Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: TheTalkingMeowth
« on: November 30, 2020, 04:10:35 PM »

If you want to set it up that way, then sure, it works.

But the "locked" techs (this is empire builders in general, not aurora specifically) usually aren't actually like that. Example: dark matter tech in stellaris, where you can wildly surpass fallen empires in every other way in a reasonable time frame (they only have like 10 levels of repeatables). Or weird "one per galaxy" limits like the wonders in Distant Worlds (or megastructures in stellaris, for that matter). DW is actually a big offender in this, with the race locked techs that can nevertheless be traded freely. Or MoO with its 1 Doom Star limit.

Basically, artificial limits imposed for balance reasons that are not justified in setting. Rubs me the wrong way.
Posted by: xenoscepter
« on: November 30, 2020, 04:01:45 PM »

Quote from: Panopticon on November 29, 2020, 03:07:26 AM
Quote from: xenoscepter on November 25, 2020, 05:45:45 PM
Quote from: TheTalkingMeowth on November 25, 2020, 05:19:06 PM
Neat ideas, thought getting fairly far afield.

However, I absolutely hate the idea of adding more ruins only tech. It's a pet peeve of mine. Like, the people who built those ruins presumably invented this without needing to find it. If they could do so, why can't we? Ancient caches of impossible to replicate technology is a staple of science fiction and fantasy, and it's just really, really, stupid.

 - I never see it so much as "impossible to replicate " as, "billions of years of evolution worth of advancement" hence it's more practical because it dodges the plot hole of "why the hell didn't someone come up with this sooner?" to which the answer becomes, "because we haven't evolved into sentient, Omnipotent Furbies... yet." or some such typical "Pre-Cursor" type nonsense. Having it be ruins only would one solution, but not the only one. Just requiring mining and the sub-sequent transport, defense and so on could potentially be enough to offset any OP-edness.

I think that having ruins only tech isn't super believable personally, if you find like, the suggested matter transmuter tech in the TL3 ruined colony for example, it raises rather a lot of questions, if these guys could research it, why couldn't we? Are we to believe that when this civilization previously existed they too looted ruins and found it there? If so why weren't they higher tech level? Unless the civ they got it from also looted it, and so on and so on. It doesn't really seem plausible that that stuff would survive a collapse that destroyed multiple civilizations, let alone one.

Maybe having it have a chance to show up on worlds with an anomaly, or as something similar as a stand alone event not tied to ruins could work

 - No, I'm looking at it as a situation where we find it in ruins only because we'd need to play thousands and thousands of years in-game before we could develop it ourselves. The TL3 species may have looted it like us, they might have been a slave race of the guys who developed it, or they might just have been that much more evolved. Even in a 100% Research Game... how many times do you make it to Photonic Engines? Yet Photonic Engines are god-like and researchable, but if you wanted them it would take a long time even without a reduced research rate. What if it took the equivalent of IRL years worth of gameplay to advance your Aurora civilization that far? How many techs would need to be coded in-between? Is it not easier to say "your empire has to find this tech." or to say, "Your empire is pretty much either gonna have to find this tech or spend millions, maybe even billions or trillions, of years to develop it organically." How much easier is it to code? And who wants to read through, or play through, billions of trillions or even "mere" millions of years of evolution? Who the hell could even write believable material for such a case?

 - Ruins-only stuff has always been to me stuff that would take a very, very, very long time to develop on our own, or possibly something we never would have figured out because the methods used were completely alien to us. Perhaps requiring tooling and processes designed for eight-armed or psychic beings? The possibilities are endless.
Posted by: Panopticon
« on: November 29, 2020, 03:07:26 AM »

Quote from: xenoscepter on November 25, 2020, 05:45:45 PM
Quote from: TheTalkingMeowth on November 25, 2020, 05:19:06 PM
Neat ideas, thought getting fairly far afield.

However, I absolutely hate the idea of adding more ruins only tech. It's a pet peeve of mine. Like, the people who built those ruins presumably invented this without needing to find it. If they could do so, why can't we? Ancient caches of impossible to replicate technology is a staple of science fiction and fantasy, and it's just really, really, stupid.

 - I never see it so much as "impossible to replicate " as, "billions of years of evolution worth of advancement" hence it's more practical because it dodges the plot hole of "why the hell didn't someone come up with this sooner?" to which the answer becomes, "because we haven't evolved into sentient, Omnipotent Furbies... yet." or some such typical "Pre-Cursor" type nonsense. Having it be ruins only would one solution, but not the only one. Just requiring mining and the sub-sequent transport, defense and so on could potentially be enough to offset any OP-edness.

I think that having ruins only tech isn't super believable personally, if you find like, the suggested matter transmuter tech in the TL3 ruined colony for example, it raises rather a lot of questions, if these guys could research it, why couldn't we? Are we to believe that when this civilization previously existed they too looted ruins and found it there? If so why weren't they higher tech level? Unless the civ they got it from also looted it, and so on and so on. It doesn't really seem plausible that that stuff would survive a collapse that destroyed multiple civilizations, let alone one.

Maybe having it have a chance to show up on worlds with an anomaly, or as something similar as a stand alone event not tied to ruins could work
Posted by: StarshipCactus
« on: November 25, 2020, 07:51:05 PM »

Could always make the module a million tons too, by the time you can build it, million ton shipyards should be easy.
Posted by: xenoscepter
« on: November 25, 2020, 05:45:45 PM »

Quote from: TheTalkingMeowth on November 25, 2020, 05:19:06 PM
Neat ideas, thought getting fairly far afield.

However, I absolutely hate the idea of adding more ruins only tech. It's a pet peeve of mine. Like, the people who built those ruins presumably invented this without needing to find it. If they could do so, why can't we? Ancient caches of impossible to replicate technology is a staple of science fiction and fantasy, and it's just really, really, stupid.

 - I never see it so much as "impossible to replicate " as, "billions of years of evolution worth of advancement" hence it's more practical because it dodges the plot hole of "why the hell didn't someone come up with this sooner?" to which the answer becomes, "because we haven't evolved into sentient, Omnipotent Furbies... yet." or some such typical "Pre-Cursor" type nonsense. Having it be ruins only would one solution, but not the only one. Just requiring mining and the sub-sequent transport, defense and so on could potentially be enough to offset any OP-edness.
Posted by: TheTalkingMeowth
« on: November 25, 2020, 05:19:06 PM »

Neat ideas, thought getting fairly far afield.

However, I absolutely hate the idea of adding more ruins only tech. It's a pet peeve of mine. Like, the people who built those ruins presumably invented this without needing to find it. If they could do so, why can't we? Ancient caches of impossible to replicate technology is a staple of science fiction and fantasy, and it's just really, really, stupid.
Posted by: xenoscepter
« on: November 25, 2020, 03:56:21 PM »

 - I'll chime in with my two cents:

 --- The ruins idea could be a facility which generates new TN Minerals on site, with the caveat that you still need to mine it yourself. The ruins could have a means of expanding their production, via Xenoarchaeology. Similar in the vein of the old Xeno Teams from VB6, you'd have a chance to discover a possible "expansion", but you'd need to send in Construction units to actually bring it online. I think they should be fairly common in ruins, but with the caveat that they produce specific minerals, not the full package. Maybe multi mineral ones and a full package one could exist, but be much rarer. Then the chance of discovering an expansion would roll for either more of the existing mineral produced, a higher accessibility, or a new mineral altogether. his could tie in with a ruins-only tech that would lead to being able to build your own facilities.

 --- The Nebulae could have it so that they roll for minerals like a gas giant, with the nebulae level determining how much it produces per annum and the accessibility of it. You could then have ships use Sorium Harvesters to gather it up. This would provide a small trickle of infinite fuel, unless you just so happened to have a HUGE nebula; however, such a nebula would become a highly contested resource and you'd need to protect it. Thus this version of the Nebula resources would facilitate a more widespread use of Electronic Hardening and specialized HPM ships for defense and raiding of enemy Nebula mining. I'd suggest making the per annum similar to the current Starting Mineral Generation, with every level of Nebula counting as 10%, while the accessibility should be completely random... or at least the same means of determination used for everything else.

 --- The Black Hole on the other hand should generate using a boosted version of the Homeworld Mineral Generation routine. Then that result should be reduced by a percentage based on the Class of the Black Hole, with a Class X having no reduction and a Class I being only 10% of the result. The accessibility should likewise be determined by the Class of the Black Hole, with a Class X having 1.0 and a Class I having 0.1, this makes the more powerful ones more lucrative than the weaker ones. Such you would a powerful vessel to do any meaningful harvesting, and as you may well need protection for the better finds, you would again need special ship designs to defend them. You couldn't use Jump Point Stations either, since they would get sucked in, thus Jump Point Assaults become a significantly higher threat to any such operation.

 --- Finally, I think all three of these options should be locked behind Ruins-Only technology. The facilities require tech to develop and build. The Black Holes would require a special mining module to harvest, while all three would require special Geological Sensors to do a survey for those regenerating minerals in the first place. This new sensor could also have the benefit of functioning as both a Geological Survey Sensor and a Gravitational Survey Sensor for the purposes of conducting regular surveys. Along with Improved, Phased and so on improvements. The new sensors could be more expensive and slightly bigger to compensate, like 300 Tons and twice as expensive as a standard version of either. Ground Team Surveys would NOT improve these prospects on planets, but the enhanced survey would make them re-roll for eligibility.
Posted by: Malorn
« on: November 25, 2020, 02:38:29 PM »

I like a lot of these ideas, the question of  course is if steve is even interested in such concepts, however.

I think black holes have a lot of promise, the comet thing for a tiny trickle of minerals, and the nebula thing also.

I'd limit it pretty heavily to a trickle of resources with a heavy investment, and it needs to not be something you can build up in large numbers or stack together. One nebula = this much regeneration, no matter how many mines are attached, you can't mine more than is there. Ditto black holes, comets, etc.

A ruin artifact would also be a really cool thing, so long as it can't be replicated in any way nor more produced.
Posted by: xenoscepter
« on: November 25, 2020, 01:48:19 PM »

Quote from: Platys51 on November 25, 2020, 12:52:48 PM
If black holes or nebulae will be introduced, they could be the place where such devices could be deployed.

Dust collectors for nebulae or the gravity thing for black hole.  Level of nebulae or pull of black hole would determinate acc of collectors in such system.

Acces could simply be limited by this module being massive, think 1Mt or so, and thanks to need for armor or engines to survive in nebulae or black hole system, deploying them would be massive undertaking as whatever design would contain them, would need to be built in large shipyard.

Each module could have 100 mines output, but limitation of 1 per system and need to be in special systems, along with great investment to deploy them and low acc in most special systems would make them last resort for empires preparing for long dark age that comes after conquering the galaxy.

 - I like this idea... :)
Posted by: Platys51
« on: November 25, 2020, 12:52:48 PM »

If black holes or nebulae will be introduced, they could be the place where such devices could be deployed.

Dust collectors for nebulae or the gravity thing for black hole.  Level of nebulae or pull of black hole would determinate acc of collectors in such system.

Acces could simply be limited by this module being massive, think 1Mt or so, and thanks to need for armor or engines to survive in nebulae or black hole system, deploying them would be massive undertaking as whatever design would contain them, would need to be built in large shipyard.

Each module could have 100 mines output, but limitation of 1 per system and need to be in special systems, along with great investment to deploy them and low acc in most special systems would make them last resort for empires preparing for long dark age that comes after conquering the galaxy.
Posted by: Droll
« on: November 25, 2020, 12:43:15 PM »

Quote from: nuclearslurpee on November 25, 2020, 12:17:43 PM
Quote from: Zincat on November 25, 2020, 11:48:52 AM
I would not mind some very late game TN generation options, but it needs to be done well or it will change how the game plays.
Iirc the technobabble was that TN minerals "condense" within the core of large planets over millions of years.
At least that's what I recall. As for comets, I don't remember why they were TN-rich.

Anyway,given the timescale involved, it seems that comets would not do it. A better solution maybe, if we want to keep in line with the technobabble, would be that very large/dense planets generate very slowly some TN materials inside. That way a system with a lot of large planets could be valuable evven if they are all dirt rocks.

I would be against the possibility of "fabricators", no matter what the investment required. Balancing these kind of "end-game" productions would always be iffy. And expansion has always been one of the driving forces anyway.

Maybe a reasonable solution is to use the concept of gravity wells accumulating TN minerals and apply it to stellar masses, which would be large enough to "condense" an appreciable tonnage of TN minerals per year, but this is usually consumed in stellar fusion or some such gobbledeygook, but with highly-advanced TN technology (say, antimatter engine level?) we can build a device that can interdict the condensing minerals before they get trapped in the star's gravity well and collect them for more interesting purposes, like blowing up aliens.

Mechanically this would be a large, expensive ship module probably limited to being a one-of (with one sufficient to collect all of the tonnage "produced" by a single star per annum - more modules or ships give no extra resources form that star) that provides income equal to one or some smallish number of mines. Possibly different star types have different mineral "accessibilities" as well to add a bit more strategic depth.

I honestly think that if it is a ruin only tech, then it would be ok to have something like this as long as it is incredibly costly to actually invest in it. The idea of having it be on a ship away from defensible planets is a good idea since it means that a-it can be destroyed and b-you need to also invest in defenses and probably logistical support for it.

This should only be viable for empires that have basically maxed out the tech tree of aurora, given that many people play with reduced tech research rates most people wouldn't even get to the point where they could begin to use these.

Regardless of the fabrication stuff I have always wanted the various stars to behave more like an actual body as opposed to just an anchor point for the other system bodies, allowing for them to maybe have unique effects on their system.
Posted by: nuclearslurpee
« on: November 25, 2020, 12:17:43 PM »

Quote from: Zincat on November 25, 2020, 11:48:52 AM
I would not mind some very late game TN generation options, but it needs to be done well or it will change how the game plays.
Iirc the technobabble was that TN minerals "condense" within the core of large planets over millions of years.
At least that's what I recall. As for comets, I don't remember why they were TN-rich.

Anyway,given the timescale involved, it seems that comets would not do it. A better solution maybe, if we want to keep in line with the technobabble, would be that very large/dense planets generate very slowly some TN materials inside. That way a system with a lot of large planets could be valuable evven if they are all dirt rocks.

I would be against the possibility of "fabricators", no matter what the investment required. Balancing these kind of "end-game" productions would always be iffy. And expansion has always been one of the driving forces anyway.

Maybe a reasonable solution is to use the concept of gravity wells accumulating TN minerals and apply it to stellar masses, which would be large enough to "condense" an appreciable tonnage of TN minerals per year, but this is usually consumed in stellar fusion or some such gobbledeygook, but with highly-advanced TN technology (say, antimatter engine level?) we can build a device that can interdict the condensing minerals before they get trapped in the star's gravity well and collect them for more interesting purposes, like blowing up aliens.

Mechanically this would be a large, expensive ship module probably limited to being a one-of (with one sufficient to collect all of the tonnage "produced" by a single star per annum - more modules or ships give no extra resources form that star) that provides income equal to one or some smallish number of mines. Possibly different star types have different mineral "accessibilities" as well to add a bit more strategic depth.
Posted by: Zincat
« on: November 25, 2020, 11:48:52 AM »

I would not mind some very late game TN generation options, but it needs to be done well or it will change how the game plays.
Iirc the technobabble was that TN minerals "condense" within the core of large planets over millions of years.
At least that's what I recall. As for comets, I don't remember why they were TN-rich.

Anyway,given the timescale involved, it seems that comets would not do it. A better solution maybe, if we want to keep in line with the technobabble, would be that very large/dense planets generate very slowly some TN materials inside. That way a system with a lot of large planets could be valuable evven if they are all dirt rocks.

I would be against the possibility of "fabricators", no matter what the investment required. Balancing these kind of "end-game" productions would always be iffy. And expansion has always been one of the driving forces anyway.
Posted by: Malorn
« on: November 25, 2020, 09:53:05 AM »

The issue is that I'm not sure more then a tiny number of comets actually do return within a realistic timeframe, so some generation changes might be relevant.
I like this change, it would make those empty comet only systems potentially very valuable
Posted by: Droll
« on: November 24, 2020, 10:10:24 PM »

Quote from: Malorn on November 24, 2020, 09:32:29 PM
I think long term there needs to be some sort of renewable resources as an option, since as game stability and speed increases, games may become longer and longer.

However, there are much better ways to do that, which do not encourage snowballing or turtling. For example, perhaps comets should regenerate their supplies of TN elements when they return, thus systems with fast period comets would become quite valuable for long-term renewable mining.

Regardless of the system, it should reward territory control, not massive population buildup.  Massive populations already have many advantages, and renewable resources should not be one of them.

I like this change, it would make those empty comet only systems potentially very valuable