FreeOrion

I was talking about IG 2's way of dealing with things to give you an example. In that game you have no chance to catch the enemy even if you keep your fleet in your own space. From a realism point of view this may be cool. From a gameplay point of view it was very annoying. Especially if you were engaged in more than one war.



This has nothing to do with my conception of what the game should be. It has to do with my conception that we should not revisit past decisions. Fortunatley this conception matches the offical policy.

If you have serious problems with the way things are run feel free to report things to the next higher person in the hierarchy.

Surely someone remembers what was passed, so should post them, even in minor detail.

HAHA not to play the devils advocate or anytihng BUT the idea of starlanes wasn't acutally *voted* on. It was debated and then Tyreth and Aquatiane decided that they'd be in to give space some "terrain" But regardless, they are in and action takes place in star systems, done and done (you can thank me and BB? or impaler? for the option to turn them off)

_________________
Aquitaine is my Hero....

Sometimes we won't have a vote. The public review is a chance to see what most people want. If there's a consensus, we'll go with that unless we're convinced it will be a bad design choice.

My hope is to make starlanes optional, as in modders will have a choice not to use them for their own particular changes if they don't want. Our official "mod" will be balanced to take into account starlanes.

I've just gone over this thread and tried to summ it up. So here is what I gather from our discussion so far, actual numbers could be made editable by placing them in a text file or giving an option at gamestart.

- Starlanes are created at gamestart (and not by building something on a planet)
- Each System has 1-4 Starlanes
- Offroad Speed is 25% of Starlane Speed, regardless of technology
- Starlanes can be turned on or off. Turning them off may unbalance the game but that's nothing we would worry about.

Is there anything else we need before we can put this up for review? Also, if anyone has serious problems with the things I just listed or if I listed something wrong, please say so.

I don't think a hard number was decided for the ratio of off-road to starlane travel, and it most likely won't be until we get to game balance mode. But a constant starlane to off-road ratio was decided on.

Impaler had an idea that we could create a sort of weighted graph or bell-curve. With the majority of stars having the average number of starlanes (3?). And a few having more and less.

Also we should also have the option to have a no-offroad game, just because sometimes its fun to play as a bastard who find the perfect choke point in the universe and exploits it

Unrelated yet pertinent: We need to decide what sort of things in FO will be changable in game as a start-up option and what can only be reached via txt files etc. Becuase certainly the player oughta be able to easilly change just about every aspect of the game BUT he doesn't have to balance them. However with start-up options the player can change them all and they all need to be balanced (by us of course).

_________________
Aquitaine is my Hero....

Yes, the number was not decided, but it was mentioned. Even if it's just a placeholder we need some sort of number to start with, right?

I like your idea of no offroading as an option.

I think we might even give players the option to turn off things that unbalance the game, as long as we say so. Like a big red warning sign "caution: turning off starlanes may unbalance your game".

What I would like to see in a game: A starlane is just a pretraveled route. No starlanes exist before you or the NPC travel to a new system. Access to new systems is limited by fuel and tech based on distance. There should not be a penalty for not using starlanes. Or if there is it should be an option in the game Startup Options.

Using starlanes trends to limit the NPCs to only using them... and that gives the human player a distinct advantage.



If you do this then the NPCs have to use it as a strategy too. Which implies the NPCs will be spending a lot of effort building up fortifications in systems with three or more starlanes even when they are deep within their area of control. < Actually, in any game where there are starlanes, the NPCs should be using "Choke Point Protection Techniques" any time they meet a new race. >

On the other hand if there are no starlanes then there are no choke points and all systems will be built up and protected evenly as they grow and progress. < This also promotes a "Be nice to your neighbor" policy until you think you have the necessary strength to go gallyvanting around with a conquering war fleet while still leaving enough ships in-system to protect them. >

****************
Note: I personally have never liked starlanes in a space game. IMO they impose an artifical restriction on the players.

Worm Holes are a different subject... I like the concept and systems with WHs are the places that I'd be building my main defense structures.

And while on WHs... they should have a huge income modifier, giving the controlling empire a huge incentive to control both ends of them.


Thumper

The reason why starlanes are generated at gamestart and do not change over the course of the game is because that way the AI has less trouble with them. Back on the old forum this was one of the first things we settled on: No changing speed ratio, no changing starlanes. Simply because we don't need to make our programmers' job any harder than it already is.

If starlanes are pretravelled paths:
-you could travel at max speed without fear of hitting asteroids.
If offroad is areas that are unkown or not travelled much:
-you have to travel slower
-but you could travel at max speed, the cost being sinificant ship damage or loss of ships. Would that be a cool option.

Thumper

I don't like the idea.

But while thinking about this, i wondered, if off-road travel will be optional too?

Darn This post needs to be deleted

Would you please eloberate on your dislike for this?



Why not make it a sub option under "Starlanes YES/NO". If YES then "Allow off road travel: YES/NO".


Thumper

Its too much of a "but". There's starlanes, BUT you can travel offroad. You have a lower speed offroad, BUT you can fly at higher speeds. You might destroy your ships, BUT you can simply send more ships.

Starlanes increase the strategic possibilities, slow-offroading cuts them down a lot, but fast-offroading would pretty much destroy them in my oppinion.