Code:
Hull
name = "SH_COLONY_BASE"
description = "SH_COLONY_BASE_DESC"
speed = 10
starlaneSpeed = 0
fuel = 0
stealth = 0.1
health = 5
buildCost = 1
buildTime = 1
slots = Slot type = Internal position = (0.50, 0.50)
location = OwnedBy TheEmpire Source.Owner
graphic = ""
This is the hull for the colony base. It is never unlocked, so the player can never build any ships with it aside from those which are created via the CreateShip effect. It cannot move out of the system.
Code:
ShipDesign
name = "SD_COLONY_BASE"
description = "SD_COLONY_BASE_DESC"
lookup_strings = true
hull = "SH_COLONY_BASE"
parts = "CO_COLONY_POD"
graphic = ""
model = ""
This is the premade ship design for the colony base. It cannot move out of the system, but it can colonize any habitable planet in the system.
Code:
BuildingType
name = "BLD_COLONY_BASE"
description = "BLD_COLONY_BASE_DESC"
buildcost = 450
buildtime = 1
maintenancecost = 0
location = And [
CurrentPopulation low = 3 high = 999
OwnedBy TheEmpire Source.Owner
]
effectsgroups = [
EffectsGroup
scope = Source
activation = Source
effects = CreateShip "SD_COLONY_BASE" Source.Owner
EffectsGroup
scope = Source
activation = Source
effects = Destroy
]
graphic = ""
This is the colony base building. When it is built, it will spawn a colony base ship and then be destroyed. This, I believe, is the simplest way Colony Bases can be reasonably enacted at present. I don't believe any further complications are necessary. It might, is some circumstances, be desirable to build a colony base even when there are no uncolonized habitable planets present, for example if the player plans to create an artificial planet, or annihilate an enemy planet. Therefore, I see no reason to restrict the number of colony bases that can be present. In terms of current playability, there's also no good reason to complicate things by making the colony base remove population from the building planet, since having different rules for colony ships and colony bases only serves to confuse the matter, and furthermore, it has not been decided that building colony ships/bases should consume population from the producing planet anyway.
TBeholder wrote:
You're right, but there's two reasons: first, impact may be greater since building and using a colony ship takes a lot of time, while building several bases to populate the system is quicker; second, it have to be implemented separately anyway (again, the ship is spawned)
The most likely implementation of colony ships costing population to produce would be to allow buildings to cost different resources besides PP. So a colony pod ship part would cost 1 population in addition to however much PP, and this population would be allocated to the project in the same way as PP. Furthermore, in the future, the colony base would ideally work without the building being the middle-man, so there's not much point in thinking in terms of the colony base ship being spawned by the building in the long-run.
TBeholder wrote:
Depends on the balance. I suspected the opposite. If by the time both Gene Bank and Cloning Center are built the planet is about to reach its population cap, it was kind of waste - it would be better to build something productive that will remain useful. Also, it eats both maintenance and its own penalty. In MoO they are much more useful, since there are reproduction centers that send their population elsewhere. Which reminds me...
That doesn't sound like a fun decision to make on every single planet...
TBeholder wrote:
I'm in favour of areas, or 1-2 StarlaneJumps if it's supposed to work via transport (unlike radars, etc), but still.
So, to make it useful we would need some means to export all this people...
I think bilding that moves population away (emigration center) would do, but right now i didn't debugged this one yet
You don't need a means to export them. You just need to say that it works on systems within a certain distance or number of starlane jumps, and the player can assume that there's some means to export them. At any rate, anything related to resources shouldn't, IMO, be area of effect, since one of the great advantages to FO's pooled resource system is that you don't need to really worry about micromanage-y details, like import/export across large distances and exact supply routes... this should also extend to things like making sure all of your planets are in range of a cloning center/industrial center/etc. That kind of experience is very micromanage-y and not fun, especially on a larger scale. If you have your doubts, just fire up a game in a 500 star galaxy and try to make sure all your industry planets are within range of a Solar Orbital Generator. Not fun. Matters will only get worse when there are actually other, more interesting things the player could be doing instead, like diplomacy and espionage.
TBeholder wrote:
Yeah, IMHO even a bit of overkill.

Since it's enough to build this on the homeworld once to affect all fresh colonies without any extra spending.
That's right. And more importantly, without any extra micromanagement. Deciding whether or not to build the Cloning Center time and time again for each colony is lame, boring and repetetive. Deciding
where to build the Cloning Center
once is far better.
TBeholder wrote:
Why not? Perhaps not 2x, but cross-adjustments that are useful but not "must have" make the whole game less linear.
Such "cross-adjustments" don't have to be explicit. Instead, there might be a strategic or tactical advantage to having two particular buildings present on a planet without one actually affecting the functionality of the other. Such "compatibility bonuses" should be tactical or strategic, and available for the player to figure out and manipulate on his own, rather than simple, numerical, and force-fed to the player.
TBeholder wrote:
Depends on the interpretation. That is, it makes sense if such indirect effects cover as much as direct effects of an object in question. If a Genome Bank otherwise is good for the whole empire, then of course it should be good for this purpose everywhere too.
So it's presented this way only because i copypaste my own tests, and i'm more cautious with one-cover-all effects in general (when one thing covers all, there's less need to optimize and compromise, and that's one of the points of strategy IMO).
Remember though, that when one thing covers all, it greatly increases the strategic importance of that one thing, and therefore the fun of building and protecting it. When there are many boring generic buildings scattered everywhere, the player becomes less concerned with the strategic significance of the buildings and more concerned with using them to maximizing production through micromanagement, which is bad.