Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Saving during combat makes for cheating...

You could just save and reload until you roll big hits and big dodges...

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

It also makes for annoyance. In PBEM It doesnt matter much anyways since you cant reload with the other there. Cheating prevention fine sure, but it also is a huge problem since its the one thing keeping those of us who do like that aspect of the game from true potential http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Im not flaming or arguing, just saying there are better methods of cheat prevention.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

In simultaneous movement, ships with seek after orders should anticipate their target's movement when they're moving on the same day. It's completely absurd how much easier it is to evade a pursuing fleet in SEIV if you happen to be moving at exactly the same speed. It's also ridiculous that two fleets can both be trying to engage each other in combat, and end up repeatedly passing each other and exchanging position through the whole turn without starting combat even once. In the case of a loop of seek after orders with all ships moving at once and no ship's course being independent of the target's movement, one force could be picked randomly to not anticipate the target.

It would also be nice if seek after orders could be issued targeting your own ships. This would be useful for sending reinforcements to a fleet, especially if the fleet being reinforced is seeking after an enemy, making it impossible to anticipate where the reinforcements should go without risking them fighting the enemy force before joining the main fleet.

A "wait" order would be nice to have. Sometimes I want a fleet to wait for reinforcements to arrive and then proceed to attack in the same turn. As it is, the only way to accomplish this is to have the fleet waste some of its movement going back and forth. If the meeting point happens to be a warp point on a hostile border, this has a chance of making you lose the warp point defender's advantage if the enemy attacks that turn.

If a ship is seeking after another ship, and the target ship goes through a warp point to a system you don't have an observer in, the seeking ship should head to the warp point and go through it rather than just stopping.

There should be some way of setting guidelines for whether a fleet should go out of its way to avoid an unexpected enemy presence in its path. If a 100 DN fleet is chasing another fleet and a lone LC gets in the way, the huge fleet should destroy the brave, foolish light cruiser rather than falling behind in the chase to go around.

Conditional orders should be possible (e.g. "destroy that new battleship, but only if it leaves the protection of the minefield").

Orders should be editable without reentering the entire sequence.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

I think this is a good idea, the economic activity of a planet would be represented by animated gifs played over a plante that shows tiny ships flying around and larger space stations orbiting. Of course they would look like little dots jetting too and fro on the main map, but a little telling eye candy.

I don't like controling independant freighters, but a fun and game important economic model would be great. I often wish I could be a trader empire or really anything other than a military juggernaught. Trade routes could be established like in CTP, and I think resources should be like Civ3. We could keep the gerneric minerals, organics, and radioactives and have them traded like normal, but have rare resources that are required for unique or tech heavy items and have THOSE traded like in Civ3. So no matter what you can always build generic spacecraft, but to get the good stuff you need to secure/fight for specific planets/locations.

Population should eat organics http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

/me casts vote against Civ 3 style resources. All they do is make you restart the game way too many times due to the game cheating and giving you really bad starts compared to the AIs (especially your neighbors)... Miss out on a critical resource and you are screwed. Horsemen and phalanx don't fair well against pikemen and knights... _If_ some sort of resources are going to be in the game, lack of them should provide a bit of a penalty or offset one, rather than just make huge eras of items unavailable.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Starfury's Soylent Red needs to be passed on too http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

I reccommend playing my Pirates & Nomads mod.
Play as a Pirate, and you'll have a great time with your handful of ships as you seed the AI shipping lanes with engine-damaging mines, ambush small military ships, loot and pilliage small colonies, and generally be a greedy nuisance with your storm-hidden pirate bases.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Considering the curresnt state and proboble future state of SE AI, anything that makes the game more dificult is better. And of course not having resources is the point, that means you would have to negotiate for them or take them. One of the things I don't like about the current SE is there is no difference from planet to planet to any great degree. All locations are the same. I think it would be great if I was the only dilitium source in the galaxy and build a trade empire around it. Would also be great if I had to form a galaxy wide coalition to break up a cartel as well.

In its current form there is only one aspect of the game, build a military. and usually like the RTS games most of us hate numbers care the day too. I wand more depth.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Yeah, but something like "bonus resources" like in Civ3 would be nice. I.e. your planets are basically all the same, though some have bonus resources like Dilithium, Tritanium, Neutronium and stuff, which add certain bonuses to things being done there. For example Dilithium bonus resource might make for an intrinsic "resupply depot" capacity for the planet, removing the need to build one, or might make engines of ships built in that sector/system/empire cost less. (The cost decrease would be biggest in the same sector, for example 50%, in the system 20%, and the rest of your empire 10%.) Tritanium decreases mineral cost for your starships or makes armor more efficient or allows for more damage resistance of components. Neutronium provides a large bonus to armor strength of armor components. Ships/units built with these bonuses will retain them for ever, however if you lose the source (by military action/random event/over exploitation in a limited resource game) you lose the bonus.

Also, population happiness should be looked into. It should be clarified to a greater degree why populations are unhappy. Now, you can simply station troops on planets to increase happiness/decrease revolt risk. But not all people would like military police. This should be implemented in the game; i.e. troops make for higher productivity if it falls low due to unhappiness, but decrease the unhappiness even further, increasing the revolt risk. You could also alleviate taxes/production speed (i.e. strain)/ship luxury goods there/etc. to improve happiness but at the cost of certain things (i.e. alleviating taxes would mean a happier planet but less income, reducing production speed would mean more happiness but less productivity in resource generators/spaceyards, etc.).

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

Please include a real time clock in SE V UI so players can keep track of the time.

Re: SE5, Tell Aaron what\'s on your Wish List
 

PROPOSE BAN ON ALL CIV 3 RELATED SUGGESTIONS.

To keep the point direct, Civ 3 was not a good game.