It reminds me that too few games let us recreate tthe kind of battles that occur in the Dune series, and the warfare involved (using special species from the world : worms, or how missiles are usefull, or how concealment works (fremen), or how hard weather condition change how you fight : the importance of water and distils)

I also find the ideas interesting... But for me it would be almost a different game.

Of course, in an ideal world, with an endless (pun intended) budget, you can probably make a 4x with a space combat simulator, a ground combat simulator and an RPG included somewhere to boot.

But then it isn't a 4X anymore.

We will have - through the heroes - a bit of an RPG element, the battles in the trailer look good, we have to figure out how they work out tactically... Ground combat, well I agree about it for an expansion... For a main game, not so sure, as for me it isn't exactly the core of a 4x game.

I agree about it for an expansion... For a main game, not so sure, as for me it isn't exactly the core of a 4x game.

Yes I agree, though we don't know exactly how involved ground battle is, the focus does seem to be more on outer space elements.

SABA wrote:
Yes I agree, though we don't know exactly how involved ground battle is, the focus does seem to be more on outer space elements.

And that doesn't have to be a bad thing. Everyone wants at least one really good, deep and complex combat system. Two is a bit much for the first release, probably...



Anyways, there will probably be tons of technologies and race-dependent modifiers already. If I remember correctly, it was stated that ground battles could last several turns, so there is a more complex element involved than in other 4x-games, already. Anyone remembers the reference?

Gratuitous Tank Battles style?

maceman wrote:
Gratuitous Tank Battles style?

Yes, please. That would just be Awesome. (yes, with a capital "A")

Sharidann wrote:
I also find the ideas interesting... But for me it would be almost a different game.

Of course, in an ideal world, with an endless (pun intended) budget, you can probably make a 4x with a space combat simulator, a ground combat simulator and an RPG included somewhere to boot.

But then it isn't a 4X anymore.

We will have - through the heroes - a bit of an RPG element, the battles in the trailer look good, we have to figure out how they work out tactically... Ground combat, well I agree about it for an expansion... For a main game, not so sure, as for me it isn't exactly the core of a 4x game.

Completely agree with Sharidann on this matter.

Being new to these forums I would first like to say that you guys have an amazing and unique design philosophy to creating games. I hope this turns out to be a successful venture so we see more of this approach when designing games.



With that said, one of my main issues with these types of games is they almost never put any creativity or resources behind ground combat. It almost always seems like an afterthought to the base game design, which I’ve never understood. Tactical space battles are obviously very exciting when done properly and the draw of most players here, but I think a lot can be said for taking part in the struggles of your ground forces as they fight campaigns across exotic and strange worlds.



I realize it’s probably a little late in development to implement actual tactical battles at this stage, but I am wondering if this is something that the game engine would be capable of supporting for a possible expansion down the road and if there is any interest in exploring this area more?



To be clear, I’m not talking total war style graphics or hour long battles (although that would be nifty) but just a simple game map representative of the type of world your fighting on with a handful of units controlled in a traditional RTS fashion. If you look at games like company of heroes without the base building (maybe defensive building) you have an intuitive system which takes complex ideas like cover and fire support and makes them fast and fun, making an ideal base to work with.



Beyond the tactical battles, you don’t see much attention given to the advancement of weapons and tactics ground units would use. I would like to see some tech trees that deal with this whether its advancement of infantry weapons, mechs and tanks, air support, or tactics there would be a lot of possibilities to explore. Even if a species became space faring it’s a little silly to think they wouldn’t still develop strong ground forces and advance technology for those considering your resources and population are all still on planets and unless you bombard a planet to dust troops are needed for invasions.



In lieu (or support of) tactical battles I think there are other possibilities to explore here with the ground game. I’d like to see a system of “special” mission types. For instance with the proper research you could develop elite units capable of assassinating or capturing enemy heroes, destroying or disabling structures or defenses, or possibly after an enemy ground invasion fighting a guerilla war on the planet disrupting the enemy’s ability to build new structures and having negative effects on the economy of the planet.



The last thing I would like to see is a more RPG feel to the troops, being able to name them like ships and they develop experience as they go making them more effective and lethal. They could be upgradable from simple militia for defense of colonies to your more specialized elite strike forces with unique abilities for special operation style combat and supplemental to recon fleets.





Just some ideas I’ve been kicking around in my head I think would add some depth to the game and set it apart from others on the market.

What i like about Gratuitous Tank Battles is... it's basically the same principles as space battles. Design your basic units, give them some strategy and send em off to war! (I need a tissue).



Yes it would involve a lot more technology and detail than most are looking for and yes it screams expansion... but wouldn't the AI required for it be largely the same as the space combat?

and speaking of which how fun would it be to call in an airstrike from orbit?

Yeah, I didn't really think it would be something that would work in the initial release just more curious if its possible with the current engine in the game and if any thought has been given to it. The time issue I don't think would matter much for single player as there should be an option to auto-resolve included so you would basically only be fighting the important battles or none at all if that's what you wished. The issues comes in multiplayer as people tend to be more competitive and wouldn't be fond of an auto-resolve given the random nature of it which could dramatically slow the pace of the game.. I think the only simple solution to that would be allowing it to be toggled in the game set up so people who don't like it wouldn't have an issue and could play with like minded players.



As far as it not being 4x enough, this is a relatively stagnant genre for a reason and that's because it doesn't appeal to people who don't like looking at charts and graphs for the majority of gameplay. I'm not saying that those charts and graphs aren't important or that the game should be dumbed down in any form, but appealing to different types of gamers and making the game more attractive is better for everyone involved meaning more money to the devs and more features expansions for us.



Gratuitous tank battles is a perfect example of how something can be simple and fast but also engaging and a lot of fun. And I'm willing to bet that game didn't have an epic budget to work with.

I thought the MOO2 concept of ground combat was the best. Results depended entirely on technology and race modifications (and heroes too, I think). It’s simple and fast but it provides you some idea of how good (or bad) your ground troops fare in a fight as well as fun eye candy, watching troops, tanks and walkers slug it out. I don’t think too much work should go into ground combat – it’s the space combat that really matters.

Stretchycheese wrote:
I thought the MOO2 concept of space combat was the best. Results depended entirely on technology and race modifications (and heroes too, I think). It’s simple and fast but it provides you some idea of how good (or bad) your ground troops fare in a fight as well as fun eye candy, watching troops, tanks and walkers slug it out. I don’t think too much work should go into ground combat – it’s the space combat that really matters.

I agree, I wouldn't want any time or focus taken away from space combat. Without epic space combat the ground stuff wouldn't matter anyways because the game wouldn't be as fun during the type of combat that you would be active in 90% of the time, I'd rather just see it as an addition once things are feature complete.

I've always like the options of being able to bombard a planet from orbit or invading the planet. However, I've noticed that most games have the planetary invasion occur instantaneously. You land the troops, they overwhelm the defensive army in a day or two, and the planet is yours by the next turn. I'm in favor of a hands off approach, or even a "choose your strategy for invasion" like in Galactic Civilizations, but it's always bothered me that invasions happen instantaneously. Planets are large places, and planets that are well developed shouldn't be an easy pushover. It should take time for an invasion to be successful. In Distant Worlds, it can take a long time for an invasion to end, and I found that I liked it. It's more realistic. It takes time to fight a war. That's my two cents.

In 10 min space strategy, you have to bomb the planets to 0 pop to be able to colonize them. So big planets can resist longer.