Page 1 of 1

Suggestion: Diplomatic & Colony Templates

Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2022 1:38 pm
by mordachai
An Idea I had:

Make Colony Templates, and Diplomatic Templates.

Similar to troop & fleet templates - let me define what should be:
- Befriend
- Ally
- Close Ally
- Undermine
- Enslave
- Exterminate

Like - what goals define those - and then I can set for each relation empire - manual - "befriend" or "neutral" or "undermine" - and then the automation could actually work towards that (if I'm using suggest, then it would suggest towards those goals, but NO FURTHER).

If automated relationships - then it can choose the goal-category, but I can still define what's included in that category (such as I could remove galaxy map sharing from all of them).

-----

Same thing for Colony Templates:

- Minor
- Established (?)
- Major
(I don't recall what the games terms are since they're mostly invisible / irrelevant to me as a player currently)

But let me define:
- Buildings to build in what priority
- Troop levels to build (as actual numbers of troops - the troop template could still be using the current troop templates for minor/major/whatever - but the target count of troops - the troop-level - should be up to me based on colony template).

And this could end the spamming me with inappropriate suggestions constantly.
Instead, I'd have the ability to define what I mean by each of these things, and the ability to then tell the automation what I want it to pursue, both at in diplomacy, and in colony management -- and I could keep my definitions across games (and save them as named templates if I wanted -- though I personally doubt I care about that feature, seems easy & obvious & some folks would care).

Re: Suggestion: Diplomatic & Colony Templates

Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2022 1:42 pm
by mordachai
A somewhat obvious follow-on would be to allow me to define other categories for worlds:

Troop Mustering/Staging Point
Ship Construction Nexus

However, those seem more like "traits" I'd want to add or remove independently of the base "minor/established/major" _

such that I could have any level of world indicate that it should focus on troops, or/and on ship building, or not on either one.

There are probably other tags worth considering? Mining focus? Entertainment & Tourism Mecca? Science / Academic Focus? Diplomatic Center?

...the tags could be mutually exclusive if that's easier - so a world has a level + an (optional) focus attribute (but just one?)

Multiple is more natural, but even a single focus would be a welcome improvement.

NOTE: it would be REALLY NICE if we could automate the movement of troops towards a regional staging point so that invasion fleets could have a one-stop-destination per theater of war for reinforcements.

Re: Suggestion: Diplomatic & Colony Templates

Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2022 8:30 pm
by StormingKiwi
100% agreed.

Also the "Apply Population Policy to all colonies" button is a nuisance....

Because it doesn't apply to future colonies, and aliens that are not known to your empire are not listed. So I still have to update this more frequently than is ideal.

Re: Suggestion: Diplomatic & Colony Templates

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2022 12:36 am
by mordachai
StormingKiwi wrote: Sat Oct 29, 2022 8:30 pm 100% agreed.

Also the "Apply Population Policy to all colonies" button is a nuisance....

Because it doesn't apply to future colonies, and aliens that are not known to your empire are not listed. So I still have to update this more frequently than is ideal.
Yep - that could also be some sort of a template...

Although - really - isn't all of this simply because the AI is too dumb to do the most basically correct thing - which is move population to places where they'll thrive - instead of places where it bogs down and crimps your pop capacity?

Fix that - and this thing is unnecessary -

Albeit - yes, agreed - it should at a minimum apply to future worlds & pops -
possibly by expressing it as "these races only" as oppossed to having to individually mark each one as a yes/no, which is tedious and inherently going to fall short / be short-sighted, as you note, above.