Hegemony Argument Thread

[archimage_a]

Well Hegemony in space would be good, because it wouldn't be 'Hegemony'...more like 'Empire'...going around colonising stuff, shooting natives or at least brainwashing them, exporting rare ores from the back of beyond, using slave labour-errr-civilising the natives. BUT with all the fun of firing planets at each other and other stuff like that.

 

With reservations about being able to 'have planets in the middle of nowhere' I think its a good premise.

Oh, and how are we, if we are going to, stop Mather from developing photon destablisers and blasting the universe with it? Or going around with miracle tech that cures, makes more intelligent, happy, muscly, speedy and all the other wonderments which having a snake in your stomach is supposed to confer...Cause it kinda makes the game boring when everything can be countered by a snake or a pill of some type.

'I fire my laser'

'My snakes regenerate all my people'

'I virus bomb you planet'

'My snake cures everyone'

'I flipping send in eagles to kill you snakes'

'My snakes regenerate themselves and teleport back inside their hosts'

'I divide by Zero'

'My snakes are immu...Wait, what? Why is the world going dark? OH MY GOD! WHAT DID YOU DO ARCHIMAGE!'

 

Personally, I think that it should be between A and B years for a tech between Y and Z strong.

So if I wanted 'Deathstar Laser' it would take between 9 and 13 years and be between 40 and 90 on the Ownage Scale.

That way, Retech coming along and going 'Yoink' would take between 9 and 13 years and be between 40 and 90 on the OS...Rather than stealing my tech that took 10 years and was 85, on the OS, in 2 years.

 

Something a bit like that. I think we can be old school about it and let people between themselves what is fair and what isn't though, if people disagree then we ask someone outside the tavern to decide(remembering tl;dr, so no 'I need it because of [2 pages of reasons])

 

 

Edit:

As a map idea:-

No Earth, no Alpha Centuri or other stars we know the names of. The plus and minuses arn't meant to be there but I can't get rid of them, they could mean brightness or something...I don't know. People keep some sort of a record of their own system(s).

[hide][/hide]

[Seraphi]

That actually sounds pretty good.

 

Resources would most definately need to be worked on though. (Extraction rates, value, how much is on each planet, what "Undiscovered" metals now exist (With limits. No goddamn naqeuaeuoadah or however many vowels it has) etc.)

 

And planet/star/system stats (Is your system covered in asteroids? Harder to get to, more dangerous, but better for defense and resources.)

[The_Mather1]

Archi, I never used photon weapons and I had thrice as many human as goa'ulds and Jaffa.

 

Ross, it's naquadah, or naquadriah if it is the unstable isotope, it's not that hard to spell. Also I made naquadah long before you started complaining, it actually took until space for that.

 

[spoiler=Better map?]

 

[Seraphi]

The main point is that it just doesn't work and is overpowered. "Hey, my lasers are twice as powerful as yours now that I have this Naqeuaueaoeaodah!"

 

I prefer simple maps, to be honest. That way notes can be added in case something needs to be known to all players around.

[The_Mather1]

Lasers are not amplified, radiation and electricity is. Also why are you writing naquadah with twice as many letters and several wovels after eachother when there is only the "ua" in the correct spelling?

 

Also edited the map, removing background and unclear names.

[Seraphi]

Better, except now it's eye-burningly annoying to read due to resizing, and pretty much the same as Archi's.

[a_bert]

Archi, that map is great, though my worry is that it's not big enough for all our egos.

 

Personally, I think that your method of modding, while very respectable and so clearly logic based isn't perfectly suited for a game like this, though this is my own ego talking. I honestly think a mod simply saying "yes and no" to techs is good enough, though perhaps the mod assigns a definite value for how long the tech takes to research? Though, obviously, if people would prefer to have X = Y then that's what we'll do.

 

With resources.. we can make this really deep or we can make it really complicated or we can make it both or we can make it simple.. It's what people prefer. The only thing is, that approach makes me concerned this would just be a text based tribal wars.

[Retech]

We could make it that you assign values to a planet if you are the first to own it, or the moderator generates the values for newer planets. There could be some sort of system where you make trade-offs, like high population capacity at the cost of fewer natural resources. Haven't thought of how to do that, but it could work.

[a_bert]

The [neutral] moderator [me!] would assign all stuff like that, or there would just be arguments. But it's a good idea.

 

Ross, what is it about Archi's map that you don't like?

 

Forgive me if anything I've said in these past 2 posts doesn't make sense, I'm in a clan match.

[Retech]

Well you could even have numbers, like "points" if you will, to make everything balanced.

[The_Mather1]

Better, except now it's eye-burningly annoying to read due to resizing, and pretty much the same as Archi's.

Archi's is way too big, I the image is four times as wide as the forum.

Also I'm able to read the names on mine while having my head more than one meter away from the screen. Though I could resize it, it is that small due to me using the "forum" setting on the hosting site.

 

[spoiler='Better?]

 

[a_bert]

Points should work fine I guess.

 

I kinda like having a map bigger than my window.. makes it seem more epic, but of course, majority rules.

[Seraphi]

I still like Archi's better. The colour scheme is good.

 

I don't think planets should have tradeoffs, I think some planets SHOULD be blatantly better than others so that there is conflict.

Moderator should assign climate, size, atmosphere, resources, temperature, landscape etc. before putting it on the map. And make sure the planets are evenly spaced, and there are no uberplanets right next to each other.

[a_bert]

I agree with that.

[The_Mather1]

Ok... want me to make some system maps?

[a_bert]

Yeah.

 

Do it in Archi's colour scheme, have 5 planets per system.

 

I'm thinking 1 'asteroid' planet, 1 gas giant, 1 'normal' habitable planet, and 2 random planets with randomly generated points from a base of 20?

 

What do we think the "planet values" should be?

[Retech]

I still like Archi's better. The colour scheme is good.

 

I don't think planets should have tradeoffs, I think some planets SHOULD be blatantly better than others so that there is conflict.

Moderator should assign climate, size, atmosphere, resources, temperature, landscape etc. before putting it on the map. And make sure the planets are evenly spaced, and there are no uberplanets right next to each other.

 

That's why I said that the moderator would assign the values of planets that weren't player controlled. I was talking about our starting planets, where the planets would have to be equal, at least relative to each other.

[a_bert]

OOOOOOOH! I see what you mean. That's a much better way of doing things.

 

So, how about, we have 4 areas of planet value, and when you choose your starting system planet (1 player per system?) you split 20 points between them.. If we wanna go into something like that.

 

Or perhaps even just saying your planet "specialises" in either X, Y, Z, or N?

[The_Mather1]

Yeah.

 

Do it in Archi's colour scheme, have 5 planets per system.

 

I'm thinking 1 'asteroid' planet, 1 gas giant, 1 'normal' habitable planet, and 2 random planets with randomly generated points from a base of 20?

 

What do we think the "planet values" should be?

I was thinking more detail for the planets themselves and adding trajectories in light gray. And rolling for how many/what kind of planet, also roll for possible twin/triplet suns.

 

Like that idea?

[Retech]

After all, one culture might be like today's Earth, with heavily concentrated cities and rural areas with an Earth-like climate, while on another world, the people might be cave dwellers that hide in the shade to escape the desert heat.

[a_bert]

I don't get what you mean, Mather?

 

4 "specialisations"?

 

Resource gathering

Population

Tech research

Military prowess

 

Those sound good? What else is needed? What isn't?

 

I'll do the rolls for a bunch of planets once those are finalised. One roll for the number of planets per system, then from T-3 planets I'll roll the specialisation for the planets left. Minimum planets per system 4?

 

i.e. if I roll a 5 for number of planets, then 1 is player chosen as colonization, 1 is gas giant for resources(?), 1 is asteroid plant for resources, and then 2 are preset specialisations.

[Seraphi]

I don't think I like the four specialisations system... It just seems too limited in scope. I mean, for one player a warm planet could be incredibly habitable, but for another it could be a hellish wasteland.

 

That said, I'm not sure I could come up with another system either.

[a_bert]

You wanted something specific!

 

How could a warm planet be beneficial to one player and not to someone else? Do you guys really want aliens in this or something?

 

Maybe you'd prefer something like this: http://www.starportgame.com/wiki/index.php/Planets

[The_Mather1]

Seems good enough, I tried to make a map out of rolls and randdom eplipses as trajectories, let's just say most of them either went through an astroid belt or close to the smaller of the two suns.

[Seraphi]

That's actually what I based the original planet list on :smile:

 

I do want aliens, to an extent. No lichte overpowered growth rates, and no mechos immunity to pretty much goddamn everything. And no stargate creatures.

 

I think certain planet types should be beneficial to certain races, and planet types should definately be generated randomly, as you said.

 

I think there should be more categories of resources than on that list, as well.

 

(PS. Economics need a really big fixup as well.)