SE IV The End Of An Era.

[PvK]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

quote:

---

Originally posted by PvK:

Combat Mission is an excellent example of that stye of play. I like it, but there are weaknesses even in such a well-done rendition. One is it relies on an extremely good tactical AI, which Combat Mission has but SE and SF don't.

So? SE5 would suffer the same from lack of a good combat AI with any combat model, other than the Starcraft-style RTS model, which noone wants.

---

I was saying that Combat Mission needs more sophisticated AI than many other designs, to work well, and that may be an issue with similar designs for SE5. The Combat Mission tactical AI is very complex and well-done. It's still a source of frustration and limitation at times, though. If it were done about as well as the AI in SE4 or Star Fury, Combat Mission might be an frustrating disaster, with units shooting each other, vehicles ramming each other, dropping artillery on itself, etc. Part of this is because the system puts the details of execution under AI control for a while, to react to the real-time action as it unfolds. I can easily imagine falling into a similar design in SE5, with some big issues. It doesn't have to be that way, but it's a danger.

At least with full-control turn-based orders as in SE4, there is no danger of "the AI did something really stupid and I lost my fleet because of it!" Well, there is if you don't break formation in tactical combat...

PvK

[Siegebreaker]

It could be dual turn-based & RTS, like Fallout Tactics, with in RTS units moving and firing as long as they have action points.
I don't think that game its that much of a click fest.
(Oh well, yes it is. )

[ March 01, 2004, 20:07: Message edited by: SB ]

[narf poit chez BOOM]

*staggers out of the thread, muttering something about 'not even thinking of reading all that!'*

[Paul1980au]

Well a more advanced and adaptable AI combat system in SE5 would be helpful

[Fyron]

The "clunkiness" can often be replaced by other problems, though (e.g. Star Fury).

Please stop comparing games of entirely different, unrelated genres. It hurts your arguments more than helps them.

It's possible to needlessly overlook strengths in both ways. Yes computers can do things board games can't. But that doesn't mean computer game designers can't take advantage of many solutions and concepts from interesting board games. The point was that it's frustrating to see games with lots of potential that suffer from some needlessly limited game mechanics.

Such as turn based combat, which is needlessly limited.