Actual 4D Space combat - Endless Space 2

Actual 4D Space combat

Copied to clipboard!

Jiheu

Newcomer

Jiheu

Newcomer

9 years ago

Aug 4, 2015, 2:23:09 PM

In was the case in Endless Space(or supreme commander; i don't remember) with the asynchronous problem in multiplayer: you could play in a different space/time universes with your friends. If amplitude studios can build a game where you can merge these universes...

0badgesSend private message

Igncom1

Craver

Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery win wars.

Igncom1

Craver

9 years ago

Aug 8, 2015, 9:44:04 AM

SOTS 2 is good, really really good.

When It doesn't crash.

Still nice however.

0badgesSend private message

Stargem

Newcomer

Stargem

Newcomer

9 years ago

Aug 8, 2015, 8:18:47 AM

Yeah, SOTS was the best in the 4x genre when it came to the combat. Maybe the folks at Kerberos would be interested in hiring out their talents to Amplitude? It would give them a chance to practice for SOTS3, along with filling an emptied treasury after the SOTS2 debacle.

0badgesSend private message

Slashman

Eyder Precursor

Slashman

Eyder Precursor

9 years ago

Aug 8, 2015, 7:40:13 AM

The problem with most space 4x games is the lack of willingness to commit to a decent battle system in the first place.

It's either the boring as hell stats game like GalCiv or some kind of weird turn-based silliness that makes a mockery of actual space combat.

Sword of the Stars was the only series to have the balls to realize that there is no good half way for space battles.

IMO, the best option is to do decent space battles where you can properly command your ships. Limit the number of battles by limiting the number of fleets based on the size of the map or better yet, owned systems. Stop making it so that having a fleet is the only way to defend a system and let people build defensive outposts, fighter hangars, ordinance launchers etc to protect systems. Make system defenses effective but costly enough that you cannot protect every single system you own, thus requiring the deployment of fleets in a meaningful and tactical way. If you're all out attacking the enemy, then you leave gaps in your defense so you choose your fights carefully. That approach should cut down on pointless fleet spam that bogs the end game down.

I don't get this odd philosophy that if you have a good space 4x, then you have to sacrifice engaging and interesting combat. That's the thing that pisses me off the most about the GalCiv series. If you like exciting space combat...well too freaking bad for you. Auto-resolve and build another entertainment center instead.

smiley: sarcastic

0badgesSend private message

uriak

Newcomer

uriak

Newcomer

9 years ago

Aug 7, 2015, 12:12:57 PM

Sounds like feature creep to me.

I'd think the priority would be to focus on the experience of the parts that are the most repetitive. Past a point most battles will be auto solved. Give us more options in that regards.

For instance, a "don't bother" factor you can give to large fleet, whereas they don't even signal unbalanced encounters (single ship ws armada) and just give you a final turn report (today we squashed some scouts haha)

And some auto tactic selection for your fleet, maybe with a faction/balance setting. The game computes if the encounter is Easy, noticeable, difficult and you can pick a tactic for each and only be prompted on challenging events.

People tend to focus on the battle themselves for two main reasons imho. They were the only real way to look at your faction itself, (the planets were all similar and without battle/ship editor you would barely know who you are playing) and the main eye candy. But quickly enough there is only stuff to do on a few key battles. The feel of grind in late game is something that tends to turn people off that game phase.

Oh : and it would be neat to have the tech progression gives more qualitative possibilites thatn quantitative. The cards are a nice possibility of course. But in ES you get very soon the feeling you'll only get more of the same, gameplay wise.

0badgesSend private message

rockmassif

Officer

rockmassif

Officer

9 years ago

Aug 7, 2015, 8:53:43 AM

I actually really like the combat in ES, it brings something different to the table. It's kinda like a card game.

If we had more battlecards with unique abilities and more ways to affect the fleet formation that would be really good.

And for the love of god please do something about battle results, I destroy every ship in the enemy fleet except one without losing any of my ships. And it just says "DRAW"? How is that draw? It should be something like CLEAR VICTORY.

0badgesSend private message

Apocalypse

Newcomer

Apocalypse

Newcomer

9 years ago

Aug 7, 2015, 2:17:08 AM

Falkner wrote:
I liked ES' combat much more than GalCiv's.

You just turned me away from GalCiv than

smiley: stickouttongue

The weakness of the endless space combat system is imho that the balance made it boring. Go long-range, alpha strike the enemy fleet to death. Nothing more to see. It somehow showed signs of depth that were swapped away by the balance.

0badgesSend private message

JErosion

Newcomer

JErosion

Newcomer

9 years ago

Aug 6, 2015, 3:43:10 AM

Honestly I dont thing Endless Space needs 3D space combat, let alone space combat that involves gratuitous dimensions. I liked the Card Battle system of Endless Space, although i would not mind more cards.

One thing i would like to see is that the Battlefield to matter more. In ES when you had a battle and you set the battle to manual the game generated a battle you could watch. and you see all the planets just floating around but instead what if the battle took place around a single planet instead. thereby allowing certain anomalies to effect the battle. (ei. a planet with High Gravity will effect the accuracy of both combatants however it will if one of the combatants owns the system that the battle is taking place in it will effect him less.

And who gets to pick which planet a battle takes place around could be handled by a "maneuver score", which could be determine by a number of factors. Like Having a Hero attached to the fleet, a maneuver score of the hero, the quality of the fleets engines, other techs installed on ships, whether the system is owned by the player. It could help a player who has fallen behind on certain techs, to try and bridge the gap by placing the enemy on difficult battlefield.

0badgesSend private message

Foxdragon

Old

Foxdragon

Old

9 years ago

Aug 5, 2015, 11:28:19 PM

They could make the combat like Gratuitous Space Battles but in 3D where you set up your ships on what they do before the battle starts and then its over to the AI.

0badgesSend private message

ghost_general

Newcomer

ghost_general

Newcomer

9 years ago

Aug 5, 2015, 8:34:57 PM

it would be great if we could do more before the battle starts. better formatioons , target priority and such. and in adition maybe a change in the turns. i think of letzt say.. 6 phases. the 1. and the 6. are arival and the ending. and in between there are just 4 phases. no one for long middle and short range...

so ong range weapons could fire in phase two. but ships with shorter range would have to spend on or two phases to get in range... i can als o thing of ordering shipt to get out of the enemys weapons for some phases. if this is done it woul be possible to compare the ships speed of both fleets so a fast longrange fleet could use a hit an d run battle style to avoid short range damage . on the other side u could have super fast close combat shipt that break through enemy fire and take them out on close battle. im sorry if this is not written that well but i hope u get the idea.

if this is planned out well and balanced we can do a lot with the battle in advance.

oh and it would be GREAT if the game would remember the last setting for the fleet of a previous battle.

0badgesSend private message

Stargem

Newcomer

Stargem

Newcomer

9 years ago

Aug 5, 2015, 5:33:32 PM

I would prefer it if Amplitude continued using cards and turn-based combat. To me, the problem isn't the concept of the cards - it was implementation and variety that was the issue.

0badgesSend private message

SpinnerMaster

Enthusiast

SpinnerMaster

Enthusiast

9 years ago

Aug 4, 2015, 6:45:34 PM

I would love a sort of seamless transition in ES2 between combat and turns, I am not entirely sure how that would work, but I would like to see what Amplitude is planning for ES2.

0badgesSend private message

AIMMO

Sentient Sower

AIMMO

Sentient Sower

9 years ago

Aug 4, 2015, 6:03:55 PM

What if the 4th dimension is the Ampliefied Reality like in the trailer?

0badgesSend private message

ericbrooke

Survivor

ericbrooke

Survivor

9 years ago

Aug 1, 2015, 10:12:56 PM

Homeward was/is probably the best game for 4D space combat. There is a real lack of 4X games that try to do this and few do it well, yet it is the thing that makes space combat so challenging.

This could be played out in where do create Outposts, Space Stations, asteroid belts, positioning of planets, satellites etc

0badgesSend private message

JackAu

Newcomer

JackAu

Newcomer

9 years ago

Aug 4, 2015, 2:17:17 PM

I don't think it should be Homeworld level stuff, but it should at least give us more control in a more 2D RTS fashion such as direction of ship path, ways of attack in a timed turn.

something can be better done with 2 screen

0badgesSend private message

Ecervele

Celestial Mercy

Ecervele

Celestial Mercy

9 years ago

Aug 4, 2015, 2:08:14 PM

What is a 4D combat???

smiley: surprise

You mean can fight in time, like time travelling battle units which can go back minutes back and multy infinitly which will increase the amount of energy of the universe from the nothingness of time travel absurdity???

O:

So much trolling possibilities...

smiley: sarcastic

0badgesSend private message

the_wamburger

Newcomer

the_wamburger

Newcomer

9 years ago

Aug 4, 2015, 8:25:33 AM

Okay, you broke my mind and I still have no idea what you meant.

0badgesSend private message

Jiheu

Newcomer

Jiheu

Newcomer

9 years ago

Aug 4, 2015, 12:33:17 AM

If you want to see what is a 4D combat, you can unfold a tesseract into a 3D space. At the end, it will be a battle in 8 differents cube in which you can travel continously from one cube to one another.

In Homeworld, you can jump with a certain time T from point A to point B which is impossible in a 3D space( the crossed distance is more than the distance crossed by light with the same time T). However, if you can find a shorter way below the distance crossed by the light by travelling in an another cube during the proces it will not break this physical law (the shorter way in a 3D non-euclidian space is not always the straight line, that's the same for a 4D space).

So yeah, Homeworld could present 4D combat maybe...

smiley: biggrin

0badgesSend private message

VIPNasarog

Analyzer Officer

I know nothing. To learn more, come visit us @ eXplorminate.net

VIPNasarog

Analyzer Officer

9 years ago

Aug 3, 2015, 10:41:20 PM

What is 4D combat? X Y Z and smell planes of combat?

0badgesSend private message

Falkner

Lord

Unbowed, unbent, unbroken

Falkner

Lord

9 years ago

Aug 3, 2015, 8:11:48 PM

I liked ES' combat much more than GalCiv's.

0badgesSend private message

?

Click here to login

Reply

Comment

Characters : 0

0badgesSend private message

PostCancel