SE5, Tell Aaron what's on your Wish List

[deccan]

Note: Sheesh, I started this yesterday, but SJ beat me to it. Anyway, mine is just a list of the suggestions that I really like, so keep that in mind.

Okay, I've gone through the entire thread, and here's my favourites, edited and rewritten in many cases. I've assumed that it's given that SEV will use a real-time, 3-D, tactical combat system. I've left out "obvious", "too much is never enough" demands like greater modability, eye-candy, better sounds, better AI, better multiplayer support etc., some things into which I might to go into greater detail later and technical, behind-the-scenes stuff.

General Gameplay

1) Diplomacy system with greater granularity, mixing and matching specific conditions and rules, and of course, AIs that can understand and work with such a system. (Puke, Phoenix-D, dumbluck, dogscoff )
2) More realistic / sophisticated and less absolute minefields system, that factors in such things as number of ships moving in the mined sector that turn (small, single ships have a chance of slipping through from pure luck), complex characteristics of mines (instead of just damage) etc. (Pax, Imperator Fyron, LGM, Ed Kolis)
3) More realistic / sophisticated trading system with physical trade routes / ships that need to be defended and is linked to resource procurement even within an empire. (Puke, Slick)
4) Also, trade routes should initially cost resouces to set up and return a profit only over time. (Ed Kolis)
5) The ability to analyze units and facilities for tech, not just ships! (Ed Kolis)
6) Me would like the ability to tow bases in system. (Me Loonn, Ares)
7) Retrofitting should take shipyard capacity so that retrofitting is not a loophole past the capacity limit! (LGM, Erax)
8) Ability to change a race's abilities / characteristics through technology. (Some1, Gryphin, clark)
9) Units and facilities should cost maintenance. (LGM)
10) Realistic implmentation of passive / active cloaking and detection. (orev_saara)

User Interface

1) Ability to use mouse-wheel and move windows within the game, more keyboard support / more hotkeys (Gryphin, Loser, TerranC, Andres)
2) In the Construction Window, ability to right click on a given planet and select "Go to Planet." This will take to to the system map with the planet highlighted. (Stone Mill)
3) A list of spotted enemy ships, a way to remember their positions.
i e a foreign ship log, so that you can quickly see incursions and the way they are going. (Ruatha)
4) Editable / savable/ loadable orders for ships with greater detail and control. (Baron Munchausen, Me Loonn)
5) Queues / lists / reports need more sorting options. (Me Loonn, tesco samoa)
6) Search and replace for queues. (minipol)
7) Be able to give the launch order to planets from the colonies list. (rextorres)
8) Lists / queues / reports should remember their position. (minipol, Imperator Fyron, steveo)
9) Using TAB pages like when clickin planet(detail/facil/cargo/ability) on SECTORS too, when sector has more than one planet or whatnot. (Me Loonn)

Ship Modelling / Mechanics

1) The "Lego" ship design model. (Ed Kolis)
2) Percentage-based cloaking ability depending on many factors including cloak ability, enemy sensor ability, distance, ship size, sector-specific features etc. (dumbluck, Arkcon, Rigelian, jimbob, Ares, LGM)

Combat

1) Randomized damage within a range instead of a fixed number, perhaps influenced by partial successes (the die roll barely made it), critical successes (the die roll succeeded by a large margin) etc. Supplemented perhaps by a critical failure system (the die roll failed dismally, increase reload time for this weapon)? (Krsqk, Imperator Fyron, Baron Munchausen, Ragnarok, Rigelian)
2) Editable, independent damage types, shields only, skips armor, damage only to components with a specific flag etc. Might also be conditional, e.g. if shields, then quad-damage to shields, else normal damage to engines only or whatever. (Ed Kolis, Andres, Krsqk)
3) Damage to fighters should be one-hit, one-kill, instead of having damage spill over to the rest of the stack for normal weapons. (Rigelian)
4) Ability to switch from tactical combat to non-animated strategic combat. (TheBlip, Imperator Fyron)
5) Ability to retreat from combat. (Tenryu, Chronon, Jmenschenfresser, atomannj, Noble713, Magnum357)
6) More variation in the 'hit probability profile' of different weapons. (Rigelian)

Tools / Utilities

1) The ability to easily set the game to run for x turns or until some specified condition is reached. (PsychoTechFreak)
2) The ability to save/reload game settings and to regenerate a map on the first turn if you don't like your starting position. (HEMAN, Gryphin)
3) A scenario editor with ability to support pre-scripted events happening when set conditions are achieved. (BadAxe, pmazolo, Noble713)

[ July 03, 2003, 03:35: Message edited by: deccan ]

[deccan]

Some elaborations on the Lego-design model for ships.

I really like this idea. Naturally, it would work best in a 3D, real-time combat system, with limited arcs of fire. A simple way to do this would be like in the MechWarrior game. You have predefined, 3-D mechs (hulls) with predefined component slots. Specific types of components go on specific types of slots. You also need to take into account component tonnage and physical size of the slot. Which component takes damage depends on where you hit the mech and what component is located there.

Perhaps, one way to do this for Space Empires would be to predefine a number of hull types (3-D models with predefined component slots) for each hull size. I believe that the model used in Starfleet Command 3 can be considered as a very simplistic way of doing this.

Some problems that I foresee: however you do it, you'll be deviating from the standard SE totally free-form design philosophy. Some hull types will definitely be superior to others and it would be very difficult to strike a balance amongst the different races. Also, it would take a lot of work to do. I'm willing to live with these limitations, but I'd bet that many are not.

[deccan]

Space Travel

This has been mentioned before, but I really dislike the "warp point" travel system used in SEIV. My reasons:

1) One of the most fun aspects of SEIV I believe is that it provides a generic system that players can mod into their favorite SF universes. However the most popular SF universes (Trek, SW etc.) use an FTL travel system. Even in B5 with warp points created by big ships, it takes time for ships to traverse from point to point.

2) There's no sense of "deep space" in SEIV, everything is so ... local. The game doesn't really capture the sense that outer space is really huge compared with the scale of solar systems. I believe that in-system travel should take next to no time at all, while interstellar travel would be very, very slow.

3) Like other posters have said, it eliminates heavy defenses at warp points.

4) If you like, make things more interesting by incorporating MOO3-style starlanes (perhaps stick with the original MOO3 idea that they should only be very slightly more efficient than regular interstellar travel at first and only gradually improve with better navigation infrastructure at both ends of the starlane) and stargates.

[deccan]

Miscellaneous

Some relatively simple stuff that I haven't seen other people mention:

1) A better resupplying system. Allow supplies to be transferred between ships the way that cargo is transferred. Make a component (Deep Space Refueling System). Give ships equipped with that component a special command that when turned on will make it automatically top off all other non-resupply ships in its fleet.

2) I don't normally have a problem with abstracting supplies to mean both fuel and ammunition in general. I do have a problem with ships with quantum reactors generating missiles and bombs for ships, so perhaps they should really be broken up into two separate areas.

3) Maybe borrow some ideas from MOO3 for formations. Ships should be assigned positions within a specific formation, say, picket, escort, core, vanguard, rear-guard etc. Each formation savefile should save information on how the ships with different assigned positions should be positioned relative to one another in 3-D.

4) In the Ships / Units list, I really hate seeing ships that I have assigned to fleets appear as individual ships. If I've assigned them to a fleet, I manage the fleet as a whole and hate to have to worry about them as individual ships.

5) Make the entire game play in simultaneous mode only. Eliminate the "immediate" mode (or whatever it's called) entirely.

[Loser]

Originally posted by deccan:
5) Make the entire game play in simultaneous mode only. Eliminate the "immediate" mode (or whatever it's called) entirely.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Interesting, but why?

[Fyron]

Originally posted by deccan:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Loser:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by deccan:
5) Make the entire game play in simultaneous mode only. Eliminate the "immediate" mode (or whatever it's called) entirely.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Interesting, but why?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think it's the way the game really *ought* to be played. If I play in the "immediate" mode, I can use the attack command on a sector, and if 30 rounds of combat isn't enough, launch enough attack command and so forth with using up movement points. Surely, the designers didn't intend this!</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Surely, they did. Otherwise, it would not have been programmed that way. A lot of people prefer to play the game in Sequential mode instead of Simultaneous. The game caters to both crowds, and is not hurt by it in the slightest.

Space Travel

This has been mentioned before, but I really dislike the "warp point" travel system used in SEIV. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Warp points are what make the game Space Empires. There is almost no chance of them not being used in SE5.

[ July 03, 2003, 19:54: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[Ruatha]

I'd like the possibilty to add add-ons like in VGA Planets.
New features (EXE files or DLL files) to the game by indipendant authors.
And then a graphical standard UI to handle it.

[Ed Kolis]

Custom Unit Types
All of the ship and unit types (ship, base, fighter, satellite, etc.) are really defined by a set of attributes or flags - "can move", "can warp", "can be carried as cargo", "launches in Groups", "consumes supplies just by sitting there" etc. So why not allow modders in SE5 to create their own unit types with whatever combinations they want - a fighter that can warp, a ship that consumes supply every turn, drones that launch in Groups, etc. I can try to draw up a complete list of these abilities and which ones are prerequisites or mutually exclusive...

[deccan]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Warp points are what make the game Space Empires. There is almost no chance of them not being used in SE5.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Does StarFury use warp points as well, or aren't you allowed to say?

[deccan]

Originally posted by Loser:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by deccan:
5) Make the entire game play in simultaneous mode only. Eliminate the "immediate" mode (or whatever it's called) entirely.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Interesting, but why?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think it's the way the game really *ought* to be played. If I play in the "immediate" mode, I can use the attack command on a sector, and if 30 rounds of combat isn't enough, launch enough attack command and so forth with using up movement points. Surely, the designers didn't intend this!

[deccan]

Leaders

I believe that a good model would be the leaders system in Medieval: Total War. Leaders should have a definite physical presence (as opposed to being an abstract package of game effects as in MOO3). As such they can be killed when the ship / base / planet / ground troop unit / fighter group etc. they are on is destroyed, assassinated, take time to move between locations etc.

There should be no practical limit on the number of leaders per empire, although you might specify that there can only be one "active" leader per ship / base / planet / ground troop unit / fighter group etc., and the rest are only passengers / cargo so their bonuses don't apply.

Leaders should have some basic stats, such as Space Combat Command, Ground Combat Command, Acumen (efficiency at being a bureaucrat), Dread (efficiency of keeping troops and population under control), Loyalty (resistance to being bribed), Toughness (resistance to assassination attempts, personal proficiency in ground combat) etc.

They also have special "Vices & Virtues" that are generated randomly / gained through events and have in-game effects. For example, a leader who you consistently assign to a fighter group and excels at it (wins many battles) will eventually gain an "Expert Pilot" trait, a leader who retreats from combat a few times gets a "Coward" trait, a leader who governs a planet that builds a few large-scale infrastructure projects get the "Master Builder" trait and so on. There should be a maintenance cost for leaders as well that goes up as they become more powerful. Oh, and of course, they can have any kind of special ability you want, example if piloting a cloaked vessel, increase the effective level of cloaking ability by some set amount etc.

You get leaders from random events, by building some special buildings (training academies, universities) that add to your pool of recruitable leaders, popping up from un-led ships / units that excel in combat, by bribing enemy leaders, by capturing enemy leaders and turning them to your side etc.

Each empire should have a number of Posts / titles that it can award to leaders. More Posts / titles can be generated by building special one-per-empire buildings. Example: build a one-per-empire StarFleet Command Headquarters to generate the Fleet Admiral post. Award that post to an existing leader to vastly increase his Space Combat Command ability and so forth. Other Posts / titles can be generated by building special one-per-system or one-per-planet buildings, example, build a System Seat of Government to generate a System Governor post. In general, giving Posts to leaders increases their loyalty. Stripping them of Posts vastly reduces their loyalty. In M:TW you had to physically send an emissary to the leader to strip his titles. I don't believe that this is necessary here, you might make it so that leaders with relatively low loyalties already have a good chance of rebelling if they are stripped of titles, perhaps taking ships, troops or planets with them.

For even more fun, make it so that keeping your Fleet Admiral at StarFleet Command Headquarters gives a slight bonus to all of your deployed fleets while assigning him to one specific fleet gives a vast bonus to that specific fleet alone.

Posts / titles available and the buildings that generate them should be race / empire specific. Also make the ability to attract wandering leaders a race / empire trait.

Finally, should the emperor himself be a physical leader as in M:TW? I don't believe this to be necessary. It made sense in M:TW because of leaders riding into battle, princes as successors and so on, but I don't believe it makes sense in terms of an SE game.

[Joe Cool]

I would love to be able to save progress on my turn, open it later, and continue working on it.

[Loser]

Originally posted by deccan:
Leaders
words, words, words<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Something like this would be great. But it doesn't have to be Part of the Game, just build into the game the ability to let us mod this.

Oh yeah, and let Leaders go Rogue, taking Planets, Ships, or just Troop stacks with them (moddable like everything).

[ July 04, 2003, 03:48: Message edited by: Loser ]

[Suicide Junkie]

Originally posted by deccan:
Does StarFury use warp points as well, or aren't you allowed to say?<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Originally posted at Shrapnel's SF salespage (http://www.gamersfront.com/cgi-bin/store/Category.cgi?item=41001&type=store&AffiliateID=35)
As captain of your battle cruiser, you'll travel through solar systems via warp points, ...<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

[narf poit chez BOOM]

I WANT TOAST!

[Me Loonn]

Woo !
Just figured what might stop retro exploiting.

Make max difference when retroing to 10-15% and not the 50% what it is now.

[deccan]

More miscellaneous requests:

1. Make a start game option in which all players' characteristics and traits are hidden from each other.

2. Make sure that the Tech reports correctly remembers all tech levels inferred from scanned ships, facilities seen on planets, spying activities etc.

[Atrocities]

I would like to go through all of the threads and put all of the suggestions into catagories so that Aaron can review them. There are literally a thousand plus suggestions for SEV spread over at least 10 threads in two or more forums catagories and more than one overall forum.

So if you do continue to post suggestions PLEASE put then under a catagory. Now we need suggestions for the catagories. Any one want to offer a few?

Economy
--Resources Managment
--Economic Structure

Intel
Research
Setup
Combat
Map

Game Play
--Graphics
--Documentation

Politics
--Trade
--Diplomacy

[Fyron]

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
I WANT TOAST!<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Narf, posting this stuff all over the place is not funny in the slightest.

[Krsqk]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
I WANT TOAST!<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Narf, posting this stuff all over the place is not funny in the slightest.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually, I did smirk when I saw it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

[narf poit chez BOOM]

i havn't posted it that much, have i?

[Atrocities]

Temperal
Organic
Armor
Stealth
Tracking

[ July 05, 2003, 01:31: Message edited by: Atrocities ]

[narf poit chez BOOM]

and i know the perils of overusing jokes.

[Q]

I believe almost everything that I could suggest has already been mentioned in this huge topic. But I would like to highlight three fields that are the most important for me:
1.) Modifiable. The possibilities to modify should be increased even more compared to SE IV (it was a huge improvement from SE III). Even abilities or possibilities that are not used in the standard Version might be very valuable for modders. Just an example: abilities working for facilities usually can't be used for components in SE IV.
2.) AI. I know many people here in this forum play mostly PBW and therefore the AI is not that important for them. However if you compare the number of SE IV copies sold (see topic about that) and the number of PBW players, you must conclude that the majory of the people who bought SE IV are playing solo games. Therefore any improvement of the AI will be an important sales advantage.
3.) Low hardware requirements. Again for computer freaks, who upgrade their computer every 3 months, this might be not very important. But I appreciated very much that I can play SE IV with a 5 year old machine!

[narf poit chez BOOM]

the ability to add abilities. dll or built-in language thing, like stars!:supernova was going to have.

[userx]

I have a few major things on my wish list that I don't think has been covered.

1)Real Homeworld Abilities
There should be a big difference between your colonies and your homeworld... even in a late game or 200-300 turns.

A homeworld has 1000s of years of development, population growth, culture, facilities, etc... a colony, even after 100 to 200 years of colonization, should never match the importance that a homeworld has. Currently, after a 30/40 turns for example, a colony can have the same population and industrial importance as a homeworld... this is nuts.

Imagine us colonizing Mars. After 20/30 years there might be thousands living there and they may be contributing significantly to science and industry, but they would be insignificant in terms of industrial production capacity, population, real GDP (or rather GPP), culture, science, etc. Even after a couple of centuries they would still be small (maybe important) compared to Earth.

That's one...

2) Many Very Minor races
One thing that SE is missing is the feeling that there is lots of intelligent life in the universe. It would be good to have minor races that are planet bound that you could trade with, conquer, or form a union with. They would provide huge population base, industry, economics, and science. It would also add to the importance of the concept of a "homeworld (see # 1)." You could aquire serveral important homeworlds through conquest (empire) or peaceful assimilation (United Federation of Planets).

Not to be confused with minor space faring races.

3) Emphisis on Planetary Conquest
OK, how many time has an alien fleet showed up over one of your colonies and destroyed it? This is not very economical.

Destruction of a colony or homeworld should be a Last resort and very rare occurance. Empires are formed by conquest not destruction.

With planetary conquest comes the possibility of rebelion and liberation as well as long term ground war commitments.

Also, there should always be survivors of a planetary attack. That could prove interesting if the enemy desides to colonize the planet he's just bLasted for a few months... guerilla war anyone?

4) Lastly, like in our own history, empires rise, fall and rise again (and fall) and wars don't Last forever. Currently in SE, your can tell early in the game who will prevail (or at least who will surely lose). The strength of races over centuries should be a little more dynamic with the possibility of strong empires suddenly falling while weak ones suddenly rise. You get the idea...

That's my wish list. Oh, and more ship classes and serveral possibilities in the same class.

Thanks for reading.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

4 would have to be done carefully so as not to randomize the game. perhaps periods of culteral strength/weakness which strengthen/weaken all of the attributes of your federation or empire, but not so much that your success/failure would be determined by them.

i just had an idea: perhaps your culture modifier's could modify as you play. if you have a lot of research facilities, you slowly get better a research. or, if you only have a few, you get worse.

[ July 06, 2003, 07:13: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]

[Me Loonn]

One small addition more http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

When a sector with sumthing in it is selected, moving cursor shows the range to that sector. What I want is to extend it to also other systems, automatically calculating shortest route there.

Only a small change but can reduse alittle time to finish each round, if one doenst have to manually count all those 10 wps route to that colony far far away, only so see if there is enough supplies left.

[Slick]

There is a current solution for simultaneous games. Turn on "movement lines" and then order your colony ship to move to the destination. You can see how many turns it will take. The end will be + or - 1 turn due to the way it calculates the number of turns. For turn based movement, the ship will move when you give the order so this won't work.

Slick.

[Loser]

Originally posted by userx:
1)Real Homeworld Abilities<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Take a look at the Proportions (http://invirtuo.cc/phpwiki/index.php/Proportions) mod. I think you'll find just what you need in there. Originally posted by userx:
2) Many Very Minor races<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">While I believe it is not possible to increase the number of Neutrals beyond six (Would an Experienced Modder Please Clarify?), minor races can be modded into the game. Lood for the threads about Primative Races (http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=008867;p=2#000 024). It's a very promising concept. Originally posted by userx:
3) Emphisis on Planetary Conquest<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Some of the TDM AIs (http://invirtuo.cc/phpwiki/index.php/TDM-Modpack) are more interested in landing Troops than glassing the planet. Try playing a few games against them. Also, if you are playing agaisnt humans, perhaps you should let them know that each time they glass a world it lowers it's value. This may encourage more Troop-focused behavior. Originally posted by userx:
4) Lastly, like in our own history, empires rise, fall and rise again (and fall) and wars don't Last forever.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If you take a look at the timescale of the game, it doesn't take a few centuries. A long, long game can take a number of decades. It's just a matter of scale, and the scale of the game is one long war. Originally posted by userx:
Oh, and more ship classes and serveral possibilities in the same class.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This also can be modded, in fact almost every mod has additional ship sizes. All, I think, except for TDM (http://invirtuo.cc/phpwiki/index.php/TDM-Modpack), FQM (http://invirtuo.cc/phpwiki/index.php/FQM) and a few mount (http://invirtuo.cc/phpwiki/index.php/mount) mods. Originally posted by userx:
Thanks for reading.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thanks for posting. The community around the game is the reason I come back to it and I'm sure others feel the same.

It sounds like a lot of the changes you want made to the game are changes you could realistically make yourself. Give modifying the game a shot, it's a bLast; even if you're like me and never make mod anything worth sharing.

[ July 06, 2003, 23:19: Message edited by: Loser ]

[deccan]

Originally posted by deccan:
Some elaborations on the Lego-design model for ships.

I really like this idea. Naturally, it would work best in a 3D, real-time combat system, with limited arcs of fire. A simple way to do this would be like in the MechWarrior game. You have predefined, 3-D mechs (hulls) with predefined component slots. Specific types of components go on specific types of slots. You also need to take into account component tonnage and physical size of the slot. Which component takes damage depends on where you hit the mech and what component is located there.

Perhaps, one way to do this for Space Empires would be to predefine a number of hull types (3-D models with predefined component slots) for each hull size. I believe that the model used in Starfleet Command 3 can be considered as a very simplistic way of doing this.

Some problems that I foresee: however you do it, you'll be deviating from the standard SE totally free-form design philosophy. Some hull types will definitely be superior to others and it would be very difficult to strike a balance amongst the different races. Also, it would take a lot of work to do. I'm willing to live with these limitations, but I'd bet that many are not.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I haven't noticed this screenshot before:
http://www.malfador.com/starfury/sfscr11.html

But from it, it seems that Aaron does indeed use something similar to what I described for StarFury and hence for SEV.

[LGM]

Originally posted by Me Loonn:
Woo !
Just figured what might stop retro exploiting.

Make max difference when retroing to 10-15% and not the 50% what it is now.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The problem with this is many weapons increase more than 15% in cost per level. With Minerals this is probably not an issue since the Engines and Command and Control structures use so much Minerals, but with Radioactives or Organic weapons, a 15% limit is too restricting. Phased PPB I cost 100 Rad, PPB II costs 150 Rad. There is a 50% cost increase there alone.

Instead, I would suggest that retrofitting only be allowed for similar class components. You can replace a weapon with a different weapon. Countries did weapon retrofitting in WW II.

Retrofitting would not be exploited so much if it took Queue time to retrofit instead of repair time. In my opinion, repair only components should have resource capacity, not number of components capacity. Repairing a stellar Manipulation component should take a lot longer than one turn to repair. Currently, you can repair a 60K Min component in one turn, but it takes you over a year to build one. Perhaps there should be an "expired" state that differs from a "damaged" state on ships.

[Loser]

Originally posted by LGM:
The problem with this is many weapons increase more than 15% in cost per level. With Minerals this is probably not an issue since the Engines and Command and Control structures use so much Minerals, but with Radioactives or Organic weapons, a 15% limit is too restricting. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'm guessing you haven't pushed the limits of the retroseries 'exploit' yourself. The limitation is not %50 difference in each of the three resources, it's the summed total. I'm not sure, but I think that might make a difference in your discussion.

[Fyron]

Yes, that does indeed make a big difference. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[dogscoff]

After playing this game and making patch suggestions for two years, I now realise that nearly everything I've ever asked of Aaron boils down to one thing, which can be summed up below. I know a lot of you will disagree with this, but tough, this is my opinion (and I doubt Aaron will agree with me anyway=-)

SEIV currently plays like a wargame. It is a wargame. Empire management, diplomacy, resource production, colonisation... these things are all, in the end, nothing more than infrastructure to support your military effort.

I'd like a game that flips this concept on its head. I want an empire management game, in which war is nothing more than one of many interesting complications.

I'd like a game where you could happily play for a thousand game turns without ever even seeing another race. Just keeping the population happy is enough of a challenge (ask your local president/ prime minister/ monarch/ dictator-for-life if you don't believe me) and I'd like a game that reflects this.

This fits any "real-world" model more closely imho, and would provide a far more absorbing game. Maybe this game won't be SE5, but I'd like to think it could be, with the right modding.

That's also why I only play proportions, btw- because it puts (slightly) more emphasis on empire management and less on warfare.

[ July 08, 2003, 09:04: Message edited by: dogscoff ]

[Fyron]

So go play Sim City. Sure, it has no warfare, but you only wanted warfare to be a small part of the game anyways. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

SE4 is not a war game, it is a strategy game. A war game is just that; war. They focus on manuevering predetermined forces against each other in combat. They are complex, but they do not encompass nearly as much as SE4 does. A strategy game is war + economics, essentially. I am not certain, but I do not think there is much research done in-game in very many war games. A strategy game is about building up your empire, then a military, then war. They cover more areas than war games do.

Strategy games are not about managing the minute details of your populace. Stuff like that will undoubtedly bog down a strategy game into unplayability if it goes too far into the minutia. What you are looking for is a completely different genre, and there is no guarantee that Aaron would be able to make a game of that genre well (as there are few (if any) game programmers that can make awesome games in every genre).

[dogscoff]

So go play Sim City. Sure, it has no warfare, but you only wanted warfare to be a small part of the game anyways.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I've heard some bad things about the latest Sim City games. I wouldn't mind playing "Sim Galactic Empire", but as far as I know that hasn't been made yet. SE4 goes most of the way to what I want, I just want it to go that little bit further.


SE4 is not a war game, it is a strategy game. A war game is just that; war.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">As usual, you're trying to divert the discussion into tedious quibbling over semantics. My point (as you well know) is that the focus of SEIV is warfare.


A strategy game is war + economics, essentially.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">But the economics- as well as the research, colonisation, ship design, and diplomacy- are all represented simply as support services for warfare. But in reality, it's the other way round. War exists to defend/expand one nation's economics and culture, economics and culture do not exist simply to perpetuate war. (Although there's probably potential for a whole new thread out of this statement.)


Strategy games are not about managing the minute details of your populace. Stuff like that will undoubtedly bog down a strategy game into unplayability if it goes too far into the minutia.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Not necessarily. It would probably involve a lot of extra code, but from the player's point of view things would not necessarily have to be much more difficult or complex. I'm not going to repost all my lengthy suggestions for dynamic populations, improved plague modelling, settlement growth, regime types and everything else, but if you don't remember from the Last time I posted them just believe me when I say that nearly all of the extra work would be done in the background. Not in a "MOO3 taking control from the player" kind of a way, but in a "this is what the indirect results of your actions would be" kind of a way.


What you are looking for is a completely different genre,
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'll grant you that it is a different genre, but not a completely different one. Like I say, SEIV is half way there already.

All I'm really asking for is an empire that actually feels like it's a complex, unpredictable, living, breathing society rather than a collection of variables to be considered when designing my next fleet. Conquering the galaxy is all very well, but I want an empire worth conquering the galaxy for.

[LGM]

Facility Management: It would be nice to plot facility replacement in the construction queue and to repeat this item. For example, Replace Research with Intelligence. When the turn for this item comes up, it will scrap a Research facility and build an Intelligence facility. This would allow you to change the function of a planet without having to either go back to it each turn or to prescrap everything before starting to build the new stuff.

Blocaded planets should only be able to utilize resource equal to their own production per turn.
Or production + 1/10 of their storage (1 yr rationing). Better yet, blocated planets should have their own resource pool (cut off from the rest of the empire).

Partitioned Empires should have resources pools per partition. Partitions are created by cutting warp-points (no known connection path), enemy occupying warp-points.

Occuppying warp-points should cut enemy contact links through those warp-points to other races.

[LGM]

Originally posted by Loser:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by LGM:
The problem with this is many weapons increase more than 15% in cost per level. With Minerals this is probably not an issue since the Engines and Command and Control structures use so much Minerals, but with Radioactives or Organic weapons, a 15% limit is too restricting. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'm guessing you haven't pushed the limits of the retroseries 'exploit' yourself. The limitation is not %50 difference in each of the three resources, it's the summed total. I'm not sure, but I think that might make a difference in your discussion.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I guess I shall have to exploit that more! Just what I need, another way to more fully micromanage the game! I wish I didn't know this!

[Fyron]

As usual, you're trying to divert the discussion into tedious quibbling over semantics. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Umm... no. I have never tried to divert any discussions into tedious quibbling over semantics. The only times I argue about semantics are when it is directly relevant to the discussion. Also, my post was nowhere near a diVersion into semantics. That one line was about classification, not word meanings.

[Ed Kolis]

Dogscoff, you really sound like someone who would actually enjoy MOO3... it's been described quite accurately as "SimGalaxy"... me, I can't stand the Sim games http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

A few more ideas for SE5 (or even an SE4 patch):

When you trade tech or analyze ships, if you don't have the prerequisites for a tech, the data is just thrown away, even if you get it later in the same package! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif What I'd like to see is, if you get say Shields 2 but you don't have Shields 1 or even Physics 1, the data is stored away in a database (i.e. the tech is placed in a "pending" list that you can view from the research screen), and when you research or otherwise acquire the prerequisites, the tech finally becomes available. Note that I'm treating Shields 1 as a prerequisite for Shields 2 here, and I'm saying that Shields 2 could be explicitly gifted to an empire that doesn't HAVE Shields 1 - this would make tech trades much simpler, since you wouldn't have to play the game of "subtract my tech level from your tech level and hope the other guy isn't lying" - you just give him levels 3 through 5 of Advanced Military Science and if he was lying about his tech level, well tough for him because he either won't be able to use the tech right away (if he overstated his level) or one or more levels will be useless (if he understated it)! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

edit: Oh yes, and it would be handy to have a display of our tech level vs. their (known) tech level in the tech gift/trade window next to each tech e.g. (dunno if this will look right on the board)



Ours Theirs

Advanced Military Science 3 1

Construction 1 ß blank represents not yet known that they have it

Energy Stream Weapons 4 6

Physics 3 1

Phased Energy Weapons 0 3

Also, about the resource value distribution across planets - currently, all resources have simply a minimum and maximum value, which is the same for all resources, and the statistical distribution is (I think) flat - you're just as likely to get a 23% mineral planet as you are to get a 100% mineral planet. What I'd like to see is a more varied distribution, with separate settings for each resource - so minerals might run from 0% to 150% with a fairly flat distribution, much like in SE4, but organics might cluster around 100%, and radioactives might run all the way up to 500% but most of the planets would have very low values.

[ July 08, 2003, 21:56: Message edited by: Ed Kolis ]

[deccan]

Hey, let's keep this forum a friendly place, okay? If I wanted nasty arguments, I would've stayed in the MOO3 forums http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif .

I think that the thing to keep in mind is that there is no such thing as what a strategy game, or any game at all, *ought* to be like. What any game is like depends strictly on what the designers and players would like it to be. I think that you can avoid a lot of bitterness by avoiding such phrases like, "A strategy game should have such-and-such features..." and rewording them into phrases like "I would personally really enjoy it if a game had such-and-such features..."

As a matter of personal taste, I would side with Dogscoff in wanting more detailed modelling of planets. I would also greatly enjoy a space strategy game in which combat is optional, not required.

However, I would disagree with Dogscoff if he implies that all of the extra detail would have little impact on the level of micro-management required to play the game. If all of the added detail were to be meaningful, then surely the control that the player has over them should (uh-oh, the "should" word again http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ) have a discernible impact on gameplay, and dealing with the control of those details means added micro-management time. Doing otherwise would replicate the MOO3 problem of plenty of "look-but-don't-touch" details. In other words, I agree with Imperator Fyron that those details that won't require constant player attention and oversight "ought" to be abstracted.

[deccan]

To be fair to Dogscoff, I'd like to add that there does seem to be a huge disparity between the level of detail modelled for planets and that for ships in SEIV, considering that in the "real-world", a planet would be a far, far more complex thing than a ship.

This really isn't surprising given that most players really enjoy customizing ships down to the smallest detail possible (and there are players in this thread asking that ships be built component by component and then assembled). Even Imperator Fyron is on the record for requesting better customization options for missiles and more sophisticated modelling of minefields. In fact, I don't recall anyone saying, 'Hey, enough is enough, ships and combat are plenty detailed already!"

Detailed modelling of planets / population / economies is quite a different matter, but I'd like to go on the record that I'd like a better, more sophisticated modelling of these aspects of the game. I suspect that Proportions-mod fans, who enjoy building up planets over time, will like this as well, but of course, I can't speak for them.

[Ed Kolis]

Hear, hear! And here's to hoping the SE3 idea of "over/underworking" your population with an effect on their happiness returns... but this time, there could be different ethoi (happiness types in SE4-speak) - the "workers" ethos, for example, might actually ENJOY being overworked (to a degree) and get angry if you don't provide enough work for them! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

A simple idea I thought of which could probably be implemented in an SE4 patch is to have a setting on the planets list where you can filter it to planets within X distance of a resupply depot (yours or an ally's) - very handy for Ancient Race players, since their planet list gets all cluttered up with stuff on the far side of the galaxy! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

[narf poit chez BOOM]

the "workers" ethos, for example, might actually ENJOY being overworked (to a degree)
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">like it.

[dogscoff]

Umm... no. I have never tried to divert any discussions into tedious quibbling over semantics. The only times I argue about semantics are when it is directly relevant to the discussion. Also, my post was nowhere near a diVersion into semantics. That one line was about classification, not word meanings. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">See what I mean?


Hey, let's keep this forum a friendly place, okay?
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Don't worry, Fyron knows I'm just poking fun out of him. It's kind of like the national passtime around here http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif


If all of the added detail were to be meaningful, then surely the control that the player has over them should (uh-oh, the "should" word again ) have a discernible impact on gameplay, and dealing with the control of those details means added micro-management time.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, not if those details were modelled as indirect rather than direct consequences of your actions. You'd still only be managing the same old things, but you'd have to think a little more carefully about the fallout.

For example, it's all very well releasing a plague on a neighbouring enemy's planet, but you'd have to consider that the plague might infect your planets by means of a friendly third party trading across both borders.

Or you might think twice about bombarding that stubborn breakaway planet if you knew it would create a refugee crisis on your nearest planets.

Another thing to consider is that if somehow extra micromanagement is involved, you can always hand it over to the ministers. Let's just hope the ministers in se5 are better than those in se4.

As for me liking Moo3... I've never played it, but from what I hear I don't think I'd liike it. I'ma micromanagement nut. While I believe that some things should be handled in the background by the game, there are also some things that the player needs to be in control of, and it sounds to me like Moo3 took those things away.

[Fyron]

See what I mean?<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I saw what you meant as soon as I read the post. Yes, that Last post was about semantics (well, the Last sentence was), and, it was directly relevant to the discussion at hand.

Don't worry, Fyron knows I'm just poking fun out of him. It's kind of like the national passtime around here <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

I think that the thing to keep in mind is that there is no such thing as what a strategy game, or any game at all, *ought* to be like.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Noone has said what a strategy game ought to be like. Classifications exist for a reason. The game genres are well defined so that almost all new games can easily be placed in one of them without a second thought. Games are not made so that they have everything they need to fit into a genre, they are just placed in the most relevant one when they are done. There is really not any list of things that a game has to have to be a strategy game (or for any other genre). Both SE4 and Chess are strategy games. What do they have in common? They require similar types of thinking to play them, and pretty much nothing else (turn based is irrelevant, as that is not genre defining). If there was a list, one of these games would not be classified as a strategy game.

That being said, a strategy game ought to require future strategic planning. It ought to have varied choices available. It ought to have depth. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[Loser]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Games are not made so that they have everything they need to fit into a genre, they are just placed in the most relevant one when they are done. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Tragically this is not true. Big, impersonal, method-driven companies will frequently target their search for a concept around the money-making genre (MMPROG, RTS, whatever). I can't think of a 4X game made so, and I don't imagine companies like Malfador or Shrapnel take this approach, but sadly it does happen. Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Both SE4 and Chess are strategy games. ... If there was a list, one of these games would not be classified as a strategy game.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">True: I'd say Chess is a Tactical game, to use the genre-ish terminology (Warcraft is strategic, MechCommander is tactical). Originally posted by Ed Kolis:
A simple idea I thought of which could probably be implemented in an SE4 patch is to have a setting on the planets list where you can filter it to planets within X distance of a resupply depot (yours or an ally's) - very handy for Ancient Race players, since their planet list gets all cluttered up with stuff on the far side of the galaxy! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">In situations like these I'll go into the Empire window and mark every damn system in Systems to Avoid. Setting the Planet window to No Systems to Avoid cleans up the display. Then, as you open up a new ring of colinizable worlds, take those worlds out of Systems to Avoid. This can cause a problem when ships are set to avoid Systems to Avoid, but it's a decent trade in my book.

[ July 09, 2003, 13:17: Message edited by: Loser ]

[Ed Kolis]

On a more upbeat note http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

How about an option for fleet strategies that prevents faster ships from "flying ahead" of slower ships, thus breaking the formation?

[Erax]

SE4 is not a war game, it is a strategy game. A war game is just that; war. They focus on manuevering predetermined forces against each other in combat. They are complex, but they do not encompass nearly as much as SE4 does. A strategy game is war + economics, essentially. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Both SE4 and Chess are strategy games. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Fyron, is there a contradiction here ? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Personally, I see no reason to make a distinction between 'war' and 'strategy' games, they're all strategy games to me, with war games as a subset. The important point is that they all appeal to the same kind of player.

[Fyron]

The important point is that they all appeal to the same kind of player.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That is not true. Not all players like economics and such, and some players do not like the lack of it.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

still could be labelled as the same kind of players - the kind that wants to study a stratagetic/tactical type problem.

[Fyron]

For determing which comps get damaged from a shot, how about an extra line that functions like HPs do now for determining which comp gets hit. The HPs would have no bearing on this calculation. This new ability has no bearing on anything but the calculations for determining which comp gets hit, and the calculation would remain roughly the same. So, you could have large, easy to hit, easy to destroy comps (like Warp Nacelles in a Star Trek mod, or solar sails). Easy to hit, but take little damage to destroy. Or, you could have really strong, small comps that are hard to hit, but can take a lot of damage. Think of the modding possibilities! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[jimbob]

So IF, would you want a scale from 1-10 as far as the order to be hit? All components at level 1 must be hit before any components at level 2, etc etc.

Alternatively, one could actually make a scale from 1 to 100, with the value determining the % chance of the component being chosen for damage versus other components. If you gave a component a 100% value, the component would be hit like armor (I guess there'd be an internal competition between all armor-like components). Then it would "roll a die" for each component after that to see if it is damaged. Then you'd have an internal competition between all the "winners" to see which one is actually damaged.

If either system were used, it would also be nice to have a set of abilities for mounts which would push the number either up or down (making the component more or less likely to be hit) with the obvious max/min being 10/1 or 100%/1%.

[Fyron]

No scale, just whatever values you want to use like now. Basically, the formula for determining which component takes a hit is this: Assign numbers to each HP of each component. For example, Bridge gets 1-10, LS 11-20, CQ 21-30, first engine 31-50, etc. Then, generate a random number in the total range. The weapon hits the comp corresponding to that number. I want this same system to be kept, but to use the new "chance to be hit" field instead of the HP field.

Actually, it would be cool if components remembered their damage, and each point of damage hit a random component. Or maybe that would get really complicated. But, each comp should still remember its damage (even out of combat). Repair bays could be made to repair HPs of damage instead of just whole components.

[ July 11, 2003, 19:21: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[narf poit chez BOOM]

yeah, what fyron said.

[Rojero]

I don't know if any one said this, but how about having leaders? You know like fleet commanders that effect the way your tasks force acts. Also if there is land combat that is as detailed as the Space combat how about leaders for that too? Or leaders for espionage, research, economics, etc..etc.
I think that would be a cool idea have a limited amount of leaders, but then can choose what type we have, maybe like 50 leaders?

[Ed Kolis]

Game setup options (or even special warp-opener abilities) that restrict created warp points to (a) the edge of the system, or (b) a sector in the direction of the target system from the star, or (c) both. (In other words, banning "instawarp nexuses" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif )

[minipol]

Originally posted by Rojero:
I don't know if any one said this, but how about having leaders? You know like fleet commanders that effect the way your tasks force acts. Also if there is land combat that is as detailed as the Space combat how about leaders for that too? Or leaders for espionage, research, economics, etc..etc.
I think that would be a cool idea have a limited amount of leaders, but then can choose what type we have, maybe like 50 leaders?<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yeah, i said that already. It would be fun if that was added

[Me Loonn]

What about an idea of an optional req that would allow / deny certain facilities / components or even tech areas based on race characteristics, for example, to deny race with ground combat below 80 (-20) developing large troops, and deny race with below 80 (-20) repair getting level 3 repair bays.

[ July 14, 2003, 05:59: Message edited by: Me Loonn ]

[Ed Kolis]

Ooh, good idea! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
(Note, I am not doing this just to increase my post count, I'm doing this to show my support for Me Loonn's idea so it has a better chance of being included in SE5 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif )
edit: all right, this post DOES have a point now, I also want to mention that there could be a line in SE5's equivalent of Happiness.txt for planetary overpopulation - people should get mad if they get too crowded in! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif (Of course this would probably mean you wouldn't want to start the game with a full planet, but that could be easily changed...)

[ July 13, 2003, 22:16: Message edited by: Ed Kolis ]

[Erax]

Call me strange, but I don't like the idea of leaders. Unless every ship has a named Captain, which you can switch around between ships, and they bring their experience with them... and the training facility creates cadets, which can be transferred to the ships and gain experience... hmmm... OK, I'll rephrase my initial concept : I don't want leaders like in MoO2, I want something much more involved ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[Ed Kolis]

A few more ideas (wonder if Aaron got tired of reading all these? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif )

Components or facilities that require or preclude the installation of other components or facilities on the same planet - for example, installing Crew Quarters (instead of a Master Computer) would be a requirement for the Telekinetic Projector (or who would be doing the telekinesis? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

Make ships and classes moddable subclasses of some base "stellar object" class, thus making the handling of ringworlds easier (could be constructed like a ship but populated like a planet) and allowing the much-requested space colonies and ark ships

Ringworlds and Dyson spheres that take up multiple sectors (assuming there still ARE sectors http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif )

Races that have different population masses, and lifesupport technology to reduce the amount of "overhead" space used in transporting population as cargo - early on, population transport could be like in Proportions (100 kT / 1M), but then it could reach P&N levels (20 kT / 1M) with advanced life support systems, and maybe even stock SE4 levels (5 kT / 1M) with some sort of molecular reconstitution technology http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[jimbob]

I also want to mention that there could be a line in SE5's equivalent of Happiness.txt for planetary overpopulation - people should get mad if they get too crowded in! (Of course this would probably mean you wouldn't want to start the game with a full planet, but that could be easily changed...)<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If a planet were overcrowded, then plagues would hit them harder too... I guess they'd have a higher mortality rate as a percentage of total population versus a less populated planet.

Imperator: I don't quite understand the methodology of your system for damage distribution, but totally agree with the concept! I just hope Aaron introduces something along these lines in SE5.

[Loser]

A way, any way, to make planets drop Troops on other planets in Strategic combat.

[dogscoff]

Game setup options (or even special warp-opener abilities) that restrict created warp points to (a) the edge of the system, or (b) a sector in the direction of the target system from the star, or (c) both. (In other words, banning "instawarp nexuses" )
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'd like a variety of FTL options. You'd have regular warp points by default, but then the option to research other possibilities. Of course some ppl would disagree with this, so the option to mod them out/ turn them off would be necessary.

Stargates- a bit like warp points, but only artificially built and when you enter a stargate, you can exit at any ally-owned stargate of your choice. (barring the occasional random event ditching you in the wrong system, of course=-)

Direct flight- relativistic flight in a straight line from one system to another. Takes years and years and years (and a QR would be handy), but great for sneak attacks on "turtled" opponents.

Hyperspace- Maybe you could have a second galaxy map for hyperspace, sitting behind the normal galaxy map. Your ships would fly to the nearest entry point (or create one) then jump into the other map. This map would be much smaller than the other one so that ships can travel quickly from point to point, but with all the entry points proportionally distanced from one another. Ship encounters in hspace could be turned on or off in game setup. There wouldn't be any "terrain" in hyperspace either by default, but it would be cool if you could mod it in and/or build bases/ planets there for colonisation.

Infinite Improbablity Drives- Now I'm just being silly.

Oh, also, I'd like to see the option for monster maps. If I'm crazy enough to start a game with 10,000 systems and 200 AI players, that's between me and my (overworked) computer=-) By the time SE5 gets to it's fourth or fifth patch, we'll all be driving 8000mhz pentium VIIs anyway.

[Ed Kolis]

Yes, FTL! Definitely FTL, at least as an option! (Pay no attention to MOO3 this time, the fact that it combined warp points with FTL is NOT the reason that it sucked http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif )

Also, this is a bit cheesy, but how about shields and even armor that only works some of the time, or only covers specific components? You know how in Star Trek if they get the shield frequencies right they can get right through the shields? Well, something like that, only on the order of seconds instead of milliseconds. (And remember the Metools from Megaman? They were invincible... except for a second or so after they opened their shells to shoot! Wouldn't it be fun to install an impenetrable armor plate on your weapons, but require it to be opened in order to actually shoot? Gives you the real "evil overlord" effect http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif )

[narf poit chez BOOM]

If I'm crazy enough to start a game with 10,000 systems and 200 AI players, that's between me and my (overworked) computer=-)
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">and my computer isn't intelligent, so YEEHAA!

[minipol]

Troop combat in simultaneous suffers from the fact that troop transports drop all troops.
Maybe a "batch" system would be in order so that you can specify before an attempted planet capture how many troops you want to drop per combat turn. This would continue until the planet is captured or all troops are destroyed so if you capture a planet fairly quick, you would have enough troops to continue to the next planet in the same system.
This would make troop combat more fun

[Erax]

Or just program it into the transport's orders : attack planet III, drop 30 troops. Attack moon IIIA, drop 10 troops.

Maybe it would be easier to do this by including new parameters in the strategies.

[Joe Cool]

I'd love to see:

1) ability to save orders mid-stream
2) ability to open orders too see what orders you actually sent Last turn (didn't I wind up sending my fleet through that wormhole??!)
3) ability to send mail to yourself, so you can keep reminders
4) Ability to export mail to a .txt file
5) A more textured intel model

[Rigelian]

Troop combat in simultaneous suffers from the fact that troop transports drop all troops. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Apologies if this has been said before in the thread.. but IMHO troop combat suffers FAR more from the problem that you can't drop troops from 2+ transports simultaneously. This makes it very difficult to capture large homeworlds intact, you have to beat them down first by bombing them. I should be able to drop 600 troops from 4 small transports and have that resolved as one round of planetary combat.

[geoschmo]

IMHO troop combat suffers FAR more from the problem that you can't drop troops from 2+ transports simultaneously.[/QB]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If your first wave or troops at least survives ten rounds without getting killed the other ships can drop reinforcments in a later round. But yes it would be better if the AI would asses how many trooops were needed and drop that many, or allow us to control it somehow with strategies.

[ July 17, 2003, 15:43: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

[jimbob]

This is why large transport ships are so important. Also, try dropping super shielded/armoured troops in the first wave to "take a beach-head". Let your subsequent waves actually hand out the punishment.

[Ed Kolis]

Wow... never thought of that strategy... yeah, if my first transport's worth of troops can stay alive through 30 rounds of combat (yeah, right - works better in P&N with only 1 round http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) then any subsequent drops will continue to wear down the defenses!

more ideas...

Components/facilities that have a specified chance of randomly failing - you have enough solar sails on your spy ship to provide enough power to move and cloak without needing to resupply, but one fails deep in enemy territory and you drop out of cloak! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif You only put one Colossal Mount Yamato Cannon on your superdreadnought worldkiller, but it fails right in the middle of a crucial battle and your fleet is crushed! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Your plaguebomb escort is fleeing from a colony it just plagued when its engines fail and the enemy boarding ships catch up and steal your bioweapons technology to use against you! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

edit: btw, this was actually inspired by an example in my statistics textbook involving making sure there were enough solar panels on a satellite to ensure a 97% chance the satellite wouldn't run out of power, so you can thank the author for this idea http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

This one could probably be implemented in an SE4 batch, but you know how you set your "AI minister type" (Aggressive, Defensive, Neutral, or - in P&N - None) in the .emp file? I'd like to be able to check and even change that in-game to suit my current strategy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ July 17, 2003, 19:54: Message edited by: Ed Kolis ]

[Fyron]

There are only 10 rounds of troop combat per battle. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[DavidG]

Another major problem with troops IMO is the inability to review the combat to see what happened. I would love to be able to do this so that one could asses how effective a certain design is. Since you can't I don't really bother with any varies troop designs. Just stick 3 cannons on em and see what happens.
(PS this applies to simultaneous combat, I recall there is a sort of review in single player mode)

[DavidG]

I've said it before and I'll say it again cause it really bugs me. I would like SE5 to know what 'percent' means. Combat sensors should allow your weapons to hit 10% (or whatever they are rated at) more times than they would without them. They currently do not act that way.

(and yes I know some people will say 'that is exactly what they already do' but they are wrong. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif )

[narf poit chez BOOM]

and just to make Katchoo happy, some cowbells. they can tell you when your ships come home.

[minipol]

shift-left click and select a production for many orbital space yards at once.
I'm in the process of construction 4 sphere worlds at the same time. To accomplish this is first build 21 orbital space yards. Then you have to click each and one of them to give the order for 10 platings, 10 cables and 1 sphereworld. Off course, the space yard list scrolls up every time so you have to scroll down the list to see where you were. You can now shift-left click to select several orbital space yards but you cannot give open a construction queue.
It would be cool if you would get the normal construction queue and the build orders that you have given would be applied to all the orbital space yards you had selected.
This would save a lot of time and clicking.

[Ed Kolis]

Mass multipliers!
I got started thinking about this when I realized that the Tractor Beam III is no better than the Tractor Beam II (see separate thread), and I thought, "hmm, what could make the TB3 more useful?" So what if there were "mass multiplier" abilities that multiplied the effective mass of a ship, for purposes of propulsion, tractor/repulsor beams, and gravitic sensors? A heavy mount tractor beam might have a 150% multiplier to ship mass (only applicable when fired), for instance, to allow your ship to tractor ships 50% larger than itself. Or an inertial damper might have a 75% multiplier, making it 25% harder to see with gravitic sensors and require 25% fewer engines! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

edit: Oh, and how about storms that jam/unjam long range scanners!

[ July 19, 2003, 22:21: Message edited by: Ed Kolis ]

[Ed Kolis]

Here's another idea... you know how there are weapons which only damage a planet's conditions? Well, something even more useful would be weapons that only damage a planet's VALUE! (Oh, and allow these weapons to be used outside of combat, like stellar manipulation!)

Actually, perhaps an option for stellar manipulation devices should be to make them combat devices, so you have to actually get in range to use them and can't just set your strategy to "don't get hurt" and then destroy the planet from afar http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif Of course then the definition of "combat" would have to be extended as you could engage in "combat" with an uninhabited planet in order to change it to asteroids http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

edit: Oh, and something along the lines of this in SE5's equivalent of Happiness.txt:

This Planet Gifted := 200
Planet In Empire Gifted := 40

In other words, you can't go around trading entire planets full of people without getting them pissed off at you... imagine if the US tried to "sell" North Dakota to Canada to pay off the national debt http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif (Hey, didn't Dave Barry suggest that once?)

[ July 25, 2003, 06:05: Message edited by: Ed Kolis ]

[Q]

One little idea: ship type deception.

A component that would allow you to display another ship type to all other players than it is in reality. If the ship has this component you can select any other ship type you have and all other players will see the faked identity! Mimic your colonizer as baseship or vice versa!

[Ruatha]

Originally posted by DavidG:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Q:
One little idea: ship type deception.

A component that would allow you to display another ship type to all other players than it is in reality. If the ship has this component you can select any other ship type you have and all other players will see the faked identity! Mimic your colonizer as baseship or vice versa!<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Good idea. Make it work like cloaking device so ships with good detection could see through it. I was thinking this idea myself a while ago. There was another game out that used this idea but I can't remember what it was.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">VGA Planet had an add-on that gave the Lizards the Chameleon device, that could make ships appear as other ships.
It was real fun to see enemy raiders attack what they belived was a small transport only to find it to be a T-Rex battleship, whoa ha ha!

[ July 25, 2003, 14:38: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

[Suicide Junkie]

Make Armor a serious contender vs Shields for ship defense.

Be sure to make them distinct, though...
Cheap and hard to repair vs expensive and quick to recharge for example.

[Q]

Originally posted by Suicide Junkie:
Make Armor a serious contender vs Shields for ship defense.

Be sure to make them distinct, though...
Cheap and hard to repair vs expensive and quick to recharge for example.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think you can have that already in SE IV by giving the armor more hit points.
But what I would like to see in SE V are multiple levels of shields and armor. Then you can give each weapon unique possibilities which level and shield can be skipped and you can create a never ending research tree that gives you better shields and armor and better weapons that defeat this better defenses and so on......

[jimbob]

imagine if the US tried to "sell" North Dakota to Canada to pay off the national debt (Hey, didn't Dave Barry suggest that once?)<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ed: If you throw in both Dakotas we'll give you 25% off all beef exports for then next 5 years too http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

All the ideas for SE5 are pretty amazing... I'd love to see even half of them implemented! I'd also like to see a speed modifier to combat. I figure that a scout going 8 movement in combat is going to be harder to hit than the same size scout moving only 3 in combat. In the B5 mod I've got some ships moving in excess of 10 movement in combat... shouldn't these ships be harder to hit?

Secondly, how about hologram projections (sorry if someone mentioned this specifically) that allow you to multiply the number of ships in a fleet by producing phantom ships? Boy you could have the other guy chasing a single scout with 8 hologram projectors = a fleet of 9 ships!

[ July 25, 2003, 17:41: Message edited by: jimbob ]

[DavidG]

Originally posted by Q:
One little idea: ship type deception.

A component that would allow you to display another ship type to all other players than it is in reality. If the ship has this component you can select any other ship type you have and all other players will see the faked identity! Mimic your colonizer as baseship or vice versa!<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Good idea. Make it work like cloaking device so ships with good detection could see through it. I was thinking this idea myself a while ago. There was another game out that used this idea but I can't remember what it was.

[tesco samoa]

when you click on a ship or fleet its orders are displayed.

When you right click on a planet / unit / item it takes you there.

[Ack]

A newbie's list.

I love the game and spend entirely too much time playing it. But overall I'm hoping SEV is opened up a bit and allows different strategies outside of primarily conquest.

1. Ability to split planet production between projects.

This would be nearly identical in functionality to the existing research and intel screens.
Say I'd want to construct mines at a rate of 2 per turn, but still would like to build research centers.

2. System comparison screen.

Sometimes I'd like to look at an entire system to determine what needs to be built there.
So something like the planet screen but by system with units, ships, facilities listed by planet in that system.

3. Peaceful or Diplomatic win conditions.

I just don't feel the need to defeat EVERY race.

4. Ship routing through supply points.

When I send a ship three systems over it would be nice if it automatically visited a resupply base at every system.
Yes, I often forget to set waypoints when directed ships/fleets.
I'm slipping this in at the four slot to disguise the how whiney it really sounds.

5. Allow some elements of the scoring to be modded.

Again, the scoring seems to favor conquest/empire building which limits how the game can be played.
Perhaps something as simple as score = (a * pop^na) + (b * tech^nb) + ..., where a, b, na, and nb would be user defined values.

6. Better Intelligence and have it play a larger role in the game.
      Clearer algorithm for how intelligence works and how to improve success/failure.
           
            Perhaps this can be improved by allowing the overpurchase of the selected intelligence item.
                  For example 10k points 1X effectiveness of an item, but 20k points gives you 1.25X.  So that by paying 10k extra points, the chance of success is improved by 25%.

7.  Move intelligence button onto main view and off the politics screen.

8.  Add ship warnings to the map or log screens. 

Too many times I've had enemy ships slip into my sectors without me noticing. 
It would be great if this just pointed out races with Non-Intercourse or War pacts. 
A user option for selecting what Messages are received would be even better.

[Suicide Junkie]

3. Peaceful or Diplomatic win conditions.
Try the "Galaxy at peace for X turns" condition.

If you can get all the races to stop fighting, and come to a peaceful coexistance, game over, you win.

[mac5732]

AI Diplomacy, IMHO, I would like to see the AI intell tweaked up for most of the races, some are still to easy to use intel against.

just some ideas Mac

[Krsqk]

I would like to see facility effects stack between families (but not within the same family). I would also like to see all modifiers multiply rather than add. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[Fyron]

It would be better if we could choose for each component, facility etc. if each ability on it stacks or not. Basically, take all stacking abilities (of the same type) on a ship, add them up (multiply, whatever). Then, compare to all non-stacking abilities. The ship gets whatever of these bonuses is best.

[mac5732]

movable Space Stations, Battle Stations, Starbases like in the Delv Mod, its great to be able to move them where you want them

just some ideas mac

[Loser]

Put a note in the log when a ship doesn't retrofit.

Tell me why a planet is rioting.

[Ruatha]

The wait clock, that comes up when loading the game, couldn't the handles move around?
That would be the most valued and used improvement, almost enough to name it SE5 by this update only http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[Cirvol]

Aaron!

I'm a long time se4 fan... i bought both se4 and se4 gold http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

please please add these - they are THE MOST IMPORTANT imho

1. Save partial turns for multiplayer games... with current pbw games, a turn often takes more than a few hours... ie, more than a couple of sittings - please allow partial saves turns. Better yet, when you hit end turn, allow the system to load that 'turn' file and continue issueing commands, thus modifying the players turn file.

2. SHIP combat INITIATIVE. please add something which interleaves the ship movement and shooting in combat... base it on speed and experience please -- fastest and most experienced crews go first http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Don't let ALL ships for one side go first... it just wrecks the game.

[Suicide Junkie]

I would like flexible, moddable retrofit options.

For example, an organic race that can retrofit ships to larger sizes at the expense of experience.
It would simulate organic growth, and the race could be restricted to only building baby-escorts, then growing them slowly into warrior-dreadnoughts with incubator-training facilities.

[Loser]

Make Emissive Armor stack.

Not that the emissive effects should stack together and apply to every shot, but that each time an Emissive component is damage the Emissive bonus is taken off anew.

[ July 29, 2003, 16:36: Message edited by: Loser ]

[narf poit chez BOOM]

i don't know why i didn't think of this before. a quieu done message when a planet has finished construction.

it does have a message for failed retrofit.

[Loser]

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
it does have a message for failed retrofit.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yeah but it has the same title in the log as a successfull retrofit.

[Ruatha]

Yep, there should be a "Warning" button to see warning Messages, failed retrofits, alien ships spotted, damage taken by warp points (Events now), etc.

[Suicide Junkie]

Originally posted by Loser:
Make Emissive Armor stack.

Not that the emissive effects should stack together and apply to every shot, but that each time an Emissive component is damage the Emissive bonus is taken off anew.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">IE: Make a new ability for SE3-style emissive armor.

[mac5732]

Have AI build Battlestations on wormholes for defense..

just some ideas Mac

[Lord Kodos]

Not sure if any of these have been mentioned but...

-A races Streangth rating effects its boarding attack and defense.
-The ability to make components create planets from nothing
-The ability to transfer crew(experience) from one ship to another. Also on this point, Escape Pods.
-Chlorine, and Nitrogen Atmosphere types.
-Desert, Dead, Machine and Forest planet types
-Negative Ruins! "Youve gone and woken Cthulhu! nice going! moron!"

[narf poit chez BOOM]

"unfortunatly, the artifact your scientists discovered is a giant dimensional transporter. it just needed a little more energy and your ships' was it. guess your scientists will take a little more time getting home."

[Suicide Junkie]

-Chlorine, and Nitrogen Atmosphere types.
-Desert, Dead, Machine and Forest planet types<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Even better:
Arbitrary Atmospheres and surface types.

The ability to set abilities on the planets depending on type...

(Eg: +50% organics production from Forest worlds, maximum value 30% on Dead worlds)

[DavidG]

Originally posted by Loser:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
it does have a message for failed retrofit.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yeah but it has the same title in the log as a successfull retrofit.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">More importantly tell us in simultanesous games if a retorfit will be over that 50% as soon as we issue the command. I hate having to get a calculater or pen and paper out to do a calculation when I working on a 3Ghz Pentium 4.

[Stone Mill]

I'm sure this was mentioned, but another plug for:

Communications history with each empire should be appended to a viewable .txt file, easily accessible in the interface. So you can look at what was discussed 10 or 100 years ago...

[cybersol]

Originally posted by Stone Mill:
I'm sure this was mentioned, but another plug for:

Communications history with each empire should be appended to a viewable .txt file, easily accessible in the interface. So you can look at what was discussed 10 or 100 years ago...<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Wow, that would be great in those really long PBW games, especially when you have 4 or 5 other games at the same time. This one gets my vote as well.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

open the calculater before you run se, then alt-tab to it.

i don't know if it works when you have a window up, though.

[ August 01, 2003, 17:21: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]

[Ruatha]

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
open the calculater before you run se, then alt-tab to it.

i don't know if it works when you have a window up, though.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It works, but you shouldn't have to do it, I agree that you should get an instant warning; the post attempt warning should be pre-attempt!

[Loser]

Originally posted by Suicide Junkie:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">-Chlorine, and Nitrogen Atmosphere types.
-Desert, Dead, Machine and Forest planet types<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Even better:
Arbitrary Atmospheres and surface types.

The ability to set abilities on the planets depending on type...

(Eg: +50% organics production from Forest worlds, maximum value 30% on Dead worlds)</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">YES! More moddability! Originally posted by Lord Kodos:
-Negative Ruins! "Youve gone and woken Cthulhu! nice going! moron!"<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Moddable Ruins Too!

[Ruatha]

I like the warp points travels, but I also liked the free travel in VGA planets.
Can't there be both?
Add hyperspace engines to the tech tree, these will enable travel outside of the warp point lanes, much slower travel between starsystems but it canm be a real surprise when you show up, plus turtelling becomes impossible.
This will add spin off tech like deep space scanners, to see if anyone is coming through space.
The possibility to create new starsystems, bases in deep space, scanners to seek for such bases.
Navigation computers that enable hyperspace travels, better navigation computers is lesse chance of death by hitting a star etc.

If it takes no time to travel through warp points, you could have speed in hyper space travel, so better engines equals faster travels, as the normal engines does, but you need both normal engines and hyper engines if you want to by-pass the warp-points and a nav computer.
And then if it's say 20 light-years between the systems, the first engines could have a speed of half a light-year a month, and then increasing up to several light years a month with higher tech levels.
This way you could start a game on a custom map without WP and have stellar manip turned off, so if your a fan of free travel you can have a game with only that.
But as I've already stated, I'd like to have it all.

to sum it up:

Both Warp points and free deep space travel through extra hyperspace engines.

[Fyron]

It would be great to be able to mod in free-space travel, but then, that is really counter to the flavor of Space Empires, so I do not know if there is much chance of such being added to the stock game.

[jimbob]

Ah, but if it isn't added to the stock game, it won't be do-able in any game (we need the hard-code in place for "normal" travel as well as warp point travel).

I'd really like this dual travel thing too.. I think it could make for some interesting ruses and better cross-over mods. I still think that the most efficient system should be the warp points however. Travelling from star to star in normal space should take a long time until very advanced propulsion systems are created.

My question is, would the advanced propulsion systems (hyperspace, warp drives, etc.) add points to in-system and combat speed? I vote no.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

make it moddable.

i like moddable.

[DavidG]

Originally posted by Ruatha:
I like the warp points travels, but I also liked the free travel in VGA planets.
Can't there be both?
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think this could effectivly be accomplished by the feature I've heard in demand that is warp points with some abiliteis. ie they only Last one turn. so you could have a component that could open a temporary warp, then on the same turn you could give your ship warp orders (something u can't do now unless it starts on a warp) And then when you get your turn you would see your ships in the next system and the warp point would already be closed.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

wouldn't include deep space.

[Q]

Perhaps this is impossible but I would like that some of the great work that has been done for SE IV could be used for SE V too, especially the new races and mods. So somehow SE V beeing a super patch for SE IV.

[Omnicron1]

Hmmmm.... maybe just a little more graphics... and slightly better sound just a few cosmetic touch ups you know everything else is great

[Loser]

Make ground combat different in some way that surprises, amazes, and impresses us.

[Geckomlis]

Add the ability to transfer supplies and resources like any other cargo.

[LGM]

I want more Targeting Options:

Random (allows ships with same combat plan to spread missle fire over more targets)
Has Shields
Has no Shields
Worst Defense
Best Defense
Easiest To Hit (net all modifiers)
Hardest to Hit (net all modifiers)
Has Quantum Reactor
Has Stellar Manipulation
Most Cargo
Least Cargo
Has Shipyard
Most Supply
Least Supply
Most Boarding Defense
Least Boarding Defense
Has Minesweapers [added Aug 5]
Has No Minesweapers [added Aug 5]

----------------------------------------

I would a fleet to have a wait period before ships breaking formation. Best I can currently do is use a formation that puts the leader in front and make the weakest ship the leader so the fleet disperse once combat begins. Of course if they target strongest, they will ignore the lead ship. Perhaps a checkbox to break formation as soon as first fire occurs or a range to enemies at which the formation breaks up. This change would allow mixed speed fleets to close together for a while and then when close enough, the faster ships can do their thing (board, ram, etc).

-------------

Missles ought to be smart enough to retarget with remaing movement capability. It really stinks when 20+ missles disappear because the target was destroyed.

[ August 05, 2003, 18:08: Message edited by: LGM ]

[DavidG]

Originally posted by LGM:
I want more Targeting Options:

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Good idea. Don't forget: Target Minesweepers.

[Khemul]

I didn't play SE4 much but did enjoy SE3 quite a bit so sorry if some of these are already in.

-Nomadic race style. This race would for some reason or another have abandoned their world. Instead they live in space stations or orbital stations. (at the very least, stations with populations would be nice). Maybe even a special tech to allow mobile habitats.

-More personality to Organic races. Maybe growing everything rather then building it. This way they'd use nearly entirely organic resources. Maybe with a longer build time to compensate.
-Similar change for Crystal races but with metal used entirely rather then organics.

-Larger ship classes. After all we get to build planets http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

-And of course better AI. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[Suicide Junkie]

Khemul:
You should Try my Pirates & Nomads mod http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[Khemul]

Just curious whether anyone has heard any official word on SEV yet? I haven't seen anything on the Shrapnel's or Malfador's site about it but...it is listed for pre-order on Chips & Bits with a 10/03 release.

[Ed Kolis]

Originally posted by Khemul:
Just curious whether anyone has heard any official word on SEV yet? I haven't seen anything on the Shrapnel's or Malfador's site about it but...it is listed for pre-order on Chips & Bits with a 10/03 release.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Hahahahaha!!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Well, don't believe them... word around here is it's slated for summer 2004 at the earliest! Perhaps they were thinking of Starfury, which is scheduled for September 2003? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

[Ed Kolis]

Here's another idea... support image and sound file formats other than BMP and WAV - these are uncompressed, so they take up a LOT of space on your hard drive! I know using compressed formats like PNG and MP3 won't save on download times for mods (everyone zips their mods anyway http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) but it would at least save some space on our hard drives http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[mac5732]

AI's to build Battlestations and Starbases on wormholes for wormhole defense along with Sats, The Ai needs some stronger wormhole defenses especially against human players http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

just some ideas Mac

[Ed Kolis]

yeah... just borrow the defense algorithms from SE2, man those AI's kicked butt! or did they just use a resource multiplier cheat? hmmm... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[narf poit chez BOOM]

instead of my slider idea for moving stuff, just click on the number. like if you've got 52454634 and you want to move 1000000, you click on 5>2<454634. left click, move out. right click, move in.

[Ed Kolis]

Here's something that IMHO would help SE5 appeal to a broader audience...

Since the combat's going to be realtime anyway, wouldn't it be cool to have multiplayer realtime combat in LAN and TCP/IP games? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Imagine the kinds of things you could do with the Furball games - a constant slugfest where you actually control the ships! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Don't you think that would attract at least a bit of the RTS crowd? (And since SE5 will be fully moddable, those of us who prefer a more strategic game can always slow down the speeds of ships in combat or something so it doesn't turn into a clickfest! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif )

[narf poit chez BOOM]

something was said about a Last patch. if that's not out yet, how about bumping all the 2^8 and 2^16 variables up to 2^32?

[Ed Kolis]

Gee... if SE5's graphics are realtime rendered... you know what THAT means?

Spinning Tech Items like in MOO2!!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

[narf poit chez BOOM]

ooh, spinny...

[ September 05, 2003, 05:47: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]

[Loser]

I have always had a special affection for things that are shiny or go 'round-and-'round.

If the GUI could be made to support few frames of animation, the image-mod-happy among us could make the spinning things for any mod.

But I still want to be able to save during a Simultaneous Turn.

And leave many-selected ships selected after I give them Just One Order.

And when I open a Construction Queue from the F7 Construction Queues window, and clear that queue, and it was on Hold, it turns Hold off, but does not turn off the Hold indicator. So when I click to turn off the Hold indicator it actually put the Queue on Hold.

And make it so I can choose not to have ships already in fleets displayed in the F6 Ships Window.

And more Hotkey. Lots more Hotkeys. I want to be able to do everything with the keyboard.

But it's a great game as it is. I love it. Really.

[Ed Kolis]

How about using XML to store the data files? It's a standard but flexible format so it shouldn't be hard to find programs to ease editing the data files or code libraries to assist in creation of modding utilities.

[Phoenix-D]

More importantly- what advantages would XML give? I can think of a couple disadvantages right off the top of my head.

[Ed Kolis]

There are already existing programs which will, given an XML schema, which could be supplied with the game, let you edit XML data and automatically validate it as you edit, so you don't have to rely on the game's cryptic error Messages and search for errors in a half-meg text file. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Also, there are existing class libraries which can handle XML data in an object-oriented fashion, making it easier for Aaron to write the game and easier for people like Suicide Junkie, DavidG, and myself to create modding utilities.

What disadvantages did you have in mind? (I can think of the huge file size with all those opening and closing tags, but it couldn't be much worse than the current data files with their repeated field names... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif )

Another idea I just had is the ability to export (and possibly even import) any sort of data from the game as a text, XML, CSV, Excel, or whatever type of file the game uses to store its data - not just the tech tree, but ship designs, system maps, colony lists, you name it. This might seem like I'm going a bit far for just a game, but bear in mind it's been done for Stars! - you could run programs on the data and calculate, say, the refueling range of all your ships in one fell swoop! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif And what would be even cooler is if there were some way to call those custom programs from some menu or something within the game interface... whoa! talk about moddability! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

[Ran-Taro]

Additional area's of gameplay that let you play an interesting strategic game, without resorting to violence, and still win.

I'm thinking here of interesting cultural, technological, scientific, diplomatic, exploration etc type ways to play and win the game. I have some ideas about this might be implemented, actually. So I might send them to MM if they are interested.

[Atrocities]

I read a thread about a week ago by Renegade that had a lot of great ideas in it. Perhaps he should post them here as well.

Here is one more of my many ideas. (I think I have suggested something on the order of 200 now over the span of 20 or so threads such as this.)

You know what would be a great addition to Options for SE V? The option to select the starting planet name and or system for each player. This way if you are playing the Federation you can set the starting name of your planet to Earth and the system name to Sol.

To go one step above this, have the ability to design "pre-established" systems and be able to set these systems as your players starting system wether the map is custom or randomly created.

[ October 15, 2003, 03:21: Message edited by: Atrocities ]

[narf poit chez BOOM]

it's alive!

*cue thunder, lightning, spooky music*

[Atrocities]

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
it's alive!

*cue thunder, lightning, spooky music*<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Dude you truly scare me.

Are you paid to be weird, or do you just do it for free?
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

[narf poit chez BOOM]

it's funny. most people don't have enough funny. you want to know what's scary? people who seem to think humor can only involve other peoples pain, when the best kind of humor releaves pain.

[Atrocities]

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
it's funny. most people don't have enough funny. you want to know what's scary? people who seem to think humor can only involve other peoples pain, when the best kind of humor releaves pain.<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Very true. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[Loser]

I would still like to see more keyboard functionality.

Hotkeys, Hotkeys, Hotkeys!

[narf poit chez BOOM]

but ai humor is the one that truly bites.

*whaps himself with a hammer*

*whaps david with a hammer*

[Ed Kolis]

Originally posted by Ran-Taro:
Additional area's of gameplay that let you play an interesting strategic game, without resorting to violence, and still win.

I'm thinking here of interesting cultural, technological, scientific, diplomatic, exploration etc type ways to play and win the game. I have some ideas about this might be implemented, actually. So I might send them to MM if they are interested.<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">BTW, If Aaron says "give me an example", point him in the direction of Civilization 3 and Galactic Civilizations. I've never played either game but I've heard that in each of them there are special structures you can build which give you "cultural influence" and can actually sway nearby populations to join your empire; also, in GalCiv, there are a lot of random events and ruins effects which actually require the player to make a choice - for example, you might
discover a planet with a race of sentient whales, and you have several options: enslave them (free labor, but causes unrest), exterminate them (you can now colonize the planet, but makes other races dislike you), or set the planet aside as a sanctuary (gains points with the environmentalist factions).

Say, I read about this laptop (http://www.sharpsystems.com/products/pc_notebooks/actius/rd/3d/details.asp) which supposedly has the ability to display real 3D images! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Assuming this is R2D2-secret-message-from-princess-Leia type stuff and not the cheap gimmicks you see on credit cards, this would be a really cool feature to incorporate into SE5... just imagine the space battles you could have! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif (I might even accept a 3D map then! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

[narf poit chez BOOM]

that link gives an 'object not found'.

[David E. Gervais]

Originally posted by Atrocities:
Are you paid to be weird, or do you just do it for free? <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Are you talkin to me? You TALKIN to me? Are YOU talkin to ME?

My humor is free and sometimes it bites. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Cheers! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

..Sorry I couldn't resist.

[Ran-Taro]

Originally posted by Ed Kolis:
BTW, If Aaron says "give me an example", point him in the direction of Civilization 3 and Galactic Civilizations. I've never played either game but I've heard that in each of them there are special structures you can build which give you "cultural influence" and can actually sway nearby populations to join your empire; also, in GalCiv, there are a lot of random events and ruins effects which actually require the player to make a choice - for example, you might
discover a planet with a race of sentient whales, and you have several options: enslave them (free labor, but causes unrest), exterminate them (you can now colonize the planet, but makes other races dislike you), or set the planet aside as a sanctuary (gains points with the environmentalist factions).
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yeah, I have a good handle on both those games, along with some of the other 4X's (and I think MM probably would too) - but I reckon Space Empires could do it better than any of them. Working on it now for fun. If it works out OK I'll send to 'em and see what they think. It's probably a bit too complex to go into here, though.

[ October 16, 2003, 00:52: Message edited by: Ran-Taro ]

[SpaceBadger]

Dunno if this has been suggested yet (I've only read the most recent four pages of this so far...) but here is something that I am having a heck of a time trying to mod in SEIV: systemships. You know, non-starships - they can't travel via warp-point unless they are carried by another vessel. This type of ship is common in SF and in SF games, and introduces all sorts of strategic wrinkles, especially if the "jumping" equipment is massive/bulky/power-hungry enough to put starships at a disadvantage against ships not carrying the jumping equipment.

I've been trying them as a variant of Fighters, and not pleased with anything I'm coming up with yet - so how about putting them in SEV?

SpaceBadger

[SpaceBadger]

Yay, I'm a Corporal now! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Umm, should my feelings be hurt that I've now made 51 Posts and Narf has never offered me any cheese? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

SpaceBadger

[Me Loonn]

Ok... heres "Yet More Ideas", part MCMXXIV.

1. Capturing planet with resource / cargo storage facilities also gets you the cargo / resources that should logically be there.

2. New component / facility flag: "Makes Obsolite" ! Same as the req, but it makes all them listed obsolite once this has been researched. Means they wont show in Designs / construction windows when the "show only latest" is on.

[ October 16, 2003, 01:25: Message edited by: Me Loonn ]

[narf poit chez BOOM]

i can't get everybody!

*offers Spacebadger some cheese* belated welcome to the forums.

anyway, somebody's already done system ships. check out highliner mod.

[SpaceBadger]

Yum, we Badgers just love a nice hunk of cheddar. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I will check out Highliner mod - I don't think I have that one yet. Thanks for the tip.

SpaceBadger

[Parasite]

I would like an "Upgrade Facilities" button to work on one planet. That way I would not have to upgrade everything when I just want one almost complete shipyard to complete as a lv2-3. It seems a shame that I can refit my whole empire, but not just one planet. Note I am talking about stuff in the build queue, not stuff already built.

I would also like a way to upgrade all items in an empire, but not change the build queues. I hate upgrading everything to lv3, then going back and changing all the queues back to lv2 so they can build one a turn. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

Does anyone else start a factory at lv1, then put the queue on hold for that Last turn or two while you get the lv3 tech?

[Loser]

Originally posted by Parasite:
Does anyone else start a factory at lv1, then put the queue on hold for that Last turn or two while you get the lv3 tech?<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Sometimes, when the AI has me outclassed everywhere else. I think that might be on the 'gamey' list, though.

[edit: Since the Robotoid Factory is the Last thing I build on may resource worlds this is not a bad plan. You just leave the 'held' queue sitting for however many turns it takes you to get Comptuers 3. Of course, it's a good idea to put Ship Yards on every world, so you might need to free that up prematurely if you get a surprise from your neighbor.]

[ October 17, 2003, 20:10: Message edited by: Loser ]

[Merry Jolkar]

The single greatest improvement I can think of would be to enable us to save partially completed turns! Especially late in game, with dozens of systems to manage, I'd love to be able to save, transfer the file to my laptop, work a bit, and so on...

One other more nice twist would be to have the ability to review old turns. Go back and re-read those Messages you sent and received. See who broke promises, etc. Something like a cumulative turn file that builds up as you execute turns (not something you would want to have to download each turn from PBW of course!)

Ships that are fleeing from pursuers and have the same speed should not get caught. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

Why have one fleet shoot all their shots first? Order of combat should depend on each ship's "initiative", which should depend on weapon tech, experence, special technology! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

[ October 18, 2003, 04:47: Message edited by: Merry Jolkar ]

[Loser]

Just tried that man. Cannot Save
During a simultaneous movement game, the game is saved automatically when you end your turn.<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">

[Atrocities]

The single greatest improvement I can think of would be to enable us to save partially completed turns! Especially late in game, with dozens of systems to manage, I'd love to be able to save, transfer the file to my laptop, work a bit, and so on... <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Please forgive my ignorance, but I think you can do this now. I often save my turn files when I am only halfway through them because the phone will ring or something else comes up. I think return later and finish the turn then process it.

OPTION - Save Game

[Quasar]

In the construction que list a column with radio buttons for "hold" wolud be great. It is painful when you have hundreds of planets / bases and need to put 50 or 60 on hold.
Another column for "emergency" build rate would be great too!

[ October 19, 2003, 02:18: Message edited by: Quasar ]

[Atrocities]

One of the things that I would love to see for Space Empires V is the race contact system improved.

I feel that if "discovering" a race and having full contact with it before they open com channels is not something that I like.

How can I explain this. Lets say two ships from differant races meet in a neutral system and combat occurs, NO information regarding the victor should be gain except for the knowledge that there is another race out their. On the Political screen a shaded out figure with say a Question mark would then be vissable.

The way to establish contact would be to send Messages, and attempt to find their homeworld.

Now if a race has full scanners and they survive the combat, then the sensor information can be used to build a racial profile. BUT communications must be established before any treaty offers can become available.

The reason for this is for anaminity. Remember in DS9 where ships were being lost in the Gama Quadrant, and it took many months before the other races knew about the Dominion and that it was them that who destroyed thier ships. Even after they knew of them it took several more months to open a dialog. They had no intel on them except to that they exsisted and basically what they looked like, but nothing else.

Having a system like this increases the need for scanners, intel, and diplomacy.

[Ed Kolis]

How about a "randomized" tech tree? I remember suggesting for SE4 something like MOO3 has, where you might need level 5 of Physics to get Hyper-Death BLasters one game and level 7 the next, but why not also randomize the effects of the technologies? There could be up to a 10% or some amount settable in the data files variation in all numeric attributes associated with any technology, so a DUC-5 might do 36-44 damage, have a range of 4.5-5.5 km, fire every 0.9-1.1 seconds, weigh 27-33 kT, etc. depending on who built it (or maybe even on which spaceyard it was built at!)

Also, even if this is not implemented, it might be helpful to measure the mass and hitpoints of smaller vehicles in tons rather than kilotons, both for realism and precision - it's kind of hard to have a 10% variation in size or a +25% increase in damage from a mount when your component is only 2 kT! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Regarding tech again, a more interesting model for analyzing vehicles (and facilities? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) might involve a list of possible tech areas you can get from analyzing something, along with a % chance, a range of points (not necessarily a whole level!), and a max. level you can attain (so you can't get level 12 propulsion by analyzing a bunch of C-T engines http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) Also, you'd get a chance at tech for every component, not every ship... so a WMG-3 might give you a 50% chance at up to 50,000 points in High Energy Weapons up to level 10, but also a 25% chance at up to 20,000 points in Propulsion up to level 7 (what you need to get High Energy Weapons in the first place) Then you might get both... or you might get nothing! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[Renegade 13]

Something that would be great to have in SE V would be the ability to convert facilities from one type to another.

So maybe you could convert all your Research centers to Intel centers after you have completed all possible research, for say, 50-70% of the cost of a brand new Intel center. Right now, as far as I know, you have to go individually to every planet with a research center and manually scrap it then build whatever you want instead. It takes a long time and is kind of annoying. It'd be great to be able to press a button and choose a new type of facility to convert all your now useless research centers to.

Thought this idea might be a good idea to implement when SE V rolls out. (Hopefully soon http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif )

[Loser]

Actually, you can scrap all Research centers everywhere at once in the F5 Colonies window. Of course, you still have to go through all the now lightened colonies in the F7 Construction window, but if you sort them by Facilities and then by Construction you will have them all in a row and be able to work through them fairly swiftly.

[Monolith]

I am new to SEIV, and don't have the time to read through this entire thread at the moment, so I'll post a couple ideas that may be repeats.

It would be nice to see a winning condition whereby you form something the equivalent of the UFP out of Star Trek. The idea being that your race sets out to build diplomatic relations and unity to an extent that is reflected in some kind of scoring, the member races of the "Federation" you put together scores based on their individual scores. Not surprisingly, the computer players (some any way) should be trying to establish their own form of this.

Another idea would be to have a pausible real time system for ship combat ala the old Microprose game, Task Force: 1942. The elegance of fleet control and firing would be a natural fit to the SE style of play. Now, I am not a fan of RTS play, but this is one model that "feels" right.

I know it has been suggested before, but I would also like to see the system view resemble the orbiting, isometric style of MOOII.

[ October 21, 2003, 14:10: Message edited by: Monolith ]

[Renegade 13]

Originally posted by Loser:
Actually, you can scrap all Research centers everywhere at once in the F5 Colonies window. Of course, you still have to go through all the now lightened colonies in the F7 Construction window, but if you sort them by Facilities and then by Construction you will have them all in a row and be able to work through them fairly swiftly. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yep, I knew you could scrap them all at once, but that's a small part of the whole process. But thanks for the faster process for adding the items to those many, many construction queues. I hadn't thought of that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Renegade

[tesco samoa]

ability to retro all ships at once or select them from a list for retro.

and build ships at this yard to join x fleet....

[Loser]

Originally posted by Renegade 13:
Yep, I knew you could scrap them all at once, but that's a small part of the whole process. But thanks for the faster process for adding the items to those many, many construction queues.<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Now, if only I could do it all with the keyboard, then it would be automated.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

don't know if anyone's posted this; it was inspired by some comments in the devnull thread about retrofitting. retrofitting should be like building a ship; it should take time based on number of components and cost.

[Ed Kolis]

Scale mounts that are built into the game engine, like in MOO2. SE4's scale mounts that have been modded in have the awkward problem of requiring the base component size and cost to be very large, so you get "Ion Engine I is 1000 kT and costs 30,000 minerals?!? WTF?!? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif " And you also have to go to the trouble of selecting the scale mount from the mount list every time you want to use a scaled component. Instead, how about allowing percentages or multipliers in the Components.txt file, so you could say

Component Name := Ion Engine I
...
Tonnage Size := 10% <- relative to size of hull
Tonnage Structure := 20% <- again relative to size, so for a 100kT hull it has 20 HP
...
Cost Minerals := 300% <- again relative to size of hull, so for a 100kT hull it costs 300 minerals

or, even more flexible but less readable & harder to implement & design a component stats window for http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif :

ComponentName := Ion Engine I
...
TonnageSize := [Hull.TonnageSize] * 10% <- the Hull object refers to the hull this component is mounted on
Tonnage Structure := [TonnageSize] ^ 2 * 0.1 <- increases as the SQUARE of the size for some reason http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif a 100kT ship would have a 10 kT / 10 HP engine, a 300kT ship would have a 30 kT / 90 HP engine...
...
CostMinerals := [TonnageSize] ^ 2 * 3 <- there's that square again, remember the "Economies of Scale Mod"? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[narf poit chez BOOM]

would certainly make my mod easier.

[Monolith]

Okay, I am almost certain these have been listed... but...

- A "web" plasma field weapon ala the Tholians from the original Star Trek series

- Leaders with traits ala the MOO series for Fleets/Ships/Systems

- A Space Elevator as a component to complement that Space Yard facilities to speed those puppies up, or possibly some other use. It just sounds so cool to have, I just want it in the game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

- Greater range of racial characteristics

[Alneyan]

Originally posted by Monolith:

- A Space Elevator as a component to complement that Space Yard facilities to speed those puppies up, or possibly some other use. It just sounds so cool to have, I just want it in the game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Do you mean a facility to improve the construction rates of your space yard? If so, you may already do so with SEIV. There are such facilities in the Adamant mod, and another mod as well IIRC. In Adamant, you have to build a "project" of expansion of your space yard, for any of the three resources, and then upgrade the project into a working extension. That way, the limit "only one space yard per colony" is forgotten. (I believe it is the purpose of the project facility, but Fyron will have to confirm this supposition. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

[ October 28, 2003, 19:01: Message edited by: Alneyan ]

[gregebowman]

How about a fog of war? You know, where you don't even know where the next warp point will take you? The thing I like about Galactic Civilizations is that you have to explore the entire galaxy to know what's out there. I kind of like that, instead of knowing what the galaxy already looks like, but just not sure of what each sector looks like until you come out of the warp point.

Also, speaking of GC, how about having objects or discoveries out there that you can come across, like an ancient ship relic. I know there are planetary ruins, but how about finding an advanced ship with wonderful new technology?

[Ed Kolis]

And don't forget the mystery traders who travel at impossibly high warp speeds so you have to plan your trade ships' routes carefully, but if you do manage to catch them, you're in for a big surprise! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[spoon]

I'd like to see the Minimum Chance to hit raised to something like 20%.

I think this will curb a lot of frustration I see new players suffer from when their 100-ship fleets get squashed by ten ships with max defense.

In any case, both Minimum Chance To Hit and Maximum Chance To Hit should be something modders can tweak.

[Me Loonn]

IMHO, the there should always be 5% change to hit or to miss - it worked so well in fallout 2. Its better that way since there would be more unique battles, even the best ship CAN miss (even with the talisman).

[Atrocities]

What would be nice would be if the AI had predisposed demeanor settings.

You choose Aggressive / Cunning and the game automatically uses a preprogramed AI that is aggressive and cunning. Of course you can always edit this and tweak it or add new combinations.

The nice thing about an option like this would be the ease of pick and choose your AI type without all of the guess work and lack of actual benefit of a races predisposition that we currently have.

The Ai will know that it is to attack in X way if X predisposing is selected. IE if the AI is set to Friendly / Peaceful, then it will not declare war upon you the instant it meets you like the AI currently does.

The problem with the current AI is that it does not understand demeanor, race definers, or mood settings such as peaceful, hostile, etc.

If we had preestablished parameters for the AI to use, that could be edited of course, then the AI would have a solid foundation on knowing how it is suppose to react. Oh sure you can make the agreement that we have this ability now, but the truth is we do not. All AI's, regardless of settings, seem to act an awful lot alike.

The second thing I thing should be included as a must have improvement is something that I have discussed many times before. The addition of the AI to understand Demeanor in diplomatic Messages. IE if I send a message and tag it as friendly, then the AI knows it is a friendly message and will respond accordingly. Now if I send a hostile message then the AI will understand this and our relations will grow strained.

Couple these two ideas together and you will have an AI that will act like it is told to act, and will respond accordingly to other races demeanors and tones.

So when I select Gun Boat Diplomacy as an AI setting along with Aggressive, the AI will know that I expect it to respond aggressively and with force to any unsatisfactory diplomatic situation.

The reverse is true for a race that is set up to be Peaceful and Polite.

Just my two cents worth.

"If I had two cents, I'd spend it." - CW

[ October 29, 2003, 20:31: Message edited by: Atrocities ] dogyams

[Ed Kolis]

The current "100 mines per sector" limit seems rather arbitrary; here's an alternative way to curb uber-minefields, borrowed from Stars! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Mines have a decay rate! Each turn, some percentage, say 2% (of course moddable in the data files and modifiable by racial traits, mine hulls, mine components, etc.) of every minefield, spontaneously detonate / run out of supplies / whatever. (Perhaps if they spontaneously detonate this detonation could be detected by enemies, alerting them to the presence of a minefield?) Anyway, so suppose you manage to build a 1000-mine minefield. You don't have 1000 mines for long, though, because you lose 20 the next turn, and just in order to *maintain* the minefield, you have to launch 20 new mines! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif There could always be some minimum value like 100 for which no decay occurs, so smaller minefields wouldn't need to be maintained and they would work like in SE4.

The same logic could be applied to satellites and any other kind of units that are deployed in space in large Groups for a long period of time... though it's a bit less evident why a satellite would spontaneously self-destruct... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif (it might run out of supplies though)

[Ed Kolis]

After playing the Dominions II demo (wow, can't wait for the full game! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif I wonder if it's moddable like so many of Shrapnel's other games?) I got to thinking, "gee, there are a lot of cool ideas in here that would fit into SE5!" (Really! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif ) Here are a few that I can think of right now:

-Morale in combat - OK, we don't have individual soldiers running around on the battlefield, but we could apply the system to ships' crews, so when a crew runs out of morale points (which could be affected by taking crew losses, losing friendly ships, or by special weapons - the Psychic tech tree would become even more interesting, and the WMG is pretty awe-inspiring in itself:D), the ship automatically turns and flees! Of course, installing a Master Computer would mean your ship never flees (unless some modder designed to create master computers that are intelligent enough to have morale http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) Morale could also be affected by a racial trait, either the Happiness trait or a separate one.

-Save in the middle of a turn - OK, I know, it's something we've been bugging you about since SE4 was released, but this just gives me an excuse to bring it up again http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

-Artifacts and special items that can be assigned to units. In Dom2, certain units can construct special weapons, armor, rings, etc. by using magical crystals. Or, you can find them, win them in contests, whatever. These items can then be assigned to units (usually commanders since they can make the best use of them). The way this might work in SE5 is, you might have your standard Anti-Proton Beam which can be constructed at any old spaceyard. But there might be some experimental Version that can only be constructed at a special lab and retrofitted onto a ship there. Or instead of finding Massive Ionic Disperser technology at a planet, you find three or four Massive Ionic Dispersers... you can try to analyze one or more of them and gain the technology, but that could be risky - they could blow up, or you might take them apart and still not be able to figure anything out... or you can take them to your Xenotechnology Lab and fit them onto your flagships...

-Mercenaries! Bid on them and the highest bidder gets to order them around for a few months, and if enough survive, they go back to auction! Or do it the Merchant Prince way and you pay them a salary every turn based on how many are still alive, but the auctions are more fun http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Also, I have an idea for making supplies & maintenance a bit more interesting & realistic without making the game too cumbersome (like some people say Stars! is, with the shuttling minerals around):
Get rid of "supplies" and instead let ships carry around resources (min/org/rad or whatever SE5 uses) to use as supplies, just like they carry around cargo, with the full range of transfer commands. Yes, this sounds like Stars!, but wait - There's also a global pool, like in SE4! Merge the functions of "spaceport" and "resupply depot" so wherever you have a spaceport, your ships can stop to draw resources from the global pool to use as supplies (or return them if you need them for construction). Maintenance costs would then be some value assigned to each component and hull in the data files, independent of the construction cost, and maintenance would be deducted from each ship's supplies/resources every turn. But how do you get your resources to your planets to build things? Well, there would be a two-tiered system: local resources and global resources. Local resources are like in Stars! where you have to move them around; any fresh colony starts with a few generated from scrapping the colony ship; make sure you build a spaceport first! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Global resources are like in SE4 and come into play when you have a spaceport in the system (which isn't blockaded, and your planet isn't blockaded either http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) Construction would use global resources first, saving the local resources for times of shortage (like a blockade). So all in all, most of the time you wouldn't *have* to micromanage your resources (due to the global pool), but there'd still be the strategic element of laying siege to a system by blockading the spaceport! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[narf poit chez BOOM]

that stuff about supply's made sense. but i still want moddable types of supplies. probably a few people here who want a whole economy going, to. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[DarkAngel]

I'd like it if you could have more than 255 systems

[Monolith]

I know it's pure eye candy, but the 3-D map of MOO3 is quite nice and adds flavor; surely SE V will have it right?

Disclaimer: I do NOT play MOO3!

[ November 02, 2003, 14:46: Message edited by: Monolith ]

[Ed Kolis]

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
that stuff about supply's made sense. but i still want moddable types of supplies. probably a few people here who want a whole economy going, to. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Wow, it did? It barely made sense to me when I was typing it! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif
Yeah, I'd like moddable types of supplies and resources, too; no reason my idea would be incompatible with that...

[tesco samoa]

here is one i would realy like to see.

Game Setup

Quick setup .... ( you know what we have now )

Or Detailed setup.

Where the admin picks the number of planets the player starts with and either a random generation of locations or they can go into the map and pick the planets., What tech levels the player starts with, The starting number KT of ships and KT of units that are available. What events they want to occur and when ( and/or quick pick default types ) Be able to select the cost of each research type and what levels are available. And alter any component or facility costs abiliites or what ever. So if it is available in the game it is available for manulpilation at the game set up screens.

Then the Player on turn 2399.9 gets to go through and place what ever facilities they want on their planets, Design and deploy all ships and units in their controlled space.

[tesco samoa]

adding more...

the ability to determine what can be traded , analyzed in a game at setup. the ability to set up what level the fog of war will be ( no info on alien races to complete info )

And the ability as an admin to go in and check an empire out or the whole map, what current orders are and what went on in communications. for current and previous turn http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

A treaty level where you trade tech without having to click on every tech every time and the ability to set up payments or loans to empires and charge interest. So a credit system. So players can buy ships , planets resources off each other using credits and the credits could be used to purchase resouces ???


I have mentioned some of these ideas before...

[larrybush]

I emailed parts of this to Aaron already, but here it goes again with some other ideas thrown in for good measure! I'll probably be repeating ideas in other Posts, so I'll apoligize up front for that.

If it would be possible when staring a new game to check box one of several Faster-than-light drive playing styles. This would really capture the majority of Sci-Fi universes for modders like me, and it might be do-able in your existing executable files.

1)The standard warp point movement system.

2)The outside edge boxes of each system linked to the corresponding outside edge boxes of the neighboring systems to simulate Star Trek style of movement. All warp points and warp lines are invisible, but all movement to the edge of a system will move you to the edge boxes of the next system in the map. Engine mod inter face to determine how far and how fast engines can travel per turn so you can simulate the differing capabilities of the various warp engines. The no warp points in this movement style or the warp points are invisible to the player would simulating the feel of Star Trek movement style.

3)A check box to only allow a warp engine/generator component to open warp points to various other systems based on a distance setting in the component text file. Warp points are not used in map construction; they exist only when generated by a warp capable ship. They would also close and disappear when the ship move is complete. This almost exists in the game now but implementation is slightly different. This could simulate Babylon 5 or Star Wars movement styles.

An ability to play in much larger maps > than 255 systems. And the ability to specifiy the scale of maps. I.E., this one is one light year per square, this one is one parsec per square, etc. This would be for the campaign creation aspect. 3D maps would be nice too. Like the freeware program CHview if anyone is familiar with it.

An ability to setup scenarios, i.e. the ability to setup multiple starting points, home worlds, fleets and research already progressed to a point specified by the scenario designer. The ability to specify reinforcements. Basically to step into a SCI-FI game/world that already under way instead of starting games from the "beginning? as it were.

And no offense to anyone, but cleaning up the TCP-IP implementation to let the computer handle all the proccessing would be a real help. Just push the next turn button and sequence any combats and have it all simultaineous and invisible to the players.

The ability to link mutiple maps for immense campaigns. And the ability to transfer units and such between maps for campaign continuity.

An AI that would be able to kick butt while playing the proportions mod (which is my favorite although I've modded Star Trek and other SCI-FI universes into it)

And to really step off the edge, it would probably be way too much work to make a separate ground combat module to better simulate that aspect of Sci-Fi. Possibly similar to a typical board style hex map wargame. Remember Fifth Frontier War for Traveler by Game Designers Workshop.

Hex or Square map for garden worlds, cratered vacuum worlds. Unit counters that are produced just like components for Vacuum troops, Mechanized forces, militias etc.
A separate time-scale maybe to blend into the main game. Logistic considerations to show the real complexity of future interstellar ground combat. These thoughts would allow players and modders to simulate game universes like Starship Troopers or whatever they’re into at the time.

Any one remember their first Space exploitation/exploration game? Mine was this little ASCII Star Trek game on a PDP 1170 home made "Home" computer, forget the name of it though! I think it was about 1977/78. Just after that it was a cheap little board game called Warp War, then Starfire whish SE4 reminds me allot of.

Oh well, I better shut up now!
Larry the wishful thinker, and the dismal programmer!

[Deathstalker]

Don't know if this has been mentioned yet already but how about warp point 'ownership'? (maybe once an outpost/starbase/whatever is built there??) In this I mean an Empire owns that specific warp point and can charge $$ for other Empires to use it (tarriff) or can even refuse entry (even to allied Empires, refuse colony ship access etc , this could of course raise that empires anger level or even have the empire decide to shoot its way though ,etc) or grant entry though defenses (even though a treaty is currently not signed to avoid a fight etc). I would just love to keep my systems MINE, enough of the overly friendly AI colonizing planets in my system!

That and AI's that will actually go through with their threats (ie, break treaty with race x or we will punish you....etc)

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by larrybush:
then Starfire whish SE4 reminds me allot of.
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It should. Aaron cites it as his main inspiration for the Space Empires series. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[Ed Kolis]

Admiral Wunderbar, take a look at Starfury for an idea of what combat in SE5 will look like. (With a lot more ships you can order around, of course! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif ) Does that address some of your concerns? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[Admiral Wunderbar]

Haven't read everything, but here goes:
- Event Scripting!!! Such as:
+ If Player2 is in quad21.sect1821 then
++ Set victory Player2
or
+ If PlayerX has ships then
++ For ShipNum from 0 to PlayerX.MaxShipExisting DO
+++ If Ship has ResearchAbility then
++++ PlayerX.ResearchPts += blah blah

- Unified abilities, in such that doesn't matter if the star destroying ability is in a facility, inherently in a ship or in a component, it's still computed normally.
- Multiple effects in intel projects -> as in an ability list for a facility.
- Divide points evenly in Research window will not attribute more points to a project than it needs to be completed
- Spacial Colonies: a kind of ship or base that can grow (be added to) and support population as a planet (with all the inherent modifiers) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif
- Even in 2D, lots of animations for weapons and it's effects.
- In combat screen: fog of war. You don't know what's hiding behind that planet! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
- Ship turning counts as a movement. Either by 45 or 90 degrees as 1 move-point, depending on the ship mass.
- Inertia? Acceleration and de-acceleration takes a toll, like in first round moving you have max-speed /2 and to move less or stop you have a minimal speed after reaching the maximum speed.
- 3D RT rendering of some actions, like fighter launching, huge cannons destroying a battleship, etc.
- A pill for my digressing tendencies. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[Monolith]

>ASCII Star Trek game on a PDP 1170 home made "Home" computer<

WOW!!! I remember seeing that in the bookstore in 1980 or thereabouts when I discovered D&D in high school no less. I remember thinking "cool" when I saw the cover, then I was like WTF is this about, it's all asteriks and pound signs, not a Klingon in sight... hard to imagine I knew so little about computers then, but even harder to imagine it's how I make my living now.

Yes, I AM an old fart who plays computer games. Wanna make something of it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

[ November 11, 2003, 13:05: Message edited by: Monolith ]

[Fyron]

And no offense to anyone, but cleaning up the TCP-IP implementation to let the computer handle all the proccessing would be a real help. Just push the next turn button and sequence any combats and have it all simultaineous and invisible to the players. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That is what it does now... you just hit the next turn button and it makes and sends the next turn. But, removing the ability to keep track of what is going on (ie: sending/receiving turn/player files) would be a bad idea in the extreme.

Yes, I AM an old fart who plays computer games. Wanna make something of it <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Why would anyone do that? There are quite a few of you around here. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

[ November 11, 2003, 16:06: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[larrybush]

[QUOTE(ie: sending/receiving turn/player files) would be a bad idea in the extreme.[/QUOTE] Please Explain why? Maybe there is something I do not understand.
I would think if you could allow the computer to perform all functions in the tcp/ip host and player windows, like the process turn/play turn function and just allow the human to play, you know just use the next turn arrow. It seems like it is an play-by-email sort of solution. My context by the way is for LAN get togethers at home, maybe play files could be archived by the computer in auto-saves. Don't get me wrong though, I enjoy the game and give plenty of credit to the designers for a great classic game.

[Fyron]

Removing all of that info from the host is bad because all of that info is very, very useful while hosting a game. Forcing turns to process without host intervention is bad in general. There could be options to run the game like that, but forcing it to run with total abstraction is a bad move.

[dogscoff]

Here are the things I think se5 needs to truly make it a 'next generation' SE game. In no particular order:

-Galaxy wide and system-wide fog of war, range-dependent cloaking and ranged ship/planetary sensors to go with them.

-If we are to keep the grid-based system maps (as recent statements from MM imply) then at least increase the resolution.

-units, ships, bases and planets all programmed from the same 'stuff' to allow modders to blur the boundaries between these different items (ie planet-like ships with research and mineral production, ship-like planets that can move and fight etc)

-Less forgetful AI.

-By all accounts combat is in for a major overhaul anyway, so I won't bother listing my suggestions for tac combat, but more precise strategic combat commands would be nice. Oh, and we need a retreat option.

-More complex plague system.

-A few more variables and random factors thrown into the minesweeping process to make it a little less predictable.

-Ditto for boarding combat. (why mix in ship experience & racial ground combat stats?)

-Captured populations to maintain their racial characteristics, even if it was just their resource production bonuses.

-Refine the "doming" system so that you can have a few million non-breathers living on your homeworld without such extreme penalties.

-Overhaul of intel system.

-More complex population modelling and involvement to provide a greater 'peacetime' empire-management challenge.

-No limits (or extremely generous limits) on game size and number of players.

[Suicide Junkie]

I was just looking at the budget screen in SE4, and was hit by an idea.

Tariffs... In SE4, you only get them from empires under subjugation or a protectorate.
What if you could charge tariffs for "allied" ships travelling through your territory?

Crank the price high enough and they won't send ships through. Either that, or declare war on you http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[Ed Kolis]

I second that! And let's have the rate be settable on an empire-by-empire or a system-by-system basis! (Both would be a bit too much to handle, don't you think? Though I wouldn't mind having the ability there for modders to fiddle with as they see fit http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) Five and a half minerals a sector per kiloton for you, my dear friend! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

I'd like to suggest a simple cosmetic change that wouldn't affect the game much but might add a bit to the suspension of disbelief in RP games... You know how you have an Empire Name and an Empire Type? Well, what about empires that don't classify quite so easily, such as the United Federation of Planets? I've seen games with "United Population" and "United Federation of Planets Population", both of which are kind of awkward... not to mention when the Klingons ask you to declare war on the dishonorable "United people"! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif So how about something a bit like Stars!, where you have a noun phrase that's the full empire name (e.g. "United Federation of Planets", "Xiati Empire", or "Star Empire of Romii"), and an adjective phrase that's used to describe the race or their possessions (e.g. "Federation", "Xiati", or "Romiian")? Perhaps there could also be an "Empire Type" so there can be Messages like "Your pathetic empire/republic/federation/whatever is repulsive to us! Prepare to die!"

[Roanon]

Even if I am a minority: I like the current mine system. If you allow mines without limit or make sweeping less predictable, mines will become too important. A few cheap units everywhere, and the biggest warfleets are nor problem any more. This will bog down any game infinitely after a certain stage of game where everyone has enough minelayers.

Stalemate games and games where the one who moves is the one who looses suck. The current system which allows you to gamble, but also to be absolutely sure that your minesweeper-protected uberfleet will reach its target undamaged is not realistic, but good for the game.
If there will be minefields without limit, there must be an option like "sweep with care". Sweepers should be able, when encountering a field to big for them, to sweep as much as they can and then stop and continue sweeping next turn - instead of mindlessly ramming the remaining mines.
Also, equipment for detecting minefields before actually impaling on them should be researchable.

[Ed Kolis]

Mines don't have to be as powerful as they are in SE4, though - when was the Last time your ships were damaged but not destroyed by a minefield? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif "A few cheap units", with the proper mine system (i.e. mines do less damage individually but you can have more in a sector, which incidentally can be modded in SE4 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ), would only serve to slow down a huge fleet, damaging a few ships here and there. (That's what we could really use with mines though - instead of all mines damaging one ship then the next, the damage should be allotted randomly so you end up with a bunch of moderately damaged ships most of the time!) It would only be large minefields that have the power to take out a large fleet.

And incidentally, you CAN mod mine-detecting sensors into SE4... just create a sensor with a detection level equal or greater to the mine's cloak level! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[Lighthorse]

Here what I want to have in SE5.

1. Diplomacy that actually works
2. A turn-based space strategy game.
3. Keep the modability, but improve it, make it easlier to use/friendly user/print off the mod settings. Important is to keep SE5 moddable.
4. Firing and shield arcs Some weapon only fire straight ahead, other can only fire 90 deg. forward and point defense with 360 degree arcs. Show shield strenghts by color code per arc. Thus if the right side is drained down to 20%, it shows itself as red.
5. Change the combat map from a close square to a open ended circle. Allow ships to exits the combat map if they can out run they pursuiters.
Allow planets/storms/ast belts/etc to hid ships that are behind them, block fire and sensors.
6. Have a ground map in hexs, size of map depending on planet size. Place population centers, facilities, shipyards, defense centers in different hexs. It should take longer than one turn to conquer a planet, unless its nuked from outer space.
7.Shipping lanes that appear as some dull race's color line that connects different sections together. Have the ability to blockade/raid/attack that shipping line and steal those resources. Thus empires will have to protect their freighters, form convoys with military escorts and fight to maintain lifeline of trade.
8.Sats should spread evenly around planets and warp-holes.
9. The Ability to export current tech levels in tech trades.
10.Better intelligence system
11. Save/printout begining game settings and map of on going game. Print from race settings, mod settings, etc from the game.

That all I have for now, more latter
LIGHTHORSE
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

[Fyron]

2. A turn-based space strategy game. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It is going to be a turn-based strategy game... MM has never said anything to the contrary.

It should take longer than one turn to conquer a planet, unless its nuked from outer space. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You can mod that. Increase strength and numbers of milita, reduce ground combat rounds to 1. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ November 13, 2003, 04:30: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[Kiedryn]

Hello. It is my first post here :-)

1. It would be nice to have special characters.
2. Borders: You can claim systems or planets to be yourse even if you dont have colony on them.
3. Diplomacy: It should be improved!!!
- right of passage.
- stronger alliance (when you ask your ally to make war with your enemy and he refuse, then alliance is broken)
- possibility of making international organizations (such as UN, NATO, Landsrad "DUNE")

[Alneyan]

2. Borders: You can claim systems or planets to be yourse even if you dont have colony on them. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It can already be done, as long as you have visited the system (that is, if it appears on your galactic map, it can be claimed as being yours) You have to do it manually though.

[Fyron]

Actually... you can even claim a system you have not yet visited. It will not appear claimed on your map until you visit it, but others will see it as claimed (if they have visited the system). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[Suicide Junkie]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana"> It should take longer than one turn to conquer a planet, unless its nuked from outer space. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You can mod that. Increase strength and numbers of milita, reduce ground combat rounds to 1. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">P&N does that in some Versions.
One militia for every 2M people, and the militia get 1 attack/30 defense points.

Battles are commonly over a year long, and if the defending race is emotionless, they can continue to build reinforcement troops while they fight.
(Non emotionless typically start rioting after a few turns)
This provides plenty of time to counterattack the enemy, and drop reinforcement troops for either race's side.

Small worlds and small numbers of attacking troops (5-20) can fight to a stalemate indefinitely under these rules.

[mvstang]

First time here, so I haven't had a chance to read through the 40 some pages of responses yet, so my one thought has probably come up already, but here it is. It's a little long read, since I tend to ramble and get down into a lot of detail, so bear with me.

The one big thing I'd like to see is crew/governors/characters within the game. There are a few parts of implementing this that would be rather easy, and also make it easily mod-able, and a few parts that might be a little more complicated.

Since the game data is mostly based on txt files, which I think is great, you start with a text file that defines characters and or character types. Either every character would then have a skill level in all applicable areas (explained in a bit), or create types of characters, such as political, ground troops and space troops, who only have skills in the areas within their type. Political skills could things like increase/decrease production amounts, building speeds, research and intelligence bonuses and planet happiness modifiers. Ground commanders would be rather simple for bonuses to combat, space would be a little more detailed. Bonuses to ship travel speed, ship combat speed, damage, maintenance costs, supply costs and repair speeds for example. All should have some sort of loyalty and morale levels. Skills should probably start at 100 for no effect, that way you could have characters with less than 100 to have them be a detractor, but they might have high skills in other areas to make up for it.

Then make a text file that defines various positions, such as ship captain, planetary/system governor, ship engineer, ship navigator, ship combat officer, mineral plant supervisor, etc. Each position then has fields for the abilities from the abilities text file that apply. For example, a mineral plant supervisor position would have it's Value1 as Resource Gen Modifier Planet - Minerals. When that position is occupied, then the amount of minerals generated by that planet would be increased by the skill of the character. Ship Engineer could have many applications, repair time, added propulsion, reduced supply costs for movement and reduced maintenance on the ship for example. Ship captains could increase the effect of all other crew in the ship based on a leadership skill. Admirals could increase the effect of all captains within an entire fleet.

To implement this to the ships and planets, there are two methods. Add a line at the end of each planet size and vehicle size of Number of Crew types, simliar to number of abilities, for example 4. Then you'd have 4 triples of lines that would describe which position it is, how many of that position are allowed (max), and how many of that position are required (min). Perhaps also the skill and minimum level required for holding that position. For example on an escort:

Number of Crew:= 4
Crew 1 Type := Captain
Crew 1 Descr := Description
Crew 1 Val 1 := 1
Crew 1 Val 2 := 1
Crew 1 Val 3 := Leadership
Crew 1 Val 4 := 50
Crew 2 Type := Navigator
Crew 2 Descr := Description
Crew 2 Val 1 := 1
Crew 2 Val 2 := 1
Crew 2 Val 3 := Ship Piloting (as opposed to fighter piloting)
Crew 2 Val 4 := 50
Crew 3 Type := Engineer
Crew 3 Descr := Description
Crew 3 Val 1 := 1
Crew 3 Val 2 := 0
Crew 3 Val 3 := Engineering
Crew 3 Val 4 := 75
Crew 4 Type := Crew
Crew 4 Descr := Description
Crew 4 Val 1 := 50
Crew 4 Val 2 := 5
Crew 4 Val 3 := Ship Crewing
Crew 4 Val 4 := 25

This could then be expanded as ships grow so that a Dreadnought could require a captain with a leadership skill of 120, and perhaps dozens of crew types to fill with crews in the thousands.

The other option to applying this to planets and ships themselves is to put these lines within components and facilites instead. For example, a Bridge could require a captain and a navigator, while a research center could have 1 position available for a research scientist, but not required. This is probably the more versatile option of the two, since positions would only be required for running the various components of a ship you decide to put on them.

The one big problem with this is it can get very complicated and overwhelming very fast for larger ships, but you could always mod it higher for more complexity, or mod it lower for less, by removing all requirements except a captain for example.

Facilities like Academies and the Ship and Fleet Training sites could either train current characters to a certain level over time, or a higher Academy level could create a better default character on average at creation, which is something I haven't figured out how it should happen yet (character creation that is)

Whew, long rambling idea, that's most of how far I've thought it out at this point. Putting in a basic character system might not be too hard to do, but I wouldn't know, and something like the above idea would allow those of us who like it more complex to mod to our hearts content to make it more detailed.

Thoughts?

[Ed Kolis]

I personally think it's a cool idea, but probably a bit below the scope of this game... remember, you're going to have empires with hundreds or thousands of ships here, do you really want to track every single crewman on every single ship? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Now maybe if you could track different kinds of experience for each ship's crew, and transfer crews between ships... in other words, instead of "Executor 0001 is at 5% experience", you could have "Executor 0001 has 1562 crewmen with 10% in gunnery experience, 7% in tactical experience, 2% in scientific/exploration experience, 6% in engineering/repair experience, and 3% in medical experience. The ship requires 1500 crew to operate at optimal capacity and has quarters for up to 3000.", and if you wanted to transfer more experienced crew from the Eggsterminator 0002 (what a silly name for a ship http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif ) then the relative experience levels would change based on how many crew you transfer - if you transfer a lot of crew, the experience changes a lot, but if you only transfer a few, it only changes a little. (So it would require a lot of 60-man Escorts to replace the crew of a 3000-man Dreadnought http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) See the BBS game "Falcon's Eye" (not the Nethack front-end, the BBS multiplayer strategy game!) for a good example of handling aggregate experience; you have experience Ratings from 5 to 10, 5 being the default that people get when they change occupation. Let's say you have 100 builders, and you want to make them mages, but you already have 50 mages at rating 10. So your builders become mages with rating 5, but they're averaged in with the existing mages, so you have 100 * 5 = 500 XP from the builders, and 50 * 10 = 500 XP from the existing mages. You have a total of 1000 XP divided across 150 people, so you get a rating of 6.7 (the game rounds to 1 decimal). Now let's say you only made 10 of those builders into mages. Then you'd have 10 * 5 = 50 XP from the builders, and 500 XP from the mages, or 550 XP spread out across 60 people, or a rating of 9.2 for all the mages, old and new. And then every turn everyone's rating goes up by 0.5. Does that all make any sense? And does it sound any simpler than what you proposed? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[Q]

I would like an improved AI, e.g. improved AI decision making about locations for attack and colonisation. I see frequently in SE IV colony ships going to the other side of the quadrant while empty planets would be in the same system. And fleets moving one turn in one direction and the next turn coming back again without attacking an undefended enemy colony or ship within reach.
The AI seems an important point for the sales promotion of SE V because I think the majority of the people who bought SE IV play it solo.

[Gryphin]

I want a game with all the great
Graphics
Movement
Size of maps
Easy to use Map Editor
But:
Almost none of the
Economics
Politics
Tech tree. (maybe just 20 - 40 items 3 levels deep each. I know this can be modded. I don't have what it takes.
Just pare it down to something like the other game I play.
Oh and a human or two to play it against.
Maybe I want something on Par with SE III and CIV II but better. This is ambigous because I have not thought about it till now.
Maybe more later.

[mvstang]

Originally posted by Ed Kolis:<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I suppose that's true, depends on what sort of game you like to play. I hand't even thought about the fact that I've modded my game down to the point where even in a large empire, you only have maybe 100 ships, they're all expensive, take a long time to build, and are extremely important. A system something like mine would work well for game with fewer numbers of important ships (although planet governors and such would depend mostly on galaxy size), while a system like yours would work better for games which there are thousands of ships, quickly replaceable by more.

[se5a]

has this been said?

the ability to take half a turn, save it, then come back to it later and finish the turn.


how about this also
be able to give engines .5 movement per turn (or whatever) so you will get 1 movement every two turns (or can this be done already)
I was thinking of makeing a mod where the turns could be every copple of hrs, but everything would be slowed down, so althouh you get say a turn every six hrs, ships move aprox equivelent of running the turn every 24 hrs.

[dogscoff]

I love edkolis' suggestion.

A similar system could be used to track the different abilities of different races on a planet: IE I have 30million Drukshocka with a +10% mineral production bonus, and 8million Fazrah with -2%, so my total mineral production for this planet will be... {insert maths here}.

Also I love the idea of tracking the exact amount of crew on a ship, the amount needed for it to run effectively and the amount of ppl it can hold. For one thing it would be good to have to consider building extra cabin space for 'spare' crew members on your warships, and for another it would add a little meaning and challenge to the "fire on own ship" command- ie you have to have somewhere to transfer the doomed ship's crew to first (or fire anyway and take a morale hit).

Finally, it would make boarding a really interesting part of combat. Should I smash the ship to pieces first so my boarding parties will encounter less reisitance, or should I try to take it intact? Maybe the old crew will surrender and turn into population for my cargo hold?

This crewing malarky might add a little micromanagement, but maybe this could be switch on and offable, or a really good minister written..?

Finally, I'd love planetary population to be monitored at higher resoltion than millions- ideally in individuals (ie planet X has population 12,853,022 instead of simply 13 million). Then, crewing ships could actually have a real (although very small, until you start building Death Stars anyway) effect on planetary populations. Damaged ships could crash-land and set up a tiny survivor colonies, watching the skies and waiting for rescuers... imagine the roleplay potential.

[Ed Kolis]

A better manual... I know that Aaron personally wrote the manuals for SE4 and Starfury, and I hate to put his work down, but they do seem to be basically copied text out of the game screens with no further explanation... often even the useless filler text... look at the Starfury manual, there's half a page devoted to descriptions of the various "generic cargo" components, even though those descriptions mean nothing in the game! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Very misleading! Perhaps if the beta testers could have some input into the manual before it's finally printed? I'd certainly be glad to help http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[Parasite]

I would like to set the first "game Setup" screen to remember options set in the Last game, or have a standard setting you could make.

Something to the effect that if you always play "no intelligence", "huge map", ect. you would start a new game atleast from that base, then change it for any specialies you wished.

[JLS]

Facilities with a percentage factor for modders to self-destruct set Facilities when a planet is captured.

An optional pop-up. When one accidentally hits global [upgrade facilities] a confirmation Yes-No pops up.

[Deathstalker]

And please please please, pretty please.....mouse wheel support http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[Tnarg]

The ablitity for an empire to secretly fund pirate ships. Ships that carry no flag and can freely attack and or pillage those juicy lightly defended ships in your neighbors system, even if you have a treaty. These of course should cost more than a regular ship (to pay for the high price of mercanaries) and carry no distinct empire design (neutral ship designs). To make them even more interesting, if they are captured there would be a small chance that the crew would talk and say what empire they are working for which leads to interesting repercussions for roleplay.


If the leader abilties like MOOII is entered into the equation, there could be some random pirates available for hire along side of clean cut moral boosting captains.

[Tnarg]

All of those cool systems like black holes, nebulas, organic infestations, ect. need something to make them a benefit provided the right technology is researched.

Take for example the Chigs from "Space Above and Beyond". They were abable to exploit black holes and gain a strategic advantage and move about them freely. Or perhaps if pollution is factored into SEV, wouldn't this be a great dumping ground for all of that pollution. Or agian a place where limitless sources of energy are aquired.

Organic Infestations could be a boon for those oraganic trait races. Birthplace for organically grown ships? Any planets in this system would have an added shipyard rate for organic races.

All of these could have a seperate technology tree to expand the tech tree more and add more play style options.

[JLS]

Originally posted by Tnarg:
All of those cool systems like black holes, nebulas, organic infestations, ect. need something to make them a benefit provided the right technology is researched.
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Fyron, there must be something you can do here for FQM, you Stellar guru http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[JLS]

Colonies that have rebelled, could acquire some predetermined by modder and or random traits

[Fyron]

Originally posted by JLS:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Originally posted by Tnarg:
All of those cool systems like black holes, nebulas, organic infestations, ect. need something to make them a benefit provided the right technology is researched.
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Fyron, there must be something you can do here for FQM, you Stellar guru http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Not really... you could add invisible stars and then they would be useful for generating solar supplies, but that is about it. Unless you add asteroids and let planets be built there... nothing else I can think of that would be possible, other than destroying the stuff, building a star and then building a RW/SW out of it, but that is not what Tnarg had in mind.

[larrybush]

Maybe some more map editor support, text on the stategic map; you know so you can type things like "---Neutral Zone--" along with dash marks to define it. Maybe allow for Star name text only on unexplored stars... After all even if you have not explored it, you know what name it is. Here's a big one... Ability to randomize planetary systems within a map. What I mean is; I play on an accurate map of the local star group, my daughter goes in and changes the planets for me for replay value, The Sol system stays the same. I mostly play the Man Kzinti wars and the First Kafer war (from Space 2300)some times the first Thoilian war, but I use the near star map over and over with new starting locations for the aliens and new planetary systems so I don't know where the valuable planets are.

[Tnarg]

On the main system map, instead of abbreviations that show where shipyards, resupply, ect. that seem to get jumbled and hard to read with the more stuff a planet has, how about a ring system that stacks. Red ring for ship yards, Green for resupply, yellow for training facility and on an on. If there happens to be a main planet and several colonizable moons that all have ship yards, then four red rings to signify four ship yards. Optional of course for those that don't want the visual distraction to clutter the aesthetics.

As far as visual significance, I for one beleive that one would just be able to look at the system map to determine where all of your specific priority planets are. See and Immediatly know everything you need to know from a strategic standpoint about your planetary system. Instead of relying on memory, there is eye candy right in your face telling you what want to know without clicking on anything.

This could work with intelligence too, discover something about a specific enemy planet and wham, nice little ring and a potential target to help one plan for an invasion. With enough intelligence missions eventually one will have a nice set of enemy system maps with an assortment of visual rings to deteremine where to hit em where it counts. Nothing like a big fat and stacked juicy visual aid to guide a fleet by. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[Kamog]

Has this been mentioned before?
Be able to put giant engines on a planet and move it around.
Be able to move bases by using ships to tow them.

[Kiedryn]

Special ship orders such as:
- Stop every ship trying to pass this sector
* when he don't want to, fire on ...
- Stop specified race ships.
- Stop on every request when abroad/home space.
- Ignore every stop request when abroad/home space.
- Block every foreign ship (it can't leave this sector without your permition).
- Allow foreing ships to leave through specified warp point.
- Escort foreing ships to leave your spece through specified warp pont.

And - Right of passage for specified foreign ships / specified foreign ships class.

[AMF]

First and foremost, keep everything that is currently in SEIVGold - it is the best game I have ever seen.

But, adding the following would make it even better (if such a thing were possible):

* Special characters. This has been mentioned before, but adds a lot to the game and, ideally, would be optional in the game start up screen. Each special character could have a design file with their attributes, and settings that dictate how they behave in game (are they greedy? Honorable? Chaotic? wander around, perfer a certain race to work for, help in quests, Etc?)

* Graphics: MOOII did only one thing better than SEIV - graphics, especially during combat. Having a tactical combat system that *looked* good is a nice to have, but a *very* nice to have...

* A setting forcing players to ?explore the galaxy? rather than allowing them to know the limits and location of systems from the get-go?and if your ships die or are killed quickly after going through a WP, that system would still be unknown?(perhaps a subroutine that determines if your ships had enough time to get off an "SOS" message pod before dying might give the player an idea of what killed them...)

* Planets that orbit and spin

* Mercenaries (when one side loses, the merc pools get those ships added to it, and can be hired with the use of resources, etc?) and privateers (to allow players to fund pirates with letters of marque against their enemies, as well as a random event that does the same?)

* A Combat model that has terrain and allows retreats - each tactical battle should have at least a chance for some random terrain (asteroids to hide behind, space wrecks, etc...) and a much greater chance if the combat takes place in a strategic hex with terrain...

* The ability to set the ?break formation? setting for individual ships in a given fleet. Plenty of times I've wished I could have only that single kamikaze Battleship break out of formation?

* The ability to make all of the above and most of the options in the current game optional or dialable from the game set up ? so we can do more in-game customization.

I've babbled enough.

Thanks,
Alarik

[ November 20, 2003, 13:10: Message edited by: alarikf ]

[dogscoff]

* Special characters. This has been mentioned before ... settings that dictate how they behave in game
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">OIC... special characters. When people mentioned special characters before i thought they meant support for foreign alphabets, you know, special characters. D'oh!


help in quests, Etc?)
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Quests? you're not mixing SE up with DO are you?

[Alneyan]

As far as I know, SEIV supports ASCII characters fine. (I didn't have any trouble with non-English characters) But I wonder how other keyBoards (Japanese or Russian for example) would work with SEIV, or with any game for that matter.

[AMF]

Originally posted by dogscoff:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">
help in quests, Etc?)
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Quests? you're not mixing SE up with DO are you? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">no, what I mean was implementing mod'able options for things similar to quests...such as "whoever is the first nation to find the mythical lost battlestar of Kor" or " the "first empire to build device X" or "whoever defeats space monster Y gets the secret of greek fire" or whatever...the creative possibilities are pretty wide open.

And, ok, for special characters I meant unique individual personalities in the game, similar to what MOOII had. The Dread Pirate Roberts, the Cloaked One, blah blah blah...a bunch of famous individuals wandering around the universe who can, if they come to your side, give you minor benefits (+5% to ship to hit, +5% to ground combat, blah blah blah)...

thanks,

Alarik

[jimbob]

I still am hoping for satelite formations.

Derelict ships that can be taken by boarding actions --> then you could get technologies from them by dismantling them.

Once you get tractor beam, you should definitely be able to tow ships around. See the derelict...

I absolutely LOVE the pirate stuff! SJ made an entire mod for it, but was limited by the game to a large degree. I think this could go places.

[SpaceBadger]

Originally posted by Lighthorse:
Here what I want to have in SE5.

1. Diplomacy that actually works
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You mean with AI? Yeah, smarter AI would be great. I'd also like to be able to tell them to keep their ships out of my systems, even if we are allies. As it is now, I often have to refuse alliances with AI just to keep the pesky buggers from colonizing (and then claiming!) my home systems.

5. Change the combat map from a close square to a open ended circle. Allow ships to exits the combat map if they can out run they pursuiters. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Man, I -hate- the little square combat map! What, space has -corners-??? And a faster ship that is beyond weapon range should be able to stay out of weapon range and escape, not get caught in those %&^%*# corners!

7.Shipping lanes that appear as some dull race's color line that connects different sections together. Have the ability to blockade/raid/attack that shipping line and steal those resources. Thus empires will have to protect their freighters, form convoys with military escorts and fight to maintain lifeline of trade.<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes, at least some form of shipping that has to actually move from one place to another for trade to occur, that would be vulnerable to piracy, commerce raiding, or simply refusal to allow through controlled warp-points. This would vastly improve the strategic game to my thinking - especially if you could tick some option boxes for each empire, allowing all/none of their shipping, or only commercial shipping, or ban colony ships or military ships - or this could be automatic depending on the level of treaty you have with them, allowing only commercial ships to pass at NA, TA, and TRA, military ships for MA, and colony ships only for partners.

8.Sats should spread evenly around planets and warp-holes. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes, it is so annoying sometimes now when you have a good number and variety of satellites in a sector either as guards or as reinforcements for a fleet of guarding ships, and then when combat comes they are all in one lump that may not be placed very well to assist in combat.


SpaceBadger

[ November 20, 2003, 23:49: Message edited by: SpaceBadger ]

[Phoenix-D]

A slightly better maitence scheme. What I'm thinking of is a empire slider for maintance, and -maybe- another one a the ship or fleet level. So you can over-fund or under-fund your fleets.

Over-funding would give a temporary bonus to experience (well rested crews), under-funding would do the reverse, and ships would not be able to completely re-fuel at resupply depots, repair themselves, or retrofit.

Ex: base maint is 20%. You fund at 10%. This is spread evenly over all your ships, so they must stay at a resupply depot two turns to be fully resupplied, their repair, construction and retrofit rates are at 50%. Each ship also has a 50% chance of taking damage each turn (if something breaks, it can't be replaced)

Underfunding, whether by choice or by budget starvation, becomes less the "ok, I'm loosing one ship per turn now" and a more realistic approach to what would happen in this situation.

[Ed Kolis]

The current scheme for determining the cost of racial characteristics is too conducive to min-maxing - look how many empires have +20 this and -20 that, because most of the thresholds are at plus or minus 20! Here's an idea to encourage more diversity in empire design:

Instead of specifying a base cost, a high and low threshold, a high and low cost, and an absolute minimum and maxmum, you would specify only four numbers in the data files: a base cost, an exponent, and the minimum and maximum. Then the cost to raise an attribute by 1 point would be calculated like this:

base cost * (current attribute level / 100) ^ exponent

Thus, if your base cost for an attribute was 100, and your exponent was 2 (a quadratic relationship), then to raise the attribute from 100 to 101 would cost 100 * (100 / 100) ^ 2 = 100 points, but to raise it from 80 to 81 would cost 100 * (80 / 100) ^ 2 = 64 points, and to raise it from 149 to a godlike 150 would cost 100 * (149 / 100) ^ 2 = 222 points, with a gradual progression in between instead of a sudden jump at 80 and 120.

[jimbob]

Underfunding, whether by choice or by budget starvation, becomes less the "ok, I'm loosing one ship per turn now" and a more realistic approach to what would happen in this situation.<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">A good model to study on underfunding the military would be the current Canadian forces. Our Prime Minister, in his infinite wisdom, has our guys flying around in 40 year old "Sea-King" helicopters... often referred to as "Seeking Helicopters" because they keep seeking the ground mid-flight http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif .

[SamuraiProgrammer]

I have taken the time to read much of this thread (5/6) again from the beginning. Here are my thoughts on some of the ideas.

I agree with Fyron that mines need some work. First of all, early in the game, it seems as if mines destroy every ship that is hit. Should this be so? Perhaps 1 mine = 1 dead ship is a bit too much. Late in the game, you just make sure you have enough minesweepers to sweep a maximum mine field and it becomes academic. Neither situation is 'fun', but rather seem to be doors with 'secret knocks' that once the 'knock' is known, just become a nuisance.

How to fix them? There are many ideas, I am sure, but one thing I would add is this. The odds of a ship hitting a mine in open space are quite small. Simply travelling in something other than the opitmal 'straight line' course would add only 2% to 5% to transit time but make it less and less likely to meet a mine. To simulate this, we should only be able to mine fixed installations such as planets and warp points.

***

Rigelian's admonition (March 5, 2003) to only make the trade bonus base on the 'real' economy is a bit limited, IMHO. Part of trade would be passing rare items from one side of your empire to the other side. Perhaps the trade bonus base should include trade with other empires. An argument could also be made to include Last turn's trade with this empire. This would represent value added trades. For example, we ship raw materials (cotton) to China and recieve manufactured products (clothing) in return. The amount of profit on manufactured products is based in part on the amount of raw materials imported.

***

Several arguments were advanced on how the calculations are being made for combat accuracy. In my mind, this is more a problem with semantics. As with anything, there are many ways to go about it. Different methods make for different results. What result is being sought? It does not matter so much how things are accomplished. What is more important is that there are clear examples of what is going on so that one person's prior understanding of the language deceives them as to how the game engine works.

On the other hand, it is an excellent opportunity for more flexibility. Perhaps there should be a suite of targeting components that add percentages and another that multiply. Balancing these against their costs will give the Space Empires community something to argue about for months and months. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

If both additive and multiplicative modifiers are used, the order in which the modifiers is applied becomes important. This could lead to yet another level of flexibility for modders ... Early Mult.... Early Add .... Late Mult... Late Add...

***

Randomized variable damage is not so important in large battles. If the number of ships available is reduced considerably, this may be a must. In a large battle, the averages will work out such that fixed damage gives essentially the same result. In small battles, it can have a bigger infulence on the outcome.

Also, if real time combat is implemented, the variable damage may be more important to have.

I am not sure I like critical hits because they can have a very large impact on the game if they happen early in an important battle.

***

Leaders could add an important facet to the game. However, I think they are already simulated with training facilities.

***

One ship fleets.. Please don't disallow this. I use it to note the fleet mission so I can remember why they are headed where they are headed.

As for gaining fleet experience, I see that this is a problem, but not as important to me as being able to mark a transport as "Picking up oxygen breathers" (or actually "Get Oxy")

***

The talisman has been a source of much comment. I would like to see it in the game as a large improvement to accuracy, but not an absolute 100% hits every time. Nothing is perfect. How do we know that the gunner did not have an impure thought during the Last 'shore' leave?


***

AI Considerations... I have lobbied for the ability to write our own AIs. If that is asking too much, here is a second request. Make the game file distributed to the player have only the information the player is aware of and publish the format as well. Then, as Lisif Deoral suggested, you make the .plr file be simple text commands. These two acts would allow anyone who wanted to to automate their empire if they were really motivated.

***

Real time combat .... I have no urge to play out battles in realtime. Others might and more power to them. It would be neat, however, to be able to watch a movie of your combats. Especially if the ships were following your orders intelligently.

(BTW, I love Starcraft and even enjoy Warcraft - I just don't have enough time to play this game that way)

***

Squares, Hexes, Movement Points.... I would like to see no grid at all. Probably asking for too much, but it would be nice. Fleets, Ships, and Units would need to react to nearby enemies for this to work.

***

Communication Lag - Wonderful idea. However, for it to be really useful, the units should have a bit more intelligent autonomous activity. Better AI or scripting would make this workable. Otherwise, it should be an option only. It will make Mount Learning Curve too steep to climb for new players.


********
Quickies
********

Ability to save orders mid turn - YES, PLEASE!

Moveable windows - YES, PLEASE!

Ability to do most things from the keyboard - YES, PLEASE!

All lists remember their positions - YES, PLEASE!

More filters and sorts on the lists - YES, PLEASE!

Foreign Ship Log - YES, PLEASE!

In game option to select a mod - YES, PLEASE!

Wrap around tactical combat - NO!

Extended tactical range or allow disengagment - YES!

Incorporated PBW - YES! (although the way it works now is fine)

Fog of war includes the names of my planets, ships, etc. - YES, PLEASE!

Inserting a carriage return when <ENTER> closes the window could be done with <CTRL+ENTER>

Carryover for shipyards - YES, PLEASE

Ability to load or unload less than the full complement of any cargo - YES, PLEASE

Customizable, printable, and exportable (to spreadsheet) reports - YES, PLEASE


********
Bizzare? - bound to cause flaming http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
********
Perhaps FTL travel that does not use warp points could be added as an option.

[deccan]

Originally posted by SamuraiProgrammer:

How to fix them? There are many ideas, I am sure, but one thing I would add is this. The odds of a ship hitting a mine in open space are quite small. Simply travelling in something other than the opitmal 'straight line' course would add only 2% to 5% to transit time but make it less and less likely to meet a mine. To simulate this, we should only be able to mine fixed installations such as planets and warp points.
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">How about simply small ships hard to be caught by mines, and perhaps include specialized small ships designed to slip by mines without sweeping them, and make large fleets without minesweepers very vulnerable to mines?

[Me Loonn]

Wellm theres is ONE major "issue" (for me anyway) in simul play - with unit launch / recovery.

Why cant i (in simul game) launch nor recover LESS than the maximum amount of units ? Mayby i dont want to place more than ONE spysat per sector (or sat miner). And mayby i dont wanna use more than one ship doing this as it works just fine in instant game.

Then there are things that does work in simul but NOT in instant ..

Solution might be a better order queue :
1. Load Satellites - 5 x Spy Mk II
2. Load Satellites - 20 x Defender Mk IV
3. Move to All Gone(6,6)
4. Launch Satellites - 1 x Spy Mk II
5. Move to Gone Bad(6,6)
6. Launch Satellites - 1 x Spy Mk II
7. Launch Satellites - 5 x Defender Mk IV
8. .... etc

I think this would solve several things not working in simul but that does work in instant.

[dogscoff]

HOw about if mines gradually drift off/ break down. You need to keep replenishing the minefield for it to remain effective, and if your enemy can somehow get a single ship or small fleet through and harass your minelayers, then he might get a chance to send a full fleet through.

Of course, he probably won't know *exactly* when your minefield expires, since (a) he might not have seen when you laid them and (b) mine expiry could be slightly randomised, and/or affected by tech levels and/or maintenance.

[Ed Kolis]

Yes, minefield decay is a good idea - as I mentioned a while back, a minefield that decays at a rate proportional to its size means that the more mines you have, the more you need to maintain the field, and minefields will take a very long time to die away completely, so you won't have to worry about your minefields TOO much... see Stars! for a cool minefield system http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

One more thing I'd like to see in SE5 is taskforces... You can assign a fleet battle orders in SE4 like "attack planet" or "don't get hurt", but a real fleet is composed of multiple types of ships, which should each be doing their own job with orders specially crafted for their task. So what I want to be able to do is divide up a fleet into any number of taskforces, and assign battle orders on a taskforce basis - sort of like in Dominions 2, where you have multiple squads, each with their own battle orders, under one commander. I know you might say "well use multiple fleets" but then you have to multi-select them any time you want to give them strategic orders like "go to sector (5,5)" and that gets to be a pain (and I'm not even sure if the fleets stay together when one is faster than another)... it would be like if in Dom2 you had to multi-select each individual squad of soldiers that a commander commands to make sure they all move to the same place at the same time... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif But I'd still like to be able to create fleets without taskforces (or vice versa, whichever seems more appropriate, it's just a matter of semantics http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) and move ships around without assigning them to a fleet (or have that done automatically) - I *hated* having to create a new fleet with all the rules involved every time I wanted to deploy any ships in MOO3, even for the most trivial task! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

[AMF]

One thing that was mentioned a while back but which I would like to elaborate on is a new maintenance scheme for SE-V.

Currently, maintenance and ongoing support costs of vessels is fixed *and* the deletrious effects of poor or inadeqaute supply are handled as random events. (ex: ship accidents, which are rare). And, even more important, attrition is non-existent.

This is a bit unrealistic IMHO, and can be easily rectified.

Set Maintenance on a slider so you can pay lower or higher as you wish, with the baseline being what it is currently or whatever you mod it to.

Then, have ship accidents, troop attrition rates and so forth increase or decrease as you decrease or increase your chosen maintenance cost. Modeling them as "random events" is *not* realistic, as they are not random but closely tied to the level of support/maintenance they receive.

A sliding maintenance scale should also be used to affect combat, since it also encompasses ongoing training, wargames, and exercises to keep the crews and troops proficient.

Think of what it takes to deploy a US Carrier battle group or a USMC Expeditionary Unit. They take a LOT of regular training and maintenance, and that is simply to do peacetime duty. When that money is not spent, there is often a precipitious drop in readiness and training, ships go down, engines conk out, parts break, people lose skills, etc...

All of this sounds complicated, but can be easily modeled behind the scenes and relegated to a simply slider that the player controls while the game engine does the nasty calculations.

Also, it would make space exploration more realistic - I can't help but think that there should be a lot more space accidents than I ever see in a game...

Just my two cents.

Thanks,

Alarik

[Suicide Junkie]

I agree with Fyron that mines need some work. First of all, early in the game, it seems as if mines destroy every ship that is hit. Should this be so? Perhaps 1 mine = 1 dead ship is a bit too much. Late in the game, you just make sure you have enough minesweepers to sweep a maximum mine field and it becomes academic. Neither situation is 'fun', but rather seem to be doors with 'secret knocks' that once the 'knock' is known, just become a nuisance.<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">One thing to do is to remove sweepers from the game.
Then decrease the power of mines significantly.

A single ship still won't make it, but a modest fleet will have most of its ships take some non-fatal damage.
This will either slow them down to a sector or two per turn while they repair, or cause them to start taking losses and be very vulnerable to counter attack.

[jimbob]

yes, essentially you are suggesting that mines should have a half life... just like radioactive decay. If the half life is 10 years, then it will take 100 turns for half the mines to go "non-operational". But becuase it is a log function, at the 20 year mark you would have 25% of the mines still present, then at 30 years you'd still have 12.5%.

So your larger minefields won't go away for a very long time, just become weaker and weaker over time.

I end with another plug for satelites! Please, can we have formations for them? You could put them in high orbit, medium, or low orbit; one bunch, several bunches; location of the satelite packs (ie 2 bunches, one on North side, one on south side) etc.

[Atrocities]

I think that this mine suggestion is an excellent idea overall. I would however add one feature to it. A tech that would allow for a reduced rate of decay over time. In otherwords, a technology that would replenish the mines automatically or rather maintain them for a significant time. This technology would of course be very expensive and only be available in the later stages of the game.

Also add to the random events Accidental detonation of mines, entire mine fields and the occational discovery of an acient mine fields.

How about a new system type, anicent mine field. A system littered with mines that can only be swept by very advanced stage mine sweepers.

[jimbob]

ooooh, nice suggestions on the mines all round!