| Author |
barracks planets that mean something |
likes to fly
Cadet
Joined: March 04, 2004
Posts: 2
|  Posted: 2004-04-06 10:55
i had the idea of when you make an infantry unit it would use one worker. This worker would be regenerated as the population increased. This would be more realistic. If this happened making units on a planet would mean something. Right now it seems that units are robots. They are made only from pieces of metal.
Plz tell me what you think of my idea.
_________________
|
MrSparkle
Marshal
Joined: August 13, 2001
Posts: 1912
From: mrsparkle
| Posted: 2004-04-06 11:29
I love it, and said so when I heard it in the lobby!
It's a great idea. Right now barracks only need metals to function. They SHOULD need population too. I mean, disbanding a unit adds to pop, so building one should subtract from pop.
Imagine how it would be with this. If you plan on taking infantry off a planet and replacing them right away with new units (say, during an invasion of an enemy system), make sure the planet is prepared to train more infantry cuz it's gonna have a worker shortage for a little while. Or, you could build extra domes and farms, or just pause the barracks. So basically barracks would be 'drafting' the planet's population, which makes perfect sense considering this is wartime in the MV. You don't want to draft and can afford to have less than 32 infantry? Pause the barracks.
I really love this idea. I think it's worth testing at the very least.
_________________
 "My father taught me many things ... keep your friends close, but your enemies closer" -Michael Corleone
[ This Message was edited by: Holycannoli on 2004-04-06 11:30 ]
_________________
|
Juxtapose
Grand Admiral
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: May 11, 2002
Posts: 1308
From: Give me your bullets!
| Posted: 2004-04-06 12:01
100% agree with this idea. Make Infantry and Population interchangeable. Force planets to maintain a worker reserve or suffer from worker shortages if they want infantry to protect them.
Is 1/3 of the work force really going to sit in their Research Labs if Alien agressors decend on their planet? No! Draft them and put them in the line.
_________________
I type with the tongues of my enemies, ascend from the backs of my friends, ignore the plight of innocents, and dance on the graves of my gods
|
Danek Ma`arna C`arns
Fleet Admiral
Joined: March 26, 2004
Posts: 102
From: Atlanta
| Posted: 2004-04-06 12:05
It is the future, maybe the soldiers are grown in labs from Iron Wombs and never have contact with the planet's population until you claim the soldiers to be too old to fight and disband their units. You destroy imaginary artifical people's lives on a whim and now you want to conscript imaginary citizens into your private slave armies?!?!? Does your evil know no bounds?
I still do not know much about this game, and planet building is definately my weakest knowledge, but it would seem to me you have WAY too much control over the planets as it is. I am not sure why the military has complete control over civilian structures. Power, habitat, even mining... should probably be beyond player control. They should build on thier own. Players can build military structures (the things you can bomb), if the local civilians have built enough power, research, and workers to support such structures.
I mean, even a small search on the internet has provided several step by step building plans for each type of planet based on the desired result. I just am not sure an entire galaxy of cookie cutters is the best thing...
_________________
|
Gideon
Cadet
Joined: September 14, 2001
Posts: 4604
From: Oregon, USA
| Posted: 2004-04-06 12:14
Ahhh, but when you disband Inf, they currently mystically increase your pop count by one each.
_________________
...and lo, He looked upon His creation, and said, "Fo shizzle."
|
Pope
Fleet Admiral
Joined: June 11, 2002
Posts: 2449
From: World of tomorrow
| Posted: 2004-04-06 12:30
Quote:
|
On 2004-04-06 12:14, Gideon wrote:
Ahhh, but when you disband Inf, they currently mystically increase your pop count by one each.
|
|
They are replacing People! Gideon is a Robot too! They got my Sister! Aaaahhh!
_________________
|
Ash'elth
Grand Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: June 07, 2002
Posts: 1128
| Posted: 2004-04-06 14:34
Doesn't make much sense in any way shape or form really.
1) Population growth is linear -- that is, rate of growth is independent of current population. If we modeled, accurately, population growth you'd get it growing faster the more people you get. Something I haven't noticed.
2) Rax build times.
If I remember correctly heavy infantry build at a lower rate than population grows on the planet. Even regular infantry do so.
3) population growth vs rax build time in the game system.
From 1 and 2, you could make an arguement that rax would decrease the rate of population growth. However current population growth rates are invalid (should be an exponential growth rate). Then lets look at the population usage in the game. As it stands now, major planets have huge population requirements simply to get the facilities up and running. Now, if you wanted to build troops in a system where troops cost population you'd have to further develop a planet with domes so you had 'spare' population you could funnel into troop building.
Thus more domes and a net result in lower defense.
4) Would production of troops REALLY effect the work force?
Soldiers do other things than sit around waiting to fight. You'd have troops running military instillations (defense basese, depots, sensor/dictors, starports, generators). In that respect, having troops also still count as working population.
5) Troop numbers VS population numbers.
1 'troop' probably represents something like a batillion or a regiment
In the US ArmyDivisions are made up of 2-5 (seems to vary and can't find the pentagon's order of battle) Bridages of 3-5,000 troops. Most Divisions, such as the pacific theatre forces number around 17,000 soldiers.
Thus a planet with 32 'divisions' would have under 750,000 soldiers.
Increase that number ten fold to 7 million soldiers if you wish.
Compare this to a planet with a population of 100... Now, the earth has a population of 6 billion. Lets and lets assume this would be the 'standard' max population of a terran planet (60 population units) that means each population unit would correspond to 10 million people.
A full 32 infantry units assuming 17,000 OR 170,000 troops/unit still means MAXIMUM troop counts <<< 1 population unit.
____
Odd things:
1 troop = 1 population unit.
That don't make sense nomatter how you count it.
_________________
|
Juxtapose
Grand Admiral
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: May 11, 2002
Posts: 1308
From: Give me your bullets!
| Posted: 2004-04-06 15:05
Quote:
|
On 2004-04-06 14:34, Ash wrote:
A bunch of complicated arguements and...
Odd things:
1 troop = 1 population unit.
That don't make sense nomatter how you count it. |
|
Maybe Military training in the future is a lot more involved and a lot less, ah, survivable?
_________________
I type with the tongues of my enemies, ascend from the backs of my friends, ignore the plight of innocents, and dance on the graves of my gods
|
Phoebuzz
Grand Admiral
Joined: November 17, 2003
Posts: 110
| Posted: 2004-04-06 18:48
I'm 100% for the idea. Building troops on a planet should drain pop.
Quote:
| Ash wrote:
1) Population growth is linear -- that is, rate of growth is independent of current population. If we modeled, accurately, population growth you'd get it growing faster the more people you get. Something I haven't noticed. |
|
Immigration, Emigration & Overcrowding.
Population emigrates from overpopulated planets to underpopulated planets, and otherwise overpopulated planet's growth is stunned due to overcrowding.
Ok, a better population growth system would be better, but this is DarkSpace, not SimPlanet, so it's probably low priority, and the current system works nicely.
Quote:
| Ash wrote:
4) Would production of troops REALLY effect the work force?
Soldiers do other things than sit around waiting to fight. You'd have troops running military instillations (defense basese, depots, sensor/dictors, starports, generators). In that respect, having troops also still count as working population. |
|
That is partially true. While soldiers can spend time working installation, they are not honing their combat skills while doing so, hence soldiers spending their time working in installations are going to be inferior to the soldiers spending their time training.
Quote:
| Ash wrote:
5) Troop numbers VS population numbers.
1 'troop' probably represents something like a batillion or a regiment
*removed rest of reasoning* |
|
That's a baseless assumption, and all the rest of your reasoning based on this baseless assuption is consequently meaningless.
A realistic military size for a population of 6 billion would be somewhere around 2 billion soldiers. I simply say that because I assume 4 billion high-tech civilians can support 2 billion soldiers.
Actually, the economic efficiency of population could be anything with enough technology, so the ratio of civilian:military could also be anything.
The current 1 infantry = 1 pop is not only possible, but also easy on the game mechanics, interface and is user friendly.
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
