If ground battles are meant to occur across multiple turns, then each turn the 'scan' effect could trigger for a different planet. It seems like that would pretty effectively give the sense that there were multiple battles taking place across multiple planets simultaneously.

I agree with Mokinokaro that Ashbery76s replies do not seem to make any sense. Anyway, I also feel like there are plenty of reasons why there'd be only one battle for a system. A multi-planet ´battle system would be awkward to do. For example the defender might be spreading out their troops on all the planets to defend them all, except then the invader would have a big advantage since it would be all their invading army vs. one planets worth defending troops. So either force the invader to also balance their troops which wouldn't make sense or just have all the defending troops on one central planet, which is how it is already. That said, I would also like to see some kind of arena modifieres for planets. Maybe both planetary ones, anomaly ones and random ones(But then again in space no one can hear thunder ever since it was switched off). 

Also, I know this hasn't really been criticized so no point arguing in favor of it really, but I do like how ground battles take (much) longer than space ones. Historically, naval engagements were short and destructive(To various degrees anyway), while infantry combat took quite a while, even with mechanized warfare becoming a factor(If you look at the conflict in Syria for example it has been going on for years[I know its not as straightforward as a Cravers invasion on a Sophon colony, but there are plenty of other examples since I'm right about this]).

I definitely agree that the current visual representation is sorely lacking. I see absolutely no reason to watch it.

The visuals need to either provide additional information on the performance of our troops, or simply be fun to watch. Ideally both.

I had imagined a scan view presentation of at least one planet, possibly all planets in the system, with colored hologram icons showing invading and defending troops, population centers, defensive structures, and other improvements. The invading troops would slowly advance across the planet with each "round" of the battle as they kill defenders, but if they cause collateral damage, that is shown by changing the appropriate icons.

Thank you all for these early feedback! 

On our side, we envision the Ground Battle visual as a scan view of one of the battle occurring on the system, as if you were looking at the main front.  We really want to emphasize on population that's why we went for this representation, in the midst of the battle.

Would it be better for you if we improve the flow from the notification to the battlefield by:

1) Adding a zoom to one of the planet 

2) Triggering a scan effect on the planet

3) Then highlighting the different conflict zone of the planet, with data on each of them.

4) Zooming on the main conflict zone, which is the battle resolution.

(Screenshots come from internet and are not relevant in term of art directions / quality :) )

Cheers,

First really cool to see a dev respond to this thread.

One question about the visualization of ground battles: Should they also feedback about what you could improve the next time or should they only look cool and are a addon to a simple ground combat system? The space battle visualization should give you an idea what is working and what not, especially with the ability to trigger the scanning view. I got the idea that the ground battle view is just a visual interpretation of a very simple and focus system. Meaning you are not choosing battle plans or equipping your ground troops.

I thinkt his is important to keep in mind. If the visual should give feedback it has to be readable and not over complicated and hectic. Then a battle line as shown is OK. Otherwise the more cinematic and realistic in the overall depection of the actual system would be cool. Like Meedoc suggested/asked.

Meedoc wrote:

Thank you all for these early feedback! 

On our side, we envision the Ground Battle visual as a scan view of one of the battle occurring on the system, as if you were looking at the main front.  We really want to emphasize on population that's why we went for this representation, in the midst of the battle.

Would it be better for you if we improve the flow from the notification to the battlefield by:

1) Adding a zoom to one of the planet 

2) Triggering a scan effect on the planet

3) Then highlighting the different conflict zone of the planet, with data on each of them.

4) Zooming on the main conflict zone, which is the battle resolution.

(Screenshots come from internet and are not relevant in term of art directions / quality :) )

Cheers,

Thank you for taking the time to reply.

I personally feel that your suggestions, aside from 4, would be ideal. The general feeling in this thread is that we'd like to see 'the bigger picture' in more detail rather than just one battle. If it's multiple planets being attacked within a system for example, then I at least would prefer to activate a 'scan effect' and switch between planets to have a look at the invasions taking place on each one, as opposed to looking at just one battle on a single planet. That said, I have no clue what's feasible and what isn't. 

Essentially, I'd love a really detailed 'scan effect' on a system under siege. This could take a purely militaristic approach and refer to troop movements, global casualties and notable points captured/destroyed for instance, or even a more civilian one where we see a kind of news report.

I think I'd like to see something like what Cat-o-Nine-Tails is imagining -- some sort of visual representation that is both informative as to troop progress/strength and interesting to watch. To that end, I think it'd be cool to see both 2) and 4) of Meedoc's ideas implemented. The scan of a planet under siege could provide the former and the zoom in to a particular climatic battle (say, of the enemy's last stand/the conquering of the planet capital) could provide the latter. I think something like that accomplishes the sort of 'story' focus ES2 is going for (there's a part of me that really wants to see what it's like trying to fight a Craver; the art Amplitude's shown looks so cool.)

It'd also be great to see whatever kinds of defensive fortification the system has visually represented in the attack/defense. In both ES1 and EL, there was nothing of the sort; you couldn't really tell that a particular system or city was chock full of defensive improvements, which for me at least, took away from the immersion of the game. It's a minor detail in the grand scheme of things (both games still very enjoyable without that addition), but definitely something I would've liked to see then, and something I hope to see for ES2. :)

I like the dev idea i mean battles shouldnt be a single thing we are talking of planet wide conflicts millions of soldiers fighting and dying cities gettting bombed planet wide facilities being bombarded to shattered glass i think it should feel like that with several planet wide alerts new reports and some nice data like casualty numbers ( both civilian and militar) vehicles and troops deployed stuff like that you know some fluff i mean the new battlescreen is an upgrade of the old one but i still feel it pretty lacking but this is coming from a guy who likes set numbers and technical info. 

Mokinokaro wrote:

Ashbery76 wrote:

Mokinokaro wrote:

I think part of the issue is that ground battles can take several game turns to resolve (by design)  while space battles are resolved in one game turn.

The main purpose of ground battles is to stall an invasion, not stop it.   It's to hold out until the fleet arrives.

Well that does not make sense.It's like comparing Trafalgar to the whole Napoelonic war.The battle for planets should take a fair while for realism and to stop quick blitz of empires.In the EndlessSpace expansion I could take a whole empire in one turn which is not good with dropping troops.It made the game easy because the A.I rarely used the system.

Your reply isn't making much sense?    Ground battles DO take multiple turns.    They're supposed to.

Fleet engagements however are one turn.    You take out the invading fleet and the ground invasion is over.

I wasn't really following what Ashbery76 was trying to get at either, I think they did agree with you, but completely misread your initial point...

atejas wrote:

If ground battles are meant to occur across multiple turns, then each turn the 'scan' effect could trigger for a different planet. It seems like that would pretty effectively give the sense that there were multiple battles taking place across multiple planets simultaneously.

Agreed. I like Meedoc's suggestion for handling it, as that conveys a sense of scale without completely losing a direct connection to the battle.

However, if you say that you chose this representation to stay "close to the population," then I feel the battlefield shouldn't be some barren valley in the middle of nowhere. Put the defenders inside fortifications with a sprawling metropolis right behind them, so we get a feeling that this is a grueling siege of the system capital, whose fall would devastate enemy morale and lead to their surrender (somewhat analogous to The Fall of Paris being a blow to French morale.)

Additionally, it would be great to see said fortifications reflect the actual defensive improvements of the system.

And please, don't array them in a straight line like that. Have a less regular frontline, and let the units move around a bit, so it feels more dynamic.

Meedoc wrote:

Thank you all for these early feedback! 

On our side, we envision the Ground Battle visual as a scan view of one of the battle occurring on the system, as if you were looking at the main front.  We really want to emphasize on population that's why we went for this representation, in the midst of the battle.

Would it be better for you if we improve the flow from the notification to the battlefield by:

1) Adding a zoom to one of the planet 

2) Triggering a scan effect on the planet

3) Then highlighting the different conflict zone of the planet, with data on each of them.

4) Zooming on the main conflict zone, which is the battle resolution.

(Screenshots come from internet and are not relevant in term of art directions / quality :) )

Cheers,

As it currently stands, the entire scene takes just under half a minute, which I feel is a good time for it without it becoming intrusive. If you are able to implement all these steps in the scene without it extending the time too far, I think that would be great. Perhaps you can have this scan integrated not in the scene, but in the menu prompt? Replace the crossed swords with the planet while keeping the ring that conveys the odds?

This entire problem might not even be with the visuals, but with how the ground battle system doesn't properly handle multiple planets.

1. Population differs from planet to planet, not just between systems. 

2. There is no way to say this without stating the obvious but here it goes, all the listed troops (infantry, tank, and plane) are unable to travel between multiple planets in the system without the aid of a spacecraft.

3. There is no reason that I can think of why the attacker shouldn't be required to take over each planet individually before claiming control over a system.

With all that said, I think the visuals of each light on the globe being snuffed out one by one would carry a heavy impact with an extremely simple visual.

radlawnmower wrote:

...

With all that said, I think the visuals of each light on the globe being snuffed out one by one would carry a heavy impact with an extremely simple visual.

I second this.

This could be represented on a system level, and the tie-in to population is very clear.

In regards to the earlier point about population differing from planet to planet. I view these battles as a representative aggregate for the system*, which is why a very specific representation (two lines of troops) creates a visual disconnect for me. I think if a system representation was possible (eg. light for every population centre) the details of which planet had which troops wouldn't matter.

*For example, if your system's troop strength was 10, and the enemies troop strength was 14, there are multiple ways the code could randomly divide the troops across the planets to add up to 10 and 14 respectively. Mathematically the conflict could be resolved on a system level, and then translated back to the planetary level. As long as you didn't have zero troops on a given planet any result could be plausibly filled in by the user to create stories (one army holding out against all odds, or clear massacre).

What we haven't taken into consideration are the tactics that can be done during a siege. In the gameplay footage there were Surrender, Protect System, Local Resistance (Defender) and Preemptive Bombing (Attackers). I suggest that every idea of visualization should take this into consideration and should show the difference and the impact of this choice. So from this gameplay video the Preemptive Bombing looked like it damaged the troops, even the own, before the battle. But it wasn't too to clear to me. If there are this choices I suggest to have a clear view which highlights these choices and give feedback of their impact.

The ideas with the zoom and so on sounds cool to watch but they shouldn't take away from the focus and the outcome. Taking the preemtive bombing as an example it could be highlighted with the actual spell out of "Preemptive Bombing", then impacts could be seen on the screen with some casualties numbers (the gameplay video showed some substractions of the overall army strength in percentage) and then a pause which lasts a little bit longer as in the gameplay video.

MezzoMax wrote:

What we haven't taken into consideration are the tactics that can be done during a siege. In the gameplay footage there were Surrender, Protect System, Local Resistance (Defender) and Preemptive Bombing (Attackers). I suggest that every idea of visualization should take this into consideration and should show the difference and the impact of this choice. So from this gameplay video the Preemptive Bombing looked like it damaged the troops, even the own, before the battle. But it wasn't too to clear to me. If there are this choices I suggest to have a clear view which highlights these choices and give feedback of their impact.

The ideas with the zoom and so on sounds cool to watch but they shouldn't take away from the focus and the outcome. Taking the preemtive bombing as an example it could be highlighted with the actual spell out of "Preemptive Bombing", then impacts could be seen on the screen with some casualties numbers (the gameplay video showed some substractions of the overall army strength in percentage) and then a pause which lasts a little bit longer as in the gameplay video.

I think all data you mention should be clearly explained in after battle report. In ground and space battles. But great someone is remembering ti, as it is very important in gameplay.

Not sure how much work will be for Amplitude to put different animations for each tactic, but after Meedoc's post, I think they want to make it more fun to see for the players.

lo_fabre wrote:

Not sure how much work will be for Amplitude to put different animations for each tactic, but after Meedoc's post, I think they want to make it more fun to see for the players.

You are probably right. It seems as space battles will give you more feedback because more things are to consider: ship blueprints, choosen tactic, environments like anomalies, fleet composition.

Whereas ground combat has no troop outfitting, the ratio of infantry:tanks:planes is determined by a fix ratio and pulled directly from your pops, the tech advancements are automatically applied. So ground combat animation is more for the looks and an addon to the ground combat from ES1 : Disharmony.

I guess this is also due to the fact that space battles happen more often whereas ground combat is mostly decided after the space battle is won and the ground forces are overwelmed. Then there will be some instances where a decent ground defense can be mounted and the ground combat will consist of more rounds and hopefully stall the invasion long enough. This is just my feeling. I guess most of the time ground combat will be fairly swift and sometimes take more rounds. Especially newly established colonies will fall instantly.

That said I am totally in favor of everything discussed so far. Giving a great visual representation is cool. Meedoc ideas are going in the right direction.

Meedoc wrote:

Thank you all for these early feedback! 

On our side, we envision the Ground Battle visual as a scan view of one of the battle occurring on the system, as if you were looking at the main front.  We really want to emphasize on population that's why we went for this representation, in the midst of the battle.

Would it be better for you if we improve the flow from the notification to the battlefield by:

1) Adding a zoom to one of the planet 

2) Triggering a scan effect on the planet

3) Then highlighting the different conflict zone of the planet, with data on each of them.

4) Zooming on the main conflict zone, which is the battle resolution.

(Screenshots come from internet and are not relevant in term of art directions / quality :) )

Cheers,

Yes, please.