FreeOrion

Yeah, that's what i thought you meant. I guess my "in other words" isn't very clear.


Similarly i think it unlikely that we will have "species-specific implementation of social techs". The work involved in making and especially balancing species grows exponentially when we start including that kind of stuff.


I'm not sure you understand the question. "which planets rebel?" was asked in the context of a multi-planet superorganism. If being a multi-planet superorganism has any game-effect at all, it means that there is no variation between the allegiance and happiness of the member planets— since mood and thought are a function of the collective whole. In such a situation all planets would be equally content. I suppose it is possible the conditions for rebellions could be checked before the planetary-specific inputs for allegiance and happiness are equalized across the whole group, but it is hard to guess if that would be practical without the coding being half-done.

The question has been pretty thoroughly hashed out for non-collective beings.

_________________
—• Read this First before posting Game Design Ideas!
—• Design Philosophy
—•— My Ideas, Organized —•— Get an Avatar —•— Acronyms —•—

Well, then -- just calculate things normally, and then just use the species/empire demographic averages for the actual mechanical impact. I.e.; have the superorganisms pull from a different location for actual mechanical impact, and then just run everything else normally. This is why I originally assumed that there would be empire demographics, much like one sees in the Civilization series. It would add to the overall value of the game (i.e.; let people see 'how they are doing') and simultaneously simplify this little bit of code.

_________________
Function. Verify. Cultivate. Invent.

I'm sure we could find ways to implement rebellion for an empire sized superogranism, as eleazar said we don't need special rules to implement this, but perhaps we should think about it anyway, there may be something fun enough to justify the extra effort. Going by the idea that really low happiness leads to mental disorders would justify rebellions but its not the only option, for example I had the idea that in addition to George style productivity penalties for moderate unhappiness a mental breakdown could result in paranoid delusions rather than rebellions.

When a super-organism has paranoid delusions other empires start dropping treaties and declaring war, or so the player thinks. In reality those empires said nothing and retaliatory attacks are, from their point of view, unprovoked. If the other empire's try to initiate diplomacy for real there is a chance they'll get a paranoid rant in response, if this happened the player doesn't even know someone tried to talk to them.
If we want to take this further may attack with ships that in reality don't exist outside the super-organism's mind; any ships or planets destroyed/invaded by these fictional ships are randomly reset to their original status after a short while.
Finally all other empires who have contact with the superorganism are informed that it appears to be showing signs of paranoia, in short attack now while its distracted

Now, that is just plain mean.

_________________
Function. Verify. Cultivate. Invent.

One-point on the idea of species specific techs. there are two ways that the idea could be implemented without being directly species specific

1. Techs that replicate a species pick ie Tolerant/Core Waste Dumps from MOO2... a Tolerant species doesn't need them... because they naturally have that ability.

2. Techs that have differing effects based on what your species picks are, ie species inbuilt Ethos will affect the happiness of implementing certain government techs.


I think 'hivemindedness' should be a pick that acts like #1... it is a natural 'ability' that can be replicated by technology (with various levels of course up to Georgeness)

Telepathy, should we decide to include that, could probably also apply.


As for Rebelling... if a true multiplanetary organism is going to have rebelling planets, then I think it should be random which ones rebel... ie every planet you have has a X% chance to rebel based on various stats.... of course, using the mental breakdown model, reconquest wouldn't mean that 'all is well' instantly, reintegration would take time. (it may even take some of those techs to 'make' a higher level hive mind)

Good.


Ideally in a game there should be no % chances of things happening, but instead real cause and effect reasons behind why something happens. I imagine that this would also allow players to see why there planets rebel and give players the ability to prevent rebellions.
But there can be good reasons, eg distance from homeworld, lack of food, supply problems, crime, policies. I could see a % chance system coming into effect more to decide when a rebellion will occur, as given a good reason, if a rebellion is to occur, it would be uncertain if it would happen today or next week. If a rebellion would occur is not so much chance, but what has happened to lead up to this, eg for the last x turns the planet has had no food supplied.

I agree with the no % chances in general.

However, using % to decide when a planet rebelled (that was in the state of 'ready to rebel') would be good. For a multiplanetary superorganism, that % method could also be used to determine Which planet rebelled.

More on the concept of eusocial animals in the world here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siphonophora

These bastards are just neat.

_________________
Function. Verify. Cultivate. Invent.