Star Wars: A galaxy divided timeframe discussion

[Thanas]

As you know, tomorrow we start the second gameyear of Star Wars: A galaxy divided. It has come to the attention of the mods that some players might wish for a faster/slower progression of the timeframe.

So I created this thread to show you some ideas that are being kicked around:


1. Shorten the timeframe
Basically, we would change the 3 months realtime=1 year gametime to 2 months realtime=1 year gametime.

2. Other choices to make the game faster
These would be decided by the mods and most likely will have things like shorten construction times of larger shipyards, create more expansion or a more aggressive stance of NPC factions.
Note that changing the rules might have some effect on game balance - it would most likely favor larger nations over smaller ones.

3. Do nothing
What it means. For those who like the status quo.

4. Lengthen the timeframe
For people who want a slower progession.
**************************



My personal opinion:

I think the game is fine as it is. The long time period allows all of us to coordinate with each other and allows us all to take short breaks from the game when RL does not permit us to reply immediately. Furthermore, should one player decide to go inactive for a bit, it allows them to be reintegrated without missing too much. In my view, the game is a nice fun thing to relax me after work, so I kinda like it going a bit slow.

The only thing I think that might be necessary is to allow for a faster construction of big shipyards, but that can be done without changing the timeframe too much, as none of us has yet created such large shipyards.

[The Romulan Republic]

Any option would be ok, but as someone who has an unfortunate habit of taking a while to post sometimes, a slower progression wouldn't hurt me.

That said, I can see how some of us might want things to move faster. I'll wait and see what others have to say before voting.

Edit: I do still feel that the rules are needlessly complex, so if option two involved streamlining the rules in some way, I might vote for that.

[Thanas]

Edit: I do still feel that the rules are needlessly complex, so if option two involved streamlining the rules in some way, I might vote for that.

Whoah. In the last four months, I have answered about 200+ PMs about this game and without the rules, the mods would have been totally lost. I think they are as lean as we can get.

[RogueIce]

Edit: I do still feel that the rules are needlessly complex, so if option two involved streamlining the rules in some way, I might vote for that.

Whoah. In the last four months, I have answered about 200+ PMs about this game and without the rules, the mods would have been totally lost. I think they are as lean as we can get.

Yeah. I like the rules as they are.

And we could have posted a big huge combat mechanics thing. But we didn't. So count your blessings.

[The Romulan Republic]

Yeah. I like the rules as they are.

Again, any of the above is fine as far as I'm concerned.

And we could have posted a big huge combat mechanics thing. But we didn't. So count your blessings.

I shudder at the thought.

Just my personal tastes. I like things as simple as possible. I'm more interested in story and diplomacy than budgets and such. But yeah, their have to some rules to keep things manageable.

[Thanas]

And we could have posted a big huge combat mechanics thing. But we didn't. So count your blessings.

I shudder at the thought.

Heh. The initial proposal - without looking at exceptions, ambushes etc. was 6 word-pages long.

[Serafina]

And we could have posted a big huge combat mechanics thing. But we didn't. So count your blessings.

I shudder at the thought.

Heh. The initial proposal - without looking at exceptions, ambushes etc. was 6 word-pages long.

What the....ok, i have to say this: I really like the rules as they are .
We have good rules for resources, building, research - everthing that determines what one player has avaiable.
And we have no rules for the usage of these assets - which is great. because it requires creativity.
And after all, thats what it is all about.

@Topic: The timescale of a year is ok. However, i fear that we won't see any mayor combat happen for quite some time. simply because you need way too long to be able to build dreadnoughts - and you need those to crack planetary shields.
Which means that you can not attack a major planet right now - because no one has dreadnoughts.
There are two possible solutions:
-Make planetary shields more vulnerable. However, this would contradict a lot of canon.
-Make dreadnoughts avaiable faster.

I would prefer the latter solution. My proposal:
Soften up the "five major worlds" limit. Either reduce it to three or four - or introduce a limit of one dreadnought per major world (or two major worlds, if you like).
This would mean that smaller nations could build dreadnoughts, BUT they would be more limited, and therefore more vulnerable.

Regards
Fina

[Thanas]

Soften up the "five major worlds" limit. Either reduce it to three or four - or introduce a limit of one dreadnought per major world (or two major worlds, if you like).
This would mean that smaller nations could build dreadnoughts, BUT they would be more limited, and therefore more vulnerable.

Hmm. This is an interesting idea. However, with the current shipyard building times, almost everyone will already have enough major worlds to start dreadnought production by then.

Unlesss they set up their nation as you did, but the rest of the players are hardly to be blamed for that when you were explicitly warned against doing so.

[RogueIce]

Soften up the "five major worlds" limit. Either reduce it to three or four - or introduce a limit of one dreadnought per major world (or two major worlds, if you like).
This would mean that smaller nations could build dreadnoughts, BUT they would be more limited, and therefore more vulnerable.

Hmm. This is an interesting idea. However, with the current shipyard building times, almost everyone will already have enough major worlds to start dreadnought production by then.

Yes, depending on how you do your upgrading of systems. We might change a bit if people aren't upgrading average worlds to major a lot, but we'll see. As it is, we have at least four years before the first 8000m yards come online, and I don't think anyone is building a 19km yard any time soon. So we can wait and see, I think.

By the by:

@Topic: The timescale of a year is ok. However, i fear that we won't see any mayor combat happen for quite some time. simply because you need way too long to be able to build dreadnoughts - and you need those to crack planetary shields.
Which means that you can not attack a major planet right now - because no one has dreadnoughts.

Actually, you probably can with the right planning. But you'll need a shit ton of troops to do it.

[Agent Sorchus]

I voted to increase timescale to two months equal a year, because of the ease in using a quartering system to keep track of time.
Perhaps giving everyone a one Dreadnought with no restrictions is the best and simplest solution.