|
|
|
 |
|

March 26th, 2010, 01:10 PM
|
Private
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 15
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Welcome Star Legacy Development Group!
Computer can handle a lot more today then they could, but the evolution of a turn base game comes down to a couple simple factors for combat resolution. Actually controlling your ships in combat is only good for single player games. If you try and have manually controlled combat in a multiple player 4x game, regardles of wether or not it is RTS or by turn, someone, somewhere is going to be sitting there waiting for other players to finish their combats, and deciding to go do something else. Combats need to be auto-resolved in order to keep 100% of the people at their computers and interested in the game.
In your single player game, it totally acceptable to give the person control of the fight, because he stays involved in the game 100% of the time. Wether it is RTS or a frm of turn based combat... that depends on other elements of the design and come up to a designer decision.
|

March 27th, 2010, 04:20 AM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 5,425
Thanks: 174
Thanked 695 Times in 267 Posts
|
|
Re: Welcome Star Legacy Development Group!
Quote:
Originally Posted by InfStorm
Computer can handle a lot more today then they could, but the evolution of a turn base game comes down to a couple simple factors for combat resolution. Actually controlling your ships in combat is only good for single player games. If you try and have manually controlled combat in a multiple player 4x game, regardles of wether or not it is RTS or by turn, someone, somewhere is going to be sitting there waiting for other players to finish their combats, and deciding to go do something else. Combats need to be auto-resolved in order to keep 100% of the people at their computers and interested in the game.
In your single player game, it totally acceptable to give the person control of the fight, because he stays involved in the game 100% of the time. Wether it is RTS or a frm of turn based combat... that depends on other elements of the design and come up to a designer decision.
|
I agree with the MP aspect and if the game is to work for PBEM, then having the autoresolution done Dominions 3 style would be the best option.
|

March 27th, 2010, 09:00 AM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: behind the keyboard
Posts: 225
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Welcome Star Legacy Development Group!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edi
Quote:
Originally Posted by InfStorm
Actually controlling your ships in combat is only good for single player games. ...in a multiple player 4x game... Combats need to be auto-resolved in order to keep 100% of the people at their computers and interested in the game.
|
I agree with the MP aspect and if the game is to work for PBEM, then having the autoresolution done Dominions 3 style would be the best option.
|

|

March 27th, 2010, 11:12 AM
|
 |
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Outter Glazbox
Posts: 760
Thanks: 12
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: Welcome Star Legacy Development Group!
Maybe combat could be broken up into say four (ex.) segments. Four segments would constitute one combat turn per game turn? After each segment, ships could be re-ordered to continue, change tactics, reinforce, or disengage! 
|

March 27th, 2010, 10:27 PM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: behind the keyboard
Posts: 225
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Welcome Star Legacy Development Group!
With SL rekindling my interest in the genre I just wanted to share this article I found in my surfing that might be of interest to this group:
history of space empire games 1980-2002

|

April 3rd, 2010, 01:25 PM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 121
Thanks: 2
Thanked 4 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Welcome Star Legacy Development Group!
Thanks 
|

June 23rd, 2010, 06:08 PM
|
 |
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: At work or sleeping
Posts: 821
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Welcome Star Legacy Development Group!
Has anyone here played Star Chamber? I just started and it's pretty much kicking my ***.
I don't know if anyone remembers a card collecting / deck building game called "Spellfire" from the early 90's (maybe late 80's) but it's like that... only not, cuz it's a boardgame.... only not, cuz it's online... with a computer... so.... yeah.
Anyway, check it out - very simple and fast but HEAVILY HEAVILY reliant on skill and strategy. HEAVILY. Did I say very big on Strategy? And it's "free":
http://starchamber.station.sony.com/
EDIT: This should probably be moved to "Off Topic"?
__________________
Aa Turam Empire
Geekdom is eternal... you will be assimilated... resistance is futile.
A+ Se GdY S++ Fr- C* Cs* Sf- Ai++ Au>M! M- Mp! S@ Ss+ R! Pw+ Fq++ Nd? Rp++ G++ Mm++ Bb-- L-- Tcp
'We, the weird, chasing the pointless, for no reason at all, have been finding out things that have no effect on anything important for at least a couple days and are now qualified to chase our tails to the merriment of all watching.'-Narf et al
"Of course, you don't want to be going about handing out immortality willy-nilly, that just wouldn't be responsible." -O'Shea
Last edited by TurinTurambar; June 23rd, 2010 at 06:11 PM..
Reason: should be moved
|

September 19th, 2010, 01:03 PM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: behind the keyboard
Posts: 225
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Welcome Star Legacy Development Group!
Anything new to share on Star Legacy Development?
Recent emails from Impulse about a discount on Star Ruler reminded me how long its been since I bought a 4X game I truly enjoyed - but the reviews for it are still a pretty mixed bag with the bugs worrying me more then game play issues.
|

September 20th, 2010, 06:01 PM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Posts: 4,547
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts
|
|
Re: Welcome Star Legacy Development Group!
Hmm, I don't recall if anyone had mentioned the colony infrastructure system before, so I guess I could describe it here...
Basically, it's like the population assignment system in MOO2 or the budget sliders in Civ - you reassign population to different tasks like mining, farming, and science.
The main difference is that there's also an "infrastructure" level on your colony. This infrastructure level determines how efficient your population is at doing whatever task. If you have more people assigned to a task than you have infrastructure for that task, then the excess people are "unemployed", and will not be as efficient at producing resources. The infrastructure, however, will grow over time to fill demand. On the other hand, if you have too little population to work the infrastructure, then the infrastructure decays over time as it's unused.
So, say you have 5 billion people on your homeworld, and 1 billion each of mining, farming, science, culture, and government infrastructure (infrastructure types subject to change). Your population is initially divided evenly among the five tasks, but let's say you want to focus your homeworld on science.
So you move half a billion people off of mining, say, to science. Now you have 500M miners with 1000M mining infrastructure, so you get, say, 500M metals, and your 500M unused mining infrastructure decays - now you have 950M total mining infrastructure, assuming a decay rate of 10% per turn.
On the science side of things, you have 1500M people trying to be scientists, but only 1000M science infrastructure! So you get your 1000M science points from the people who have infrastructure, plus a small amount from the people who are trying to work without infrastructure - say, 10%, or 50M science, for a total of 1050M science. Then, your infrastructure grows to 1050M (assuming a 10% growth rate) since there are 500M "unemployed" scientists. The next turn, your scientists will get to use that science infrastructure, for 1050M + (450M * 10%) = 1095M science points. Changing a planet's production takes work, just like in SE5 where you'd have to scrap and rebuild facilities, but it's much less micromanagement!
Though actually, writing this out like this makes me want to consider suggesting a change to the system - with the percentage growth and decay based on the number of unemployed people or unused infrastructure, you'll never actually reach your target level of production, so you'd actually be better off "overshooting" your allocations so you can actually get to the production levels you want to be at! Thus, I'd want to suggest basing the percentages on, say, one or the other of the two values (infrastructure and workers), or maybe the average of the two, rather than on the difference between them!
__________________
The Ed draws near! What dost thou deaux?
|

September 20th, 2010, 08:37 PM
|
 |
Private
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 18
Thanks: 1
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Welcome Star Legacy Development Group!
Would planets have innate value of some kind, like a mining value?
__________________
 Skyburn, System Lord of House Bifrost (PBC IV)
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|