Ship crew being restricted to the local species

For what's not in 'Top Priority Game Design'. Post your ideas, visions, suggestions for the game, rules, modifications, etc.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
EricF
Space Dragon
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 10:12 am

Re: Possibly strengthening environmental restrictions

#1 Post by EricF » Thu May 24, 2018 10:36 am

Dilvish wrote:
Gault.Drakkor wrote:And really if we are shipping parts all over the empire how hard would it be to ship crews around? Not advocating this but really, but ... Why aren't ships built with the best parts available when it comes to crew? Current game play says we shouldn't. Anti micromanagement says we should.
For someone "not advocating" that sure sounds an awful lot like advocating. This primarily seems like it should be a different thread to me, but since it also seems to underpin your response to the basic idea floated above, I'll give a little bit of a response. I think you are overemphasizing simplification in the name of anti-micromanagement. The essence of a strategy game lies in making of choices subject to constraints, and the need to crew a ship with the local species was chosen as a strategic constraint for FO long ago. The proposal of this thread is entirely predicated on that existing underlying constraint. If you wish to discuss the strategic value of that underlying constraint please start up a separate thread for that.
Are you suggesting changing ship production that is done in space? With parts shipped from everywhere in the empire? In an environment completely separated from the world below? Which the entire rest of the game has gone out of its way to enable?
It seems to me like these questions are all bringing in details that aren't inherently part of the game (well, maybe not the first question, but I don't see how it matters anyways). There only a few armor parts for which even the raw materials are indicated to be shipped around, let alone completed parts. You might choose to fill in those details because they fit your idea of 'realism', but in FO realism is just another type of fluff that we use for flavor when it supports the chosen design. When choosing between alternate design choices of equivalent value, we might let fluff be the feather that tips the balance, but we don't let realism or other fluff dictate design choices.
I disagree with changing what can be produced based upon species current environment.
If there is something more to this sentiment beyond a mix of your realism concerns and your issue with the underlying constraint of crew being restricted to the local species, I'm not seeing it. If the local crew cannot use a certain part, then a ship employing that part cannot be crewed locally and therefore such ship cannot be built at that location. It doesn't matter at all where the individual parts could be imagined to have been built. And even this whole bit about saying the local crew "can't use" the part is just a bit of fluff for the proposed constraint on construction. Fluff is quite versatile and should be adapted to the strategic design choices, not vice versa.
Holy S*** F**K I could not disagree with everything said here more strongly than possible. NO NO NO NO
There is no strategic or tactical decision involved in building ships in locations without the best pilots.
If you have species that are good or better pilots then you build all your ships there,
There is NO strategic advantage to building ships elsewhere.
PERIOD.

So yes, when I design a ship I should be able to assign a pilot of choice.
When I design a troop ship I should be able to assign ground troops of choice.
PERIOD.

This will avoid a lot of bullshit Micromanagement.

User avatar
Dilvish
AI Lead, Programmer
Posts: 4685
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:25 pm

Ship crew being restricted to the local species

#2 Post by Dilvish » Thu May 24, 2018 5:36 pm

I recently proposed an idea that is strongly underpinned by the current FO game mechanic that a ship's crew species is determined by the local species where the ship is produced. A very significant portion of the reaction so far, is actually directed at that existing game mechanic. Reconsideration of that basic mechanic is a very distinct topic, and rather than jumbling the two conversations I'm setting up this thread to focus on the existing mechanic. I've sure there are also some old threads here in the forums dating back to when the mechanic was first introduced, and it would be great if someone could link those (or I'll try to get around to adding them).
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

Ophiuchus
Vacuum Dragon
Posts: 505
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am

Re: Possibly strengthening environmental restrictions

#3 Post by Ophiuchus » Thu May 24, 2018 7:45 pm

EricF wrote:If you have species that are good or better pilots then you build all your ships there,
There is NO strategic advantage to building ships elsewhere.
Being able to build ships closer to operational area is a strategic advantage.
So building up a planet with the best pilots closer to the border is a tactical manouver. But often location and cost/effort (moving planets?, building colony and shipyards) is too high. And yes, it feels a bit micromanagy. Maybe a "Imperial Gunners (species)" policy or building for deciding which species affects the weapons. But maybe we actually want to keep the planets/star combinations as strategical resources.

For troop ships it usually doesnt matter so much. So when starting to roll over neighbors I often build subpar troop ships (just more of them) as reinforcements.

Also notice that the "build closer to operational area" advantage does stop existing as soon as you can send your troops through a stargate....
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Post Reply