FG: The Future of Galactic Overlord - Discussion

[Jamski]

Ok, the current game of GO is coming towards a climax, as soon as the two superpowers stop pussying about and actually get to grips with each other, so its time to look towards the future of Galactic Overlord.

The beta of GO2 has gone OK so far, but I have to admit that for the present GO2 will remain an interesting experiment. Instead I propose to clarify the rules of GO to come up with an Apolyton Gold Edition I think most of you prospective overlords will be happy about that.

The proposed changes (If its not mentioned then let's assume its not in need of any change)

1.) Spies
Spies need a slight beefing up. The aim of the game is to get more fights and more clear eliminations, right? With this in mind:

• A spy will now stop Disengage orders.
• If two players spy on each other, the spies cancel each other and their orders proceed as if no spies were used.

2.) Overlords With No Bases
Overlords with no bases need to shut up and die. Or at least die faster.

• A player with no bases cannot use or build any specials.
• A player with no bases at the end of a round takes 20% attrition (rounded up) This is always at least 1 whole ship.
• It is possible to use a spy on an player with no bases.

3.) Captured Bases
If those overlords get back into the game by capturing someone's bases, they then often have to sit a few turns, unable to do much due to lack of home bases. So...

• A player who captures some bases when they previously had none at the beginning of that turn automatically trades the first 5 captured bases for one home base. If there are less than 5 bases captured, tough, play as before.

This allows the player to at least have the option of building ships or specials the next turn.

4.) Allied Defence
As his orders a player may instruct the GM that instead of attacking or shielding he wishes to perform an Allied Defence. This works exactly like an allied attack, except the target is a friendly planet.

• Both fleets must have the same OoB, or the defenders will treat the allied defenders as enemies!
• If player A sends orders to make an allied defence with Player B, it is possible both that Player B returns the favour and sends orders to make an allied defence with Player A, or that they trust Player A to defend their bases and attack a third Player.
• If a player orders an allied defence, but is themselves attacked at home that turn, their fleet will cancel the allied defence order and defend at home. Defending home bases has priority over rushing to assist a rival.
• Because of the above rule, it is always assumed that allied defence uses the whole fleet.
• Should the defence fail, the player that was attacked loses his bases as normal, but the assisting player(s) is safe - Exception: Use of Disengage orders results in the loss of both defenders' bases.

5.) Domination Victory
If a player has more than 2/3 of the bases in the galaxy, or more than 75% of the shipping tonnage they may claim a domination victory. If this is accepted by the other players then the game ends. No player is forced to accept domination, and has a right to fight to the last.

6.) Base Trading
No longer to be allowed at all.

7.) Opponent-based OoBs
No longer to be allowed at all. You may submit seperate offensive and defensive OoBs. This should cancel the defensive advantages slightly.

Some clarifications:

Weapon values vs unusual orders:

Lasers x2 vs Unopposed
Torpedoes x2 vs Unopposed
Fighters x2 vs Unopposed
Lasers x1 vs Manouvre
Torpedoes x1 vs Manouvre
Fighters x1 vs Manouvre

-Jam

[GeoModder]

So, your GO2 proposal will go to the lost kingdom then?

I do like the changes proposed upthere.

[civman2000]

I don't see why double damage should be done when you're unopposed. Why is there such a huge difference between being unopposed and being opposed by a single frigate?

[Kassiopeia]

Because it'd require craploads of work to scale the damage based on the amount of resistance and the relative strengths of the opposing fleets?

[civman2000]

Because it'd require craploads of work to scale the damage based on the amount of resistance and the relative strengths of the opposing fleets?

But the basic system already does this: you subtract one point of damage for each point of resistance. Sure, it's a crude system, but doubling damage when you're unopposed is even more crude and arbitrary.

[GeoModder]

I hopes this will encourage Overlords to come in with more balanced fleets.

[joncha]

I'll second Jamski's suggestions, and repeat my fixations: Remove M, D and opponent-based OoBs.

[Hercules]

With the no bases rule, D can become a risky option.

Maybe a limit to 5 defensive OoBs, but it is important, for strategy purposes to retain the option to vary the OoB. The surprise comes in what the opponent builds or doesn't build.

[joncha]

I strongly feel that opponent-based OoBs takes away from the strategy of the game.

Your opponents have diametrically opposed builds? Better choose your OoB carefully...

[Jamski]

Oh shi...

Forgot to put the NO OPPONENT BASED OOBS rule in, thanks Joncha

-Jam

[Kassiopeia]

Opponent-specific OOBs do not produce any conceivable gain, really. The attacker will realise that the defender's OOB will be designed with the attacker's fleet composition in mind, so the attacker will adjust his own OOB accordingly to second-guess the defender's presumed OOB.

In other words, it's the same situation and result as with no specific OOBs, except you are using up more time and effort. It's a lovely game of cat and mouse. "He has lots of lasers while I have lots of fighters - he will second-guess that I will throw torps in front to counter his lasers, so he'll actually put fighters in front to counter my torps, so I'll start with lasers after all!"

Edit: Jamski

[Hercules]

Is there any way to restore a balance to the unallied player?

If attacked by a 2 faction alliance, overall defensive power is increased by 25%? (or for story purposes the allied attack is reduced by 25%- bureaucracy overlap)
if attacked by a 3 faction alliance, defence increased by 33% ( or attack, reduced by 33%)
if by 4 or more, defence increased by 50% (or attack, reduced by 50%)

[Jamski]

This just stops people using opp-based OoBs to say "if the really big guy attacks me then use D"

-Jam

[Spaced Cowboy]

Good changes, but I can't be buggered to send in that many frakein OoBs...one for D, one for O.

I'm leaning with joncha on the M and D, but I'm willing to give it a shot with the spy negating a D. M is okay and adds some risk/variety to the standard.

Captured bases should be 3 instead of 5 to get the home. 5 is a bit to steep (theory is that you should alway have a home base).

I still like the one shot no base option. No attrition for one turn and that is all you get to get a base back, else bye-bye.

[Kassiopeia]

I think the Allied Defence will be more than enough to do that. However, I don't think the unallied should even have any sort of balance restored to him. Alliances are supposed to be deadly, that's what shields and spies are for.