1 Reply by [TI] Primo (edited by [TI] Primo 07-Sep-2012 17:28:48)

  • Posts: 4,031
  • Tag points: 671

Re: population to hold defense value

it only makes sense, and it will make banker raids less easy (or at least on popbankers), and planet passing gets an extra dimension too.

how is it that 2 soldiers can overtake millions of pop, surely, if the pop is being held properly (no starvation etc) they would not accept being captured, especially if it means they get mass slaughtered.

it changes some tactics, and makes the game more realistic.

and obviously it shouldn't be much, but i don't see how 1 soldier would control a mob of thousands

NEE NAW NEE NAW

Primo

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,230
  • Tag points: 1

Re: population to hold defense value

Depends if the soldier has a nuke he could set off. Plus, when is the game supposed to be realistic? In RL lasers would take out way more bombers than 10 each tongue

"The market is like a.....game within a game Teddy"

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,791
  • Tag points: 185

Re: population to hold defense value

Interesting observation.

I like the idea of population fighting back, it definitely makes ground fights less predictable.  I suppose maybe there should be some gauge of how willing a planet's population are to be taken over.  Like you mention, a starving people may be happy to go to a new empire, whereas a healthy population might not go so easily.

Cool idea!  What other factors could play into a population's willingness to surrender?

Got a few bucks?  The Imperial Tip Jar is accepting contributions!

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 5,595
  • Tag points: 241

Re: population to hold defense value

1: Remember, pie, we're not talking about a scenario of populations desiring the new government.  In IC, when you lose a planet, the people are all killed (perosnally, I always interpreted it as the planet colonies being reengineered to suit the conqueror's population).  Under this model, it's not that people are happy to surrender because they will get food.  Rather, they're just too weak to actually fight.
2: Morale could also be an issue.  In theory, an empire which dedicates its resources to extensive conflicts (i.e., lots of attacks) would divert private-sector resources away from the conventional economy, reducing the reosurces available to mount an offensive.
3: What about the amount of time a planet was occupied?  Perhaps if a planet was occupied less than 96 ticks, a penalty exists to population defense as people get acquainted with the landscape, gravity, geography, and other aspects of the planet.  Over time, undeveloped colonies become larger, more hardened defenses, simply from merit of continued activity (not sure about this idea... just randomly throwing out stuff).

Make Eyes Great Again!

The Great Eye is watching you... when there's nothing good on TV...

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 4,190
  • Tag points: 1699

Re: population to hold defense value

This is a good idea and has been mentioned a few times before. I think a simple defense value and everyone dying if they lose (as it is now) wouldd be fairly simple and interesting pie. I would elaborate if i wasnt using my cell! Alas good idea.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Xeno
  • Xeno
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 4,779
  • Tag points: 34

Re: population to hold defense value

Consider pop like buildings.  If you are within NW range you can take the pop.  If you're over NW range you end up killing them.  Shouldn't apply for inter-fam-swaps, though.  Buildings and pop should pass to players of same fam regardless of NW. 

If a member of an enemy fam takes the planet with pop intact, within first few ticks there's a chance the pop will escape and set off a nuke and blow the planet if a significant number of ground forces aren't stationed, say 10%.  So if you take over a planet with 50k pop you'd have to station 5k soldiers to prevent the pop from escaping and the odd chance (maybe 1 in 25) that they'd blow the planet. 

Also, to take a planet, you would have to have at least 5% the number of ground forces of the population on the planet.  This would require about 300 to 700 soldiers to take a fully populated planet (without LQs).  This would prevent early raids.

Also, this would give pop bankers the defensive advantage they need to survive, for without having to build so much ground, and so many portals, they can use more income to upkeep the ridiculous number of wizards and agents they'd need (due to their higher NW) to defend against pesky ops.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 4,031
  • Tag points: 671

Re: population to hold defense value

that would benefit big fams though
as with a planet with 5m pop, you'd need to station 500k soldiers to counter
that's a lot for a smaller player

NEE NAW NEE NAW

Primo

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

8 Reply by Xeno (edited by xeno syndicated 09-Sep-2012 05:17:29)

  • Xeno
  • Xeno
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 4,779
  • Tag points: 34

Re: population to hold defense value

Realistically, pop bankers wouldn't build 5m pop per planet.  Maybe 600k is average, which would mean 6k to hold the planet (less or more according to differential in players' respective military bonuses). 

If you wanted, you could make another 'occupation' phase to take the planet after the ground phase.  Say the attacker doesn't have the 10%:population of ground remaining after the ground battle phase. In this case, the attacker would lose the battle, but a certain amount of pop would die, making it easier to take the planet a subsequent time around.

Tt is feasible that pop bankers might start OBing pop planets to some crazy level like 5000%, just so they wouldn't have to build any ground.  But the expense bulding the LQs necessary would enormous and probably not worth the GCs and resources to do so. 

Whatever number of forces that is determined to be necessary to hold a pop planet, it should be low enough to make it feasible for an attacker of a lower NW fam to be able to take such a planet and profitable for them to hold pop planets - the pop income from the planet should be significantly greater than the upkeep cost of the number of ground forces required to hold it.  Yet the number required to win the occupation phase of the battle should be high enough to give pop bankers the defensive advantage they need since they now have to build ridiculous numbers of wizards to protect their pop from getting opped.

I would say that if the attacker / occupier can earn 1k a tick from the planet's pop, the upkeep of the soldiers required to take and hold the pop shouldn't be more than 500gc / tick or it wouldn't be worth it to station ground to hold pop planets.  What % does that work out to?

How much pop can provide the income necessary to upkeep a single soldier every tick?  100?  50? 10?  I have no idea.  How would one figure this out? 

If it is 50 pop to upkeep one soldier than the ratio of soldiers:population required to take a planet's pop and hold it should be 1:25 (so about 400 soldiers for a planet with 10000 pop; 40k for a pop of 1 million; 200k for a pop of 5 million

Remember, though, the attacker doesn't have to station the forces.  If the occupier doesn't station enough forces, each tick there's a chance (maybe 1 in 25) that the civilians will blow the planet.  Since the number of ticks it would take for the pop to be successfully "adapted" to their new occupiers would be 24 ticks, it would be almost certain that over the course of 24 ticks the civilians would blow the planet.  After 24 ticks the occupier could recall stationed forces without fear of the planet getting blown.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 4,031
  • Tag points: 671

Re: population to hold defense value

i think just a plain defense value per pop would be sufficient to change things

and 10% of 600k is 60k, not 6k tongue

NEE NAW NEE NAW

Primo

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,944
  • Tag points: 16

Re: population to hold defense value

you send 2 soldiers, 1 is the most useless ever and dies of a heart attack and the other is Chuck Norris and captures the planet alone.
Prove me it's not realistic!

'Success! The realm of Genesis has been reduced to dust! Our forces are leaving the planet though, as it is scheduled for demolition to make way for a new hyperspace bypass.'

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Xeno
  • Xeno
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 4,779
  • Tag points: 34

Re: population to hold defense value

> [TI] Primo wrote:

> i think just a plain defense value per pop would be sufficient to change things

and 10% of 600k is 60k, not 6k tongue

Yup.  Hmm oops.  So, well, that doesn't sound like it would be profitable for an occupier to hold pop, then.  Maybe 1% to 5% of pop would be better.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 6,555
  • Tag points: 90

Re: population to hold defense value

> Kollop wrote:

> you send 2 soldiers, 1 is the most useless ever and dies of a heart attack and the other is Chuck Norris and captures the planet alone.
Prove me it's not realistic!



Lmfao kollop, too true! lol

~*✠ ]PW[ Forever ✠*~

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

13 Reply by Xeno (edited by xeno syndicated 09-Sep-2012 17:23:38)

  • Xeno
  • Xeno
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 4,779
  • Tag points: 34

Re: population to hold defense value

There should be an occupation phase (to last24 ticks after a planet is taken) where the population is in a state of rebellion; where every tick there is a battle and where the stationed ground forces fight the pop.  Something between a ratio of 1%to5% of ground forces to the population would be necessary for the occupying forces to win these battles.  Just as in any battle, a certain number of population and stationed forces would die every tick according to the respective size of forces.  Depending on population growth bonus, it could become more difficult to overthrown their occupiers each tick if the amount of pop they lose in their battles each tick is greater than the amount of new population that grows each tick. With a high pop growth bonus, say anything over 0% the pop still grows in spite of their losses each tick if say they fight 5% of ground.  Therefore, even though 5% of ground is stationed the first tick, if the population growth is high and outpaces losses, the ground forces might only be 4% the following tick, and, therefore, the population's rebellion would be successful.  Thus sometimes, the player would have to calculate how many forces they would need to station to hold the population according to the target empires population growth bonus (not the occupier's pop growth bonus). However, if number of ground forces stationed is higher than the minimum required (like 100% the population instead of 5%), the entire population might get killed off in one tick.  In this case, the occupation phase would end that tick and the planet's pop would reset to 0.  I would laso think the buildings should get destroyed.  Both the planet and the population would be considered naturalized.  In this way, a would be occupier has the option of trying to hold the population and the infra and profit by doing so, or just killing them off and starting from 0 pop and 0 infra.  It might prove to be better for the occupier because they would have to station 100% ground forces:pop for only 1 tick to kill them off and rest the planet to 0, and so their ground forces can be used elsewhere the next tick. 

Now, if the player doesn't station much more than the 1%-5% required to to fend off the population, battles would continue to occur every tick for 24 ticks after a planet has been taken until such time as either the pop dies off due dying more each battle than what is produced according to their population growth bonus, or until the population wins an occupation battle.  After 24 ticks, the period of time it would take for the population to become amalgamated into the occupier's civilization, the occupation phase would end and the planet and its pop would be considered naturalized.

If at any time over the first 24 ticks the pop won any of the battles, a number of things might happen:

1.   a chance that the pop would escape and blow the planet
2.   a chance the pop would escape but fail to blow the planet and leave the planet with infra intact to the occupier
3.   a chance the pop would escape but fail to blow the planet but succeed in lowing the infra
4.   a chance the pop would overthrow their occupiers and take control of the planet the planet, with infra intact, would revert to the empire that had lost it

You could do other cool things with this:

You could have an op called "sponsor rebellion" or "incite insurrection".  This could be used by say only the Quantam (each race should have a special, race specific op, I think).  The op could be used only during the first 24 ticks after a planet has been taken.  It would be considered an offensive op and would break a fam's overseer protection if successful or if discovered.  It would not have to be issued by the empire nor the fam that lost the planet, but any Quantam of any fam of any empire.  Like the spread false info op, the Quantam opper wouldn't have to take the planet him or herself, but could choose which empire would receive control of the planet, as long as that empire would be a member of the oppers family (this could be used for intra-fam planet swapping btw).

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 406
  • Tag points: 3

Re: population to hold defense value

I think it would be better if the population had .001 defense value per person. No special circumstances for the time the planet was owned.

I like the idea.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Xeno
  • Xeno
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 4,779
  • Tag points: 34

Re: population to hold defense value

Doesn't make sense that it only takes one tick for the pop to 'calm down' and not try and not be willing to revolt.  There should be something like a period of 24 ticks where the pop could revolt and retake the planet if sufficient ground is not stationed to hold it.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 406
  • Tag points: 3

Re: population to hold defense value

My thoughts are that all planets captured or explored will start with x amount of population (based on planet size.) Those "people" would be loyal to the empire who governs them.

I would agree with you xeno, except when you take over a planet all of the planets inhabitants are killed and replaced with a small number of population from your empire. The reason they would have to die is because they can't hold a defense value if they don't fight back, and if they fight back they will surely be overwhelmed.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 4,031
  • Tag points: 671

Re: population to hold defense value

xeno, the revolting idea, although interesting, is a different idea than this one.
if you want to discus it, make a thread for it, but it's off-topic here

NEE NAW NEE NAW

Primo

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

18 Reply by Xeno (edited by xeno syndicated 10-Sep-2012 19:46:42)

  • Xeno
  • Xeno
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 4,779
  • Tag points: 34

Re: population to hold defense value

"I would agree with you xeno, except when you take over a planet all of the planets inhabitants are killed and replaced with a small number of population from your empire."

What I am saying is that this should be changed so that when you take over a planet, you also take over the pop as an attack would take over lasers.

"xeno, the revolting idea, although interesting, is a different idea than this one.
if you want to discus it, make a thread for it, but it's off-topic here"

But it is the same idea.  It is a way to provide a defensive bonus for a pop banker:

Developer could copy and paste the same code you use for bomber and laser phase of a battle for and an occuptation phase: pop would be treated like a defensive building like lasers, and the ground troops like bombers, and if the ground troops are sufficient, they claim the pop, just as if bombers were sufficient to take lasers.  The code is already in the game.

This occupation phase should repeat every tick for 24 ticks after a planet has been taken.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

19 Reply by Render

  • Render
  • Guest
  • Tag points: 76

Re: population to hold defense value

kseno (sorry that key in my keyboard isnt working) you started with a great idea and like often you tend to complicate it (and our devs tremble everytime you post those long tekst blocks!)

so yeah lets go back to your original thinkin' -> pop fighting to defend their homeland

that's ekstremely awesome smile  now my 2 cents to this idea, what I consider an easy and simple way to make it happen:

After you have owned a planet for more than 5 IC years (what'd be around 250 game tics) the population in it feels so attached to that planet that they will have the ability to defend it if you build a "stronghold".
The "stronghold" would be a new building (not appearing with the rest of the infra) that you can only build when the planet has been owned for more than 250 tics. The option would appear in the planet screen (like when you build a portal) and it should cost a lot of iron and cash (plus the OB and large empire penalties) and it'd take 10 tics to be built. It would appear also in your recent reports when a stronghold is built and it would appear in an infil report aswell.  It'd also require a new icon in the "planets" page to show which planets have a stronghold.

The only effect of the stronghold is that the population of that planet would act like defending soldiers.
If you'd have it at 10k pop and no portal then its like if you had 10k soldiers stationed there. If the planet is portalled then you'd defend with your main fleet plus 10k ekstra soldiers.

comments?

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 6,105
  • Tag points: 2265

Re: population to hold defense value

Render.. come to irc plz

~~Lemming of leather and lollipops~~

Right, so what are we waiting for?  Can we get this going?  Any other feedback?

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 5,595
  • Tag points: 241

Re: population to hold defense value

ooooooh... someone got in trouble with the teacher!  Guess who's getting detention!  tongue

Make Eyes Great Again!

The Great Eye is watching you... when there's nothing good on TV...

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

22 Reply by Render

  • Render
  • Guest
  • Tag points: 76

Re: population to hold defense value

> [TI] Primo wrote:

> I'd like to agree with you xeno, but then we'd both be wrong.

tongue


srry Primo I just noticed u started the thread, not xeno (using ctrl+paste now)

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Xeno
  • Xeno
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 4,779
  • Tag points: 34

Re: population to hold defense value

I like my idea better.  It's not actually too complicated.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • lamb
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 489

Re: population to hold defense value

yeah it is complicated...

primo's is simple and efficent and would change many tactics too the game..

stop trying to over take his thread and go make ur own... tongue

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • lamb
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 489

Re: population to hold defense value

too further add to your idea primo, maybe u could chose a certain % of ur pop to serve in the military, so the banker has to chose how much of his pop they are willing to sacrifice to help defend their planets...

0 Dislike 0 Post Points