Logo Platform
logo amplifiers simplified

[Discussion] Please revamp the battle system(Xpost/cleanup)++

Reply
Copied to clipboard!
13 years ago
May 13, 2012, 6:02:13 AM
I think the developers should really consider adding another combat module for single player in an expansion because to me the current implementation of the combat model absolutely ruins the game experience. I've got to the point to putting the game aside. If the design decision to basically reduce combat to an interactive movie was done to please the multiplayer minority, I fail to understand why not an alternative approach was chosen: Just add another option which really implements tactical combat (for sp) and keep the stripped down interactive movie for MP. I simply don't get why to please one side you have to go against the other.
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 13, 2012, 6:33:35 AM
I love this Combat System, It reminds me of KingdomHearts: CoM. A card based battle is just so much more intense then smashing my face on the keyboard to unleash mass amounts of 'attacks'. That's so cliche, and overused, and honestly, would make me hate a game like this. Imagine the multiplayer flop if The combat system changed to a sort of RTS style! IT would make long drawn out battles, and it would get OLD very fast, especially for players who like to dominate with military, such as the cravers. Tactic card style is much better. The reason this game is what it is is because of the simplicity yet incredibly well thought out actions of the players. I don't want this to be a game like Multiwinia, or EE (empire earth, I know both RTS. but Live combat systems) because It would be incredibly easy to just faceroll your keyboard, instead of taking the time to imagine what the other player might or might not draw.
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 13, 2012, 8:35:46 AM
the current battle system is nice because it does not require extensive care on the players part.



You select your cards and then watch, perhaps reselect to adapt but mostly its straight forward.

Your success in battle is not based on YOU microing every last one of em right down to unit movement but rather on you having made the right decisions when fitting your ships and building the infrastructure to support throwing them at your enemies.



+ it really saves on the time factor which is especially nice when multiplayer comes around: the current system takes up only a modicum of time and still does present the battle in style (though more variation i nthe movements and stuff is in order) with all the choices you made represented properly.



Building a combat system that requires the player to move units and give attack orders is also taking away from the feeling of having a fleet battle. you then will agai nend up with that same old and i have to say tired moO problem of mindlessly having to click through your stuff - this gets grating even at the best of times (i ran moo battles on auto most of the time and simply played for victroy through attrition and superior industry.... managing +50 ships per fleet every time... beh....)



Now, fleet sizes are limited in ES, but not limited are the numbers of battles you pic per turn.

having to manage 50 units on the personal level is grating no matter if its on one battle or spread over 10.





Current one is decent, needs more variation but decent.







It might be expanded upon by adding formations and setting orders for targeting priorities but please, do not make me have to control all those units by hand again.



I am the emperor/leader/whatever not the friggn helmsman.
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 13, 2012, 8:48:46 AM
I really don't understand the absolutistic opposition by some who want to impose to others what they hold to be right. What is wrong with the idea to add a real tactical combat layer (I prefer turn based as in MOO2) in an expansion for those who'd like to have it? They can keep the repetitive movie presentation for the others too
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 13, 2012, 12:53:32 PM
Because it take away the devs time. And it needs balancing. and bugs crushing. And while they do that they don't work on others things that may be more important.
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 13, 2012, 1:33:12 PM
I do agree with VieuxChat here with the fact that adding a real combat system would be way too time consuming for the developpers. I think that now, the combat system has to be improved: Like it has already been suggested and taken in consideration by the dev team, removing the camera would already add a huge improvement to battles. Being able to see what is actually happening is more than important.



And again this thread here: /#/endless-space/forum/29-archives/thread/13328-suggestion-formations-that-prioritize-targets

is in my opinion definitely a good idea to improve the combat system itself by involving a bit more the player in the fight. You could also keep the card system with this method too, the dev wouldn't have to rebuild everything from scratch
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 13, 2012, 3:01:06 PM
eXorZist wrote:
I do agree with VieuxChat here with the fact that adding a real combat system would be way too time consuming for the developpers. I think that now, the combat system has to be improved: Like it has already been suggested and taken in consideration by the dev team, removing the camera would already add a huge improvement to battles. Being able to see what is actually happening is more than important.



And again this thread here: /#/endless-space/forum/29-archives/thread/13328-suggestion-formations-that-prioritize-targets

is in my opinion definitely a good idea to improve the combat system itself by involving a bit more the player in the fight. You could also keep the card system with this method too, the dev wouldn't have to rebuild everything from scratch




this. some more involvement o nthe inner goings on without actually implementing the time consuming manual control already found io ther games.
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 13, 2012, 3:54:01 PM
I like the quick combat feel, but I'm not a fan of the rock/paper/scissors type battle. Makes me feel like I'm playing pokemon or something...



Only 4X I played a lot was Stars!. And I think I ignored all the battles except for my final stands :P



It's super-effective!
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 13, 2012, 4:36:34 PM
I bought the game hoping for a new MOO, but I was very much dissappointed to find out that there's no tactical battles. Either you lat the computer calculate the results for you (why does it take so long), or you can at best "play a card" in 3 phases of the combat. This is ridiculous. We're not playing a board game from 1984.



Please add tactical combat, it would bring a totally new dimension to the game. Without tactical combat this game will be slaugthered by the reviews (and they'll be right about it).
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 13, 2012, 6:15:15 PM
Or not. The game focuses more on the grand strategy part of the game. Don't think about them as poor RTS battles, but as enhanced automatic resolution. I'm in favor of more things to be able to do while in battle, but it needs to stay simple.

The choice of cards is already tactical. It's just that it needs some tweaking, add 1 or 2 phases and the ability to give 1 order pre-battle. And it's someone that loves wargames (the old way, with counters) that say this.
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 14, 2012, 12:00:24 AM
kibertoad wrote:
No. Please no. Current combat system is what makes this game unique. Everybody and their dog has nowadays implemented a detailed ship combat system, and you have a plenty of choice if that is the kind of a game you want to play. However, 4Xs that are truly global and do not require you to micromanage very single ship in every single battle or face lousy autoresolve with lots of casualties are mostly non-existent.



Camera management definitely could be improved, but rather than that - current system is nearly perfect.


Agree! I don't even really like/grok the card-like system and *still* I like the combat system. I'm glad the game is not trying to bolt a space sim onto a 4x. Have spent hours playing X3, but the combat was meh anyway. I enjoy the strategic planning and am glad to have the comp do the rolling, targeting, etc.
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 14, 2012, 1:57:28 AM
personaly i like this system as it seems more realistic as your admirals would be the ones leading the battle and conforming to the plan/tactics.
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 14, 2012, 2:26:14 AM
As for sinking 10 hours into the game after buying it, I can safely say I like the COMBAT system of it. There's one thing that is bugging me though, and that's the ship creation system. In my opinion there's no real "defined rules" for ship creation, even fighting on hard just amounted to throwing tonnes of kinetic weapons and armor onto my ship- leaving the beam and missiles and everything in between untouched. The way I feel is that the combat is perfectly fine, it's the ship creation and balancing that needs tweaking.
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 14, 2012, 2:48:46 AM
they are still in alpha so the tweeks for this will come lets wait for that time and make sure their needed to smiley: smile
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 15, 2012, 2:41:42 PM
DudeBoogaloo wrote:
I love MOO2, but I'm honestly all for the current combat system. I find the rock/paper/scissors outcome of the tactic cards to make the battles surprisingly suspenseful, and I really like the look of the cinematic style presentation. I don't think I would have been excited about it having it described to me, but after playing a few battles, I love it.




+1 ( I'm definitely pro-games of incomplete knowledge, let's face it, that's why Chess gets boring ). Endless Space definitely has a, "wtf just happened?" to some of the battles, especially when heroes are in play.



I'd like to add that Meru needs to stop being disingenuous or flat out lying, by comparing Endless Space combat to Gal Civ 2. In Gal Civ 2, you had no control over tactical combat, you just watched a movie-simulation play out:



7:18



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BZ9N4oWrEw





Originally Posted by kibertoad

"No. Please no. Current combat system is what makes this game unique. Everybody and their dog has nowadays implemented a detailed ship combat system, and you have a plenty of choice if that is the kind of a game you want to play. However, 4Xs that are truly global and do not require you to micromanage very single ship in every single battle or face lousy autoresolve with lots of casualties are mostly non-existent."



Camera management definitely could be improved, but rather than that - current system is nearly perfect.





Meru wrote:
Unique? are you new? Galciv2, GSB, Armada 2526. this isn't a unique or good combat system.






Gratuitous Space Battles Video Review



1:10



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDDuw9M6P6U
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 15, 2012, 3:39:46 PM
I don't think this game needs a "real" combat system, I just think it needs to expand a bit on the current one. The current one is exploitable and has clear defined optimal configurations - which wouldn't be so bad if the fleet and ship design wasn't so rich. Basically, creating ad-hoc ships and fleet isn't really important or difficult, and doesn't involve situational choices, because the current combat system is too basic to make good use of these. We need more incentive for the proper use of "combined arms" and fleet composition.



But that doesn't require a SotS-like tactical combat system - it just requires a few refinement on orders, combat/pre-combat tactics choices, and the like. Something as simple as giving ship class roles ("Shield larger ships"/"Act as point defense"/"Stay behind the frontline"), or modules with fleet-wide bonuses ("+20% defense to the whole fleet if this ship is alive","+20% attack bonus,+20% defense bonus to this ship if there is a larger ship in the fleet", etc) would change combat in major ways.
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 15, 2012, 3:54:14 PM
I haven't been playing all that long yet, but so far I like this combat system. To me, it lets you guide the battle some without requiring you to put in half an hour (or more) to win a single fight. I think that would get tedious fast considering the amount of battles that can happen rapidly after each other. I like that it doesn't take away from the general game as a real combat system would, imho, shift the balance of the game dramatically.



I do feel there is some merit in what is said above about the actual ship building, but I think I'm going to need to play a bit longer to really get a grip on the concept. I just wanted to chime in that I like the current system and don't feel like the game needs an elaborate real combat system.
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 15, 2012, 4:54:49 PM
I will chime in to add that I like the current system, it is innovative and a perfect upgrade from the "two units fight one wins" style of Civ.



That being said, I have two points. First, the auto system needs to be improved. It seems that I get consistently worse results using auto than using manual. Second, there needs to be some more variety to the cards, in my opinion. Not enough to make it crazy, but a little. Like rock-paper-scissors-fire maybe smiley: wink did anyone else cheat like that when you were young?
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 15, 2012, 6:06:45 PM
Meru wrote:
http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2666017 original post





1) In short, I think the battle system is a huge mistake. MoO II did it overwhelmingly right, Galciv2 did it overwhelmingly wrong & that is the model with which you are building upon.

>Realtime is fine, Sword of the stars did it "well"(many improvements could be made but it is a fine start to a real time system, overwhelmingly better than the Galciv2 model)

>Turn based /works/ there isn't a single 4x "successor" in existence that has stuck to the turn based battle system, Why? it is probably the main thing that keeps me going back to MoOII over newer 4x games.

>Cinematics are great, but they only go so far: Your ship designs are beautiful & exciting to watch but player interaction is the main selling point of a "game" Gratuitous space battles unfortunately only forwarded the Galciv 2 model, which makes for a pretty game but ultimately low playability, I purchased GSB & all its expansions, but ultimately only ended up putting 14 hours into the game before I had experienced all it had to offer, to me at least. I guess that model works but I don't think anyone will be talking about GSB a decade from now, at least I hope not.

>Ships appear to have more options("subsystems" or "accessories") than in galciv 2, but the Rock-Paper-Scissors battle system limits you to a shallow experience imo. (Armor-Shields-Flak/Short-Medium-Long)





I totally agree. The superior battle system of MoOII was reached no more in any 4x game. I can imagine it's a litte late in development for totally change the battle system of ES but it would be worth it (IMHO).
0Send private message
13 years ago
May 16, 2012, 7:30:32 AM
I like the current combat system, more cards might be nice, but that's really all I can see, and there's probably many I've just not come across yet so even that's just speculation as I've only played a little so far.

But I think to go for a 'detailed, micro focused space combat' would actually detract from the game, for me at least
0Send private message
?

Click here to login

Reply
Comment

Characters : 0
No results
0Send private message