Seemingly obviously, there is a huge negative impact as well, but how much of this is really felt in Phoenix?
Some tangible examples:
Minerals and materials used (military and civil)
People and animals killed (KIA, disease, starvation)
Environmental damage
Infrastructure damage (housing, transport)
Most of these are addressed in Phoenix
Some less tangible examples:
Morale (psychological, social damage)
Politics
Education
Non-military sciences
I was really wondering if the players are absolute dictators or if the game itself/GM ever throws up any curve-balls to stop their universal domination plans!
| QUOTE (Wraith @ Apr 27 2006, 09:59 PM) |
| IRL, wars produce a high rate of technological expansion and mass production. Seemingly obviously, there is a huge negative impact as well, but how much of this is really felt in Phoenix? Some tangible examples: Minerals and materials used (military and civil) People and animals killed (KIA, disease, starvation) Environmental damage Infrastructure damage (housing, transport) Most of these are addressed in Phoenix Some less tangible examples: Morale (psychological, social damage) Politics Education Non-military sciences I was really wondering if the players are absolute dictators or if the game itself/GM ever throws up any curve-balls to stop their universal domination plans! |
The game does address all of these items except tech increases (maybe gaining tech through combat is too easy to manipulate).
As far as the GM needing to intervene vs big aggressive players... other players banding together is usually the answer and requires no artifical intervention.
Goth
The changed priorities of a society, and the different attitude to risk can promote technological advancement. The destruction of resources, information, infrastructure and people can degrade it.
| QUOTE (Goth @ Apr 28 2006, 01:10 PM) |
| The game does address all of these items except tech increases |
The game does this as well.
Mica has said before that 9 out of 10 special actions are to do with combat and you can bet the affiliations in war are doing most of them.
| QUOTE (Rich Farry @ Apr 28 2006, 12:24 PM) |
| War in itself does not create technological progress. The changed priorities of a society, and the different attitude to risk can promote technological advancement. The destruction of resources, information, infrastructure and people can degrade it. |
What about captured technology? Where would our rocket and jet industry be today without the tech captured from the Germans in WWII?
Many advances come from stolen tech during war...even via spies during "cold wars"
| QUOTE (Goth @ Apr 28 2006, 02:31 PM) |
| What about captured technology? Where would our rocket and jet industry be today without the tech captured from the Germans in WWII? Many advances come from stolen tech during war...even via spies during "cold wars" |
If you manage to steal a starbase with tech on it then you would have that too
Of course phoenix tech is a little easy to move, and having an item doesn't give you any benifit into researching it (unlike having a sample in real life)
Of course technology can change in different ways, but primarily I was saying that in war, R&D on military technology is a major focus.
So you are saying that all of my examples are addressed...
Does that mean that a world changes the (amounts of) resources it produces afdter long periods of war (environmental damage)?
Does it also mean that the populace can in some way put pressure on the leadership to pursue peace rather than war?
| QUOTE (Wraith @ May 2 2006, 11:08 AM) |
| Does that mean that a world changes the (amounts of) resources it produces afdter long periods of war (environmental damage)? |
Try nuking a planet heavily and see what that does to the biosphere
(or just look at the fun things happening in cnf space atm).| QUOTE |
| Does it also mean that the populace can in some way put pressure on the leadership to pursue peace rather than war? |
Via special actions I'm sure they would, civilian uprisings and stopping merchandising at a starbase etc. With the new infrastructure options I'm sure war will have a larger effect as well.
It just seems to me that the way some populations have been treated they would not be likely to continue supporting some leaders, or in some cases be down right revolutionary.
| QUOTE (Wraith @ May 2 2006, 01:55 PM) |
| SO, the populace have no say in how a player runs his positions, regardless of how prosperous or successful he is? (unless another player interferes with SAs) It just seems to me that the way some populations have been treated they would not be likely to continue supporting some leaders, or in some cases be down right revolutionary. |
Currently Mica does this manually - Ive had changes to the locals occur regardless of SAs being done, so I assume Mica is watching (at least at certain 'hot' locations anyway!).
When the infrastructure changes come in, Id hope for this being part of the system - the last lot of ideas put forward (including race hate, etc) seem to suggest there will be impacts. Im hoping the update is taking so long because it is being designed to act very dynamically to both local and interstellar activities....nukes being used by anyone, anywhere could affect income on all planets as everyone ducks under the table in case they are next, etc.
Mark
I like that some of it is being automated, though I assume Mica's personal touch will still be required in some places.
I need to read more about the infrastructure updates!