Hot posts in thread: All about ships

Sehr geehrter Konstantin

ich möchte hier noch einmal ganz kurz etwas zu unserem Forschungs-und Vermessungsschiff sagen . Ohne Frage ich stimme mit Ihrer Aussage von oben zu 100 % überein.
Was passiert aber wenn die Meldung auf meinem Display erscheint , System erkundet? Kommt dann der Kapitän und versetzt alle Wissenschaftler, welche nicht abmustern oder in einen wohlverdienten Urlaub gehen, in Kälteschlaf ,bis zur nächsten Reise in ein nicht erforschtes System? -Aber eigentlich wird das wohl eher nicht geschehen . Die Wissenschaftler würden uns wohl eher den Dienst aufkündigen als das wir Sie von Ihrerer Forschung abhalten könnten : -Kälteschlaf Chef können wir das noch ein kleinen wenig verschieben ,der Geologe Dr. Wenig möchte noch die Gesteinsproben von Tauceti 1 und 5 sowie die neuen aus dem hiesigen Wüstenplaneten untersuchen, die Biologin Annette Wunderlich weiß nicht, ob Sie bis zum Kältetiefschlaf -Termin alle Pflanzen - und Tier-proben des Wüstenplaneten langzeit konserviert bekommt , die Chemiker möchten vorher noch eine Sonde der Klasse 3 zur Untersuchung des Sonnenwindes der hiesigen Sonne starten, die hyper physikalische Abteilung meldet merkwürdige Verzerrungen am Asteroidenfeld im hiesigen System und bittet um ein Shuttle zur Untersuchung, da würde auch übrigens gerne unser Astrophysiker Prof. Heinzelmann mitfliegen wollen, um seine String -Therorie vom verbesserten Warp -Reisen zu überprüfen. Man sieht also,das Schiff arbeitet immer .Um ihn eigentlich gerecht zu werden, müsste es permanent einen flachen Forschungsbonus geben, aber erstens haben wir solche Boni schon sehr viele durch: Umverteilung von Geldmitteln , Governeure Helden Asteroiden- und Astrophänomänale- Forschungsstationen und die welche ich vergessen habe. Außerdem finde ich das langweilig.da Ihr viel zu tun habt würde ich die folgenden Vorschläge eher für ein DLC in Betracht ziehen.1. Lösungsansatz einen Teilzeithelden (Kapitän)nur für das Forschungsschiff er steht uns erst ab der Hälfte des Spieles zur Verfügung und kann nicht rekrutiert werden, sondern ist in einer Entscheidung einfach da wenn man Ihn will zum Beispiel ein Schiffsführer dessen bitte um ein besseres Kriegsschiff nicht erhört wurde, ein verletzter Kriegsveteran , ein sich hochgedienter Wissenschaftler. Ich gebe zu das ist auch nicht sehr originell. 2. Lösungsansatz - Mini -Erfindungen . Das passt gut zum Thema und soll nur in Form eines kurzen Ereignisses( ein bis zwei Zeilen)präsentiert werden die Auswirkungen auf das Spiel sollen so gut wie nicht spürbar sein. Es geht nur darum Spieler das Gefühl zu geben mit einem lebendigen Universum zu interagieren und den Wert des Forschungsschiffes zu wiederspiegeln- ein Beispiel:ein Unfall im geologischen Labor des Vermessungsschiffes Sirius bei dem Sich die Gesteinsproben von Tauceti 1 und 5 vereinigten führten zur Entstehung eines neuen Metalles welches unserer Tritanumhülle 1% mehr festigkeit verleiht.
Ich danke für das Lesen.

 

Thanks for the additional info, that does sound like "overkill" (too much)
I guess that is a problem inherent with many ideas, sometimes an idea can sound good in theory, but not be any fun in practice. The situation you describe above sounds "cute" on the surface, but you clearly show that it was impractical and no fun for the player.

 

Sehr geehrter Konstantin
ich wollte gar keine große neue Diskussion über ein Thema eröffnen was wir bereits einmal besprochen haben . Es war nur ein Hinweis das manche Sachen eine andere Wirkung erzielen als man gedacht hat . Ein Beispiel :ich hatte die Gelegenheit ein solches sehr gut entwickeltes System von Frachtschiffen in einer Stellaris Mod in Aktion zu sehen . Was gab es da nicht alles: Raumtaxis , Reiseschiffe , Frachter Tanker sogar Reklameplattformen all das konnte ich in meinem System sofort sehen aber meine drei Fregatten , das wichtige Konstruktionsschiff oder das Forschungsschiff musste ich erst suchen, inzwischen habe ich die Mod wieder deaktiviert so schön sie war.

 

Agreed, keep the ship abstract, if there is any way to attack it in the future, make that abstract as well. That isn't what motivated me to rate the ship so lowly however.
It is true that each player has a different style, some will build and use them others will not, the same holds true for other aspects of the game as well. My opinion of the ship is based on the fact that it isn't an actual need, it's there if you want to use it but you can easily ignore it as well.

 

Wertes Forum
so sehr ich am Anfang der Diskussion der Meinung war das es Spaß bringen könnte ein solches Schiff zu haben , denke ich mittlerweile ,das wir schon ganz schön viele Informationen auf der Sternenkarte verwalten müssen . Wenn der ganze Frachtschiff -verkehr noch hinzu käme , geht die Übersichtlichkeit verloren und das kann nicht das Ziel sein. Ich glaube manchmal ist weniger einfach mehr und in diesem Fall würden Programmierer und Rechner damit entlastet und das kann nur gut sein.

 

I know , it always boils down to how you wanna play the game. And there are so many ways to play a game, than there are people.

You don't disparage me this it what the forum is for, so we can have discussions/opinions in here and come with some "clever insights"...heheh

 

Obviously...haven't you seen one of my numerous disclaimers ...
All opinions are mine and mine alone, they reflect my perspective only and those who have a similar style. So for me, until I actually "need" freighters, they are a "meh", just there as an optional choice. Contrast that to the other ships, I can play an entire session on the hardest difficulty and not build or use a single freighter, I can't do that with most of the rest.
So regardless of playing style, this following holds true...they are not critical to have, they are abstract, they can't be targeted...
I'm sorry my friend, I don't disparage your opinion or point of view, (you know that's not my style), and anyone can, (and should) play the game in the way it suits them best... but at the end of the day, in comparison to the rest of the ships in ISG, I find them "lacking"

 

Well as I said I don't disagree per se. But it boils down to how you want to play the game, so the "meh" statement is in your gameplay the right expression . It might not be true for all...

 

I'm confused my friend, I've played quite a few sessions, the only resources I've ever needed were strategic, and those don't require a freighter. I've built massive empires repeatedly, the only time I used freighters was;
If I took over an existing asteroid mine that required them, (done only if I need the strategic location of said mine)
And for testing purposes.
In my later games, I don't even bother building freighters for the conquered mines as they still extend my logistical range without freighters being assigned to them. I'm a war-monger and prefer to spend my SSPs judiciously.

Hmm. perhaps all outposts should require freighters before being operational? It could be assumed that they are not self-supporting and need a constant supply (hence the freighter)

This would increase their importance tremendously... at which point I would want a mechanic for attacking those freighters (some have already been proposed)

In conclusion, I just don't see where they are more than a "meh" as currently implemented.

 

To some extend I agree but in the long run you need resources for your empire. So when you say "meh" I understand what your are saying to some extent, but it boils down to your gameplay and resources you need for your empire. So freighter might become crucial later in the game.

 

Thanks for the suggestion

 

Welcome aboard Komandar, nice to have you with us. I've also played those games as well, and agree about the AI in SEV

For ISG in PA 10, use a support ship, it will give you an instant boost in production. This will be felt more acutely in newer colonies, the boost in production, infrastructure improvement etc, is drastic. In a way, it works just like pop transfer in those other games but is more abstract and way more streamlined.

 

I have been playing the pre-release Alpha 10 for the last few days. While I have never played MOO2, I have played the hell out of Space Empires 5 ( I liked it, whished the AI was better), Armada 2526 Gold, Galactic Civ 3. All of these allow for moving population around so you can control production. I have noticed a lack of this in the pre-alpha 10. Will this be a design element added later on?

 

This could be perhaps combined with leaders, who might be able to get a super specialized option for leading a fleet into battle.

They can choose between various command bonuses as a fleet commander, or whether they wish to be a "warrior" warship captain or alternatively, a hot shot fighter pilot. The warrior types would be on combat ships like titans loaded with weapons, while the commanders would be on the command ships. You could also have a fighter squad leader, but this will require that the fighter system be better balanced.

Leaders in such a case might need the respawn ability as they are killed - particularly the fighter one that will often "die".

 

I think having command ships would definitely be a plus to the game and fit well with the philosophy of “fewer but more important ships”. As to how it would work out, I theorize that there are multiple ways to accomplish it, ranging from the easy to hard.

If you want an approach that involves the least amount of coding and effort, borrow from what already exists in the game.

First we could start by adding a new early-mid level tech to the research tree, a ‘command module”. Once researched, the module should be available for placement on large hulls, Cruisers and up. The module should be expensive in construction cost, (perhaps prohibitively so), and take up a considerable amount of space, (like bomb racks).

The attributes of the command module could be similar to telemetry buildings, giving small boosts to evasion, targeting, etc. This would be the “least effort, least reward” solution, but it would suffice as a bare minimum. Obviously, only a single command ship could confer bonuses in battle, they would not stack.

A more sophisticated approach that would fit well with the existing game, (but require more work to implement), would be to give command ships the ability to use formations in combat. For example, at a basic level, the player could select from a number of pre-defined formations when entering combat, (line, wedge, concave, etc.), rather than the random placement we currently have. Additional research could unlock more advanced command modules, the player would then have more formations to choose from, (or maybe even be allowed to set his/her own).

Perhaps we could even combine both approaches and really get something formidable in play. We could even make it so that the loss of a command ship in battle has very negative consequences for the owner, this would really spice things up.

 

Another option that might be considered is a dedicated C&C ship which might convey various bonuses to the ships in a fleet.

I'm not sure how that would work out though.

 

I too enjoyed the discussion my friend and don't worry about Google translator, it may not be perfect, but it was adequate. Enjoy the game!

 

Sehr geehrter Herr Konstantin

herzlichen Dank für ihre Antwort ich denke jetzt "funken wir auf der selben Welle", vor allem wenn man weiß welchen Stellenwert bei vielen Spielern ein Produktionsbonus hat. Leider habe ich in meinem Enthusiasmus vergessen, das die Anführer für alle sichtbar sind (ein Thema über das man nochmal sprechen sollte aber nicht hier , hier gehört es nicht her) ich danke Ihnen das Sie mich daran erinnert haben ; denke ihr letzter Vorschlag ist die Lösung. Nochmals vielen Dank für Ihre Zeit . Ich verspreche mehr Artikel von Ihnen zu lesen, fürchte aber da ich nur zur Entspannung spiele und nicht Hardcore das ich nur wenig nützliches beizutragen habe. Ich habe unsere Diskussion sehr genossen. Mit freundlichen Grüßen Wanderer
PS: Ich hoffe das ich keinen Fehler gemacht habe und der Google -Übersetzer alles richtig wiedergibt.

 

Good morning Herr Wanderer,


You are welcome sir, and yes, your post did make me think about the concept, it can be improved without changing the economic system. This would benefit the game in my opinion.

I like what you are proposing now very much, using the pirate skill of leaders to disrupt trade routes is intuitive and natural, it would also enhance leaders that much more and aid with immersion. At the same time, it would increase the importance of freighters and add some fun to their use. The player would no longer treat them as an after-thought, the concept you propose would also not be management heavy.

Perhaps then, we can streamline this further and make it specific to ISG

We would need a new type of ship, a "raider". This could either be a specific ship type as you propose, (unlocked by having a leader with the Pirate skill), or it could be a module on an existing ship class, (also unlocked by having a leader with the Pirate skill).

This ship could then be deployed to an enemy system at either end of an existing trade route and would disrupt the route, perhaps even by eliminating the freighter assigned there.

Defending against a "raider" could be in the traditional sense, meaning, a war ship present at the target system. If the "raider' is engaged and destroyed in combat, I would like to see the leader killed (though a very skilled leader could have a chance of surviving) The "raider" could be sent alone on a mission and be stealthy but vulnerable, or it could be escorted and lose its stealth. What I mean here is that a single "raider" would not show up on scanners, the player would only realize its presence once it arrives on the target system. If the "raider" is escorted, however, normal scanning rules would apply.

In order to keep things abstract, the raider would not actually "steal" anything, it would simply "deny" the benefit of either a strategic resource or an asteroid exploit to the owner, while at the same time, destroying the freighter, (if any) assigned to the route.

Perhaps this could be a good compromise solution?


And now, it is my turn to thank you for the time you are expending in discussing this topic and the attempt you are making in proposing viable solutions to enhance game-play. It is very much appreciated!