SE5, Tell Aaron what's on your Wish List

[Ed Kolis]

I'd like to see the abilities for strategic and tactical movement separated completely - currently, we have an ability to give tactical movement but no strategic (afterburners), but not the other way around - for every 2 strategic movement, you automatically get another tactical movement. What if you want to change the scale of the game so that ships are slower in combat without slowing them down on the system map? Or what if you want to have "jump drives" (only useful for long distances - you pick a target and jump there, but they're not very precise and take some time to charge up so they're useless in combat except maybe for retreating) and "thrust drives" (only useful for short distances - they're not as fast, but they have more maneuverability)? (I hate to say it, but MOO3 had "star drives" and "system drives" which behaved much the same way )

[President_Elect_Shang]

Copied from The Peace Thread:

I would like to see jumping through warp points added as an ability that can be given or taken away. I would also like to see the introduction of external ordinance racks as truly external, based on the size of the ship and not requiring internal space. Finally I would love to see the ability to treat ships as though they have the fighter ability to dock but not the fighter ability to heal after every combat. Then you could create non-jump engines that are smaller and faster than jump engines. The ships that have these could dock with carriers for ships with jump engines. Imagine jumping into a system, losing your jump carrier and not having a way to get back home. That would create a whole new dimension to the strategic element in my opinion. For the old gamers who like one engine that does it all they could just add them back in, or keep them in the first place and let people like me mod in the other engine type.

[Ed Kolis]

I'm just stealing all the good ideas from Dominions 2, but hey, that's how games work, right?

So anyway, this idea from Dom2 is that while it makes sense for troops on a planet to increase productivity by "coercing" the population to work, they should also (for most happiness types) DECREASE reproduction, or even cause a small loss of population if there is no reproduction... think about it in the real world... people who are oppressed are not going to be wanting to bring up kids into their world, and there's always the occasional fatality from police brutality or mishaps or something

[Fyron]

That makes no sense. Just because there are troops on a planet does not mean that they are going around oppressing and/or brutalizing people.

[Patroklos]

Warp and non-warp capable engines.

[ December 16, 2003, 02:58: Message edited by: Patroklos ]

[President_Elect_Shang]

Are you thinking of a Mod along the lines of StarFire?

[Ed Kolis]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
That makes no sense. Just because there are troops on a planet does not mean that they are going around oppressing and/or brutalizing people.

Troops will do what troops will do, and if you get the benefits of occupation, you ought to pay the price Besides, it also depends on your culture - some people will actually enjoy the security of having troops, while other races will take it as oppression. Perhaps it could also depend on the race of the occupying troops, though - I imagine Fazrah occupying forces would be much more brutal than, say, Abbidon

(imagines a long drawn-out argument with Fyron causing this wonderful thread to get locked )

[Fyron]

Some troops, yes. But not all. Rash generalizations should be avoided.

[JayBdey]

This may have been said before, but I'm not going to read all 50+ pages to see if it was.

I would like the windows to be able to move around, and be able to open multiple screens without having to close the window I'm in.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Some troops, yes. But not all. Rash generalizations should be avoided.

all of them?

i found myself a perfect qoute while browsing through baen's bar(forum).

"Precisely because the tyranny of opinion is such as to make eccentricity a reproach, it is desirable, in order to break through that tyranny, that people should be eccentric. Eccentricity has always abounded when and where strength of character has abounded: and the amount of eccentricity in a society has generally been proportional to the amount of genius, mental vigor, and moral courage it contained. That so few dare to be eccentric marks the chief danger of the time."
--John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, 1859

in a Fred Geisler's sig.

[ December 17, 2003, 04:35: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]