[Suggestion] Odium

from Sins Forums

How about a general relations penalty for maintaining a large military force.. it would seem likely that other factions would prefer more evidently peaceful rivals, and it might help to turn factions against each other close to the end?

It would have been good to have different government types.  However, we could still have some of the effect- I'd also suggest that there would be an element of repugnance associated with some technologies.. Perhaps these?

Fallout, Novalith, Backroom Deals, Favoured Client, Insurgence, Foreign Sabotage

Martyrdom, Ruthlessness, Eyes of the Converted, Persuasive Offers, Inspired Wraith [sp?- Wrath]

Slavery, Shock And Awe, Expert Bounty Hunting, Raider Relations

Another separate suggestion- could it be made possible to mix locked and unlocked teams in the expansion?  Then you could have human players playing locked games with unlocked AI providing possible allies, and also the abiliy to lock AI factions together as one team.   

 

2,576 views 4 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top

 I agree something like that would good for super weapons. The same as nuclear weapons is frowned opon. Although when you think about it, the countries that are super powers and have had them for a long time don't suffer any signifficant penalty. Only really the countries that are developing them.

 When you think about it though, all weapons do some pretty nasty stuff. It would be good if you could claim planets by only taking out military hardware, and not bombing planets populations to smithereens, brainwashing them or taking them hostage. If your a good leader with good social, business and industrial standards, good people should want to be part of your society. It would only need the elimination of the repressors assets to initiate this.

 I like the thought but it may be to late to add something like this. I still think Diplomacy is good expansion though.

Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top

It won't be possible to mix locked and unlocked teams, but there is a fleet penalty that fluctuates based on how many ship slots are used compared to everyone else. If you maintain levels close to your opponents, it's not that bad, but if you fall behind, there's a relations penalty.

Galactic Civilizations III
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top

That seems closer to 'temptation' than 'odium'..!!  I suppose if the code already exists then you could add a diplomatic penalty for having a large military force as well, it might help to form the stop-the-leader alliances which the AI used to be weak at?  The AI were never slow to attack me when I had no fleet in previous versions, even without the extra incentives!

Not being able to mix unlocked and locked means that we won't be able to have locked humans on separate teams playing with unlocked AI- which is another game type and one that might reward a civics build...  If you can find another means to implement a king of the hill game or maximum number of winners for all-unlocked games it wouldn't be important, as it would clearly be an improvement to have the human players unlocked as well.

It would be good if you could get it to work though... games like 1v1v1 become far more possible with a few unlocked AIs in the mix!   

 

Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top

I completely agree, it's senseless that the AI will punish you for having a small fleet and reward you for a great one with complete disregard for the strategic situation. This does tie in with the lack of a 'there can be only X winners' game mode as it's not so problematic having a 'big brother' ally with a much larger fleet who could crush you at any minute if things turned hostile when said big brother really has no incitement to break the alliance.