Bugs stole my Korabian spice!

[Sarissofoi]

So I play as Zenox. Having nice time.
My scouts find a moon(uncolonizable) with Korabian Spice.
So I bulit mine here with defensive battery.
Then some lizards go on war with me and they destroy mine but my fleet and defensive structures fend them.
So I start fighting them but then I notice that there is no Korabian DefBase in my list.
I check and I find that some bugs colonize Korabian Moon.
With 2 my defensive bases on it.
Whose are they bugs bases.
And my empire didn even notice that.
And these wasnt ever act of war.
...
Have enough DW for another year.

[Nedrear]

I am sure it was not a barren moon as they are uncolonizeable but a desert world. And the other things are standard.

[Erik Rutins]

Hi Sarissofoi,

It should be a serious diplomatic hit for them to do that. Also, with Legends if that was within your sphere of influence, they would only be able to colonize it if at war (in which case, your defensive bases would fire on them). The only situation where they can colonize it without being at war is if it is in neutral space. I agree there should be some kind of warning and ideally an option to open fire (and risk war) if a colony ship approaches.

Regards,

- Erik

[Malevolence]

That's not to say that a weapons control status isn't needed.

Others have commented on the need to quarantine systems in terms of friendly movement, well I would suggest that fleets and ships need a weapons control status that overrides the idea of war for the above reason -- to impose a quarantine by force.  I've documented many cases where fighting with ships when you are not at war with the faction causes all kinds of AI headaches. So far the fix has been to make war more likely.

However, I think this kind of system would greatly assist in protection of key assets, colonies and facilities where weapon systems may be fired at any target not positively recognized as friendly. For example, keeping others out of debris fields. This would also benefit the AI, in that, players could not slip troop transports past starbases and defensive bases to effectively seize a colony when not at war.

Examples could be
-- weapons free = fire at any state-owned target not friendly
-- weapons tight = fired only at state-owned targets recognized as hostile by disliked, or attacking other friendly assets
-- weapons hold = fire only in self-defense, at war targets, or in response to a command (the only current weapons control status)

This isn't to say that fighting shouldn't have the same diplomatic consequences they do now, but it allows the player to draw a line in the sand around important resources, assets, etc.

[MasterChief]

ORIGINAL: Malevolence

That's not to say that a weapons control status isn't needed.

Others have commented on the need to quarantine systems in terms of friendly movement, well I would suggest that fleets and ships need a weapons control status that overrides the idea of war for the above reason -- to impose a quarantine by force.  I've documented many cases where fighting with ships when you are not at war with the faction causes all kinds of AI headaches. So far the fix has been to make war more likely.

However, I think this kind of system would greatly assist in protection of key assets, colonies and facilities where weapon systems may be fired at any target not positively recognized as friendly. For example, keeping others out of debris fields. This would also benefit the AI, in that, players could not slip troop transports past starbases and defensive bases to effectively seize a colony when not at war.

Examples could be
-- weapons free = fire at any state-owned target not friendly
-- weapons tight = fired only at state-owned targets recognized as hostile by disliked, or attacking other friendly assets
-- weapons hold = fire only in self-defense, at war targets, or in response to a command (the only current weapons control status)

This isn't to say that fighting shouldn't have the same diplomatic consequences they do now, but it allows the player to draw a line in the sand around important resources, assets, etc.

Now your talking... along with quarantines in friendly situations, "Gun Boat" diplomacy opportunities would really increase the richness of an already incredible game.

[Sarissofoi]

They seriusly shouldnt be able to colonize planets/moons with military bases on it(or any other basses too).
Seriusly do you imagine colonization attempt on Giblartar or Fort Knox?
BTw If military bases give you some sort influence in system(in legends)?

[dawilko]

Perhaps military stations ect, should throw a small 'infulance' bubble around the planet or % of the system they are in.

[NinjaCool]

Seems like an interesting idea dawilko. Just enough sphere of influence to cover a planet if a military station is build on it to symbolize your empire claiming the planet but not the system itself would stop what Sarissofoi has experienced, although the AI should need to learn this idea to at least some degree.

Perhaps if this opens up to too many possibilities to be exploited by a player, then maybe link it to only be able to build military station with a sphere of influence at extremely rare luxury resources where no empires have a presence in the system and/or also link it to the distance from your nearest colony so you cant go calming planets half way across the galaxy using military stations?

[HectorOfTroy]

ORIGINAL: NinjaCool

Seems like an interesting idea dawilko. Just enough sphere of influence to cover a planet if a military station is build on it to symbolize your empire claiming the planet but not the system itself would stop what Sarissofoi has experienced, although the AI should need to learn this idea to at least some degree.

Perhaps if this opens up to too many possibilities to be exploited by a player, then maybe link it to only be able to build military station with a sphere of influence at extremely rare luxury resources where no empires have a presence in the system and/or also link it to the distance from your nearest colony so you cant go calming planets half way across the galaxy using military stations?

Hmm, very much likely to be exploited by a player.

If you are slow to colonise and Ai grabs your planet, bad luck. Go find another one or take it over by other means (war, trade, sphere of influence ).

let's not make the game completely easy, we do need some challenge.

[Mysterius]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

I agree there should be some kind of warning and ideally an option to open fire (and risk war) if a colony ship approaches.

I support the idea.
However, the AI often send a colony ship to an already colonized planet because they weren't aware it was, or because the ship was too slow and got here late. Defensive bases shouldn't fire in this case, since the planet is already colonized anyway.

[martok]

ORIGINAL: Malevolence

Examples could be
-- weapons free = fire at any state-owned target not friendly
-- weapons tight = fired only at state-owned targets recognized as hostile by disliked, or attacking other friendly assets
-- weapons hold = fire only in self-defense, at war targets, or in response to a command (the only current weapons control status)

This isn't to say that fighting shouldn't have the same diplomatic consequences they do now, but it allows the player to draw a line in the sand around important resources, assets, etc.

I like this. Would very much like to see it implemented!

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

I agree there should be some kind of warning and ideally an option to open fire (and risk war) if a colony ship approaches.

If this is actually implemented, I believe the diplomatic hit should never be against that who "owns" the space. If it's in your sphere of influence, your right to colonize should take priority over the mine.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Malevolence

That's not to say that a weapons control status isn't needed.

Others have commented on the need to quarantine systems in terms of friendly movement, well I would suggest that fleets and ships need a weapons control status that overrides the idea of war for the above reason -- to impose a quarantine by force.  I've documented many cases where fighting with ships when you are not at war with the faction causes all kinds of AI headaches. So far the fix has been to make war more likely.

However, I think this kind of system would greatly assist in protection of key assets, colonies and facilities where weapon systems may be fired at any target not positively recognized as friendly. For example, keeping others out of debris fields. This would also benefit the AI, in that, players could not slip troop transports past starbases and defensive bases to effectively seize a colony when not at war.

Examples could be
-- weapons free = fire at any state-owned target not friendly
-- weapons tight = fired only at state-owned targets recognized as hostile by disliked, or attacking other friendly assets
-- weapons hold = fire only in self-defense, at war targets, or in response to a command (the only current weapons control status)

This isn't to say that fighting shouldn't have the same diplomatic consequences they do now, but it allows the player to draw a line in the sand around important resources, assets, etc.

Add in there fire on ANY colony ships. Yep, you may end up at war with your best ally, but it may be better than losing the rare resource.

[colonyan]

It would be nice if sphere of influence had two layers.
1. Inner layer which gives exclusive resource access right.
2. Outer layer which gives territory effect.

But yeah if some sort of significant investment can assure sphere of influence remote from any colony would be interesting.
Also, pirate will have more use to attack those kind of influence projecting star base. You pay(or give ships/resource) them to
attack it. If AI can manage those aspects it would be cool.