He posted so the idea could be fleshed out. that's kind of why we post, rather than simply e-mailing the devs.
My point was that he didn't specify details, so it's silly to accuse me of having misconceptions. Anyone who looks at this idea is going to interpret it uniquely, and it's silly to fault people for that.
I felt I made fair presumptions given the ambiguity of the suggestion.
He didn't specify details because he meant it to be a cooperative effort. if he were to put numbers in, it adds the power of suggestion to bias the replies people give. either for his numbers, if the person uses tends toward courtesy online, or against, if they don't.
make it a random event, triggerable by extremely low culture. it'd make the advent's culture an actual weapon.
There are no other random events in Sins currently. Frankly I think added them would be a major departure from the current way the game is built. Random works well in Civilization, where virtually everything has an element of chance to begin with, not so much in Sins where if you had all the facts you could theoretically make 100% accurate predictions due to its strong determinism.
As per the Manual:
The pirates will deploy after a random amount of time once the timer has ended, to the nearest planet of the player with the highest bounty at the time.
and
The Dunov's Targeting Uplink ability improves the accuracy of nearby ships. This increases the damage-on-target, on average.
the way you described it made it appear to be a shoddily integrated event. if it was properly integrated, it could work well.
Where are you getting this "shoddily implemented" from? When did I imply that at all?
My core presumption was that a civil war means you lose control of the affected planets, and a hostile enemy faction spawns on them. The rest of my post was simply analysis based on that simple presumption. How is that "shoddy implementation"? It seems to be the very definition of a civil war.
Yes, it is not your definition of civil war. it is how you assume it would be implemented.
The "logical fallacy" you stated above makes little to no sense - technically it is fair by logic to have everyone harmed in the same way, to the same extent.
My entire point is that just because everyone is harmed to the exact same extent doesn't mean it's balanced at all. Balance is a lot more than just fairness between factions. It's about expanding the tactical options within the game.
Having a single very powerful option, even if it may be shared between all factions, is not balanced because it wipes out so many other options.
This is something I do agree with, at least in concept. You don't want the game to become a battle between ships of a single class. otherwise, there's no skill involved. But if you were to have it be a neutral, non-player controlled event, then it wouldn't be that game-breaking.
The difficulty worth considering here is this: we agree that the costs of a civil war are very high, therefor any sensible player will invest in countermeasures. This leaves a simple conundrum: we have a highly complicated and elaborate feature that will require significant development resources to implement, but because of its nature players are going to work tirelessly to prevent it from ever actually occurring. The feature is self-defeating, its own ramifications ensure players won't ever allow it to come to pass.
That's not to say that there isn't a middle ground where it's preventable but still happens, but I think you have to make a case for that.
You mean like the Starbase/minefield combination? giant structures that take entire fleets/other starbase to take out?
If you can't come up with a reasonable idea of how your own idea would work, why would the devs devote time and energy to do so?
It's a suggestion. thus, being only a suggestion, it won't have much in the way of detail. deal with it. the lack of further detail also only means that the OP doesn't think they have the programming knowledge to specify.
