I had just bought Endless Space (Empire Edition of course, I always stand up for people who have idea and passion for what they are do). This game is pretty good, and, futhermore, this is 4x. How many games of this type we have today? One per year? Oh, less. Maybe one per two years. But there is one problem relative one of the major mechanism of the game. Combat. Probably, the idea is not bad. We don’t have direct control over our ship, but we can give they “general” orders. So, idea is good, but execution of this idea.....Now, what we have, is simple cinematic, usual cut-scene, always the same. Two fleet approach on they, and fight begun. We have long range, medium range, and close range. After all of this “turns”, battle ends. We don’t have control over this, what we see on our computer screen. We only can choose cards for the particular “stadium” of the battle. As I said, idea is not bad, but we have too little control over our fleet. If devs added new orders (as approach speed, direction of arrival our fleet, behaviour of our ship, like aggressive, defensive and the ability of decide which ship will attack which enemy ship and the “weak-point” system like engines, guns, shields), battle would be more exciting, and the strategy will have more influence on this, what we see on our screens.

With Regards.

Perhaps you would be interested in my threads on the subject of combat.



Links: /#/endless-space/forum/28-game-design/thread/11640-5th-tech-tree-military-doctrine and /#/endless-space/forum/29-archives/thread/13307-expanding-on-combat-doctrine-and-fleet-construction.

I kinda like the combat mechanics, points for originality and potential. Makes sense seeing that an administrator of an empire probably wouldn't micro-manage battles(unless you're Alexander the Great). Though I do hope they'll add more depth of strategy like you mentioned. Direction of attack, flight path, how close to the enemy the attacking ships arrive(what if you could jump right into a prolonged melee turn?) etc. Also, we need more than just one battle cinematic.



I guess the devs got more planned for combat in the beta or the launch version though. We're still in alpha after all. I get the sense that the devs are holding out on some of the really good stuff.

Bugg wrote:
I kinda like the combat mechanics, points for originality and potential. Makes sense seeing that an administrator of an empire probably wouldn't micro-manage battles(unless you're Alexander the Great). Though I do hope they'll add more depth of strategy like you mentioned. Direction of attack, flight path, how close to the enemy the attacking ships arrive(what if you could jump right into a prolonged melee turn?) etc. Also, we need more than just one battle cinematic.



I guess the devs got more planned for combat in the beta or the launch version though. We're still in alpha after all. I get the sense that the devs are holding out on some of the really good stuff.

I agree, I enjoy the combat mechanics although I don't consider them too original. Of course there is much potential however, and I want to see the combat card and ship design mechanics made more in depth. The links I posted above in an earlier comment are to threads where I consider just that. Fleet formations and doctrine should be included, at least this would be one way to use the card system further and add depth. Most certainly we need to gain depth in combat somewhere however since it is an unavoidable and very large part of the game.

Bugg wrote:
I kinda like the combat mechanics, points for originality and potential. Makes sense seeing that an administrator of an empire probably wouldn't micro-manage battles(unless you're Alexander the Great). Though I do hope they'll add more depth of strategy like you mentioned. Direction of attack, flight path, how close to the enemy the attacking ships arrive(what if you could jump right into a prolonged melee turn?) etc. Also, we need more than just one battle cinematic.



I guess the devs got more planned for combat in the beta or the launch version though. We're still in alpha after all. I get the sense that the devs are holding out on some of the really good stuff.

All heroes can be trained at anything. They just start out with different main skills. What's wrong with creating a decent hybrid?

Inquisitioner wrote:
All heroes can be trained at anything. They just start out with different main skills. What's wrong with creating a decent hybrid?

Oh, with administrator I meant the PC.

Scolpe wrote:
If devs added new orders (as approach speed, direction of arrival our fleet, behaviour of our ship, like aggressive, defensive and the ability of decide which ship will attack which enemy ship and the “weak-point” system like engines, guns, shields), battle would be more exciting, and the strategy will have more influence on this, what we see on our screens.

I'de like the ability to mark each ship in my fleet as Engage or Evade. Then the fighers would fight, and the support ships would avoid combat until the very end. It would make escort missions for a destroyer to fleet up with a colony ship to avoid pirates.

AngleWyrm wrote:
I'de like the ability to mark each ship in my fleet as Engage or Evade. Then the fighers would fight, and the support ships would avoid combat until the very end. It would make escort missions for a destroyer to fleet up with a colony ship to avoid pirates.

That's certainly an option I haven't thought about. I'm still in favor of my system using Signature Radii though.

ArrowLance wrote:
That's certainly an option I haven't thought about. I'm still in favor of my system using Signature Radii though.

ArrowLance wrote:
One of the greatest frustrations in combat is the difficulty in using mixed fleets and various hulls. Endlessly losing corvettes and 'suicide' destroyers isn't the worst mechanic but it would be nice to have other options for these ships in combat. To that end I propose a new modifier for all ships: Signature Radius. Signature radius would dictate the chances of a ship being targeted and how much the accuracy modifier on enemy weapons would affect their attacks. It makes sense enemy ships would be attracted to target and engage ships that are 1. Enormous on their sensors and 2. Easier to hit with their weapons. It makes sense that your leviathan dreadnaught shouldn't be hit more often and not have he same accuracy standards for hitting it as a miniscule corvette.

The idea seems good, and doesn't seem incompatible with Engage/Evade. They serve different strategic purposes. One is to promote the survivability of smaller combat vessels, and the other is to promote survivability of non-combat vessels.



Another method of achieving both goals might be to implement some sort of Electronic Warfare, with ECM and ECCM systems installable on ships. You could load up a ship with a lot of ECM and it would be practically invisible to scanning/weapon locks.