|
|
Post by Rob on Apr 13, 2018 21:02:16 GMT
Hello, from time to time I need to feedback from you lot to a radical idea I've had and tested and its worked quite well. Obviously its hard for you to make a judgment on this not having played the game and seen very little video so will try and explain as best as I can. Currently a skirmish game consists of having up to 9 star systems each traversable via Quantum Fracture Points. Your HQ is in one system and your opponents are in another, the systems in-between are filled with Raiders, abandoned outposts, resources etc, you are able to take these systems by placing an outpost in the middle and create strategic points around the mini galaxy. Think of Sins of a solar empire, Star Wars empire at war (realtime), Sword of the stars, Carrier Command etc. Now this sounds fine as you can have a lot of fun taking a system that might have precious resources or holding one with a defensive outpost, however these systems are not massive, a ship could fly from one side to the other in about 3 minutes.   So recently while playing Star Trek Armada 2 I was thinking....why have 9 smaller systems when I can have 1 giant play area like other RTS games including Executive Assault 1. Today I created this play area and to my surprise it worked as I thought it would be technically impossible due to the scale. The system included 2 giant planets (instead of a planet in the skybox background), an asteroid belt, nebular and various resources scattered around the system. Think Executive Assault 1 meets Elite Dangerous or Haegemonia. The upside is that the area no longer feels claustrophobic and you really feel like you are in space, plus no jumping between systems as its all in one giant system (with a new interplanetary drive created), you'll actually be able to blow up planets rather then the station with a super weapon, you would still be able to build outposts, have a lot more space to move your fleet around in especially the larger ships and might even become more multi. The downside is you might loose a little of the strategy planning with the bottle necks and of course will mean reprogramming part of the game to cater for the new system, plus might become a little more complicated trying to keep track of things in a large area rather than small bite sized systems.  Let me know what you think. Cheers Rob |
|
|
|
Post by Fraze_ on Apr 13, 2018 21:50:00 GMT
Well, a ship taking 3 minutes to fly across makes each area still sound quite large to me, personally i would prefer the 9 systems as you can be a lot more tactical,there is a greater planning element and as you said it can be nicely organised.
|
|
|
|
Post by theDemolisher13 on Apr 14, 2018 1:21:18 GMT
So let me get this straight. You want to remove the 9 system and replace it with one large system that contains the whole map. Then you'll be adding a new jump drive so your ships could get from any two points in the system with relative ease. On top of that the new super weapon will no longer destroy a system/station but instead just destroy the planet/station that next to it?
Hmm . . . Personally I prefer the 9 system as it add in the whole thing of like stronghold systems and what not but perhaps we can find some common ground here. As I have two suggestions to that you may like.
1. We do a bit of a hybrid between the two concepts. So for example we turn 9 systems into 5 systems and we plop two players in one system then also make each system twice their size and twice as much is in each one giving them more importance. This would still allow for the strategy of who has what system and what not but also allow for more open combat between the players in the same system. Oh before I forget let's also add in a planet destroyer super weapon and a system destroyer Maga weapon.
2. Make this idea of yours into another game option as I would like to see which concept the community likes to play with more and sides we all know more options tends to be better then fewer and how many other games do you know of that do something as radical as this? I mean being able to change one of the biggest concept pieces in a game I mean there are very few games that offer that these days.
|
|
|
|
Post by navy3001 on Apr 14, 2018 1:28:09 GMT
I like the orginal idea overall, because it reminds me of my number one fav RTS a little, Conquest: Frontier wars were you can battle up to 16 randomly generated maps that are linked by wormholes...everything being one just one map...would just feel like a nather RTS map..but more then one maps would make it a whole new level of fun!
|
|
|
|
Post by Jayjaxx on Apr 14, 2018 1:45:58 GMT
I'd say the 9 system... system. I like the idea of front lines and choke points, the other jump drive would probably be made to not be able to cheese the game with what in star wars is called a thrawn pincer. I'd say the 9 systems but perhaps with some other form of traveling alongside the jump drive, perhaps that a smaller ship or carrier (if they exist haven't been keeping super up to date.) Something that perhaps could be used for a thrawn pincer, or smaller "infiltration" fleet. A bit like how a Star Craft 2 Reaper could harass the enemy mineral line. Just so that the only things you could attack are choke points, so you would have to garrison your systems. Maybe those smaller ships could set up a large "phasegate" so that if they werent destroyed you could attack without having to go through the chokes.
TL;DR
- 9 systems
- smaller ships w/ expensive research locked jump drive could ignore the link system to a point
- smaller ships could create a teleport gate to make a temporary new way of getting a whole fleet behind enemy lines.
Why
So it isnt a chokefest think operation locker or metro out of battlefield, and you still have to garrison your systems or risk getting surprised from behind. But still has front lines so you know that save a breakthrough they can only come from a few points
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Apr 14, 2018 9:47:31 GMT
I like the orginal idea overall, because it reminds me of my number one fav RTS a little, Conquest: Frontier wars were you can battle up to 16 randomly generated maps that are linked by wormholes...everything being one just one map...would just feel like a nather RTS map..but more then one maps would make it a whole new level of fun! I enjoyed Conquest: FW as well but each system did have quite a big map. Will have a toy around and see if I can code to cater for both sized maps and have a bit of an experiment. |
|
|
|
Post by Fraze_ on Apr 14, 2018 12:10:34 GMT
You should add a poll so people can vote
|
|
peel1
New Member
Posts: 15 
|
Post by peel1 on Apr 14, 2018 17:27:32 GMT
I feel maybe making the 9 small systems a bigger one by simply bending them together into different "sectors". Also are the maps randomly generated or are they premade because I feel that may make a difference to what you should do.
|
|
|
|
Post by navy3001 on Apr 14, 2018 22:22:29 GMT
I like the orginal idea overall, because it reminds me of my number one fav RTS a little, Conquest: Frontier wars were you can battle up to 16 randomly generated maps that are linked by wormholes...everything being one just one map...would just feel like a nather RTS map..but more then one maps would make it a whole new level of fun! I enjoyed Conquest: FW as well but each system did have quite a big map. Will have a toy around and see if I can code to cater for both sized maps and have a bit of an experiment. alright! P.S me and someone are remaking conquest: FW in unity atm...really REALLY early alpha though  but anyways, the systems are much more fun and if you can make them larger then sure! because even in conquest you could set the maps to be small.. really REALLY small |
|
|
|
Post by navy3001 on Apr 14, 2018 22:23:12 GMT
I feel maybe making the 9 small systems a bigger one by simply bending them together into different "sectors". Also are the maps randomly generated or are they premade because I feel that may make a difference to what you should do. he said that the system map is randomly generated with a seed |
|
peel1
New Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by peel1 on Apr 14, 2018 23:20:54 GMT
I feel maybe making the 9 small systems a bigger one by simply bending them together into different "sectors". Also are the maps randomly generated or are they premade because I feel that may make a difference to what you should do. he said that the system map is randomly generated with a seed o sweet I must have missed that in that case it depends on the generation methord |
|
|
|
Post by kinggreed on Apr 15, 2018 21:10:50 GMT
Yes how it has gone so far I couldn't more hype with the 9 system mechanic. As for the one large system that will be awesome and I personally am looking forward to see how it will unfold. 10/10 support all the way.  |
|
|
|
Post by kars225 on Apr 16, 2018 12:15:45 GMT
I would say stick with the 9 system idea. Or what you could do is have the regular 9 systems but then the very middle system (the choke point between starting systems) be a larger system. It would be where the majority of the fighting takes play early game and if you were to lose that system then you would be able to either go around it or launch gorilla strikes against it's owner. Plus then you would have a few systems to still set up defenses in.
I like the idea of 9 systems but if they're all the same size people might begin to ignore some and go for the direct route to the enemy base. So different size systems would be super cool. Or possible the ability to choose in the game settings which size systems you would want for a skirmish like other map size settings in Supreme Commander/Command&Conquer.
I really like the fact that you're asking the community for advice. Keep up the good work!
|
|
|
|
Post by radimentrix on Apr 16, 2018 19:23:48 GMT
Registered just for this post  i assume we'll have several maps, just like in EA1, so why not use both systems? huge single-system maps or several smaller maps with choke-points, connected by your quantum fracture points. in EA1 big maps work because there are chokepoints and it's not totally open field, on the other hand Star Wars Empire at War doesn't need chokepoints since the maps are quite big and the main buildings heavily defended. so while i'd love to be flying more than 3 minutes and have fleets fighting in a huge space, i'd also enjoy matches like i had in Conquest: Frontier Wars with lots of systems of different size, cleaning a system, establishing fleets around the wormholes to intercept all hostile ships, claiming the systems piece by piece and forcing my enemy further and further back. so please both. if just one is possible then please jump points, many systems but make them varying in size, from 1 or 2 minutes to 10 minutes till you reach the other side |
|
|
|
Post by theDemolisher13 on Apr 16, 2018 20:33:06 GMT
Registered just for this post i assume we'll have several maps, just like in EA1, so why not use both systems? huge single-system maps or several smaller maps with choke-points, connected by your quantum fracture points. in EA1 big maps work because there are chokepoints and it's not totally open field, on the other hand Star Wars Empire at War doesn't need chokepoints since the maps are quite big and the main buildings heavily defended. so while i'd love to be flying more than 3 minutes and have fleets fighting in a huge space, i'd also enjoy matches like i had in Conquest: Frontier Wars with lots of systems of different size, cleaning a system, establishing fleets around the wormholes to intercept all hostile ships, claiming the systems piece by piece and forcing my enemy further and further back. so please both. if just one is possible then please jump points, many systems but make them varying in size, from 1 or 2 minutes to 10 minutes till you reach the other side Hey we're like minded on this. Also welcome to the forms radimentrix. |
|
