Should AI be able to colonize in my space?

I thought the same thing.Should crossing borders mean war ala CIV4.

*aggree* but Borders are based on influence not Military power (it should). I belive that They should respect your borders depending on the Military power in your borders and same is for how strong the forces are in THEIR borders...

In my last game most of my empire was behind another empires borders, looks really confusing to say the least.Border should actually mean what is says.

The only real borders are the atmospheres of the palnets you control. The lines on the map are not borders, but showing who is the dominant cultural influence in the region (planets within your colored areas have a influence ratio less than 1).

It clearly says ownership on the map icons, not dominant cultural influence.Very confusing, the CIV4 method is better, when you overrun their border, the city becomes yours, ie keeping the ownership border relevant.

No, That both:

A. Sucks

B. Does not fit in with the current (and better) method.

(Current method - Each planet has an influence value and resistance value, Hard to explain but it worked well in GC1, And will work well here.)

Besides, That would mean that say your boarder and the Torians are fighting each other, And you both have boarder planets, A third party could buy influence points from both of you and tip the balance.

The truly annoying thing about this method is that you have to colonize even Class I( planets to keep the computer from putting an outpost there! It is just infuriating to try and chase down these littl;e podunk planets that aren't worth squat. I have taken to playing with uncommon habitable planets just to minimize this. At least that way you like a Class 3 planet is worth taking.

It just feels retarded to settle them when 70% of your colonies are Class 16 and higher!

In Star Trek etc there where respected "boarders" of Federation etc. This should be implemented here as well. My boarders should be respected by the nieghbouring AI and so should systems being colonized by my side.

As Darth Kryo says, the lines are not borders. They mark your political power. They are intended for cultural strategies rather than military. There is a thread from a couple of weeks ago where we were discussing the idea of having both where a secondary smaller area close to your planets (say have the influence area) becomes claimed territory, it might happen yet, who knows.

On the point of the tiny marginal planets. Have you considered that there is no reason that compels you to settle or take them? A very small colony is vunerable to cultural take over, much more so than a large colony. It's relatively easy to 'flip' those small planets rather than mounting offensives on them. It will just take a bit longer. Also due to their small size you don't need much of an invasion force to knock them out.

I still think some sort of boarders should be implemented me thinks:

There should be 2 boarders one on influence and one on military
Military Boarders are calcualted by Military power in the area (Plus Owned "outposts" of all sorts)
Influence will often be larger. Military borders are Respected as Empire Boundiares and they cannot enter without declaring war or Asking for a (don't kill me!) Open border pact... then they can come in and stuff...makes for a stable empire and protects your important Areas (During intial rush It won't matter because military will be pooled in Colonyships) so lemme sumarize this:

1)Military borders are calcuated by Military power and are treated as "true Borders" and AI cannot invade without War or A open border Pact.
2)influence Borders are calcuated on the current system no change here and is often going to be the largest (Unless you are warlike nation Sorta like The Dregin...) What does everyone else thinK?

The borders are working as designed.  It will not be changed as it is one of the principle game mechanics of GalCiv. 

In essence, the AI (and you) can build anywhere.  However, build in the middle of someone else's territory and that planet will eventually get swallowed up. 

Civ 4's culture and GalCiv's influence are not the same.  There is no starbase equivlanet in Civ 4.  As a result, cultural warfare is a major part of the GalCiv universe.  If the AI builds some dinky colony in the middle of your territory, it won't take long for it to become yours.

If that is true... why would the AI want to build one there?

The main point of confusion seems to the be the actual label. The label should therefore be changed to something more intuitive, from ownership to "Influence" or "Cultural Domination". The change of "Ownership" to "Influence" or "Cultural Domination" would remove the hard link that the space in a color belongs to that empire.

Personally, I like having a military claimed space. But I wouldn't want it based on Military Power. It shouldn't matter if I've got a military that is 10x stronger then all the other empire's put together... or if I have the least powerful military at the moment. A one tile border from all your worlds and starbases would be effective (and prevent non-resource star bases from being put next to a resource star base). But this tile limit could be made alterable via Galactic Council (although making it bigger might lead to conflicts over who owned shared tiles).

I like Civ4's borders. I like its closed and open border system. I think that works very well, and would also fit into GC. But if Brad doesn't think it is appropriate for GalCiv, I can accept that.

One last thought. If you had closed borders to an empire, you wouldn't be able to trade with that empire. As trade pays for your fleets, you'd want to have open borders with all the empires you can in GC2, so the net effect might be the same thing as what GC1 and GC2 have now... no military ownership or permanent open borders. It's the same thing.

If that is true... why would the AI want to build one there?

Because the AI sucks right now.

I like Civ4's borders. I like its closed and open border system. I think that works very well, and would also fit into GC. But if Brad doesn't think it is appropriate for GalCiv, I can accept that.

Ever won a game in Civ IV by swallowing up all the other cities through culture?

Not every other city. However, I have won a Civ4 game by taking all AI cities that weren't the AI's CAPITAL cities through cultural strength.

In Civ4, you can win Culturally by having 3 legendary cities (only takes building all religious academies in 3 cities, with a couple of wonders). It's the Civ4 equivalent of a Galaxy Culture win in GC. Cultural Victories were easier under Civ3... that was identical to the GC1 cultural victory. Just have the dominant cultural strength in comparison to the other empires for X number of turns. It was the default/back door victory. They tightened that in Civ4 making it something you have to actively work and plan on now. Much more difficult then the a Space Victory, or a the Dominant Land Control (Military Conquest) victory.

Civ4's open borders is a good addttion. I like being able to pick which empire I'm being friendly with (have open borders) and which I'm making going around me (have closed borders). Civ4 does allow certain kinds of units to pass through your borders regardless of border status. So you cannot be a complete pain to the AI by keeping your borders closed. But it does impact relations and trade significantly by keeping your borders closed to another empire.

I think having a small, hard line that only your trusted friends (or active warring enemies) can cross would be a good addition to Galactic Civ. But I think the current cultural influence system is a good thing. As I've said earlier, I think the problem is that too many users are confusing "Cultural Influence" for "Militarily Controlled/Exclusively Claimed Space". Look at the real world. The amount of water a nation is allowed to claim from its shoreline is a much smaller range then the amount of influence it projects from its shores. I would think that is what GalCiv's universe is like. Everything within 1 light year of Earth is militarily controlled by Earth space forces. But Earth's influence would control a much larger region of volume around Earth, even though Earth cannot legally claim that larger volume as its exclusively controlled military space.

Now, again, we don't have to have it in GC2. But it could be useful in making it clear to players that their influence extends beyond their hard borders. Logically speaking, a star-faring empire is going to "militarily own" a volume of space well past the atmosphere of their worlds. They'd have to, for their own security. But that space probably doesn't extend much further out then the Helio-sphere of a world (ie, about 1 or so light years out). Beyond that would be intergalactic shipping lanes and open space, but it would still have influence on that volume out past it's hard border of control.

Ever won a game in Civ IV by swallowing up all the other cities through culture?

hehe, fair enough

Yeah but capturing through culture isnt fun, not in my book anyhow. Vast fleets and armies is the way to go!

Yeah but capturing through culture isnt fun, not in my book anyhow. Vast fleets and armies is the way to go!

But GC2 is designed to give you the choice instead of forcing you to win by a certain route. It's all good.

Much more difficult then the a Space Victory

i Read (i found some files)
About the Apollo program and SS Stuff...They have to do with a space victory (IE:Getting to centari first and then blowing up earth?)

That's one of the classic Civ series win conditions. You build the planets first interstellar colony ship (module by module) and launch it when you think it will A) survive the trip and get there first.

The first Civ to get a ship to Alpha Centauri wins.

Cool thing is depending on the modules you fit it has a different chance of success and travels at a different speed, so if another Civ launches a ship before you there is still a chance to beat it by ading more engines onto your own vessel.

Guess what my favourite Civ feature was?

I thought the same thing.Should crossing borders mean war ala CIV4.

/agreed

BTW cant stop playing Civ4

You are confussing borders with sphere of influence (military, political, cultural), when you colonize a planet and then the fog of war (I like the title) is lifted you find out that you just colonize a planet in the backyard on one of the other races, so your best plan of action is to increase your cultural influence or conquer their planet, or just do nothing and let time determine who will end with the planet, as they said those are not borders but areas of influence.

Off topic: Civ4's space victory is the same as Civ3. You have a particular list of ship parts you have to build. As soon as you have built them all, you win. It's not the Civ1/Civ2 matter of designing a ship with a % chance of getting there. It's the Civ3 of 5 casings (hull platings), 3 thrusters, 1cockpit, 1 docking, 1 statis module, 1 engine (power plant). Do that all before any other player has (and they have to have the tech to build the parts, so tech leader usually wins), and win. if someone is ahead of you, you invade their capital and disrupt their ships building for a certain time.

The main point of confusion seems to the be the actual label. The label should therefore be changed to something more intuitive, from ownership to "Influence" or "Cultural Domination". The change of "Ownership" to "Influence" or "Cultural Domination" would remove the hard link that the space in a color belongs to that empire. Personally, I like having a military claimed space. But I wouldn't want it based on Military Power. It shouldn't matter if I've got a military that is 10x stronger then all the other empire's put together... or if I have the least powerful military at the moment. A one tile border from all your worlds and starbases would be effective (and prevent non-resource star bases from being put next to a resource star base). But this tile limit could be made alterable via Galactic Council (although making it bigger might lead to conflicts over who owned shared tiles). I like Civ4's borders. I like its closed and open border system. I think that works very well, and would also fit into GC. But if Brad doesn't think it is appropriate for GalCiv, I can accept that. One last thought. If you had closed borders to an empire, you wouldn't be able to trade with that empire. As trade pays for your fleets, you'd want to have open borders with all the empires you can in GC2, so the net effect might be the same thing as what GC1 and GC2 have now... no military ownership or permanent open borders. It's the same thing.

Please. Unless you're playing at a very low level, there's no way you're conquering entire civilizations with culture in Civ IV. Maybe with a combination of military might but no way you're just taking over enemy cities through building temples and wonders. Once you get to the 7,500 cap, the next border limit is 75,000.

Besides, there's no strategy. You just build buildings in your cities and hope you can do it faster than your opponents. The GalCiv cultural victory path is much better IMHO. It lets you build star bases that spread your culture out there.

I think the AI should be wary of just sending ships through, but let's keep some perspective. It's one thing to claim a piece of habitable land. It's another thing to claim trillions of miles of vacuum in space as being uncrossable.

The CivIV culture system is broken. You can't win the game by culturally assimilating entire civilizations as you can in GalCiv. It's about military victory or running out the clock in the form of the time victory or the space victory.