Welcome to THE FIRST entry in the Mechanical Wonders series! These articles pluck a single game mechanic from a specific game and talk about why the mechanic is noteworthy. Maybe it does something innovative and awesome that others can learn from. Maybe it does something cool but so subtle you never realized it. Maybe it does something so wonderfully awful that is an example of what not to do! So read on and let us know what you think in the comments.
The Competitive, Galactic Talent Search
I like it when 4X games find new avenues for empires to interact that go beyond the typical “bash ‘em over the head” warmongering or “trade me your space dust for my space sheep” exchanges. Starbase Orion (and go read our review) has a mechanical wonder that I’ve never seen implemented in any other 4X game, which of course gets right at this idea of finding other avenues for interaction.
In Starbase Orion, when a new leader pops out of the primordial ether and comes looking for work (as they mysteriously seem to do in most 4X games), a curious thing happens. Instead of the leader declaring their hiring price as a take-it, or leave-it proposition, the leader shows up as a possibility for ALL empires at the same time. All the empires then enter a bidding process to who will win over the leader. To the highest bidder go the spoils!
The mechanics of the bid are pretty straightforward. The leader will show up and offer services at a modest (starting bid) price. Everyone can toss in their bid at that price or a higher bid amount. Then you click end turn. On the next turn, the system will tell you what the highest bid was, and everyone else then gets a chance to bid an even higher amount (if they want). This repeats turn after turn until a high bid goes uncontested, at which point the leader joins the high bidder’s empire.
Also of note is that the maintenance cost for a leader is tied to the winning bid amount (I think 10%), so it’s possible for leaders to get pretty expensive to keep if the bid gets driven way up. The good news is that leaders don’t actually stick around for long (30 turns if I recall correctly), before the reenter the leader pool in hopes of being picked up by another empire for higher price!
Now, what makes this system so interesting is that leaders are exceptionally powerful in Starbase Orion. While they don’t level up or anything, each leader has a range of passive and strategic abilities that can dramatically shape the course of your empire’s growth and development. Certain combat leaders can form the backbone of your military options. One such leader lets you change movement orders mid flight, which is huge for warmongering. Some colony leaders can boost production or research to insane levels or provide other passive perks (like all your ships getting free research labs!)
The bidding system enables the leaders to be so powerful and transformational because, potentially, each leader obtainable for any empire. It cuts out the luck of the draw and makes it more strategic (and interactive!). The bidding system acts as an organic, player-driven balancing system. If a powerful leader comes along, empires will get into a bidding war, which drives the price up, and somewhat tempers their power.
The other cool aspect of this is the strategic double-think created through this bidding system. Sometimes a leader will show up that I know one of my opponents would really want but that I don’t need. Do I let them have it for cheap, or do I bid a little bit anyway in hopes of driving up the price but not actually getting the leader? It’s a risky strategy because you could get stuck paying for a leader you don’t want!
All in all, this is a fantastic system and the kind of idea that I wish more 4X games would explore. There is tremendous fertile ground for creating interesting non-military interactions between empires that simply don’t get enough attention.
So until the next Mechanical Wonder comes along, please let us know what you think in the comments!
Oliver is a perpetual dabbler of all-things gaming. This includes: game playing, game theory-crafting, game designing, game blogging, game criticizing, and of course game gaming. His interests span from strategy to FPS games, from tabletop miniature and boardgames to PC and mobile games. Oliver was first bitten by the 4X bug with Sid Meier’s Alpha Centauri, although other 4X favorites include Armada 2526, Starbase Orion (on iOS), and Age of Wonders III.
looks like an interesting mechanic.
if the AI can handle it well it sure adds some more depth to the gameplay.
but this could also be a gamebreaker if the AI is to dumb and get’s itself into financial trouble cause of the bidding process.
The AI in SO is pretty good, and it does a decent job in the leader bidding game. i recall feeling that it ever broke itself in the bidding process.
I may not have seen this particular case (leaders) in 4X’s before but Sins of the Solar Empire (not a 4X according to myself ;)) does have a (pirate) bidding mechanic. There is at least 1 other strategy game that I can’t recall at the moment. I’ve never been “Wow’d” by it, especially since AI in strategy games often cheats through cash. If territory, items/equipment or other resources were in the equation (with their corresponding -in-game ‘market value’), this would be much more interesting.
It’s not exactly a 4X game, but Offworld Trading Company also has a bidding mechanic for all sorts of things including land tiles, techs, and structures.
I really liked the pirate mechanics in Sins. It was a pretty slick implementation of this same general idea.
I dig the idea in theory and it definitely sounds like a unique and interesting mechanic, but it seems like it kills immersion a bit. Like, why would I want a hero who I knew for a fact would betray my empire if given enough money?
Well, mercenaries have played significant roles in shaping events over the course of human history. It’s not much different from that in concept. Also, I should clarify, they can’t be purchased away from your empire once hired i.e. after you successfully win the bid. They will eventually leave on their own and re-enter pool to be bid by whomever wants them then. This would be like saying “why would I want to hire an employee if one day they might leave my company and work for competitor?” Because if you don’t hire them you’re going to be left behind.
Ah, but you’re not hiring an employee. You’re hiring a CEO. These are leaders, right? And yes, mercenaries are still used even today, but they are not typically put in charge of a battalion and given strategic battle plans or military secrets with an understanding that they may take this intel to the enemy when their contract expires.
I am, what I guess you could call it simulation player. In order to enjoy a game, I have to fully immerse myself into the story and will often make obviously subpar decisions, mechanically speaking, because that is what my narrative demands. And I know that I personally would have difficulty selecting someone that I thought of as not loyal to my cause. (Side note: A friend of mine got really frustrated with me because I refused to ever take Auron into battle in Final Fantasy X. Guy kept trying to convince me that Auron was a badass and I needed him but I didn’t care – I didn’t trust Auron’s motives so I refused fight beside him or even to arm him.)
First if all, nice idea for a regular series of articles! This will be definitely interesting and possibly enlightening to follow, that much is for sure.
With this specific mechanic I find myself undecided. In a human multiplayer environment this kind of interaction probably feels good, but I completely agree with expalphalog. What would happen, when Civ would be played with this rule and a personality would offer their abilities or inventions to the highest bidder? Capitalism at its ugliest, you might say.
“I have this great ship with this great mega weapon and I can create monsters that will fight for you”, is, come to think of it, an invitation for everyone who either doesn’t want to ruin their coffers or allow for the chance to finally face them to try and eliminate them from the equation, so while the mechanic as such may be interesting and worth a couple of thoughts on how to make use of it, its application in this case seems not quite so wonderful.
I find your view fascinating but also perplexing.
I mean, there are plenty of cases throughout history (and still today) of specialists selling their services for the highest bidder. Renaissance era artists were wooed by the wealthy patrons who funded them, no doubt getting into bidding fisticuffs to acquire the most prestigious artists, or thinkers, or engineers.
I feel like you’re viewing these bidding instances as if they act in isolation from a constant well of things to bid on, and also in the context of broader economic considerations. If you bid on something, whether because you want it or you are trying to prevent someone else from having it, then you also need to acknowledge the opportunity cost you pay for not having enough money to bid on the next thing – which could be even more powerful or useful. This is where the depth of it comes in. A lot of board games use these kinds of bidding mechanics to great effect, as either a small part of the game or the entire focus of it.
Not just board games in fact. In the late 80s I was playing a Play By Mail (postal mail, not email) called Middle Ages. It was played on the World of Greyhawk map and at supported 120 players per game in a deep political/economic/military setup, with kings, emperors and several levels of vassal nations.
Entirely written in DBase, with weekly turns and 5+ page reports printed on continuous paper sheets by a Citizen 24-pin printer, it is to this day the best gaming experience I had. We used to weekend travel for meetups to define military and political strategies with or against the rival factions of Madrid, Lisbon, Pamplona, Beja and Toulouse players. Someone would always bring a huge rollover map of Greyhawk they carefully printed in sessions, joined and laminated and then painted on top to reflect the current political divisions and known army/fleet locations.
I am giving all this irrelevant information because I miss it 🙂
So, the same way we had to pay careful attention to population growth in order to recruit into our armies and fleets, we also had to hire generals and admirals from a regional pool. We would precisely bid against each other for these military resources. Generals and admirals not only had a huge impact on the army/fleet capabilities in battle and ability to retreat earlier with minimum loses, but in fact you couldn’t even move an army/fleet outside your territory without one. You could only defend yourself with it. If you tried to leave your borders with a leaderless army or fleet you would suffer major loses to morale and large numbers of desertions and also suffer a major hit your your Nobility support levels. Taking into account our expensive the military setup of your nation was (it accounted for 80% of your entire expenditure), it seemed like a terrible waste of money.
These auctions were major events that happened every three months of real time (around 12 game turns) and also served as a political forum, to exert power, influence (even inside an allied domain) and dictate the upcoming strategies. And when a general the level of an Alexander showed up in that pool, you can bet a lot of phone calls (as in, the good ol’ landline call) would take place and emergency meetups organized, so we could join efforts and order coin trades in the next couple of turns to help one of us secure that military resource.
The point is, it fit very well with the rest of the game and it was dead on in giving the game two major benefits:
– An interesting and replayable mechanic
– A mechanic that introduced variability and uncertainty at all stages of the game and influenced the gameplay
The problem is the – stressed – importance of the leaders. I mean imagine THIS scenario: WW II. Oppenheimer is offering the nuclear bomb to the highest bidder. I think, that makes the point a bit clearer.
I think it depends a lot on how the game balances this with everything else.I didn’t play Starbase Orion, so I don’t really know. How much “expensive” is money in the game? How decisive really are these leader skills in the strategic map? How much the 30 turn limit represents as faction development? Etc…
Regardless of how well or poorly executed it is however, I like the idea because it represents exactly the type of approach 4x games need in my opinion: If well designed and along with other features, this is for instance an excellent mechanic to add spice to the middle and late games.
Yes, exactly. It adds a great orientation point for economic interaction. Money in SO is reasonably tight, and does nothing just sitting in your bank account. Often you’re deciding between whether to raise bids on leaders versus using money to accelerate production.
That series of articles is my favorite from now.
GJ!
Sweet! Glad to hear it!