what about the diplomacy/politics system/model?

what would keep you from creating multisided battles...

As far as I heard, we will have the options to trade tech and make trade routes. I think you can also transfer cash and ships, maybe even planets. Alliance there will be for sure, as for more than one sided battles, why not its in real time right.

Hello again all,

Based on what I have seen in other RTS games on Diplomacy coppeled with the scope of this game, most likely there will be limited diplomacy; by that, I mean what Emperor said will most likely be close to what will be released. Sadly, only turn-based strategy games would have the capabilities for comprehensive Diplo and the like but unfortunatly none that i have seen have anything approching good diplomacy options.
It is possible that SoaSE will have something more complex then what emperor described, if it takes a good amount of time for game elements to be imployed(ie the creation and deployment and ships/fleets, travel times, colonial development and the like). However, this would mean more wait time for most people. Since most gamers today are all about satisfaction now, a longer/more-realistic wait time will most certainly be out which means no indepth Diplomacy functions.
The one thing off the top of my head that might work is if diplomacy were to be set up if one in one of two ways or to have both of these ways as options in the game.
1) Have Diplo stations(or something similar) that can construct courier ships.
2) Have Diplomatic messages set up in stages so that only they are transfered piece meal(ie. step 1 - TEC sends Vasari negotiation message. step 2 - TEC sends Vasari non-aggression prop. s3- TEC send Vasari limited trade offer. so on and so forth.
Those are only in context of interaction with an ai or if elected in an option screen at start a forced method for players.
Those options do 2 things, firstly, they force a small wait time( either by ship travel time or delayed radio transmission) so that a player doesnt have to put much thought into the proposal, basicly a yes, no, or not now type thing. Secondly, with a time commitment, you wont have 2 or three players sit there and right at start have a solid alliance with massive trade rights and the like.

Now, I have tried to put a rather long idea into a very short context, something i am not the best at. The main limitation for an indepth diplo/political model in an RTS game is simply time. If developers expect and average game to be done in 30 min then there is no point if it is 2 hours, then possible minorly indepth model, but the more complex a model the more time it would take for a player to set-up trade routes and the. The problem becomes how complex. To light on the sauce and you feel like you have been cheated, to heavy and in takes all the flavor away from the main dish. That is why I suggested what I did with my two options because it would make it a bit more like ancient-medievil(sp) eras, where diplomacy between empires was a man on a house or boat with a few key points. Sometimes a lot of points, but concise and to the point propsals.

I think i will quit boring everyone now lol.

Lharrs

I kindof like the idea, but the multistage diplo sounds a little bit antiquated and it doesnt make sense in the context of things.

just make sure that 1) it doesnt become overcomplicated and ruins the concept of the game and 2) that it doesnt make trading TOO difficult, and ruin the capacity of a trade-based nation overtaking all others through market manipulation.

speaking of which, MONOPOLY
I want the ability to monopolize a certain resource, if I manage to get all the planets of it

Hello again eveyone,

it IS antiquaited, however I dont know how long things will take during a given game. It would be fairly simple to make a nice diplo/political model for a TBS but since this is an RTS, things must be simple, given the point of the game is combat. That is why you have a multi-stage process, to give the illusion of an indepth setting. There could also be a specificity levels aswell.

By that, I mean, if you wanted to initiate trade with a given faction, todays' standard RTS has you form a non-aggression pact, then the trade-rights(if they offer that at all). Once that happens, you get a small trickle of currency. Now that is because games only last 30min and there is no point for a more indepth system. Hopefully, this game will take a little longer then 30min to complete a game. If so, then there is room for a more indepth model. It would be simple to put in the standard model of non-agression, trade, alliance, and maybe a mutual-defence pact type thing. But what you would do is something a little more indepth. Two factions sign a non-aggression pact, then a general trade rights aggreement. This would give limited trade rights. Then an open borders policy which would grant additional rights. Since this would take the trade from a controlled path to a more open and profitable one, it would also open yourself up to high espionage risks. The last step would be to give unlimited trade access. Essentially both factions are so fond of one another that foregin traders are given the same rights and privilages as native traders.

Since that would be a little simplistic, you add a few provisos. One, you make it take a small amount of time for any treaty to be recieved by any player( call it processing and drafting - ie beuracratic stuff). That is why I suggested a Diplomatic evnoy type ship. After that, have a few tiers of agreements, pacts, and rights to go through. Nothing fancy or complicated. With just those two ideas put together, you would have perhaps a 5 - 10 minute engagement. That is if the players know each other in real life and want to set-up an alliance. For others, it will take longer. The messages can be as simple as any of the ones currently out today, "player 'A' proposes an allinace." Depending on the other players' level of espionage and the like, they may catch wind of this. For example out of say 7 players in this fantasy senario, player A wants to ally player B. They have gone through all the stages necesary(sp) for and allinace and now player A makes his/her propsal(a point and click affair, all of 3 seconds). Player C however is at war with player B. Player C and player A are in the second stage of trade. Open Border trading occurs regularly. Player C as traders spying for him in player As' empire and they catch wind and relay their message to player C. With that, player C knows that his enemy player B will most likely soon be able to bring additional forces to bear on him since player B can pull ships from the shared border with A. Player C can do what he/she wishes with that info.

There can be even more then that aswell and still not get complicated. Simple pieces forming a grand design. I would go into additionall detail, but one I have taken up enough space, and two, I am planning to impliment these ideas I have(polished up of course) in my own game

Lharrs

wow that was long.... but a good read is sometimes worth it

Agreed, that is a very thoughtful post... the only thing I don't like about it is the time that it requires. What if you are in trouble and need help NOW? You don't have 10 minutes to ally with someone else. You need to be able to quickly negotiate, beg, or bribe someone to help you.

Also, in the event of betrayal, you need to be able to sever that relationship very quickly.

i hope its kept simple if you encounter another player/race an embassy is set up on their homeworlds,
i think it should be one diplomacy screen for everything trade war decs etc,

to set up a trade route with another player it should be kept simple too --diplomacy--- trade treaty-- set up trade route from your planet to theirs

i think communications will be pretty advanced ingame to avoid having to send diplomatic ships although i like the idea personally.

thats my 2 cents

Frogboy said he sees this as a crossbetween many games, including GC2.

So hopefully the diplomacy is as deep as GC2's. (Especially with Stardock assisting!)

This is supposed to be RT4X, afterall. It would be sad if all the 4X elements were just tacked on.

Hello again all,

If someone is attacked, then of course there will be a rather sudden end to any positive diplomatic treatise or pacts between the factions involved, and there would be a color coded ping/message notifying a combat involving an ally( if of course the ally has elected to show such pings... one wouldn't wish to show all ones battles to allies).
As for the time length, I was trying to keep most of my text as it pertains to diplomacy and not other involoving factors. The only reason for timeed transmissions, will be to add to the feel of an indepth system. They dont need to be there, but if they are left out, then just about any RTS game anyone will play will seem to have a simplistic diplomacy structure.

There are two ways as I see it, that an RTS games' Diplo can work. The first, is a simple model designed for short games(ala WC series, SC, C&C series, Homeworld series, etc); Games designed based on a typical game lasting for 20min to 30min. These games have a very basic system in place because they are short and a more involved model is not practical given the number of reasources, opposing factions, scale, and timeframe. Very simple options( the most complex model I have seen for this being): non-aggression, trade rights, and Alliance. That is it, with the understanding that every RTS worth anything has the standard reasource/unit trading options. Some minor things may be included with some games.

The second way Diplomacy could function is on a slighty larger scale, design for a game that will take between 45min and 2hrs. Keep in mind an RTS is only truely viable if the players can play a match in one sitting. For this, the options can be opened up a little bit, however to much would be fawly. In my estimation(plus or minus a few options) there are two solid ways to make Diplomacy a minor/major part of the game without hindering play.
The simple version is this:
- Trade[basic rights(small cash flow), resource/unit tradeing]
- Military pacts( cease-fire[default option for all factions), non-aggression, peace treaty, mutual-defense, Alliance]
- *tidbit stuff* special game related things, maybe certain planets have valuable trade commodities that can have special trade routes given or some such.

The more indepth Diplomacy that would make the game more involved wouldbe this:
- Trade[ basic rights*(small cash flow +), Open borders**( higher cash flow increase)]
- Military[ ceasefire, non-aggression, mutual defense, military alliance***, Alliance)]
-- All trade and OFFICIAL aggreements done through the game mus be done through a Foreign Office station or similar structure, and courier ships will be sent out to the corisponding faction. Unofficial aggreements and the like may be constructed toward a faction, by a chat channel, and manual stance triggers.
* basic trade would allow border colonies with a trade structure to trade with the foreign power(s) that Basic rights have been granted to.
** Open Borders allow foreign merchant fleets access to your inner colonies, cash inflow is increased but so is your vunerability to espionage for those powers that have access to your colonies.
*** Military alliance allow a friendly factions' combat vessels to freely move in your space. this option is availible so that a player may choose to have either open borders or Military Alliance active without the other.

In addition to those, I would have special locations and items/minerals/things(or whatever) and hte like for specific trade amongst the factions. Ex "Player A will give player be control of 'X' Plasma field. In return, player B will give player A 15% of the 'blahblahblah Plasma Concentrate harvested from the Field." These special negotiations would only be availible to two factions that have Basic rights or here in trade to each other.

Mind, the later part described could be done very simply, with out much trouble, but then i would have developed a game with that in mind from the start. A TBS would be more diffivult, but I believe I have already used up enough space.

Lharrs

In the future, how should I break my responses up not to have them so long at first glance?

do your threads in points, not paragraphs.
because I am NOT reading that...

I don't see why a game can't be as long as GC2 and still be Real time.

Your loss Schem.

Hiddenranbir: in singleplayer it can be as long as you want. But a multiplayer game needs to be shorter because it would be difficult to get the same 10 people to come back every day for your regularly scheduled game. If you can't finish a game in one sitting then more often than not you won't be able to get everyone back together again to finish it.

Yeah I learned that from Sword of the Stars, we'd get a good 2v2 goin and then a few hours later we would quit for the day, and then maybe a week later try and pick up where we left off and can't remember anything we did a week ago.

Again...I don't see why not. Even a game as large as Civilation gets multiplayers, which takes much longer being a TBS. It does also give options to have a smaller game. (Picking a smaller map!)

Also, it happens in Europa Universalis. It's a big game, in real time, that gets the hell played out of it in multiplayer.

I have never played Europa Universalis, but I do know that a if the games are done well, a TBS cannot be played in an RTS format, and an RTS in a TBS format will be increadibly boring. The reasons why can be shown through the shear number of things that can be done in a TBS that would only make playing it in an RTS fashion rather frustrating. Say, for example you were playing Sword of the Stars in RTS format, Sword of the Stars being one of the most simplistic stratagy games I have seen, it insults the very idea of what a Space 4x TBS should be. Yet even with that said, you would need to design several different types of ships with the tech that you have, manage at least 20-30 planets, and then have combat(at times with 2-6 battles taking place at one time). Now, say we actually made this more like a TBS should be, lets say that on those planets you have to manage, there is actually buildings you can place, and locations of where to place them, then lets say you only had a certain amount of room in which to place them, futhermore, you have orbital structures, shipyards and ground units to manage, oh and dont forget about the rest of your planets and moons in that system. Well, now that you have managed all of that and it has taken say maybe 2-5min per planet in the system, you come out of management to find that 3 of your 25 star systems(A, B, & C are being attacked. Which one do you choose to defend? well lets say you pick the one that is most valuable(B your bread basket system, it has 30% of you total food output for your empire). You zoom to the battle and find a nicely sized fleet. You then coordinate your defense forces, make sure yous stations and planets are at full alertness and the like and you then begin to repel the attack.

Whew, that was close but it only took you 10min for that fight, and another 5 min for the clean up afterward to make sure your system will get rebooted. But crap, you now have to manage the other two battles. At one of them(system "C"), your AI defenders won, but you still have the manage clean up a little bit but the other, it appears that one of your HUMAN opponents(given that this is multiplyaer) thought that the battle for system "A" was worth his/her time and he/she kicked the pudding out of your forces, has made landings on several colonies in that system and has sent his/her fleet to another one of your colonies. Not only that, 15 worlds over 9 systems are complaing of food shortages since the system you defended(B) was your bread basket and got jacked up by the enemy even though you repeled the attack. In addition you have 3 diplomatic envoys asking to speak with you 2 of them standard trade aggreements but the 3rd is form one of the Human players and it has text to read. Not to mention your reasearch is done, you need to construct a fleet of Ships and transports to retake system "A" and the new DN class warship wont be coming online since it was being constructed in system "A" unfortunatly, that player sent in bomber wings against your construction yards first thing.

More happy news, two other human players now see that you are occupied with the battles and whatnot so they are forming a military pact to attack your outlying colonies. They already have 2 to 3 fleets each on their way, bu you dont know that yet since your busy.


You would end up losing something like that since it is done in Real-Time and you not because you are an inept commander(although you may be) but because you simply can't manage everything at one time. That is hte reason for turns, that is the reason for the TBS games. They offer more then a RTS ever could. They are ment to be played for hours, days, weeks, and some times months just for one game. And since it is turn based, everyone is at the same place on a save, you can take as much time as you need ot catch up on the game if you play 2 weeks after you last session.

In an RTS, the reason for it being so simplistic is, that you can't possibly do what you can in a TBS.

Another way to think of it is something like this, a TBS game is like running the Empire and a RTS is like running a fire-base. The fire-base has pretty much one goal, and that is to be a fire-base. Send ou patrols and the like over and over again(bad analogy but nothing else comes to minds right now).

When I go about creating my game, I wont sit down and have a discussion with my team about weather an RTS or a TBS will better, I will simply say, "We are going ot do and RTS and a TBS, which do we do first?"

They are two different animals. Useing Civilization as an example probably was not the best of choices, but using that, a small map doesn't make the game simple enough to play in Real-Time, it just means you get to the fighting a lot sooner with less reasources.

Lharrs

Lharrs post is a good one.

With Sins , its pretty important that Quality of commands is the Bottleneck , not Quantity of commands.

You suck because the quality of your commands suck ,not because you didnt "click fast enough"

I think abother way I could have presented this is by making an example out of the structure of a small segment of a game I am putting together.
This is a TBS invasion of a starsystem that for the simplicities sake will be a 1v1 match so that in in one turn, it will be resolved. 1 turn would be the equivilant to perhaps a week real time. Some things have been changed from the original design so that others can't steal the ideas( not that mine are great or anything, but I havn't seen people useing some of this stuff in games, so I want some things to be considered my own). Again to keep things simple, this system will have 5 rings with 3(1 moon each) habbitable planets 1(2 moons) unihabitable giant and one asteroid belt seperating the giant and inner planets. To keep is simple, Player A attacks from the outer reaches of the solar system( the typiclly portrayed way). The inner planets, PB1, PB2, PB3, and their moons psb1, psb 2, psb3, The Belt and the gaint PB4, and its moons psb4 and psb5.

I wont be going into detail of where planets are or how longer turns and the like are tkign and what not, that is too detailed for this.

TBS
Campaign Turn 1
- Player A - System Assault Ship(think something like the Alien Mothership in ID4) jumps in to the oustkirts of the Polaris system and is detected on system scaners and patrol ships. The larger System seige ships detach from grapples off the System Assault Ship and move into formation. Bay doors open on the SAs and fleet, picket, and patrol ships are launched and begin to move into formation. The intend of Player A is for the system to be Striped of reasources except for PB2, psb3, and psb5 which have been deemed fit for colonies.

- Player B - had sent 3 fleets from systems further out to bolster the defenses here. 2 of them are a turn(week) or more out, one will arrive in less then a week, expected at 5 campaign turns(days). PB2 is the primary world for this system and as such has the most Defences and Infrasturcture. It also has access to the Inter-Solar Gate, and System Gate Hub.

- A - Preliminary sensors show high energy readings around PB2, moderate energy readings for PB1, psb1, psb2, PB3, psb3, and The Belt. psb4 and 5 seem to be light. The First turns action will be to begin Construction of a JumpGate, a stealth recon of PB2, and a recon in force of psbs 4 & 5.

- B - readings indicate a large energy reading on the edge of the system, first riority is to get a data on the fleet. A skirmish force will be sent. Since the gates around psbs 4 & 5 are not yet up, ships will use the PB4 gate to jump in and form a pirimiter. Main defense fleet orginizes. Little is known of the race B is fighting other then they use Jumpgates, near instintaneous travel from system to system.

Turn 2
- A - Stealth recon drone reveals Major gate network, and a large gate seems a hyper gate, not as advanced as As gate. Both force recon elements reach their destination and find little in the way defenses, and each have a gate under construction, scanners show ships heading for both groups. A seige force must be sent to engage the Gate network at PB2 1/2 the fleet is mobilized. The recons engange,
--- Combat --- psb4 - LRMs with ECM are targeted on the defense platforms, with fighter/bombers from the LCV in support, BBs and BCs provide longrange fire. No casualties, a glassing of the planetoid commences.
--- Combat --- psb5 - Simultaneously with teh glassing of psb4, LRMs w/ECM with fighter/bomber cover are sent for the orbital defenses. BBs and BCs moving behind them to set-up in Orbital Bombardment formation over the planetoid. Capsule Marine are launched to the planetoidal surface to secure beachhead locations. Power suit marines are behind the fleet ships waiting to be deployed.

- B - the ships sent to psbs 4 & 5 will group on 5 to make a stand so the civilians can finish pulling out.
--- combat --- psb5 - the defense force reaches psb5 and seen capsuls being fired to the surface. the orbital defenses are not very effective since invaders are firing from outside the effective range. the capsule ships are firing in a hole created after the orbital defenses were blown up. computer reprograming done to the defenses send them toward the enemy. the 2nd defense fleet arrive on the outskirts of hte combat as the 1st fleet engages. Orders are to engage at close range since hte attackers are fighting from long range.

Turn 3 ( less detail, time to bring the TBS advantage Home)
- A - the battle at psb5 goes poorly do to a lack of the enemies inclanation of close range combat. A small force is assembled and sent to counter this. The recon element from psb4 arrives to assist, and the Seige fleet attacks PB2. Inside the empire, 4 systems are undersiege form a bug like enemy the terraforming and colonization of 6 new systems has begun. Defense forces have been sent to the 4 systems in question. New ships have been built and are forming into fleets. New advancement in laser weaponry and metalurgy allow for ship upgrades, designs must be made and with the relatively new disoveries in explosives, new fighter/bombers can be put into action.

- B - The first assisting fleet from outside the solar systems comes through te gate and begins to form up as small defnse forces are sent via the system gate network to protect their respective worlds. A support element is formed and sent to psb5 via the PB4 gate. The fleet that just came through the gate has the new drone tech integrated which means more ships for less people.

I realized looking back, that I didnt do that great a job on this one, but I wont delete it either, seems like a waste. Anywho, the "--- combat ---" would essentially be realtime combat taking place. you would have that times like 10 and you might get a picture of what is going on, way to much to have in an RTS.

I would love to go into more detail, but it would take much longer posts for that.

What Ironclad and Stardock are trying to do are great, I think they may have something here. But for Hiddenranbir, they arent making the game very complex. There is no ship desgin, you get what they give you. I didn't gather that there would be any planetary combat, and since it focuses on combat, other mechanics wont be that complex either.

Lharrs

if only he could make the posts SMALLER

lharrs, I've read two of your posts and I think they're pretty much genius. but please learn to make them a bit smaller...

I shall indeed make the endevour to reduce the length of my responses. It is just so very difficult to formulate short retorts once the creative flow begin to move. Never the less, I will make the attempt.

Lharrs.

Thanks for the compliments.

I mean, the best of all is if you could summarize at the end for us lazies  

I refuse to read the amount of typing that went into this thread. Anyone wish to give a summary?

i've already asked.

good to know we have similar, albiet lazy, principles   

nicely put.

Ahh well, guess this discussion doesnt deserve our wisdom