Home World Forum
Stars! AutoHost web forums

 Jump to Stars! AutoHost

 
 
Home » Stars! Clones, Extensions, Modding » FreeStars » Idea: Diplomacy Pane
Idea: Diplomacy Pane Mon, 28 August 2006 13:23 Go to next message
Coyote is currently offline Coyote

 
Lt. Commander

Messages: 906
Registered: November 2002
Location: Pacific NW

 Instead of having a simple friend/neutral/enemy toggle for each race...


Set up a Diplomacy pane that allows toggling of specific interactions with each other player, eg:

[] Neutral in combat
[] Ally in combat
[] Minefield passage
[] Allow refueling
[] Allow stargate access
[] Reveal cloaked ships
[] Share scanner data
[] Pool Energy research
[] Pool Weapons research
[] Pool Propulsion research
[] Pool Construction Research
[] Pool Electronics Research
[] Pool Biotechnology Research
[] Pool Special Devices
[] Refuse ship gifts
[] Refuse ingame messages

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Mon, 28 August 2006 14:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kotk

 
Commander

Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003
Coyote wrote on Mon, 28 August 2006 20:23

[] Neutral in combat
[] Ally in combat
[] Minefield passage
[] Allow refueling
[] Allow stargate access
[] Reveal cloaked ships
[] Share scanner data
[] Pool Energy research
[] Pool Weapons research
[] Pool Propulsion research
[] Pool Construction Research
[] Pool Electronics Research
[] Pool Biotechnology Research
[] Pool Special Devices
[] Refuse ship gifts
[] Refuse ingame messages


Good idea in general ...
I would add also
[] Enemy in combat
[] Share design data
[] Share historic data
Wink

I would replace "reveal cloaked ships" with
[] Reveal bases
[] Reveal fleets
[] Reveal minefields
[] Reveal minerals
[] Reveal installations
But i think these should be forbiddable by game rules.

What i dont like at all are these:
[] Pool Energy research
[] Pool Weapons research
[] Pool Propulsion research
[] Pool Construction Research
[] Pool Electronics Research
[] Pool Biotechnology Research
[] Pool Special Devices
If i understand correctly that this does mean you get immediate and costless tech trade? Also turns off the possibility for others to interfere with your tech trade?
Special devices pool means that you may build alien PRT/LRT devices? I would hate it. Confused

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Mon, 28 August 2006 21:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
LEit is currently offline LEit

 
Lt. Commander

Messages: 879
Registered: April 2003
Location: CT
 One of the things I think is good about Stars! is that tech trading is neither certain or easy.

The ease of backstabbing adds to the excitement too... Although some may disagree. I don't want to get into a discussion about it here however.

Kotk wrote on Mon, 28 August 2006 14:48

Coyote wrote on Mon, 28 August 2006 20:23


[] Reveal cloaked ships
[] Share scanner data
[] Refuse ingame messages


Good idea in general ...
I would add also
[] Share design data
[] Share historic data
Wink

I would replace "reveal cloaked ships" with
[] Reveal bases
[] Reveal fleets
[] Reveal minefields
[] Reveal minerals
[] Reveal installations
But i think these should be forbiddable by game rules.



Refusing ingame messages should be very easy.

The rest should be possible by sharing data from one client to another. Although I doubt it'll make it into version 1, it should be possible that a later version will allow some data sharing. However, you still wouldn't be able to target a ship (or minefield) you cannot see with your own scanners.

[Updated on: Mon, 28 August 2006 21:19]



- LEit

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Tue, 29 August 2006 04:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
gible

 
Commander

Messages: 1343
Registered: November 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

 I'd like to add to that the option to reveal or hide things individually, or as tagged sets (enabling custom tagging is a good idea generally)

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Tue, 29 August 2006 06:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
m.a@stars is currently offline m.a@stars

 
Commander

Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left
Kotk wrote on Mon, 28 August 2006 20:48

[] Share design data



Perhaps a separate check for "own" and "others" data... Wink


Quote:

[] Reveal bases


Perhaps revealing gates (class, location) could be an independent check.


Quote:

If i understand correctly that this does mean you get immediate and costless tech trade? Also turns off the possibility for others to interfere with your tech trade?


I don't like it, either. Would make for a quite different game, even if they were teammates.

Speaking of which:
[]Teammate in combat (he attacks or is attacked, you help him despite secondary settings)
[]Share planetary routes!
[]Shared command (in case incumbent x-file fails to show up, take commands from teammate(s) x-files Cool Whip

[Updated on: Tue, 29 August 2006 06:53]



So many Stars, so few Missiles!

In space no one can hear you scheme! Deal

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Tue, 29 August 2006 06:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
m.a@stars is currently offline m.a@stars

 
Commander

Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left
LEit wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 03:19

The ease of backstabbing adds to the excitement too...


Well, con artists would need to exert themselves just a little bit more in cased they wanted gate access or minefield access. Twisted Evil


Quote:

The rest should be possible by sharing data from one client to another. Although I doubt it'll make it into version 1, it should be possible that a later version will allow some data sharing.


That shouldn't be too hard to code. Clients should be able to export fleet and planet dumps, anyway, so it would be just a matter of adding the "import" side of things. Rolling Eyes

Quote:

However, you still wouldn't be able to target a ship (or minefield) you cannot see with your own scanners.


Yep. That should be managed by the server, in the movement phase. Would be cool, tho. Very Happy AND it would add yet another opportunity for backstabbers! Twisted Evil Whip

So many Stars, so few Missiles!

In space no one can hear you scheme! Deal

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Tue, 29 August 2006 23:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
LEit is currently offline LEit

 
Lt. Commander

Messages: 879
Registered: April 2003
Location: CT
m.a@stars wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 06:52


[]Share planetary routes!



Actually, there is no reason why each player can't assign a route to every world. It currently isn't in the server side, but wouldn't be that hard to add. That way you could set up a route that included rerouting at unoccupied/allied or even enemy worlds.

Although, one problem I can see with this is that it may be possible to abuse it for jump games.

- LEit

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Wed, 30 August 2006 04:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kotk

 
Commander

Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003
Pooling "route" orders between races seems not too bright. The whole route thing is too primitive anyway. Wink

Ships cannot be built and moved during one single turn. Automating future activities by server is nice if there is reason to expect that some turns will be missed by client. Otherwise most of it (future plans generally) can be left up to client program to keep track of them. Nod

Current "route" feature is elegant in sense its simple to implement. 
a) TAKE EVERY built *fleet*
    IF *route* *destination* of planet is set then  
        set fleets WP0 order to *route*
b) TAKE EVERY *fleet* with *route* WP0 order 
    IF *route* *destination* of planet is set then  
        add new WP1 to it: 
            optimal speed/gate to route *destination*
            order is *route*

I think that this idea can be extended without making it lot harder to implement.

1) there a) means simply that you can set default orders for built fleets, no reason why it must be *route*.
2) ability to filter the types of fleets routed. Using "EVERY built cruiser" instead of "EVERY built *fleet*" gives way to route only cruisers.
3) having set of default orders for various types (you can build only 16 types of ships so not too heavy burden) would cause cruisers say to be sent to a, freighters sent to b and minelayers just lay fields.
4) *route* wp order itself like we see in b) means that planets can command with fleets. So lets view it as "accepting commands" wp order. Why only planets can command? Was fun if you can put a flag onto map say deep space spot and set the default commands there for all sorts of fleets that come and accept them.
5) Since fleets can be any set of 16 designs the idea needs further thinking... maybe by making it possible to add some custom "fleet type" property to fleets (and to designs)?

Now if to extend *route* wp command like that then sharing that info (or even worse "pooling" it) between allies would make it a real mess. Laughing

Other wp command that i think needs extending (or removing) is *patrol*.
Cool




[Updated on: Wed, 30 August 2006 04:40]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Wed, 30 August 2006 09:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
m.a@stars is currently offline m.a@stars

 
Commander

Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left
Kotk wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 10:37

Pooling "route" orders between races seems not too bright. The whole route thing is too primitive anyway. Wink


Actually, I like your concept better. Very Happy

Also, no reason why a Client cannot use a deepspace dot as destination for route orders, and even assign "route" orders to it for routed arrivals to follow. Very Happy

Last but not least, when you write "16", you actually mean "n, with n spanning from 16 to possibly 256", right? Helps keep certain assumptions in perspective. Wink

So many Stars, so few Missiles!

In space no one can hear you scheme! Deal

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Wed, 30 August 2006 10:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
LEit is currently offline LEit

 
Lt. Commander

Messages: 879
Registered: April 2003
Location: CT
m.a@stars wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 09:22

you actually mean "n, with n spanning from 16 to possibly 256", right?

Actually, there is a limit in the rules file, but there is no limit on that limit other then it has to fit in a long int (so about 2 billion). I would argue that you shouldn't set the limit too high however.

- LEit

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Wed, 30 August 2006 12:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kotk

 
Commander

Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003
Yes that (very artifical as idea) design limit makes game more fun. Especially to think that even now there are 32 different ship hulls ... however player may have only 16 ship designs with these hulls at any one time ... so free design slot is sometimes very expensive thing. Wink

Why i brought that 16 up ... just to display that using a more sophisticated routing possibilities can be done with more or less intuitive user interface that adds possibilities but not MM. There may be single routing that routes everything. If user wants there can be up to 16 route orders to have different routing for every design. Improved freedom. Cool

[Updated on: Wed, 30 August 2006 13:19]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Fri, 01 September 2006 11:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
StarsBob is currently offline StarsBob

 
Crewman 2nd Class

Messages: 14
Registered: June 2004
This is one of our group's major complaints about stars (lack of variation in diplomacy settings).

One thing we would love would be the option to turn off the ability for friendly ships to jump to a particular gate. That gate would be set to "accept own ships only." It would be nice to be able to turn on only one gate too (for tech trading).

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Fri, 01 September 2006 12:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kotk

 
Commander

Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003
Yes. Adding complexity calls for adding some clearness as well. Rolling Eyes

What i mean ... For example ... when opponent has changed something in diplomatic relations with you then automatic message should come. Something like:
"The Predators have allowed you to use their gates."
Then it is probably more clear. Nod Also it probably adds some feeling if someone sets you to default as their enemy in combat. Wink

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Thu, 14 September 2006 07:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
gible

 
Commander

Messages: 1343
Registered: November 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

 oh yeah....as long as we're sharing information...the ability to share FALSE information...and the ability to tell the source(and age) of information.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Thu, 14 September 2006 08:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
m.a@stars is currently offline m.a@stars

 
Commander

Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left
gible wrote on Thu, 14 September 2006 13:44

oh yeah....as long as we're sharing information...the ability to share FALSE information...and the ability to tell the source(and age) of information.


Awww, yeah! Cool How could I have forgot about that one! Wink Whip

So, the idea of "tagging" should be handy for:

Deal Selecting which info will be shared with a certain degree of falsehood... Perhaps even having several different sets for several different "friends" with several different parameters...
Deal Selecting which ships (not only which designs) get which route orders or combat plans... Say, your mineral-balancing fleets, your pop-balancing fleets, and your packet-stealing fleets...
Deal Selecting which gates will be allowed for which users...
Deal Selecting which cloaked ships, minefields, and the like are you revealing to your friends...
Deal lots and lots more, just untying a lot of cool options from fixed design slots, predefined categories and such...

Of course, the server needs to know about those tags, and the rules for acting on them. Rolling Eyes But then, that could actually mean overall LESS coding! Sherlock Whip

So many Stars, so few Missiles!

In space no one can hear you scheme! Deal

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Mon, 18 September 2006 03:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
gible

 
Commander

Messages: 1343
Registered: November 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

 The server wouldn't necessarily need to know about the tags, but it would certainly cut down the .x file sizes if it did.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Mon, 18 September 2006 07:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
m.a@stars is currently offline m.a@stars

 
Commander

Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left
gible wrote on Mon, 18 September 2006 09:31

The server wouldn't necessarily need to know about the tags, but it would certainly cut down the .x file sizes if it did.


Confused Of course the server needs to know/interpret/validate anything that affects fleet movement (gate ability) or scanning reports (fleets revealed). Sherlock Whip

Many other tags would be a "client-thing" of course. Just transparent to the server side of things. Cool

So many Stars, so few Missiles!

In space no one can hear you scheme! Deal

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Tue, 19 September 2006 05:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
gible

 
Commander

Messages: 1343
Registered: November 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
m.a@stars wrote on Mon, 18 September 2006 23:00

gible wrote on Mon, 18 September 2006 09:31

The server wouldn't necessarily need to know about the tags, but it would certainly cut down the .x file sizes if it did.


Confused Of course the server needs to know/interpret/validate anything that affects fleet movement (gate ability) or scanning reports (fleets revealed). Sherlock Whip

Many other tags would be a "client-thing" of course. Just transparent to the server side of things. Cool


The lack of serverside tags would just mean that the diplomacy conditions would have to be specified to every object rather than a tagged groups. = larger .x files

It shouldn't affect .m files IMO since the server shouldn't reveal the tags used by other players. unless we include those in the diplomatic choices lol

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Tue, 19 September 2006 07:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
m.a@stars is currently offline m.a@stars

 
Commander

Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left
gible wrote on Tue, 19 September 2006 11:44

the server shouldn't reveal the tags used by other players. unless we include those in the diplomatic choices lol


That could be nice. Keeping your partners updated on your diplo settings would give them more assurances. Very Happy As an optional thing, of course! Twisted Evil

But they would still notice if one of their fleets failed to gate to one of your planets because you set that planet "off-limits" via special tags. Rolling Eyes Whip

So many Stars, so few Missiles!

In space no one can hear you scheme! Deal

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Tue, 19 September 2006 09:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
gible

 
Commander

Messages: 1343
Registered: November 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
m.a@stars wrote on Tue, 19 September 2006 23:44

But they would still notice if one of their fleets failed to gate to one of your planets because you set that planet "off-limits" via special tags. Rolling Eyes Whip


naturally...hence the need to know the source of information as well as the age of it. an alt text popup like thing would be good for that imo

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Thu, 14 December 2006 15:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sirgwain is currently offline sirgwain

 
Senior Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 86
Registered: March 2004
Location: Tucson
 Should player relations be public to all players? For example should Ted be able to tell that Bob has set him to enemy status? Like a declaration of war?

Obviously in battle your ships won't stand defenseless if attacked, but should the players receive a message with their new enemy's intent?

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Thu, 14 December 2006 18:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
sirgwain is currently offline sirgwain

 
Senior Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 86
Registered: March 2004
Location: Tucson
 The reason this is coming up for me is I am trying to implement battles in my Stars! clone. Each ship stack needs to know if it should attack the other stacks and which stack to attack. Simulating battle on the server is no problem because the server is aware of all player relations for every fleet. The client side is another issue altogether. The player's only know about their own relations and therefore they don't know if an enemy ship stack should attack or not.

I'm trying to avoid sending battles over the wire as a series of stack movements and firings, but it looks like I'm going to have to to preserve player relations. I suppose upon battle I could make their feelings known to each player, because by the time a battle starts the gloves have been thrown down, so to speak.

Battles are pretty complicated!

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Thu, 14 December 2006 19:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
gible

 
Commander

Messages: 1343
Registered: November 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

 I'd suggest the ugly method of stack movements etc and resolving the combat on the server. Revealing diplomatic settings is a bad idea IMO. eg, if my ships(player A) are set to attack enemies only and a 3-way combat ensues with my ally, who I've set to friend, and a third player who I have set to neutral but my friend has set to enemy, then my ships should fire on the third party to support my friend even tho they'd normally not fire on them.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Thu, 14 December 2006 20:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Coyote is currently offline Coyote

 
Lt. Commander

Messages: 906
Registered: November 2002
Location: Pacific NW

 Yep. making the diplomacy settings public would ruin the shadowed machinations that help make Stars! so fun. It's debateable whether the race to which your settings apply should get to know about them, third parties should absolutely not. Some settings, like share scanner data, would be obvious; others, like whether to reveal cloaked fleets, would not. It could be interesting to keep "reveal cloaked fleets" on while you build a warfleet, send it into enemy territory, and then uncheck the box and make your fleets suddenly vanish.

On second thought, if cloaks could be turned on/off on a fleet by fleet basis (perhaps SS only?), it could open up FUN possibilities as far as baiting interceptors into ambush or luring them away from your main force. Lurking Be paranoid.

Also, SS minefields should be 75% cloaked. Twisted Evil

[Updated on: Thu, 14 December 2006 20:18]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane Thu, 14 December 2006 22:47 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
sirgwain is currently offline sirgwain

 
Senior Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 86
Registered: March 2004
Location: Tucson
 That's the way I was starting to lean after implementing it on the back end.

There are certainly advantages to the legacy Stars! approach of encrypting data files and having everything be run by a client.
With this client/server approach I have to be really tight about what data gets transferred back to the client in the form of universe knowledge. My client is trustworthy, but any VB programmer could use my API to query the server, which opens up a whole new realm of hacks.

The battle sequences will be built and returned by the server, then viewed by the client. That actually makes the server code simpler, which is good in this case.

Thanks!

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic: Polar Coordinates in a Stars! Universe
Next Topic: Production Queue time estimates
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat May 11 06:42:35 EDT 2024
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.3.
Copyright ©2001-2011 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software