target to help one plan for an invasion. With enough intelligence missions eventually one will have a nice set of enemy system maps with an assortment of visual rings to deteremine where to hit em where it counts. Nothing like a big fat and stacked juicy visual aid to guide a fleet by. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Has this been mentioned before?
Be able to put giant engines on a planet and move it around. Be able to move bases by using ships to tow them. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Special ship orders such as:
- Stop every ship trying to pass this sector * when he don't want to, fire on ... - Stop specified race ships. - Stop on every request when abroad/home space. - Ignore every stop request when abroad/home space. - Block every foreign ship (it can't leave this sector without your permition). - Allow foreing ships to leave through specified warp point. - Escort foreing ships to leave your spece through specified warp pont. And - Right of passage for specified foreign ships / specified foreign ships class. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
First and foremost, keep everything that is currently in SEIVGold - it is the best game I have ever seen.
But, adding the following would make it even better (if such a thing were possible): * Special characters. This has been mentioned before, but adds a lot to the game and, ideally, would be optional in the game start up screen. Each special character could have a design file with their attributes, and settings that dictate how they behave in game (are they greedy? Honorable? Chaotic? wander around, perfer a certain race to work for, help in quests, Etc?) * Graphics: MOOII did only one thing better than SEIV - graphics, especially during combat. Having a tactical combat system that *looked* good is a nice to have, but a *very* nice to have... * A setting forcing players to ?explore the galaxy? rather than allowing them to know the limits and location of systems from the get-go?and if your ships die or are killed quickly after going through a WP, that system would still be unknown?(perhaps a subroutine that determines if your ships had enough time to get off an "SOS" message pod before dying might give the player an idea of what killed them...) * Planets that orbit and spin * Mercenaries (when one side loses, the merc pools get those ships added to it, and can be hired with the use of resources, etc?) and privateers (to allow players to fund pirates with letters of marque against their enemies, as well as a random event that does the same?) * A Combat model that has terrain and allows retreats - each tactical battle should have at least a chance for some random terrain (asteroids to hide behind, space wrecks, etc...) and a much greater chance if the combat takes place in a strategic hex with terrain... * The ability to set the ?break formation? setting for individual ships in a given fleet. Plenty of times I've wished I could have only that single kamikaze Battleship break out of formation? * The ability to make all of the above and most of the options in the current game optional or dialable from the game set up ? so we can do more in-game customization. I've babbled enough. Thanks, Alarik [ November 20, 2003, 13:10: Message edited by: alarikf ] |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
As far as I know, SEIV supports ASCII characters fine. (I didn't have any trouble with non-English characters) But I wonder how other keyBoards (Japanese or Russian for example) would work with SEIV, or with any game for that matter.
|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Quote:
And, ok, for special characters I meant unique individual personalities in the game, similar to what MOOII had. The Dread Pirate Roberts, the Cloaked One, blah blah blah...a bunch of famous individuals wandering around the universe who can, if they come to your side, give you minor benefits (+5% to ship to hit, +5% to ground combat, blah blah blah)... thanks, Alarik |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
I still am hoping for satelite formations.
Derelict ships that can be taken by boarding actions --> then you could get technologies from them by dismantling them. Once you get tractor beam, you should definitely be able to tow ships around. See the derelict... I absolutely LOVE the pirate stuff! SJ made an entire mod for it, but was limited by the game to a large degree. I think this could go places. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
SpaceBadger [ November 20, 2003, 23:49: Message edited by: SpaceBadger ] |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
A slightly better maitence scheme. What I'm thinking of is a empire slider for maintance, and -maybe- another one a the ship or fleet level. So you can over-fund or under-fund your fleets.
Over-funding would give a temporary bonus to experience (well rested crews), under-funding would do the reverse, and ships would not be able to completely re-fuel at resupply depots, repair themselves, or retrofit. Ex: base maint is 20%. You fund at 10%. This is spread evenly over all your ships, so they must stay at a resupply depot two turns to be fully resupplied, their repair, construction and retrofit rates are at 50%. Each ship also has a 50% chance of taking damage each turn (if something breaks, it can't be replaced) Underfunding, whether by choice or by budget starvation, becomes less the "ok, I'm loosing one ship per turn now" and a more realistic approach to what would happen in this situation. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
The current scheme for determining the cost of racial characteristics is too conducive to min-maxing - look how many empires have +20 this and -20 that, because most of the thresholds are at plus or minus 20! Here's an idea to encourage more diversity in empire design:
Instead of specifying a base cost, a high and low threshold, a high and low cost, and an absolute minimum and maxmum, you would specify only four numbers in the data files: a base cost, an exponent, and the minimum and maximum. Then the cost to raise an attribute by 1 point would be calculated like this: base cost * (current attribute level / 100) ^ exponent Thus, if your base cost for an attribute was 100, and your exponent was 2 (a quadratic relationship), then to raise the attribute from 100 to 101 would cost 100 * (100 / 100) ^ 2 = 100 points, but to raise it from 80 to 81 would cost 100 * (80 / 100) ^ 2 = 64 points, and to raise it from 149 to a godlike 150 would cost 100 * (149 / 100) ^ 2 = 222 points, with a gradual progression in between instead of a sudden jump at 80 and 120. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Quote:
|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
I have taken the time to read much of this thread (5/6) again from the beginning. Here are my thoughts on some of the ideas.
I agree with Fyron that mines need some work. First of all, early in the game, it seems as if mines destroy every ship that is hit. Should this be so? Perhaps 1 mine = 1 dead ship is a bit too much. Late in the game, you just make sure you have enough minesweepers to sweep a maximum mine field and it becomes academic. Neither situation is 'fun', but rather seem to be doors with 'secret knocks' that once the 'knock' is known, just become a nuisance. How to fix them? There are many ideas, I am sure, but one thing I would add is this. The odds of a ship hitting a mine in open space are quite small. Simply travelling in something other than the opitmal 'straight line' course would add only 2% to 5% to transit time but make it less and less likely to meet a mine. To simulate this, we should only be able to mine fixed installations such as planets and warp points. *** Rigelian's admonition (March 5, 2003) to only make the trade bonus base on the 'real' economy is a bit limited, IMHO. Part of trade would be passing rare items from one side of your empire to the other side. Perhaps the trade bonus base should include trade with other empires. An argument could also be made to include Last turn's trade with this empire. This would represent value added trades. For example, we ship raw materials (cotton) to China and recieve manufactured products (clothing) in return. The amount of profit on manufactured products is based in part on the amount of raw materials imported. *** Several arguments were advanced on how the calculations are being made for combat accuracy. In my mind, this is more a problem with semantics. As with anything, there are many ways to go about it. Different methods make for different results. What result is being sought? It does not matter so much how things are accomplished. What is more important is that there are clear examples of what is going on so that one person's prior understanding of the language deceives them as to how the game engine works. On the other hand, it is an excellent opportunity for more flexibility. Perhaps there should be a suite of targeting components that add percentages and another that multiply. Balancing these against their costs will give the Space Empires community something to argue about for months and months. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif If both additive and multiplicative modifiers are used, the order in which the modifiers is applied becomes important. This could lead to yet another level of flexibility for modders ... Early Mult.... Early Add .... Late Mult... Late Add... *** Randomized variable damage is not so important in large battles. If the number of ships available is reduced considerably, this may be a must. In a large battle, the averages will work out such that fixed damage gives essentially the same result. In small battles, it can have a bigger infulence on the outcome. Also, if real time combat is implemented, the variable damage may be more important to have. I am not sure I like critical hits because they can have a very large impact on the game if they happen early in an important battle. *** Leaders could add an important facet to the game. However, I think they are already simulated with training facilities. *** One ship fleets.. Please don't disallow this. I use it to note the fleet mission so I can remember why they are headed where they are headed. As for gaining fleet experience, I see that this is a problem, but not as important to me as being able to mark a transport as "Picking up oxygen breathers" (or actually "Get Oxy") *** The talisman has been a source of much comment. I would like to see it in the game as a large improvement to accuracy, but not an absolute 100% hits every time. Nothing is perfect. How do we know that the gunner did not have an impure thought during the Last 'shore' leave? *** AI Considerations... I have lobbied for the ability to write our own AIs. If that is asking too much, here is a second request. Make the game file distributed to the player have only the information the player is aware of and publish the format as well. Then, as Lisif Deoral suggested, you make the .plr file be simple text commands. These two acts would allow anyone who wanted to to automate their empire if they were really motivated. *** Real time combat .... I have no urge to play out battles in realtime. Others might and more power to them. It would be neat, however, to be able to watch a movie of your combats. Especially if the ships were following your orders intelligently. (BTW, I love Starcraft and even enjoy Warcraft - I just don't have enough time to play this game that way) *** Squares, Hexes, Movement Points.... I would like to see no grid at all. Probably asking for too much, but it would be nice. Fleets, Ships, and Units would need to react to nearby enemies for this to work. *** Communication Lag - Wonderful idea. However, for it to be really useful, the units should have a bit more intelligent autonomous activity. Better AI or scripting would make this workable. Otherwise, it should be an option only. It will make Mount Learning Curve too steep to climb for new players. ******** Quickies ******** Ability to save orders mid turn - YES, PLEASE! Moveable windows - YES, PLEASE! Ability to do most things from the keyboard - YES, PLEASE! All lists remember their positions - YES, PLEASE! More filters and sorts on the lists - YES, PLEASE! Foreign Ship Log - YES, PLEASE! In game option to select a mod - YES, PLEASE! Wrap around tactical combat - NO! Extended tactical range or allow disengagment - YES! Incorporated PBW - YES! (although the way it works now is fine) Fog of war includes the names of my planets, ships, etc. - YES, PLEASE! Inserting a carriage return when <ENTER> closes the window could be done with <CTRL+ENTER> Carryover for shipyards - YES, PLEASE Ability to load or unload less than the full complement of any cargo - YES, PLEASE Customizable, printable, and exportable (to spreadsheet) reports - YES, PLEASE ******** Bizzare? - bound to cause flaming http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ******** Perhaps FTL travel that does not use warp points could be added as an option. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Quote:
|
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Wellm theres is ONE major "issue" (for me anyway) in simul play - with unit launch / recovery.
Why cant i (in simul game) launch nor recover LESS than the maximum amount of units ? Mayby i dont want to place more than ONE spysat per sector (or sat miner). And mayby i dont wanna use more than one ship doing this as it works just fine in instant game. Then there are things that does work in simul but NOT in instant .. Solution might be a better order queue : 1. Load Satellites - 5 x Spy Mk II 2. Load Satellites - 20 x Defender Mk IV 3. Move to All Gone(6,6) 4. Launch Satellites - 1 x Spy Mk II 5. Move to Gone Bad(6,6) 6. Launch Satellites - 1 x Spy Mk II 7. Launch Satellites - 5 x Defender Mk IV 8. .... etc I think this would solve several things not working in simul but that does work in instant. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
HOw about if mines gradually drift off/ break down. You need to keep replenishing the minefield for it to remain effective, and if your enemy can somehow get a single ship or small fleet through and harass your minelayers, then he might get a chance to send a full fleet through.
Of course, he probably won't know *exactly* when your minefield expires, since (a) he might not have seen when you laid them and (b) mine expiry could be slightly randomised, and/or affected by tech levels and/or maintenance. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Yes, minefield decay is a good idea - as I mentioned a while back, a minefield that decays at a rate proportional to its size means that the more mines you have, the more you need to maintain the field, and minefields will take a very long time to die away completely, so you won't have to worry about your minefields TOO much... see Stars! for a cool minefield system http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif
One more thing I'd like to see in SE5 is taskforces... You can assign a fleet battle orders in SE4 like "attack planet" or "don't get hurt", but a real fleet is composed of multiple types of ships, which should each be doing their own job with orders specially crafted for their task. So what I want to be able to do is divide up a fleet into any number of taskforces, and assign battle orders on a taskforce basis - sort of like in Dominions 2, where you have multiple squads, each with their own battle orders, under one commander. I know you might say "well use multiple fleets" but then you have to multi-select them any time you want to give them strategic orders like "go to sector (5,5)" and that gets to be a pain (and I'm not even sure if the fleets stay together when one is faster than another)... it would be like if in Dom2 you had to multi-select each individual squad of soldiers that a commander commands to make sure they all move to the same place at the same time... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif But I'd still like to be able to create fleets without taskforces (or vice versa, whichever seems more appropriate, it's just a matter of semantics http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) and move ships around without assigning them to a fleet (or have that done automatically) - I *hated* having to create a new fleet with all the rules involved every time I wanted to deploy any ships in MOO3, even for the most trivial task! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
One thing that was mentioned a while back but which I would like to elaborate on is a new maintenance scheme for SE-V.
Currently, maintenance and ongoing support costs of vessels is fixed *and* the deletrious effects of poor or inadeqaute supply are handled as random events. (ex: ship accidents, which are rare). And, even more important, attrition is non-existent. This is a bit unrealistic IMHO, and can be easily rectified. Set Maintenance on a slider so you can pay lower or higher as you wish, with the baseline being what it is currently or whatever you mod it to. Then, have ship accidents, troop attrition rates and so forth increase or decrease as you decrease or increase your chosen maintenance cost. Modeling them as "random events" is *not* realistic, as they are not random but closely tied to the level of support/maintenance they receive. A sliding maintenance scale should also be used to affect combat, since it also encompasses ongoing training, wargames, and exercises to keep the crews and troops proficient. Think of what it takes to deploy a US Carrier battle group or a USMC Expeditionary Unit. They take a LOT of regular training and maintenance, and that is simply to do peacetime duty. When that money is not spent, there is often a precipitious drop in readiness and training, ships go down, engines conk out, parts break, people lose skills, etc... All of this sounds complicated, but can be easily modeled behind the scenes and relegated to a simply slider that the player controls while the game engine does the nasty calculations. Also, it would make space exploration more realistic - I can't help but think that there should be a lot more space accidents than I ever see in a game... Just my two cents. Thanks, Alarik |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
Quote:
Then decrease the power of mines significantly. A single ship still won't make it, but a modest fleet will have most of its ships take some non-fatal damage. This will either slow them down to a sector or two per turn while they repair, or cause them to start taking losses and be very vulnerable to counter attack. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
yes, essentially you are suggesting that mines should have a half life... just like radioactive decay. If the half life is 10 years, then it will take 100 turns for half the mines to go "non-operational". But becuase it is a log function, at the 20 year mark you would have 25% of the mines still present, then at 30 years you'd still have 12.5%.
So your larger minefields won't go away for a very long time, just become weaker and weaker over time. I end with another plug for satelites! Please, can we have formations for them? You could put them in high orbit, medium, or low orbit; one bunch, several bunches; location of the satelite packs (ie 2 bunches, one on North side, one on south side) etc. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
I think that this mine suggestion is an excellent idea overall. I would however add one feature to it. A tech that would allow for a reduced rate of decay over time. In otherwords, a technology that would replenish the mines automatically or rather maintain them for a significant time. This technology would of course be very expensive and only be available in the later stages of the game.
Also add to the random events Accidental detonation of mines, entire mine fields and the occational discovery of an acient mine fields. How about a new system type, anicent mine field. A system littered with mines that can only be swept by very advanced stage mine sweepers. |
Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
ooooh, nice suggestions on the mines all round!
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:07 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.