.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

Raging Tiger- Save $9.00
winSPMBT: Main Battle Tank- Save $6.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > Shrapnel Community > Space Empires: IV & V

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 23rd, 2005, 07:10 PM

klausD klausD is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Posts: 170
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
klausD is on a distinguished road
Default Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?

I am not sure if I should look forward to the next release of a game which was since its SEII incarnation one of my favorite games. I can understand all the wows and hoorays of many fans. The screenshot graphics are looking very good and some features of the new release are very promising (like the infinite universe and tech trees) But IMO there are some more or less serious problems with SEV if it arrives in the announced way.

1. To the most serious problem
Realtime tactical combat? I cannot understand this. After 3 Editions with good old turnbased combat, Aaron is planning one central element of the game in realtime
At least for me I never played a good realtime/turnbased hybrid type of a game. (ok I played also never a good "pure" realtime game) And the baddest of them was MOO3. This game had also a realtime tactical engine and my fear is that Aaron SEV will go in the same trap than MOO3.
One strength of the SE series derives from its similarity to the boardgame Starfire and that game is of course turnbased. So the upcoming realtime change of SEV is fundamental to the whole game and there are virtually no broad discussions about it in the forums.

2. Another prob: ground combat
As far as I was able to follow the messages about current SEV, Aaron plans a similar ground combat system as in SEIV. While this is in my eyes preferable to a realtime ground combat system its not the best one. Many posts are opting for a better ground combat. So is there any chance for this? And if not, why is Aaron ignoring the many demands? Personally I would not like to have a very detailed system with ground movement or so. But there should be a motivation to design different types of units (like artillery, special planetary assault units and so on) and a possibility to do some abstract tactics like "dig in" or "all-out assault". It would also be good to have the possiblity to planet assault with several ships at once instead with just one.
I think invading whole worlds is not a minor thing. I is complex and it could sometimes last very long. (sometimes for years in game world terms) The SEV design should pay attention to this matter and should adjust the rules accordingly. Such an approach would make the gameplay deeper and would add an additional and interesting dimension in strategic planning.


3. All these stuff about heroes, ship crews and so on

Well the scope of the game is to rule hundreds of worlds with hundreds of billions inhabitants. Single persons or ship crews should rather be the scope of a small unit tactics game, SF-shooter or an SF-adventure than that of a galactic strategy game. I as designer would improve the AI or do better ground combat rules instead spending my time on developing hero rules.

What do you think about this?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old April 23rd, 2005, 07:37 PM
douglas's Avatar

douglas douglas is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 1,152
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
douglas is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?

1. The primary reason for switching to realtime combat was for play balance. In SEIV, the turnbased nature of combat gives a HUGE advantage to whoever gets to shoot first, which is usually determined pretty much randomly. Most of the concerns I've heard about the realtime combat issue are that it would degenerate into a rapid clickfest with little actual strategy. I'm not in the beta (yet) so I can't say for sure, but I'm pretty certain it will be realtime with pausing - take all the time you need to issue orders, then watch them executed in realtime for either a set time or until someone hits pause - so that's not likely to happen.

2. Yes, all we had heard for a long time indicated that ground combat would be just as simplified as it is in SEIV. Then this screenshot got posted.

3. "Heroes" or "Great Leaders" or whatever you want to call them were one of the most liked features of the MoO series, and they have been requested for SE many times by many people. I'm afraid you're outvoted on this one. Besides, even in a gigantic empire with 100 billion citizens, surely there are a few individuals who have developed a widespread reputation as one of the best at their job, whether their job is fleet command or new colony development.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old April 23rd, 2005, 09:00 PM

klausD klausD is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Posts: 170
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
klausD is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?

The primary reason for switching to realtime combat was for play balance. In SEIV, the turnbased nature of combat gives a HUGE advantage to whoever gets to shoot first, which is usually determined pretty much randomly

If the "play balance" was the prob in SEIV then its easy to change it without turning the whole tactical system upside down. MOO2 has achieved this with a simple trick - alternating initiatives depending on the offence modifier. With a little bit time to think about it a similar solution would also have been possible in SEV.

And regarding play balance. In realtime the guy which clicks faster on some pause or order button wins over the slower thoughtful guy. And while he manage one part of the battlefield he get stomped on the flanks by his frenetic clicking enemy who is used to play those realtime shooters. THIS I call a problem in play balance.

To solve the problem with the faster clicks the only possible solution seems to me if the game automatically stops every minute or so and this is the only time both players can give orders. During the game is moving no order issuing should be allowed by any of the players. After order issuing the game should only go ahead if both players (not just one) hit their "go" buttons until the time the next predefined pause showes up allowing to give new orders. Another realtime system prefers the fastclicker over the slow thinker.

Another problem is the range of weapons. As long as the weapon range is per hex or per square there is no problem in calculating the necessary distances for optimal usage of a weapon.
And how is it in realtime? I suppose you have to hit a seperate button for each single ship to be informed about the maximum weapon ranges. What is with bigger ships and different weapons on them? Do I have to click on each weapon system seperately? And do I have to calculate in the current moving speed, so that the weapon range of every weapon on every of my ships is changing every second? A real clicking nightmare if you want to control a whole fleet. And very dissatisfying if you fire-click too soon and the salvo is 3mm to short.

Such a realtime system is not what I understand of a good strategic game. MOO3 is greeting!

Ground combat screen
Thanks for the link to the screenshot. If this is used then it seems that the ground combat system is hex- and turnbased. Not a bad thing if it is designed well.
So now we have a turnbased ground combat system and a realtime space combat system? (and a turnbased strategic system) What comes next?

Single Person and Heroes
I still think they add unnecessary design time but I can live with them as long as the rest of the game is ok.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old April 23rd, 2005, 09:17 PM
douglas's Avatar

douglas douglas is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 1,152
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
douglas is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?

Quote:
klausD said:
And regarding play balance. In realtime the guy which clicks faster on some pause or order button wins over the slower thoughtful guy. And while he manage one part of the battlefield he get stomped on the flanks by his frenetic clicking enemy who is used to play those realtime shooters. THIS I call a problem in play balance.
Which is why Aaron will be very careful to design the combat engine so this isn't a problem.

Quote:
klausD said:
To solve the problem with the faster clicks the only possible solution seems to me if the game automatically stops every minute or so and this is the only time both players can give orders. During the game is moving no order issuing should be allowed by any of the players. After order issuing the game should only go ahead if both players (not just one) hit their "go" buttons until the time the next predefined pause showes up allowing to give new orders. Another realtime system prefers the fastclicker over the slow thinker.
Congratulations for answering your own concerns! I'm pretty sure this is almost exactly how it will work when the game is finished.

Quote:
klausD said:
Another problem is the range of weapons. As long as the weapon range is per hex or per square there is no problem in calculating the necessary distances for optimal usage of a weapon.
And how is it in realtime? I suppose you have to hit a seperate button for each single ship to be informed about the maximum weapon ranges. What is with bigger ships and different weapons on them? Do I have to click on each weapon system seperately? And do I have to calculate in the current moving speed, so that the weapon range of every weapon on every of my ships is changing every second? A real clicking nightmare if you want to control a whole fleet. And very dissatisfying if you fire-click too soon and the salvo is 3mm to short.
Do you really think you'll have to micromanage battles that much? I'm sure your ships will be perfectly capable of figuring out that they have to move just a little bit closer before shooting by themselves. The orders you give will probably be more along the lines of "Stay at maximum range of x weapon while trying to surround the enemy. Fire as requently as possible using targeting priority list y and allocating z% overkill to compensate for misses."
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old April 24th, 2005, 12:50 AM
Kid's Avatar

Kid Kid is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 20
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Kid is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?

I heard the same from the MOOIII developers about their real time combat system and for three years I waited only to see the game die in three weeks. I am very disappointed I thought I had finally found a 4X game to take up where MOOII left off. I will not buy a real time game.
__________________
Pressure, it makes diamonds and it makes dust. Do you sparkle in the sunshine, or just blow away with the wind?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old April 24th, 2005, 01:08 AM
douglas's Avatar

douglas douglas is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 1,152
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
douglas is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?

MoO3 was a disaster, I'll grant you that, but I very much doubt the same thing will happen to SEV. MoO3 wasn't even developed by the same company as MoO1 and 2, much less the same people, and went through many major design changes. It also suffered from a lack of dedication to making a truly good game in the face of pressure to get it out the door quickly so the publisher could make money. SEV is being developed by exactly the same person who made all the previous Space Empires games, is not going through frequent radical revisions to the basic design, and Aaron has a history of delaying release to make the game better and then sticking around and improving it for years afterwards. Even right now, the beta test has started and quite a number of the beta testers are forum regulars who have expressed some concern over the issue in the past. If the consensus is that the realtime combat engine sucks, you can depend on it that Aaron will keep working on it and improving it, taking suggestions from every fan who cares to give one, until it's great. You should at the very least give the demo a try when it comes out.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old April 24th, 2005, 01:10 AM
Kid's Avatar

Kid Kid is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 20
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Kid is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?

I don't understand why game companies don't get it. The exploration, the Tec research the building up of the planets are all for one purpose....combat. It is all just to get you into comabt with the ships you've designed. It is the tactical turnbased combat that made MOOII and for me SEIV must have games. I don't want the AI making any decisions for me. I'd play MOOIII (if it can still be found in the dust bin) if I wanted that. I'm sorry to come off so hard but I am very dissapoined. There is a reason everyone holds MOOII up are a measuring stick. Think of that, a 10 year old game that is still considered the best game yet.
__________________
Pressure, it makes diamonds and it makes dust. Do you sparkle in the sunshine, or just blow away with the wind?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old April 24th, 2005, 01:31 PM
douglas's Avatar

douglas douglas is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 1,152
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
douglas is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?

... Said two beta testers, who have actually had the opportunity to try out the new realtime combat system. Does that do anything to settle your concerns, klausD?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old April 24th, 2005, 02:43 PM

Phoenix-D Phoenix-D is offline
National Security Advisor
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 5,085
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Phoenix-D is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?

Said beta testers might want to watch their comments lest they get wacked with the NDA stick..
__________________
Phoenix-D

I am not senile. I just talk to myself because the rest of you don't provide adequate conversation.
-Digger
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old April 24th, 2005, 05:06 PM

DeadZone DeadZone is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
DeadZone is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Realtime or turnbased tactical combat?

I for one love the idea of a real-time combat
*Just to note that Ive yet to actually try SEV combat out*
As Ive always found Turn-based combat too slow and tedious, and Im the type of guy who likes to have to think fast and be on my feet

As for, who can click the quickest... dont forget it will be against the AI, who can think a 1000 times faster than us anyway, plus issue a 100 orders to a hundred ships before we finish that first thought
As for MP, if its like SEIV, then you dont get to see the combat until after its occured anyway
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2024, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.