| Author |
Planet clusters |
jamesbob
Grand Admiral
Joined: August 22, 2009
Posts: 410
|  Posted: 2011-02-03 00:02
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-02 23:27, Saint Valentine wrote:
On a side note, I think we should also consider one more factor that holds little relevance currently.
Sometimes if you pay attention, you'll read the words "faction has taken control of y system" and then it will turn red or green and you just say whatev.
I would say that Control being the new concept in planetary and system wide terms, it would also make sense that if a system become yours, that controlling the area would provide some kind of control boost. Oh you know what I'm getting at.
The star of a system is an object in itself and it does get assigned a faction when a majority of the planets in the system become that faction.
One more factor in the game: Making significant the capturing of a system.
Say a control % just like on planets was placed on the star itself. Obviously, there are the main planets that orbit the star. It makes sense then that *their* ship value affects the star too. The Star has a Control % value the goes up or down depending on the ship value of the various factions with main planets orbiting a sun. The star is neutral until a factoin gains 100% control and it becomes locked for at least 1 hour.
Taking control of a system should have beneficiary affects for all the planets in the system that a faction owns, such as a small 1 ship point value boost, or increased resource output. Considering that it having any negative effects on the enemy planets in the system is also an option, I leave that on the table for other people because that may be too OP.
-Ent
-Ent
[ This Message was edited by: jamesbob on 2011-02-03 00:02 ]
|
|
i actually like that idea
_________________
|
Reznor
Marshal
Joined: March 29, 2010
Posts: 316
| Posted: 2011-02-03 02:20
I kinda like this idea. The star thing doesn't make a lot of sense, unless you think along the lines of the people inhabiting these planets. They'd start joining whoever's winning right?
Same with the planets too. Say the Earth get's capped and you're a peasant living on the moon. Who you going to follow now, eh? Whatever the crap the Earth says, that's who  .
_________________
Indictor: 1. To accuse of wrongdoing
Interdictor: (DS) A planetary emplacement or Cruiser Class vessel capable of preventing FTL travel in a certain radius.
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2011-02-03 05:14
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-03 02:20, Reznor wrote:
I kinda like this idea. The star thing doesn't make a lot of sense, unless you think along the lines of the people inhabiting these planets. They'd start joining whoever's winning right?
Same with the planets too. Say the Earth get's capped and you're a peasant living on the moon. Who you going to follow now, eh? Whatever the crap the Earth says, that's who .
|
|
Thats the basic realistic philosphy that I was going for.
This kind of system gives a bit more significance to the concept of what the factions are. Its a bit of depth to the game.
The star thing is just a representation of the amount of control a faction has influence over a system, just like control % on planets is just a representation of how much influence a faction has on that planet.
By orbiting a planet, your mere presence is a threat to them, so they're naturally going to want to join your side. If a fleet is there, then holy crap, they really are scared. They change sides fast.
Of course, the enemy factions military doesn't go for that crap, so they work against the control. Sadly, 32 infantry is no match for seven or eight ships.
But! You're nearby a ton of planets. They give support, resources, etc. That boosts morale. You're not so damn scared of that big fleet, so the fleet doesn't gain any control over the planet because that planetary government just doesn't care. Not to mention that, but you know that the citizens of a planet probably only care about their immediate planet first, then a cluster of planets if they're in one, and the system as a whole, beyond that it doesn't really matter to them. So they don't even have control over the system, who cares?
But then they bring in the bombers, and kill off the population, disabling the planet and killing untold amounts of people. They surrender fast.
And as the other planets fall, the remaining planets in those clusters start to think twice. Maybe joining the other side isnt a bad idea, so there is less resistence, control is gained quicker. Makes logical sense.
And when other planets in the cluster see a main planet in the system has fallen, they start getting a little hesitant too, but no matter. They still dont have the system.
But when main planet after planet falls, eventually, control over the system shifts, that factions essential "influence" on the system. Eventually the other planets fall faster, easier.
Of course, this is all without planet defenders. When you throw in defenders, that reverses that control. A realistic narrative can illustrate game mechanics.
Just like Hull% is just a representation of structural integrity and disregards "weak points" on a structure and so on. Things in video games are just representations so as to not complicate everything too much. Thats all the idea really was.
-Ent
_________________
|
SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral
Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
| Posted: 2011-02-03 17:56
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-03 02:20, Reznor wrote:
I kinda like this idea. The star thing doesn't make a lot of sense, unless you think along the lines of the people inhabiting these planets. They'd start joining whoever's winning right?
Same with the planets too. Say the Earth get's capped and you're a peasant living on the moon. Who you going to follow now, eh? Whatever the crap the Earth says, that's who .
|
|
But if you know you have the rest of sol to back you up...
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
