Danos Ideas #1 ***** DIPLOMACY ********
from 
GalCiv2 Forums
GalCiv2 Forums
Hi everyone,
When a certain company ran MOO3 into the ground, I thought that my favourite game genre was gone forever (Turn based Space Empire games), but Stardock's approach to game building is a breath of fresh air, and I am tickled pink that they will be doing GalCiv 2. Never have I heard of a company taking their approach:
* An open beta with weekly updates on the game
* Developers commenting on forum ideas posted by fans
* A year long guaranteed support with enhancements and tweaks???? Ye gods, we are lucky if a company actually issues a later patch to fix the product they sold in the first place.
* Not penelizing legitimate customers with copy protection that is useless in the first place
THIS is the way games should be made in an ideal world. Company's should realize that they are making games, not shoveling hamburgers to mindless consumers. Anyway ... enough of my venting.
I have been recently playing GalCiv, and since GalCiv 2 is humankinds last, best hope for continuing the space empire genre, I thought I would post my ideas that would be in the perfect space empire game, and generate some dialog. I do not claim to be a game designer, and I am sure many of my ideas while pretty on paper would downright blow in actual implementation ... and I have no idea how these ideas would wreck havoc with the AI routines that are so critical in a strategy game, and were one of GalCiv's strong points. Anyway, I am going to throw things up in the air and see how they fly. My first topic will be Diplomacy
Diplomacy
The Diplomacy in GalCiv is great. I love the ability to wheel and deal pretty much anything with the races, and I like how they will accept fair trades, rather than only accepting 5 star systems in return for a crust of bread.
More Chatty
*************
However it would be nice if races would sometimes call up just to say hi, or say something that lets me know how they are generally feeling (Boy, Race X is really getting on my nerves! etc). Yeah, I know I can see the actual measure of the relationship, but getting a call makes it that much more personal and adds soul to the game. People like to roleplay in these games, and if the computer did so to, it would make it that much more enjoyable. It would also be good if you could either praise them like a good bootlicker, or rattle your saber like a warmonger with slight impacts to the actual relation bar.
When you actually do something that causes their relations with you to change significantly it would be great if they called and told you exactly what you did and how they feel about it. This kind of cause and effect would definitely draw people in.
More Detailed Reports
***********************
I love hearing the reports when two races go to war, and the stats that show how they are doing. This transforms the game from a static, game of me against the computer to a living, breathing universe with distinct personalities. Do these reports come up in random intervals, or is it based on your espionage level? Anyway I would love to hear MORE statistics in these reports such as how many ships lost, how many systems, people killed. etc
Do this ... or ELSE
*******************
There should be a way of telling a race to accept your demands or they can have a chat with your fleet of battleships.
Borders
*********
As it stands, there doesn't seem to be any real borders with races in the game. I am free to move my forces throughout the system with barely a hiccup from the race tresspassed. There should be definite borders that can cause definite political fallout if their territory is trespassed upon, unless they are allies, or there is a Right of Passage Treaty.
Promising the Sun and the Moon ... Literally
*********************************************
When a race is doing very badly in a war they should promise anything to anyone to survive. To the aggressor they should promise whatever they can to secure a peace treaty. Or they should try and get other races to try and attack the aggressor, or at the very least denounce the aggressor's actions (see below). It shouldn't wait until they have been reduced to a few star systems before it starts begging for mercy.
Causi Belli
***************
You should be free to declare war on whomever you like, whenever you like, but there should be consequences. Without a cause for war, you should take a morale hit and the other races (even allies) should lower their relations with you significantly. A cause for war would be similar to one's relation to other races, but would be different in that the race isn't free to lower or raise it however they want. It is the publically perceived (from all races) justification for war. Perhaps a scale of 0-100 with 100 being the heighest just cause, and 0 being the lowest (though maybe reversing this might be better so that is better aligned with relations). At some point, X (say 75), there are no diplomatic or morale impacts to declaring war. If the Causi Belli rating is lower than this point, then the amount that it is lower determines the degree of impact. If it is higher than X then there is a continual morale penalty for NOT declaring war, but no diplomatic penalty (or maybe there is one ... maybe they think you are spineless if you put up with such actions), and the degree of impact again is proportional to the difference between the Causi Belli rating and X.
Of course the danger here is that with Causi Belli, no one will want to go to war with anyone. So there have to be ways you can voluntarily change it, so you can war without the impact. You could do several things such as
* Trade Embargos
* Cancelling Treaties
* Border Infractions
* Getting caught Spying and Black Ops
* Recalling an Ambassador
* Denouncing statements. The amount this raises Causi Belli would depend on the speaker's diplomacy rating
* Concillatory statements (Wimp speeches).. These would tend to lower causes of war, but at the cost of Morale for the people hate a gutless leader. The amount this lowers Causi Belli and the Morale penalty would be inversely proportional to the Diplomacy Rating of the speaker
* Have Black Ops invent some cause (though there is a chance this could backfire)
* Firing on Trespassing ships
* Disputed territories might generate a small amount of Causi Belli per turn
etc
Although issuing a statement of Denounciation or recalling an ambassador would logically only give the party that those actions were directed against an increase in Causi Belli, in the interests of giving the player more choice I would say it should result in an increase in Causi Belli on both sides. Thus I can either peal harbour an enemy, or spend a bit of time doing some diplomatic slapping in order to avoid the diplomatic and morale hammer.
Of course for each of these actions, all the other races should hear a report about how X fired on Y's ship, and how Y then recalled their ambassador etc etc, so that they can scramble to put their hatched plots into action at what seems to be a coming storm.
Steam Roller Effect
********************
This seems to still be in place ... i.e. once you reach a certain critical mass of warships and transports you can pretty much eat the heart out of any empire and there is absolutely no reason not to, once you have the resources to do this. I think it would make for a much more enjoyable game if there were reasons NOT to completely devour an empire overnight, but rather digest an opponent in bite sized nibbles. For example, there might be some sort of scale comparing the worlds you have seized vs your adversary. At a specific difference, you start to take a morale and diplomatic penalty as you continue to devour and plunder what was once a proud empire. Good empires will despise the unabashed slaughter, while evil ones will only pretend to be concerned, but in truth being more worried about the aggressor accumulating too much power. As the aggressor continues to eat into the empire, relations will deteriorate and races will publically issue denouncing statements (thus increasing their Causi Belli). In addition the aggressor will suffer Morale problems as their own people become sickened of the slaughter. Of course Peace Treaties should have to be in place for a number of turns, otherwise the aggressor can just declare war again to continue plundering.
Trade
*******
I think the power of trade is another one of GalCiv's major strengths. One thing that I would like to see though is that trade should be a major conduit of culture. Thus if X establishes a Trade route with Y, then X begins pouring cultural influence into Y (but not vice versa, unless Y establishes their own trade route). Thus receiving trade is something of a mixed blessing. Y could impose Tarrifs upon X which would lower trade slightly for both sides for X's trade routes with Y but negate the culture influx. Why would anyone NOT place Tarrifs upon trade routes? Well, this would likely cause a Tit for Tat reaction of X placing Tarrifs on Y's trade routes. Also it would make it less likely that other races would establish trade routes. Tarrifs would not enhance relations as much (or at all) as a free Trading would, and lastly, perhaps it gives a slight increase to Causi Belli.
Also, instead of having technology drive the number of trade routes that can be established, this should be a negotiated item in diplomacy. I.e. ... I will give you 300 bc if you give me a new trade route.
Trade Goods
*************
I like the idea of Trade goods, but it seems strange that I can be the most depraved power in the universe and not duplicate trade goods because of some sort of galactic patent. Like anything I should be able to duplicate a trade good, even if someone else owns it, as long as I don't mind the consequences, races reluctant to trade with me, races very reluctant to trade any trade goods for me, and of course heavy diplomatic penalties (maybe even being kicked out of the galactic council ... after all, its okay to kill billions of people in war ... but DON'T INFRINGE ON A PATENT! LOL)
Treaties
**********
There should be additional treaties in this perfect game. There should be non-aggression pacts (each side won't attack), mutual protection pacts (automatic going to war if anyone declares war on the other. If X and Y have a mutual protection pact and X declares war on Z, then since X is the declarer Y need not go to war). There should be Rights of Passage, and the ability to trade territory maps. Lastly there should be a Free Trade treaty in which each side promises not to place tarrifs on the other's trade routes. All of these treaties, including peace treaties should have a time length attached with them unless the proposer chooses an indefinite length of time for the treaty. Anyone can break a treaty if they really want, as long they don't mind being hit with the Diplomatic and Morale penalty hammer.
Perhaps there should be a way of lending money to other races?
Proxy Wars
**************
I think it would be really cool if you had the option of tinkering in the affairs of Minor Powers. You could invest a certain amount of money into them, and at a certain point they would join your empire (unless there was some system of protectorates in place, though that would be tricky to implement). Of course other empires might do the same, and it would be a battle of influence. Randomly, any kind of such tinkering (between one, or two tinkerers) could spark a civil war (or one could be initiated by a tinkerer through their black ops). At this point it would be a slow battle between the influence of the two tinkerers or the tinkerer and the major power, until one side becomes the victor. The battle would depend on the amount of influence and tech of the sponsoring (or native) powers. And of course all the while the population dwindles. If there is only one tinkerer then if the tinkering fails, the minor power gets a huge Causi Belli factor and terrible relations with the tinkerer.
Why would anyone go through all this cloak and dagger stuff? Well because the sponsorship is unofficial no Causi Belli is required. Of course if there is an option for the sponsorer to send 'Military Observers' then this could generate Causi Belli, particularly if both Tinkerer's send such observers. Such a proxy war could well escalate into a full galactic conflict.
Anyway, these are my ideas for Diplomacy. Comments? Suggestions?
Dano
When a certain company ran MOO3 into the ground, I thought that my favourite game genre was gone forever (Turn based Space Empire games), but Stardock's approach to game building is a breath of fresh air, and I am tickled pink that they will be doing GalCiv 2. Never have I heard of a company taking their approach:
* An open beta with weekly updates on the game
* Developers commenting on forum ideas posted by fans
* A year long guaranteed support with enhancements and tweaks???? Ye gods, we are lucky if a company actually issues a later patch to fix the product they sold in the first place.
* Not penelizing legitimate customers with copy protection that is useless in the first place
THIS is the way games should be made in an ideal world. Company's should realize that they are making games, not shoveling hamburgers to mindless consumers. Anyway ... enough of my venting.
I have been recently playing GalCiv, and since GalCiv 2 is humankinds last, best hope for continuing the space empire genre, I thought I would post my ideas that would be in the perfect space empire game, and generate some dialog. I do not claim to be a game designer, and I am sure many of my ideas while pretty on paper would downright blow in actual implementation ... and I have no idea how these ideas would wreck havoc with the AI routines that are so critical in a strategy game, and were one of GalCiv's strong points. Anyway, I am going to throw things up in the air and see how they fly. My first topic will be Diplomacy
Diplomacy
The Diplomacy in GalCiv is great. I love the ability to wheel and deal pretty much anything with the races, and I like how they will accept fair trades, rather than only accepting 5 star systems in return for a crust of bread.
More Chatty
*************
However it would be nice if races would sometimes call up just to say hi, or say something that lets me know how they are generally feeling (Boy, Race X is really getting on my nerves! etc). Yeah, I know I can see the actual measure of the relationship, but getting a call makes it that much more personal and adds soul to the game. People like to roleplay in these games, and if the computer did so to, it would make it that much more enjoyable. It would also be good if you could either praise them like a good bootlicker, or rattle your saber like a warmonger with slight impacts to the actual relation bar.
When you actually do something that causes their relations with you to change significantly it would be great if they called and told you exactly what you did and how they feel about it. This kind of cause and effect would definitely draw people in.
More Detailed Reports
***********************
I love hearing the reports when two races go to war, and the stats that show how they are doing. This transforms the game from a static, game of me against the computer to a living, breathing universe with distinct personalities. Do these reports come up in random intervals, or is it based on your espionage level? Anyway I would love to hear MORE statistics in these reports such as how many ships lost, how many systems, people killed. etc
Do this ... or ELSE
*******************
There should be a way of telling a race to accept your demands or they can have a chat with your fleet of battleships.
Borders
*********
As it stands, there doesn't seem to be any real borders with races in the game. I am free to move my forces throughout the system with barely a hiccup from the race tresspassed. There should be definite borders that can cause definite political fallout if their territory is trespassed upon, unless they are allies, or there is a Right of Passage Treaty.
Promising the Sun and the Moon ... Literally
*********************************************
When a race is doing very badly in a war they should promise anything to anyone to survive. To the aggressor they should promise whatever they can to secure a peace treaty. Or they should try and get other races to try and attack the aggressor, or at the very least denounce the aggressor's actions (see below). It shouldn't wait until they have been reduced to a few star systems before it starts begging for mercy.
Causi Belli
***************
You should be free to declare war on whomever you like, whenever you like, but there should be consequences. Without a cause for war, you should take a morale hit and the other races (even allies) should lower their relations with you significantly. A cause for war would be similar to one's relation to other races, but would be different in that the race isn't free to lower or raise it however they want. It is the publically perceived (from all races) justification for war. Perhaps a scale of 0-100 with 100 being the heighest just cause, and 0 being the lowest (though maybe reversing this might be better so that is better aligned with relations). At some point, X (say 75), there are no diplomatic or morale impacts to declaring war. If the Causi Belli rating is lower than this point, then the amount that it is lower determines the degree of impact. If it is higher than X then there is a continual morale penalty for NOT declaring war, but no diplomatic penalty (or maybe there is one ... maybe they think you are spineless if you put up with such actions), and the degree of impact again is proportional to the difference between the Causi Belli rating and X.
Of course the danger here is that with Causi Belli, no one will want to go to war with anyone. So there have to be ways you can voluntarily change it, so you can war without the impact. You could do several things such as
* Trade Embargos
* Cancelling Treaties
* Border Infractions
* Getting caught Spying and Black Ops
* Recalling an Ambassador
* Denouncing statements. The amount this raises Causi Belli would depend on the speaker's diplomacy rating
* Concillatory statements (Wimp speeches).. These would tend to lower causes of war, but at the cost of Morale for the people hate a gutless leader. The amount this lowers Causi Belli and the Morale penalty would be inversely proportional to the Diplomacy Rating of the speaker
* Have Black Ops invent some cause (though there is a chance this could backfire)
* Firing on Trespassing ships
* Disputed territories might generate a small amount of Causi Belli per turn
etc
Although issuing a statement of Denounciation or recalling an ambassador would logically only give the party that those actions were directed against an increase in Causi Belli, in the interests of giving the player more choice I would say it should result in an increase in Causi Belli on both sides. Thus I can either peal harbour an enemy, or spend a bit of time doing some diplomatic slapping in order to avoid the diplomatic and morale hammer.
Of course for each of these actions, all the other races should hear a report about how X fired on Y's ship, and how Y then recalled their ambassador etc etc, so that they can scramble to put their hatched plots into action at what seems to be a coming storm.
Steam Roller Effect
********************
This seems to still be in place ... i.e. once you reach a certain critical mass of warships and transports you can pretty much eat the heart out of any empire and there is absolutely no reason not to, once you have the resources to do this. I think it would make for a much more enjoyable game if there were reasons NOT to completely devour an empire overnight, but rather digest an opponent in bite sized nibbles. For example, there might be some sort of scale comparing the worlds you have seized vs your adversary. At a specific difference, you start to take a morale and diplomatic penalty as you continue to devour and plunder what was once a proud empire. Good empires will despise the unabashed slaughter, while evil ones will only pretend to be concerned, but in truth being more worried about the aggressor accumulating too much power. As the aggressor continues to eat into the empire, relations will deteriorate and races will publically issue denouncing statements (thus increasing their Causi Belli). In addition the aggressor will suffer Morale problems as their own people become sickened of the slaughter. Of course Peace Treaties should have to be in place for a number of turns, otherwise the aggressor can just declare war again to continue plundering.
Trade
*******
I think the power of trade is another one of GalCiv's major strengths. One thing that I would like to see though is that trade should be a major conduit of culture. Thus if X establishes a Trade route with Y, then X begins pouring cultural influence into Y (but not vice versa, unless Y establishes their own trade route). Thus receiving trade is something of a mixed blessing. Y could impose Tarrifs upon X which would lower trade slightly for both sides for X's trade routes with Y but negate the culture influx. Why would anyone NOT place Tarrifs upon trade routes? Well, this would likely cause a Tit for Tat reaction of X placing Tarrifs on Y's trade routes. Also it would make it less likely that other races would establish trade routes. Tarrifs would not enhance relations as much (or at all) as a free Trading would, and lastly, perhaps it gives a slight increase to Causi Belli.
Also, instead of having technology drive the number of trade routes that can be established, this should be a negotiated item in diplomacy. I.e. ... I will give you 300 bc if you give me a new trade route.
Trade Goods
*************
I like the idea of Trade goods, but it seems strange that I can be the most depraved power in the universe and not duplicate trade goods because of some sort of galactic patent. Like anything I should be able to duplicate a trade good, even if someone else owns it, as long as I don't mind the consequences, races reluctant to trade with me, races very reluctant to trade any trade goods for me, and of course heavy diplomatic penalties (maybe even being kicked out of the galactic council ... after all, its okay to kill billions of people in war ... but DON'T INFRINGE ON A PATENT! LOL)
Treaties
**********
There should be additional treaties in this perfect game. There should be non-aggression pacts (each side won't attack), mutual protection pacts (automatic going to war if anyone declares war on the other. If X and Y have a mutual protection pact and X declares war on Z, then since X is the declarer Y need not go to war). There should be Rights of Passage, and the ability to trade territory maps. Lastly there should be a Free Trade treaty in which each side promises not to place tarrifs on the other's trade routes. All of these treaties, including peace treaties should have a time length attached with them unless the proposer chooses an indefinite length of time for the treaty. Anyone can break a treaty if they really want, as long they don't mind being hit with the Diplomatic and Morale penalty hammer.
Perhaps there should be a way of lending money to other races?
Proxy Wars
**************
I think it would be really cool if you had the option of tinkering in the affairs of Minor Powers. You could invest a certain amount of money into them, and at a certain point they would join your empire (unless there was some system of protectorates in place, though that would be tricky to implement). Of course other empires might do the same, and it would be a battle of influence. Randomly, any kind of such tinkering (between one, or two tinkerers) could spark a civil war (or one could be initiated by a tinkerer through their black ops). At this point it would be a slow battle between the influence of the two tinkerers or the tinkerer and the major power, until one side becomes the victor. The battle would depend on the amount of influence and tech of the sponsoring (or native) powers. And of course all the while the population dwindles. If there is only one tinkerer then if the tinkering fails, the minor power gets a huge Causi Belli factor and terrible relations with the tinkerer.
Why would anyone go through all this cloak and dagger stuff? Well because the sponsorship is unofficial no Causi Belli is required. Of course if there is an option for the sponsorer to send 'Military Observers' then this could generate Causi Belli, particularly if both Tinkerer's send such observers. Such a proxy war could well escalate into a full galactic conflict.
Anyway, these are my ideas for Diplomacy. Comments? Suggestions?
Dano
Stardock Forums
Nothing like getting invloved in a war, without actually being at war. It would be interesting to give supplies,money and tech (which you could do in GC1) but maybe actually get to see results of your efforts. I remember in the old game Colonization, I used to give the Indians guns when they were at war with the other powers, I could actually see them in use in the fights. It was pretty satisfying.
of ideas I would like to throw into the mix: