The Infamous Reno The Infamous Reno

AI building Starbases all over my "territory"

▼

AI building Starbases all over my "territory"

from GalCiv2 Forums
Hi,

I recently upgraded to the 1.11 patch, and granted, I haven't been playing the game for long, but I've encountered a pretty annoying issue.

Later in the game, the AI has taken to sticking Economy starbases all around my planets. My homeworld currently has economy starbases from all of the other four major civilizations around it, and I'm having to build influence starbases at a ridiculous rate. My side of the minimap looks like a rainbow there are so many. Recently, they've all started putting in Influence starbases too, all around my planets. I control about 1/3 of the map, so it's hard to keep up with them and still maintain my military. There are at least three starbases from other races around all of my systems, and even in some unpopulated ones. The economy starbases especially make no sense, as they're not getting any bonuses from them as far as I know.

I tried countering by going into their territory and building starbases, but I immediately start getting threats from them to remove them, and since I can't take on four civs at once at my current strength, I'm forced to let them do as they please.

I tried going into the Diplomacy menu and looking for an option to force them to remove them, but apparently such a thing doesn't exist, which hardly seems fair, as my only other option is to declare war on four other civilizations. There are so many that I would literally have to trade away all of my tech tree and all of my money to get rid of even half of them.

I scouted their territory and they're only doing it to me, they don't have any bases in each other's territory.

It's also incredibly annoying to have them randomly park fleets of warships around my planets. I'm not at war with anyone, but if I were, it'd be trouble. I tried doing the same to them, and got the same threats as before.

My relations with three of them are close or warm, and the last is neutral if it matters, so I don't understand why they're doing it. None of them are allied with each other either.

I'd also like to take the opportunity to reiterate the need for some sort of restrictions on enemy ships and starbases in my territory. For one thing, there are so many that the game is starting to lag when I start scrolling around my own territory, and two, if they declare war, they're already in prime position to attack, while I can't do the same. I'd like to see the ability to restrict foreign ships with weapons or starbases in an opponent's territory, or at least the option to tell them to get lost.

I've read other posts that all make the point that its impossible to control borders in space, and that's true to a certain degree, but I think that this is going a bit overboard, as no soveriegn entity would allow another power to build on this scale anywhere near their planets. I know there's the whole space is vertical too argument, but civilizations on earth claim airspace, so I don't see this as being any different. I know influence and territory are two seperate things, and I'm not talking about influence being redefined as borders, but rather the introduction of a new element, perhaps a diplomatic ability, that allows you to place restrictions on what the AI can park near your territory, perhaps based on your current relations with them.

Neutral and below would allow only freighters in, warm would allow scouts in addition to that, close would allow ships with weapons below a certain power, and alliance would allow warships and perhaps a certain number of starbases. (Of course, there should be an option for the player to restrict at will what is and isn't allowed into his territory.)

I'm not talking about this being a 100% AI is barred from your territory, they can choose to ignore it perhaps if they have a higher military or diplomatic ability than their opponent, or are currently at war with you.

Another idea is to set borders, but to only allow the AI or player to restrict what they can see, IE, if you went behind the AI and slipped some ships through their sensor grid they wouldn't be able to tell you get them out, because they wouldn't know they were there. Perhaps this would work better if there were a "Listening Post/Observation Post" module for the starbase, or heck, I guess just better sensor upgrades for them. Inversely, if they parked some ships in your fog of war area, you wouldn't
be able to stop them from entering your "territory" unless you uncovered them. Maybe there's a way to work the espionage ability in here, but I've written enough as it is.

...Wow, look how much I typed. Anyhow, my main point is is that this is really annoying, and I'd like to see some way other than declaring war or buying them off to get rid of their ships and starbases around my planets.

Thanks for reading, if you made it this far.

19,555 views 46 replies
Reply #26 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
anyone, and I mean anyone that build a starbase of any sorts in my territory/influence sphere gets it's ass kicked.. I immediatly declare war and start killing them.... the AI actually stops building them in that game
Reply #27 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
You can trade for a minning starbase for around 950,000 BC (or there abouts) So basically, you cant trade for them lol, but then again, there game turning things, so it should be nah impossible.

I agree, there should be a "get your ships/starbases out of my territory" command (wasnt there one in galciv1? Or am I confusing it with a different game?)

Not sure why they would build economy starbases, they always build influence ones in my area, I love it cause it gives me a excuse to goto war!!

ST
TouchTasks - Access tasks with ease on Windows touchscreens.
Reply #28 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Since I'm getting demands to (re)move starbases from other races when they are to close to their planets, I want to be able to make that demand too.
Reply #29 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I have thought about posting exactly this.... Do you moonlight as a psychic???

I HATE that other races can just waltz in to my territory. It's the one thing that keeps me from playing this game alot.... The common argument "you can't control borders in space". Anyone remember the nuetral zone? If Cap'n Kirk so much as went NEAR it they were getting an earful from some Romulan with nothing to do but watch space.

IMHO, implementing borders is not difficult. Your influence establishes the border.... It's a boundary, period. It establishes your "domain". That doesn't mean you can see all of it. You have to patrol... build starbases and equip them with monitoring staions and the like. Any race infringing on your space without your permission is considered commiting a hostile act. You can shoot them out of the sky with no diplomatic repercussions, as you were not the aggressor, you were simply defending yourself. In turn, if you violate the border of another race without their permission, he can blast you without anyone batting an eye.

It would require treaties with all of the races, from war, non-aggression, nuetrality, trade/economic, open borders to full alliance. If you don't want anybody in your pool, hold to non aggression treaties. If you don't want warships in, stay at the trade level. Open borders allows any type of ship in, while a full alliance would be necessary for starbases to be built in your territory. This concept is in hundreds of games, and is much more favorable to the way the game is now. I'm sure it could even be expanded upon to create mid to end game situations that could swing the balance of power to keep the game interesting.

And if the Yor or the Drengin have numbers on you, and decide they want to mess with you anyways, make sure you have the "No, no, you go right ahead and build that starbase cuz I don't want to get my a@# kicked just yet option" instaed of an automatic declaration of war.

I hope I have not overstayed my welcome, being this is my first post....

Now, if we can just stop all of the "I can't hack it anymore, we're wussing out and giving all of our worlds to the guy you really have a problem with..." stuff.... Where's your dignity... your honor... fight like a Klingon until the bitter end... even if it is just 2 turns away....



Reply #30 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I've seen the arceans build multiple economic starbases around my planets. The share bonuses with allies rule wasn't on btw.
Reply #31 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I hope they dont implement boarders cause Im a worse abuser of building influence and military starbases in other peoples areas then they are to me, I think its a cool tactic to try to demoralize the enemy with influence and crank up a military advantage before attacking.

ST
Reply #32 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Your influence establishes the border.... It's a boundary, period


No no no no no no no.

No.

I'm not against your idea completely, but this particular part I do not agree with. Borders would have to be seperate from influence since sometimes your planets fall within someone else's influence. If you include a second border system which will never overlap someone else's planets then that's a good idea, apart from a couple of concerns.

1. What happens if you have two seperated regions of control (if a race surrenders to you for instance)? You'd have to have a way of getting ships from one to the other. Perhaps something along the lines of the way range works (you can order ships straight through, but cannot change course.

2. There should be 'free passage' treaties to allow you to pass through friendly nations space. Perhaps this could be rolled into alliances.

3. Non-hostiles such as freighters or scouts would be excluded. Obviously unarmed but dangerous ships (troop ships, possibly colony and constructor) would not
Reply #33 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
IMHO, if the computer can demand (ask?) that you remove fleets, starbases, etc., then we should have the ability to do likewise. The computer already pretty fairly evaluates whether it wants to take you on/out militarily. It should be a simple assessment of yes (I'll dismantle/move) or no (make me!). Perhaps your declaration to move or face the consequences, can only be delivered if /when one of your warships comes upon or stands in sensor range of said transgressor? Not a programmer, so only a suggestion. It seems to me though, that enforcing the limits of your influence by physical presence/patrol is the minimum requirement. Also, planets belonging to other civilizations must be allowed the ability to place said bases within some defined range of their planet to allow some way to keep from being arbitrarily rolled over by the mere chance of falling into anothers sphere of influence (again within the limits already set of max starbases per sector).
Reply #34 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Of course, there is the other factor that I've noticed in a large map game. I had a logistics rating of 15, had built 25 starbases (many of them influence based, sneaky ole me!) and my price for another starbase was at 2045. Now, in the same game, the Iconians, who were about equal to me in strength across the board (which wasn't that great) had 71 starbases!!! And that was just inside my area of sight which was about a third of the galaxy (wonderful thing those Eyes of the Universe mixed with a engine heavy Tiny ship). 71 starbases. The Iconian Logistics was 15, same as mine. How in blazes could they afford that?!? I was practically broke despite earning 500 bc per turn. I checked their income by surrendering and it was less than mine. Just wondering if someone knew something I didn't.


The idea of starbase invasion with influencers is pretty obvious but I don't agree with it. No matter how you look at the galaxy, races are going to be very aware of where their "space" ends and where your "space" begins. Borders are not just an idea, they are a fact of life, whether it be on a planet (thinking of one very close to the stellar mass known as Sol) or in the fictional depiction of future space. Somebody waltzing in with constructors, warships, and troop transports just isn't going to be tolerated (unless the aggressor grossly outmatches the aggressee, in which case the latter whimpers in the corner like a well-beaten dog). However, influencial and political borders are two different things. We cannot confuse the issue. For example, Japan has a defined political border yet American culture does rather well there. American influence extends into Japan but if America tried to transport troops or build a military complex inside Japan's political borders, the Japanese govornment would have a kitten! The opposite effect is true. Japan's influence reaches American soil but their politics do not. So, long-winded or no, influence and politics are not bedmates.


I am not, however, just spouting off demands that MUST be met. I'm not the Drengin Empire (although they did technically kick the living snot out of me in a previous game). I don't know what kind of work would go into creating such a political boundary and how devastating such an endeavor would be to the rational sanity of programmers that have brought me such a wonderful way to waste hours upon hours (upon hours!) of my life in complementary enjoyment. I hope that such a request for political borders can be met but will not be too distraught if it is not, since I've got a good idea of how much work goes into programming.


And now, for my grand finale, I will present to each of you still conscious after all this time, my idea on political boundaries.
Political boundaries are naturally based on habitation. Habitation in this game occurs only on planets (super duper space station cities just aren't too popular here, thank the Users
Reply #35 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
There should be no limits on where anyone builds anything, only consequences, but ATM there is no "get out" option for us, once/if that is added, the playing field is equaled IMO, why should boundries limit what someone does? Its up to you weather you tolerate it or not, same as them, but again, we have no "get out" option, other then attacking and I feel STRONGLY that we need a get out option ourselves.

I see it like this, the AI is a coward as it is, the last thing we need is something else that limits the AI, haveing the AI build a starbase to screw you is one of the few things the AI does to provoke you, they rarely declare war, so this is one of the few annoying things they do that can provoke you to going to war with them.

As they rarely declare war on you, and they dont do this one thing that can provoke you to goto war, theres not much left, so I feel that ANYTHING that can cause a conflict is a good thing.

Anyway, sorry if this is unpopular, but ANYTHING the AI can do to make ANY kind of a challenge is worth its weight in gold.

ST
Reply #36 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I'm not sure what version you're playing but in the last game I played, I was playing good and the Drengin, Drath, Iconia AND the Alteran's ALL declared war on me and all within about six month's of each other. And being attacked is a common thing for me. The AI knows the difference between suicide and a good fight. I've had a high powered civ and nobody would come near me, but then I started in a perfect position and got everything right. In every other game, I've had declarations of war at any time the AI had even a chance to capture a planet or two.
Reply #37 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I find them annoying too.
What if you could influence capture or conquer starbases? If you could do that then they would need to be built in areas you could defend.
Reply #38 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
No no no no no no no.

No.

Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

Yes.

You know why? Because its allready like this in the game according to most of the UP "laws". Your denying something that allready exists in the game. I recall many a up proposal that charges other civs for having starbases or planets in your "territory".
Reply #39 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Point to Kanaric. I'd forgotten about that. But is the game using the influence border as the mark of your territory? I think so but I'm too certain. I still support the idea of political boundaries though. I should considering the dissertation I made earlier
Reply #40 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
In reading all the replies, I would have to agree that political and cultural boundaries are different things, but for the sake of programming and simplicity, and the way they play out in the game, the cultural borders would suffice quite nicely...

I like the idea of having each planet have a "political" influence, but then you'd have all these polka-dots of politics all over the map that would be completely different from the "spheres of influence"...

In a recent game I had one lone planet engulfed in an AI's influence. There were 7 of his planets all around, and my culture was not strong enough to reach that planet. To use the US/Japan anology from previous post... It would be like Japan was in Kansas, surrounded by the US on all sides. The way the game is now, that planet would eventually rebel and join the AI, unless I took the steps I did to save it. I built an influence base in MY territory near the border, and gradually upgraded it until I could keep my planet.

The AI then plopped an influence base in my territory right between the planet and my base. It ruined the game for me, as I don't tolerate that and blew it up. I then spent the rest of the game fighting him, cuz he couldn't believe I had the nads to tell him "no".

I think the current influence model would lend itself quite well to being a border, and that there should be a nuetral zone between the various influences, which are off limits to any building or entry by either side... unless there is a treaty that allows it, or you want to go to war, in which case, build away !!!

The dynamic of gaining/losing trade, alliances and the like would go along way in the mid to end game.
Reply #41 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I too would like a 'get out of my space' option in diplomancy.

Also, would be nice to have some type of 'respect our borders' treaty you could sign with races. When you sign the treaty you are restricted from moving into and/or building things in the other's space. And let there be an option that if you do move in, the next turn or so a diplomancy screen pops up where you have the option to break the treaty, pay a penality or something like that.
Reply #42 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

Yes.

You know why? Because its allready like this in the game according to most of the UP "laws". Your denying something that allready exists in the game. I recall many a up proposal that charges other civs for having starbases or planets in your "territory".


But you're still ignoring the problem of having planets that are potentially within another race's influence. Or your entire empire (it happens). What precisely are you supposed to do then? Just sit there and not build anything?
Reply #43 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
No118 has a valid point, which is why political and influence should be two things, I believe. The influence trait is actually a good one as it stands and, unless the devs feel the need, doesn't have to be modified. I like the influence aspect of the game. Keeps me on my toes when I butt up against a bigger empire (yes, I'm constantly the underdog in my games. I hate low difficulties where the AI sits like a dumb lump, but am not yet good enough to tackle the game at challenging). But the one thing that continually irks me is the title of this thread. There really are NO borders in the game and, I'm sorry, but I think that makes the game a lot less exciting for me. Knowing that, with a 25 move transport I can jump all the way through an enemy "territory" in two turns (maybe one) and attack his innermost worlds (or the converse happening to me) is ridiculous. Ever hear of the sci-fi terms "border world" and "core world?" I have and they sound like a really good addition to this game.
Reply #44 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Now that is an idea eravenheart, having two different things for cutural/ social influence and political influence.

Social influence would be a lot more flexable, changing with the times. The political influence would be the so called borders of the empire where you could restrict travel and keep others from building bases.

I like.
Reply #45 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
But the one thing that continually irks me is the title of this thread


There was a reason I put it in quotation marks.

Working in a political border and the diplomatic options that would go with it seems like a simple and fun way to improve diplomacy and make it more versatile. Perhaps the influence border could be a dotted line and a lighter color on the minimap, and the political border a solid line and a darker color.
Reply #46 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Well, I've been giving this a little more thought and I'd like to see what you all think. The political boundary would begin at the core system. In this case, we'll go with Sol. Now, with the Terran capital located on earth, that is the political figurehead of the Terran Empire. The political boundary would start there and encompass every planet in the system (although right now, only Mars is of any use). That boundary would also extend outward a set number of parsecs from the STAR, not Earth. Let's call this 4 parsecs. No other empire can enter this "restricted space" without having at least a travel agreement with the Terrans. Now, in order for the political power of Earth to expand, the Terrans have to colonize a world. Just establishing a colony is NOT enough. A political building should be created and ready for construction on a world. Only one of these buildings need be in any one system but they can be built on all planets (for redundancy protection). The creation of this building creates another political center that radiates a border out 4 parsecs from the star at the center. I know, 4 parsecs isn't much, but the inclusion of several new techs in the diplomacy branch of the tech tree can increase the range of political influence out beyond the initial four. That will still leave a good number of parsecs in a sector with only one system passable by other empires. In order to blockade that area, if you will, a starbase can be constructed with a new module pack that allows the starbase to act as a political center. Upgrades to the modules can increase the range of this as well. This way, a player can block off an entire sector (after considerable expense in tech research and starbase construction since the modules would have to have a hefty construction cost and even create a maintenance fee for the starbase). Political boundaries in a sector can ONLY extend to the edge of that sector. Any overlap with another sector is lost unless the new sector also "belongs" to the empire. For the question of multiple owners in a single sector, political boundaries end one parsec from the boundary of the conflicting empire, creating a "neutral zone" of two parsecs between the empires. Planets "caught" in another empire's political boundary (due to two empires colonizing a system and one building the political center before the other) do not "switch over" like they would if they were culturally dominated but the world can be traded with an increase in value to the political "owner" of the area. If the second empire in question builds a political center in the same system, the neutral zone effect takes over and both worlds are within the neutral zone. Passage in a neutral zone is possible but doing so should lower relations with the other empire unless an agreement is made (only trade vessels can ignore neutral zones). Of course, all of this is useless without a new politics system that would allow new treaties/agreements, even if they are just added into the existing trade screen. Anyway, I think I covered most of it. If I left anything out, don't be afraid to point it out. And arguments are always welcome, as long as they remain civilized and constructive. I like when people point out things I haven't thought of.

Another dissertation is at an end.