|
New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
Hi Guys !!
This might have been mentionned before, but here goes... I had an idea for a new option when you setup a SE4 game - It would be specially useful for PBW games. I would call this option "Restricted Surrender" "Restricted Surrender": This option would NOT give players the choice of which empire to surrender to. Instead, your empire would be surendered to the player who has dealt you the most damage. This option could be a ON/OFF feature. What do you think ? RiTz21 |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
I like it. It has always bugged me I'm kicking someones butt and then they surrender to an allie.
|
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
I guess that would be ok. But how do you calculate who is entitled to receive the surrender? Seems to me it would require a significant amount of judgment from the program. You can do something to that effect now just by a gentlemans agreement, or vote of the remaining players. It would seem to me to be an uneccesary amount of code for something that would not be used all that much.
Personally I just prefer not allowing surrender at all. It just gives too much of a boost to the player receiveing the research and the big chunk of whatever is left of the empire. Players should have to take the planets, or recolonize them themselves. If the guy getting whipped doesn't want to play till the bitter end just let the AI play out the string for him. If surrender is disallowed, the AI will as good a job of playing till the end than a human can do. Geoschmo |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
The AI in Master of Orion would surrender to one of your rivals just to spite you. That was one of the most realistic features of the original MOO AI. I liked it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif If you want to have 'house rules' in your PBW games go right ahead, but I'm not in favor of any hard coded game restrictions. I wish the SE IV AI would act like the MOO AI sometimes.
[ June 30, 2002, 23:48: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ] |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
Quote:
|
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
We had a long drawn out discussion on this forum a while back about whether surrendering to an ally or not is realistic. Basically it depends on your point of view. The important question isn't really whether or not it's realistic, but whether it affects game play too drastically.
One suggestion that came from that discussion I would definetly support is a hard code change to allow you to refuse the surrendeer of a race. The biggest problem with enforcing the house rules against this is that the empire receiving the surrender is often an innocent victim and yet get's tainted by the actions of the surrendering player. By allowing them to refuse to accept the surrender of another empire this problem would go away. Geoschmo |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
One suggestion that came from that discussion I would definetly support is a hard code change to allow you to refuse the surrendeer of a race.
A Very Good idea! |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
Surrending to an ally is realistic. Just don't think of it as surrending but realising that you cannot defend nor support your people properly but realising that another can.
|
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
Surrendering could be balanced by making it less of an immediate benefit. For example, newlay acquired ships could be unavailable to receive fresh orders for a turn or two. New tech levels could be dripped through to the receiving empire over the course of several turns. This would give other empires the chance to seize some of the surrendered booty before the receiver had a chance to consolidate it.
Oh, and I heartily agree with the option to refuse a surrender. |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
You know, with almost every other diplomatic option you do need both parties to accept. Treaties, other than declaring war, trades, gifts, even tribute has to be formally accepted. I don't see why MM can't let you choose to 'accept currender' or refuse it.
[ July 01, 2002, 18:00: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ] |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
How about in a fight having the "Enmy" if beaten give up! rather than distroy the whole fleet
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
While not really addressing the topic directly on point, the concept of surrendering could be greatly expanded in SEIV. It might take some serious recoding, but I can wish.
The best gaming model for a surrender that I have ever seen is from Empires in Arms. It’s a non computer game for the most part, unless Aide De Campe is being used as a supplement. A surrendering power would offer a surrender. The winning power would then counter offer with either a conditional or unconditional surrender. A conditional surrender had to be accepted by the loser, while an unconditional surrender could be rejected. For the terms of a surrender, there were two tables, one more severe than the other. An conditional surrender allowed two choices from the lesser table, while an unconditional surrender allowed three choices from either table. Following a surrender, there was a mandatory peace imposed. The in game effect was to allow for multiple wars, wars of revenge, and carefully designed peace treaties which added a lot of flavor to the game. Such a feature could help eliminate the 1000 years wars between brotherly empires, a part of SEIV which makes me pull my hair out. |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
Thanks for the comments people !!
-> geoschmo: I think the mechanism to calculate who did the most damage to you is already implemented in SE4 - Think about it: how is the SCORE calculated ?? Anyone doing something to your empire that lowers it's score could be recorded. Then if you surrender, the code just has to lookup who did the most damage and that would be the receiving empire. Here I would add another Idea: An option to set the Minimum percentage of 'Score points' to loose before you are allowed to surrender. For instance, you could set this % to 25%: This would mean that you CANNOT surrender unless you lost 25% of your Current total score -> and then you would be able to surrender to the empire that did the most of this damage. This has the added benefit of making it harder to surrender to friends... -> Baron Munchausen: your said "The AI in Master of Orion would surrender to one of your rivals just to spite you. That was one of the most realistic features of the original MOO AI. I liked it" Woa !! Relistic ? Do you mean realistic as what happends in real life ? I don't think France surrendered to the British when the Germans invaded it in world war II ... Could you explain what You mean exactly ? -> Baron Munchausen: "I'm not in favor of any hard coded game restrictions" - I agree completely with you. That is why my original message says "Option" ... Magic word here http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif -> DavidG: That's a nice idea ! (limiting what you can to in Diplomacy) - But it should be optionnal (magic word again http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif -> geoschmo: "We had a long drawn out discussion on this forum a while back about whether surrendering to an ally or not is realistic. Basically it depends on your point of view" Hmmm I would be curious to know how the proponents of surrendering to an Ally while you are invaded justified their point of view !!! -> ZeroAdunn: "Surrending to an ally is realistic" - See my comment to the Baron http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif cheers ! RiTz21 |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
Realistic meaning it was like what a human player would do. Sure, a 'real' country doesn't usually surrender to another just to spite a conqueror, though I don't think it's unknown in history. But a real human player does do this in a strategy game. That's good AI programming.
|
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
I confess that I have not had as much time to play as I want, in fact, SEIV is not on my HD right now (not to worry, as soon as I have time to play, its going back).
Maybe I missed it in game play, but an empire can surrender to another empire it is not at war with? If this is how it is, seems to me surrender should be limited to those empires currently at war with the surrenderor. Surrendering to a friend is kind of silly IMHO. |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
Well Ritz, we can go through it all again if you'd like. Everyone here knows I enjoy these discussions. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
First of all what France did in WWII does not corelate directly to a surrender in SEIV terms. It's actually closer to weaker empire agreeing to a subjugation treaty. France did not at any time cease to exsist. Germany did not annex French territory the way that they did most of Austria for example. They occupied it. The Vichey government took it's orders from Berlin of course, but they retained, at least on paper, autonomous control over their own affairs. And once they were liberated they wasted no time in throwing off the shackles of German occupation and assisting in the war on the side of the Allies. In SEIV a surrendering empire simply ceases to exsist and all it's planets, population, ships, units, and technology become lock stock and barrel part of the empire receiving the surrender. This is simply not realistic, even by moderm day standards. So much less so to think it wouldn't happen in a future war between star systems and different races. When faced with a choice between subjugation and annialation as a race at the hands of an invading enemy, and cooperation and protection under the wings of a third party ally, it is ludicrious to think an empire wouldn't choose the latter. Not to mention the fact that no race of beings made up of tens of billions of individuals spread out on dozens of planets in several star systems with dozens of ships would simply change flags because one person, their former leader told them too. The planets and ships in direct threat of destruction probably would, but those not in immenant danger would likely choose to fight on independantly, or seek the protection of a nearby friendly empire. Now, if the game code were somehow modified to reflect this, maybe we could talk. Say for example the home system planets would fall to the enemy recieving the surrender, but planets that are in systems with or near an ally would go over to their flag. That might have some realism to it. But I am afraid that would be hopelessly complicated to design, much less program. I would like to see some changes to allow individual planets or fleets to rebel and switch sides when faced with imminant destruction. That would add a new factor to the game and give more of an incentive to blockading planets. These suggestions could be done in a Role Play game format without any code changes. It owuld take some work and a lot of cooperation from the players, but it could be fun if done right. But as far as SEIV is concerned, again I say realism is not the end all and be all of deciding factors. It's much mroe important to consider the impact of surrender on the game. Complete unconditional surrender and absorption of an empire as it happens in SEIV, whether or not you think it's realistic, is just too potentially unbalancing. That is why we requested an option to turn it off, and why I always disable it in my games. Geoschmo [ July 02, 2002, 03:01: Message edited by: geoschmo ] |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
Hmm interesting thoughts there. So in a nutshell when an empire surrenders it's home world would go to the empire surrendered to and all other worlds could have a random chance of say joining another empire are becoming independant. If you looking for an historical parrallel I think this could be applied to WW2 as some of the French forces overseas joined Vichy and some continued with the Allies. (I think that happend)
|
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
Well, that might be better than what we currently have -- monolithic surrender is a bit odd. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif But yet another 'random event' engine/process is not the best way to go with this. There needs to be tracking of things like population attitudes towards other empires and races so that there can be a much more 'articulated' process for determining behavior when a surrender occurs. Various systems could have completely independent tracking of 'attitudes' for that matter. A system right next to a friendly empire might reasonably have a much stronger liking for this ally than a system on the other side of your empire.
If your population absolutely loathes the empire you are trying to surrender to then rebellion would be rife, and most of the planets/systems should go to another empire which your population has a favorable attitude towards OR should declare independence (and try you in absentia for treason... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ) Systems with more affection for a nearer neighbor should logically join that neighbor. Core systems might be the ones to declare independence and try to continue without the treasonous imperial center. [ July 02, 2002, 21:41: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ] |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
My thoughts about surrendering in SE IV. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
The inability to form a true partnership in SE IV. Several players can claim that they are the United Federation of Races but there is no clean way to apply the government. With each player taking a regional director position. Now an outside force attacks, usually very xenophobic with no regards to life, vaporizing billions. Now why would the Last surviving worlds ‘join’ the enemy that has destroyed most of their culture rather than becoming fully assimilated into the other region of the Federation which it has had open and free trade for generations and possibly even many of its race already living on many worlds within it. Surrendering to a long-term ally even outside of a direct threat is reasonable. It is the only way to represent the assimilation of another culture by another. If my Empires Partner for 200 turns has over 100 planets and my Empire 20 planets. Would stand no chance in an outright war if one broke out between us. Why wouldn’t I as the leader of my race join my people to the allied race? Players seem to be saying the only way to conquer an enemy is by crushing them with their military until they surrender. I say that is pretty bogus. There are many other ways to beat an enemy or have another empire submit to you. Hell this even works both ways. In one PBW game, when faced with destruction, all my allies destroyed, I pleaded for my races existence to a vastly more powerful empire. I offered my empires loyalty and services for survival. The other empire agreed though he could have easily crushed me. Over the next 100 turns my empire factored strongly into his winning as his forces fought the other superpower and mine fought the other minor powers. In the end he declared my people equal rights to his and we settled in for galactic peace, game over. It was one of the best games I have played. In another game I tried to create an UFP type collation. There was a charter with membership rights, support pacts, research treaties. SE IV’s mechanics made this extremely difficult. But the effort was very educational. I had a horrible but secure position in one corner of the galaxy. I had no interest in going to war with my larger allies and eventually dispersed my empire among them. Of the handful of times I have surrendered. It has always been to a long-term ally. The benefits they gained were marginal, perhaps a single battle fleet. It has never made a difference tech wise since such an ally already has all the same tech as my empire through joint research efforts. How is this wrong? Now if an opponent attacked me in an honorable fashion. Conquering my worlds with troops rather than vaporizing them. Thus showing some consideration to my empires people. I would be far more inclined to surrender to him than another. I have never seen another player do this yet on PBW. So until I do my empire will always become refugees to an allied empire. Now don’t get me wrong. I have also seen games where someone quits after 50 turns for whatever reason and surrenders to a random empire. Suddenly that person is in first place. So I can see were some problems lie. All it did in those games was get everyone else to gang up on the player. I have also seen spite surrender. In one game I negotiated with a player that had a hopeless position. I had his home system isolated. Cut off from any help, I tried to give his race an honorable surrender to my superior forces. He agreed that he had no chance and told my empire he would surrender to me. What did he do, he surrendered to another empire that one of his scouts had encountered earlier in the game. One he didn’t even have a treaty with. Totally screwed me over. I could have conquered his home system with my fleet and troops but it would have been messy affair. When I tried to make my case to the other player for the unjust surrender. The other player just laughed and said ‘all is fair in love and war and go take a hike’. I was livid. I don't see any easy solutions to this issue. [ July 02, 2002, 19:21: Message edited by: Rich04 ] |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
Hellooooo .... anybody home?
If you disable surrender to prevent "spite surrenders," then you'd better disable trades and gifts also. Because otherwise the "spiteful" player can just gift/trade everything to another player, and he has accomplished the same thing as surrender. (With the small difference that the receiver can decline.) |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
Quote:
So, if you're not at war with someone, how the heck could you surrender to them? You can easily be subjugated, but that would require the subjugator to either offer that position to you, or else force it upon you (which would then make it surrender =P). Alternatively, you could request to be subjugated, which would be a Last-ditch effort against being forced to surrender to your enemies. To put it into numbers, there are absolutely zero non-abusive ways of surrendering to an ally in SE4's scope. If you're surrendering to an ally, you're cheating. There's still a way of cheating, even if this is implemented -- just declare war on an ally, then surrender to them. Perhaps the only way of surrendering would be if an enemy has a ship in your home system? (That too could be abused, but not as easily.) In any case, whatever Malfador comes up with, someone will just find a way of abusing it. I say go for making it only work for people you've declared war with, then let the chips fall where they may from there. New Politics options?: Surrender - immediately surrender to an enemy (i.e. must have declared war) Propose Subjugation Treaty (Subjugatee) - request that an ally/neutral/enemy subjugates you Propose Subjugation Treaty (Subjugator) - request that an ally/neutral/enemy becomes your subjugate |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
Quote:
Geo |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
I'd still like to see 'surrendered' empires retain an underground identity and reconstitute themselves (rebel!) if the conquering empire is badly weakened by external events. Like systems having individual attitudes to other empires, this would take some complex tracking, though.
|
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
Quote:
Geoschmo |
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
The 'grant independence' option was added due to my prodding on the old eGroups/Yahoo Groups SE4 discussion list before anything was officially released. Unfortunately it seems never to have been implemented like so many other things. I'd be thrilled to see the AI just use the same options it used to use in SE III, like demand surrender, demand tribute, request help against another empire, etc. This would make the game much more lively and interesting. I've only seen the AI demand surrender ONCE in many, many games.
|
Re: New option Idea for SE4 - Surrendering
Personally, I like the way the AI Politics is handled in Alpha Centuari/Alien Crossfire - when another faction offers their surrender to you, they continue to have an identity whether you accept them as your loyal Pact Brother, or whether you eliminate them to the Last man.
I love the idea of a conditional surrender. You could get down to some serious negotiation there.... technologies, planets, ships, and of course, reparations. Some moolah in the form of resources, which means they can't go building up their forces again until they rebuild enough production (assuming they've been running in deficit because they're the losing party). I also think the planetary bombardment (to kill off population) should be something you have to specify deliberately from the interface, so you can strike at military targets only, and have the option to blockade the planet. This gives you some leverage in a surrender negotiation - if they fail to hand over what you want, let rip with the mass drivers http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:56 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.