You are making it sound more complicated than it is. For the player it essentially means that colonization tech only applies to his own race. Other races he may find will typically only be able to settle their native home planet. And colony ships he find will be able to settle whatever is listed in the info box that pops up when you select the ship as it always does.
Yes, I pointed out that any colony ship, including one discovered, will have its available valid target types listed. However, you are ignoring the issue I pointed out that in order to determine what effect the hypothetical player will benefit from his next tech level research - he'll have to drill through multiple screens, as one of your propositions was to have tech advances in colonization affect each native type differently. It's hardly the simple matter as you suggest.
Not to mention trying to figure out what expansion opportunities a tech research will open up, as the player has to identify the newly available types for each and every race.
When you say, "typically", you miss the point that the strength of a system is in how well it adapts to "atypical" situations. Your proposition works fine for typical situation, but very poorly for atypical situations.
Colony tech from other races will be extremely expensive to buy, so it is essentially a non-option, and only something to pursue if you have a large minority race. So never anything confusing, but only something a player would do deliberately.
Why should they be expensive? In one proposal, you suggest that each and every native type have its own tech tree. In that case, the tech recipient will ONLY be able to use it to expand his colonization options for the affected race. If this is followed, colonization tech has a DRASTICALLY LOWER worth, based on the recipient's native type, and the negotiation value should be lowered to reflect its decreased worth. After all, L3a tech for volcanic native type might be quite valuable to another volcanic race, but it's relatively worthless to an aquatic race that controls no population of that type. Yet you propose INCREASING the tech trading value, while lowering the relative worth? Makes no sense to me. What you're suggesting is weaving tech trading into a tangled web.
And I disagree that it is a "non-option" to trade for tech or something that a player will do only explicitly if he has a large subjugated race of that type. At the closing of a war, if I'm beating on the race (ie: winning, have taken multiple planets), I'll quite happily return a planet or two for technology thrown in with the peace deal, especially if I consider them to be low value or difficult to defend. Under your system of DECREASED worth and INCREASED price, you're forcing me to take ANY OTHER technology in the peace deal, over colonization tech? Where's the sense in that?
It's also quite possible that a player will wish to dump cash into a relatively weak, but friendly race if that race comes under attack by larger, unfriendly race. Humans sharing a border with Boskarans (unfriendly) and Securans (friendly) - a cash-rich human player would be quite justified in wanting to dump cash into the Securans. In that case, why quibble over inflated tech prices, when one's real objective is to prop up the race? Non-option, as you suggest? Trading tech as a pretense for propping up a race is a reasonable tactic. Yet with your proposition, "L3a Desert colonization" tech which is relatively worthless to me, is valued MORE than phased beams (L3 beam weapon path)?!? Sounds absurd. Yet your system makes it even less beneficial to prop up a race and take it's overpriced, low-worth technologies if the player trades for colonization tech, as opposed to ANY OTHER type of tech.
Not to mention spies. For races with espionage bonuses in the hands of a patient player who grooms his spies, tech theft can be a very reasonable venture. Non-option? I disagree.
As for the tree. The current tech tree has two branches, this will triple it to six, but where only two are available and really of any use to any player.
You will end up with 10 (possibly 8, if you merge ice/volcanic) tech trees where you have two now, as by your proposal (ref: your post 5/8/2012 2:26:34 PM) the wet/dry branches are counted independently -
Now we have 2 trees universal to all players:
- Wet Tree (Continental -> Ocean -> Ice)
- Dry Tree (Marsh -> Desert -> Volcanic)
You propose to replace with two trees (wet and dry) available with a like pair for each and every native type - that comes out to up to 12 paths by my count, not 6 as you suggest. Two branches - wet and dry for each native type -
- Continental Native
- Marsh Native
- Desert Native
- Ocean Native
- Ice Native
- Volcanic Native
6 * 2 = 12. This is following your preferred method -
ORIGINAL: Carewolf 5/8/2012 1:53:34 PM
Or the way I would prefer it, that such a tech ONLY affects races with those native origins.
Or 6/8 following your other proposed method -
ORIGINAL: Carewolf 5/8/2012 1:53:34 PM
I am starting to think though that four trees instead of 3 would make more sense: Continental/desert, marshy/ocean, ice, volcanic. Simply to make sure the two extreme types are not too easy to get hold of (there are also a lot of desert races).
- Continental/Desert Native
- Volcanic (Ice/Volcanic potentially merged
So, 6-12 branches, of which 2 will primarily be useful to the player - the other 4-10 branches will essentially be wasted tech if researched, or low-worth but expensive trades if he trades for them.
I don't see how this "improves" the game.
Corrected, as I misread Carewolf's post - confusing, as he proposes alternatives to the system at various points.
< Message edited by Kayoz -- 5/11/2012 1:41:43 AM >