Intergalactic Civil War !!?? - Page 7

jc173 · #61 April 7th, 2001, 01:12 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Baal:
I don't think it should be an incentive to not become MEE. It's more like an egg timer, it gives you an amount of time to do the Mega-Evil thing or you are back to square one with another empire out there that is just as bad *** as you.

It gives purpose to try to win fast or as I said you are back to square one.

As for the splitting of the empire. It should calculate your size and split you into multipul pieces accordingly. And even better it's coded to give the human player the smallest alotment of planets/ships/stuff.

Personally I don't think this necessarily makes sense. What if I am a bloodthirsty empire that enjoys war? How would the other races regard your breakaway republics? Personally I don't really like this idea, I hate it when games try to force me into finishing the game in a set amount of time for no real discernable reason. I would suggest if MM includes this feature, include a flag to turn it off.

The other thing is I don't totally agree with the MEE idea. While there should be some trigger that makes the computer realize you are a threat, just having a large empire should not be a bad thing. If you implement this empire split up you are essentially penalizing the player for doing well.

[This message has been edited by jc173 (edited 07 April 2001).]

[This message has been edited by jc173 (edited 07 April 2001).]

chewy027 · #62 April 7th, 2001, 02:16 AM

JC173 I agree with your statement

"The other thing is I don't totally agree with the MEE idea. While there should be some trigger that makes the computer realize you are a threat, just having a large empire should not be a bad thing. If you implement this empire split up you are essentially penalizing the player for doing well."

It would be like being penalized for doing well but maybe we could change the parameters for being MEE and then implement this trigger.

Also, do you not like the Civil War idea or just the MEE trigger?

Thoughts?

[This message has been edited by chewy027 (edited 07 April 2001).]

Trachmyr · #63 April 7th, 2001, 04:09 AM

As an addendum to my earlier post:

As for ships that join the new empire, only vessels in systems that now have planets of the new empire have a chance to convert. All ships in the same sector as a planet, retain the loyalty of that planet... ships in sectors with out planets have a chance to convert equal to: (# of planets converted in system) out of (# of planets loyal + # of planets converted).

As to a MEE like trigger dor civil war, I would not want that implemented.

As for Genocide, that should be made a new line in Happiness.txt (?) (you know: Bloodthirsty, Peaceful, Neutral)... some races wouldn't care, some would be upset, others would cheer.

chewy027 · #64 April 7th, 2001, 04:15 AM

Thanks Trachmyr. I'll update the overview. Keep the ideas coming.

Baal · #65 April 7th, 2001, 04:44 AM

Sometimes things don't always make sense. But here's my try. If you are bloodthirty then if you make too many treaties with other races you should have a civil war because you are not mean enough. That would require a different trigger.

Anyway MEE doesn't make sense for peacefully expanding races anyway, but it does work for bloodthirsty races. So, I guess that it is a trade off.

chewy027 · #66 April 7th, 2001, 05:17 AM

Since some people have stated they don't like the MEE trigger maybe we could just have it influence happiness. If you are peacefull society and a MEE than people become unhappy. Likewise, as Baal stated, if you are bloodthirsty but have treaties the people become unhappy. This way the MEE indirectly can cause civil war through unhappiness.

this trigger still needs to be discussed by everyone but i have put it in the overview.

mac5732 · #67 April 7th, 2001, 10:16 PM

My opion, only, From all that I read in the thread, it sounds like the best possible trigger would have to do with attitude of the population each planet, each system and empire wide. Civil war could be a planet, which in turn affects the system and several systems infect the empire. If the empire goes to civil war the easiest way (I'm not a modder or programer) I think would be for the computer to check all planets of the empire, those with specific attitudes would have a chance to join or not join depending on their attitude at the time. Example, Jubulient, 95% not join, Happy 85% not join,
unhappy 65% not join, indeferent 50%, riot
30%, total civil disobedience 15%, insurrection 100% to join. This way it would not matter what size the planet was etc, Also the new rebellious empire would automatically be at war with its parent. The AI would treat it the same as any other player, The new empire would have the same make up as its parent, traits, attitudes, ect, or they could be racial traited as warriors or blood thirsty or whatever.
Sorry its so long,
just some ideas mac

For empire civil war, the trigger could be if 2 or more systems rebel, This would give the chance of civil war but not made easy.
Also the new empire would automaticly be given a space yard on the originating planet as well as a Govt. Facility, It would become a new empire. You could code it as either a neutral (I personaly don't like neutrals) or a bona fide expanding empire. Remember, the less hard code changes, the easier it is to implement a change. that's why I think if we look at attitudes and what triggers them it would be easier then massive changes. Example, if your bloodthirsty, at war pop happy, lose battle goes down in that system, if lose world goes down empire wide, If peaceful, war goes down, treaties goes up, If you use biological weapons for some races attitude would go down, others goes up, depends on your racial traits. again sorry for the long post, sometimes i get long winded.
just some ideas mac

[This message has been edited by mac5732 (edited 07 April 2001).]

[This message has been edited by mac5732 (edited 07 April 2001).]

jc173 · #68 April 8th, 2001, 01:42 AM

I don't have a problem with the civil war, I like the idea actually. I also think the MEE is not necessarily a bad thing, but I just don't like the way it's triggered now. Granted being the largest and most prosperous empire may cause resentment and envy (seems to work that way in our world sometimes), but declaring war on such an empire does not necessarily make sense to me. For one thing it is not necessarily in the other empires' best interest for long term survival. The other thing is I think that systems should way more heavily in the MEE trigger not planets. Why would colonizing a moon in one of my core systems that I have claimed for years suddenly make the rest of the known galaxy decide I am the ultimate threat?

Anyhow I might not have been clear enough in my Last post, but I think that tying a rebellion to MEE is just putting a limit on the player's options just because that player is doing well. Some people may like that, and I am certainly not going to tell people how to play. But if such a feature were implemented I'd prefer to be able to turn it off.

chewy027 · #69 April 8th, 2001, 02:39 AM

JC173 I agree with you. But i think MEE is a good trigger if the conditions for MEE would be changed.

Mac5732 happiness on each planet probably would be the second best trigger. The best trigger would be the loss of your capital or homeworld. As for the happiness that could follow one of the rule sets in the overview.

Thoughts? Suggestions?

dumbluck · #70 April 8th, 2001, 10:05 AM

THANK YOU Chewy027!!!!!!!!!!

thank you for saving me at least 30 minutes of reading! your hard work has not gone unappreciated!!!

THANK YOU CHEWY!!!!!!!!!