New Proposal: The Planet limit!

General discussion for the game Anacreon
Post Reply
User avatar
Finnian
Militia Lieutenant
Militia Lieutenant
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 12:09 pm

Sun Aug 02, 2015 1:58 pm

An empire can have a limited number of planet: after that number popular revolution are unstoppable.

The aim of my proposal is avoid the risk of sleeping galaxy (as now), where few empire are giants and the others are condamned to remain little and insignificant forever,

i wasn't conscious about the risk of killing the game when I've planned the mastership of the galaxy
IN GEORGE WE TRUST

User avatar
Xephyr
Militia Captain
Militia Captain
Posts: 828
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 1:52 am
Location: Orion Arm, Milky Way
Contact:

Sun Aug 02, 2015 6:50 pm

A better mechanic to introduce would be a way for small empires to inspire revolution on larger empire's worlds, and then take control of the planet through diplomacy rather than battle. Groups of planets can already secede because of rebellion, so this might be easy to implement.

This way, small empires can gather resources, ships, and planets. by leeching directly off of larger ones, who may not be able to coordinate defenses against this on a galactic scale.
Project Renegade (Beta) : "The Poor Man's Corporate Command!"
"Cowards die many times before their deaths; The valiant never taste of death but once. " -Julius Caesar as written by William Shakespeare, a notorious permadeath player.

User avatar
rigelxvi
Anarchist
Anarchist
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 6:56 pm

Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:53 am

Xephyr it's a briliant idea! Hober Mallow would appreciate this change.
Just ask Leonardo DiCaprio: even the big ones go down.

User avatar
Atarlost
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 2391
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:02 am

Fri Aug 07, 2015 1:35 am

Another option might be able to implement an empire life cycle.

Any empire above a certain size that isn't gaining stars some rate proportional to its current size falls into a declining state and will steadily increasing military production and stability penalties (decadence) until it is completely destroyed.

It might still be possible to conquer the galaxy, but holding it for long would be impossible and holding anything together for long after decadence set in would be another major achievement.
Literally is the new Figuratively

Watch TV, Do Nothing
Militia Captain
Militia Captain
Posts: 755
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 12:22 am

Fri Aug 07, 2015 3:44 pm

Maybe different doctrines should impose different stability maintenance requirements. Something like Fire and Movement could require continuous expansion, Strength and Honor could require regular warfare (either offensive or defensive), Law and Order could require prompt resolution of planetary revolts, etc.

When playing aggressively you would benefit from switching to an offensive doctrine, but if you're going on vacation you could pick a highly stable doctrine.

Still think it would be better to bin all the current doctrines and implement something based on the Transcendence sovereign taxonomy.

User avatar
Atarlost
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 2391
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:02 am

Fri Aug 07, 2015 4:37 pm

Being able to switch doctrines defeats the point of an empire life cycle. The whole point is to destroy large empires so the game doesn't stagnate.

If you go on vacation from a game like the current incarnation of Anacreon someone will conquer your unreactive empire. That's an unavoidable flaw in the extended real time multiplayer paradigm.
Literally is the new Figuratively

User avatar
catfighter
Militia Commander
Militia Commander
Posts: 466
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 5:17 am
Location: Laughing manically amidst the wreckage of the Iocrym fleet.

Sat Aug 08, 2015 7:22 am

Xephyr wrote:A better mechanic to introduce would be a way for small empires to inspire revolution on larger empire's worlds, and then take control of the planet through diplomacy rather than battle. Groups of planets can already secede because of rebellion, so this might be easy to implement.

This way, small empires can gather resources, ships, and planets. by leeching directly off of larger ones, who may not be able to coordinate defenses against this on a galactic scale.
It is already an arguably viable strategy to kill half of someone's empire merely by capturing and/or utterly trashing their trillum worlds, then mopping up the more weakly defended among the newly independent planets.
Atarlost wrote:Another option might be able to implement an empire life cycle.

Any empire above a certain size that isn't gaining stars some rate proportional to its current size falls into a declining state and will steadily increasing military production and stability penalties (decadence) until it is completely destroyed.

It might still be possible to conquer the galaxy, but holding it for long would be impossible and holding anything together for long after decadence set in would be another major achievement.
I think that just having the galaxy reset after someone kills every other empire (and/or is the last one left) would be sufficient, but I like your idea.

I don't think that age should have an influence; just size, to prevent giants from sitting on the board for forever. Risk of Succession is already a small size deterrent, but it would help even more if planets randomly rebelled once the Risk gets above a certain level.
Behold my avatar, one of the few ships to be drawn out pixel by pixel in the dreaded... Microsoft Paint!

Day 31: "I have successfully completed my time reversal experiment! Muahahaha!!!"
Day 30: "I might have run into a little problem here."

Post Reply