why do we need different types of the same gun? that level of fiddle is nothing to do with ES's aesthetic and would break the way Deflections &c are handled





itt: people think 4x means MOAR TREES when what matters is the wood

I guess I may be biased as a fan of card games, but I don't think there needs to be any fundamental changes to the battle system. 'Fleets' in other 4x space games tend to be many more ships than in ES which is why it appears to me people are expecting formations and so on. There's a very naval vibe to how the battles go and it encourages balanced designs, ie you can't just load up a ship with nothing but missiles and no defense as a smart enemy will counter with cards and destroy you up close.



I'd suggest having an option to retreat, and perhaps an upgrade or tech that allows you to see what the balance of weapons is on an enemy ship. And more cards!

Why? Partly it'll give more tactical depth to customizing your weapons and defence mod, instead of everyone firing the same mundane weaponry.

Well, why couldn't the same effect come from the current card system?



Say your ship had kinetic weapons, you could have three generic offensive cards which would essentially be three different attack effects (faster RoF for lower accuracy, better accuracy for lower RoF, and balanced) this could be reflected in the visuals, be all impressive and cool, and require a minimal to moderate amount of added complexity to the current system (maybe the selection screen could be paused but you wouldn't be allowed to change your cards after selection?).

I feel I am kinda middle of the road on a lot of this. On the one hand i really enjoy the style of the combat sequences as

well as the card system, but having said that i do see the need for some serious iteration on the card system to increase player involvements in battles.

As it stands often i find i just stack MP and then auto resolve with basically no likely chance ill loose anything.



I agree with a lot of the players on the thread that are talking about the need for combat improvements and many of the reasons for them.

Though we must be realistic about how those improvements might be executed this late in the development. I think iteration on the existing

card system is the best bet for all of us to get more out of this before release that will be both functional and meaningful to the players.



However i do pose to both the Devs and my fellow ES players in this thread that while many play 4x games for varied reasons i think

it can be agreed and I would argue widely assumed by consumers that a fair part of 4x ("Expand, Exploit, Explore Exterminate") in the scifi genre involves to

no small degree spaceships and meaningful interaction with them. I love and i want it clear i LOVE the focus on the strategic empire building elements of the game.

But i think it warrants consideration as to how the Larger scifi/strategy gaming audience even within the 4x niche would take to a game with a shallower

then expected experience with the spaceship interactions. Not just simple direct confrontations but how those confrontations are initiated or avoided.

The thread regarding the retreat card and the topic brought up about ships/ territory interactions between factions i think are both good examples of this.



The targeting of specific ships systems seem like an interesting option and i would like to see it but i don't think any of us but the devs could speak to the complexity or viability

of its implementation at this point in development. The realistic damage modeling would be a very nice touch as would functional hard points. I find i take some personal issue with the

existing combat system on this point as it heavily rely on the cinematic immersion in battles to fill the gap between direct player interaction and what amounts to mostly just watching the battle play out which is still awesome but as it is has issues.



When i see these great looking ships go at it in epic cinematic fashion i find it hard not to cringe a little and be drawn out of the moment when i see shot, missile, and laser just appear out of the hull of the ship. If the Devs simply have not implemented a feature that would correct this by all means i retract the above in regard to this and would eagerly await access to that build. But if not i think its something that would seriously warrant the attention of the development team.



I would love to see this game succeed and grow especially being this studios 1st game. But i think in order for that to be true and for

wider acceptance of, admittedly what is already even though in alpha a gorgeous product, will require some more development related to these above stated issues.



That is my 2 cents hope someone finds it interesting/helpful =D

Ohma wrote:
Well, why couldn't the same effect come from the current card system?



Say your ship had kinetic weapons, you could have three generic offensive cards which would essentially be three different attack effects (faster RoF for lower accuracy, better accuracy for lower RoF, and balanced) this could be reflected in the visuals, be all impressive and cool, and require a minimal to moderate amount of added complexity to the current system (maybe the selection screen could be paused but you wouldn't be allowed to change your cards after selection?).

That's agreeable, gives a larger tactical nuances to the weapons. Maybe another card for overloading your weapons, gaining +30% damage, but a chance for it to malfunction and damage your ship.

@Dudd, for this to be an innovative game, additions must be made. thats what this thread is all about O_o.

Eiensakura wrote:
Why? Partly it'll give more tactical depth to customizing your weapons and defence mod, instead of everyone firing the same mundane weaponry.

Sword of the Stars is →thataway→ man

Meru wrote:
@Dudd, for this to be an innovative game, additions must be made. thats what this thread is all about O_o.

when has innovation ever meant 'more'?

DuddBudda wrote:
Sword of the Stars is →thataway→ man

This is the suggestion's thread, not a stagnation field.

Eiensakura wrote:
This is the suggestion's thread, not a stagnation field.

oh, such wit, I am undone



seriously though, I am disappointed in the response, even on the dev's forum, to a 4x game with a minimalist philosophy





in case there's any confusion on what minimalism means, allow me to quote from wikipedia

the work is set out to expose the essence, essentials or identity of a subject through eliminating all non-essential forms, features or concepts

by taking this approach, ES is almost unique among 4x games of the last decade





and it's beautiful for it, though I admit I took my time breaking with my 4x predilections

Wow the amount of backlash at this idea is pretty substantial. I don't get it, wheres the fun in building an empire when the only thing you get to do with a fleet is watch an animated sequence while playing cards? As an indie game, I'm pretty sure the reason why they chose to throw away combat is because it saves time, but I really don't see how people would rather have this over actually attacking with ships...I always thought people who liked strategy liked to do something else than play poker with 1 card. Endless space plays great in every area, but the combat makes alot of it fall apart :/

BlackJack88 wrote:
I feel I am kinda middle of the road on a lot of this. On the one hand i really enjoy the style of the combat sequences as

well as the card system, but having said that i do see the need for some serious iteration on the card system to increase player involvements in battles.

As it stands often i find i just stack MP and then auto resolve with basically no likely chance ill loose anything.



I agree with a lot of the players on the thread that are talking about the need for combat improvements and many of the reasons for them.

Though we must be realistic about how those improvements might be executed this late in the development. I think iteration on the existing

card system is the best bet for all of us to get more out of this before release that will be both functional and meaningful to the players.



However i do pose to both the Devs and my fellow ES players in this thread that while many play 4x games for varied reasons i think

it can be agreed and I would argue widely assumed by consumers that a fair part of 4x ("Expand, Exploit, Explore Exterminate") in the scifi genre involves to

no small degree spaceships and meaningful interaction with them. I love and i want it clear i LOVE the focus on the strategic empire building elements of the game.

But i think it warrants consideration as to how the Larger scifi/strategy gaming audience even within the 4x niche would take to a game with a shallower

then expected experience with the spaceship interactions. Not just simple direct confrontations but how those confrontations are initiated or avoided.

The thread regarding the retreat card and the topic brought up about ships/ territory interactions between factions i think are both good examples of this.



The targeting of specific ships systems seem like an interesting option and i would like to see it but i don't think any of us but the devs could speak to the complexity or viability

of its implementation at this point in development. The realistic damage modeling would be a very nice touch as would functional hard points. I find i take some personal issue with the

existing combat system on this point as it heavily rely on the cinematic immersion in battles to fill the gap between direct player interaction and what amounts to mostly just watching the battle play out which is still awesome but as it is has issues.



When i see these great looking ships go at it in epic cinematic fashion i find it hard not to cringe a little and be drawn out of the moment when i see shot, missile, and laser just appear out of the hull of the ship. If the Devs simply have not implemented a feature that would correct this by all means i retract the above in regard to this and would eagerly await access to that build. But if not i think its something that would seriously warrant the attention of the development team.



I would love to see this game succeed and grow especially being this studios 1st game. But i think in order for that to be true and for

wider acceptance of, admittedly what is already even though in alpha a gorgeous product, will require some more development related to these above stated issues.



That is my 2 cents hope someone finds it interesting/helpful =D

The rpoblem isn't the system, but the fact that missiles are really overpowered as is. It's more a tuning fact than anything else.

Meru wrote:
@Dudd, for this to be an innovative game, additions must be made. thats what this thread is all about O_o.

There I agree with you. It's more a refine thing than a system revamp that is needed.

Maybe there could be additional effect with weapons : flak could be used to fire, beams could melt armor, kinetic weapons could have a medium bonus on medium range and a huge on close range.

Or cards could add those effects.

DuddBudda wrote:
oh, such wit, I am undone



seriously though, I am disappointed in the response, even on the dev's forum, to a 4x game with a minimalist philosophy



in case there's any confusion on what minimalism means, allow me to quote from wikipedia



by taking this approach, ES is almost unique among 4x games of the last decade



and it's beautiful for it, though I admit I took my time breaking with my 4x predilections

Well let's talk about the heroes that level up to 20 and get 1 skill point each time. So basically what are the skills we can get with those famous skill points ?



We have the stats increasing skills that are available according to the 2 classes. You get 3 level of each giving you a couple of extra points in one specific stat.

We have the multiple stat increasing skills (veteran) 4 levels giving you a couple of extra points in each stat.

We have the skills giving battle cards for one of the class.

We have the skills increasing system production or food production that are of two types +% or +fixed value.

We have the skill "buy one get one free" giving you an extra skill point



On a commander, to reach max stats this will take you 12 points of skill (3 defense, 3 offense, 4 veteran, 1 team spirit, 1 cyberskil). So now you have 9 points left to get other skills (unless you want to increase a third stat) to make your hero unique. Most likely, according to what is available just in the commander skills tree, you will get tactician for 2 extra skill points. Then with the 7 last points you may want to take the "card skills" (battle action, 4 of them) and their enhancement skill (dustwielder). If you are a pilot as well, then you may maybe take a few different things. If you are anything else you will probably not take any skill outside the commander tree, because you will need the hero were it belongs and were he's best at, at the command of a fleet, not rotting on a planet being less then an average governor.



So in that case, minimalism leads to a single template and the illusion (for the player) that he can actually go where he wants to, but in fact he's in a corridor and have to follow the line.



Sure it is essential, striped from everything that is not essential, that what most tunnels or corridors do, being essential : one entrance, one exit and a path in between.



Now, what we are talking about (and by we, I am including both seasoned 4X players and newbies with ideas) is to add more "simple" content to allow that corridor to be linked with side doors. Put rooms behind the side doors, put other corridors and you end up with a house. It's more complex than a single corridor, but as a house it is still an essential and minimalist concept. We're not talking about putting marbles statues or flowers in the corridor, we're talking about opening a wider space from this corridor to build something bigger like a house.



For Heroes, what could it be ?



Well I throw a few simple ideas like that : Corvette specialization - all corvettes in the fleet of this commander will receive a 10% hp bonus and a 5% chance to avoid any incoming shots, beam, missiles - Dreadnought specialisation Cost 2 skill points- All dreadnought will receive a 10% bonus to their damage output, additionally one dreadnought selected randomly (if more than one in the fleet) will have an increased 15% chance to do critical damage. Master navigator - Fleet increase movement by 2 Targeting coordinator - The heros is an ace with targeting and sniping, fleet receive an additional 5% accuracy and 2% chance to critically hit.



Ok that's it for the example, now you tell me if you really think those additions would hurt the game or if we have to stay on a minimalistic concept ? Anyway, at the end, the designers will decide what they want, we are just giving out free ideas.



But fact is, I do not think a too minimal 4X will please the veterans, and I do not think any casual or "new to the genre" player will like it either. It has to be accessible as a game, easy to jump into it in the first few minutes of the game but I do not think it would be right to remove any content that add replay value and could actually bring this game to a status that will make it a reference in the next 10 years, just like the Master of Orion 2, which shall I remind it, has not yet been forgotten for 15 years.

VieuxChat wrote:
It's more a refine thing than a system revamp that is needed.

Maybe there could be additional effect with weapons : flak could be used to fire, beams could melt armor, kinetic weapons could have a medium bonus on medium range and a huge on close range.

Or cards could add those effects.

I guess most if not all of us agree on that and they are many many many good ideas on this board about what could be done to make this game a future reference without revamping it. I just hope the devs and designers are going to take the time to check them.

I'm not saying I want RTS style combat. Allow me to pick a card for the battle phase, but also allow me to do more stuff... Not just picking 3 cards in a battle.



For example;

-Segment the phases further. Allow me to target enemies manually.

-Add formations. Like cards, let players make & choose their formations.

-Make positioning of ship formations important; if there is a long range ship in front at the "melee" phase, give it penalties. If there is a short range ship on long range phase, give it penalties. Allow other ships to hide behind the ones at front. Etc...



One fatal flaw that most of the space based 4X games do is, keeping command actions at minimal. If there is much at stake, you need to have more control over your units. Losing a fleet is a big deal; losing a unit is another. This is why I like 1upH rule for Civ5, you have to position yourself, plan ahead, and execute it. But in this game, all you do is create fleet, throw it at the enemy. You cannot plan anything else. Sure, you are not supposed to manually fight every battle, but those battles that matter, you can just watch, which is a joke. SotS & Civ5 are good examples for what I've said here. You don't have to fight all battles by yourself on SotS. But you can make a huge difference when engaging your enemy on battles that may change the outcome of the war.

I think we should be allowed to study the enemy ships in battle and furthermore have more time to select the battle cards.

hailander18 wrote:
I think we should be allowed to study the enemy ships in battle and furthermore have more time to select the battle cards.

Well that could be a nice idea for a battlecard "Scanner", for the adventurer class. Since we were mentioning playing a card before the battle that would last for all phases, get a technical report could be one and you could get more data during the battle.



Though you can actually see the setup of enemy fleets when you choose your mode of participation, I guess this would have to be "advanced data" (but what ?).

lyravega

I'm not saying I want RTS style combat. Allow me to pick a card for the battle phase, but also allow me to do more stuff... Not just picking 3 cards in a battle.

I think that RTS combat would be a huge mistake for the goal that endless space seems to pursue. From what I can gather it's going for multiplayer.



While playing multi, one of the most annoyingly feature of most turn-based games is their battle system, in which you have to move every unit one by one and ke battle last for up to 20-30 minutes. That is, if you play at all : if you are not in a conflict, you just have to wait for hours sometimes until others play out their battles (while 2 players are at wars, they may have 4-5 battles per turn...), and then, when it's your turn to battle, your inflict the same torture on others.



Other good tries at solving that problem coming to mind would be : SOTS, which limited battle time to do so. So much that at first, if you do not play with extended time (default is 4 minutes, up to 10), while assaulting planets with early game ships, your ships actually do not move fast enough to even shoot at the planet. Or in dominions 3, multiplayer game is more about PBEM, and you actually script your armies, enabling complex battles without requiring the other player to have the same playing time as you do. Endless space does not look like it's meant to be played by PBEM, however... so neither solution is actually good.



Secondly, this is not a space battle game. It's a 4X type of game. 4X, in my opinion, do not have to be huge "battle simulators" like gratuitous space battle is. Once again, my opinion is that 4X games are more about outproducing, outresearching, and outmaneuvering your troops so you're overwhelming the enemy, than micromanaging battles to gain an edge.



While more options would add a lot to the game (fleeing comes in mind, or more card choices - 2 cards for long range, 2 cards for med ?) the current battle system seems a pretty good solution for what the game seems to aim: multiplayer 4X, in which turns come fast one after another.

I like simple combat. I hate having to micromanage everything. If I want painfully detailed combat, there's already dozens of other 4X games out there that fit the bill. Props to the devs for trying something different!

While i like the Idea to add more depth to the combat, it should built on the existing system and not change completly.