Galactic Conquest Organization Ideas & Discussion

A section for that silly thing called "role play" and other forum games.

Moderators: th15, Moderators

User avatar
Arcalane
Pseudofeline Overlord
Posts: 4034
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:37 am
Location: UK

Post by Arcalane »

TrashMan wrote:You could handle salvage in a more simpler way...depending on the number of destroyed enemy ships you fill up your "salvage meter".. once it reaches 100% you get to pick one tech the enemy had on it's ship to research.
the salvage meter drops to 0 after that and you have to fill it up again for the next salvage.
Yeah, but that doesn't account for ships with a lot of different weapons and ships with hardly any. I mean, you could easily exploit the salvage meter to easily get Aegis Generators even if your enemy hardly used them, whereas it would be far easier to steal their weapon systems if they used a lot of them. ;)
As for the repair mechaninic, given fixed fleet sizes you can just remove the damaged ships from combat for 1 turn (simulating them going to some repair yard).
This doesn't really work when your fleets are behind enemy lines. :)

~~

Some basic construction rules;

Whilst I'm not going to force anything regarding "spaceworthyness" there -are- several rules that will apply to appearance;

Ships should appear to be structurally sound.

A ship's core should not be more than around 25% covered by sections.

A ship's core cannot mount more than 2 weapons OR 1 module.

Sections should not overlap each other by more than 25%.

Weapons and modules should not physically overlap at all whilst being placed. Their edges may touch, but they may not overlap whilst doing so.
Last edited by Arcalane on Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
  /l、
゙(゚、 。 7
 l、゙ ~ヽ
 じしf_, )ノ
TrashMan
Commodore
Commodore
Posts: 581
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:34 pm
Location: Inside the God of War

Post by TrashMan »

Arcalane wrote: Yeah, but that doesn't account for ships with a lot of different weapons and ships with hardly any. I mean, you could easily exploit the salvage meter to easily get Aegis Generators even if your enemy hardly used them, whereas it would be far easier to steal their weapon systems if they used a lot of them. ;)

Well, it IS an abstraction. :wink:
You can always attribute it to luck, ingenuity of your researchers or just a almost in tact piece of salvage.
[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]
User avatar
Normandy
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:34 am

Post by Normandy »

Just kind of curious, other than Arcalane, how many of you have seen my CF RP? I think that some concepts from it (mainly the combat concepts, invasions, assaults, sieges, etc...) could be easily applied to "Galactic Conquest".
[url=http://www.fallingsandgame.com/][img]http://www.gaussianstudios.co.cc/hosting/fsgbanneram3.png[/img][/url]

tl;dr-ers will be shot on sight.
[size=75][url=http://bsf.wikidot.com/]BSF Wiki[/url]
"I have measured your 'fun', and science has quantitatively rated it a three." ~Lord Tim (Data Realms Fan Forums)[/size]
kaaskopp
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 7:01 am

Post by kaaskopp »

Arcalane wrote:Sections should not overlap each other by more than 25%.
you mean, a section may cover 25% of an other section, or 25% got to be visible of a section at least?
[img]http://i17.tinypic.com/71qxdkx.png[/img]

joa, hascht wasch gegn waischwuascht?
scheiß weißwurst. Geht um alkohol junge!!
User avatar
Arcalane
Pseudofeline Overlord
Posts: 4034
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:37 am
Location: UK

Post by Arcalane »

Sections may only overlap each other by 25%. In other words, at least 75% of their surface area must be visible. Note that this doesn't count when it comes to weapons or modules on a section - only sections overlapping other sections.

Thanks for Siber for pitching this one at me;

No, you may not cover one section with 4 others, each taking up 25% of the section below. :roll:

Other rules!

The weapon platform core should not be used for anything. At all. Ever.

The civilian core should likewise not be used for anything, with the exception of civilian ships, which will be provided as 'stock'/'default' rather than faction-specific civilian craft.

The base and diagonal base cores should only be used for defense platforms and starbases.

Normal/Alien/Pirate cores are free game.

The small/tiny core has yet to be judged.
  /l、
゙(゚、 。 7
 l、゙ ~ヽ
 じしf_, )ノ
_Ti__
Commander
Commander
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:04 am

Post by _Ti__ »

I think these construction rules are to limiting. my idea was to make the cost of a ships based in how many sections it use. them, you could add more HP and speed. the price for them would be based in how many sections you have, using exponential curves (and a maximun limit), so you woudnt be able to make fast and big ships or small and heavily armored ones. So if someone wants to stack sections, it would make the ships more expensive and slow. The formulas for the curves could be calculated based on the stock ships.

Also, don't see why limit the cores use. for example, why don't use base cores on ships, or why have diferent rules for the civ/small/platform cores, since theres not much size diference betwen them.
[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]
User avatar
Arcalane
Pseudofeline Overlord
Posts: 4034
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:37 am
Location: UK

Post by Arcalane »

Covering sections achieves nothing save confusing the AI where demeters and deflectors are concerned, and it can also seriously detriment layered ablative armour.

As it is, I do not think we will be using a complex system of interacting curves. That's just overkill.
  /l、
゙(゚、 。 7
 l、゙ ~ヽ
 じしf_, )ノ
Himura.Kenshin
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 11:35 pm
Location: Below My Postcount

Post by Himura.Kenshin »

Has this started in any way or form? So many new RP related threads in ETC forum D=.
Warcraft III (U.S. East) -~-~- [( Aequinox / DACI-Equinox / Equinox]4[Lyfe )]
XBox 360 LIVE (Mostly CoD:WaW) -~-~- [( EquinoxXenom )]

[quote="Wyrdysm Games"][i]Stop quoting the line above in your sigs![/i][/quote]
User avatar
Arcalane
Pseudofeline Overlord
Posts: 4034
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:37 am
Location: UK

Post by Arcalane »

No, the Galactic Conquest is far (as I see it) from starting.
  /l、
゙(゚、 。 7
 l、゙ ~ヽ
 じしf_, )ノ
TheBlueEcho
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
Posts: 1435
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:31 am

Post by TheBlueEcho »

Himura.Kenshin wrote:Has this started in any way or form? So many new RP related threads in ETC forum D=.
I think all those RP's Started because people just want something similar to CW, without the chaos, and without waiting for GC.
...
Or they could be Prep'ing up.
I not really sure...
User avatar
goduranus
Captain
Captain
Posts: 455
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:09 am

Post by goduranus »

Why not just make the GC simpler so we can all play now? you can add time consuming features like techs, salvage, espionage and the like later. For now, I'd just like to see a strategic map based fleet tournament.
User avatar
Arcalane
Pseudofeline Overlord
Posts: 4034
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:37 am
Location: UK

Post by Arcalane »

No. I am not willing to compromise that much.

Besides, if you want to do that, you can just make your own map. It ain't that hard. :roll:

Just remember that Galactic Conquest is reserved for this project.
Last edited by Arcalane on Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
  /l、
゙(゚、 。 7
 l、゙ ~ヽ
 じしf_, )ノ
AllStarZ
Captain
Captain
Posts: 292
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 8:16 am

Post by AllStarZ »

Personally I think this thing is going to fail because its too complicated. You're trying to take on too much at once. Economic, warfare, design, etc.

I think that this Galactic Conquest thing should be broken up and simplified, at least until we all know the rules for most of the aspects this presents.
User avatar
Arcalane
Pseudofeline Overlord
Posts: 4034
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:37 am
Location: UK

Post by Arcalane »

I don't doubt it'll fail if people keep thinking it will. That's negative thinking, people. We don't need that.

The entire point of the GC is that it provides a SOLID framework on which to emulate and resolve intergalactic conflict, rather than the "fuzzy" medium of roleplay.
  /l、
゙(゚、 。 7
 l、゙ ~ヽ
 じしf_, )ノ
AllStarZ
Captain
Captain
Posts: 292
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 8:16 am

Post by AllStarZ »

Arcalane wrote:I don't doubt it'll fail if people keep thinking it will. That's negative thinking, people. We don't need that.

The entire point of the GC is that it provides a SOLID framework on which to emulate and resolve intergalactic conflict, rather than the "fuzzy" medium of roleplay.
Well willpower can't move mountains. Take a look at the "Great Leap Forward".

I think we should just break it and put it together at a later date, work out the chinks you know? Because right now trying to understand the rules for this is pissing me off.
Post Reply