Real life, mostly. I'm still trying to kick Aralonia into doing the map. I've otherwise hit a case of writer's block and haven't been able to make any other progress. Inspiration just ain't coming to me.Normandy wrote:We have no word from Arcalane.
Whether he's bogged down in Real Life™, or simply abandoned the project, we don't know.
Galactic Conquest Organization Ideas & Discussion
Moderators: th15, Moderators
／l、
ﾞ（ﾟ､ ｡ ７
l、ﾞ ~ヽ
じしf_, )ノ
ﾞ（ﾟ､ ｡ ７
l、ﾞ ~ヽ
じしf_, )ノ
Well, since it's just writer's block...Arcalane wrote:Real life, mostly. I'm still trying to kick Aralonia into doing the map. I've otherwise hit a case of writer's block and haven't been able to make any other progress. Inspiration just ain't coming to me.Normandy wrote:We have no word from Arcalane.
Whether he's bogged down in Real Life™, or simply abandoned the project, we don't know.
How about you list the things that need doing, and we can all try and fill the gaps? For instance, you need a map. Why not just let anyone who wants take a crack at it? If you/we don't like it, it can always be discarded, or at least used as a stepping stone as we figure out what we need.
Aralonia has been working on it lately, so I'm leaving that in his hands for now.
Stuff that's needed;
Economy. Some kind of economic scale. Will we work in tens, hundreds or thousands of credits? Could we pretend to work in thousands, but use tens for the numbers, with rounded costs? For sanity's sake, there is a galactic currency, and it is called the credit. It may not be original but everyone understands it. Anyone arguing with this choice of name will be summarily executed for wasting time.
System bonuses, perhaps. These should be relative to the overall game, not combat. A system could be a rich source of a particularly useful ship construction alloy, reducing all ship production costs or times, for example. Bonuses depend a lot on how the map turns out, and these bonuses should be relatively few and far between. Could certain systems have extra long-range gates that lead vast distances across the in-game universe to add different routes and allow empires at long distances from each other relatively quick access?
Movement. How do we handle it? I'm thinking a maximum of 1 jump per turn, in a move and attack fashion similar to SW: Battlefront 2. Movement distance will be limited similar to Galactic Civilizations 2, in which a fleet cannot move a set distance beyond a friendly system. Research could enhance this. Note there will not be a fixed supply system.
Research. The basic system goes "planets generate x Research Points per turn, which can be put into research topics. Once a topic reaches the required amount of points, it is complete." But what researches do we have, and what are the rates like? How will the tech-trees behave? Do players pick from one fixed tree at the start ("Conventional" (Terran) or "Exotic" (Alien)?) and progress down that, or do we have a more open-ended system that perhaps includes some ANDs, some ORs and some NOTs, restricting players from advancing up BOTH trees at once - allowing them to use a little exotic weaponry and most conventional weaponry, or vice versa - or what?
Ships and Bases. Do we go for a strict and rigorous points-and-cost based system, or do we go for an approval-first build-your-own loosely-regulated system? Input on both is required, especially some guidelines if we do choose a more rigorous and serious system.
Planetary Enhancements. The "Mainworld" of a planet will have some space for additional enhancements and structures. What kind of structures will we have, and what kind of effects will they have? Take in mind that they should not directly impact combat (ie, a structure that increases allied weapon power in a system) but should be more geared towards production and economy/science.
Systems. As it is, my vision is of one "main" colonized planet per system. The population is primarily irrelevant to cut down on overheads. However, should we include system/mainworld quality that can impact production output and have additional (or less?) space for planetary enhancements?
Stuff that's needed;
Economy. Some kind of economic scale. Will we work in tens, hundreds or thousands of credits? Could we pretend to work in thousands, but use tens for the numbers, with rounded costs? For sanity's sake, there is a galactic currency, and it is called the credit. It may not be original but everyone understands it. Anyone arguing with this choice of name will be summarily executed for wasting time.
System bonuses, perhaps. These should be relative to the overall game, not combat. A system could be a rich source of a particularly useful ship construction alloy, reducing all ship production costs or times, for example. Bonuses depend a lot on how the map turns out, and these bonuses should be relatively few and far between. Could certain systems have extra long-range gates that lead vast distances across the in-game universe to add different routes and allow empires at long distances from each other relatively quick access?
Movement. How do we handle it? I'm thinking a maximum of 1 jump per turn, in a move and attack fashion similar to SW: Battlefront 2. Movement distance will be limited similar to Galactic Civilizations 2, in which a fleet cannot move a set distance beyond a friendly system. Research could enhance this. Note there will not be a fixed supply system.
Research. The basic system goes "planets generate x Research Points per turn, which can be put into research topics. Once a topic reaches the required amount of points, it is complete." But what researches do we have, and what are the rates like? How will the tech-trees behave? Do players pick from one fixed tree at the start ("Conventional" (Terran) or "Exotic" (Alien)?) and progress down that, or do we have a more open-ended system that perhaps includes some ANDs, some ORs and some NOTs, restricting players from advancing up BOTH trees at once - allowing them to use a little exotic weaponry and most conventional weaponry, or vice versa - or what?
Ships and Bases. Do we go for a strict and rigorous points-and-cost based system, or do we go for an approval-first build-your-own loosely-regulated system? Input on both is required, especially some guidelines if we do choose a more rigorous and serious system.
Planetary Enhancements. The "Mainworld" of a planet will have some space for additional enhancements and structures. What kind of structures will we have, and what kind of effects will they have? Take in mind that they should not directly impact combat (ie, a structure that increases allied weapon power in a system) but should be more geared towards production and economy/science.
Systems. As it is, my vision is of one "main" colonized planet per system. The population is primarily irrelevant to cut down on overheads. However, should we include system/mainworld quality that can impact production output and have additional (or less?) space for planetary enhancements?
／l、
ﾞ（ﾟ､ ｡ ７
l、ﾞ ~ヽ
じしf_, )ノ
ﾞ（ﾟ､ ｡ ７
l、ﾞ ~ヽ
じしf_, )ノ
My take on things:
Economy: Don't worry about the credits. We're working with organizations that can throw around more material and manpower than anything ever seen on Earth. Instead, use 'Resource Units' to construct things, and just use credits as in-game fiction. It's going to have to be somewhat abstracted, of course.
System bonuses: Every system should have stats. For example, (Material, Vitality, Gates, Bases). Every system will have the same number of points, but distributed differently. For example, one with high amounts of material and gates, but low bases and almost no vitality could be a system full of asteroids - their paths aren't predictable enough yet for many bases, and there's nothing to terraform, but they're very easy to mine and the gravitational well is small, making it easy to travel to/from.
Movement: Sounds fine. I'd go with a limit based on the number of jumps between resupply stops, myself - and every resupply stop takes a turn of being idle. This will allow for a feeling of overextending supply lines, without having to actually have supply lines.
Research: I'm thinking something almost like a White-Wolf system here - different traits and skills, each of which can have points put into them. For instance, Ship Speed, Armor, Max Sections, and so on. Might allow for more versatility there. Weapons will go from being unusable, to costing more than normal, all the way to costing the normal amount or even less. Some weapons will require other things, too (like the Mega Tach, for instance, will require the Tachyon and the Repeater to be maxed out first).
Ships and Bases: Go with the standard tourney pricing, but with the base stats determined by research, as above.
Planetary Enhancements: I'd restrict it to one of a few different things - Mining, Research, or Production, maybe one or two more if they come up. Mining would increase resources gained, Research would give better research (duh), and Production would allow ships to be built more quickly.
Systems: System stats, as I gave above, will help determine production output, a rough guideline as to population, and so on.
Economy: Don't worry about the credits. We're working with organizations that can throw around more material and manpower than anything ever seen on Earth. Instead, use 'Resource Units' to construct things, and just use credits as in-game fiction. It's going to have to be somewhat abstracted, of course.
System bonuses: Every system should have stats. For example, (Material, Vitality, Gates, Bases). Every system will have the same number of points, but distributed differently. For example, one with high amounts of material and gates, but low bases and almost no vitality could be a system full of asteroids - their paths aren't predictable enough yet for many bases, and there's nothing to terraform, but they're very easy to mine and the gravitational well is small, making it easy to travel to/from.
Movement: Sounds fine. I'd go with a limit based on the number of jumps between resupply stops, myself - and every resupply stop takes a turn of being idle. This will allow for a feeling of overextending supply lines, without having to actually have supply lines.
Research: I'm thinking something almost like a White-Wolf system here - different traits and skills, each of which can have points put into them. For instance, Ship Speed, Armor, Max Sections, and so on. Might allow for more versatility there. Weapons will go from being unusable, to costing more than normal, all the way to costing the normal amount or even less. Some weapons will require other things, too (like the Mega Tach, for instance, will require the Tachyon and the Repeater to be maxed out first).
Ships and Bases: Go with the standard tourney pricing, but with the base stats determined by research, as above.
Planetary Enhancements: I'd restrict it to one of a few different things - Mining, Research, or Production, maybe one or two more if they come up. Mining would increase resources gained, Research would give better research (duh), and Production would allow ships to be built more quickly.
Systems: System stats, as I gave above, will help determine production output, a rough guideline as to population, and so on.
That is splitting hairs a bit, as nobody has defined what a credit represents, and 'resource unit' is roungly equal in nebulosity. Plus, Arca already said he doesn't want to discuss the names on pain of execution, so...Comus wrote:Economy: Don't worry about the credits. We're working with organizations that can throw around more material and manpower than anything ever seen on Earth. Instead, use 'Resource Units'
Limiting your maximum distance from freindly territory simulates supply lines with less book keeping, and in my experince with Masters of Orion, is a pretty good system. New researchs and stuff can increase your range, of course.Comus wrote:Movement: Sounds fine. I'd go with a limit based on the number of jumps between resupply stops, myself - and every resupply stop takes a turn of being idle. This will allow for a feeling of overextending supply lines, without having to actually have supply lines.
Why don't we use the tourney system, but instead of limiting players to X amount of points, we say something along the lines of for every point it costs, means it costs 1*10^y credits, where y= the power of 10 which is appropriate to our scale.Arcalane wrote:Ships and Bases. Do we go for a strict and rigorous points-and-cost based system, or do we go for an approval-first build-your-own loosely-regulated system? Input on both is required, especially some guidelines if we do choose a more rigorous and serious system.
[img]http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/8666/cylonbasestareyevq0.gif[/img]
Mjolnir, Hammer of Thor. Id like to see you try to kill me, and why would you want to take my stuff, its all crap anyway.
Mjolnir, Hammer of Thor. Id like to see you try to kill me, and why would you want to take my stuff, its all crap anyway.
A good point. Same difference. I'm just wary of using a monetary system, but the difference between ten thousand credits and ten thousand credits worth of unobtanium just doesn't come into play in a game.Siber wrote: That is splitting hairs a bit, as nobody has defined what a credit represents, and 'resource unit' is roungly equal in nebulosity. Plus, Arca already said he doesn't want to discuss the names on pain of execution, so...
In my opinion, this will be too complicated and boring. Everything should be more simple. I mean, no refuel, population, only one resource, etc.
Economy: Credits, in hundreds
System bonuses: Like Arcalane said, some give production bonuses, credits bonuses, etc.
Movement: my idea is 1 turn with 1-3 moves per day. You don't have to wait for everyone to make his move, you just can make one turn every day.
Research: my idea is that every player can submit 3 custom weapons to use in the game. Then, the judges will analyse, aprove or reprove(if exploitable, for example) and then give it a price, wich will be very high. However, on the course of the game, the player can spend credits improving these weapons, separately. Once the game starts, they cannot be changed, but can be banned if necessary.
Ships and Bases: not sure o this, but it can't be so loosely, or we will have too much chances for exploiting. But also, I would like to see interesting ships, not just ships designed only to be effective at max, like in tourneys.
I also like the idea of bases being able to be upgraded over time.
Ill comment later on the rest, and I hope my english is barely correct and understandable.
Economy: Credits, in hundreds
System bonuses: Like Arcalane said, some give production bonuses, credits bonuses, etc.
Movement: my idea is 1 turn with 1-3 moves per day. You don't have to wait for everyone to make his move, you just can make one turn every day.
Research: my idea is that every player can submit 3 custom weapons to use in the game. Then, the judges will analyse, aprove or reprove(if exploitable, for example) and then give it a price, wich will be very high. However, on the course of the game, the player can spend credits improving these weapons, separately. Once the game starts, they cannot be changed, but can be banned if necessary.
Ships and Bases: not sure o this, but it can't be so loosely, or we will have too much chances for exploiting. But also, I would like to see interesting ships, not just ships designed only to be effective at max, like in tourneys.
I also like the idea of bases being able to be upgraded over time.
Ill comment later on the rest, and I hope my english is barely correct and understandable.
[url=http://www.wyrdysm.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2315][b]ENEBRA COLONIAL NAVY[/b][/url]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v60/_Ti__/ECNsig.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v60/_Ti__/ECNsig.jpg[/img]
[quote="_Ti__"]
Research: my idea is that every player can submit 3 custom weapons to use in the game. Then, the judges will analyse, aprove or reprove(if exploitable, for example) and then give it a price, wich will be very high. However, on the course of the game, the player can spend credits improving these weapons, separately. Once the game starts, they cannot be changed, but can be banned if necessary.
quote]
Nooooooooo.
A lack of costum weapons would be horrible.
They should just be more expsensive.
Research: my idea is that every player can submit 3 custom weapons to use in the game. Then, the judges will analyse, aprove or reprove(if exploitable, for example) and then give it a price, wich will be very high. However, on the course of the game, the player can spend credits improving these weapons, separately. Once the game starts, they cannot be changed, but can be banned if necessary.
quote]
Nooooooooo.
A lack of costum weapons would be horrible.
They should just be more expsensive.
Well, its better than no custom weapons. maybe increase the number to 5? And the judges could make their price higher anyway.derekiv wrote:_Ti__ wrote:
Research: my idea is that every player can submit 3 custom weapons to use in the game. Then, the judges will analyse, aprove or reprove(if exploitable, for example) and then give it a price, wich will be very high. However, on the course of the game, the player can spend credits improving these weapons, separately. Once the game starts, they cannot be changed, but can be banned if necessary.
quote]
Nooooooooo.
A lack of costum weapons would be horrible.
They should just be more expsensive.
[url=http://www.wyrdysm.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2315][b]ENEBRA COLONIAL NAVY[/b][/url]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v60/_Ti__/ECNsig.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v60/_Ti__/ECNsig.jpg[/img]
Still, Nooooooooooooo._Ti__ wrote:derekiv wrote:Well, its better than no custom weapons. maybe increase the number to 5? And the judges could make their price higher anyway._Ti__ wrote:
Research: my idea is that every player can submit 3 custom weapons to use in the game. Then, the judges will analyse, aprove or reprove(if exploitable, for example) and then give it a price, wich will be very high. However, on the course of the game, the player can spend credits improving these weapons, separately. Once the game starts, they cannot be changed, but can be banned if necessary.
quote]
Nooooooooo.
A lack of costum weapons would be horrible.
They should just be more expsensive.
I don't mean like super powerful weapons I mean like slightly modified.
There is a lot that can be done with default weapons. True, more is possible with modded weapons, but it's hardly a requirement for building fun ships. Now there's no real huge reason why a system couldn't be developed for automaticly pricing custom weapons, or why custom weapons couldn't be submitted to the judges and priced... except time. Lots and lots of time. It's probably a lot more trouble than it's worth, in the long run.
..._Ti__ wrote:Everything should be more simple. I mean, no refuel, population, only one resource, etc.
That's the entire idea. Credits = primary resource. No refuelling, no population tracking. In fact, the only other resource you have would be research points. Technically production output might count, but that would only come into play if we had the stricter system. Production output basically defines the rate at which a sector can construct spacecraft or bases. This encourages construction of "assembly plants" (planets set up specifically to construct additional spacecraft) and other planet specialization.
There would be no resources, otherwise. The stuff about the alloy was just a kind of "fluff" reasoning as to why that system granted the benefit. It would have no practical effect otherwise.
@Comus;
What'd I say about the currency? ¬¬ It's just names and numbers, and that's all that we're using it for. We could use man hours. We could use chunks of rock. We could use gold pieces, or doubloons, or even pieces of eight. It doesn't really matter. The credit is there and meant to be fairly flexible.
@Mjolnir;
Deceptively simple! It captures the effect I wanted without having to manually price (in credits of course) the seperate weapons and modules.
It may need a little refining, but it's a good start. No cap except your wallet also encourages diversity and, as _Ti__ says, should stop people from min-maxing their ships by giving them no practical maximum save their wallet. Sure they can still design for maximum efficiency, but people will still be able to one-up those in one way or another.
Some sort of power grid or module limitation will need to be retained, however, to prevent over-use of certain powerful modules.
Also, slight modification of the multiplier would allow people to use the different rulesets. For example, the credit multiplier might only be 1x for a PT, but it could be 2.5x for a DS, and 4x for a BS.
@Siber;
That's how I explained it, isn't it? Maybe I wasn't specific enough.Limiting your maximum distance from freindly territory simulates supply lines with less book keeping, and in my experince with Masters of Orion, is a pretty good system. New researchs and stuff can increase your range, of course.
@Comus;
Also, ship speed isn't fast enough (currently) to penalize fleets that run out of fuel outside of a refuel depot unless they're totally immobilized. In which case they're rather screwed unless we add resupply fleets, which is unlikely, because then they'll probably just get abused somehow.
／l、
ﾞ（ﾟ､ ｡ ７
l、ﾞ ~ヽ
じしf_, )ノ
ﾞ（ﾟ､ ｡ ７
l、ﾞ ~ヽ
じしf_, )ノ
ECONOMY: sounds good
SYSTEM BONUSES: whatever, just keep it simple. they are unimportant IMHO
MOVEMENT: 1 jump per turn sounds fine. enforces strategic thinking.
RESEARCH: who needs it? Let's start will all tech.
Come to think of it, what's the time span of a turn in in-game turns. A day? A week? A month? Does it make sense to come up with 30 new tech within a year or a month?
SHIPS AND BASES: rigorous point system. Cuts down on the whining later and is easier to balance.
PLANETARY ENHANCEMENTS: do we need them? I guess they can allways fall under the category of:
- fleetyard
- trade hub
- orbital defenses
- intelligence outpost
- sensor grid ..etc..
SYSTEM: Simplicity is good. Homeworld can have some bonuses as far as I'm concerned
SYSTEM BONUSES: whatever, just keep it simple. they are unimportant IMHO
MOVEMENT: 1 jump per turn sounds fine. enforces strategic thinking.
RESEARCH: who needs it? Let's start will all tech.
Come to think of it, what's the time span of a turn in in-game turns. A day? A week? A month? Does it make sense to come up with 30 new tech within a year or a month?
SHIPS AND BASES: rigorous point system. Cuts down on the whining later and is easier to balance.
PLANETARY ENHANCEMENTS: do we need them? I guess they can allways fall under the category of:
- fleetyard
- trade hub
- orbital defenses
- intelligence outpost
- sensor grid ..etc..
SYSTEM: Simplicity is good. Homeworld can have some bonuses as far as I'm concerned
[img]http://www.wizards.com/magic/images/whatcolor_iswhite.jpg[/img][url=http://www.wizards.com/magic/playmagic/whatcolorareyou.asp][b]Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.[/b][/url]
[url=http://www.wyrdysm.com/battleshipsforever/shipdatabase/uploads/VANavy.rar]VA FLEET[/url]
[url=http://www.wyrdysm.com/battleshipsforever/shipdatabase/uploads/VANavy.rar]VA FLEET[/url]
They SHOULD be important, however, to encourage fighting over the systems and specialization of those systems. They should be things that can swing the outcome of a war, but not make their owner utterly invincible.TrashMan wrote:SYSTEM BONUSES: whatever, just keep it simple. they are unimportant IMHO
Yes. Too much simplicity is a bad thing. We want some strategic depth beyond just fleet movement.PLANETARY ENHANCEMENTS: do we need them?
How 'bout no to an alltech start. That eliminates a lot of RP potential for arms-races and is a vast area with a lot of other potential.RESEARCH: who needs it? Let's start will all tech.
Come to think of it, what's the time span of a turn in in-game turns. A day? A week? A month? Does it make sense to come up with 30 new tech within a year or a month?
As for timespan, I (imagine) it would probably be 1 turn = 1 week. The tech rate would not be fast enough to allow you to come up with that many techs in a month or year anyway.
／l、
ﾞ（ﾟ､ ｡ ７
l、ﾞ ~ヽ
じしf_, )ノ
ﾞ（ﾟ､ ｡ ７
l、ﾞ ~ヽ
じしf_, )ノ