Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

The Troops are only a minor feature in SE4.
Yea, you can design your troops (and it's cool), but you can not do so much...
In fact, the SE4 ground combat (like most of 4x games in the space), it's very simple: only one stack of invader Troops against the defender's stack.
In my opinion, I believe that MM did the right decision: the core of the game is the "Galactic Conquest" not the "Planetary Conquest".

About your questions:
1) The Troops, like the Satellites, Plataforms, Mines, Fighters, etc, are placed in the Planet "Cargo Area", after you build it.
You can load them into transports if you want, and "regroup" them... but the game always group your units, depending the name that you used to create them.
If in the early game, you build light Troops with Small Rockets, you should name them "Light Rockets 1", for example. But, if later, you have new tech to design better troops, you should create a new Troop design (with a different name), using the new tech.

2)I think that MM only was keeping the same idea than SE3...

3)I'm not sure, but think not. Anyway, I'm sure that the Troops are expendable resources: you can build a lot of them, very fast.

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

Thanks.

That was the impression I was getting - another 4x game with no/poor ground combat. It's kind of like the Tactical game I suppose - MM has to pay lip service and throw something out to those of us searching for a bit more depth.

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

While we're on the subject, does anyone know how ground combat works? Planets with no troops on them seem to generate one militia defender for each 20 million population, but I wish I knew how they are equipped. Do they get top-of-the-line stuff, or just small DU cannons I, or what? All I know is that more than two or three of these defenders can kick the butt of a whole transport load of high-tech troops. That's why I usually don't bother with ground combat, and just demand planets. To keep things from making the game too easy, I only do this when I've defeated a planet's defenses and have ships blockading it.

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

The best "ground combat" in a "space game" is IG II.

Wingte


<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Narlotep:
Thanks.

That was the impression I was getting - another 4x game with no/poor ground combat. It's kind of like the Tactical game I suppose - MM has to pay lip service and throw something out to those of us searching for a bit more depth.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

I just started messing around with "Troops" and am not very impressed with creating them let alone using them. I had to stop short, so some of these answers may become clear when I try again tonight.

My assumption (yeah, I know) was that I could produce "units' that I could group into tactical organizations, i.e. just like we can build ships and group them into Task Forces or Fleets. However, this does not appear to be the case.

1.) How do you regroup troop "units" into actual units? I built twenty "units" with
the design name "Light" and they all plopped out together and are sitting in the planet's "Cargo" area (????). From there, they appear unmodifiable, i.e. giving the group of units a true name rather than "Light" which has inexplicably become their organizational name or regrouping into smaller organizations.

2.) Seems strange that troops require designing and my boarding parties do not. Why can't I just use those shipboard boarding parties as "troops" as well. Granted they'd be lightly armed, but with the AI's inability to defend his worlds properly, they'd be good enough.

3.) Do troops gain experience? If so, is this by "unit" or by "group of units"? Again, if there is no organization and units are just clustered into blobs o' units, then how can the player take advantage of higher experienced units that he may wish to group into elite formations?

Anyway, its early and prior to coffee, but these are some of my scattered thoughts from Last nights experimenting.

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

Wingte,

IGII Ground Combat looked good, but several reviews dinged the AI's ability to use ground units. As I'm a solo player that killed it for me.

To tell the truth, I am really going to wait on SEIV until I hear some reviews that address the AI - so far I am "underwhelmed" by its ability. However, I do realize this is only the demo Version, so I'll still give it a chance.

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

Well.. IG II was intended to be an Online game so the AI would have been irrelavent.

Wingte

[quote]Originally posted by Narlotep:
[b]Wingte,

IGII Ground Combat looked good, but several reviews dinged the AI's ability to use ground units. As I'm a solo player that killed it for me.

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

It's just a matter of personal taste but IG2 left me rather cold, good ground combat or not.

It certainly has its strong points but it lacks the depth and versatility of SE4. IG2 seemed flat to me in some important ways and I found it hard to get interested in the prepackaged empires, especially the warrior race who can't even access the diplomatic functions. I find the "flavor" of SE4 much more involving, especially when it comes to the customization abilities.

Maybe if I was at all interested in multiplayer gaming, it'd be different, but I think I've already spent more time playing the demo Version of SE4 than I spent playing the full release Version of IG2.

I spotted a couple of copies of IG2 on the bargain wall at a shop today. It'd be a decent cheap buy but I wish I hadn't bought it at the full price!

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

No, by far the best ground combat in a 4X game can be found in SSI's Star General. Planetary invasions are fought using the Panzer General game engine (unfortunately also used for the space portion of the game), with a variety of unit types including AFVs (tanks), mobile artillery, anti-tank infantry, flying spotters, fighters, and bombers. It was great, as invasions of larger planets required several space turns (with 10 ground turns per space turn), and you usually needed to keep the planet blockaded.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by wingte:
The best "ground combat" in a "space game" is IG II.

Wingte


<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

One experience I had with ground combat went as follows:
I had defeated the planet's space station and had destroyed the 3 weapon platforms. (The planet's cargo showed 0 platforms.)I then brought my troop ship in and dropped them to capture the planet. When it went to the ground combat screen, the planet defenses showed the weapon platforms (still at 0) and ZAP one combat tick and all my troops were gone.
I would think that destroyed platforms whould not have counted in the combat. Is this a bug?
Please note that this all occurred within one 30 turn combat.
BTW I then used my attack ships to wipe the planet clean, that'll show 'em.

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

"In my opinion, I believe that MM did the right decision: the core of the game is the
"Galactic Conquest" not the "Planetary Conquest".

But the most important bodies in the galaxy are the planets.
Nobody can oversea the fact that the ground combat system is just designed plain bad.

The first group of people dont bother at all with it, because its boring, cumbersome and not balanced.
The second group which likes to plan their wars and logistics on planets too, critisize MM for this design decision (I belong to this group)
And the third group does not pay attention to the problem at all as long as there is a new fancy-fizzi-super-cool-destroy-all-enemy-ships-at-once-cannon in the game, because they think that the a space 4x game should consist of gun whamming trough the galaxy.

IMO a good 4x game should consist of much more: a trade system (like civ, boo for MM), a diplomatic system (bravo for MM) a space combat system (bravo bravo for MM), a ground combat system (boo, boo for MM)
you know what I mean.

klaus

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

I forget the exact circumstances (comes of staying up all night playing addictive games), but I remember one combat in which a planet wound up with -1 weapons platform. IIRC, it could still somehow fire at me. Has anybody else encountered this bug?

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

I, for one, don't mind the system the way it works now. I'm here for a 4x game in SPACE not a ground tactical game.

Also, MM is a very small company (if I understand correctly) and isnt in a position to do a really, really good ground combat system in ADDITION to a really, really good 4x game, right?

Lets review the other 4x games ground combat:

Moo II : you create "troop ships", fill them up with the best troops you have, then they can attack the enemy planet AFTER the space combat is done. Troop ship do nothing but carry troops and they are not part of any engagement involving the invasion, so you cannot "throw everything" at the enemy troop ship to try and destroy it. If the enemy wins the space battle, the troops land, walk from the left side of the screen to the right and whoever has the best forces wins.

Imperium Galactica: Troops are all in tanks. The tanks get to the planet inside the cargo holds of ships. You cannot build a "troop ship" because you are not allowed very many "troop holds" as compared to any ship design. There is no real way to create a large "troop ship", you have to put troops on your starships, which then can get destroyed in combat.

Once you get on the ground, there is 1 city there (suppossedly representing a planet of millions or billions of people???) that you can "tank rush". Very limited tactics available: focus your fire, try to stay at your best weapons range, etc.

In the end, neither game gave the "feel" of actually conquering a planet.

Moo2 did a little better in the fact that each planet had a "loyalty rating". If you didnt work hard to subjugate the conquered populations (through diplomacy or through stationing a garrison force), they may rebel and automatically switch back to the enemy, which added some realism, where in IG2, once you land, they are all loyal to the death for you...

What would the people here like to see? What would REALLY give the feel of conquering a whole entire planet, without becoming a whole entire game? I'm not sure I see anything that could satisfy me beyond the current system..

------------------

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

I'm also happy with the style of the ground combat as it is. More sophistication would be nice and more player control would *defintely* be nice, but I agree with you completely: space combat is the heart of the beast in games like this.

That said, there are still some balancing that needs to be done. The planetary militia is just too tough, and there really needs to be a way to drop troops from more than one transport at once. I suspect the first may even appear in the next demo (hope, hope, hope!) and the second sounds like a good candidate for an update/patch if it doesn't make it into the release Version.

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

Although I'd love to see a heavily-detailed ground combat componenet ala Star General or (now that I think about it) Emperor of the Fading Suns, I know it won't make it into SE4. Therefore, I'll settle for improvements with the current system.

1)Militia need to stop regenerating after each transport lands its troops. Is this a bug?

2)Some better indication of how ground combat actually works would be nice. How about a combat screen similar to that of Call to Power, where the different units line up and attack each other, and it can be rather easily distinguished what killed what and how easily. I hope that doesn't sound confusing.

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

Noble713,

Ahh, the memories. I have to agree that Star General was the best computerized representation I've experienced with both Space/Ground components. I was never a fan of the PzGen series, but I still pull that one out for a quick fix, warts and all.

(I miss GDW's old "Invasion:Earth" cardboard/map game &lt;sigh&gt;.)

I absolutely_do_agree that the emphasis should be on the Galactic Conquest side of things. My point is if in SEIV we're getting into the nitty-gritty details of building ships and organizing fleet operations, where is the other half - the ground side. My point is MM has chosen to put a ground combat system into the game so why not do it to the same standard as the space combat component?

To be honest, I feel they should either dump it or do it right. Again for those who just want the macro experience, make tactical ground combat an option, just as the tactical space combat is.

I realize MM is a small company and this is not a show stopper as there is always planetary bombardment, but there is something visceral in getting down on somebody else's mudball and taking it away from him as part of an integrated multi-dimensional campaign...of course then you have to garrison, but that's another problem. ;-)

Narlotep

Re: Anybody using Ground Combat/Units??
 

Narlothep:
I can only agree with you. Your post hits the point.
I for my part would be satisfied even with a simple but challenging ground combat system. (with tactics, garrisons, multiturncombat etc.)

klaus