1/10/2017 Topic: Where did you hear about Barons of the Galaxy? RadCavalier	I heard about this seeing some art on DeviantArt, was intrigued by the picture so I looked you guys up. Looks like I found a hidden gem!
1/10/2017 Topic: Ways to help the development? RadCavalier	Hi! I'm quite new to the game, but I love what you guys are doing here. I was wondering if there was any way we could help grow the game/community in terms of creative contributions or, well, anything you could think of. I plan to donate when I can, but until that point I was wondering if there was anything more substantive we could offer? -RadCav
1/10/2017 Topic: Compenstation RadCavalier	I agree, while the time is the more significant consequence, it is also the whole reason attacks would happen in a PvP war.
1/10/2017 Topic: Give us Event Ideas! RadCavalier	What if the city rioting created a co-operative event that encourages players to supply certain high-tier services or products to pacify the populace? This event may possibly trigger due to logical reasoning (local combat, severe lack of an essential resource, etc.) and could even provide opportunities for opportunistic corporations to expand into those cities to fill those needs.
1/15/2017 Topic: Some QoL notes :) RadCavalier	Hi! First thing's first, I've been playing this game almost every day and I love it! I've been chewing on some event ideas, but for now here are some Quality of Life notes I've had while playing. First, it would be awesome if we could have the names of the people posting messages hyperlinked to their corporate profile, so we could click and get more information on who is doing the talking. Second, if possible, I think it would be helpful for military units to have their base stats displayed on the construction screen, as well as their upgrade screen. Without seeing which upgrades I chose in the past, or the current weaknesses of the units it makes choices a little tricky. I like shoring up my units' weaknesses, and I can't do that without seeing what their stats are/will be. Also, if the upgrade choices of the past could be logged somewhere in the case of ships, it would be good to see what I've done in the past. Lastly, and this is the doozy that I think may not be possible.. would it be doable to add a "Trade Routes" page which reads all infinitely looped orders, their destinations and the cargo sold as a means of managing our fleets of transports and freighters? I've taken to writing a separate spreadsheet to manage mine, but keeping it updated is tricky since demand drops in cities, routes change, and oftentimes I find myself working with outdated information. I just think a Trade Routes page, however it gets formed, would help immensely in keeping things how I want them. But I recognize this one might be shooting for the moon. At any rate, just wanted to say this has been a great game and I fully intend on donating when I have the dosh to do so! Cheers!
1/26/2017 Topic: Typos RadCavalier	Heyo, just making a place for me to post the various typos I might see as I play the game. Here's one: A revolutionary power plant for vehicles is fast and cheap making their demand burn up the charts. Their power comes from a compact **for of anti-matter** that occasionally becomes unstable and either runs vehicles out of control into awe inspiring car wrecks or simple detonates an entire city block. A bunch of Sunday drivers have formed a petition to ban these types of engines from the streets. Pretty sure it should be "form of anti-matter" That's all for now.
5/2/2017 Topic: We are going live on Saturday May 13th! RadCavalier	YUSSSS I've been waiting for release to come back!
5/8/2017 Topic: The official Orbital Megastructures thread RadCavalier	I have to say, I'm not in favor of the thought that starbases would participate in attacks. They seem purely as a defensive measure to strengthen the hold on a Strategic Orbit Point. However, maybe a star base could act as a dry dock for ships, offering a discount to repairs when ships are stationed there? It could offer the chance for SOPs to be used as staging grounds during interplanetary war. Making them even more strategically significant. Also, the warp gate idea is intriguing, but I'd like to suggest splitting it into interplanetary and interstellar gates? Maybe I'm thinking too big, but if interstellar warp points were arranged at the LaGrange points of a star, so interstellar travel isn't so immediate? Meanwhile the planetary SOPs could be used for interplanetary acceleration?
5/8/2017 Topic: Small typo in Mech infantry unit critical RadCavalier	I'm glad the community is so dedicated to helping make this game run snoothly.
5/8/2017 Topic: "Mark all as read" RadCavalier	Sounds good to me too :p
5/8/2017 Topic: Planet Names RadCavalier	I was curious, is there any possibility that non-solar planets might eventually be able to be named more gripping/homey/interesting things than Starname#? I'm not sure how the naming process would be accomplished. Possibly either randomly, like cities are now. Or maybe vote based by all current inhabitants? With dev veto of course. I only ask because I have plans to relocate out of Sol permanently. And I didn't know if one day planets might take on a little bit more personality than they have now.
5/9/2017 Topic: Planet Names RadCavalier	I agree with Dread against microtransactions. I think voting on 10 random names (maybe from a pool of player submissions?) would be ideal. And Badmaw, please don't hijack my thread with off-topic "advice" where you, yet again, try to tell Dread what to do. It doesn't make you any friends here. For the most part everyone is quite happy with Dread's design and direction choices. That's why we all play this game. Stop telling him "how it should be." There is a right way and a wrong way to give constructive criticism. The right way offers a solution to a problem without pressuring the person to agree. The wrong way is foisting your preferences on the person regardless of creative intent.
5/9/2017 Topic: Planet Names RadCavalier	Hutton, I respect what you're saying, and I understand the need for some Wild-card players to stir the pot. But I'm also not going to tolerate unfathomable arrogance and incivility. Like Badmaw said, maybe expecting people to not be know-it-all ******* is because I'm American. Returning to the topic and in response to your other post, I think 25 cities might be a little high? Outside of Sol, keeping a planet with 25 cities running will probably involve about 30-40 people. I suppose it comes down to what Dread thinks an appropriate threshold-difficulty for naming would be. For my part, I was thinking the restriction could be based on length of time a planet has had "developed" status (capable of planetary ruler).
5/9/2017 Topic: Planet Names RadCavalier	Okay, two thoughts: 1. "I'm not making a typical cash grab game based on the all the current "meta" for marketing a browser game. I'm trying something different =)" This is exactly why I've supported this game and signal boost it to friends/viewers whenever I can. It's elevating gaming to art, over industry. (Ironic in an industrial/economic game) 2. I think a hidden "Sol III" tag would work, but I'd also be just as happy with "Earth (Sol III)" as a visible tag. Also, the fear regarding an initial set-up of the first few colonists naming a planet is that every unlocked star will result in a mad dash for naming rights. Unless that's what you'd want to go for.
5/9/2017 Topic: We are going live on Saturday May 13th! RadCavalier	You did good, Badmaw. 👍🏻
5/12/2017 Topic: Do the planets move? RadCavalier	I'm almost certain they don't. It would probably wreck the pathing code hardcore to implement that. :p
5/13/2017 Topic: Interception? RadCavalier	I was chatting in the Discord and the topic came up of shipping lane raids. Is it possible to intercept moving fleets, given the varying speeds and turn-based nature of movement?
5/19/2017 Topic: Moon Charter - Defenses RadCavalier	I believe the only equitable means to establish defenses on the moon is a pre-determined list of fortifications and defenses supplied to those three organizations which have, up until now, so hotly contested lunar real estate. The Mining Guild, Ark, and Dogstar would each enforce this list of fortifications/units ensuring that each organization's defense does not exceed the others, and any two can exist without the third to prevent vulnerability to perfidy. Independent organizations wishing to contribute to the defense of the site would be welcome under these terms only so long as they remain independent. Thoughts? -Mathias Shaw
5/19/2017 Topic: Moon Charter - Use of Artifacts RadCavalier	It's one thing to eliminate a research facility, but it's quite another to sell an artifact to a blackballed corporation. Do we plan to have punitive measures for corporations that may not be aware of the treaty and then punish them for their ignorance? Furthermore, this would mean the cultivation and maintenance of a database of blackballed corporations. Do these corporations have a period in which they might remove themselves from this list? Who will maintain the list? What of those who will enforce it? This new proposition of trade embargo with corps in violation of the treaty may be a taller order than you are initially intending. In this, I feel it is a much more realistic proposition to limit ourselves to the management of which research facilities employ themselves on the Moon, rather than attempt to maintain a database of those in violation and those who supply those in violation. Complications will grow exponentially.
6/7/2018 Topic: Suggestions on Narrative, Inflation and Friction RadCavalier	As ever, these are merely suggestions. I'm certain DrDread has his own vision for the game and I want to start by thanking him for creating something we all enjoy so much. This game has an excellent foundation, but there have been concerns over end-game inflation and stagnancy. With that in mind, I've decided to compile the notes from a discussion in Discord along with a few of my own thoughts. I'll be breaking down the post into several sections, starting with the design/theory and ending with practical suggestions for solutions. If you just want to get right to the suggestions, skip this first bit, because it's all about why we need what we need. From a design perspective, I personally think the solution to a lot of our outstanding problems can be summarized into two big categories, Money Sinks and Context/Narrative. In reference to Money Sinks, players don't have enough reasons to spend their money. For a healthy economy (especially in a game all about economy) there needs to be a balance between money being generated by the playerbase vs. money exiting the ecosystem of the game. This prevents inflation and the stagnancy of "having all the things." This balance is actually achieved very well during the early-mid game as upgrades and infrastructure costs burn up a great deal of money generated. It creates a really good sense of progression, but it's a temporary state, as once you hit your logistics/military cap and upgrade your structures to Level 10, you run out of things to burn your money on. This is where I think we should implement more "running costs" rather than "lump costs" to coin some phrases. I define a "running cost" as a continual "cost of doing business" that recurs over and over, a good example of this would be the cost of using a Warp Gate to accelerate your fleet. Every time you want to use the gate, it will cost to make that happen. But, importantly, you can choose to forego the cost for the slower alternative. A "lump cost" would be something like upgrading your Corp HQ from level 9 to 10. It is a one-time obstacle that is meant to be a tall hurdle, but once cleared, you've progressed beyond it and don't face it again. Because of this distinction, asking for higher levels in buildings, or higher logistics/military is good for the sense of progression, but it won't solve the inflation issue. That will only be solved by "running costs" that create continual, dynamic choices that force the player to choose between the more efficient/more expensive option, and the less efficient/less expensive option. The second thing I mentioned was Context/Narrative, it's all well and good to get bigger numbers, but there needs to be a reason to care about those numbers. So far, the community has done a great deal to try to provide their own narrative, but it struggles against the design of the game, rather than acting in concert with it. An example of this would be the Lunar Accords and the conflicts leading up to it when the game first started. That was an excellent piece of player-driven emergent narrative that gave a context to the struggles around Sol's ONLY artifact node. The reason I bring this up at all roots back to Eve Online. Eve's core gameplay tends to be very dry, it's often joked about as "Spreadsheets Online" and yet it has high appeal to new players. Why? Because of the stories that veteran players have in the sandbox environment of the game. Even if the gameplay itself isn't pulse-pounding, the context surrounding the gameplay makes it riveting all the same. As such, I personally believe we, both DrDread and the community as a whole, need to come together to flesh out the world of BotG in an effort to give it more character and personality in the hopes of making memorable stories not only for ourselves, but as a point of appeal to those we'd like to invite to the game. Now, stories can't exist without conflict, as we've seen in the game's past. And conflict typically doesn't occur without reason, especially in a game where war quite literally doesn't pay. The huge expansions of space caused by Weyland-Yutani meant that everyone got much-needed breathing room and more to spare, but it also meant that conflicts died down because everyone had plenty of space to expand in their own corner of the world. While this presents a problem, I believe it can be mitigated by adding content that gives each star or region of space a character or identity all its own. When I left, there was some discussion about creating "planetary quirks" that would give each planet mechanically-relevant changes to industries and units on their surface (think like, a "Fertile" planet increasing production of Crops/Meat industries while also lowering demand for both). I think this is an excellent idea that creates varied appeal and prompts meaningful decisions on where and how to expand your operations. Even negative quirks could have an upside. A planet might be more hostile to commercialization, but it also means if you're willing to put up with the maluses you'd have the planet to yourself. Another possible option is an Artifact-esque addition of "strategic resources" (a concept seen in Stellaris to great effect). Specific resources which could be harvested to increase production speeds, or provide additional artifact-like bonuses to units, but are only found with great rarity. These would be a point of contention amongst corporations and prompt the politicking and intrigue I feel many of us feel is lacking in the gameplay. Perhaps this is what DrDread has in mind with the "Artifact Fragment" update, though I'd like to see Artifacts become even less abundant and more useful. At any rate, that concludes my musings on the game design. Here are some concrete suggestions both by myself and others in the BotG Discord: - A tax percentage option that directly impacts population growth in a town, adjustable by rulers. This tax would act exactly how the current tax system does, but with the added choice of balancing profits over city growth. -In-city events that would have to be mitigated by investment from players (disease, crime sprees, riots, etc.). These could factor into the prestige system as well, where we, as corporations, either ignore, mitigate (say, 50% expense for a partial success) or resolve (100% expense, total success) the issue at hand. These events would be in the style of fads and such. -The ability for rulers to create tariffs on specific guilds or corps. Both inclusive and exclusive. Basically, setting a tariff rate, and who it targets. This could be used to generate non-combat friction and possibly even prompt embargos and trade wars between players without the destruction of their property. -Industrial espionage via "operative" assets that act similar to nanite swarm/geoscorcher artifacts, these operatives could be created out of a unique building (similar to the way a research station creates an artifact). Potentially create a Play-Counterplay interaction with Operatives and Security. This would lead to the cost-benefit analysis of deciding exactly how much Security you need to upkeep to maintain safety. Some ideas: -Sabotage (production at one structure is lessened by a 20-30% range for a short time) -Labor strike -Work Accident -Espionage (production at one structure is stolen by a ~5% range) -Planetary Quirks. As mentioned before, either randomly or non-randomly assigned bonuses and maluses that affect the appeal of planets for various purposes. Not all planets would even have to have them. This would act as an extension of the non-random attribution of resources on various planet types (for example, the high metal content of volcanic worlds or the fact food resources only spawn on certain terrestrial planet types). -Nameable Planets (either generated names, or player named). This one is actually a big one for me. Stars have names, cities have names, our planets need names. Once something has a name it can start having an identity. Perhaps name them only after a certain number of population is reached? I think it's a small thing that would actually go surprisingly far in helping us create a world full of character. -This will seem like an odd one, and perhaps I'm way off here, but I think adding separate discord channels under the general channel for each populated star system would be useful for helping develop internal communities within the greater playerbase. Again, it always comes down to creating systems that help form distinct identities within the community. -Strategic Resources (similar to artifacts, specific boosts to productivity in certain industries, ability to mitigate harmful planetary quirks, etc.) I'll add more to this post as I think of them, but I'm in a bit of a scramble right now. I really would love to see some open discussion on these suggestions and whether or not people would like to build on the ideas or point out flaws in them. -Shaw edited by RadCavalier on 6/7/2018 edited by RadCavalier on 6/7/2018

---