[Discussion] Raze Planets: It kills Craver and hissho.

Copied to clipboard!

MODNosferatiel

Informer

"God's in his heaven, all's right with the world." Nerv Motto, Neon Genesis Evangelion

Message

MODNosferatiel

Informer

47 300g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 5, 2012, 11:18:23 PM

Edited the title.

0badgesSend private message

Igncom1

Craver

Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery win wars.

Message

Igncom1

Craver

11 400g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 5, 2012, 6:06:45 PM

Isn't this the same with any invader?

Its not about what you actually conquer, its all about the spoils of war. Cravers use the FIDS bonus to get systems back to full strength in no time at all, and the Hissho use the Bushido bonus mainly for their actual colony's anyway.

If you always got good stuff from taking enemy worlds, the Craver and Hissho would be the most dominant forces in the game! Its a balancing factor.

0badgesSend private message

NewHorizon

Newcomer

Message

NewHorizon

Newcomer

100g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 5, 2012, 6:08:44 PM

I honestly dont see the purpose of a raze option anyhow, unless im missing something like a limit on how many buildings you can scrap in a turn. Heres a for instance: scrapping takes no time at all so you can just scrap everything and then spend a little dust terraforming down your system if you are about to lose it. Has basically the same effect id imagine. Id never do this though cos a lannister always pays his debts... (i always take my system back)

0badgesSend private message

VIPFinalStrigon

Sheredyn

Message

VIPFinalStrigon

Sheredyn

33 000g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 5, 2012, 6:13:57 PM

NewHorizon wrote:
I honestly dont see the purpose of a raze option anyhow, unless im missing something like a limit on how many buildings you can scrap in a turn. Heres a for instance: scrapping takes no time at all so you can just scrap everything and then spend a little dust terraforming down your system if you are about to lose it. Has basically the same effect id imagine. Id never do this though cos a lannister always pays his debts... (i always take my system back)

I think the purpose of Raze would be for the times you have a new system. You just colonized it, haven't had time to do much for it...and for some reason or another, the AI or another player want the system and will invade for it. Razing a system might put some negative anomalies on it to hamper the new owner.

Also, in terms of always tacking a system back, that's true...But there have been a few times where it's taken me a while to get a system I built up back. If I could have, I would have razed it simply so the enemy couldn't benefit from what I built up.

0badgesSend private message

NewHorizon

Newcomer

Message

NewHorizon

Newcomer

100g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 5, 2012, 6:44:47 PM

I like the idea of a negative anomaly as a sorta F you to the invader but if you blow up everything that is on the planet i feel like there should be some repercussions politically. Cant go around blowing up peoples homes. I understand the benefits of razing your planet when you are running from an enemy but i could see it being abused somewhat if restrictions arent placed on it.

0badgesSend private message

VIPFinalStrigon

Sheredyn

Message

VIPFinalStrigon

Sheredyn

33 000g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 5, 2012, 6:55:04 PM

NewHorizon wrote:
I like the idea of a negative anomaly as a sorta F you to the invader but if you blow up everything that is on the planet i feel like there should be some repercussions politically. Cant go around blowing up peoples homes. I understand the benefits of razing your planet when you are running from an enemy but i could see it being abused somewhat if restrictions arent placed on it.

I'm not sure...In World War II, for example, the Soviets employed a scorched earth strategy when Germany invaded. They destroyed everything they could as they retreated so that the invaders couldn't make use of any of their new conquests. When the tables turned and Germany was put on the retreat, they did much the same, so that the Soviets couldn't use anything.

Seeing as you're taking hits as well, giving up systems (and thus, losing all of the time and money you pumped into building those systems up), that should be enough of an incentive to draw the line somewhere for defense.

0badgesSend private message

steinernein

Newcomer

Message

steinernein

Newcomer

18 400g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 5, 2012, 8:58:07 PM

So the Soviets and the Germans in WW2 were both Pilgrims affinity right ?!

0badgesSend private message

Igncom1

Craver

Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery win wars.

Message

Igncom1

Craver

11 400g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 5, 2012, 9:07:36 PM

No, they were not that benevolent to the locals.

0badgesSend private message

greenmushroom23

Fanatic Survivor

Message

greenmushroom23

Fanatic Survivor

27 800g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 5, 2012, 10:31:46 PM

i see no "raze planet" ability anywere.... or auto explore...wtf man...why did we vote on it?

0badgesSend private message

Igncom1

Craver

Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery win wars.

Message

Igncom1

Craver

11 400g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 5, 2012, 10:41:45 PM

Auto explore is low in terms of the community's wish list and so keep getting shelved.

And as to raising planets people mean destroying all of the improvements, abandoning systems is a affinity for the pilgrims however.

0badgesSend private message

LordReynolds

Newcomer

Message

LordReynolds

Newcomer

100g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 5, 2012, 6:01:54 PM

Both Faction are basically required to expand by conquest. If all they ever get is broken down, burned wrecks of systems how can they be expected to play?

Cravers need to conquer systems in order to make use of em via their fids bonus. This is only useful if they do not have to spend 20+ turns rebuilding the systems. With raze, it will ruin the cravers main gameplay aspect: conquer stuff and turn it against the former owners.

Hissho are somewhat less relaint on the conquered system i nquestion but they still should not get a big fat nothing everytime.

In fact: noone should get a big fat nothing just because the defender cannot defend.

I hope these concerns are adressed at some point.

0badgesSend private message

Theodotus

in Disguise

"My God, it's full of stars . . . ."

Message

Theodotus

in Disguise

25 900g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 6, 2012, 12:42:49 AM

Razing systems will address the problem some people experienced with expansion disapproval resulting from having to conquer a lot of enemy systems in order to prevail in a war. Previously, all the conquered systems would really jack the expansion disapproval of the conqueror. With system razing, less than ideal conquests can just be exterminated.

I understand system razing to mean eliminating all the population. If it only means getting rid of the improvements, the above does not apply.

The Pilgrims' ability to evacuate a system leaves one pop behind, so it doesn't actually empty the system.

0badgesSend private message

Njero

Newcomer

Message

Njero

Newcomer

6 000g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 6, 2012, 2:23:04 AM

The OP and several others have mentioned removing improvements as a core focus of razing (and OP finds this to be a significant problem), but as you can do this for free already that clearly isn't the point of a razing feature. My personal preference, in fact, would be for a razing feature to leave (at least some) improvements intact, and only remove the population. I'd be happy either way though, as long as the population can be removed.

There are two potential opening states for a world to be razed: colonized by your faction, or colonized by an enemy faction. The former case would allow you to eliminate the population of a system targeted by your enemies (or which you colonized in error, derp-click!), denying your opponent the benefit of an established population base to contribute to their rebuilding efforts, or allowing you to tempt your opponents into investing resources colonizing a region you can easily retake at a later time. I'm sure there are plenty more strategic reasons for abandoning colonies that would come up in multiplayer. The latter would allow you to wrest control of a system from your opponents without saddling yourself with an unwanted planet, or leaving an easily re-takeable system should you be forced to retreat from that sector.

I haven't played as Pilgrims yet, so I'm not clear on the mechanics of the feature that Theodotus mentioned. An advantage in the area of planetary abandonment is fine, but I don't think it should be a monopoly on all strategic evacuation/elimination.

0badgesSend private message

Theodotus

in Disguise

"My God, it's full of stars . . . ."

Message

Theodotus

in Disguise

25 900g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 6, 2012, 3:26:55 AM

The Pilgrim affinity ability takes all pop except one and all improvements in a system and packs it into a colonizer called Fleet Errant. When the Fleet Errant arrives in a new system, it uses all the pop to colonize planets there, as well as transferring the improvements. More than one planet can be colonized this way all at once, assuming there is enough population in the Fleet Errant and the Pilgrim player has the requisite tech necessary to colonize the different plant types in the destination system.

0badgesSend private message

Njero

Newcomer

Message

Njero

Newcomer

6 000g2g pts

13 years ago

Jul 6, 2012, 6:11:25 AM

Given that description (and now I really want to play as Pilgrims!), I don't think a global ability to depopulate a colony would undermine the Pilgrims in any way.

0badgesSend private message

Stalker0

Newcomer

Message

Stalker0

Newcomer

14 000g2g pts

12 years ago

Jul 30, 2012, 2:32:29 AM

Theodotus wrote:
Razing systems will address the problem some people experienced with expansion disapproval resulting from having to conquer a lot of enemy systems in order to prevail in a war.

Yep, this is me is the primary reason people want razing.

Now...that doesn't necessarily have to be the only way, there may be other ways to mimick that effect.

0badgesSend private message

Firehound

Newcomer

Message

Firehound

Newcomer

100g2g pts

12 years ago

Jul 30, 2012, 2:36:06 AM

You can already effectively "raze" a planet. Scrap the improvements a turn before. Then the system collapses into a perpetually unhappy cesspool with 1 pop/planet before the ownership goes up unless it was a really good system to begin with.

For the Destroy system you control: I would like the ability to depop a colonized planet. Though there should be repercussions. Whether it be a happiness penalty for killing a ton of people or otherwise displacing them, it should be a penalty to the razer. And shouldn't be instantaneous.

0badgesSend private message

Ã¸rret

Newcomer

Message

Ã¸rret

Newcomer

100g2g pts

12 years ago

Jul 31, 2012, 10:21:30 AM

I would really appreciate the "raze" feature if that would mean i can wipe out an enemy colony without the need to own it myself. I really hate it to conquer an"toxic gas giant system" only to prevent the enemy from building cheap "block ships" in my backyard. In especially if you consider the expansion dissaproval malus in "Endless" difficulty. You cant offord owing masses of garbage systems when each of them ruins your empires approval.

0badgesSend private message

Igncom1

Craver

Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery win wars.

Message

Igncom1

Craver

11 400g2g pts

12 years ago

Jul 31, 2012, 10:48:39 AM

This is why i play UE, and build up my money before invasions so i can spam any needed approval improvements otherwise all i can say is take your invasion in steps and only invade parts of the enemy you can efficiently hold with good approval.

0badgesSend private message

Click here to login

Comment

Characters : 0

0badgesSend private message

PostCancel

[Discussion] Raze Planets: It kills Craver and hissho.

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Report comment

Moderate comment

Annotate comment

Moderate thread

Move thread