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

That's great!

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

Not sure if this one has been suggested, and its probably a bit late anyway, but here goes - debris fields forming after battles, that can be mined using robo-miners like asteroid fields.

It could be useful for finite resource games. Think about it; there's just been a few dozen dreadnoughts blown away in a sector. Thats potentially several thousand kT of resources, so why not let some of that be reclaimed? have the value of the field based upon a percentage of the total value of the destroyed ships.

OK, it may not immediately be worth it, but I have found that many battles take place in the same locations (same heavily contested planets or warp points) so the debris could potentially accumulate after each battle.

I guess this can bring in other ideas such as procuring technology from debris/derelicts etc...maybe a % chance to find an intact component in a debris field if you use the right type of equipment, say a salvage tug equipped with a space yard and some sort of scanner, but perhaps thats complicating things a bit.

Talking of derelicts: one thing thats always slightly annoyed me is if you can't afford the maintenance costs anymore, you lose a random ship or ships (crew scuttles the ship); firstly, why not set a priority system for which ships should be abandoned, and also set whether the ships are scuttled and destroyed, or should simply be abandoned but left intact in a stable orbit somewhere, for later retrieval and repair. Abandoned ships have no allegience, and all components would be inactive; all thats required is a boarding party to come back and reclaim the ship.

Of course, simply leaving the ship somewhere runs the risk that an enemy could easily capture it! I just think it would be nice to have the option; do you just blow it up and build another, or risk leaving it and try to reclaim it later? Could produce some interesting situations, racing to claim that hi-tech dreadnought that someone foolishly left floating in space...

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

Interesting idea...sort of like a reverse engineering ship capture thing...as for the abandon/scuttle issue due to resources...instead of destroying the entire ship, maybe some form of stepped effectivness system should be initiated. Like when you dont' have a bridge, LS, CQ, and your are restricted to 1 move, no attacks, that sort of thing, or maybe even damage random systems for each turn with out supplies/maintence...

Kana

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

I certainly like the damaging idea better than the current system; maybe a combination of the above ideas, especially if crew becomes a resource - damage the ship until the crew (or you) decide to abandon the ship due to lack of life support, giving the choice to scuttle or leave the hulk for later reclaimation. Makes even more sense if crew is a resource because then you've gotta decide - save an experienced crew, or limp on in the hope you can reach a repair facility before the crew dies.

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

I think if a colony ship runs out of supplies the population on it should die off because of lack of food

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

How about being able to put different races as crew onboard a ship to gain specific advantages? Like say, a Terran ship would be good with weaponry or so, while an Eee crewed ship (although still under terran control) would have better shielding, or maybe mixed crews and give a nerfed version of the racial specials to the ship?

Also, maybe add infantry in stock games? Give them a better to-hit ratio due to their ability to get into smaller areas?

Oooo, since we have crews in the game, maybe an escape pod component? Say Ship A's crew has 13% Experience, their ship gets slagged, the crew escapes (or most of them do) and their pod acts like a fighter craft and can slowly shuffle back to a planet, whereon they act like cargo to be loaded on a ship built from that planet (Or possibly be moved to another one). Then when Ship B is built, the crew would have about 9% Experience (To simulate the loss of some crewmembers during combat/trip).

And I have a question, has it been stated whether or not the different races will have different facility models? (Thought that's a lot of strain on modellers and texture artists.)

Another suggestion on ships, basically is component placement has some strategic value, say Ship A has it's bridge in the middle deck, on top, bottom and around it are armor components, whereas Ship B has the bridge on the Top Decks and right at the front of the ship with no armor around it. Ship B fires at Ship A, Ship A's components in front of their port armor become destroyed along with the armor, leaving the bridge intact. (I always thought it was silly that armor HAD to be on the outside of ships. Seems more like a job for shields.). Ship A fires on Ship B, scoring a direct hit on their Starboard components and their bridge since it was unarmoured.


Those probably didn't make sense so please forgive me.



Oh, One last thing. Would it be possible for us mac users to get a version? (Right now I have my old dell set up just to play SE4) I'm sure it wouldn't hurt sales seeing as how Mac users are limited to Civilisation 3 and Moo3 in the way of 4x games. (Edit: I can't believe I spelt Sales as Sails...)

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

Interesting idea...might make things a bit comlpicated though...

Would be nice to have infantry and other types of units in ground combat; it certainly needs a major overhaul...there has been some lengthy and interesting discussions on ground combat earlier in the thread

Escape pod component...yeah, gets my vote. Not too sure about having to fly a craft back to a planet tho...might be better just to have an escaped crew automatically go back into some kind of crew pool.

different race-> different facility models...this would be good...could have a system where we have the generic pictures/models in one area, then under each race folder, a file which points to race-specific models/pictures which overrides the generic files...

Again interesting idea...although I'm not sure if it would really be worthwhile; why would anyone put armour on the ship and not put all other components behind it? unless of course you introduce components that cannot be behind armour...

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

Basically for a couple of reasons, one, weapons can't fire behind armor (Unless, it was like a blast-door or something, but I'm talking massive plates.). Second, Sometimes you may want to armor certain components on a ship if you're pressed for space, IE Life Support, CQ and Bridge to keep the ship running. Or, of course, engines. On Cargo Transports you armor up the cargo bays.

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

I was wondering if mines in seV will work the same way as they do in SEIV, since I kind of dislike the SEIV system. The problem is that it is kind of an all or nothing situation. When you have researched mines and your enemy hasn't you're kind of invincible. It's very cheap, and very easy to lay a minefield, and your enemy has no chance to get through untill he has researched mines and has built enough minesweepers to sweep one hundred mines (or more if the game settings are changed). After that point mines are completely useless, and you might as well not bother to build them.

A solution would be to make mines work differently:
The main defence against mines should not be minesweeping but mine avoidance. A player that wants to defend it's ships against mines could research a "mine detection" technology. when discovered a ship-component would become available that gives ships a 70% (or some other percentage) chance to escape from a minefield unharmed.

When a fleet consisting of ships equiped with these components would enter a minefield, each ship would have a 30% change to be hit by the mines, which would most probably mean the ship would be completely dead. 70 percent of the fleet would survive, which would make the mines less of an all or nothing weapon. This would also mean we could abandon the silly limit of a hundred mines per sector which we have in SEIV.

Ofcourse research in mines would lead to components which makes mines more effective, and gives them a to hit bonus, this would lead to a research arms race between mine avoidance on one side, and more effective mines on the other side. Also designing mines would be a bit more interesting, you would have to choose wether you put in that extra warhead for maximum damage, or that new sensor that gives your mines a larger chance to hit.

Ofcourse normal minesweepers would also be available, but they should probably be less reliable, and more suited for sweeping minefields around planets or warp points that have already been taken from the enemy.

What do you think?

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

I wouldn't go that far, but maybe something like, weaponry without special mounts (Normal DUC's, AP beams, etc) can sweep some mines.

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

A couple more wishes for me:
1. Make it work on WINE!!!! I don't wanna go back to windows! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/mad.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif
2. Little nitpick: could you rename "weapons platforms", since a) they share an abbreviation with "warp points", confusing everyone, and b) they can be used for more than weapons (armor, combat sensors, ???)
3. Add an option to require ships to travel to the proper lagrange point or whatever to open a warp point (in other words, if you want to open a warp point to a system to the right on the map, you have to travel to the right side of the system to do it).

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

Along with Ed's suggestion with WINE, I will reiterate once again, make it work on Mac OS X! (pretty please? I'll give you my first born.)

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

Hmm, but is that a good trade? I'd want the option to have your second or third born if the look better value. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

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

I vote for the great name of 'Ground Bases'
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif

Kana

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

Why not just call them Defense Platforms

anyways, this is especially needed in Infantry or crews are included in the core game, Troops, ships, anything that would require a person to operate can be effected by Biological\Chemical Weapons.

Just as an example, Base A gets attacked with a missle carrying the Plague level 3, owner of Base A doesnt have a cure so the crew dies off but the base is still infected allowing for Race B to come threw and take or destory easily Base A, in addition if race A had changed the crew out, all crews or ships troops etc that come in contact with crew from Base A will be infected aswell. So hitting one base could potential destroy the entire race if the person was careless.

Of cource something like this would take at least a year or so, so the chance to save everyone by researching the right tech would be available.

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

I've probably mentioned this several times before, but what about randomized tech trees? Each tech could have in addition to a base level of each of its prerequisites a maximum positive variance (which determines how much the prerequisite level can vary) and a probability of occurrence. So if Phased Polaron Beams required level 5 physics with a 2-level variance and a 80% probability then they could appear anywhere from level 3 to level 7 of physics, or they could simply not appear one out of five times. Additionally, you could have a game option which sets whether each race gets their own uniquely randomized tech tree (balanced of course in some fashion so one race doesn't get all the fancy techs early and another never gets anything http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif) or if all races in the game get the same tech tree. Imagine what that could do to tech trading, assuming (unlike MOO3 which implemented a similar system) that each race does not know without using intel what another race's tech tree looks like! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/eek.gif

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

To me 'platforms' just sound like something in space...or the air...And Ground Bases could be used for other things, not just offense and defense...

As for the Random Tech...a nice interesting idea...I don't really thing that tech research should be directly linear...sometimes you get a brainstorm or luck, and you get something early, or get bogged down with problems and setbacks...and get research later...

Kana

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

Random Tech is probably a good thing...anyway, just a few more random thoughts which may (or may not!) be nice to see included in the game:

(1)
Paying "research maintenence" i.e. a percentage of research points need to be expended just to keep your current level of technology (representing training/teaching); otherwise you will start losing tech levels (might be more appropriate to rename research to knowledge or something in this case)...that way you can bomb someone back to the stoneage. Also means you still need some research even when you reach the end of the tech tree.

(2)
Have a "facility prerequisite" on components (or even other facilities), so you can have factory facilities that "build" components (at least in abstact terms) - for example, you want to build that quantum engine do you? well, have you got a quantum engine factory in your empire? No factory, no engines. Could extend it so more advanced weapons/components need more infrastucture present, so lets say, basic DUC doesn't need a factory, APB 1 needs a single level 1 weapons factory, APB 2 needs a single level 2 weapons factory, PPB 3 needs 2 level 3 weapons factories, WMG needs 5 factories at level 10, etc (these are just arbitrary numbers BTW). Extending it to facilities, could have something like "uber research centre" which requires the existence of, say, 10 basic research centres before it can be built...

entries in the components text files would look something like this:
Types of Facilities Req := 1
Number of Facility Req 1 :=5
Facility Name Req 1 := Weapons Factory
Facility Tech Level Req 1 := 10
Facility Location Req 1 := Empire ; can be Sector,System or Empire

so this tells us we need 5 Weapons Factories at level 10, located anywhere in the empire, for us to be able to build this component

(3)
This is an alternative to (2)...could have it so the presence of the appropriate factory in the empire simply gives a small discount when building that component; having no relevant factory just means it costs more to build (hand built prototypes or whatever..no mass production). Could have it so the bonus kicks in only if the required level and number of factories are present in the empire.

Could use the same format as the previous example, just add the following lines:
Facility Effect Req 1 := Bonus ;can be Enable or Bonus
Facility Bonus Req 1: 50

enable tells us if the component is "enabled" by the facility (i.e. can't be built without its existence), otherwise bonus tells us the percentage reduction in cost when building that component

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

Great ideas..... however, if it's not implemented already, there's little chance that it'll ever be in the first release, seeing as to the fact that it's already in such an advanced stage. Really good suggestions, though.

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

Tach =)

okay some idea from me about sensors:

how about to make sensor have like 3 diffrent ranges.

1. long to very long range: You see there is something, just a ping )
2. short to long rang: You see the strengh from then ping (ships, typ) but cant see more
3. short range: You see detailed informations from ship, race , etc.

with tec-tree you can research diffrent sensors like very long range senors but they are bad at close range, or good short range sensors with very close long range...

dont know if someone has this idea earlyer in this threat (too much for me to read =) )

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

Hi,

without reading the whole thread just my two cents:

1. Improved Mini-Map
for a better strategical overview I would like to see
- the systems colored (red = enemy units present, yellow = neutral units, etc.)
- "picture" (remember) the systems from last visit (planets, units, etc.)

2. Make planetary weapons useful
In SE4 planetary weapons were rarely used ...
- increase the needed damage to kill population by 10x
- increase (only) planetary weapons damage by 10x


Best regards
Seik

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

Stellar muanipulation is SE4 sometimes causes other distant obects to disappear without explanation. One hopes this bug gets squashed firmly in SE5.

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

Speaking of stellar manipulation: one component I always wanted already in SE IV is the "genesis generator".
I first destroys every object in the system with the exception of warp points but then recreates a random standard solar system.
And make the "only one sun per system" restriction for star creation moddable. I like to have multiple sphereworlds in a system!

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

This gives me an idea, why not have some that cost unbelieveable amounts of material which can create a whole new system. So you bring a ship with the component on it to a system it creates a new warp point and a whole new system on the other end. of cource it would be a random system so it might wind up being a nebula, or black hole, but it could also create a perfect 9 or 10 planet system.

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

Zoomable strategic and local maps...they get real crowded...and my eyes will eventually go...and when I'm 80 I still want to be able to play...so maps that are zoomable will help me do that...

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

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

Great idea, I would definitely like to see this. Maybe it should only work in systems without stars though, we already have plenty of weapons of massive (stellar) destruction in the stellar manipulation techtree in SeIV, and somehow this component sounds more like something that should create stuff, not destroy entire civilisations. but it's a very nice idea!

And a suggestion of my own: (not really a new idea)
I saw in the new SEV screenshots that the race portraits have gotten a major upgrade from seIV, They look absolutely stunning compared to the weird "floating-heads-with-huge-eyeballs" aliens of SEIV. The new race pictures definitely help give the races some more character. What I'm hoping is that the speech files for the different races get simillar attention, SEIV shipped with just one speechfile that was used for all the races (mineral planets are the best!). I know from personal experience that writing a good speechfile takes a lot of time, (I did the united flora ages ago) but it really helps in giving the different races more character, you could really start hating the arrogant jraenar, and feel sorry for the friendly but naive EEE. I know this could also be done by the modding community after the game is released, but I think it would be a good selling point for the game if the races in the game are really different from eachother, it makes the universe seem that much more alive and exciting.

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

And make speech have an effect on the mood of AI empires!

In SE IV you can send whatever insulting messages you want to an AI empire without effect. Of course I realize that you cannot really ask for the AI to analyze the message itself, but if you only had some major categories of general messages like

- pleading
- insulting
- threatening
- friendly

and some more and specify for each AI the reaction to it, you might add some more flavour to the game.
I think this was already planned for SE IV with the "message tone" but as far as I know this has no effect at all.

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

According to the screen shots this might already been implemented:

- keep the race culture as it is in SE IV: a modifier that you select at the game setup and will remain. You still can edit the culture.txt file during the game if you want as I do for the AI. I use this instead of the AI bonus.
- the new government type: a modifier that you choose at the game setup, but every player can change it during the game as he wants! If your production is critically low you might change to a government type that gives you here a bonus (but has disadvantages in other fields). Later you might switch to a government type that gives you a better bonus in combat but has lower production bonus.

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

I couldn't tell from the video, but do weapons have firing arcs? If not (they were a pain to mod in Starfury), here's a simple way of doing it:

1. The arc WIDTH is determined by a parameter on the weapon's data entry, e.g.
Weapon Firing Arc Width := 90
2. The arc POSITION is calculated by converting the XY position of center of the slot where the weapon is mounted to polar coordinates.

edit: and maybe the arcs could be affected by mounts?
Spinal Mount: set to 0
Turret Mount: set to 360
Heavy Mount: decrease by 25%
Gatling Mount: increase by 45 degrees

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

Ed Kolis. What if you want to place weapons shooting ahead to sides?

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

Ahead to sides? As in an arc facing from straight forward to straight east? Then place the weapon in the northeast corner of the ship! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif
edit: oh, yeah, now I understand http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif
Well that would really depend on the hull configuration, so maybe it would be better to have the arc direction determined by the slot's data entry in the ship design... problem is, since in SE5 there are no "weapon" specific slots you'd need to define a firing arc for every slot in the hull! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/eek.gif
Maybe weapons should be limited to outer hull, though... that might narrow it down a bit...

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

You mean firing arcs from 315 degrees to 135 degrees? (right-firing)

Then find a binary or trinary star system and build to your heart's content. (or, until you get bored again and go off to pester Picard http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif )

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

Heck why limit arcs to just weapons...you could have shield, sensor, arcs to name a few...

Kana

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

Oh I already built 5 sphereworlds in a system! But I never can get enough! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif
Regarding the arcs of weapons: can anybody answer the question (from the video/without violation the NDA) if it matters if you put a weapon in the front/rear or on the side of a ship at all? From the screen shots I had the impression, that this was not the case (in contrast to starfury). Then of course all discussions about arcs would be futile.

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

I'd like to expand Q's question to include all components. The reason is in Starfury, internal component placement did matter. Once Shields/Armor on a side were gone, components placed near that side were taken out first. This makes component placement a little bit of a game in itself. An identically equipped (but not identically configured) ship in SF could be inferior to another if its internal components were placed adjacent to less shielded sides. (The components in question would be those which go in the general area and are directionless like Bridge, ECM, etc.)

While this idea may/may not have been intended for SF, I kinda like it for SF; makes ship design fun. BUT I personally don't think that should be part of SE:V.

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

I think that if there's an opaque storm, then you shouldn't be able to see OUT of it or THROUGH it as well, not just INTO it! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

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

Ahh but what if your on the edge of an opaque storm, so you signal gets lost in the general rubbish?

Hence explaining why storms are only opaque to a certain level of scanner/sensor.

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

Another idea:

Strategies
Sometimes the range for a strategy is not exactly what you want, why not give it a min and max range (ex. MinRange="4" to MaxRange="6") instead?!

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

More display options for the galaxy map like:
- show systems with more than X enemy ships.
- systems with facility Y present.
- systems with colonies of empire Z (you don't see that in SE IV when more than one empire is present in a system).
- systems with new enemy colonies since last turn.

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

#2, systems with facility Y presents is already part of SEIV at the system level. Is that what you mean?

The rest are good suggestions, they are all good suggestions.

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

Consider adding an expensive intelligence project that allows a race to intercept and receive the communication between two races.

That might seem unbalanceing on the face of it-- so you might have the result just be a fragment of the message, 30 % of the text, or every 4 th word or something. Perhaps a delay between interception and display, to allow for encryption time. This would be pointless against the AI, but it would be interesting in human games.

This sort of thing has happened in the historical wars here on Earth, so it might add interesting dimension to SE4 warfare -- giving away fleet movements, attack plans, etc.

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

SE4 already has such an intel project, and it's minimally useful as players can communicate outside of the game... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

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

I was talking about the quadrant map: I know the display options for facilities in the system map, but I would like to see on the quadrant map which of my systems have e.g. a system robotoid facility or a system gravitational shield. If possible even a differentiation of systems with completed facilities and facilities under contruction.
You would select the facility you want to show and the quadrant map marks the systems with it as "*" if completed or "x" if under contruction (just an example).
In small quadrants this may not be very important but with 250 systems I missed it more than once in SE IV. And if you can have even more/unlimited number of systems in SE V.....

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

Ed Kolis said:
"SE4 already has such an intel project,"

Really? It gives the content of the message as well? As in, "I will invade Kartogia IX while you attack the other side of the warp point to Urteka"? I never knew that. I've been playing so long without intel, I don't even remember ...

"and it's minimally useful as players can communicate outside of the game... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif"

Well, yeah. That does ruin the plan completely. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif But maybe vs the AI, if they can give more complicated mssages, it could come in handy.

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

SE:V atmosphere converters should show how much longer until atmosphere is converted. Other Planetary Engineering facilities should also show projected results.

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

What I would like to see is a "success chance" of colonizing a planet. Colonizing a planet is not just a matter of dispatching a ship and disassembling it; for example, the ship can crash, killing everybody inside, or it might be damaged upon landing, meaning that there is fewer initial populatio etc. Colonizing is risky business.

Also, I would like to see more types of random events that would specifically occur in newly built colonies, such as attacks by natives, accidents happening during construction of prefab homes, etc. Once a colony ship has successfully started a colony, it has not immediately secured its existence, and a lot of things can go wrong when the colony is newly established. Like I said, colonizing is a risky business.

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

Could remove the strategic element.

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

Im sure somone has posted ideias like mine before but here they are anyway.

My first "wish" is for an advanced ground combat mode.
i would like weapon arcs
the ability to mount components on the troops like you do on ships.
tactiacal movement and random obstacles.
an "objective building" or Facility which when captured can either end combat or must be destroyed to capture the planet. (mabye a drpoship for the attacker and a base for the defender).
This is further explained in my next wish, but i would like to see facility's

My next "wish" would be that each planet has a "area or space" probably represented by a hexgrid or something.
this would be where cargo, population and facilitys could be built/stored and could be used a template in ground combat.
this would resolve the isue of max facility on domed planets. ex you would have to create a dome for population and the facilitys could only be built adjacent to it.
cargo and population could be stored in empty spaces next to a facility or city/population center and you could create a unique planet each time you colonize. with "cities" or "domed population centers", and facilitys which take up available space represented by hexes:)
i think you could make a spaceyard or major facility take up more space and therefore you (depending on planet size ) could have more then one sy but the space used would cost you some cargo or facilitys in the long run.
also population would be used bya the facilitys creating a supply and demand on domed worlds.
i have lots of idieas on this but i think this covers the basic ideia.

Another "wish" is that (and i know this was posted earlyer)
we have supply routes made up or uncontrolled netural or private ships which can be attacked by enimy empires.
ithink it would be annoying if we saw them move every turn so they should just be visible if your looking for them( mabye an optin to show/ not show trade ships) and i think combat should only occur when you have a ship defending them. i also think having them war is too much trouble for coding and such so they should just go from planet to spaceport and such.

i suppourt the unlimited research idiea and any improvement there like "and or techs" and such.

and finally i would like to thank Aaron for the oporutunity to post my idiea's and personally i think you should take more time in producing this game and make it so good we wont want to modify it much anyway. (im bias because downloading mods for se5 will be a major pain at 56k) and if he dose want to get this game on the market i hope he will consider all the idies he left out when it goes gold.

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

@Narf: What exactly do you mean by that? Do you mean that in a positive or negative way?

@Orion:

Wish 1 is mostly granted. There are weapon arcs, there is tactical ground combat. I don't know exactly what you mean by "tactical movement and random obstacles", but in case you mean on a planet, like I said there is tactical ground combat, if you mean in space, well, the combat area is the entire system map instead of a single sector, so you can pull reinforcements in from an adjacent fleet I guess. I don't know about any "random obstacles".

Wish 2, well, it seems that there is a hex grid map of a planet's surface on which tactical ground combat is fought, and facilities do take up space there, but I don't know if you can control this. So, wish 2 is granted.

Wish 3 will not be implemented. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

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

For the random colonising success it would make strategy, and all connected threads, that much more random. This could be good or bad depending on how you like your games.

For instance a big scrap over an important system could be meaningless if you can't colonise a planet as your ship fails. So you send two, three ships just to ensure it works and then the first works and you have two out of position colonisers with no nearby planets to colonise. So that hits you initial expansion and you rist falling behind.

So it expands the strategic options, but by introducing uncontrolable and unpredictable factors. Some will like it, some will hate the idea.