Galactic Overlord - Signup

[DrSpike]

Let's try and work within your basic structure, rather than introducing unnecessary detail at this point.. I think just your last tweak alone is best. If you attack and destroy the opponent's fleet you take all his bases, but they contribute less than your bases.

Btw If you introduce base (culture) flipping I'm leaving!!

[DrSpike]

Ok you beat me. Is it really worth doing the specific base attack and intrinsic base defence? I think start simple with some reasonably balanced looking possibilities and see how it goes.

The only main thing that jumped out at me upon reading the initial rules (and I have a useless knack for these things) was that expanding was too powerful. In NW there is the city cap, and a structure whereby someone can't defend a big empire without always deflecting.

Here in your original rules you could build a big fleet, defend, and if someone attacks and wins, big deal you lose 1 base! If you tweak to base capture in some form it seems more attractive to attack.

Only thing is deciding what to do about players mopping up after 2 others had fought. Also how to divide the total should 2 players attack.

How about if you win the fight you take one base? We can then tweak the BP it yields later when we see how it works, and there are no complications with 2 attackers unless there is only 1 base.

[Jamski]

So changes 1, 2, 4 and 5 are definite already. What do you think of the others?

-Jam

[Jamski]

Heh crosspost again.

All the above except 6 and 7?

-Jam

[DrSpike]

Oops. I confused the crosspost even further by adding in an edit.

So that's why you should always make a new post.

[Jamski]

Only thing is deciding what to do about players mopping up after 2 others had fought. Also how to divide the total should 2 players attack.

How about if you win the fight you take one base? We can then tweak the BP it yields later when we see how it works, and there are no complications with 2 attackers unless there is only 1 base.

This is what we have if we implement the changes 1-5.

If two players attack (not allied) they fight two battles. It could happen that the first one wins, and takes a base, then the second one wins too and takes another base. If the first player took the last base, then that's hard luck to the second player. The empire they wanted to attack is gone.

If two allied players attack they must decide themselves what to do with the base. Perhaps they will share it and get 1 BP each from it? Perhaps they will form another agreement. Diplomacy is not covered by the rules - and this is intentional.

The only main thing that jumped out at me upon reading the initial rules (and I have a useless knack for these things) was that expanding was too powerful. In NW there is the city cap, and a structure whereby someone can't defend a big empire without always deflecting.

Expanding is not as powerful as you think, as the cost of a base means you are lowering your defenses seriously. 16 BPs buys you 3 Titans! There was also a cap of 6 (built) bases suggested - with any number captured, of course.

Ok, I'm editing the added rules now.

Send me some base names, I'm trying to make the starmap

-Jam

[DrSpike]

Well with no base capture all those battleships are doing is winning the game for the other neutral players. That's why it was IMO too powerful to sit back in the original rules.

Ok, so start with one base captured when you win the combat? That looks good. And if you wipe out the fleet you hit the jackpot.

I'm not sure if it's gone too far the other way, but it should be more fun than everyone sitting back.

[Jamski]

Not quite Spike... you have to eliminate the fleet to capture a base, so it may take two turns of combat. Just winning the combat stops the base producing the next round though, meaning victory is practically assured... unless they make a fast alliance!

Captured bases being only worth 2 BPs should stop it being too overpowering.

This is the nice middle route, and I'm think we should stick here.

Attacker Eliminated - Whoops!
Attacker Defeated   - Base left intact
Combat Drawn        - Base left intact
Defender Defeated   - Base damaged - gives no BPs next turn 
Defender Eliminated - Base captured

Its should indeed be fun.

-Jam

[DrSpike]

Shouldn't 3) be winning the combat, rather than eliminating all forces?

Edit: Ok it's your call. I just wondered this way whether a weakened player would get Jampiled and the initial attacker left with no reward.

[Jamski]

You mean :

Attacker Eliminated - Whoops!
Attacker Defeated   - Base left intact
Combat Drawn        - Base damaged - gives no BPs next turn
Defender Defeated   - Base captured 
Defender Eliminated - All Bases captured

-Jam

[Jamski]

[DrSpike]

Also someone can only lose a base if they have no ships left at all. This means piling next round is inevitable.

Edit: stop doing that!

Um, I'm not really sure which way it should be. But having it whereby a fleet has to be destroyed before a base can be captured looks wrong.

If you win the fight you get one base, but the player retreats with his remaining ships to his other bases. That was how I envisaged it.

[Jamski]

You're right. Let's go with your plan.

-Jam

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Jamski
You're right. Let's go with your plan.

-Jam

[Jamski]

Ok, I've edited everything into the Rules Changes and Clarifications post above. Surprisingly few changes in the end

Let's close it here, and get those prebuild orders and base name lists sent in so we can give it a whirl.

-Jam