Registration Date: 30.05.2007
Posts: 673
Location: Social Establishment
A Reputation for Violation
with the current reputation system in place perhaps there should be some adjustment made for defending one's own home grounds against intrusion.
a shop owned by Player A, entering territory of Player B with whom player A has no treaty could be considered suspicious to the point of threatening.
so perhaps reputation penalties and bonuses should be adjusted to take that into account.
There should be some way to compel unfriendly ships out of your territory, so what about reducing the reputation penalty for attacking an unallied ship after giving it a fair warning, of about 3 to 9 turns in advance.
if that ship is still in your territory at the end of those 3 turns you get a penalty reduction if you begin a war by attacking it.
the longer you wait for it to leave the less the rep penalty you take for destroying it. Passably down to a 25% cut for ships that turn out to be unarmed, 50% for those with cloaks or that are heavy class, down to 75% cut for ships that are armed and 100% off for ships with both weapons and cloaks or heavy class.
not only that but the person who owns the ship could take a small penalty for the violation.
Naturally allies don't need to warn each other off there territory. doing so would be insulting and grounds for ending the alliance with penalties going to the xenophobes.
Admirals could be given the option to observe the boundaries of territorie associated with all diplomatic states.
allied, peace, neutral, cease fire or war.
this would also be handing for inter system transport ships.
if traveling from system X/X/X to system Z/Z/Z, avoid territory of those we are at war with like system Y/Y/Y where a small army waits to blow up[ any passing ship I own.
another rule addition would be the retreat from territory when warned off, or ignore warnings altogether.
__________________ I've discovered alien life!
We arent alone in the universe!!!
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!
This would be messy considering the fact that you often have lone planets throughout the galaxy.
Admirals would have a really hard time finding the shortest route through a maze of territory bubbles. The computations that have to be done server side would include complicated AI routines that make the turn calculation like 10x longer.
Either that or the ships would just stop because the admirals cant find their way.
This sort of falls along the same lines I had been thinking lately.
It gets really annoying to have other player's ships come into my territory and hang out to spy. It is a basic part of this game to gather as much info as possible, and the only way to stop it is to declare war. I have done this on many occasions leaving me at war with multiple people, simply to get thier ships out of my systems. I don't like spies.
It would be nice to have another option other then declaring war on their entire empire. I guess I'm suggesting something along the lines of an extra option on the ship order menu. For this Example, I will call it Blitzkrieg.
You could attempt to Blitzkrieg a ship from a nation that you are not at war with, that is take it down fast before anyone knows what happened to it.
Now this option would have a percentage chance of automatically causing you to go to war with the ships owner, so it would be an important decision.
But currently we have no way to deal with spies in the game other then declaring war on everyone who sends ships into your system.
And information in this game can be a critical factor. And it isn't as if we can send our ships to the other side of a planet to hide them, so anyone in the system sees everything.
Perhaps maybe even a Jamming Station building could be built on a planet that hides any ships over that particular planet.
There is no trade and commerce system in place yet, so there is no reason to allow anyone into your systems for any reason.
This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by Ceejay9: 28.04.2008 15:59.
Registration Date: 30.05.2007
Posts: 673
Location: Social Establishment
Thread Starter
quote:
Originally posted by Innoble
This would be messy considering the fact that you often have lone planets throughout the galaxy.
Admirals would have a really hard time finding the shortest route through a maze of territory bubbles. The computations that have to be done server side would include complicated AI routines that make the turn calculation like 10x longer.
Either that or the ships would just stop because the admirals cant find their way.
well currently ships and fleets have to check to be sure they aren't inside a planet or a sun. why not extend that to territories?
in the case of entering the shared territories of other player it could be the most friendly that is taken into account, after all you cant demand a ship leave your territory when it's been invited in by someone with as much claim on the space as you.
in the event of shared territory involving you, well there is no way your ships can be asked to leave when you have claim to the space now is there?.
__________________ I've discovered alien life!
We arent alone in the universe!!!
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!
I agree with this. In my very first game here the main threat to me had ships in almost every system. I did not want a war with him, and I hated the fact that he could see what ships I had and were building. There really should be a diplomatic option for this. Kind of like, you have 10 turns to remove your ship from my system or I will destroy it. If they decline to move it you should be able to destroy it without going to war and without an impact either way on reputation.
Now if the other player wants to declare war, thats just fine. He has the right to do so.
If you share a system with someone and they invite another player into that system, the same thing goes. This is where good diplmacy comes in. You may need to make an arrangement with the other player who has planets in your system to allow the third party to have ships there. I am not sure what these option are, but you should havethe right to defend your space.
Originally posted by Innoble
This would be messy considering the fact that you often have lone planets throughout the galaxy.
Admirals would have a really hard time finding the shortest route through a maze of territory bubbles. The computations that have to be done server side would include complicated AI routines that make the turn calculation like 10x longer.
Either that or the ships would just stop because the admirals cant find their way.
well currently ships and fleets have to check to be sure they aren't inside a planet or a sun. why not extend that to territories?
in the case of entering the shared territories of other player it could be the most friendly that is taken into account, after all you cant demand a ship leave your territory when it's been invited in by someone with as much claim on the space as you.
in the event of shared territory involving you, well there is no way your ships can be asked to leave when you have claim to the space now is there?.
I disagree. If you and another player share a system or multiple systems, you havethe right to ask them to do things for the sake of peace. This is where good stratagy and diplomacy comes in. the other player will have to decide if it in their best intrest to allow third party ships that may provoke you into the system. Are they going to risk loosing their world for a ship or fleet of ships to park there? MAybe and maybe not. Its up to them. So in a game like this where communication is a key part of it, I think something like this would add to the depth of the game.
My problem with this suggestion is not the actual suggestion. It is a great idea to do something about territorial ownership rights.
Its just that I dont think admirals can handle it. I dont think checking for suns and planets is anything like trying to avoid territory bubbles. A ship being run by the AI could be bouncing off territory bubbles for days to try to get to its destination.
So either you turn off the "avoid territory" option and risk wars being declared and ships being destroyed, or you turn it on and risk your ships not arriving at their destination.
Your point was to do something about the spying. This way you also hurt the overall travelling process, not just the spying.
I like Rugers idea of being able to set an ultimatum. Remove the ship or get a free declaration of war (no rep penalty). Or just the right to destroy the ship. It could even be automatical. Reside in non-allied territory for too long and your ship gets a target flag that makes it able to be removed by force without formal war declaration.
Registration Date: 30.05.2007
Posts: 673
Location: Social Establishment
Thread Starter
quote:
Originally posted by Ruger
quote:
Originally posted by Lost Cause
quote:
Originally posted by Innoble
This would be messy considering the fact that you often have lone planets throughout the galaxy.
Admirals would have a really hard time finding the shortest route through a maze of territory bubbles. The computations that have to be done server side would include complicated AI routines that make the turn calculation like 10x longer.
Either that or the ships would just stop because the admirals cant find their way.
well currently ships and fleets have to check to be sure they aren't inside a planet or a sun. why not extend that to territories?
in the case of entering the shared territories of other player it could be the most friendly that is taken into account, after all you cant demand a ship leave your territory when it's been invited in by someone with as much claim on the space as you.
in the event of shared territory involving you, well there is no way your ships can be asked to leave when you have claim to the space now is there?.
I disagree. If you and another player share a system or multiple systems, you havethe right to ask them to do things for the sake of peace. This is where good stratagy and diplomacy comes in. the other player will have to decide if it in their best intrest to allow third party ships that may provoke you into the system. Are they going to risk loosing their world for a ship or fleet of ships to park there? MAybe and maybe not. Its up to them. So in a game like this where communication is a key part of it, I think something like this would add to the depth of the game.
sure you do, and you can.
you can't say get your ships out of there or prepare for war!
if your neighbors have a noisy guest over you can complain but you cant tell the guest to get lost.
if you are at war with them already then sure you can destroy them without a problem, but otherwise you have to be nice. after all you want to continue getting along with your neighbor but the guest is probably only passing through.
you could set it so that allies share there turf.
my home is your home after all. it could be another alliance option along with share line of sight.
that way allied ships cant be asked to leave someones territory regardless of how close they are to a worried neutral player, while someone who is just visiting another player they have peace with is open to insistent persuasion to leave.
quote:
Originally posted by Innoble
My problem with this suggestion is not the actual suggestion. It is a great idea to do something about territorial ownership rights.
Its just that I dont think admirals can handle it. I dont think checking for suns and planets is anything like trying to avoid territory bubbles. A ship being run by the AI could be bouncing off territory bubbles for days to try to get to its destination.
So either you turn off the "avoid territory" option and risk wars being declared and ships being destroyed, or you turn it on and risk your ships not arriving at their destination.
Your point was to do something about the spying. This way you also hurt the overall travelling process, not just the spying.
I like Rugers idea of being able to set an ultimatum. Remove the ship or get a free declaration of war (no rep penalty). Or just the right to destroy the ship. It could even be automatical. Reside in non-allied territory for too long and your ship gets a target flag that makes it able to be removed by force without formal war declaration.
Those are workable suggestions.
well you could always try setting rough way points in an effort to get it around the tricky bits.
the avoid entering territories rule could be employed just to make sure your unarmed transport ships and scouts don't enter a system occupied by the player that kills your ships on sight.
as far as technical problems go leave it to Erwin or others who know how things work to comment on them
__________________ I've discovered alien life!
We arent alone in the universe!!!
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!
This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by Lost Cause: 28.04.2008 18:44.
Registration Date: 26.12.2004
Posts: 8,573
Location: Vienna, Austria
Before we can implement features as discussed in this thread (which I like!) we need to get the territory calculation sorted out. Currently we do have overlapping territories. One of the many todo items is to change the way territory is calculated.
Registration Date: 16.07.2007
Posts: 203
Location: La Plata, Argentina
(yaju! my first post!)
Well, it could be cool if some of this options (probably some will be too hard to create) like:
· A state betwen peace and neutrality (or maybe in the neutral state) that says things like: No war, but if one of this players has a ship in Hold Position in a System under absolute control of the other player it can be destroyed without penalty (and maybe without regward). Now the problem is that sometimes you have to pass throgh, well i think that the human-social factor (that this MMO thing has) comes in play, i mean, you ask off-gameplay to your neighbour to not destroy your when passing ship. This opens the posibility of ¿toll road? (also off-gampeplay).
· There could be pacts (not exactly diplomatic states, more like diplomatic instances) like: this zone (single or group of systems) in war, or backwards this zone is secure for both players, or things like that.
ACLARATION: when i say off-gameplay i mean withowt the need that actually the game inteface or game record have this interaction inside the program.
MY POINT: I really bet to the human-social factor of players, giving the posibbility to be trusted or untrusted thanks to their actions. And complex negotiation. i know they could be annoying if players cant meet at same time, but well, burocraci invented agenda. players can set a hour and day to meet in the new chat to stay the condictions of pacts(no necessary considerated by the gameprogram). (here my brother suggest that im writing too long so) I hope that some of you understand and well... wath you think?
This idea came to my mind more than a 9 month ago. I didn't suggested it since there are more important features to add. But since you have mentioned it...
------------------
Caper Module
Type: Ship, Special
Technology: ?
Units=10, Space=20, PC=50, UC=0.2
- Can be installed only on light ships.
- Caper can attack any non-alied player. Those players see capers as hostile ship of unknown player and can attack it.
- Caper turn to "normal" ship in the "normal" fleet or in the own planet's orbit (so can't be attacked there).
- Relation between caper fleets, "normal" fleets and alied fleets is the same as caper would be ship of ally, who declared war to all non-allied players: "normal" ships will not help capers, in the case of peace theaty.
- Caper can't conquire planets.
- Player that use big caper fleets can receive reputation penalty. Player_Reputation(caper) = -(Total_caper_ship_units_in_the_battle/10000)^1.5. This is end reputation! It means, that player with -10 reputation can use around 46000 units of capers in one battle, but if he use 50000, hes reputation decrease to -11.18. Reputation penalty on attacking weaker player still work.
- Players receive reputation bonus for destroyed capers of other players. Total_reputation_bonus = total_destroyed_caper_ship_units/100000
Note: Without trade routes between systems capers don't have practical use. But it is good entertainment: pirates, pirate-hunters and... diplomatic scandals.
------------------
