FreeOrion

No sorry skdiw I mean userdefined, see the jpg on page one of the thread.
I would like to be able to name any area of space on the map. and then if i wish( if I own it or even part of it) set a leader over it.
Just like naming continants. Its all from the perspective of your own empire.
I dont want the ' Siris Sector ' to change shape just cause some ugly bug eyed race sweeps in and conquers some of my worlds. I want it to stay, beckonong me to retake it and make it whole again.

Oh. I have mentioned about searchable user-defines on the galaxy map before but they pretty much ignore the idea. The idea is something like your idea. My idea is even more general so that you can search fleets and specials also. I thought sectors could also be used to mark cultural territory and other effects. They also ignore my numbered hotkey idea, which basically allow the user to recall a frequently used screen or an area of the galaxy map quickly at a touch of a key instead of just typing in on a search box or draging the mouse around on the galaxy. I thought the developers rejected because my ideas was unnecessary. Or maybe the took it in but didn't say anything; I don't know. I know I posted the idea in the graphics thread and in couple UI or micro threads. I think sectors is very good imo; and if not, it would prove an excellent programming aid, which I think is enough reason alone. User-define could be and add on to user-dependent and also make FO more moddable.

_________________

I just gotta bump this up, since I think it's possibly the best idea that hasn't really been discussed much.....

Or, you could be able to make a treaty with a race you are at war with and create a *neutral zone* or a *DMZ (ie. De-Militarized Zone)

If you make a territory changing treaty and one of your colonies are in the boundary and you need to evac the colonists and they could resist and could cause them to seperate from your Empire and become the Marquis from Star Trek. lol (pretty cool eh?)

This excellent idea could be an effective game scale / macromanagement aid:

In the beggining of the game when you have few planets, you manage them directly (possibly with the help of governors).

In the mid game, as you develop many planets within several systems, you manage the star systems in your empire (each containing several colonised planets), but deal much less with individual worlds. On one planet in each system a 'System Capital' may be built which enables a new UI screen designed as a macromanagment tool for all planets in that system. The System Capital is a building that also has system wide beneficial effects very worthwhile for systems with several developed worlds.

In the late game, as you develop / conquer many systems, you may build a 'Sector Capital' at one of your System Capitals. Systems within a certain distance (number of starlane jumps) of the Sector Capital may be included in its sector, which the player may name. The Sector Capital has further beneficial effects for the entire sector of developed systems, and powerfully affects morale and efficiency within the sector if it is captured or destroyed. It also enables a further UI screen which acts as a macromanagement tool for systems within the sector (eg, you could set the whole sector to research focus, or adjust tax rates with one click, etc). Sytems can only be added to or removed from sectors if both the system and the capital are controlled, likewise for moving sector capitals.

This could allow empire management to dynamically scale up with the size of empires as the game progresses, without losing significant control by the player. It would also add strategic depth and flavour by adding player defined points of strategic control and galactic geography.

@Ran Taro

I like the way you explained that. Its exactly the sort of thing I had in mind when I did the jpg. Managing a large empire would be similar (well sort of) to early game when you could remember all your worlds by name.

@JamieK . Nuetral Zone, interesting idea, simply a sector with a differnt set of rules attached. I think it would work.

Interesting Planet/System/Sector based managment idea their Taro.

To clarify though, I would hope the player never losses any of their previous control mechanisms when they gain these new ones. I can still manage a planet when I have a System level Capital or manage systems when I have a Sector Capital.

Also wouldn't it naturaly follow that I have an Imperial Capital too that manages the whole empire?

Are the various level of Capitals nested in the sense that buying houses and hotels in monopoly is. I need to have a System Capital on Planet X in place first and then it get upgradeed to Sector Capital but continues to satisfy its earlier System function as well. Or is each capital built from scratch and independent of the other levels?

_________________
Fear is the Mind Killer - Frank Herbert -Dune

Hey I was looking for a thread on star types but couldn't find one ith search so I'll append here...



I see this picture and I thought for a second that there was a 'van allen belt' intersercting two starlanes. Then I relized that it is a system asteroid.

Then I thought - wouldn't that be cool if an entire 'system' was nothing but a big mess of rocks and dust and cloudlike junk? Not even a star. You wouldn't be able to build a colony in there, that is for sure, but maybe you could build a listening post, and it could make for some really interesting ship battles!

like a terain type

_________________
It's cool man!

I sure Taro will have his own opinion

Personally I agree. Control mechanisms should be gained not lost or replaced, when creating Sectors.

Creation of a sector would mean that a planet in that sector must be nominated as the place of government.

A Capital world of a system seams a logical place for pompous diplomatic types to hang out after hours. But why not give the player choice. Hide the Sector administration on a secret asteriod base away from harms way.
They may work harder that way if they dont go barmy. (Im not really suggesting that the location nominated should have that sort of effect)

As an example

Say Im the sort of player that does not like the idea of dividing his empire into seperate geographical like entities.

Earth is my Imperial Capital. Once I gain the ability to deligate governmental authority to Sector Capitals. I simply nominate Earth as Sector Capital as well.

Governments of large countries are almost always a multy leveled thing.

So earth would be the supreme capital in every way. It would be just like playing the old way.
Technically there would be a Sector with its associated advantages, just one giant one.

I wouldnt play that way myself, Its what ive always found boring about large empires in this sort of game . But the choice is there.

Yes thats how I imagine it - although I would add that in a great design the new macro control mechanisms would be powerful enough to reduce the players reliance on the old micro ones. Hence you retain the ability to zoom down to a planetary level, but don't have to do it for every planet, every turn to get the best out of your empire.

I love the sector idea! Here are some additional thoughts:

1) There should be two types of sectors; "natural" sectors and "unnatural" sectors. "Natural" sectors should be generated by the game, should be few and on the edges of the galaxy, and should consist if a small group of stars with only one entrance/exit lane and a defining feature, e.g. all stars in the sector should be inside a nebula (thus no shields) or orbitting a black hole (thus heavy gravity). The advantage of controlling a "natural" sector is that it is easily defendable via its one entrance/exit.

2) The automatic unnatural sector should simply encompass all the star systems you control, as was suggested above. The player will have to build a Sector Admin building BEFORE they can define new sectors. However, there will be several benefits to doing so: a) increased morale near sector head b) reduction of HFOG in smaller area or, if we have no HFOG, and increase in trade/tax revenues. c) Players will be able to build "patrol vessels" in each sector, which will be invisibly present a la MOO2 freighter fleet. The patrol vessels will reduce piracy, improve trade and damage enemy vessel that enter/leave the sector. The amount of damage dealt will be determined by the formula: (Number of patrol vessels) divided by (total secotr space in square parsecs). Even a small sector will probably be 10-15 square parsecs, so the player would have to have 10-15 patrol vessels to deal 1 damage to enemy vessels. You can probably build the vessels in packs of 10 9 there will be building and maintenance costs, [can only be built on sector admin planet maybe?]).

What do you guys think?

_________________
Professor Hernandez, Human ambassador to Silica:
"Hey, rocks are people too!"
Black Dawn

Second part sound good.

First part - Easier to just leave it up to the player to create the sector himself if he saw such a situation on the map. Same result in the end.

I would start off with the whole map sectored up right from the get go and I dont think we need to have any kind of restrictions on entrances and exits. The only thing I would hope for is that sectors are resonably well conected internaly (how this gets done is rather complex and involved in map generation).

Now either these "Natural" or "Anchient" sectors can be changed and remolded by the player to their hearts content OR they remain the whole game and the player creates "Synthetic" or "Political" sectors as a second and independent layer of information. Think of this as the Difference between Political Boundaries and Physical Terrain. When a system changes hands it gets added to the concours nearest sector (or perhaps becomes a orphan un-sectored system). The player can toggle between viewing the Anchient and Modern maps.

The spin here is that each Anchient Sector is the remains of an Anchient Orion era Races Empire and should have a "Capital" in it that will have Achiological Ruins in it. Their will be one "Orion" sector in every map which will have Orion as its capital. The other Capitals are like mini-Orions with smaller Goody packages and little or no guards. Recovering and Studying Ruins and all of these planets could be some kind of victory condition. Note that the Capital System and Planets are not known at the start of the game, only the Anchient Sectors are know and you know their is one capital per sector.

_________________
Fear is the Mind Killer - Frank Herbert -Dune

I think we are talking about 2 different things here.

1.- A region, state or province. In this case independent from others (no sharing of stars) wich has certain autonomy and thus can gain some bonuses with good administration. (capitals, etc). Such regions are normally delimited by geography and should as such be created at game start. This allow for better AI, etc. In the same way that RISK continents I would interconect stars in the same sector an put only some entrances to the sector itself. This shouldn't be complicated from a programer point of view (being one myself) and could create better maps (having more intelligent starlanes, real geography, etc).

2.- A tool to allow the player to select stars by interest, asign orders, etc. In this case I would think more in a user-defined group (that can have a visual display) to select frontiers, main production planets, etc. This is a tactical tool and shouldn't be used to confer bonuses at all (I see a lot of exploits in that case). Defining and traspassing this group can in fact be a very good tool to define treaties and stuff, as mentioned before.

Both things are really worthwhile IMHO, but should be adressed as separate things.