"We will not tolerate the presence of your forces in our territory. "

[Resan]

Imoh the AI having a fuss over armed freighters should stay. As other has said, it's your job to keep the private fleet safe.

But we do need some system, that makes escort wait outside of the aliens territory while the freighter does its thing.

I have also had the AI giving a fuss over armed mining stations (I think...) I've always armed my mining stations to fight of pirates. Then the AI took a colony in a system I had mining stations, and started bugging me about military forces. Could find any military and I don't arm my freighters.

Not sure if I agree with that or not, but a bit of a problem when there are no in game way to remove a trading station.

So maybe just go for planetary level shielding or something on mining bases [:)]

[taltamir]

if the AI makes a fuss about it, at least it can refer to it as "armed civilians" rather then "military"... and there should be an option to not allow the AI to let armed civilians into other empire territory (just like there is an option to not allow the AI to colonize / mine in other empire's territory)

[elliotg]

Thanks for all of these comments on this issue everyone. I can understand how annoying those repeated warning messages and the affect on your reputation must be.

I'll give some more thought to this, but probably a simple fix would be to reduce the level of offense taken by other empires when private ships with weapons enter their systems.

Also, note that freighters will not trade with other empire's that you are at war with or have trade sanctions against. However some freighters may have already been on their way to those empires before war broke out, so once they arrive they'll stop, and then probably run away when they see the enemy.

Freighters will actually trade with any empire that you're not at war with or have trade sanctions against - not just empires that you have a free trade agreement with.

[Fishman]

The simplest fix would be to eliminate the problem entirely, since the player cannot do anything about it, and there are hundreds of the damn things, all completely uncontrollable. A more complex fix would involve deals about armed freighters and restricting them from entering. Another would be to make it so a free trade deal becomes an actual requirement for freighters to enter alien space at all: Otherwise what's the point of the deal? If no deal is needed to trade, what purpose does this deal serve? Merely "reducing" the effect won't really help, since there is no way to actually STOP the freighters. Also, there's the problem with offensitivity over auto-escorts. Honestly, the AI should be less concerned about the presence of military ships, and more offended by the presence of colony ships attempting to take over their space.

[taltamir]

the free trade deal gives you both a 10% boost to income... i don't know what its 10% of... but thats what it is.

I agree with you that a better way would be that trade agreement make it so that you can send traders in the first place.

[Fishman]

ORIGINAL: taltamir this is sensible... it also has to do with costs... having armed merchants is unsustainable compared to an armed military escort.

Are you joking? Having armed merchantmen is FAR cheaper than an armed military escort! There are several points. 1. There are HUNDREDS of merchant cruisers flying about. Assigning an escort to each of them involves building several hundred battlecruisers and attaching them to each one individually, then making sure they REMAIN attached. 2. Several hundred battlecruisers costs WAY more than simply taking the battlecruisers' GUNS and stapling them onto the merchant cruisers. 3. When you do this, the private sector pays for this, at no cost to the Imperial budget. Some of them occasionally seem to decide not to purchase these armed designs, opting for the unarmed default designs. Natural selection quickly resolves these cases. Space is a tough place where wimps eat flaming plasma death.

The sustainability of armed merchantmen has already been empirically proven based on the fact that people have DONE it, and this is why this issue has come up. In comparison, equipping each merchantman with an escort battlecruiser not only fails to solve the problem at all, but is logistically infeasible in terms of both player time and cost.

[deanco2]

This seems intended on the part of the developer.

There are warnings if a ship design is not correct.  It would be trivial to add a warning, 'this design cannot equip weapons' as we have a similar warning about the military ship class if you try to take all the weapons off.

In terms of how that affects relations, that's another kettle of fish I won't get into as I go the traditional 'military escort' route.

But it does seem like intended design.

[taltamir]

ORIGINAL: Fishman

ORIGINAL: taltamir this is sensible... it also has to do with costs... having armed merchants is unsustainable compared to an armed military escort.

Are you joking? Having armed merchantmen is FAR cheaper than an armed military escort! There are several points. 1. There are HUNDREDS of merchant cruisers flying about. Assigning an escort to each of them involves building several hundred battlecruisers and attaching them to each one individually, then making sure they REMAIN attached. 2. Several hundred battlecruisers costs WAY more than simply taking the battlecruisers' GUNS and stapling them onto the merchant cruisers. 3. When you do this, the private sector pays for this, at no cost to the Imperial budget. Some of them occasionally seem to decide not to purchase these armed designs, opting for the unarmed default designs. Natural selection quickly resolves these cases. Space is a tough place where wimps eat flaming plasma death.

The sustainability of armed merchantmen has already been empirically proven based on the fact that people have DONE it, and this is why this issue has come up. In comparison, equipping each merchantman with an escort battlecruiser not only fails to solve the problem at all, but is logistically infeasible in terms of both player time and cost.

I meant in the context of the game, I am the one quoting how armed merchantmen worked in real life and is proven to be real and functional.

However, it SHOULD be more expensive... Why in the world would you assign ESCORTS to every ship? you have warp engines that let you respond to any pirate activities in the system instantly, and any pirate activity in nearby system is effectively instant at higher warp tech levels. If 3 nearby star systems have 50 merchant ships between them, plonking a gun on each is cheaper than assigning a full escort to each (50 escort)... but 6 gunboats (2 in each system, attack any hostile that enters the system, if a larger force arrives the 4 ships from the neighboring systems warp in as well) are cheaper then 50 guns and FAR more effective (since those ships are built for war)... that was my point... it is cheaper to have unarmed merchant in a SECURE area, but ONLY if it is secure. Also extra cost of merchant ships SHOULDN'T be free as it costs the merchants money. if it is in the game then that is a mis-implementation...

there are several issues here: 1. Pirates should not blow up ships, they should plunder them. 2. Pirates should never attack star-bases, there is NOTHING for them to gain 3. If pirates attack a mining station, it should be to plunder, not destroy it. 4. The AI should not be "escorting" ships but securing systems... since I have never seen a deep space battle via hyperspace intercept it seems that combat is only plausible in systems... so you need to secure merchants in systems, and in their destination... this means proactively engaging pirates (or enemy empires) as they enter your systems. 5. Armed merchants should cost more and thus produce less income.

However, until that is all implemented putting a few guns on your merchants is by far the best tactic, but it has the downside of making all the other empires furious at you.

[Interesting]

Thanks Elliot.