Ideal 4x Travel
 

So what do you guys think is the best way to do travel in a 4x game? SE/Moo's warp point, Galciv's open map? Something in between?

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

I played GalCiv back in the days of OS/2, and I never questioned the physics of open map, these are games after all.

Once I decided in GalCiv not to be aggressive at all, just to stay in my home system and see what would happen. Picketing a ship/satellite on every square became a little annoying.

So that's a vote for warp point/jumpgate/hyperspace jump points. When you think about it, all sci fi uses warp points, in a way. Nothing ever happens to the Enterprise while its at full warp, Vader can't catch the Millennium Falcon while its in hyperspace, etc.

Pretty well summarized, right here. Schlock{clicky}

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

In terms of a soley PBEM game, no AI...


I also have always had issues with the open map, as defending your space is a royal pain.

In the WP model though, being able to stack a large amount of defense in a single spot is also a drawback. Later on in SE you can create WP's, but for most of the game you can not.

B5 uses more of a hybrid where there are WP's/jump gates but some ships can can generate their own. I wonder if this model could be effective in a game.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

On a level we do have an open point travel in the SE series. A large ship with a max level warp point opener can travel great distances, and can carry a whole fleet with it, and "close the hole" if it carries a warp point closer.

People often toy with the concept of a mod that has few, or no, warp points, and a different tech tree for warp point openers, something that adds a bit of strategy to where you can go, and how quickly you want to get there.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

Having played both SE and Galciv's 1 and 2, I definitely prefer SE's warp point system. It allows for much greater defensive strength, and I'm a defensive-minded player, so it suits my play-style better. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

What do you have more fun with? SE definitely has some nice blockade strategy, but Stars! strategy is more fluid.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

I always liked the warp point system better. It allows for the use of strategic chokepoints to defend your space, which allows you to defend with fewer ships, since in an open system you basically just fortify the bejeebus out of every single one of your planets, because if you have a few fortified planets, they get passed over and your undefended planets wind up glassed.

That being said, an open system could be very interesting if implemented properly, but I don't think SE5 has the capability for this. What you would need would be a mixture of very fast, decently armed ships and slower heavy-duty pounders at each of your "chokepoints". When any enemy ships came cruising by, your fast ships would zip out and engage them, tying them up long enough for your heavier ships to arrive and do the smashey-smashey.

Of course, for this to work, you would have to have something that would funnel enemy fleets to the general area of your chokepoint, otherwise you wind up with one fleet defending each system, which is a slight improvement on one fleet per planet but not by much.

You could do something along the lines of what the 4X mod for Civ4 does, and use damaging nebulae and storms so that ships can't come at you from any direction. It's terribly unrealistic, but it would wind up being one of those fun-for-realism trades.

What would also help would be the inclusion of some sort of "supply line" system. This would not necessarily prevent, but make it very inadvisable to bypass fleets stationed at planets, even if you could, since said fleet could then cut off your supply line, and then crush your crippled fleet at it's leisure.

Anyway, I'm supposed to be studying right now, so I'm off!

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

In GGmod, I've been experimenting with impenetrable sector cloaking warppoints.
Ideally ships which end turn on the warppoint will be moved to a random neighbouring hex, but for now, I'm just throwing damage because it is simpler to script.

Defending a warppoint typically means defending the 3-5 sectors around it, or maintaining a mobile defense fleet close enough nearby to intercept enemy fleets.
Plus a few very fast interceptors to pick off the enemy sensor scouts, of course, since they can easily outrun your warships.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

Got to say I like both. I like Galcivs style in that you don't "need" warp points to get to enemy territory. This means that any warp points then become very high value targets. I don't like in Galciv the open borders stuff, declare war, ally or stay the hell out. One way for them to maybe make it a little better in this way would be to add some kind of "Zone control" module for starbases, which would prevent enemy ships entering your space for a set number of spaces. As it is now (Galciv2, not DA) you need to have a ship or SB on every sector of your borders and that eats up alot of resources alone, not to mention your actual fleets. In BOTF I used to make a starbase every 2nd square and also keep a small fast interceptor fleet on station to engage intruders. I dont mind them sending a massive fleet in my backdoor (which as I think most people agree is a act of war) as long as I have a way to defend from it without bankrupting my empire. Maybe also allow scout size ships to enter at will but be detectable by your ships and allow you to destroy them without war, would bring a few more options to the tables. "Hey, can you send a scout to Empire A since your friends (so he prob won't shoot you down) to get me some intel, in exchange I'll give you Item A?"

On the other hand system defense in SE is much easier in that you only have a few WP's to defend (assuming you get the System protection fac.), gotta love chokepoints.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

Anyone know how Starfire (I think that is the old game) dealt with travel?

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

I think warp points are overly delimiting for developing realistic strategies... However, this is vastly outweighed by the limits in AI and definable strategies. If the game was smart, then I'd dump the warp points and let the game evolve a more realistic and wider landscape of possible strategies.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

I don't like GalCiv's style. SEV's style is alright, but a bit boring since travel is instanteneous. Would love to see warp points that actually took several turns to travel through. Travel time could be dependant on distance between the two systems, engine technology and warp point type( slow, fast instant, etc. ). The danger level could then vary from warp point to warp point, slower warp points being safer, etc.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

The strategy game Ascendancy uses that exact warp lane style. It's kinda old, though.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

while we're on the topic, does anyone know if the size limits for some wormholes actually counts? I've seen a few that say nothing more than, say 500kt, can pass through only to see larger ships have no problem.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

No, the size limits don't matter. They were going to, so the descriptions were added, but the feature itself didn't make it.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

The downside of "open travel" (GalCiv, Imperium Galactica, etc) is not just the difficulty of defense but how it encourages the use of "stacks'o'doom" (where an attacker piles every ship they have into a single massive fleet, capable of destroying anything else). GalCiv imposes (artificially low) fleet limits to counter this strategy but that has other downsides.

"Limited travel" systems (with warp points, warp lanes or MOO2's "committed movement" system where a fleet cannot be recalled until it has reached its destination) make the "doom stack" approach less effective since it is less able to arbitrarily switch targets, making it easier to counter.

A hybrid setup (where warp points could be used for fast but limited travel, normal space for slower, open travel) would be the most plausible system but I have only seen this implemented in the play-by-mail game Spiral Arm - here systems are connected by hyperspace portals but you can also move one fleet via "deep space movement" to any other system, albeit more slowly. This gives defensible chokepoints but also the possibility of surprise attacks on inner systems.

Warp point creation in SEV offers the option of surprise also but it is too easily countered (System Gravitational Shielding).

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

If you use an open map, then you are playing a real strategy game. The universe is not 2D and the realism of a map that can emulate that is where the real challenges come in. A warp point system is very defined as you know where your enemy will come from and can have a 'welcoming' fleet. OR you can just mine the WP's and stack fleets on them. Even when you can open your own WP's later game tech prevents the use of them.

I think the best games are open maps and fleet restrictions. Lets face facts that one command ship could not possibly handle hundreds/thousand of smaller ships. Command has to be broken down into smaller control groups. A large attack fleet consisting of smaller groups make sense.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

What is the Stars! travel system like? I played that and VGA planets, but cannot remember.

It seems to me that the length of battles plays a major issue. If attacking a planet actually took a while, ridding the space around it of enemy ships first would be important. Most games now have battles usually ending pretty quick. In SE, after the WP, most battles will take place on the planets, as intercepting fleets is difficult due to quick movement speed.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

VGA was open map (if I remember right). Stars I'm not familiar with.

Remember that a simultaneous movement game in SE is different then a turn based game in SE. There are merits to both systems. Simultaneous movement is the better way to play multiplayer games. Turn based is good for playing against a computer opponent as the AI's just don't do well in simultaneous mode.

While most battles will be over key areas, the WAR will cover vast regions.

Remeber that Space is BIG!!! Ships are small... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/cool.gif

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

What is the technical difference between simultaneous and turn based mode? I have not played against the AI in a while http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

simultaneous:
All orders are given and then carried out. Laying Sats., mines and loading transports along with fighters, are not open to mixing and managing their content. The computer will load a transport with no reguard to type or size of the units. So if you wanted to mix Armor with Infantry you could not specify the mix. If you wanted to lay Sat's out with say 1 Sensor and 49 Defense sat's, you'd have to load the exact amount in the transport.
Movement is carried out with certain functions being regulated to the AI as far as reaction goes. A ship given an attack order will do it's best to attack the target. A specific target must be specified. Battles are all run by the computer, so you will have to designate strategies to the AI to run for you.

Turn Based:
Lets you customize your loadouts and you can unload 1 unit at a time or launch. Since no other ships will be moving, you can bypass ships/fleets you don't want to engage. You can fight your tactical battles which gives you a huge advantage over the AI.

These are just a few of the differences. There are many more that I will let you find on your own. That's the best way to learn!!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

You can load and transfer individual units in simultaneous.
The GUI is just... "sub-optimal"

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

I am doing some prototyping of a pbem game (no AI)... and am leaning towards an open map but coordinate based (no hexes). This should give the most amount of flexibility in terms movement. Hyperspace/jump gates would be the preferred method if a race so chooses to pursue that path. Combat would be all about range's rather than being on the same hex.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

The mega-stack fleet size problem, should be dealt with as a function of command efficiency, supply issues, and other factors leading to "diminishing returns".

I find the strategy of turtling counter to the belief in warp point strategy superiority. One could just as easily claim that making a mega-stack fleet is 'surrendering' as well. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

Megastacks had inherent limitations in SE4, since when you got too many ships, they'd start blocking each other from moving optimally.

And with short range guns, there is only a small number of ships that can shoot at any one target at a time.

With SE5, they simply stack up in the same location, forming an Übertower of doom and lameness.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

I want to see big stacks have friendly fire problems.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

We first need combat AI or physics that will prevent or avoid overlapping...

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

In stars!, there were sensors with ranges into the hundreds of light-years, stealth, mines which could cover hundreds of light-years...

...All of which combined meant that if someone sent an uber-stack of doom, your mines would force them to either slow down or take damage and you could attack their space with smaller, spread-out fleets, resulting in a MAD-like situation.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

A good reason to have "Command" ships with special "Command Bridges" on them. Each would have an ability to control so many ships. While fleets could still stack, each would be a stand alone entity.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

AOE weapons would quickly discourage stacking fleets.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

Only for ships under human control unfortunately...

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

That's true. Perhaps it's time for some Homeworld'ish space combat in SEVI?

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

I wonder what would be possible in a purely simulation game that does not have much in the way of graphics, ala older PBeM games.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

Stars! was open space travel, no warp points needed, travel speed according to engine tech and travel distance according to the fuel of the ship (the majority of the engines had also a low-speed no-fuel needed capacity)

It also had stargates that could be constructed in your star systems and allowed instant travel among 2 gates (with several types of gates with different distance/tonnage capacities)

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

I do like the Stars system.... looks like it has a lot of potential for strategic depth.

Re: Ideal 4x Travel
 

I have implemented a Stars type map to start with. Travel will be via Hyperspace. Initially, players will start off with a Hyperspace Accelerator in their home system. The Accelerator propels ships to FTL speeds, however the initial version will only propel small probe type objects and quite slowly.

Also, a version of a ship board Hyperspace Drive will be available, but it will be very large and only colony size ships (which will be quite expensive) can fit them. The technology the accelerators will be faster and handle large ships and the drive's will get smaller and faster.

Like Stars! I will use LY's as a measurement. I am still experimenting with speeds and map size. On a Large map size, assuming unlimited fuel, using startup technology I am thinking it should take ~100 turns to cross the map.