quote:
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.
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.
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?
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.
[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 06 April 2001).]
Re: Surrender - Big Flaw in the Game
Threaded Mode