Zones of control

So what you are looking for isn't "zones of control" in the wargame sense (movement blocked/slowed by adjacent units) but rather political boundaries in space? For example that sectors owned by a certain race would be off-limits to all other races?

That would severely limit certain cultural strategies, cause issues with sectors where different star systems are owned by different races, potentially create issues with path-finding and probably also create some opportunity for abuse (ring-fence strategies for example). It's bad enough that you can already ring-fence using 0-maintenance spaceships...

It's an interesting idea, though... maybe a 1-parsec exclusion zone from all starbases and star systems for ships with >0 attack would be possible... still creates issues though.

GalCiv is supposed to be played like chess. There are no ZoC's in chess (except in the case of a check). Besides, it's hard to patrol approximately 96 square light-years of space, especially with a single ship.

There's no peace treaty in chess though and also no fog of war. I think I see where Kevin is coming from, it's a bit cheesy to sign a peace and then build up huge armadas of ships that are moved into position for when war will begin again. A peace treaty in the game is more like a cease-fire with no restrictions beyond actual attacks.

Going back to Kevin's original suggestion, allowing peace-time attacks on ships from another race that are found within a controlled sector would open some interesting possibilities and make stealth more important. Probably not a very good idea to extend this to freighters and constructors though...

Right, Alf.

Not that the zone of control would prevent people from entering automatically, but they would be treated as minor hostile acts to the empire that owns the area. And not all areas would fall under this zone, it would be tightly coupled with planet and starbase ownership. Build a starbase, get a bit of control. IIRC in Civ, you couldn't however, build a city within another empires zone of control and likewise this would prevent an enemy starbase from appearing deep in your territory (as it realistically also seems incredible that an empire could just construct a startbase in my home region without me being aware until it just appears).

And then if you sent ships into enemy territory, depending on your position with them, they may either allow it or demand you leave under the threat of war. Alliance partners have free movement in their ally territory, but then also I think the penalty for using the alliance to mass for war should be severe on your global reputation.

Another thought, this could also be coupled with some technology to enhance the sensor aspect of the game where you could get warning blips on your mini-map or auto-center to enemy ships that cross your zone of control.

Ships in MY sectors don't bother me so much. Although there should be some penalty for loading fleets of ships outside your enemies stars, then declaring war.

Starbases, however, are another matter.

Starbase construction 10 sectors from your nearest world, and "unhindered" next to enemy systems is cheesy to say the least. Some kind of limit would add more of a strategic aspect to resource grabbing. Right now it's too easy to build "undefeatable" systems with dozens of starbases (which have no maint costs).

My personal solution in limiting starbases would be to allow up to (% of culture/10) (in any sector)starbases in any given sector (which would max us out at 9 since there is always some "enemy" influence) - a quite respectable number. Perhaps with a minimum of 1 per system. Traded starbases should also count against your limit per sector (ie, you have 9 starbases in a sector, you can't trade for a 10th unless you trade one of yours in that sector away).

Not that I expect such a drastic change, and I'd rather see some interface tweaks first, but I'd favor it.

~SDC~

In Civ3, you cannot build a city on an opponents land, unless you are at peace with them.

Why not ask to retire the sectors, and have it go by squares out from planets/star bases? Base it on tech/influence to determine the multiplier out, and you could have a UP issue to set the limit. Where to different empires claim the same territory, in peace time, largest influence wins if there is a significant difference, neither if both are near each other, and neither owns it when at war.

Of course, this would ruin much of the game as it stands, but it doesn't sound like you guys are really interested in that here. You realize that the reason you can build starbases anywhere is to allow you to extend your range out to grab new resources, settle new planets, and get your ships within range of your opponents. You don't use his starbases except where you are allied, and the 'share bases between allies' is in effect.

Also, it's a tool for the peaceful, builder victory path. You are talking about making it take at least twice as long to purse an 'extend and embrace' culture victory. Why?

Are you sure this would make the game more fun for you, or is this just an interesting idea you like to chat about?

I'm okay with the idea of a ZoC. But what if i give away some ships located deep in my territory?!
That would create a problem i think. :notsure:

~SDC~

#6 correction: In Civ3, you cannot build a city on an opponents land, unless you are at war, not peace, with them.

Pilot, I think cultural influence and zone of control as two separate issues. It is certainly feasable to have a cultral influence that extends much futher away from a planet than it's zone of control. One is military and the other is cultural. In Civ you could always push the boundries of your control by building cities (in this case bases) right on the edge of you control and continue to push your way into enemy held territory. I think the same applies here. While cultural victories are viable, it seems incredible to be able to fly deep into enemy held territory and plant a starbase in their home sector and load it with cultural mods. A more realistic approach would, I think, involve the zones of control and you building starbases to extend your zone, push your way into enemy territory, and add cultural mods to futher push your cultural influence past your military zone of control.

Your starbase locations are limited by your military control zone but your cultural can still emenate far and wide from even a starbase on the edge of your military control.

Why wouldn't it be legal to send a constructor? They aren't harmful, after all.

And most cultural mods are peaceful thing. Come on, WATERPARKS?

If you don't like it, just demand they hand that base over.

And most of that space is empty in the first place. How can you own empty space?

I'm just wondering what you reply will be. I can understand not like how people cross your 'borders', but in terms of the gameverse, how is that dangerous? What, are they going to build a trade enhancer? Boy, that sure is dangerous, isn't it? And since you don't share starbases (except in the rare instance of alliance share UP issue?), that means you starbases aren't fueling their ships. How else are they going to fuel their ships?