Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

A feature i think would make the game a little more interesting would be the ability for an empire to split. Perhaps when civil unrest is high in one sector or when one sector is basically fighting alone against another empire. Kinda like in Civ II when the capital city of a large empire got captured. Heck that could even trigger it in SE4, the loss of your homeworld. MM could even add it as an intel project "instigate civil war". What do you guys think? Good idea or bad idea?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I think it's a good idea. It would add increased depth to the game and could you imagine trying to deal with the rest of the galaxy with half your empire against you? That would be hard!

Visit the Spoogy Federation: http://spoogyfederation.tripod.com/index.html

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I like that idea espescially if the split could result in two full blown empires, not neutrals. Maybe it could even be a andom event so the human players would not have complete control over preventing it.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Making it a random event would definetely put a twist to it. Imagine being at war with someone and all of a sudden half of your empire revolts and forms there own imperium.

The other way you could do it is if you have planets with conquered races on them. Say you wipe out someone and occupy many of their planets. If you don't keep them under control they could go into a massive revolt and reform their conquered empire including any planets you colonized with them and ships stationed on the revolting planets.

And Yes it would be nice if they were a full blown empire not a lowly neutral.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I like chewy's idea. Like if you have a bunch of conquored planets and they are rioting, or even if enemy empires use subVersion. Anytime one rebels, there is a chance that others will as well.

Then you pop into ground combat mode. Even if you win, you will lose some ground troops

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I don't mind too much if one planet rebels or a planet explodes. Already harder if a star becomes a supernova and kills the entire system. But if half of the empires splits off and turns against you?? And this as a random event???? In my opinion this would turn SE IV from a strategy game to a game of chance and I really would not like it.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I must agree with "Q". Have not sense to me, if we're talking about a full random event.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Half an empire would be a lot but how about one system rebelling or planets rioting? You have to give them a small chance of survival otherwise it is no different than what we have now.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

One of the major problems with the rebelling, is that the rebels start with just a planet, likely having unbalanced or non-existant resource production.
I think that when a rebellion happens, the game should figure out which of your planets each of your units/ships is closest to.
If they're close to the rebel's planet, they will join the rebellion.

That way, the rebels will have a chance to do something. If the rebelling planet immediately built a mineral miner & started with full resource storage, then they wouldn't just lay down and die like they do now.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

In this same thought, I figured that the ability to incite a civil war, at least in part, would be similar to the Intel Project of Puppet Pollitical Parties. If you look at the parameters for the operation, it allows for a counter of the number of places to target...

To make a long story short, you can not incite rebellion in any more than a single planet at a time.

While the basic ability may be there, the implimentation of it is not. At least not from within the framework of the Intelligence engine.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

The original idea i had wasn't to make it a random event i agree it could get crazy. but that could be a possibility. What i had in mind was some sort of thing that triggered it. Then there could be a set goal for the computer to advance towards. Like I said before maybe the homeworld or something like that.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Does the PPP intel project change planet control to the instigator? I've never used it.
If it did maybe it could be changed to revolt.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

The PPP intelligence operation, if successful, will result in the planet either revolting and forming their own government (acting much like a neutral); or, the planet will join your empire and be like any other colony in your control.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

This feature would have to be hard coded wouldn't it? If so do you think MM would incorporate it in an upcoming patch or would it take an expansion to the game to add it. And do you think this feature would be worth incorporating? In my opinion (although no one asked it) it would add more depth to the game like capt_spoogy said.

Which prompts the question is MM going to eventually make an expansion and is it necessary? What are your thoughts on all the above?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I like the idea, but definitely not as a random event. An element of randomness adds a certain amount of sophistication to a game, honing the ability to adapt, but civil war being random? No warning? No, that is stretching it.

Making civil war a possibility after your homeworld is taken, on the other hand, is a great idea. Going a little further, why not say that there is an ever increasing chance of civil war for every turn that you do not have a "Seat of Government", a new facility, and lacking such and establishment would have negative happiness and production consequences to illustrate the resulting anarchy its absence would provoke.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Yeah... a "government" facility. When it is destroyed / captured then it gets harde and harder to keep order until a new one is built. You'd get one on your homeworld to represent your capital ciy, and every other one you build could represent local government.

------------------
--
There is an exception to every rule. Including this one.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Even though the idea needs to be somewhat polished, I must say I like the discussion because I think the developers DO listen to its customers (you). In fact I KNOW they do, especially if the idea could be developed the way I belive this one could be developed in.

But I think the problem is the NEUTRALS. I mean, why NEUTRALS in the first place? Maybe ALL empires should be NEUTRALS, until they discover required technologies which will enable them to travel through wormholes/warppoints?

Which makes me wonder about "warpdrive" - why is there no warpdrive? (EXCUSE ME if there really is a warpdrive feature in the game I didn't know of) With warpdrive I mean the abillity to travel between solarsystems WITHOUT wormholes - which would require several turns.

Where was I?

When softly applying "Puppet Political Parties" on your enemy's private parts they should form a new EMPIRE (Instead of a NEUTRAL empire).

ESPECIALLY! - if you have chosen "No Random Neutral Empires" in the gamesetup.

That would be so much fun if it happened!

AND,
when initiating more Puppets there should also be a greater chance for them to join that new glorious empire YOU created the Last time your intelligence agents visited your hated enemy.

And this (these) new empire(s) should be your new PARTNERS (treaty) - at least a couple of turns... (please?)

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dogscoff:
Yeah... a "government" facility. When it is destroyed / captured then it gets harde and harder to keep order until a new one is built. You'd get one on your homeworld to represent your capital ciy, and every other one you build could represent local government.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

At Last, a use for the "palace" facility.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I hadn't thought of it, but a govt. building could definetely be a way of incorporating this feature. Have a galactic capital like Coruscant in Star Wars. Also, regional capitals in every solar system might be a way of keeping each solar system under control. If a reginal capitol gets captured then that solar system slowly goes into civil war ar revolt until a new one is built. Likewise, if the galactic capital is captured the entire empire slowly goes into civil war eventually splitting if a new galactic capital isn't rebuilt. We should definetely nix the random event possibility. But like Lucanos said maybe we could polish this one up.

And Lucanos I completely agree the PPP intel should effect more than one planet at a time and when they revolt they should form their own full blown empire. Then as the subsequent worlds go into revolt they would join that new empire. Nice idea. These two features go hand in hand.

Also, there is that new warp component in the mods section. Maybe that could be used for the intersystm travel. You know how sometimes you encounter a spacial distortion and are transported to another part of the galaxy. Perhaps this warp component could create a controlled distortion and you could pick what system you would come out in. Sort of like creating a wormhole, that same screen even. Then with every advance in warp technology you can warp to further and further systems.

What do think?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I agree with Mr.Chewy et al...

A capital building or command centre on each planet could be used to keep control over a colony. If the building is destroyed by an attack or sabotage it might make that colony more succeptible to riot or rebel against the empire. Also, it could provide a little morale boost - like "Hey, the empire cares about us..."

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by chewy027:
Also, there is that new warp component in the mods section. Maybe that could be used for the intersystm travel. You know how sometimes you encounter a spacial distortion and are transported to another part of the galaxy. Perhaps this warp component could create a controlled distortion and you could pick what system you would come out in. Sort of like creating a wormhole, that same screen even. Then with every advance in warp technology you can warp to further and further systems.

What do think? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I totaly agree!

If you play a game WITHOUT pregenerated wormholes, WARPDRIVE would be essential. Then when you have the required tech you could build WORMHOLES, and you wouldn't need warpengines anymore.

In this case WARPDRIVE should be inferior to travelling through wormholes, maybe it should cost more in supplies and take longer time to travel between stars?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Well it would inherently be inferior, by existing. A warp drive would take up space on a ship that would normally be free on a ship that used wormhole travel as its normal mode of intersystem travel.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jc173:
Well it would inherently be inferior, by existing. A warp drive would take up space on a ship that would normally be free on a ship that used wormhole travel as its normal mode of intersystem travel.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly,
it should also cost more in supplies and take longer than just going through a wormhole.

Therefore there shouldn't be any wormholes at the start of the game (maybe some rarity here and there) because it would unbalance it a great deal - warpdrive is almost pointlessless if you have access to wormholes. Also wormhole technology (Stellar Manipulation) would be worth even more.

Haven't you seen "Farscape"?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

The best advantage i see in warpdrive technology is that you could transport a fleet relatively quickly without going from system to system (agreed there would have to be a large supply usage). Granted you could just make a wormhole, but doesn't warpdrive just SOUND like it belongs in a game like SE4.

And if your empire would go into civil war, you might need that quick strike ability to get those systems back. Or you may need to quickly intercept an enemy fleet before it takes out one of your regional capitals(hint, hint). Or maybe the COMPUTER AI would warp into your galactic capital system and catch you completely off guard. Bet you'd want a warp ready fleet then. Overall I think there are definite advantages to having warpdrive technology.

This technology was proposed originally to give a solution for the neutrals anyway. It's only an idea for that solution, but I suppose it could be expanded for the above uses. This like the civil war idea could give more depth to the game.

Thoughts?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I'm for anything that adds variety and make the game more unpredictable.
All the ideas in this thread sound great but will/can they be added. Most are beyond my capability.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

There could be and option in the game setup where we could turn this on or off, so everyone would be happy.

I have a question though. If an empire forms from another empire, what race style will it use??? All current empires that appear are neutrals and use neutral (generic one) style. If you want them to be like normal empires, they will have to use some unique style or they will all look the same (and cause great confusion).

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Maybe it should look like the original racestyle with a diffrent color/flag - I mean the RACE should look exactly like the original - but the ships could look somewhat different (i.e. another color).

What do I know?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Absolutely Lucanos! The race style would be the same but the color and flag would be different. Perhaps, the opposite primary color of the original and inverted flag and ship colors. Whatever, the point is the race style is same but the new empire will have varient colors. Good point Daynarr http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lucanos:


Therefore there shouldn't be any wormholes at the start of the game (maybe some rarity here and there) because it would unbalance it a great deal - warpdrive is almost pointlessless if you have access to wormholes. Also wormhole technology (Stellar Manipulation) would be worth even more.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've played a few games with No Warp Points and Finite Resources set, to make it interesting. Problem is, the AI can't handle this at all. Resource management is vital in that sort of game, since you gotta have enough in your treasury to pay maintenance costs on Stellar Manipulation ships. The AI basically sucks a planet dry and does not build storage facilities to retain the resources, stalling their development, and making them easy kills when I open a warp point to their system.

Also, AI research is lousy in that sort of game, since they pour so much into weapons techs instead of stuff like Applied Research and Stellar Manipulation. I basically now give them a Low-Medium bonus to start them with, but even then they're pushovers, since they go for more weapons tech.

Bottom line: if you want to implement this, the AI needs serious adjustment to its research and resource strategies.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

That is why warp tech would be good with few or no warp points Str8_Gain, you could just warp in and not even need wormholes. Then you would't have to pay for costly wormhole components. Maybe you'd want some wormholes between key systems or only between systems you control or at least have a regional capital in (if our idea would ever be implemented.) Either way warp tech would probably be easier on the AI anyway, and the AI would probably be a harder opponent with it.

Thoughts?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Let's take these one at a time:

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
That is why warp tech would be good with few or no warp points Str8_Gain, you could just warp in and not even need wormholes. Then you would't have to pay for costly wormhole components.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Personally, I only use mabye a couple pairs of ships equipped with warp point components (frigate hulls, one ship carries the GQR, the other the GC). My biggest concern with this is if you can detect and intercept a warp-drive fleet before it comes into your system. Also, travel times have to be taken into account (too long, and it turns into a Stars! kind of game where it takes several game years to go from one system to another). If that's the case, by the time the first AI fleets show up on my doorstep with tech that's obsolete by months or even years, I will have ships capable of wiping the floor with them, and be well on my way to SM level 3.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Maybe you'd want some wormholes between key systems or only between systems you control or at least have a regional capital in (if our idea would ever be implemented.) Either way warp tech would probably be easier on the AI anyway, and the AI would probably be a harder opponent with it.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm assuming you're still going to use the idea of a warp drive component that'll take up lots of room. By doing so, that means that you'd have to have a destroyer or light cruiser hull before you can build an effective combat vessel. Even so, these ships would be inferior to any defense ships you could cook up, even if the defense ships have inferior technology (they can simply use the space to stack more weapons/shields/armor/etc.). Also, you can use that time to attain numerical superiority as well. Meanwhile, I quietly research up to SM level 3, and open a warp point to your system and just pour in destroying everything in sight.

The key problem is that while all ships must have warpdrives, not all ships have to have SM components. I usually keep a fleet of 3 ships as my SM group (one to open points, one to close them, and one with a repair bay), and use my much bigger ships to protect them while they open and close warp points so they can bypass minefields and other static defenses.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Thoughts?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My thoughts are that I have reservations about this idea of warp drives. You'd have to give the AI a low or medium tech bonus for them to be able to use this in the early game, so they have the hulls needed to build effective ships with.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Interesting insight Str8-Gain. I like the way you disected my reply http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif! The time it takes to warp between systems could Depend on the tech level of the warp and the distance between systems. Also, the computer should probably give an estimated time of arrival. And I don't think the warp drive should take up any more than 100K this way you only sacrifice maybe two missiles or something for instantaneous tracel. I figure the warp, at maximum, from one end of the galaxy to the other, should take no morethan 6 or 7 turns at lowest level. Then as you increase up to the max level it gets shorter. Also, (this is a far out one now) maybe there could be one of those hidden techs, you know massive ...., that would give you instant warp drives or even (this ones even farther out) a tech thank links all ships to one warp. Now i will wait for you to disect this one http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Oh and by the way what do you think of the civil war idea Str8_Gain? good or bad? What are your thoughts and suggestions?

[This message has been edited by chewy027 (edited 05 April 2001).]

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Just wondering if the civil war idea would ever have a chance of being implemented. I mean does everyone else think it would be worthwhile? I for one would pay for it to be implemented into some expansion along with other new features. But the real question is does this idea stand out among the other hundreds that have been posted in this forum? And if not how do we get MM to notice it?

Thoughts?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Interesting insight Str8-Gain. I like the way you disected my reply http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yer welcome! http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
The time it takes to warp between systems could Depend on the tech level of the warp and the distance between systems. Also, the computer should probably give an estimated time of arrival. And I don't think the warp drive should take up any more than 100K this way you only sacrifice maybe two missiles or something for instantaneous tracel.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It'd make sense. 100kt is the same space that a GQR or GC takes up. This would automatically discount using Escorts or Frigates to give the AI a whomping very early on. A Destroyer hull would be the minimum size you could use.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
I figure the warp, at maximum, from one end of the galaxy to the other, should take no more than 6 or 7 turns at lowest level. Then as you increase up to the max level it gets shorter.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Egad! Six or seven turns to traverse a huge galaxy? From what I see posted below, your intent seems to be that warpdrives are to be a beginning option for interstellar travel until you could build SM ships. If you did this, then researching SM to get higher levels of GQR would be worthless. With GQR I, to cross a huge galaxy from one corner to another would take six turns at a minimum (assuming the distance is 600ly). Better have Emergency Resupply Pods or a Quantum Reactor, now that the SM component supply bug has been fixed. Even with GQR V, it'll take two turns.

For a beginning level, I'd make the transit times a lot longer. Even at the top end of the tech tree for warpdrives, I'd say 6-7 turns should be the minimum for traversing a huge galaxy. Unless I'm totally misreading your intent, the warpdrive is supposed to be a slowboat inferior option to SM components.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Also, (this is a far out one now) maybe there could be one of those hidden techs, you know massive ...., that would give you instant warp drives or even (this ones even farther out) a tech thank links all ships to one warp. Now i will wait for you to disect this one http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Destabilizing, unless the component destroys itself after use, like current SM components do. It'd give one pause before sticking a drive on a ship that can send it anywhere if they need to either use the existing warp points or stick another "instant warpdrive" on it so it can bug out if need be.

The "linked" warpdrive you're describing would be even more destabilizing, unless the travel times are made so they're not too fast or put a limit on how many ships can be "linked" to one drive. In a sense, this is what I do with SM ships now, except there's no limits on how many ships I can send through (one ship to open points, all ships go through, then my other SM ship closes the point behind them).

Overall, I do like this idea, and I do like "outside the box" thinking in general. What I'd like to see is a)playtesting on this concept, and b)an option to turn this off for those that don't want to use it.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Oh and by the way what do you think of the civil war idea? good or bad? What are your thoughts and suggestions?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm pretty familiar with this from playing Freeciv (Linux clone of Civ II). It's one of my favorite ways to totally fubar large AI rival empires, since the AI there is tough, even at "normal" difficulty levels. At a minimum, any conquered races should rebel if they make up the majority of the population of a system. If a system has a "mixed" population of your race plus conquered ones, there should be a chance that the planet(s) populated by your race in that system will join along with the rebellion.

Reservations: the Palace facility that's being bandied about should be invulnerable to the Industrial Sabotage intel operation. Mabye a new intel op should be added, with a higher price tag, if you want to take out a Palace and throw an entire empire into a civil war. Puppet Political Parties should not work against your homeworld, or whatever world you have your Palace on. Modifiers, such as a planet's mood, or the presence of your fleets in the system should be taken into consideration.

As far as their affiliations, conquered races should resurrect their empire (lending new meaning to "Though we fall now, we shall rise again!"). Planets populated by your race should either join a resurrected empire, an unconquered empire, or build their own, with preference given to building their own empire. And to add more insult to injury, have your race break up into multiple empires.

Again, I like this idea, and I'd like to see playtesting on it. You shouldn't be able to turn it off, IMHO, since it would pretty accurately reflect what would happen if somebody decapitated an empire's top leadership.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

At least we agree on the tonnage Str8_Gain http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif.

I really hadn't thought that 6 or 7 turns would be that long. But if you make comparison to the wormholes then (hit to my pride) I must admit you are right.

However, if the wormnole prevention facility being discussed in Capt_Spoogy's interesting new things thread was instituted then warp tech would be essential. Either way I don't really care if warp tech is implemented (although it would be a nice feature along with the wormhole facility) it was just an idea for the solution to neutrals as i said before.

What I'm really interested in is the Civil War feature. And I agree with every thing you stated below.

"Reservations: the Palace facility that's being bandied about should be invulnerable to the Industrial Sabotage intel operation. Mabye a new intel op should be added, with a higher price tag, if you want to take out a Palace and throw an entire empire into a civil war. Puppet Political Parties should not work against your homeworld, or whatever world you have your Palace on. Modifiers, such as a planet's mood, or the presence of your fleets in the system should be taken into consideration."

"As far as their affiliations, conquered races should resurrect their empire (lending new meaning to "Though we fall now, we shall rise again!"). Planets populated by your race should either join a resurrected empire, an unconquered empire, or build their own, with preference given to building their own empire. And to add more insult to injury, have your race break up into multiple empires."

All these comments are great and add to the ideas polish. The only thing I don't understand is the very Last sentence, "And to add more insult..." Do you mean if an empire goes into civil war it breaks up into more than two? Or are you reaffirming the Civil War idea?

I too played civ all the time and that is where I stole this idea from http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif I figured if it can be in a great game like civ why not in an even beter game like SE4

disect away!

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
At least we agree on the tonnage Str8_Gain http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif.

I really hadn't thought that 6 or 7 turns would be that long. But if you make comparison to the wormholes then (hit to my pride) I must admit you are right.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hold yer head up, man! http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif Nothing wrong with coming up with new ideas. I'm glad this is a game where we can even entertain the thought of making changes to it. The tweaking would have to come in to ensure game balance isn't totally trashed. As I said, it'd probably need to be playtested to see how well it works and to work the kinks out.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
However, if the wormnole prevention facility being discussed in Capt_Spoogy's interesting new things thread was instituted then warp tech would be essential. Either way I don't really care if warp tech is implemented (although it would be a nice feature along with the wormhole facility) it was just an idea for the solution to neutrals as i said before.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This would be a way around the objections that some have posted (that I agree with), namely that an empire could get away with the "isolationist" approach and thus become unconquerable. If no path exists to link your empire to theirs, you can't even use intel ops to try to take out their facilities with Industrial Sabotage.

Incidentally, if such specialty facilities as "wormhole prevention facility" and the "palace facility" are added to the game, there should be some way to tell your intel dudes to go after it specifically. Industrial Sabotage for now works totally at random, although you can narrow it down to a specific planet. You just can't tell it "Okay, I'd like to blow up the Wormhole Prevention Facility on planet XXX". Some sort of modifier system would have to come into play (if it doesn't already) to give the chances of success based on what sort of facility it is. Bumping off a low-security resource facility should be much easier than trying to take out a high-value target like a Resupply Depot, or a Medical Lab, or a Massive Planetary Shield. This could probably be the subject of a whole 'nother thread, since there's bound to be differences of opinion on what constitutes a "high-value" target.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
What I'm really interested in is the Civil War feature. And I agree with every thing you stated below.

(snip)

All these comments are great and add to the ideas polish. The only thing I don't understand is the very Last sentence, "And to add more insult..." Do you mean if an empire goes into civil war it breaks up into more than two? Or are you reaffirming the Civil War idea?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, it does mean that there should be a chance, albeit a small one, of your empire breaking up into more than two factions within your own race. More than a couple real-life civil wars involve(d) more than two factions duking it out. It'd also make reunification of your empire a bigger challenge if you have to bring multiple factions back into the fold.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

We just keep going back and forth don't we http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

I suppose there should be the small possibilty of breaking up into more than two. This WOULD be more realistic as long as the rest of the SE4 community agrees with that. And they start posting replies and suggestions to this topic.Along with this Str8_Gain - Chewy027 merry-go-round. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

So how the heck do we get playtesting to be done on this. Would SE4 have to make a beta and then have testers go at it?

Thoughts?

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
We just keep going back and forth don't we http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's what this board's here for! http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
So how the heck do we get playtesting to be done on this. Would SE4 have to make a beta and then have testers go at it?

Thoughts? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, a lot of what's been discussed below would require hard-code changes to the SE4 executable. Wouldn't hurt to suggest it to MM, although the gist I get from this board in general suggests that Aaron has a helluva workload already. It'd probably have to wait its turn to be implemented, along with the other good ideas prevalent on this board.

At any rate, I gotta bounce. My head's about to hit the keyboard here, since it's way past my bedtime. I'll be back tomorrow. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Dogscoff that was a big post but it was full of good stuff http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif.

"I think the civil war idea is the best suggestion for hard-code changes I have seen suggested so far."

Thanks for the support!

"How about if cities were to grow on planets automatically, without any direct influence from the player?"

If MM would put this in I think we should still be able to pick what facilities are built. The govt. buildings In my opinion should also still be facilities. I mean we should be able to decide what planet will be our regional capital. I like your idea though because it forces you to look more at the pop happiness. Although I think the civil war feature could still be implemented quit nicely without the automatic city growth.

Lets see what everyone else thinks http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I never said you wouldn't be able to decide which planet is the local/ regional capital. Towards the bottom of the post it explains that you can change them as often as you like- as long as the new city is big enough and you have the time/ resources needed to carry out the transfer of administration.

Thanks for th feedback by the way. It's nice to know that someone took the time to read that lot.

------------------
There is an exception to every rule. Including this one.

[This message has been edited by dogscoff (edited 05 April 2001).]

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Hrm. And if one successfully captured (invasion, say) a local seat of government, what would happen? Would the other colonies be merely penalized via civil disorder, or would there perhaps even be a chance of surrendering on their own -- especially if they're very much isolated from the rest of their empire?

------------------
-- The thing that goes bump in the night

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

If the building could be created then maybe it absence shoud cause unhappiness, say -40. Then if you lost it your planets would begin to riot. Maybe rioting for a certain number turns would cause a revolt, probably a hardcode change.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nitram Draw:
If the building could be created then maybe it absence shoud cause unhappiness, say -40. Then if you lost it your planets would begin to riot. Maybe rioting for a certain number turns would cause a revolt, probably a hardcode change.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think it's already set up that planets in "riot" status have a chance of breaking free; of course, they just become a neutral empire (or, for multiple planets, multiple neutral empires). The hardcode change would be setting it up so that multiple planets in riot status could all revolt together, and form a "non-neutral" empire.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

This sounds alot like the events in Civ I and II when you captured a capital city sometimes. It would split the captured empire in two, and rioting cities (or planets in this case) would sometimes go over to another empire 'in envy'. I to would like to see this option. Another thing that is missing is the concept of 'barbarians' or 'pirates' (like Civ I and II), roving bands of non-neutral origin that just hit the closest empire. (this way with the new map editor we could put a sphereworld with ruins and a baseship guarding it...Orion!!)

------------------
"The Empress took your name away," said Chance.
Owen smiled coldly. "It wasn't hers to take. I'm a Deathstalker until I die. And we never forget a slight or an enemy." -Owen Deathstalker.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

(Long post, written Tues when server was down.)

I'd like to see civil war as a possibility, but only on "realistic" terms. Also would like to see PPP intel be more "realistic." Here's what I mean by "realistic":

1a) Your home planet should never rebel. That's just silly. Moscow is never going to rebel against Russia, London is never going to rebel against UK, etc. for the simple fact that much of their importance derives from being the seat of government.

2a) Minor planets should be unlikely to start a rebellion. Riot, yes. Rebel, no. HOWEVER, if there is a major planet nearby that has rebelled, then they might JOIN the rebellion.

3a) Planets should not rebel if they are happy. Happy people don't rebel. They go to work, pay taxes, and raise families. If they're happy, why are they rebelling? Is the entire planet populated with teenagers?

4a) The ruling species is unlikely to rebel. They are in power; why revolt and risk being taken over by aliens?

5a) Planets that are close to the homeworld and/or have been part of the empire for a long time are less likely to rebel.

6a) Planets that are economically dependent on the rest of the empire are less likely to rebel. For instance, a planet with nothing but mines is less likely to rebel than a planet with balanced resource development and a shipyard.

In contrast,

1b) Former homeworlds of other empires should be more likely to rebel.

2b) Major planets (larger, more pop, better resources, more facilities) are more likely to be centers of rebellion.

3b) Unhappy planets should be more likely to rebel.

4b) Planets with a sizeable majority of an out-of-power species should be susceptible to rebellion, even if the empire is treating them well. (Populating planets with captured species would then carry a long-term risk to go along with the benefits.)

5b) Natural barriers like asteroid systems and black holes would encourage rebellion. Being on the empire's periphery would encourage rebellion. Being newly acquired or newly colonized would encourage rebellion.

6b) Another empire nearby that presents good trading opportunities would make a planet more likely to rebel, especially if there were no trade agreement in place.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

This is gonna be another too-long post. Sorry.

I think the civil war idea is the best suggestion for hard-code changes I have seen suggested so far. More sophisicated civilian management (rather than just as a portable workforce with a "happiness" score for each planet) would really improve the depth of the game. After all an empire is not a purely military entity (that comment will start debate) - the purpose of being in charge of one is to bring happiness to your population, not just to squish aliens and conquer the universe for your own ego=-). If the game motivated you more to keep your population happy it would improve realism / atmosphere enormously.

I think the idea of a capital city/ homeworld as a centre of civic order is a good one, and I like the idea of local government as well - doing the same job on a smaller scale. I suggested something along these lines in the pirate thread as a way of
seperating space-borne races (nomadic, pirate) from "settled" ones (everyone else), by not allowing the nomads & pirates to have these features.

As for the implementation of it... since we are talking about MM making hard-code changes I don't why these government centres should be facilities.

How about if cities were to grow on planets automatically, without any direct influence from the player? Each colonised planet would have a city, rated from "Outpost" to "Metropolis". This status would not be a simple factor of population but would be influenced by things like space ports, security, planet population, system population, breathable atmos, colonised moons, racial diversity, proximity to warp points and diversity of facilities/ industries.

High-status cities would give back huge benefits in production, pop growth, troop defence and maybe even extra facility space or something. Government and capital cities would have even better benefits. This would have the added advantage of forcing the player to consider stability - Picking up 80 million people and taking them away, or suddenly redeploying the massive fleet stationed in orbit would have a major impact on a planet's city. Gradual changes would be better, just like in real life.
Of course the AI will hate all this=-)

Local government cities and Capitals should have a "Minimum Status", as follows.

A system with a tiny population has no local government of it's own, but is a dependent of the nearest system with local government. Once the dependent system has a city of minimum status or higher, it gets it's own local government in that city.

A player can transfer a government centre/ capital to another city but the nw city must be of minimum status. The transfer also costs time and resources.

When a government centre is destroyed, or falls below minimum status the player can select another city in the system to be the government centre. If there is no city big enough, then the system becomes dependent another system. Transferring power from city to city or systm to systm takes time, however, and all the while civil unrest is growing. Civil unrest can lead to insurrection in the affected system and it's dependent systems in the ways already thouroughly discussed.

Capital cities work in a similar way, except the effects are empire wide rather than system+dependent wide. Capitals can be moved anywhere within the empire, at a cost. When a capital is destroyed or shrinks to below a minimum statusthe player must select another city to transfer power to. If there is no other city of minimum status or higher civil unrest will grow across the empire until either another capital can be built or the empire bcomes a protectorate of another empire.

This is the clever bit: Minimum status for a capital would be tied it to the overall empire size: A huge empire requires a city of status "Massive City" to be it's capital, but a small empire needs only "Large Town." Local government minimum statuses are scaled accordingly. Therefore, if an empire's minimum status for capital is "massive city", and it does not have a city that big, unrest will grow until part of the empire breaks away. The first empire is now smaller and therefore has a lower minimum status, enabling it to build a capital and restore order.

This would restrict the speed of empire growth, but would make the game far more involving. It would make targetting specific planets and systems far more meaningful, and would make use of the near- redundant protectorate treaty.

Just my two pence worth (with interest=-)


------------------
There is an exception to every rule. Including this one.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I think if the regional capital was destroyed then that system might have the chance of rebelling and form a new empire. The palace facility, or regional govt building, or whatever should have a large impact on happiness throughout the system. If it is lost then the pops steadily get more restless.

Likewise, if the galactic capital is captured or destroyed then the entire empire would become extremely unhappy and half of it would automatically split off. This would give added importance to the galactic capital or homeworld. There might be a small possibility of breaking up into even morethan two, but only if you are a LARGE empire.

So which worlds would split off? Well i agree with most all of dmm's post below. Probably need some changes here or there, but that is why the rest of us are out here posting.

What does everyone else think?

3a) for instance. The loss of your homeworld would make the people very unhappy throughout your empire. So probably every planet would be neer rioting anyway.

And Deathstalker Civ is where i stole this idea from in the first place. And yes barbarians or pirates would be nice, they would spice the game up a bit. But this is another topic which deserves it's own thread.

And dogscoff I read everything in this post and reply to everyone. I really want to see this thing put in the game. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Any feedback is always welcome! The more the merrier.

BTY would it be a good idea to have a civil war petition sent to MM, or would that be worthless?



[This message has been edited by chewy027 (edited 06 April 2001).]

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Please forgive me If I repeat earlier comments, I skimmed over this thread rather quickly.

I do like the idea of a civil war (what's so civil about war anyway?), as for the way it would work... here is my suggestion:

1) It would start with the same random event that causes a planet to break away and become a neutral.

2) After one planet "breaks away", then each other planet in the system is checked to see if they join... All Rioting/angry planets join 100% of the time, unhappy/Displeased planets join 50% of the time, Indiffrent planets join 25% of the time (happier planets do not join).
NOTE: Your HOMEWORLD will never join, but captured Homeworlds are 25% more likly to join.

3) It is now determined if the new empire will be a neutral or a FULL empire... If the planets have a shipyard and have a Empire Score of say 20K (This should be changeable in setting.txt) or perhaps the empire is worth at least 10% of the original empire (again changeable), then the Empire is a FULL empire... if not, it is only a neutral.

4) If the new empire is a Full Empire, then more "checks" are made. All adjacent systems are now checked, at the same %'s as above... if atleast 1 planet converts, then that system is claimed by the new empire, and all systems adjacent to that one is checked... so, on and so forth... if happiness is low then it could spread across your entire empire.

Note: If you want to make things more difficult, if a full empire forms then the happiness of LOYAL planets in borders claimed by the new civ drops one level... before they are checked to see if they join the new empire... and the planets of the starting system of the new empire is checked again!


As for the Warp technology, I could take it or leave it... But I want the restrictions on requiring remaing movement to use stellar componets removed for bases. I really want to create a "Stargate Base".

[This message has been edited by Trachmyr (edited 06 April 2001).]

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

I like the idea but I would lean toward one of the earlier suggestions, planets should have a reason to break away. Happy planets don't just rebell and form their own government for no particular reason.

Re: Intergalactic Civil War !!??
 

Good suggestions Trachmyr.Thanks http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

If we combine some of dmm's ideas and Trachmyr's ideas for the way the planets would rebel, we would have a pretty solid rule base for the civil war idea. Of course the trigger for this would still be the loss of your galactic capital/homeworld or the regional capital.

Thoughts on the rule base? Suggestions?