.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

Air Assault Task Force- Save $8.00
Bronze- Save $10.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > Shrapnel Community > Space Empires: IV & V

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 20th, 2003, 04:20 AM

Hotfoot Hotfoot is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 175
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hotfoot is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Thoughts on future of Intel

Actually, having Intel be more like the current ship-building system could be a viable alternative. Maybe even making research similar could be interesting (but that's another subject for another pondering).

Each Intelligence project would be like a ship design, in that you would decide what resources would be used into generating it. Would it be a lone spy with a hefty amount of financial and technological support (a la James Bond), or would it be like the Soviet method of three agents, each reporting on the other to ensure loyalty (and thus a much lesser chance of the agents being subverted by enemy counter-intelligence). What special rights do they have as spies (or counter-intelligence, for that matter). Some components for a project could adversely effect planetary, system, or empire-wide happiness levels in exchange for greater security of intelligence projects and against enemy intelligence projects. Some could even have negative effects on trade relations with other empires.

Ultimately, the intelligence of the empire would be a constant drain on the resources of the empire, rather than just a one-time cost. Also, each intelligence compound could only have a limited "sphere of influence". While individual components of a project might be able to increase the operation range of any project, there would be some sort of limitation on range. Barring that, at least have reliability decrease with range, or have it increase with proximity. It will be much easier to gain reliable intelligence on something closer to you than something farther away.

Intelligence compounds could still produce intelligence points, but these could be more akin to available agency personnel, rather than an arbitrary number. You would still need to fund the costs with minerals, organics, and radioactives (though it would be nice to have a nice catch-all "credits" as well, and have each resource have various market values or something).

The only real limit to any project would be the number of personnel you could use to put it together. Each personnel "point" would be a cost in a component of the project in addition to the mineral, organic, and radioactives (and maybe credits) cost of the project. If there are multiple compounds in the same system, you could potentially "borrow" personnel in order to increase project size (say, for a system-wide counterintelligence project). Using personnel from other systems would require a reduced rate to represent the difficulties of managing an interstellar intelligence network.

As for the construction of such projects, here is how I see it potentially working:

Each project would have an objective. This would be akin to the bridge/crew quarters/life support requirement. Possible objectives would include desired result, target, and methods used to obtain the objective. For example, steal a [random] technology from the Eee by Bribery and Subterfuge. Bribery would be potentially expensive, and you could put limits on how much your spies are allowed to spend on bribes, so that they don't bankrupt your empire getting you some worthless tech.

Also, like ships, each turn they would have an upkeep cost that you would need to pay, based on the components you used to construct the project. So having monstrous intel projects would be cost-prohibative for an empire that didn't have at least a decent income, though obviously cheaper than a massive fleet of ships.

As far as counter-intelligence is concerned, the same would be applicable. Desired outcome would be to catch or thwart anyone spying on you, either by tightening your security up and/or by feeding massive amounts of false information to enemy agents. You could also conduct assassinations of enemy intelligence operatives, either "passively" against those within your own territory, or actively attempting to hunt down the agents of a specific empire (or at least locating them so that you can glass the planet that they're working on). Death of your agents will, naturally, reduce your number of intelligence points. You could construct your projects to be somewhat redundant in this regard (essentially having "armor", to continue with the ship analogy), but after a time, you will need to replace your personnel.

Now, how would one do this? Well, I'm glad that you asked.

Recruitment centers. Recruitment centers for Intelligence, Research, Military, heck, even miners, engineers, traders, and so on. I'm not suggesting that we keep track of each person in your empire, but having recruitment centers on a planet would help towards a more realistic game, and really wouldn't add a whole lot of micromanagement. Just have each recruitment center be able to recruit a certain number (or percentage) of a planet's population into one of X many job pools (Construction Worker, Miner, Trader, Farmer, Research, Teacher, Space Force, Army, Intelligence, Entertainment, etc.) Each planet would have a certain number of each type, which could be shared evenly within a system. So you could shuffle a large number of miners to a mineral rich rock you've found, and so on. As your race reproduces, the youngsters will need to decide what career they would want to have, so the recruitment centers on a planet could gradually shift the balance to what you need more of. Also, populations could change jobs, so if you ran a draft, say, you could convert X non-military population into space force and army positions. You could also offer benefits to certain job types (Researchers, Teachers), taking a financial loss and turning it into a gain elsewhere.

Of course, people tend to go where the jobs are, so it should do little good to have recruitment centers when you have a surplus of possible applicants (sort of like having a total population cap on planets). As you improve your facilities, the number of jobs they can offer (and thus the number of population working at said facilities) should increase.

Best of all, if you know your enemy has one system which is a major source of their intelligence efforts, or maybe just one planet close to you which is pulling off a seriously damaging project, you can send it a fleet, attack the planet the project is on, and destroy the project itself (plus the people working on it). Think of it Hitler had bombed Benchley Park, and thus all the people working on decrypting engima and such. It could have been disasterous for the Allied Intelligence.

Now, as for time scale. As it is, intel projects take time to complete, based on the same idea as research. This is unrealistic. Instead, the projects would take time to be constructed. This would represent getting all the available resources into place, inserting agents, covert communication lines, and so on. Once a project is completed, it continues operation every turn until it is cancelled or destroyed. Different types of projects could potentially lose multiple personnel per turn, and thus be costly to have running constantly. Putting projects on hold would help stop the costs for a time (esentially similar to mothballing the project), but not prevent counter-intelligence retribution entirely, just as mothballed ships can still be destroyed in combat. The difference, however, would be that while on hold, the intelligence project would still tie up personnel (though you could go and "retrofit" the project dynamically so that you could regain some personnel for other projects if you so desired). The only way to completely regain all of your personell would be to scrap the project and make a whole new one.

Also, as successes increase, individual projects/personnel/facilities gain experience. Over time, there would be a gradual degradation of experience, representing older agents retiring and removing their experience from the availible pool, and new recruits joining to take their place (not the same as recruitment), or institutions losing effectiveness over time. If agents are lost, their experience is lost as well, and they would be replaced by a new recruit. The same system could be used for fleet experience, and even fighter/ground troop experience.

Anyway, that's my idea, and how I'd like to see intel, among other things, handled in SEV.
Plus, I think that it's somewhat workable even within SEIV with just a few (relatively minor in theory, but probably huge in practice) changes to the game.

Comments and/or suggestions are welcomed, of course.

[ March 20, 2003, 02:22: Message edited by: Hotfoot ]
__________________
L* GdY $? Fr? C--- S* T? Sf* Tcp- A++ M>M+ Mp!>Mp* RHP!>RV Pw Fq ND? Rp+ G++ AuO MM++
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old March 20th, 2003, 04:22 AM
Atrocities's Avatar

Atrocities Atrocities is offline
Shrapnel Fanatic
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 15,630
Thanks: 0
Thanked 30 Times in 18 Posts
Atrocities is on a distinguished road
Default 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.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old March 20th, 2003, 04:57 AM

Taera Taera is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 1,743
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Taera is on a distinguished road
Default 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!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old March 20th, 2003, 06:57 AM
stecal's Avatar

stecal stecal is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
Posts: 37
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
stecal is on a distinguished road
Default 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.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old March 20th, 2003, 12:59 PM

klausD klausD is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Posts: 170
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
klausD is on a distinguished road
Default 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
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old March 21st, 2003, 02:01 AM
dogscoff's Avatar

dogscoff dogscoff is offline
General
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,245
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
dogscoff is on a distinguished road
Default 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 ]
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old March 20th, 2003, 08:23 PM

Baron Munchausen Baron Munchausen is offline
General
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 4,323
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Baron Munchausen is on a distinguished road
Default 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.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.