Hot posts in thread: Tactical Terrain

  1. JOM

    JOM Ensign

    Posts:
    65
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2016
    In my opinion the best and most easy way for the tactical system would be just to copy the current MOO2 tac system, add a much larger tactical playing area (space is infinite) and add a bibliotheque of terrain and weapons effect graphics and let the players themselves mod in terrain effects on movement and weapons. Provide a space for up-and download of these mods online and I am sure this would please nearly everyone.

    Or the short version. let the crowd take part in it. I am sure you will be surprised of the creativity of some talented youngsters.

    Regarding using the whole solar system as playground I am not for it because it would change the tactical game to an operational game which is maybe nice to have someday but not in a MOO inspired game.
     
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  2. Edward the Hun

    Edward the Hun Moderator Lieutenant

    Posts:
    206
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2016
    The fact I recognize what game this is from with but a single screen shot... makes me feel I game too much. The title is not an unknown one but it isn't a commonly cited one either.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Konstantine

    Konstantine Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    Here's one, though it is RTS and not really 4x, or rather very shallow for 4x, this is a zoomed-out look
    Solon.jpg
     
  4. CrazyElf

    CrazyElf Lieutenant

    Posts:
    199
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2016

    There have been games with solar systems.

    The Evochron is a Freelancer type of game for example. A 4X type game with a solar system might be SOTS2.
     
  5. Mezmorki

    Mezmorki Ensign

    Posts:
    124
    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2017
    If anyone is curious, the only 4X game that I've played that comes close to WEGO is Starbase Orion - an iOS MoO-like that first came out many years ago. I still think it's one of the best designed MoO-likes ever.

    Combat takes place in a separate tactical space, and is entirely orders based. Both sides simultaneously issue targeting priorities, escort targets, and a general movement plan (e.g. Maintain long range, charge to closest ship, etc). However, for most engagements the battle only lasts a single turn (it's actually a set amount of time-steps). However, bigger battles or battles with reinforcements can spread across multiple strategic turns, and end up simulating a WEGO style system.

    Unfortunately, while I quite like the system, it isn't a full tactical level WEGO approach, as the time steps are locked to the strategic turns.

    So it remains the case that I would love to see a full turn-based WEGO system in a 4X. It would absolutely unique and a great selling point IMHO.
     
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  6. Konstantine

    Konstantine Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    Hello @solops you brought back memories, Avalon Hill's Gettysburg was the second game I ever played and the first that I bought with my own money.

    Like you, I too felt that I could now instantly find an opponent and that the bookeeping would be taken care of automatically, sadly, no AI offered the same challenge that a good human player could.

    I am also a huge fan of WEGO for many obvious reasons, as I said in another post quite a while ago, In actual battle, no-one waits for their opponent to finish their turn.

    @Mezmorki I visited the review you referenced, quite informative, but like you, I would love to see that system in a true 4x game, not only would I buy something like that, but if the opportunity arose, I could easily see myself supporting such a game in the same manner as I support ISG.
     
  7. solops

    solops Cadet

    Posts:
    21
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2016
    I have every version of MOO ever published, as well as far too many other games. I have been playing wargames since I was 9 (Avalon Hill's Gettysburg in 1965). The advent of computer gaming was huge for me. It meant that I would always have an opponent and that the bookkeeping of increasingly complex games would be taken care of automatically. And computers also promised improvements to games that were simply impractical for board-games. The Holy Grail for this was (is) simultaneous movement/combat. If there is ANY way to implement WEGO then it should be done now, before the game is released or it will never happen. I cannot think of a single improvement to MOO2 or any other game that would be bigger. Such a feature would be well worth waiting for and would make the game almost unique. There are a few other simultaneous games out there and they are a gold standard. Flashpoint Campaigns Red Storm is a great example. If WEGO is simply beyond possible, then AT LEAST implement an initiative based movement system for both strategic and combat movement. In my opinion, NO game involving combat should be anything but WEGO.
     
  8. Mezmorki

    Mezmorki Ensign

    Posts:
    124
    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2017
    Yes - obviously switching the whole structure would be a big departure.

    We (explorminate) reviewed Battle Star Galactica deadlock (https://explorminate.net/2017/09/25/monday-excursion-battlestar-galactica-deadlock/) and the thought was that it had an amazing tactical combat that we'd love to see implemented in a proper 4X game (it was a WEGO system). Anyway, probably not for ISG both working keeping in mind. I don't know of any 4X game that has full tactical combat with a WEGO system. Dominions-series maybe?

    A few other thoughts / suggestions:

    What if the IGUUGO statys as it is... however... what if on your turn you fully moved your ships and selected firing targets for each ship/weapon. And then your opponent moved and selected firing targets. And THEN the actual firing shots were resolved in initiative order for both sides all at once. Whether or not your shots are in range would be fixed at the time when you ordered the fire action.

    This approach, more than anything, would challenge the player to make a more careful consideration of their firing targets so as to avoid overkilling. It would add much more risk-excitement as well as skill to the system.

    As a less drastic version of the above idea, you could simply have players move all their ships and assign firing targets, and then that players ships would fire all at once at their assigned target before moving onto the next player.
     
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  9. Konstantine

    Konstantine Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    This is cool! and it may also be enough.
    I have to agree with you here, while it sounds great and would be a fresh approach to combat in a space based 4x, it would indeed require a lot of work. Maybe best to keep this as a consideration for a future expansion or DLC.

    I have to admit, that the turn based combat in ISG, is more pleasing than the combat in MoO2 as it stands now, so you are already better in this area, anything else you do to improve it further, could really set ISG apart.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  10. Adam Solo

    Adam Solo Developer Administrator Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    4,846
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    We can consider adding an alternative initiative-based combat system further down the road. This shouldn't be too hard to accomplish and it could be a prefered system to some people. I'll add this to the CFL.

    A WEGO (order planning separated from execution) system would be a bit more tricky to consider adding at this stage, I'm afraid, as it would require a bit of rework to the current system. Moreover, it would need to be an alternative combat system as we want to offer IGOUGO. I added this to CFL as well.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. Konstantine

    Konstantine Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    I like this, similar to a WEGo system as discussed here It would certainly make combat far more realistic
     
  12. Mezmorki

    Mezmorki Ensign

    Posts:
    124
    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2017
    @Possibility - I have a space 4X design that I've been working on (no programming, just theory-crafting) with exactly such a system. It would abstract combat to a system wide affair, with pre-battle order planning. But anyway, back to ISG...

    Right now in ISG tactical combat, the only real decision is whether to concentrate fire on a target or not, being mindful not to overkill the target. It's okay, but not great as is. i would look to something like Age of Wonders 3 as an example of exceptionally well-done turn-based tactical combat.

    Ultimately successful tactical combat relies on a few things to not make it an optimization puzzle: terrain, unit abilities that create an "x-factor", in combat, uncertainty, and some set of restrictions to force tradeoffs.

    BIG IDEA:
    I'm not in love with the IGOUGO style of combat most games employ. I really think initiative based and order-planning based systems are more interesting. Imagine in ISG if you assigned movement orders and target preferences for all of your units, simultaneously with the AI, and then the turn would be processed with units moving in order of initiative (would have to add an initiative trait based on speed and/or hull size). This creates a lot of interesting potential outcomes. Ordering all of your ships to fire on one target can result in a ton of overkill, so making a more calculated risk about how to spread out fire becomes more nuanced and interesting. Add in the unexpected of missed shots and armor saves, and the next turn gets even more interesting. Initiative is a natural internal balancing mechanism for small vs. large ships, allowing different ships to perform different functions.
     
    • Helpful Helpful x 3
  13. CrazyElf

    CrazyElf Lieutenant

    Posts:
    199
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2016
    I suppose the way to explain it is basically Psionic Storm is an ability that can be used for terrain denial.

    Essentially it is an AOE ability that when well placed can allow a weaker army to decimate a stronger army.




    The issue is that it requires the enemy to be tightly concentrated for it to work well. It is very valuable between chokepoints.
     
  14. Konstantine

    Konstantine Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    That my friend, holds true for many things and should be a sort of mission statement.
    I never tried Starcraft but you have me curious, you also made me think of a few things.
    The original Star Trek episode, "The Tholian web" came to mind. where two ships were placing the Enterprise inside an impassable web, that could be a good example of an "ability" if it were modified to the ISG battlefield.
    Even MoO2 can be tapped for an example/extrapolation
    Do you recall the "Artemis System Net"
    It was abstract in MoO2 but could be depicted on the battlefield as an array of mines and energized debris that could act in a similar manner to terrain.
    There are many ways to look at it and use terrain as both a natural occurrence or indeed an ability to be gained by tech.

    However, it has to be balanced. What I mean here is that we already have some players that can find manual combat tedious when more than a handful of ships are involved, others, (such as myself), don't mind it even with more than a dozen. Any terrain involved then would have to actually add some flavor and tactics without becoming a grind to a large enough percentage of players. Tricky that, it would require a subtle approach I think, perhaps even one where terrain is not always present.
     
  15. CrazyElf

    CrazyElf Lieutenant

    Posts:
    199
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2016
    This could be also be an ability (ex: AI and players can cast abilities in chokepoints). An example from Starcraft might be the High Templar's Psionic Storm (not sure if anyone has played Starcraft here).

    The issue here is that the AI has to be able to do this intelligently though.
     
  16. Possibility

    Possibility Ensign

    Posts:
    52
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2016
    I agree that combat needs more terrain and tactics. I have dreamed of large tactical combat maps with the whole solar system and asteroid fields and nebulae (I know that last part is not realistic, but i'd rather have 'fun' vs super realism in this regards), and like Konstantine said, planets and moons would block line of sight. Ground invasions should also be initiated within the tactical combat.

    Tactical Combat.png
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  17. Konstantine

    Konstantine Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    To be honest Mark, the pen and paper version offered a lot more options. I bought every expansion that came out at that time and they slowly introduced Fighters and Gun-boats. Fighters acted in the manner of their WW2 counterparts and you needed at least a dozen to take on Cruiser, they also had a single shield covering all sides. Gunboats were like PT boats with a front arc shield and rear arc. Six of them could rip apart a Cruiser quite easily but you could expect to lose a few Gunboats in the process… ah good times.

    But back to the specific topic. I thought further about how effective high speed, slow turn rate would be in making tactical battles more tactical and I think we would need to work out a few things. In Star Fleet Command, we usually had one on one engagements on a very large tactical map so the system worked quite well, excellent in fact. Translating the actual mechanic back to Turn Based would not be an issue but I believe the size of the map would be. We would require a much larger main tactical map to accommodate the possibility that a few dozen ships are squaring off and most likely a seperate smaller map (similar to MoO2) so we could keep track of our forces in relation to our opponents.

    If this were to be done correctly then, it would be a great base to build on. Other considerations such as asteroids, moons, rings, etc. could play a role only if they are actually present in the system in question. This would insure that immersion is not broken and most likely add to it.

    Even if not ISG, I would like to see a game do more here, there is a lot of potential to create something more than what MoO2 offered and add to the fun and feel that you have just entered a hostile system and are about to do battle there.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. Mark

    Mark Ensign

    Posts:
    73
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2016
    I have to admit, I hadn't even considered the old grease pen and paper board game, but it brings up an interesting observation. The Star Fleet Battles board game was one of the most deep, intricate and purely tactical games I have ever played, all with no space terrain at all. So the tactical depth generated by fast moving, slow turning , fixed weapon / shield arc ships is clearly NOT down to the RT nature of the "star fleet command" computer game and would most certainly survive any translation back to TB format such as that used by ISG. Very interesting.......
     
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2018
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. Konstantine

    Konstantine Grand Admiral

    Posts:
    2,200
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    Very astute observation my friend, I too played some star lane based games and the only way the Ai had even the remotest chance of putting up a fight is if I had a fifth of Jack for breakfast before I started playing. Oddly enough, MoO2, IG2, both free movement games, gave me a challenge, with the latter being able to kick my butt quite consistently.

    I started playing that game when it was still pen and paper and have the pc version to this very day. I especially like the older versions with shields having 6 sides rather than four, (more tactical considerations), to be honest I still play it whenever I want to kill a quick half hour or so. I like your idea here Mark, and when time permits, I want to try and explore that model further in my spare time, it is an interesting approach that may not require the re-invention of the wheel.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. Mark

    Mark Ensign

    Posts:
    73
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2016
    Couldn't agree with you more about the starlanes, I know that many people are able to suspend their disbelief and swallow them, but sadly I've never been one of them. To me starlanes just turn any game into RISK-in-space, a very, VERY simplistic land-strategy experience, aka the very last thing I want when I purchase a space 4x. If I want a land strategy experience, I have a hundred other such titles sitting on my shelf collecting dust.

    The only thing I would add is that I too have heard the old story about starlanes making it easy for devs to create passable or even great AI. However I have yet to see a single starlane-based game with even mediocre AI, making me think its really nothing more than an urban myth. Certainly the most recent starlane game MOO-Cts has AI which is universally condemned as utterly, painfully horrible, even by the very few remaining fans it has. I mean if starlanes made AI coding so easy, you'd think there'd be at least ONE starlane-based game with good AI released in the past 30+ years. Nope, not even one. In fact the only space 4x I have ever seen praised (in reviews) for its exceptional AI is Gal Civ II, a free movement game. Go figure.

    I definitely like the idea of nebulae, black holes and other space phenomenon acting as terrain on the strategic level, it worked well for MOO 2 and I think it can work equally well for any space 4x if done properly. As far as the tactical level goes, the idea of space terrain really comes down to a compromise between reality and fun. The harsh reality is that space terrain simply isn't a thing, space is enormous, extremely cold (meaning that just about anything can be detected against the background at absolutely ludicrous ranges) and for the most part extremely empty. But that isn't much fun is it?

    The tactical terrain proposals you illustrated above sound like a good compromise to me, but another possibility is to use the speed, ship position and weapon arcs to generate a sort of pseudo terrain? How? By making ships move relatively fast and turn relatively slowly so that fixed weapon and shield arcs take tactical thinking to bring into position at the right time. MOO 2 ships never moved fast enough for this effect to be very useful although it often became quite interesting if / when fleets clashed, but they hardly ever clashed, they just sat in rows and sniped at long range. But look back to the old RT game "Star Fleet Command" to see this idea quite well implemented. You usually have NO terrain at all in SFC, but the game is still tactically very deep because the ships move relatively fast, turn relatively slowly and have fixed weapon / shield arcs that you must think ahead to position correctly. Just an idea.... :)
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Helpful Helpful x 1