Post reply

Warning - while you were reading 78 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.

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

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Verification:
Are you human?:

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

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: Whitecold
« on: Today at 12:18:51 PM »

Can own naming themes be deleted/overwritten? Spelling mistakes do happen
Posted by: SpikeTheHobbitMage
« on: Today at 11:54:44 AM »

The new Survey Site List looks good.  Ground surveys have always been a pain to deal with and this looks just like what the doctor ordered.  Thank you, Steve.

One thing that might be helpful for larger empires would be to include a count of survey sites per system as an option in the overview or galaxy maps.
Posted by: alex_brunius
« on: Today at 03:16:38 AM »

You do know the Korean war never ended? it's still just under a cease fire...

The situation in the Korean border is probably the closest we have that is comparable to two Aurora races that meet for the first time without diplomacy. A very uneasy ceasefire.
Posted by: boggo2300
« on: July 15, 2019, 05:11:20 PM »

I mean imagine if tomorrow Russia starts closing embassies in the US, how long before that start to be seen as an actual act of war?

Where did you get the idea that not having an embassy would be seen as an act of war by anyone after some unspecified time?

Imagine if North Korea did not allow an US embassy nor has an embassy of their own in USA. How long before that start to be seen as an actual act of war?


You do know the Korean war never ended? it's still just under a cease fire...
Posted by: Garfunkel
« on: July 15, 2019, 01:16:26 PM »

Agreed with Scandinavian. And we have to remember that intricate human-to-human diplomacy has almost never been successfully modelled in a strategy game and it would be very challenging for Steve to write a system that covers all possible permutations. Withdrawing embassies could be seen as a threatening move in one situation yet a perfectly logical move in another situation. Same with pretty much any action relevant to diplomacy or trading.

It's probably better to have a simple, robust system without too many surprises in it. Obfuscated diplomacy systems have, in the past, generally annoyed human-players more than they have turned AI-players into even semi-believable facsimiles.
Posted by: Scandinavian
« on: July 15, 2019, 03:31:22 AM »

But on Earth we have both intercontinental communications and a well developed system for conveying diplomatic messages and personnel unmolested through third countries, even if they are unfriendly to either or both of the parties to the diplomatic exchange.

In Aurora, a system in between your embassy and your homeworld can very suddenly develop a really bad case of unfriendly naval forces that interdict your shipping, diplomatic or otherwise. I don't think it's reasonable for your friends on the other side of the blockade to take it as a deliberately unfriendly act that you don't run a jump point blockade to maintain your consular services.

(Also, simply pulling consular services and embassy personnel would be considered rude but probably not a sign of unfriendly intent, unless you simultaneously started repatriating your other nationals in the country. Obviously if you start repatriating every one of your nationals you can get your hands on, the other guy is going to wonder what it is you want to protect them from. But that distinction requires a level of granularity in the simulation of the civilian economy that Aurora does not currently support.)
Posted by: froggiest1982
« on: July 14, 2019, 09:58:02 PM »

I mean imagine if tomorrow Russia starts closing embassies in the US, how long before that start to be seen as an actual act of war?

Where did you get the idea that not having an embassy would be seen as an act of war by anyone after some unspecified time?

Imagine if North Korea did not allow an US embassy nor has an embassy of their own in USA. How long before that start to be seen as an actual act of war?

What I meant is that would be quite waring if you have embassies and consulates around and you start closing them down. The other nation might think something going on. May not be a formal act of war but definitely going to impact relationships between the 2 countries.

Regarding your example, I believe that the fact the war between the 2 Koreas has never ended then also diplomatic channels are a bit challenging due to the fact that the US is formally allied with South Korea.
Posted by: alex_brunius
« on: July 14, 2019, 06:27:50 PM »

I mean imagine if tomorrow Russia starts closing embassies in the US, how long before that start to be seen as an actual act of war?

Where did you get the idea that not having an embassy would be seen as an act of war by anyone after some unspecified time?

Imagine if North Korea did not allow an US embassy nor has an embassy of their own in USA. How long before that start to be seen as an actual act of war?



Posted by: froggiest1982
« on: July 14, 2019, 05:12:12 PM »

Also on diplomacy:

1)  Will the player be able to tell which aliens are trying to talk to him?  This seems like something that is more likely than not to be obvious.

2)  So my understanding is that, for every race you've met, relations will always drift towards the negative unless you have an embassy ship talking to them (in one of their systems?) due to their xenophobia (even if it's only "1").  So if I chance upon an alien scout in a system and we both go our separate ways and don't see each other for 10 years, when I encounter them again they'll want to go to war with me even if they've got a very low xenophobia?

3)  Are there going to be any actions that the player can take that will generate positive diplomacy points?  For example "upheld treaty commitments" by not entering alien systems for e.g. non-interaction treaty.  If not, then it appears that the only way the player can influence things in a positive direction is to have an embassy ship, and the effect of that is capped at one ship.  I was originally going to go down the road of making diplomacy modules VERY expensive and allowing more than one, but there's a lot to be said for "actions speak louder than words".  Perhaps the diplomacy modifier could put a bias (e.g. +10 points towards the good) on all the other events that happen, e.g. a -50 "ship parked above homeworld" might only have a -40 impact if there's a diplomat. 

The challenge I see here is setting things up so the player can positively influence things without having a system that can be gamed by throwing huge resources at the problem - perhaps a law of diminishing returns where the 2nd diplomacy ship is only 80% as effective, the 3rd 64% etc, which would sum up to a max 10x multiplier with an infinite number of ships.

John

All the above is a good point. I hadn't considered the initial contact followed by a long period of separation. Maybe a better option would be to have the Xenophobia function as a modifier against negative actions. So when separated, nothing changes. When in contact, actions perceived as negative become far worse when dealing with a highly Xenophobic race.

Existing treaties already generate positive points, but I will add other ways to generate positive points.

However, let's say you have established contact and have a so-called embassy ship in a system but then you withdraw it, wouldn't that be seen as at least an odd act? I mean imagine if tomorrow Russia starts closing embassies in the US, how long before that start to be seen as an actual act of war?

Maybe there could be a penalty for lost communications after X years with x be 10 as a minimum before the penalty kicks in? Would mitigate the issue? The formula could take into account the xenophoby ratio as well and could be also progressive, therefore if you don't meet the race for 10 years then the penalty would be only very low compared to bad actions and also could keep you motivated to stay in touch with most races. At the end of the day Israel doesn't stand Palestine (and the other way round) but they still talk. I bet if one of the 2 suddenly disappears it will become shortly a big issue.

I also do like the idea of the Ambassador role and could be a good use of some otherwise useless civilian administrators.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: July 14, 2019, 02:09:43 PM »

Steve, that's not an OOB, that's a Table of Ordnance & Equipment.

The TO&E tells you what you have, the OOB tells you how it's organized. In the Naval Organization tab the OOB is on the left hand side of the screen.

That is not to say that a TO&E separated by system isn't useful, it certainly is, but it'd be nice if we could click on a system or something and get a TO&E calculated, or an OOB specific for that system, linking up and down where appropriate.

You have a System OOB on both the Tactical and Galactic map sidebars.
Posted by: Hazard
« on: July 14, 2019, 11:35:29 AM »

Steve, that's not an OOB, that's a Table of Ordnance & Equipment.

The TO&E tells you what you have, the OOB tells you how it's organized. In the Naval Organization tab the OOB is on the left hand side of the screen.

That is not to say that a TO&E separated by system isn't useful, it certainly is, but it'd be nice if we could click on a system or something and get a TO&E calculated, or an OOB specific for that system, linking up and down where appropriate.
Posted by: sloanjh
« on: June 27, 2019, 08:14:12 AM »

I'm a tiny bit wary about being able to benefit from multiple Diplomacy Modules, if only for the silly potential edge case of building a fleet of embassy ships that would outweigh an alien race's xenophobia by a factor of ten or more. So long as there's some sort of limiting factor to it.

This is exactly what I meant by "a system that can be gamed by throwing huge resources at the problem".  I think Garfunkel's proposal is a reasonable example of how to allow multiple diplomacy modules without falling prey to this problem.

John
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: June 27, 2019, 03:54:16 AM »

Multiple owned populations on the same body are currently rather difficult and awkward to handle in Aurora. Will this be easier in C# version?

Depends what you mean by awkward. They are still separate populations but they are easy to distinguish because they can all have different names.
Posted by: Conscript Gary
« on: June 26, 2019, 10:46:44 PM »

I'm a tiny bit wary about being able to benefit from multiple Diplomacy Modules, if only for the silly potential edge case of building a fleet of embassy ships that would outweigh an alien race's xenophobia by a factor of ten or more. So long as there's some sort of limiting factor to it.
Posted by: Ranged66
« on: June 26, 2019, 04:59:34 PM »

Multiple owned populations on the same body are currently rather difficult and awkward to handle in Aurora. Will this be easier in C# version?
Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55