Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Member Since 16 Jan 2010
Offline Last Active Jul 22 2016 12:36 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Automated Space Combat (4X)

14 July 2016 - 08:52 AM

You have important characters who are part of the military in your Empire, right? I don't remember how fleshed out your character system is, but assuming they are given personalities, traits, and some form of political importance (IE, you as the Emperor would want to keep them happy, use them, get their support for things, etc) then you can tie together the political and strategic elements in ways that also occurred in the real world.


Think of some of the non-military reasons that ships get built, and decisions are made between building another battleship or switching to aircraft carriers (or some other general strategy): politics and economics. In Imperial Japan they continued to invest in battleships even after it was fairly clear the aircraft carrier had made them obsolete because politically powerful admirals pushed to keep building them. Here in the United States even as we speak we are building weapons and ships and all sorts of military projects not because the military wants or can use them or because they'd be effective, but because those military projects provide some jobs to certain regions and lots of profits to certain powerful people.


So say one of your military leader guys has the trait: "Favors Strike Craft." Every time you increase the rate of production on Strike Craft (fighters and bombers) this guy is more likely to support your other decisions. And, because you've got all these Strike Craft lying around, you start using them in your fleets more. This affects what else you build - no need to build anti-strike craft cruisers when you have so many fighters. You'll need more fast carriers if you want to deliver strike craft around the galaxy quickly. Etc etc. Soon enough, because of one influential character, your entire military strategy is shaped - and that's without even considering whether or not it was the best choice militarily. 

In Topic: A deeper way of representing opinions of NPCs

25 March 2016 - 09:19 AM

As Norman said, with computers it has to eventually come down to a number. Crusader Kings breaks it down into a fairly simple "love/hate" system, where everything has binary effect on NPC reaction. 


As you've started to explore, you can complicate the system (with hopefully beneficial effects) by getting rid of the simpler binary nature. Maybe an NPC has several "categories" of opinion towards the PC/each other: Personal opinion, professional opinion, religious opinion, etc. Different actions and considerations would use different combinations of the opinions. Deciding whether or not do do business with someone might use only personal/professional opinions and ignores religious opinion entirely. Deciding whether or not to marry someone uses personal opinion above all, but may be affected by religious opinion. 

In Topic: Humanoid mobs drop more useful items!

25 March 2016 - 09:11 AM

Is there an imperative reason to work towards this balance? Why not let animal mobs be less desirable to fight? It could introduce new decisions into the game, allowing for players to avoid fights when they wish rather than feeling obliged to kill everything "for the loot". This gives you new balance levers to pull, as well. EG: Quests that venture into the sewers could now be harder because the rats down there down't drop any useful loot, meaning more preparation is needed before heading in.


That being said, you mentioned trade goods. If the players require food, having animals drop meat and such could make them attractive targets depending on how hungry the PC is. Assuming there is magic in your fantasy setting, perhaps magic-using players of a necromantic bent could "harvest" soul-energy from anything they defeat. Certain animals could be very valuable in soul energy even if they don't have loot. 

In Topic: Interstellar trade at a relativistic timescale?

22 February 2016 - 11:44 AM

Years ago the economist Paul Krugman wrote something about this: 



In Topic: Victory conditions for a 4X

16 February 2016 - 04:23 PM

The coronation thing is good - you're right, sudden endings are kind of annoying, even if it's a supposed victory. Especially in a game like this (which I expect will be more about creating an evolving story than mechanical achievements).


Maybe there could also be "negative" points that are difficult or even impossible to remove? So you could have 8 points (the win number) but also one "negative" point from something you did or failed to complete, thus having a net 7 points and not able to crown yourself yet.


Trying to think of what negative point things would be though. Something that harms your prestige and standing - maybe having been found out in a murder plot you instigated, or similar stuff. Things that would cast your character/dynasty in a worse light.