Space Combat (madness)

For what's not in 'Top Priority Game Design'. Post your ideas, visions, suggestions for the game, rules, modifications, etc.

Moderator: Oberlus

Message
Author
miu
Graphics Lead Emeritus
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 2:33 am
Location: Finland/Helsinki

#31 Post by miu »

<dreaming> I would love to be able to generate homeworld like colorful backgroundrops for each battlescenario so that bitmap surrounding the system would take in account how close the galactic core it is and what kind of stars and nebulas are seen in different dirctions of current system.. so that when you battle in far borders of galaxy, you'll see the central core in right direction as far away belt, and when near central core/nebulas it would surround you.. I'm afrayd we have to do this with premade maps to get it look good enough, but rightly generated maps would be very cool.
Last edited by miu on Fri Sep 24, 2004 12:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
Difference between a man and a gentleman is that a man does what he wants, a gentleman does what he should. - Albert Camus

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13587
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

#32 Post by Geoff the Medio »

drek wrote:Basically, the combat would be decided by the ship designs and quantity, which isn't too far from how a typical RTS game ends up anyway.
My impression is that RTS games are almost as often decided by player microing ability... who can click faster and better.

Anyway, if combat is going to be quick and dirty and based on numbers and types of ships, to the exclusion of meaningful / important tactics and manoeuvring, then it may as well be decided automatically. You wouldn't really even need to show the battle in multiplayer...

Though I'd really prefer the system scale combat... mostly because it's more interesting, to me, to fly around planets than asteroids (though the multiple turns of battles issue is also a good reason).
pd wrote:could you please go more into detail how this could work. i mean is it just about moving around barricades and hiding behind them?
I'm having a hard time trying to describe tactics in words...

It seems to me that most games that have battles where everything moves at once (real time or all your units move every turn) have some sort of "terrain" to the gamefield (eg. Advance Wars), whereas games with only the game pieces are more likely to only let you move one per turn (eg. chess). This isn't great evidence, and likely isn't universally applicable, but seemed a notable observation worth making.

In my mind, if there isn't any terrain to the battle map, then fleets will always stay in their normal optimal defensive formation, and the battle will have little or no interesting tactical decisions to make. Terrain features are more likely to give reason to break up your forces... especially if certain types of ships / weapons / engines / defences work better or worse in or near certain terrain features.
miu wrote:<dreaming> I would love to be able to generate homeworld like colorful backgroundrops for each battlescenario so that bitmap surround system would take in account how close the galactic core is and what kind of stars and nebulas are seen in different dirctions of current system.. so that when you battle in far borders of galaxy, you'll see the central core as far away belt, and when near central core/nebulas it would surround you.. but I'm afrayd we have to do this with premade maps *any takers for such programming challenge?* :wink:
Slightly unrelated, but what I've really been hoping for is a nice galaxy-shape representing background image for the galaxy map. Currently there's nothing to the galaxy except the 10-500 stars you can travel to, and the parallax scrolling background. Incorporating images like this: http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/6337 ... 02_jw4.jpg might be nice. Would make the galaxy much more ... "real" and "full" looking

miu
Graphics Lead Emeritus
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 2:33 am
Location: Finland/Helsinki

#33 Post by miu »

More like pictures like these in battle background: http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/specials/ ... ntent.html
-when in outer arms, when it central core, stars/shining would surround you everywhere.
Difference between a man and a gentleman is that a man does what he wants, a gentleman does what he should. - Albert Camus

guiguibaah
Creative Contributor
Posts: 441
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 1:00 am

On the fence

#34 Post by guiguibaah »

Myself, personally I'm on the fence in terms of system based combat or planetary based combat. This is just my opinion - I don't think I may add much relevancy, but here goes :)

At first I was on the system - based attack plan. The reason behind this was...

1. Other planets could assist
2. System takeovers would happen quicker
3. Ability to use diverse terrain effects (well, some anyway, like asteroid belts).

Then I thought about the planet - based attack plan. Reasons behind this were...

1. Allowing conflict within the system / contested systems.
2. There is no "all or nothing" approach to systems. Allows for more back-and-forth battles.
3. Greater awe factor - Planets are immense compared to ships. In moo3 they were about the same size as a destroyer.
4. Different terrain effects available.
Planetary rings / Moons / Atmospheres (Gaseous planets),
large asteroid belts
Solar coronas and flares
Nebulas and comets.


If the option for planet-based attack was decided, perhaps one option would be to grant one or two planet based defences the ability to assist other planets in need. Off the top of my head, I can think of fighter squadrons, and maybe a type of really long-range cannon.

Anyhoo
There are three kinds of people in this world - those who can count, and those who can't.

drek
Designer Emeritus
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:07 am

#35 Post by drek »

I'm thinking there'd be two stages if we go for "scenic combat" over system based combat. (currently, I'm leaning towards system combat, but scenic combat could be cool too. The eyecandy could be really sweet.) The stages occurs one right after the other.

Stage 1: Starlane exit or open space The defending fleet meets the attacking fleet. Fighter squadrons from planets are a part of the defending fleet. If the attacking fleet has just entered the system in the present turn, then they might also have to face starlane exit defenses, including minefields, etc.

--intermission-- Shows the attacking fleet (assuming it won) warping to a new destination. Player chooses which planet to attack.

Stage 2: Planet bombardment The attacking fleet is shown hovering near the target. Bombs, troop and mech pods, etc can be launched at the planet. Planet defenses (satellites, space stations, fighter squadrons, non-warping ships, surface-to-space lasers and missles) try to stop the attackers. (The planet defenses would be heavily abstracted on the strategy map.)

Any surviving defending ships arrive for the party as re-enforcements in 1 or 2 minutes.

An overlay shows the state of the ground campaign during this stage. Of course, a real ground campaign could take monthes or even years....we'd abstract it to take less than 1 or 2 minutes.

Continuation: The attacker can now choose to press the attack...going after another target. Planet defenses are rather beefy and basically free, so only an overwhelming force could take an entire system in a single turn.

Stealth option: A fleet consisting entirely of cloaked ships has a chance of dodging stage 1 to conduct a lighting raid on a stage 2 target. But, they have to be quick about it, because the entire defending fleet will arrive as re-enforcements.

Speed option: Fast attacking ships can outrun slow defenders in stage 1, moving to stage 2 without defeating the entire defending fleet.

Pirate option: A fleet can choose a civilian freighter fleet for it's target in stage 2. A successful attack transfers a portion of credits, minerals, and food generated by the system to the attacker.

NPC pirates attack freighter groups, with the player's defending fleet arriving after about a minute of simulated combat.

Actually, as I spelled it out here, "scenic combat" sounds pretty fun to me.

Impaler
Creative Contributor
Posts: 1060
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2003 12:40 am
Location: Tucson, Arizona USA

#36 Post by Impaler »

All of the things you listed for Planet Combat could happen in Full System Combat.

1 - If 2 Empires each have colonies in the same system they would partispate in any combat (partispants in a Combat is unlimited because of Simultanius execution). Infact is better because you dont have designate one side the "attacker" and one the "defender" its simply a battle with all assets present to be destroyed if able.

2 - Full system combat dose not create an All or Nothing aproatch. If you cant concour a heavely defended Planet you would still be able to concour a few peripheral things and just loiter around in the system to blockade the planet. Then the next turn they send some reinforcements... Full potential for back and forth battles as far as I can see.

3 - Awe Factor depends on our Graphics department and the scaling of the map, What ever scale could be created with a single planet map could also be created with a full system aproatch the battle map is now simply 30 or 40 times larger like a bunch of little planet maps stitched together. In short Awe is not effected in any way by this scope desision.

4 - Terrain effects are far more relavent when your not dropped right on the planets/oposing fleets doorstep in Moo2 style combat. You even listed it yourself as #3 advantage of System style combat. Rings and Moons could be placeed on system maps as its all a matter of scale. Nebulas/Comets/Asteroids/Coronas would be far more relevent to combat in a system based aproatch as well. I dont see how you can even PUT a Solar Corona on a Planet map in any meaningfull way. On a system map theirs simply a large star in the middle of the map which "burns" your ship if you get to close without the proper shielding, great for getting oponents with poor shields off you tail.
Fear is the Mind Killer - Frank Herbert -Dune

User avatar
utilae
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2175
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 12:37 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

#37 Post by utilae »

Impaler wrote: 1 - If 2 Empires each have colonies in the same system they would partispate in any combat (partispants in a Combat is unlimited because of Simultanius execution). Infact is better because you dont have designate one side the "attacker" and one the "defender" its simply a battle with all assets present to be destroyed if able.
Let's not just limit it to 2 empires, there could be three. With the phased real time system it would allow 3 empires on 3 empires, or more in each battle. And if a battle spanned multiple turns another empire/player could join the battle in a later turn.

Imagine you are trying to hold off the enemy. Your ships are getting destroyed, you are not winning, but you are able to stall. They have to go through your ships to get to your homeworld. Your allie's army arrives in two turns. If only you can stall until then. You manage to stall for two turns. Combat continues over the next two turns, you sustain a few more losses, but your allie has finally arrived with his top secret Uber-Cruiser's. The battle is won.
Impaler wrote: 2 - Full system combat dose not create an All or Nothing aproatch. If you cant concour a heavely defended Planet you would still be able to concour a few peripheral things and just loiter around in the system to blockade the planet. Then the next turn they send some reinforcements... Full potential for back and forth battles as far as I can see.
Yes, I think space combat makes the game so good. After all its the "War" part that makes it fun. So if space combat had more dramas, like lasting longer over many turns, taking place in an entire system and waiting for reinforcements to arrive, battles will be richer.

I see no reason why you can't just conquer a few planets, oh the last one is too hard, withdraw to the last conquered planet or go home. You should be able to exit at anytime, though if ya wanted to keep ya captured planets, then you should leave your ships there to defned them.

Maybe you can only exit a space combat if your ships are far enough away from the enemy. So you destroy all the enemy worlds except one, go back to a conquered world and exit space combat. Your ships remain at that conquered planet.
Impaler wrote: 3 - Awe Factor depends on our Graphics department and the scaling of the map, What ever scale could be created with a single planet map could also be created with a full system aproatch the battle map is now simply 30 or 40 times larger like a bunch of little planet maps stitched together. In short Awe is not effected in any way by this scope desision.
I think that a system map is just combining heaps of planet maps, so it essentially takes away the need to attack each planet in a system seperately, which we all know what it was like Moo2. You had to destroy all their remaining planets. What this system has 5 planets. Thats 5 battles. If only I could attack the entire system.
Impaler wrote: 4 - Terrain effects are far more relavent when your not dropped right on the planets/oposing fleets doorstep in Moo2 style combat. You even listed it yourself as #3 advantage of System style combat. Rings and Moons could be placeed on system maps as its all a matter of scale. Nebulas/Comets/Asteroids/Coronas would be far more relevent to combat in a system based aproatch as well. I dont see how you can even PUT a Solar Corona on a Planet map in any meaningfull way. On a system map theirs simply a large star in the middle of the map which "burns" your ship if you get to close without the proper shielding, great for getting oponents with poor shields off you tail.
There would actually be more terrain in space than people think. Also that sun idea Impaler is pretty cool. Anyway here is a list of terrain obstacles and other obstacles in space combat:
-planets
-moons
-asteroids/asteroid belts
eg flying through causes some damage, unless your ships have high evasion/speed/or are small enough to dodge easily
-meteor storm
eg might strike your ships in mid travel through the system
-nebula
eg might have certain effects, eg slow, fast, no shields/scanners, etc
-the sun
eg maybe you can fly on it, but its super deadly without advance shields
-heat from the sun
eg maybe there are circular radiuses at certain points of the map that have diferent temps, ie hot. You may need certain shields to go too close.
-your ships
eg you cant fly thru them/not in 2d anyway
-other ships
eg you cant fly thru them/not in 2d anyway, also maybe they have really good close range weapons that stop you from just flying past
-lasting effects from weapons
eg. cluod/explosion/dimension distortion effects from weapons

drek
Designer Emeritus
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:07 am

#38 Post by drek »

All of the things you listed for Planet Combat could happen in Full System Combat.
Well yeah, that's the point. I'm thinking up ways to give "scenic combat" many of the same advantages as system combat. Of particular important to me is the ability to conquer multiple worlds in the same turn.
If 2 Empires each have colonies in the same system they would partispate in any combat (partispants in a Combat is unlimited because of Simultanius execution). Infact is better because you dont have designate one side the "attacker" and one the "defender" its simply a battle with all assets present to be destroyed if able.
Mutliple empires can participate in the open space stage. Whoever wins attains tactical initiative: able to launch attacks on planets and other targets.
2 - Full system combat dose not create an All or Nothing aproatch. If you cant concour a heavely defended Planet you would still be able to concour a few peripheral things and just loiter around in the system to blockade the planet. Then the next turn they send some reinforcements... Full potential for back and forth battles as far as I can see.
Easy. The empire that wins open space can declare blockades.
Terrain effects are far more relavent when your not dropped right on the planets/oposing fleets doorstep in Moo2 style combat.
The best arguement for "scenic combat" wherein fleets just plow into each other is that it's quick. Terrain effects implies a map that the player will have to study and reflect on in order to determine the best tactical situation. That takes longer than the two minutes I'd like for a single combat to take.

Ellestar
Space Squid
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 7:39 am
Location: Russian Federation, Moscow

#39 Post by Ellestar »

[quote="pd"]i made a small mockup how it could look like.
take a look: combat.rar 14mb/.mov

How to open .mov files?

User avatar
utilae
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2175
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 12:37 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

#40 Post by utilae »

Ellestar wrote:
pd wrote:i made a small mockup how it could look like.
take a look: combat.rar 14mb/.mov
How to open .mov files?
Quick Time
drek wrote:
Terrain effects are far more relavent when your not dropped right on the planets/oposing fleets doorstep in Moo2 style combat.
The best arguement for "scenic combat" wherein fleets just plow into each other is that it's quick. Terrain effects implies a map that the player will have to study and reflect on in order to determine the best tactical situation. That takes longer than the two minutes I'd like for a single combat to take.
If space combat took 2mins and then continued in the next turn, ie spanning multiple turns, then you could spend as long as you want studding the map. Plus, in the phased real time system, the studdying of the map would be done in the order giving part of phased real time.

Ellestar
Space Squid
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 7:39 am
Location: Russian Federation, Moscow

#41 Post by Ellestar »

Mutliple empires can participate in the open space stage. Whoever wins attains tactical initiative: able to launch attacks on planets and other targets.
What if i don't want to participate in open space stage because i will not win and maybe even will not be able to retreat (say, enemies have better drives), but i can defend planets with my fleet?
What if i want to attack one planet with fast or stealth ships, then move to a second planet when main fleet approaches? What if i'm blocking one starlane exit, but enemy comes from another? IMHO my proposal with operational orders can add a lot to a tactical aspects of the game.

Impaler
Creative Contributor
Posts: 1060
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2003 12:40 am
Location: Tucson, Arizona USA

#42 Post by Impaler »

Drek why go about creating a complex set of rules for "scenic combat" when a full system map will be simpler to make, more intiutive to the player, more flexible and much harder to screw up? Not to mention every extra screen is another click towards HELL!! Why try to cut and paste all the advantages of one system into another which has no advantages or purpose for being beyond the fact its what was done in Moo2? If you feel that their are disadvantages to Full system combat we should work to adress them which in my opinin will be far easier then trying to improve Moo2 style 1 planet battle which is flawed at the core.
Fear is the Mind Killer - Frank Herbert -Dune

noelte
Juggernaut
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 12:42 pm
Location: Germany, Berlin

#43 Post by noelte »

which has no advantages or purpose for being beyond the fact its what was done in Moo2? If you feel that their are disadvantages to Full system combat we should work to adress them which in my opinin will be far easier then trying to improve Moo2 style 1 planet battle which is flawed at the core.
I completely disagree. MoO2 combat is proven working and it's quite simple. I would prefere doing combat in a simple way. (more the moo way than the homeworld/botf way) If a simple system is working, we can strive for higher goals.

the only main flaw i can see with moo2 combat system goes with who shots first.
Press any key to continue or any other key to cancel.
Can COWs fly?

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13587
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

#44 Post by Geoff the Medio »

noelte wrote:MoO2 combat is proven working and it's quite simple. I would prefere doing combat in a simple way. (more the moo way than the homeworld/botf way) If a simple system is working, we can strive for higher goals.
What qualifies as "simple" is debatable. In many ways, a single system map is "simpler" than multiple planet maps. And if "simple" is the top priority, why not just auto-resolve combat?

drek: You made a big long post listing all the ways that the things Impaler listed as advantages of system combat could be made to happen with multistage combat. Except what Impaler was actually talking about was the way that the advantages guiguibaah listed for having a separate combat per planet would also apply to in system combat. So essentially you were explaining why having multiple battles per turn would let you have the advantages of multiple battles per turn?

I also don't see how you can say that quick battle resolution is an advantage of scenic / multistage combat. Battles can be made to be resolved by fleets plowing into eachother no matter what the scale of the map. In fact, for speed purposes, scenic/multistage merely has the disadvantage that you have to have at least two battles per turn per system, whereas with system battles, there's only one.

In terms of the importance of tactics, either system can have it be unimportant, but with system maps there are more options, such as utilae listed, for how to do that. Yes, some utilae's list is applicable to planet maps as well, but not all.

Another terrain feature: comets

noelte
Juggernaut
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 12:42 pm
Location: Germany, Berlin

#45 Post by noelte »

What qualifies as "simple" is debatable. In many ways, a single system map is "simpler" than multiple planet maps. And if "simple" is the top priority, why not just auto-resolve combat?
Hmm, do i see some kind of provocation here :-). I guess you know what i meant. Auto-resolve is already in. Now let's make the next step, not a big jump.
Press any key to continue or any other key to cancel.
Can COWs fly?

Post Reply