Adding a new Dimension to empire building

[Jean LaPointe]

There has been a number of discussions and ideas that have been put on the table and some of them feel incomplete and limited in scope, and there are some that are extremely detailed. There are a couple I have had and they were not fully explored but just a point to start with.

What I have seen and what need to be available is an action that can be continuous for a longevity and the game not to become boring as I am find many here are starting to bring up on a regular bases.

NATION PROTECTION: I have brought this up before and will again here as a bases of my example (sorry for the repeat). Nations should be allowed 6 ports, protected as the capitals, that have all the resources to build a nation. This allows for rebuilding their empires once they have been decimated to the base group of islands. This also allows for the crafter and traders to maintain their business in the game. This, also, allows for new players to gain experience and stability in a highly dynamic gaming world. Lastly, it allows the solo player and casual player stability when not involved on a regular bases. (Please note that under this idea there are still 300+ ports that available for capture.

THE PROBLEM as view in the FORUM: What do you do when you reach the end of the XP as a commander, or have the 1st rates you want and have gone through enough Port Battles to damn near wipe a country off the map? Now I am hearing boredom rising in the ranks. The ports you capture should cost that nation/clan time, ships and money to keep them. An idea brought forward, and I had never seen anything like this before, by Bach on maintaining the captured ports.

A RESOLVE: Once a nation has steam rolled its way across many ports, it should be required to maintain a present in each capture. This will require traders to bring supplies in, and a naval presence to keep governable control of the native country’s population. The more ports you capture, the more your traders need to get out and trade with the new ports and maintain a naval presence will require a ship on station – this will take away from the number of ships that can group together for the next port battle. Remember the larger the clan, the further out from the capital you can go before maintaining your empire gets shaky and advancements begins to slow down due to national interest in already captured locations.

Smaller nations can hold control close to the capital where they can keep an eye on their captured cities, or start chipping away at the larger empire clans and start taking back port locations. This will keep the pendulum of control swing back and forth, provide a constant state of play for Port Battles. No one can ever, completely take out a nation, as you grow the control over your dominion starts to get harder and harder to manage. No action in a captured for a specific length of time the local port goes into rebellion and the port returns back to the original owner of that port. Timers would need to be developed as to how long you can leave a port unattended, how long a rebellion would last and if there is any notification of a rebellion.

Maintenance of the empire from port to port should be OW to make keep a large empire a job. Ports closer to the capital should be easy to maintain because they are close to you. The further out you go and the distances become greater then it becomes harder to maintain. Then again a large clan should be able to manage its empire and balance with its fleet.

DECISIONS, DECISIONS, DECISIONS: Decisions would have to be made as to how far out do you want to expand and can you maintain that expansion. What do you have to do to keep control of lands conquered compared with future expansion plans? Right now clans can go port to port to port as the only plan. Mix in trade requirements, rebellions and duty station to keep a military presence. Now the rewards of all your conquest become vulnerable.

Monetary increases have been mentioned in the past but some of the larger clans can afford anything they want to so that really isn’t a big enough of a deterrent. Requiring clans to make daily type of contact with captured ports in order to maintain the empire is now asking individuals to do something and if one gets missed and returns back to the native owner of that port then the work of having to capture it starts all over again.

Empires, like marriage, takes work to keep it together.

[Hethwill]

I like it, in theory is good, in practice it comes down to the players even if these mechanics are in place.

 

Having ports individually modelled for economy with their unique qualities and defects might be a way to promote grand strategy.

 

Take Curacao island, Willemstad, for example. Excellent deep water harbour, known to be one of the unique warship shipyards in the caribbean and rival to Habana for ship construction( that's one of the reasons why the Brits took it ).

18th century...it has no extensive farmland, just survival plots, it cannot feed a full workforce, city, taverns, clergy, seamen, marines, royalty, etc... but it is a perfect Port for a Naval Base and Level 3 Shipyard but on the other side of the coin very little production infrastructure if any. Should make it unique.

 

I see more interest in each port being "unique" even if it means that Diplomatic agreements must be reached for nations to exchange goods. Let's say France holds no Gold production ports but has extensive Cotton plantations. Spain wants Cotton, France wants Gold. An agreement is reached ( see War&Peace patch with Lords voting ) an alliance is made and trade can flourish.

 

Should war break out some vital resources could be seized by conquering the towns and holding them.

[Sella]

I'm going to expand Hethwill's idea a bit.

 

 

I believe that everything should be driven by economy or strategic reasons. I'll use the example of a game called Port Royale. Let's take a look at this map (ignore the red highlight):

 

 

Even if it isn't visible the map is divided in "regions". Every region has a regional capital. They are the following:

France:

 

Biloxi,St Augustine

 

Holland:

 

Grand Bahama, Turk Islands

 

Spain:

 

Vera Cruz, Havana, Port Royale, Belize, Cartagena, Margarita 

 

England:

 

San Juan, Guadeloupe

 

 

Regional capital's are the seats of Governors and some the seats of Viceroy. If you observe the map you might notice a pattern. Sometimes 2/5 resource slots of the regional capitals produce finished goods and some of the surrounding settlements produce the raw materials needed to produce the finished goods. Usually a region includes approximetaly 4-5 settlements including the capital. Adjacent regions usually don't produce the same goods. If a nation ends up with only one region left, make it unconquerable but raidable as Wind has proposed above.

 

This might be useful:http://strategywiki.org/wiki/Port_Royale_2/Goods#Essential_Goods

 

Now sometimes not all the settlements are needed to supply the capital with all it needs and that will probably mean that the settlement is not important. Well i will propose a "decentralization" plan. Instead of keeping all the important resources and functions to the capitals and historical cities spread them out. For example:

 

1)Some cities like Havana could build first rates. Instead of keeping it in Havana make it exclusively available to the settlement next to it and do the same to all the regions(This might be unpopular though). 

 

2) Unique resources like gold,silver or maybe goods available from Europe are only available there.

 

3) Shipyards with higher chance of building finer ships or that can only build a certain ship. For example a French port that specializes in Belle Poules. This can only work later with the increase of the amout of ships available in the game or it will be extremely unpopular.

 

4)Recruitment hubs for officers(when implemented). They could be exclusively recruited from there or they could have a better chance of being finer if recruited from there.

 

5) Insert idea here...

 

6)...

[Vernon Merrill]

I like it, in theory is good, in practice it comes down to the players even if these mechanics are in place.

Having ports individually modelled for economy with their unique qualities and defects might be a way to promote grand strategy.

Take Curacao island, Willemstad, for example. Excellent deep water harbour, known to be one of the unique warship shipyards in the caribbean and rival to Habana for ship construction( that's one of the reasons why the Brits took it ).

18th century...it has no extensive farmland, just survival plots, it cannot feed a full workforce, city, taverns, clergy, seamen, marines, royalty, etc... but it is a perfect Port for a Naval Base and Level 3 Shipyard but on the other side of the coin very little production infrastructure if any. Should make it unique.

I see more interest in each port being "unique" even if it means that Diplomatic agreements must be reached for nations to exchange goods. Let's say France holds no Gold production ports but has extensive Cotton plantations. Spain wants Cotton, France wants Gold. An agreement is reached ( see War&Peace patch with Lords voting ) an alliance is made and trade can flourish.

Should war break out some vital resources could be seized by conquering the towns and holding them.

All of these sound like the start of some great ideas... However, the "tricky" part is deciding "who" gets to make the decision and how it gets enabled. Take Hethwill's example about France and Spain exchanging resources. "How" is that brought to the "Lords" for a vote? How is it implemented in game if it is passed? I find this stuff fascinating, really.

[Hethwill]

An Alliance means full trade.

 

IIRC an Alliance will mean traders are free to enter each others port to conduct their business