Causulties of War- Idea for future update/patch

from Sins Forums
For a future patch or update I think Ironclad should create casulty records. When you or your enemy declare war Military Deaths, Civilian Deaths, Wounded should be recorded in a sort of stats counter section of the diplomacy page. Every ship (frigates and capitals, gunships and fighters) have a crew count, and even when taking damage personnel would get wounded or killed.

The idea is that a long, protracted war could have huge loss in life, Morale accross the empire could suffer. Planets that have seen extensive warfare might feel the devestation more than planets far from the frontlines.

Also, psychologically on the player themself, you might reconsider your attempt to invade the enemies territory if the consequences mean the collapse of your empire. Plus, You might feel a bit more connected to you empire if you know you just lost 1 million crewman in that last battle to take a planet. Just like the simple concept of naming your ships, it's all about immersion into the game- becoming personally invested in your empire.

This idea is an evolved spin-off from the end mission in Homeworld2. One of the most poignant moments is the defence of the Hiigaran Homeworld, when the Vaygr attempt genocide by using atmosphere deprivation missles. Every time a missle hit, millions on the planet would die. The attempted planetary destruction created an amazing sense of threat of annihilation and elevated the immersion of the game. Yet all it was is a simple number counter.
12,828 views 24 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top
Cool
Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top
If the morale of a planet fell too low and they rebelled from your empire could you attack them to get them back? But then their morale would be low again and they would rebel again? I think this type of thing would lean towards spending resources on propaganda to keep the war going and having to do a lot of political juggling to maintain your planets. Personally it sounds like a lot of work when all I want to do is blow up ships and pillage planets.
Siege of Centauri
Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top
great idea imo
as said, immersion is everything, and i think this would add a lot of atmosphere
and it should be fairly easy to implement, as it is basically just cosmetics in numerical form
Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top
I think that's a pretty good idea, but I don't know about putting it under the diplomacy screen. I suppose on one hand it's nice to see how many of your people this person has killed and consider that during diplomacy, and vice versa, but it just seems kind of an awkward place to put it, otherwise.
Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top
Morale was suggested some time during the beta I think, I dunno what happened to it though. It would could be hard to implement and ballance(in not that much of a modder though), but it would add an extra dynamic to warfare.

Good idea :)
Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top
yea, I only said Diplomacy Screen becasue I wasn't quite sure where it should go. I wouldn't want the devs to put too much effort into creating a new page for it- unless the really want to.
Reply #8 from Sins Forums Top
I dunno i mean i would be kinda pissed if i was under attack and was loosing and having to deal with morale as well. not only would production go down, ships would be effected and not run at 100%. But i would run the risk of planets turning. I mean thats a hell of a lot of micro managing to make sure everything runs smoothly again. As for the other person the momentum that they get from winning a few battles would put them at such an advantage it wouldn’t be funny. I mean think about it. Not only do they have higher morale now with the production and ships and stuff working better. put a bounty on the other guy as well so they are getting hit from all side. I could be wrong though and be blowing all this out of the water.
Reply #9 from Sins Forums Top
Ah.. thats were desperation might come in. A new and improved emotion. People can do wonderfull and terrifying things when desperate.
Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top
RadRadRoboTank,

If all you want is to destroy ships and buildings then why are you interested in a game with 4X in it? Why build your empire if you don't have any empathy for the citizens that die, or the losses you incur? You should play starcraft or homeworld, where the effects of war are inconsequential once the mission is over. death and loss in those games are without reprecussions.
Reply #11 from Sins Forums Top
Except having your people die to enemy action wouldn't make them defect, more likely than not it'd only harden that people's resolve to destroy their enemies. Like in besieged castles back in the day, if things were getting desperate within the keep, Women and children would lend a hand on the walls.
Reply #12 from Sins Forums Top
true but when would a population go from hating you because you cant win a battle and keep loosing planets to oh crap desperate mode now we will work harder for you to survive? Im not saying the idea is bad im just looking at a few of the cons so the idea can be implimented and to work well.
Reply #13 from Sins Forums Top
I dunno i mean i would be kinda pissed if i was under attack and was loosing and having to deal with morale as well. not only would production go down, ships would be effected and not run at 100%. But i would run the risk of planets turning. I mean thats a hell of a lot of micro managing to make sure everything runs smoothly again. As for the other person the momentum that they get from winning a few battles would put them at such an advantage it wouldn’t be funny. I mean think about it. Not only do they have higher morale now with the production and ships and stuff working better. put a bounty on the other guy as well so they are getting hit from all side. I could be wrong though and be blowing all this out of the water.


You're assuming that planets will revolt, but that part doesn't have to be explored specifically. To offset "weakened" morale, maybe you would have to boost propaganda to that planet? The point is you plan your offensive properly- a failed campaign could have a devastating effect on your empire. Now That's REAL strategy. starcraft and homeworld are more like RTT- real time tactical- because nothing exists beyond the map you just played.

"A strategy is a long term plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal, most often "winning". Strategy is differentiated from tactics or immediate actions with resources at hand by its nature of being extensively premeditated, and often practically rehearsed. Strategies are used to make the problem or problems easier to understand and solve."


Empire AI aside, the pure psycological effect on the player makes it worth just putting in basic stats counters of losses. For example, say you lost 57 Million people in your conquest of the galaxy. Wouldn't you want to play again and try to take less casulties? It sort of like a personal "achievement" without those dorky icons Valve uses.


Reply #14 from Sins Forums Top
I think this is a pretty cool idea kind of like the epic generator that was supposed to go into galciv2: dark avatar.

It shouldn't have an affect on morale or really the gameplay at all since this is an RTS but it would bump the immersion factor for those of us who like to roleplay our games a bit
Reply #15 from Sins Forums Top
@Staticstarter

Yes you have valid points, I do like that idea's of what you have said but again at what point will it become a failed offence. I mean say if I split my forces up, 1 large group and 1 smaller group. The large group was a decoy to make the enemy think I was attacking a certain place. I then use the smaller group to do some much needed hit tactics on key points. Because the larger fleet gets destroyed or takes major casualties that would mean I would suffer even though I managed to accomplish what I set out to do.

As you stated

"A strategy is a long term plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal, most often "winning". Strategy is differentiated from tactics or immediate actions with resources at hand by its nature of being extensively premeditated, and often practically rehearsed. Strategies are used to make the problem or problems easier to understand and solve."

My point is even though my strategy provided me to achieve my goal I get penalized for it, I now have to deal with focusing more on production and propaganda due to the scripting thinking I have lost a major offensive. That’s the hard part to determine, if someone sacrificed ships to achieve a greater goal or if the ships sacrificed was a bad move.

@Waynaor01:

I agree, having it not affect the gameplay would make it much easier but still allow for a roleplay epic attitude of the game
Reply #16 from Sins Forums Top

RadRadRoboTank,

If all you want is to destroy ships and buildings then why are you interested in a game with 4X in it? Why build your empire if you don't have any empathy for the citizens that die, or the losses you incur? You should play starcraft or homeworld, where the effects of war are inconsequential once the mission is over. death and loss in those games are without reprecussions.


Starcraft is old and played and I can't fly space ships. Homeworld doesn't have multiplayer. If you want a game with morale why not play galCiv2? Why should I have any empathy for my civilization? Why can't I play the tyrant? Why can't I rule my world with an iron fist? My people work because otherwise I flood their planet with toxic gas and just repopulate with prisoners from another planet. You find me another multiplayer RTS game where I can save my place and fly space ships around capturing planets and having epic battles and I'll play that.
Reply #17 from Sins Forums Top
hey Shaky010,

My point is even though my strategy provided me to achieve my goal I get penalized for it, I now have to deal with focusing more on production and propaganda due to the scripting thinking I have lost a major offensive. That’s the hard part to determine, if someone sacrificed ships to achieve a greater goal or if the ships sacrificed was a bad move.

I would like to think that any great leader of an empire would have to do some explaining to his people that the destruction of the Primary fleet to acheive success with smaller strike groups was necessary for "the greater good". good ole propaganda media like the Fox News Corp- but I digress...

The pain of losing millions of crewmen should still be felt even if the strategic victory was achieved. These are not hivemind races like the Zerg or Borg (The Advent have psionics but are not a collective mind)






Reply #18 from Sins Forums Top
Starcraft is old and played and I can't fly space ships. Homeworld doesn't have multiplayer. If you want a game with morale why not play galCiv2? Why should I have any empathy for my civilization? Why can't I play the tyrant? Why can't I rule my world with an iron fist? My people work because otherwise I flood their planet with toxic gas and just repopulate with prisoners from another planet. You find me another multiplayer RTS game where I can save my place and fly space ships around capturing planets and having epic battles and I'll play that.

You're a prime example why the game should have morale and rebellion. The little guys need some way to kick you out of power!
Reply #19 from Sins Forums Top
its a great idea that i hope they will implement on the game via future patch.

i dont know if anyone already sugested this but, if a side of the war wants a truce they would have to pay money based on the casualties/destruction, the same way as real life. but as an option on the diplomacy menu.
Reply #20 from Sins Forums Top
hey Shaky010,

My point is even though my strategy provided me to achieve my goal I get penalized for it, I now have to deal with focusing more on production and propaganda due to the scripting thinking I have lost a major offensive. That’s the hard part to determine, if someone sacrificed ships to achieve a greater goal or if the ships sacrificed was a bad move.

I would like to think that any great leader of an empire would have to do some explaining to his people that the destruction of the Primary fleet to acheive success with smaller strike groups was necessary for "the greater good". good ole propaganda media like the Fox News Corp- but I digress...

The pain of losing millions of crewmen should still be felt even if the strategic victory was achieved. These are not hivemind races like the Zerg or Borg (The Advent have psionics but are not a collective mind)








In war there are always sacrifices. Understanding the sacrifice to accomplish the goal and end a war is the hard part. Say for instance I have an army of 50 million men. I sacrifice 30 million, and hurt the enemy also, but in the process I manage to destroy key locations that cripple or severely deplete the enemy’s ability to fight back. In the end if it means that the enemy can’t attack your worlds and goes on the defensive and also if it means that it brings a faster end to the war then again the ends justify the means. Everyone hates people dying but what’s the point of having a war that drags on and will consume more lives over a longer period of time. The sacrifice of the 30 million military lives to save 1 billion civilian lives I think is a better trade off.

In the end its a veiw point that determines what we do. Some would agree with my points and others would agree with yours. Some my just say build a damn super weapon death star and laugh at everyone else. :)
Reply #21 from Sins Forums Top
its a great idea that i hope they will implement on the game via future patch.

i dont know if anyone already sugested this but, if a side of the war wants a truce they would have to pay money based on the casualties/destruction, the same way as real life. but as an option on the diplomacy menu.


Now thats an idea I think could work very very well.
Reply #22 from Sins Forums Top

its a great idea that i hope they will implement on the game via future patch.

i dont know if anyone already sugested this but, if a side of the war wants a truce they would have to pay money based on the casualties/destruction, the same way as real life. but as an option on the diplomacy menu.


Now thats an idea I think could work very very well.


yeah in most games the decision to go to war is very light on the mind. my sugestion would put importance on the decision of going to war. "you wanna go to war ? well... you better win it."

i hope some devs give their opinion of this, because i think that the original idea from the thread started is pretty good and could have major implications on the war/diplomacy part of this great game.
Reply #23 from Sins Forums Top
Cool, I would very much so like someone to pay me dearly for alliance because of the damage they have inflicted ^^, though these number should not become determined on who you ally with in any way which was too leading, of course. ;)
Reply #24 from Sins Forums Top

Cool, I would very much so like someone to pay me dearly for alliance because of the damage they have inflicted ^^, though these number should not become determined on who you ally with in any way which was too leading, of course.


eheh u money grabber. but my suggestion is more for putting importance on the decision of going to war. but hey... money is always good :D