Planets and Resources

[pydna]

I suppose the two main reasons why I was thinking of zones are:

1. Micromangement - You could get through your economic management quickly.

2. Strategic Planning - Allows you to plan system defences around zones rather than individual planets.

On the other hand if you had invidiual planets/moons etc then this could be fun too. You could have multiple customizable AI scripts to run each worlds economy (e.g. Starter Colony, Mining World, Late Game Colony etc).

Also this could give the player some interesting strategic choices to make. Do I spread my system defences which will safe guard the system effectively against raids but leave me vulnerable to invasion. Or do I concentrate my defences at one or two key locations which will be far more effective against an invasion fleet but leave the outer worlds vulnerable to raiding.

I suppose it all comes down much time will it take a player to do their turn. Don't get me wrong, I personally like a bit of MM but I realise that it isn't everyones cup of tea.

[Xrati]

Late game micromanagement tends to get repetitive and really starts to take away from game play. Having the AI handle some of it helps out quite a bit.

[MarcoPolo]

I dont know about how complex or how simplified you guys want this game to look like. But if what one Shrapnel programmer said here is true about multiple races being able to colonise single planets... then how do you figure this will be done without too much elborate MM (Micromanagement).

I think that each planet should be zoned (for the purpose of sharing a world with several players), of course this addition in detail will undoubtly increase the level of MM, but I propose that it be handled in a multi-tier approach. Whereby the player has the choice to indulge in "said" MM planet functions (or tier 1), and also have a choice to retreat to another tier (tier 2)... ie interplanetary view where immediate moons, asteroids basic planetary region information is tweaked to the players preferences. Tier 3 could be the entire solar system view which enables a player to directly manipulate complete production for his entire solar systems output. It would be a summarised stats screen that allows for direct manipulation of science/commerce/production etc etc for every asset owned by the civilization in that star system. Tier 4 would be a galaxy view of all the stars within that persons acquisition. And each of these levels could be automated at the users behest.

I think the crux of this working or not lies with the focus of how resources will be exploited and in which way to have a significant bearing on gameplay. There is no point to having so many celestial bodies on offer if the game does not intend on having a resource based system of economics or advancements. If there will be no planet mining or finite resources then there will be little incentive to take over anothers territory (other than conquest alone which quickly becomes an empty exercise stilted in the tedious and repititous).

I would make certain resources more abundant on terrestrial planets than gas giants or asteroid belts but balanced enough to make it compelling to need to acquire control of a gas giant or asteroid belts too (by the same token some resources will be more abundant on gas giants and asteroid belts than terrestrial worlds). Otherwise it becomes a self defeating undertaking that offers no strategic benefits to moving an empire from rock to rock. Even stars should have research or defensive bonuses when exploited. Of course there can be star systems that maybe a barren choice for colonisation, ie a small red dwarf with maybe 2 or 3 barren worlds. But this should not detract from it having a strategic importance if its near the border of a significant civilization as it could be used to install listening posts or something that would gain the player a tactical advantage.

In the immortal words of another military tactician...

We can ill afford another Klendathu :P

[pydna]

It really depends on how you would like to design your overall planet/colonisation rules.

How many star systems would the biggest game have?

How many objects were you planning to include in each system?

Is there a limit on the number of player manufactured objects in a system? (e.g. minefields, space stations etc).

Xrati I never considered two or more players colonising the same planet. It could be interesting, perhaps some rule that only allies could do this? Ofcourse this could lead to conflict down the track if one player wanted to terraform the world and the other didn't, or they stopped being allies :-)

[MarcoPolo]

I was also intruiged by multiple races colonising one world. It is an intersting concept. I would do with allies only, but also having the option of underground colonies if the civilization in question has the technology to do so. Basically allowing a free for all, enemy, ally or neutral to grab territory in a big way and perhaps causing disputes and minor planetside skirmishes that could be resolved peacefully too if more diplomatic avenues are available.

I also hope pre space faring worlds and civilisations are an option, they could offer valuable commodities, like slaves if one is a very draconian society hellbent on conquest. I would also ask that pre space faring plants be allowed the option of joining an advanced civilisations empire, as a means of guaranteeing it survival and for rich commercial opportunities too. Or one could even colonise the planets rock strata, ie underground levels if possible, or perhaps even some underwater sea colonisation that is rich in resources and will not alert the younger civilisation to it.

All in all this game should allow for some very enticing gameplay options.

[jars_u]

Originally Posted by MarcoPolo

...I also hope pre space faring worlds and civilisations are an option...

I think that an excellent idea that I would also like to see implemented in some fashion in SL - could add some real depth to the game on a number of levels.

[MarcoPolo]

If theres one other thing that I would like to see in this game. It has to be a wider variety of stars and terrestrial or gas planet types as in games like Hegemonia, and maybe include the different orbits if there are binary or trinary systems. The models used in Free Orion Planets and stars are inspiring but i would enjoy orbits displaying habitable zones and the like. Adding more of a realism not yet seen in games of this type.

I think adding these levels of realism can create a new game dynamic that could open other tactical considerations akin to Civ4 terrain types, where each planet type has its advantages/disadvantages, whereby resources and production are balanced on these properties. Hopefully creating a richer game environment that adds another consideration for planet hunting other than just seeking the richest earthlike planet and hording such worlds willy nilly.

Without a balance in place of resources vs habitability the game would quickly become a mad dash for earth havens. By this I mean some players may have a huge number of habitable worlds but very little mineable resources, because it could be feasable to say all the rich mining and resource gathering for a space faring civilisation would happen outside terrestrial worlds. Primarily on asteroids belts and gas giants. Of course this doesn't negate the importance of terrestrial worlds offering sufficient resources at least to get your civilisation off the ground and onto the next rock. But if its abundance and a strong economy that the player is after then one can surmise that the rest of the solar system is where these riches are to be made.

[Xrati]

Ever play SE4 with the finite resources turned on?
Entirely a different game, requiring a different build strategy.

[pydna]

On the other hand MarcoPolo, I could design my race to live on Gas Giants. Hey let those hooomans have their rocky water worlds. I'll take Jupiter :-)

[Gregstrom]

That could create interesting dynamics. Your colonists aren't going to be arguing over real estate, but there's some potential for serious disagreements over mining rights.