I'm reposting this from another thread with similar subject. Did not saw that thread in the first place, nor read all 13 pages so my ideas might have been suggested before ^^



While i dont like current combat system, i'm more fan of SOTS style, changing it before release is for sure a HUGE work for the devs, as it is working fine actually.

But here a little something to spice it :

Christophe_Degoy wrote:
By the way, there is this little shady game nearly no one knows about but that might give some ideas about evolving combat system using more cards :

Smugglers 4 Doomsday

(http://www.nielsbauergames.com/smugglers4.html)



What is interesting about this game is the card system in combat which is a bit similar to what Endless Space is proposing.



While in Endless Space all cards are played from the start, in Smugglers 4, you play a card each turn during a fight, where initiative rules who is drawing card first each turn, and the fighting last until you or ennemy is dead turns after turns.



I'm not asking to make more turns in ES, but some kind of "initiative" would be welcomed, puting more strategy in the fighting.



In actual system all cards are played at same time, with no initiative advantage.



Initiative checks at each round :

What would be interesting is puting some more Initiative in it :



- preparation round : each player draw one card, cards are played same time (like a deployment phase, this will then tell who's initiative would be the best and dictate wich player throw his cards first on next round)



- long range round : the player with the worst initiative from preparation round play his card first, giving the player with the best initiative an advantage to choose his card accordingly. Then the round is played.



- middle range : depending on the result of the long range round, an initiative check is done again, and players draw their cards accordingly one after the other. Round is played after that.



- close combat range : same as middle range.



Cards initiave rolls should be done so even if you have initiative at Long Range turn (hence playing second for that turn knowing what the ennemy will do and having possibility to counter him more effectively) this does not give you an automatic initiative advantage for the initiative check on Medium Range. The initiative check should take into account result of previous round, losses and so on to tell who has the best initiative for the Medium round to draw cards.

Think of this initiative idea as a sort of moral ledger.



Some cards should negate/reduce initiative from other cards like it is working similar with the current system when a card negates another.

Some others cards should boost your initiative or ennemy initiative if the card you play/he play tell it.



To summerize, initiative system is not a separate card, it is a value added to existing cards, but used separatly to make the checks each round.



Reverse fight range cards :



The fighting should go normally from long range to short range, but there should also be "one time use cards" that make this go back one click, like going from a short range position to a medium range position, or a medium range to long range. If no more special cards played like this one, the combat goes on normally from long/middle range till it ends to short range. If there is, say, 2 cards like that, playable only once, this would probably just double the time spent on fighting.

Or there could be just one card like this one, playable only once. And one skill a Hero that would do the same but once per fight.

this card could be played in addition to another card (or not, since it's already a nice advantage to take distance from ennemy if you want to flee, or finish off ennemy for more turns)

This system would be interesting, if weapons effectiveness also vary with range (is it the case?). IE you have ships designed for long range (accuracy/damage but low armor), this card is interesting.



Evasion card :

Also adding some special "evasion" cards would also be interesting to make your ships retreat whenever you want during a fight, but at the next round following, so you still have to sustain damage to simulate preparation for a hyperjump retreat.



With just this, the initiative system and the possibility to reverse range of fight for 1 round or twice, is enough to add a lot more of interest in the current fighting model.

This system will evolve from a "sit and watch system" the case actually, to a more immersive system.

No need to add more time to each round, just split actual rounds so that each player have time to draw cards one after the other and still have time to think of their choice. this will make fighting more dynamic !



Finally adding more cards variation during the fight would also add more spice to it, since we will no longer play them at same time.

About initiative, some hulls could have more initiative than others (scout > dreadnought), some module giving more initiative. The average score of the entire fleet will be added to the value given by the cards that you draw, and used for each checks. (we wont give more initiative for 6 ships vs 3 just because we add all 6 values that's why using average is good)

Damage sustained could affect initiative after each round. And the next roll will take that into consideration.

and so on...



Many ways to explore "initiative", not changing the game mechanics a lot and keeping a somewhat similar combat system that we have already, with more dynamism.

I like the core concept and mechanic of the battle system, but the camera is aggravating. I would like either fewer cuts or fewer angles. The way it runs now there is no establishing cinematic feel. The combat looks like a collage of miscellaneous space scenes.

they can keep the card system in place but please add a real time combat that is my opinion of what makes a X4 an X4

Needs a revamp. The current system is basically an interactive movie.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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!

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).

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.

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.

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.

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.

they are still in alpha so the tweeks for this will come lets wait for that time and make sure their needed to

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

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.