Surrender - Big Flaw in the Game
 

A power that surrenders should be up for grabs to those who can occupy its space first. Surrender should not go to an empire distant from the surrendering empire.

In a PBEM game that I am in, two players that I was attacking, apparently quit and the AI took over. It surrendered to another player who has better resource and technology. That playt can now instantly produce his ship designs at his newly acquired planets. I must attack him to take planets that should have been mine.

Surrendered players should simply make all of their planets neutral so that they can be carved up by any players in the vacinity.

The ability to give away planets and systems is very 'gamey' as well. I can give my planets to another player to produce his ship designs instantly. Then he can give it back and I can make my ship designs. It is kind of likely making a BMW in a Ford plant every other tuesday.

Re: Surrender - Big Flaw in the Game
 

It would be nice if when an empire surrendered their planets either became free neutrals or were up for grabs, as you put it. Espescially when it is still to easy to get them to surrender.

Re: Surrender - Big Flaw in the Game
 

Another thought would be to only allow surrender to Empire your at war with, but the planets and ships would be divided amongst those empires in a automated process. The person surrendering would have no say in how his assest are split up amongst his conqourers.

Thom

Re: Surrender - Big Flaw in the Game
 

So how do you get a computer to surrender?

Re: Surrender - Big Flaw in the Game
 

I had an empire surrender yesterday. I blockaded their 2 remaining worlds, and just used the diplomacy screen to demand their surrender every turn.

I got all their techs, the empire ceased to exist, and their citizens were no longer mad at me on the worlds I had conquored.

Re: Surrender - Big Flaw in the Game
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LGM:
A power that surrenders should be up for grabs to those who can occupy its space first. Surrender should not go to an empire distant from the surrendering empire.

In a PBEM game that I am in, two players that I was attacking, apparently quit and the AI took over. It surrendered to another player who has better resource and technology. That player can now instantly produce his ship designs at his newly acquired planets. I must attack him to take planets that should have been mine.

Surrendered players should simply make all of their planets neutral so that they can be carved up by any players in the vacinity.

The ability to give away planets and systems is very 'gamey' as well. I can give my planets to another player to produce his ship designs instantly. Then he can give it back and I can make my ship designs. It is kind of likely making a BMW in a Ford plant every other tuesday.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't see what difference it makes how 'far away' someone is. Political allegience is not like radio waves, it doesn't decay with distance. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif If you want to surrender to someone on the other side of the map, go right ahead. I wonder what happens if you surrender a full-blown empire to a neutral? http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

But yes, it is unrealistic that planets immediately begin generating resources/intel/research for your empire and can immediately begin building all of your technologies. The rate of return to 'happiness' is also off. It should take a year or so for planets acquired by empire surrender to assimilate into your empire unless they are directly occupied with troops. Maybe they should be set to maximum unhappiness automatically? That would probably result in some rebellions, but that would be appropriate. If you conquer them one at a time with troops that's another matter. Troops can sit there and watch everyone and make them turn over the resources. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

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

Re: Surrender - Big Flaw in the Game
 

Maybe surrendered and/or captured populations should be given negatives to production. That way your original race will always be a better choice for colonizing a planet.

Re: Surrender - Big Flaw in the Game
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Thomj:
So how do you get a computer to surrender?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You need a massive score advantage, the threshold in the AI's Anger files, IIRC. ISTR that they also never offer to you; you have to explicitly ask them to surrender. With a big enough score (say, in a no-warp-point game with an uberfleet...) you can get even a non-neutral AI to surrender without firing a shot, or without you knowing where they are (if somebody gave you the comm channel, for instance).

If they refuse, you just need to raise your score and lower theirs...

Re: Surrender - Big Flaw in the Game
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Taqwus:
You need a massive score advantage, the threshold in the AI's Anger files, IIRC. ISTR that they also never offer to you; you have to explicitly ask them to surrender. With a big enough score (say, in a no-warp-point game with an uberfleet...) you can get even a non-neutral AI to surrender without firing a shot, or without you knowing where they are (if somebody gave you the comm channel, for instance).

If they refuse, you just need to raise your score and lower theirs...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But there are races that will never surrender. You can change that in the politics file of each race: "Will accept surrender from friend/enemy" = true or false.

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