I've been reading various comment threads while avoiding the DDs. I'm avoiding the DDs because I am going to buy the game and I want to, more or less, avoid spoilers 
But, in reading the various threads two things popped into my head that I believe would be interesting.
1. Ship/Fleet combat: This comes from an old wish for the Total War tactical combat. In Total War, a leader gets "command stars" that give a specific bonus to his army in combat but what I've always wanted was for experience from leading in war to give a commander access to more and better tactical disposition of his force, rather than a straight up bonus. This should be especially true if said commander has been with a specific force for an extended period so that the various sub commanders (ship's captains in this game) get experienced in the abilities and expectations of the (fleet in this game) force commander.
This could include things such as extended pre-battle deployments of forces, faints and such, reduced lag on the part of sub commanders to reflect better interpersonal communications with the overall force commander, complexities such as having a part of the force "hiding" beyond detection range that joins battle in progress to shock the enemy or comes in from an unexpected axis of approach, etc, so on and so forth.
I do not know if there will be tactical combat in this game, but many 4x do include that. If not, then the experience of the fleet commander will need to devolve back into a general bonus, but I can live with that.
If it turns out that there's no tactical battles, then maybe the fleet commanders' daring do! can be added as color. By that I mean, a news announcement of how the fleet commander flummoxed the enemy, or how the player's fleet got flummoxed, by some nifty tactical twist.
Historical examples:
Hannibal's long term leadership of his force invading Rome gave Hannibal an in-depth understanding of the strength and weaknesses of his various units and the leadership of same to allow him to set up a tactical trap for the Romans who were a recently raised force with lesser experienced leadership which made Cannae possible.
The North Korean development of the "air ambush" (2 aircraft flying so close together that they appear to be one aircraft on radar) and the resulting doubling of force over what was believed to be coming and thereby causing confusion among their enemy, from tactics tested while flying for Syria in the Yom Kippur War.
2. Empire fracture due to non instantaneous communications.
Much the same problem that Rome faced that created the east vs west Roman Empires. Huge distances make maintaining a large empire rather difficult. That's not so apparent today due to global comms, but space empire is a whole 'nother thing.
If, say, once a planet gets invested by an empire and said planet is far enough away that comms delay would be an issue, the empire in question then has to make a choice. Either deal with rather nasty lag in delay between issuing and following of orders, or the planet in question goes on "auto-pilot". There could also be a level of threat of open rebellion due to distance from the empire's primary planet or seat of governance. There could come a point where the need to keep a fleet stationed to ensure "loyalty" of the planet outweighs the value of the planet (or system, or cluster of systems, etc).
This could be addressed in different methods of control.
Found the colonies, and once they become problematic, release them as independent but allied setrapy or some such. Or, detail the force necessary to keep full possession of the planet(s), system(s) or cluster in question. Or, allow an empire "split". Or other such things.
The reasoning is to prevent the massive blobs as well as make the rate of expansion subject to something more easily understood rather than arbitrary diplomacy.
I would also like to see the thing change according to improved techs. As comms techs improve, the distance at which an empire can be maintained could increase. Once the tech (not sure what it's called but I think maybe Quantum Entanglement?) where paired atoms influence each other regardless of distance of separation is discovered and refined enough to make galaxy spanning instant comms possible (binary lingo using the paired atoms' affects to send and receive) then the distance growth limit is removed from empires.
Something like this might help in keeping the galaxy from becoming dominated by Big Blob early and mid game, and serve as a clear define for the beginning of late game.
But, in reading the various threads two things popped into my head that I believe would be interesting.
1. Ship/Fleet combat: This comes from an old wish for the Total War tactical combat. In Total War, a leader gets "command stars" that give a specific bonus to his army in combat but what I've always wanted was for experience from leading in war to give a commander access to more and better tactical disposition of his force, rather than a straight up bonus. This should be especially true if said commander has been with a specific force for an extended period so that the various sub commanders (ship's captains in this game) get experienced in the abilities and expectations of the (fleet in this game) force commander.
This could include things such as extended pre-battle deployments of forces, faints and such, reduced lag on the part of sub commanders to reflect better interpersonal communications with the overall force commander, complexities such as having a part of the force "hiding" beyond detection range that joins battle in progress to shock the enemy or comes in from an unexpected axis of approach, etc, so on and so forth.
I do not know if there will be tactical combat in this game, but many 4x do include that. If not, then the experience of the fleet commander will need to devolve back into a general bonus, but I can live with that.
If it turns out that there's no tactical battles, then maybe the fleet commanders' daring do! can be added as color. By that I mean, a news announcement of how the fleet commander flummoxed the enemy, or how the player's fleet got flummoxed, by some nifty tactical twist.
Historical examples:
Hannibal's long term leadership of his force invading Rome gave Hannibal an in-depth understanding of the strength and weaknesses of his various units and the leadership of same to allow him to set up a tactical trap for the Romans who were a recently raised force with lesser experienced leadership which made Cannae possible.
The North Korean development of the "air ambush" (2 aircraft flying so close together that they appear to be one aircraft on radar) and the resulting doubling of force over what was believed to be coming and thereby causing confusion among their enemy, from tactics tested while flying for Syria in the Yom Kippur War.
2. Empire fracture due to non instantaneous communications.
Much the same problem that Rome faced that created the east vs west Roman Empires. Huge distances make maintaining a large empire rather difficult. That's not so apparent today due to global comms, but space empire is a whole 'nother thing.
If, say, once a planet gets invested by an empire and said planet is far enough away that comms delay would be an issue, the empire in question then has to make a choice. Either deal with rather nasty lag in delay between issuing and following of orders, or the planet in question goes on "auto-pilot". There could also be a level of threat of open rebellion due to distance from the empire's primary planet or seat of governance. There could come a point where the need to keep a fleet stationed to ensure "loyalty" of the planet outweighs the value of the planet (or system, or cluster of systems, etc).
This could be addressed in different methods of control.
Found the colonies, and once they become problematic, release them as independent but allied setrapy or some such. Or, detail the force necessary to keep full possession of the planet(s), system(s) or cluster in question. Or, allow an empire "split". Or other such things.
The reasoning is to prevent the massive blobs as well as make the rate of expansion subject to something more easily understood rather than arbitrary diplomacy.
I would also like to see the thing change according to improved techs. As comms techs improve, the distance at which an empire can be maintained could increase. Once the tech (not sure what it's called but I think maybe Quantum Entanglement?) where paired atoms influence each other regardless of distance of separation is discovered and refined enough to make galaxy spanning instant comms possible (binary lingo using the paired atoms' affects to send and receive) then the distance growth limit is removed from empires.
Something like this might help in keeping the galaxy from becoming dominated by Big Blob early and mid game, and serve as a clear define for the beginning of late game.
- 1
