Shipyards and ship building

Also, is it still necessary, like in the OS/2 version, to send ships to their home planet in order to repair them? I never liked that. Instead, the idea to have shipyards to built AND repair big ships is much better in my option. You still need to send ships away from the frontline for repairs, but you don't need to cross the entire universe, just because a ship was built on a distant planet.

Also, do you have some design doc around that I can read? Just to avoid some questions.

Design Doc or some "pre-help" would be enjoyable, but probably not ready, at least not in readible form...

Hmmm. Shipyards for building ships. This is an interesting thing.

What do others think?

Yes this a good idea it also makes shipyard a vital military target to attack,maybe they should be very expensive to build so your only like to have a few per sector.

Hmm, it's an intresting thought..

Not sure what I think about it tho.

Guess that a social project "Shipyards" could be ok to use as requirement to be able to build ships. Sounds fair enough But then one could argue that you need the social project "Research Labs" to be able to have a planet participate in the research projects. And a "Trade school" social project to be able to build freighters. And so on.

Hmm why not. Sound's like it could be nice.

Shipyards-Yes! Also, how about mobile shipyards self propelled or towed/carried. Also, repair ships at a later stage of devel. to tag along with a fleet for repairs. Is supply lines a thing to be considered with this game? If so, maybe full repair isn't an option if lines are cut... How about orbital defense platforms with various abilities and also other orbital goodies like science stations, habitats, food farms, power generators, mining smeltors?

Let's make sure we're focusing on the fact that this is a game.

From a gameplay point of view, how does this make the game more fun? It seems like it just slows down the flow of the game.

Shipyards sound like orbital platforms where ships that can not fly in an atmosphere are built that require
heavy technical support to build. While this seems reasonable for some heavy battle armor, such as dreadnaughts,
it doesn't make sense for ships whose size might permit dual mode atmospheric/space operation. I think of space
only craft as being unable to enter and function in atmospheres simply because their size prevents them from
performing their function in an atmosphere. A colony ship and a transport have a function that requires
atmospheric capabilities, but only as an end part of their function (that is, they can land on a planet, but
can not lift off from a planet). Also, their function in space is that of transport and life support, with
no offensive armament and little defensive capability. Such ships, though quite large, can be built in space
without the need of the support structure of a yard.

Defenders and star fighters are examples of dual mode ships (basically atmosphere capable space ships) that
can land and take off of planets, and hence, can be built on a planet surface. Their offensive and defensive
capabilities and small size should not require being built in space.

Some medium sized ships might be builable on the ground or in space without needs for a shipyard. Perhaps
a battle cruiser can be built and launched from the ground. A basic battleship may have to be built in space
but not require a shipyard until it needs to be retrofitted with the latest advances in technology (or a new
one built containing those advances).

Once a race can build Avatar class ships or better, is where I think shipyards should be an absolute requirement.

Other factors could also play a part. For instance, ships built using "Large Scale Building" technology might
require construction in space with tools and techiques that are imposible to use without a shipyard in space.

Anyway, shipyards sounds essensial for some ships, usable for some that can be built without them (perhaps with
a bonus of reduced build time or improved capabilities), and not at all useful for some ships (E.g., the cost of
building them on the ground will always be less than building them in space).

Cheers,
Jack

John, agreed.

Maybe I'm expecting too much from this game?

If requiring obital construction facilities "...slows down game flow..." and all people want to do is rush to the next star system and crush the dudes over there, then why not dispense with ships all together and imagine some "Stargate" thing to get your stormtroopers there instantly. But make sure there is only one or two mouse clicks needed to do this as there is another system to the left that needs getting to. :VOMIT:

Tongue in cheek- sorta'.

I thought the question was about only one particular aspect of the entire game.

Jack

This aspect, IMOHO, is an important one if the theory of multiple paths to conclusion is to be more than just paid lip service to.

In an economic path, it seems to me there needs to be a posibility for a strong economic/production base. Just saying planet X is worth 23 or 30 points but giving few specifics as to how it is earned leaves it pretty dull.
If I had the opportunity to send spies/stealth fleet over to your system and selectively take out your orbital whatchagafluzits on which your economy or war production capability depended, then I might be able to gain your cooperation, surrender, sell you a new one if you didn't know it was me...

My point is this game is in space. If the cool aspects, unique qualities and benefits/dangers of being in space are ignored and space is just treated as that yucky stuff to get to the next star system then why set the game in space? The less detail-the less appealing. How hard would it be to change a few names & graphics and then have this game be about warring city states in XYZ era?

I might seem a little critical and am sure I'm not gaining "Brownie Points", but that doesn't matter. I want this game to be something I'll be proud to own a copy of and play often. Isn't expressing concerns what the Forum is supposed to be for? I'll grant I don't expect everything on my wish list to be offered here, but I'll speak up to get as much as possible of it!

Robert, did you ever play the OS/2 version? Are you in the alpha?

Brad, Played OS/2 version years ago while visiting a friend. Am not in the Alpha.

I just don't think it's reasonable to push such a radical game changing feature such as requiring ship yards floating in space without having played the game. The OS/2 version was quite fun and it didn't require the building of some structure to build ships.

The implementation suggestion here I see seems to me to be just a speed bump game mechanic. It's not like you can just crank out ships. They're expensive and time consuming to make.

Brad,
I agree with Jack on this. For smaller ships a shipyard would be a speed bump. There is no reason any planet cannot build a star fighter, a scout or a defender. But larger ships (and unlike Jack I would include colony ships and transports) are a different matter.
The addition of a shipyard for these ships would not be a speedbump but a strategic decision. This would increase the strategic focus of the game. Here you actively decide to turn the production of a planet to building large ships.
You already have spaceyards implemented in the game. The only addition I would suggest is to tie them as a requirement to build certain ships. As they already give a production bonus (currently 20%) they would not be a speedbump at all, but pay for themselves in time saved after just 5 ships.
You have stated numerous times that Galciv is not about fighting wars and conquering the galaxy (though you can do this), but that there are lots of ways to win. This change would reflect that though in that building these large battleships and avatars requires and active strategic decision. Do I build a shipyard and have large ship production facilities? or do I build research, social or economic projects and go for a different type of victory?

Paul.

For me, the shipyard is a replacement for the OS/2 version's feature, where your ships had to move to their home planet to be repaired. If this feature is no longer implemented, ships can be repaired on any colony. So if you're having a war, any nearby frontline colony can be used to repair ships. That's a bit unrealistic. On the other hand, ships having to return to their home planet is also unrealistic.

A shipyard is something you build on a colony with good production. The colony must be well protected, because if you loose it, all your ships have to travel much longer to be repaired. It adds a strategic element to the game.

Although there may be many ways to win the game, I think there is one point forgotten here. While the Terrans (you
and I) might be trying for a cultural victory the Drengins may be trying for a combat victory and the Yor may be trying
for a trade victory. If you ignore the possibility that the AIs for the other races might be trying to win the game using a
different path than the one you are using you could be defeated much too easily. With the MetaUniverse that goes
with the game I think we will see many strategems develop to account for this aspect. All the good ones will, of necessity,
be ballanced to some degree regardless of how the shipyards issue gets resolved.

Hence, my comments earlier were based more on what seems "real world" practical than on what might alter the feel of
the game. I still think of a shipyard in the context of a space type game as an orbital device, one with all the tools and the
artificial environment it takes to build complex weapons, both offensive and defensive. That is, the more advanced power
drives that are required to provide such ships with the speed to be affective offensive or defensive weapons would not be
those that can be built on the ground, shipped up into orbit, and assembled to the ship being built. The same is true for the
more advanced weapons for those ships. This is not true of colony ships. These are slow unsophisticated ships (in terms
of offensive or defensive capabilities), even though they are too large to build on the ground. It IS possible to build
the pieces on the ground, ship them into orbit, and assemble them, as well as shuttling the occupants to them. Much
the same can be said for transports unless you want the drives to be of a type that can only be built by a shipyard but
I don't see the sense in that. You want your attack and devensive weapons to be fast to give your ships better
intercept characteristics, but transports do not specifically need the speed. The same is true of freighters. While it would
be nice to be able to build fast freighters (and I would like to have that as a result of researching some tech), slow
freighters are an obvious stepping stone for trade. Why require shipyards to build slow freighters?

One last point. Historically every aspect of civilization has developed in stages. For trade, look to the history of shipping,
overland, by sea, and by air. They started with slow vehicles, built up to those of today, and show promise of becoming
faster with greater capacity. The first ships were built where they could, without sophisticated (for their time) facilities to
support the effort. Today ships are built in plants called shipyards, aircraft, rail, and highway vehicles in factories. The
complex requirements of todays earthbound transportation systems make such facilities mandatory. But our space
ventures are just beginning. We are building our first orbital platform capable of supporting the construction of primitive
ships of space exploration and colonization, but the ISS will not be capable of producing or assembling such ships, only
of supporting the personel and supply lines to accomplish the assembly. To think that we would have to build a space
style shipyard before we can begin exploration and colonization of space would be to doom any attempts to do so.

As you can see, I feel very strongly that colony ships and early freighters should NOT require a shipyard. Since I also see
transports as relatively simple ships I also don't see the need for shipyards to build them.

Cheers,
Jack

I should add that transprots, colony ships, and freighters are ships that are one trip ships. Hence there
is no need for a shipyard to repair them. Once they reach their destination they are scrapped.

Cheers,
Jack

I see shipyards as a way of controlling development. I like long games, everlasting even, so requiring shipyard development as a function of a tach tree as a method of seeing that no one person/side develops too quickly for balance. I like the idea of design of new ships as a function of research development geared to production and expansion. Just having a lot of production units should not mean the ability to build giant ultimate ships. GreyWolf

I don't like the idea of shipyards outside of a star, at all (a graphic on the main map would just look gay). I have to agree with Jack using shipyards for HUGE ships would be cool in theory.

I like the idea of using shipyards to construct large ships...maybe Battleships and larger?

Giving a bonus to building other ships would be nice as well.

I can't imagine a shipyard as a ship, able to travel beyond the orbit of a planet. Such a ship would have to be huge with horrendous defensive
capabilities or it would get destroyed. If I was faced with an enemy with such a mobile facility I would put very high priority on destroying it
as quick as possible at all costs.

Cheers,
Jack