Hot posts in thread: Desired Features

  1. Johann Gambolputty

    Johann Gambolputty Cadet

    Posts:
    16
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2016
    Random combat penalties caused by damage level (regarding engine, shield, accuracy or particular weapon) could be a reasonable trade-off.

    Of course it would be nicer to see these burning bulletholes and all that hull destruction porn. ;)
     
  2. MalRey

    MalRey Developer Lieutenant

    Posts:
    288
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    Yes, we're currently implementing a solution regarding hull/systems damage similar with the MoO2 solution which avoids this 'non-common-sense' 5%Hull -> 100% functional possibility. There is the possibility, in each attack, that the damage aimed for general hull damage may hit an internal system like a specific weapon, the engine, the shields or others. So, it may happen that the hull is still in good shape but a weapon system is already broken, or the shields are broken and now they can´t recharge anymore... unless they have Scotty or Kaylee :). We're not reinventing the wheel here, it will be more a less what MoO2 did with some balancing work. And yes, this opens the possibility to enrich the ship design adding new modifications or some specials.

    We will discuss this and other combat issues when the Space Combat dev diary is posted in the near future. Please show up there! Meanwhile, feel free to post more interesting ideas.
     
  3. Neil

    Neil Ensign

    Posts:
    30
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2016
    There is no reason that hit points have to function in this manner. Many games with hit points give units a combat penalty based upon the amount of damage they have taken.

    The number of ships expected to be involved in battles is key to level of detail that should be given to individual ships in the games combat engine. Neither of us know what the plans are regarding this.

    Now, personally, I would prefer smaller battles and more detailed ships. I would even enjoy a space 4X with only 1-3 ships a side in each battle, but having an FTL level of combat detail. FTL is, for me, the best ship to ship space combat of any game (with MOO2 second).
     
  4. Johann Gambolputty

    Johann Gambolputty Cadet

    Posts:
    16
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2016
    Hit points mean that every ship is 100% functional regardless of 5% or 99% damage. The argument about hundred ships in a battle is a bit far fetched as that battle scope is the rather late game issue. Tactical battles need more depth and as military history shows the David-Goliath phenomen is quite common on the battlefield.

    Of course I am aware that hit/hull points system is far easier to implement and that factor could be decisive when it comes to choosing the final path in development.
     
  5. Neil

    Neil Ensign

    Posts:
    30
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2016
    This really depends on the number of ships typically involved in battles. In FTL the combat was incredibly detailed, but then you only had two ships in any combat. Implementing a detailed modular damage system, if there are typically a hundred ships in a battle, would be a waste of time. Better to just use a basic hit point implementation, and spend your focus elsewhere.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. Johann Gambolputty

    Johann Gambolputty Cadet

    Posts:
    16
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2016
    a propos. turn-based combat gives the oportunity to implement a modular damage system. I mean the system which removes these boring RTSque hull points. You should be able to damage or destroy a particular parts and modules of the targeted ship. Something similar to old naval battles especially from the WW2 times. So, imagine that heavily wounded capital ships drifting with damaged FTL-engine or fighting with a fire (some FTL flavour).

    The modular damage system also gives a more depth and importance to the ship designing concept. What do you think?
     
  7. Adam Solo

    Adam Solo Developer Administrator Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    4,847
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    It's turn-based.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  8. Neil

    Neil Ensign

    Posts:
    30
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2016
    Is the combat not going to be turn-based? I think most MOO2 fans would want this (look at the hostility to the real-time combat in Nu-MOO). Of course, battles with 1000 ships won't work in turn-based unless you no longer command individual ships, but groups of ships. In my opinion, the command of individual ships was one of the most fun parts of MOO2. As the number of ships goes up, the ability to give detailed orders to them, to feel attached to them, the fear when one of your ships shields go down, the elation when an enemy ship has a warp core breech, these things all necessarily diminish. Small numbers of ships with detailed turn-based combat for me!
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Thrangar

    Thrangar Ensign

    Posts:
    36
    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    This saddens me, this gives me the impression that this game will not be much more than what we have seen already.

    I know money always comes into play, why not have game play option levels, if a certain level of donation for an option is met, it gets in the game!
     
  10. Staroid

    Staroid Cadet

    Posts:
    22
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2016
    A leader or Hero should be ANY AI NPC that has attained a level of Expertise from both Experience an Training.
    It should be an Automatic thing that would happen to any NPC any where in the Universe.
    Not an Automatic "poof" your a leader thing, without an investment of time an experience, raising them to this level.
    There could be a set criterier that any AI Manager in the Universe could obtain at any time, depending on their level.

    Once promoted to "Leader" or "Hero", their importance in Game would rise. And you may wish to move them to better
    locations in order to take advantage of their skills. Replacing them with the best managers you can find.
    Of course this all takes time, which you may or maynot have. Again your Decisions count.
    But your AI Leaders, Managers, and Advisors take the load off.
     
  11. aReclusiveMind

    aReclusiveMind Developer Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    3,040
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2016
    I've been advocating for more interesting leaders in 4X games for a long time. I may or may not have been in Adam's ear for awhile about this. ;)
     
  12. Staroid

    Staroid Cadet

    Posts:
    22
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2016
    Defense, Defense, Defense.
    Every planet in the Solar System should have some Defense and Offense capabillity. Think Shields, Missles, and Mines.
    Missles with some form of seeking guidence do not have to be Aimed, Cluster Mines can be activated remotely, and or
    sent on the warheads of some missles. The mines if Magnetic would be drawn to the ships. and be devastating.
    There could also be Gun Platforms in Orbit around planets and artificial stations created from Rocks moved an put into
    orbit around the Planets, as well as Orbits around the Sun. All of which could have their own propulsion systems that
    could automatically move them into position for Defense.

    Also deep space Sensors could Both alert and guide all systems into the Best pattern for Defense and Attack.
    Sensors should be both Narrow an Wide Band, in order to prevent a sneak attack on the Home World of that system.

    Ships of all kinds in the area, could be used for Defense and Attack, and Yes Nukes and any other Hi tech weapons should be used,
    any thing less would otherwise be stupid when considering the survival of a World.

    Of course the Level of Defense is entirely dependent on the Level of Tech developed or given to
    that system. So it could be almost Zero for beginning colonys to Max for Developed Worlds.
     
  13. Thrangar

    Thrangar Ensign

    Posts:
    36
    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Havent seen anything on leaders/commanders always loved these, with added bonuses from experienced gained, such as fleet command sizes.

    Wouild like in general a game play feature that makes everyship more important and or less ships per game as is the norm now ...there is always way to many ships.
     
  14. rxnnxs

    rxnnxs Ensign

    Posts:
    120
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2016
    You are totally right, but you should consider the following:
    How much can all those missile Bases do against a threat from "above"?
    They are not able to fire at an "UFO" that easy, but as you say, it would be really hard to take the whole earth by ground forces.
    This would never happen, or lets say, not in the agressive way... the easier way would be (hello CIA) to destabilize regions... (or hello david icke)

    But i would also like to see this at a great scale, and taking a planet is hard, very hard.
    On the other hand, lets look at a spaceship, i.e. a carrier like it would be a carrier here on earth.
    russia has just one, and that one is heading straight to the place where it can build up some pressure.
    also, not 10.000 missile bases would be able to hit this thing (because they are stationary AND not dual use and most not able to fire that easy to a moving target) (ok, they could level up ;-)).
    but u-boats are some realistic threat. (ching chang chong)
    ok, i am not talking here about A-bombs. they made the carriers obsolete :) (if, and only IF the A-Bomb is taken into account).

    what i want to say also is, that even one carrier in space should have some serious arguments on board.
    if you look at the space games, it happens really fast that there are so many forces in space, that outnumber the battles at the sea by far.

    now i would like to think about a space ship carrier as a ship that has really a size that is half a kilometer long.
    using atomic missiles, this one could lay waste to the biggest cities on earth in no time.

    at the other hand, only one anti missile defense could counter it (if at the right side of the planet or in the space).

    and i also want to plea to the developers, to implement some realistic distances.
    sure there must be a way to do both:
    1. give us a feeling about the distances that are so huge, that without many visual enhancement (or other sensors) the ships are so far away that they are invisible but at the same time already destroyed because the weapons reach so far.
    2. let us oversee the whole battle :)
     
    Last edited: Oct 17, 2016
  15. Possibility

    Possibility Ensign

    Posts:
    52
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2016
    I want to see homeworlds that have a realistic level of defense. In MOO1 you could build unlimited missile bases, but in MOO2 only a single missile base, single starbase, etc, it was lame. Look at Earth today with its 7.5 billion people, and how many of them are heavily armed, and all of the armies scattered across the planet. I want a homeworld that has 10,000 missile bases, space minefields, beam weapon bases on the moon by the thousands, fighters by thousands. The US alone has a 2,300 fighter jets already. Taking a homeworld should be the most difficult challenge possible in the game, much harder than taking Orion. And once you have defeated its defenses and plan to drop a few marine transports, you'd be met by billions of "armed civilians" that take part in their planets defenses.

    This ground combat and gorilla warfare should go on for almost the entire remainder of the game. Does anyone think the people of Earth would just sit by and let them selves be conquered by aliens? They would all fight for the survival of humanity, many would fight for religious reasons, but they would most definitely fight forever.
     
  16. rxnnxs

    rxnnxs Ensign

    Posts:
    120
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2016
    yeah, it would be great if we could see the lore each ship has gathered through his life.
    also the captains log should be readable!
    lets say it would be great if you could see in a captains log where the ship has fought so far and what was damaged, how many got killed and so on.
    we should also know how many people serve on a ship.
    it gives us so much more imagination how they would feel out there..
     
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  17. Marzipan

    Marzipan Cadet

    Posts:
    5
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2016
    Galaxy map graphics aren't that important to me. I like the system used in Aurora, which is very ugly to look at but is chock full of information. Turn based combat on the other hand, is very important.

    In short I'd love to play a game with a huge galaxy,
    Where your ship design has a definite effect and has to match your naval doctrine, IE a close range fleet doctrine won't work if you have thinly skinned slow ships with missile weapons.
    Detailed turn based combat with good graphics, I'd take performance over beauty though.
    Exploration is relevant right up to the game.
    A Dwarf Fortress like ability to tell interesting new stories with every new game.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. DeLastOne

    DeLastOne Cadet

    Posts:
    7
    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Woa I just checked the mandate... love what I saw there. Boarding, exploration, combat... really nice stuff for a game where you are at the command of a single vessel. Will keep an eye on it :)
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. Staroid

    Staroid Cadet

    Posts:
    22
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2016
     
  20. aReclusiveMind

    aReclusiveMind Developer Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    3,040
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2016
    As the dev diaries release I expect we will be seeing many threads on all aspects of gameplay. Combat will certainly be no exception!
     
    • Agree Agree x 1