|
|
|
 |

March 20th, 2003, 04:22 AM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 15,630
Thanks: 0
Thanked 30 Times in 18 Posts
|
|
Re: Thoughts on future of Intel
I would have to agree with pretty much everything that has been said here.
I would also like to see a major system for counter intel as well. A system that allows a player to focus on CI as equally or more than Intel.
__________________
Creator of the Star Trek Mod - AST Mod - 78 Ship Sets - Conquest Mod - Atrocities Star Wars Mod - Galaxy Reborn Mod - and Subterfuge Mod.
|

March 20th, 2003, 04:57 AM
|
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 1,743
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Thoughts on future of Intel
wow that was fast
Klaus - in fact it is your letter to SE mailing list that inspired me for that thread.
Interesting thoughts, but i have to say that i dont see individual "leaders" coming into play at SE. And i dont realy want to. I prefer realism over eyecandy and if you think about it, what can a single operative do after all?
Espionage and sabotage should most surely be separated. Espionage is not agression and is quite difficult to stop.
I know i might regret it but what about introducing "espionage units" into the game? Not like in Sid Meier's games though - when you start a project you produce a "spy boat" with this particular mission which you then have to bring to the destination. They are invisible save for, say, 2 sector view from specialized facilities on planets and other "spy boats".
And PPP is crap, how can you run a political party on bloodthirsty anarchic machines? Or on hiveminds? and so on. Same with Crew [whatever].
__________________
Let the game begin!
Green bug from outa space!
|

March 20th, 2003, 06:57 AM
|
 |
Private
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
Posts: 37
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Thoughts on future of Intel
Communications mimic has to go too. A potential 20% loss of mutual trade between 2 empires that will take 20 turns to rebuild, plus any co-located ships, unit & planets suddenly all attack each other and blocade planets. All this for a single intell attack? Makes PPP and mutiny seem like baby stuff.
|

March 20th, 2003, 12:59 PM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Posts: 170
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Thoughts on future of Intel
Quote:
Klaus - in fact it is your letter to SE mailing list that inspired me for that thread.
|
Glad that I could inspire you. My post was intended to make some suggestions and inspirings before Aaron is finalizing his game concepts for SEV.
"Individual Leaders" If you mean leaders like in MOO2, then I am also against this. (I did never like them really) I am just for a modified spy system with actual spies and not only abstract intel points. Of course the term "actual spies" could also be a spy ring of hundreds of individuals (if you dont like a single person)
Sabotage and Intel dividing. Maybe, but I think its difficult. In our days with human ethic values an intel spy is not so bad like a saboteur, but who knows what Aliens think about this evaluation. Maybe the Cue Cappa like Saboteurs more and hate all those intelligence gathering spies which sit only on their arses and the whole day read cue cappain newspapers?
IMO the complex of secret service should rather taken as one - for simplicity - and should not be divided, but if there are game concept reasons why it should be divided, I am for it.
PPP - yes this is crap. It should be replaced by better named and designed missions.
spy ships - good idea. A game system where I can assign certain special secret missions to spies and where it is necessary to lift them with special ships to enemy territory physically. I think its important that not all missions need physically lifting the spy to the enemy, because one can assume that certain missions require only the normal way with all those many tiny litte offmap freighters the game has already now. A further possiblity would be that hidden (in clouds and asteroids) spy ships are able to collect data about enemy planets and ships. I hope Aaron reads this thread.
bye
KlausD
|

March 21st, 2003, 02:01 AM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,245
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Thoughts on future of Intel
Many good ideas here. Might as well throw my 0.02 into the bucket.
I would like to see the mechanics underlying the game strengthened, so that certain types of intel work indirectly, for example:
If we had a system where ships track not only experience but loyalty and morale, then you might find that sometimes ships switch sides on their own under certain conditions. Then, rather than have an intel project which magically switches the ship's allegiance, you'd just have a project which attacks the ship's loyalty rating, or its morale in the hopes that you'd tip the balance in your favour
Similarly, planets should have a more realistic model for rebellion based on loyalty and morale, (with loyalty to each of the in-game empires tracked), with rebellions carrying a chance of joining another empire rather than becoming independent. Then rather than a PPP project which either switches control or doesn't, you'd attack that planet's morale, incite rioting and let the game's mechanics take care of the rest.
Throw in extra complications like troops that can fight a rebelling population and you'd have an beautifully organic and realistically unpredictable system.
A few more things: I've suggested this before as being related to population management and population movement (see my various rants about having populations move autonomously), but it's relevant to intel. I'd like to be able to set the freedom level I allow my citizens. you'd be able to choose between a variety of settings (maybe a percentage scale) between the following 2 extremes :
*Completely libertarian: foreign trade and research sharing flourish. Citizens are happy, but enemy intel/ sabotage is hard to spot. Plagues spread rapidly, populations move about freely within and across national borders. Popular uprisings are harder to control.
*Totalitarian control: Foreign trade and research sharing are lowered somewhat. Populaions cannot move so freely, so plagues are easily contained. Citizens are less happy, but their uprisings are easier to suppress due to totalitarian infrastructure. Infiltration by enemy intel is very difficult.
You'd be able to move your status on this scale during the game, but anything but the most gradual changes would cause popular unrest. Suddenly switching from one extreme to the oother would cause massive rioting.
Finally, intel against friendly empires should be easier than against enemies- after all it's easier to steal from/ sabotage someone who trusts you.
[ March 20, 2003, 12:08: Message edited by: dogscoff ]
|

March 20th, 2003, 08:23 PM
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 4,323
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Thoughts on future of Intel
Dogscoff,
Assuming that someone 'trusts you' because they have a treaty with you is a bit naive.  Let's just let the target's counter-intel level determine the chance of success.
Other than the modifiers I have recommended before, of the race on the planet, and their current anger level, having an effect.
It would be nice if the planetary 'covert recon' report would tell you the race of the inhabitants and the 'mood' (anger level) on the planet as well as the cargo and facilities.
I would also support the idea of being able to plant 'moles' in other empires. You could spend points on the 'mole' project and if it is successful you'd have those points stored for possible use in a future intel project in that empire.
|

March 20th, 2003, 08:39 PM
|
Private
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 32
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Thoughts on future of Intel
Very good observation. I too think it is unnecessary to add complications of treaties to the calculation factor. Heck, even in one of my games I had a treaty with the Jreanor (lizard guys), but I didn't trust them any more than a true enemy. Heck, a true enemy would at least be more honest in their intentions, so my distrust of them probably goes futher than that.
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|