Conflict mechanics (Concept Idea)

Hello! I know conflict will come many many years in the future, but still given the game mechanics and flow, I was thinking of how could it work in the long long future. The idea is to rip and improve this base idea so it could be implemented, again, in the years ahead future. I tried to present a simple and “functional” system which fits the game itself. All feedback, criticism, and proposals is welcome ofc, the idea is to perfect this so the devs can draw some ideas from this maybe, and to fuel community discussion :smiley:

Here it goes:
Prosperous Universe – Modular Military System (Concept Proposal)


1. Core Idea

The goal is to imagine a military layer for Prosperous Universe that:
• Stays true to the game’s economic and logistical focus.
• Uses modularity and abstraction so it’s simple to implement and expand.
• Creates meaningful decisions without heavy micromanagement.


2. Forces & Roles

• Military gameplay centers on fleets of ships, designed via blueprints and modules.
• Ships fill different roles: strike, defense, logistics support, or reconnaissance.
• Crews and manpower are required for every vessel, tying military strength directly into the economy.


3. Equipment & Design

• Ships are defined by modular equipment: weapons, defenses, support systems, and logistics modules.
• Equipment determines a fleet’s strengths, weaknesses, and synergies.
• To simplify logistics, all weapons use a general resource called Combat Supplies (instead of separate ammo types).
• Fuel, supplies, maintenance, and manpower together define a fleet’s readiness.


4. Logistics

• Each ship consumes:
Fuel for movement and deployment.
Combat Supplies during battles.
Maintenance & Crew as recurring upkeep.

• Resupply options include:
Tankers (mobile logistics ships).
Logistics hubs (system-level bases).
Planetary ports (if controlled).

• Extended campaigns naturally put strain on logistics, making resource planning just as important as combat.


5. Combat Mechanics

Orbital Combat: fleets clash in real time. Outcomes are shaped by composition, doctrines, stances, logistics, and intelligence.
Orbital Control %: control of a System is measured from 0–100%. At least 70% is required to attempt invasion.
Orbital Bombardment: fleets can consume supplies to damage population, infrastructure, and economic output.

Land Combat: once system is secured, fleets deploy forces to establish Total Planetary Control %.
– For simplicity, all defenders are represented by a single Defense Strength counter.
– This counter is weakened by combat, logistics shortages, or bombardment.


6. Intelligence Gathering (IGF)

• Intelligence is tracked with two counters:
Orbital IGF (fleets, defenses, logistics).
Planetary IGF (troops, defenses, population).

• Players assign agents to gather intelligence; defenders can assign counter-agents.
• Higher IGF % means better awareness of enemy positions and improved efficiency in combat.


7. Doctrines & Stances

Doctrines: long-term philosophies (e.g. Offensive, Defensive, Balanced) that guide how fleets fight.
Stances: real-time adjustments for deployed fleets (Aggressive, Defensive, Balanced).
• Together, these give players strategic control without requiring constant micromanagement.


8. Planetary Defenses

• Each planet may construct two types of defenses:
Space Defense Platform (assists defending fleets in orbit).
Ground Defense Platform (strengthens planetary resistance).


9. Why This Fits Prosperous Universe

Economic-first – every ship, supply, and crew member is part of the market. War drives demand and creates new industries.
Abstracted but deep – percentages, supply counters, and doctrines keep combat meaningful but not overwhelming.
Modular design – developers can start with fleets and orbital control, then expand to espionage, doctrines, or more detailed logistics later.
Persistent & real-time – all systems run continuously in the background, in line with the rest of the game.


Key Takeaway

This proposal offers a flexible framework for introducing military gameplay into Prosperous Universe.
It is:
• Modular (easy to expand).
• Economic-first (ties directly into the core game).
• Persistent (runs in real time).
• Accessible (strategic depth without RTS micromanagement).

Military mechanics could enrich the game’s economy, diplomacy, and long-term strategy — while remaining true to the philosophy that makes Prosperous Universe unique.

I tried to keep the idea simple and general so it can be slowly expanded into a theoretical framework to draw ideas from

PS: The text was formatted with AI, shame on me D:

Edit 1: Orbital bombardment discarded as per community feedback

Edit 2: Warfare is system based instead of planet based

Feedback from SLKLS

My opinion on a possible combat implementation:

Faction Governance
– Governors of faction planets can vote people into a faction government.
– This faction government can vote to build ships.
– (Optional: planetary governments could also build ships, but only defensive ones).

Ship Types
– Cheap, short-range STL defense ships.
– Expensive, large FTL-capable battleships or carriers.
– Different ship types could require different inputs and have different attack profiles.

System Control
– Ships can be used to defend or attack a system to bring it into their territory.
– Battles are resolved as a comparison of attack vs. defense numbers, with results after a set duration (X).
– Planetary defenses can be built to increase the defense value of a system.

Consequences of Victory
– If an attack is successful, the system changes ownership.
– The changes are limited to:
– Which faction/system they pay taxes to.
– What tariff rules they follow.
– There is no direct impact on existing bases.

Feedback conclusions Part 1:

  • don’t touch bases/planet pop/infrastructure directly,
  • make high end production meaningful,
  • make factions more than HQ bonuses

Edit 1: Added FB Conclusions Part 1

Feedback from Saigo

Yeah, I suspect something like EVE onlines suppression/corruption system would work. An NPC conflict “visits” a system, and player actions can affect how that conflict plays out, by interacting with the NPCs in some manner, just not direct conflict between each other. For us that NPC interaction would be one of an economic support basis.

Feedback Part 2:

Yeah. Perhaps the conflict areas are only ever in faction border systems too

that way players can “opt away” by not putting bases in those systems, or heavily opt in, by having all their bases there

Edit 1: Added Feedback Part 2