Idea: Diplomacy Pane |
Mon, 28 August 2006 13:23 |
|
|
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 |
Tue, 29 August 2006 04:05 |
|
|
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 06:59 |
|
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.
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.
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. AND it would add yet another opportunity for backstabbers!
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane |
Wed, 30 August 2006 09:22 |
|
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.
|
Actually, I like your concept better.
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.
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.
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane |
Thu, 14 September 2006 07:44 |
|
|
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.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane |
Thu, 14 September 2006 08:30 |
|
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! How could I have forgot about that one!
So, the idea of "tagging" should be handy for:
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...
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...
Selecting which gates will be allowed for which users...
Selecting which cloaked ships, minefields, and the like are you revealing to your friends...
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. But then, that could actually mean overall LESS coding!
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane |
Mon, 18 September 2006 03:31 |
|
|
The server wouldn't necessarily need to know about the tags, but it would certainly cut down the .x file sizes if it did.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Idea: Diplomacy Pane |
Thu, 14 December 2006 19:43 |
|
|
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 |
|
|
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. Be paranoid.
Also, SS minefields should be 75% cloaked.
[Updated on: Thu, 14 December 2006 20:18] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|