Why, Oh Why, is their no cooperative structures

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  Why, Oh Why, is their no cooperative structures

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Why, Oh Why, is their no cooperative structures

CBRancier posted 06-01-99 12:43 PM ET
I ask the question, if their are pacts then why are there no mutual defense and research facilities for long standing pact members. Why are there no scientific organizations that cooperate in developing technology. Why do you have to give a tech advancement instead of just a possible facility (i.e. Orbital Spaceflight: Sky Hydroponics Lab) and not the weapon that comes with that entire tech? Why don't you have a diplomat with a governor type interface that you can instruct on action and be informed of results and when authority is requested for an action or perhaps a joint project. To Firaxis: (This game will mold minds of people for years to come just as Civilization 2 did and will continue to do, you must consider the responsibility you have to lead individuals into understanding. If you have left out these or more options to perhaps show the futility of certine actions then I withdraw, if not then please reconsider these options for the game.)
MoSe posted 06-01-99 12:55 PM ET
Thank you for bringin it up again, CBR.
I was proposing the "single benefit gift" a while ago, but none backed me up. Better luck for you now?
Let me say I wouldn't anyway trust automated agents in TBS tho, ther's a long way to make them acceptable. If you like to sit, take general decisions and watch things happen, I prefer to use Settlers or Populous 4 that purpose.
MariOne
Darkstar posted 06-01-99 03:55 PM ET
These sound like a good idea. Sorry if I missed your related thread Mose.
I'd much rather give away the buildings than the tech that they are based on. And it would make more sense in some cases for the factions to demand the bene of the tech rather than the tech.
There are no cooperative research pacts and whatnot as the designers either overlooked it, or thought it not appropriate. Considering it was in Moo2, there is no telling...
-Darkstar
brad posted 06-01-99 04:37 PM ET
Another aspect of negotiations involving pacts that might be useful would be possibility to extend the benefits of a Secret Project or an orbital facility to the "Pact Brother". I might jump into a pact with whomever had the Hunter-Seeker Algorithim and offered to extend that benefit to me. Or two pacts each with 6 Nessus Mining Stations could share them - each doubling the mineral points recieved at every base! If the pact ended then the benefit would end. Or possibly such sharing could be for a negotiated period of time. Maybe this could be even a negotiated item in other situations. Ask to borrow credits from someone and pay them back with the minerals, energy and food from orbital installations.
Overall, there are several places when the negotiations between parties could be improved. Another one would be for safe passage - a step short of Pact Brotherhood (you can't enter their bases) but allow passage to units. This also could be in exchange for something else - money, a base, a tech - or not squisshing them like a bug.

whirlwind13 posted 06-01-99 09:31 PM ET
I agree completely with all of you. If you are in a pact with someone, the benifits should be greater. Co-op research would unbalance the game (i.e. Miram with UoP tech.) The computer doesnt like to be in a pact with you anyways in higher-level situations. As in Civ2, pacts are only useful on a military level...which is realistic most of the time, but not all. A total co-op should be higher than a pact...it should be a different level because pacts are strictly military in SMAC.
The ArchChancellor
Mergle posted 06-02-99 03:36 AM ET
Commerce increases when you're in a pact, so you do get a research benefit indirectly.
I agree with the general sentiments expressed, however.
Aredhran posted 06-02-99 07:13 AM ET
I *truly* love the concept of sharing the benefits of special projects between pact brother. That would be particularly nice in Multiplayer mode, where currently the only option is "OK, you build WP, I get CC, then you do VW and I'll have HSA."
It would also give incentive to the allied faction to build supply units to help his pact brother build the project.
Other sharing options would be nice... Satellites, ability to give parts of a technology ("How about 100 energy credits in exchange for the blueprints of a hospital that should really improve your citizen's standard of living, brother Lal ?")
Aredhran
CBRancier posted 06-02-99 11:40 AM ET
Thanks! I wasn't aware how many shared my oppinions on these concepts. Do you think there is any way Firaxis will respond to these possible enhancements? I've already emailed them once, no result. Not even a response, I was a bit adamant about it in my email though.
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Why, Oh Why, is their no cooperative structures
CBRancier	posted 06-01-99 12:43 PM ET I ask the question, if their are pacts then why are there no mutual defense and research facilities for long standing pact members. Why are there no scientific organizations that cooperate in developing technology. Why do you have to give a tech advancement instead of just a possible facility (i.e. Orbital Spaceflight: Sky Hydroponics Lab) and not the weapon that comes with that entire tech? Why don't you have a diplomat with a governor type interface that you can instruct on action and be informed of results and when authority is requested for an action or perhaps a joint project. To Firaxis: (This game will mold minds of people for years to come just as Civilization 2 did and will continue to do, you must consider the responsibility you have to lead individuals into understanding. If you have left out these or more options to perhaps show the futility of certine actions then I withdraw, if not then please reconsider these options for the game.)
MoSe	posted 06-01-99 12:55 PM ET Thank you for bringin it up again, CBR. I was proposing the "single benefit gift" a while ago, but none backed me up. Better luck for you now? Let me say I wouldn't anyway trust automated agents in TBS tho, ther's a long way to make them acceptable. If you like to sit, take general decisions and watch things happen, I prefer to use Settlers or Populous 4 that purpose. MariOne
Darkstar	posted 06-01-99 03:55 PM ET These sound like a good idea. Sorry if I missed your related thread Mose. I'd much rather give away the buildings than the tech that they are based on. And it would make more sense in some cases for the factions to demand the bene of the tech rather than the tech. There are no cooperative research pacts and whatnot as the designers either overlooked it, or thought it not appropriate. Considering it was in Moo2, there is no telling... -Darkstar
brad	posted 06-01-99 04:37 PM ET Another aspect of negotiations involving pacts that might be useful would be possibility to extend the benefits of a Secret Project or an orbital facility to the "Pact Brother". I might jump into a pact with whomever had the Hunter-Seeker Algorithim and offered to extend that benefit to me. Or two pacts each with 6 Nessus Mining Stations could share them - each doubling the mineral points recieved at every base! If the pact ended then the benefit would end. Or possibly such sharing could be for a negotiated period of time. Maybe this could be even a negotiated item in other situations. Ask to borrow credits from someone and pay them back with the minerals, energy and food from orbital installations. Overall, there are several places when the negotiations between parties could be improved. Another one would be for safe passage - a step short of Pact Brotherhood (you can't enter their bases) but allow passage to units. This also could be in exchange for something else - money, a base, a tech - or not squisshing them like a bug.
whirlwind13	posted 06-01-99 09:31 PM ET I agree completely with all of you. If you are in a pact with someone, the benifits should be greater. Co-op research would unbalance the game (i.e. Miram with UoP tech.) The computer doesnt like to be in a pact with you anyways in higher-level situations. As in Civ2, pacts are only useful on a military level...which is realistic most of the time, but not all. A total co-op should be higher than a pact...it should be a different level because pacts are strictly military in SMAC. The ArchChancellor
Mergle	posted 06-02-99 03:36 AM ET Commerce increases when you're in a pact, so you do get a research benefit indirectly. I agree with the general sentiments expressed, however.
Aredhran	posted 06-02-99 07:13 AM ET I truly love the concept of sharing the benefits of special projects between pact brother. That would be particularly nice in Multiplayer mode, where currently the only option is "OK, you build WP, I get CC, then you do VW and I'll have HSA." It would also give incentive to the allied faction to build supply units to help his pact brother build the project. Other sharing options would be nice... Satellites, ability to give parts of a technology ("How about 100 energy credits in exchange for the blueprints of a hospital that should really improve your citizen's standard of living, brother Lal ?") Aredhran
CBRancier	posted 06-02-99 11:40 AM ET Thanks! I wasn't aware how many shared my oppinions on these concepts. Do you think there is any way Firaxis will respond to these possible enhancements? I've already emailed them once, no result. Not even a response, I was a bit adamant about it in my email though.