Every system in the game theoretically speaking has an infinite number of links to new systems (although in reality this is more likely a few links). All you need to do is start stellar cartography within the system. Choosing systems that are off the beaten track is a good start.
On another related note, do players want the immediate seeding of another Periphery consisting of dozens of systems? Would this improve the game giving new players new frontiers to concentrate on or spread the game too thin at this stage? Would big AFFs immediately attempt to put their owner's stamp on the new Periphery thereby making the new frontier immediately disappear? Would there be complaints that many affiliations do not have the resources to expand into the new systems so they will immediately become the property of a couple of AFFs? Do players prefer the slow expansion of the game through stellar cartography into restricted systems?
The current system seems fine to me (but I'm still a semi-newbie).
A whole new periphery would be quite cool, but not if it was just a new playground for the same 4-5 larger affs to fight over.
Might be interesting if the nwe periphery was already claimed by EEM or something similar so large player affs couldn't claim whole systems without annoying the locals... would give large affs, small affs and IND alike the opportunity to explore and exploit.
The universe is ever expanding, and realistically more systems etc should be placed intermittantly within the game structure, this is to expand the possibilites for all affiliations.
your always going to get people attempt to claim these, there is nothing that can really stop this, but im sure you can come up with something to try and stop this. If you keep with the same amount of systems there is a possibility that the game for some players (explorers etc) may stagnate.
you could always put a few system specific Pirates in to stop these beggers claiming the systems, now who would think of something like that.
If this new periphery was controlled by a GM run affiliation it would give much more scope for the increasing number of player independants to have an area of the galaxy to expand into, without dealing with player instigated politics.
Dave
One idea that we came up with was to make the Cluster into a open area. The idea was as follows. The Clan should open up all their space for all races/affs to do with as they pleased as long as they...
... didn't claim any of the systems
... leaved all Clan positions to themselves
Affiliations that broke the above conditions would of course be attacked, but otherwise the Clans wouldn't really care what happened in the Cluster. The intention was of course to save us the trouble of patrolling all that space but also to create a large territory free for all, no laws, no governments and probably lots of action...
At the same time the Clans profile would be heavily reworked to reflect this new attitude. Okey, it probably wouldn't work but I still think the idea is a good one.I do not believe that just throwing in a new periphery is a good idea. Some affs would be able to make much more use of this than others. Where would such a periphery be? Connected to the Capellan periphery? Well, that would restrain access for the Confeds and so on.
Perhaps a better idea is for the Kastorian Military Junta to claim 2-3 new systems directly linked to Yank. Creating a small (4-5 system large) area controlled and protected by the KAS. INDependents AND others could move around there doing their stuff following KAS laws. Action would be possible but who dare make the KAS into enemies...
I also think that instead of just adding a new periphery it's better to add systems here and there to increase the current peripheries.
If a new periphery is to be added it should have some purpose in the game story (up to Mica). Like we find the last bastion of the ARC's or something...
Better stop my rambling now,
Peter
How about a system only being considered 'owned' if the claiming aff has a full functioning starbase (not simply an outpost) within the system. This is probably already the case anyway, but might release a system or two for exploitation. I cant see any incentive to get this adopted by the major affs, apart from a willingness to open up the game a little, perhaps formalized as 'The Balmoral convention' adhered to by all. Of course, system claims would not be recognized by IND starbases - they should join up and get a proper job.
The main developments over the last ten years seem to have been the addition of several new peripheries, each seeded with it's own established races, who are able to keep control by virtue of battlefleets - or loose control to other big battlefleets. Access to systems may be researchable by stellar cartography, but again this is 'big aff' stuff. How about replacing a few of the cometary bodies, reported as being in the outer rings of systems, with 'mini wormholes'? These would be hard to detect, and be so small as to allow passage of ships only up to a certain hull size limit. Perhaps the largest with a fifty hull limit, the smallest as low as ten. These could allow limited access to the nearby linked systems. The small guys could nip through a hole in the fence.
On from this theme - A new periphery, accessable only through a limited-hull (25? 50?) wormhole. To be fair to all, this would have to be from Yank, I'd assume.
Wild dreaming here - a Kastorian-like alien force (powerful, but no territorial ambitions), who know how to properly operate one of the stargates - and charge ($100? $5000?) per hull to allow you through - either to a completely new periphery, or any one of the other known stargates. Again accessable from Yank, I assume.
TonyH
On the other hand if you slowly expand the periphery map the only people going to do this realistically are the affs themselves. The question arises is an aff going to let it's new players into new restricted systems? Personally I'd make the system Aff knowledge and send in the newbies to investigate it.
What this means is that you have to join an aff in order to look at new stuff.
Having said that there are still loads of systems out there available to everyone which have still to be investigated thoroughly. You just might get shot out in the meantime.
andy
| QUOTE |
| The problem with powerful GM controlled factions governing systems is that players will use them as shields or nursemaids (Yank is littered with warships from many factions). |
My idea here was not to have a GM controlled faction controlling a new periphery, but simply controlling access to it. Once your in, you're on your own. It would be more difficult for big affs to build up a power base within a periphery, but they certainly wouldn't be at a disadvantage compared to smaller affs. Just disadvantaged compared to the power they could exert now.
| QUOTE (ABBA @ Sep 24 2003, 10:06 AM) |
| My idea here was not to have a GM controlled faction controlling a new periphery, but simply controlling access to it. Once your in, you're on your own. It would be more difficult for big affs to build up a power base within a periphery, but they certainly wouldn't be at a disadvantage compared to smaller affs. Just disadvantaged compared to the power they could exert now. |
'This largely inaccessible system is claimed by XXX. Anyone building here without permission will have their more easily accessible starbases in another system blown to pieces. Get off my land.'
A new periphery with its own indiginous race already in situ? Can you say Hexamon fiasco?
GM run affs are not the way forward either as the GM runs the game - not plays it.
I like the idea of wormholes to systems that limit the ship size - but then CIA shipping is small anyway
Either way that would be a very nice twist - until such time as production facilities were shipped through that is. Unless its a series of systems linked by those small wormholes thus making building of large ships in those systems a waste of time.
One thing you have to recognise - if a new system is worth having (for resources or location) then the big powers will step on anyone that gets in their way. They may justify their reasons differently but the results will be the same.
The problems of systems being claimed by the big boys will always be there unless the game mechanics are changed (restricting claims to systems with a starbase, special suns that stop combat, etc) but this brings back the controls from the old bse, which i dont think would add to the game.
| QUOTE (Mandible @ Sep 25 2003, 11:41 AM) |
| The problems of systems being claimed by the big boys will always be there unless the game mechanics are changed (restricting claims to systems with a starbase, special suns that stop combat, etc) but this brings back the controls from the old bse, which i dont think would add to the game. |
No it would not add to the game - BSE type restrictions. I do like the idea of unstable wormholes in ring 15 etc that can only be found using old marker bouys etc.
It would be far better if Mica gave new players (on political conversion) a data disk containing a new unexploited unique or such, to stimulate exploration. There are a lot of worlds out there that has not been explored.
Nic
Combat restrictions and powerful GM affs were real bugbears in BSE, and to my mind they should be avoided like the plague.
The idea of size-restricted wormholes is an interesting one. Rolling Thunder did this in US-BSE, there was an entire periphery only accessible via a single such wormhole. The size limit was 33 old-style hulls (e.g. a Survey Cruiser). 25 Phoenix hulls would be comparable.
I don't know how well this worked in the US game, but it raises interesting possibilities. Big affs that wanted to claim the space would need to build a special warfleet of tiny ships, and most would be unwilling to do this because it would use resources needed for their main warfleet.
This new space (with it's single entry point) would soon be full of tiny starbases, in marked contrast with the existing peripheries where everything is massive. As delivering materials through the wormhole would be difficult, most stuff would need to be sourced locally, leading to interesting new conflicts.
As a bonus, we'd see a greater variety of ship designs in the game - tiny capital ships, tiny freighters and the like.
rob
- The level of activity of the claiming affiliation (ships and starbases - not exact numbers)
- The location of the claiming star base
- The last time there was a battle in the system and where it was
This would reflect the fact that a claim is a matter of public record and would prevent stupid claims.
| QUOTE (Rob Alexander @ Sep 28 2003, 11:31 AM) |
| The idea of size-restricted wormholes is an interesting one. Rolling Thunder did this in US-BSE, there was an entire periphery only accessible via a single such wormhole. The size limit was 33 old-style hulls (e.g. a Survey Cruiser). 25 Phoenix hulls would be comparable. I don't know how well this worked in the US game, but it raises interesting possibilities. Big affs that wanted to claim the space would need to build a special warfleet of tiny ships, and most would be unwilling to do this because it would use resources needed for their main warfleet. |
It didn't work very well. Most affs soon built fleets of 33 hulled ships and shipped in large quanities of materials to build colonies (including a few capable of building baseships and the like) and soon the majority of the systems (there were 200 in the Nexus Region) were claimed and the conflicts from the main game area spilled over into the area (just on a smaller scale).
Maybe if the new area was a one way trip, it might be different, but I doubt it.
Then again, the mechanics in Phoenix are a good bit different then BSE and there are in game limits on just how much power an aff or alliance can project, so a new limited access area might be interesting.
Personally I like the current research project method to have a chance of opening up a new system, but I think this method should have a (small) chance to open up a new mini-periphery (i.e. a local star cluster) rather than just a single system.
| QUOTE (David Bethel @ Sep 28 2003, 12:28 PM) |
| There is one thing that might be added with reference to system claims. It may be worth adding it as a mechanic that actually publicly states; - The level of activity of the claiming affiliation (ships and starbases - not exact numbers) - The location of the claiming star base - The last time there was a battle in the system and where it was This would reflect the fact that a claim is a matter of public record and would prevent stupid claims. |
Sounds good to me!
| QUOTE (kerryh @ Sep 28 2003, 04:08 PM) |
| Personally I like the current research project method to have a chance of opening up a new system, but I think this method should have a (small) chance to open up a new mini-periphery (i.e. a local star cluster) rather than just a single system. |
I think that's the plan. If you research a system through stellar cartography and then system scan it you may find links to other systems depending on how difficult it is to "see" them.
Andy
| QUOTE (David Bethel @ Sep 28 2003, 11:28 AM) |
| There is one thing that might be added with reference to system claims. It may be worth adding it as a mechanic that actually publicly states; - The level of activity of the claiming affiliation (ships and starbases - not exact numbers) - The location of the claiming star base - The last time there was a battle in the system and where it was This would reflect the fact that a claim is a matter of public record and would prevent stupid claims. |
As long as this information is only given out on the system scan or when you jump in to the system then fine with me.
It would clear up any bogus claims as the claiming outpost can be easily destroyed.
The level of activity should be set between 1 and 10 with a %age chance of being inaccurate. I'm assuming here that this would be subspace communications or "noise" to determine the activity. Perhaps it can be a function of the MU in the system at any one time.
Andy
| QUOTE (kerryh @ Sep 28 2003, 04:08 PM) |
| Personally I like the current research project method to have a chance of opening up a new system, but I think this method should have a (small) chance to open up a new mini-periphery (i.e. a local star cluster) rather than just a single system. |
Consider it done. This is simply a part of the stellar cartography. Instead of revealing one, there may be a case for revealing the presence of multiple stars.
Example -
Special Action
Having just finished research in Stellar Cartography - Seahorse, use it to search for new systems.
Results
The stellar cartography reveals a small cluster of stars. These are Denux, Callob, Lichtenstein and Crassus. The data archive has been updated with all system links. Note that all these system still remain restricted although a special action in any one system will reveal the presence of the rest without the need to resort to stellar cartography.
New game area with a size-limit on ships entering:
Not a good idea. This will only produce a mirror image of the situation on a smaller scale. Especially since in Phoenix, there is almost no difference between building and running one huge or ten small ships.
Stellar Cartography:
Fine as it is, especially considering the latest clarifications on how it works. There may still be other ways to find new systems via special actions. This is certainly technically possible already now and I presume it happens if and when the GM deems it to be appropriate.
Hard-wiring System Claims (David's proposal):
Big No-No! Technically, what *is* a system claim? Nobody knows. To me it's just a system message. The game would certainly not suffer if they were scrapped altogether. A claim is just that, and it can be ignored, contested or overthrown. Including rules here raises the question of who would enforce those rules, and why. System claims did not help the FCN in Storm and Acropolis, they did not help the HXM or DEN in Acrux, they did not prevent hostilities in Skord, Solo and many other places. A claim is just as good as the power of the claimant. If the DTR claim a system most affs tend to accept the claim, knowing that the DTR can and will enforce it. If an IND chose to claim, say, a hitherto unclaimed Cluster system then some affs out there might invade just to prove they can - and get away with it.
Enough ranting, I'm sure you got my point.