Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 50

Thread: Combat Revisions

  1. #11
    Hmm so if planet/colony does have only 1 ATKSPD, then you really would need to build up mine fields and orbitals early in game to defend vs players. Otherwise a planet can only kill 1 ship per round.

    I'd suggest to maybe making ATKSPD for planets = population / 20mil = 20 ATKSPD (for 400mil pop planet)

    But planet killers I really not even sure about those. But knowing the sheer coast of the unit, I would want to see it with low initiative but rather high ATKSPD.
    Just think back to Death Star from Star Wars. It had 1 main weapon to kill planets (check), but it also had a ton of surface mounted cannons and carried a bunch of fighter ships.....
    So, unless you guys figure out a way for planet killer to spit out unlimited amount (but no more than 10 at the time) of fighter ships. Thank I'd advise to set base ATKSPD to ~10

  2. #12
    If target assignment is random, and target number is limited, couldn't people spam probes as decoys?

  3. #13
    I just think loudly. There are many games where combat is vital and it works well. Rules are transparent and no one complains. One example of such games is CIV III, CIV IV.
    These rules can be easily transplanted to EoE.
    1.Is there really a need to come up with complex and sophisticated new rules?
    2.Is anything wrong with combat in existing games?
    3.I am curious why one of the existing battle schemes from popular games was not implemented.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by SG7 View Post
    I just think loudly. There are many games where combat is vital and it works well. Rules are transparent and no one complains. One example of such games is CIV III, CIV IV.
    These rules can be easily transplanted to EoE.
    1.Is there really a need to come up with complex and sophisticated new rules?
    2.Is anything wrong with combat in existing games?
    3.I am curious why one of the existing battle schemes from popular games was not implemented.
    Combat in Civ takes up hundreds of thousands of lines of code and was developed by a huge dev team.

    Zarksoft is a very small team and they are trying to improve the game based on our feedback, just saying "do what someone else did" is not helpful unless you are gong to provide some examples of how it can be implemented here.


    As for what we can do to improve the system, I like atk speed mainly because it adds a different variable that can be used to differentiate the ships. Also I think random assignment is a bad idea as it makes it very easy to exploit the system such as the previously mentioned probe spam tactic.

    One way to do it would be for Ships to target ships of the same class first, then the largest ship/target, then orbitals, then planets.

    This prevents using worthless units to make larger ones invincible but still provides value for having escorts and makes atk speed a useful stat. Thus having escorts protects your capital ships from being swarmed by smaller ships. Which is exactly the role such ships play in actual warfare.

    I like the idea of giving players a reason to have a mixture of ships as opposed to just building fleets of 200+ Dreads. but i definitely dont want to see fleets with 500 probes wandering around.
    Last edited by Troy McCauley; 06-05-2012 at 01:44 PM.

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Troy McCauley View Post
    Combat in Civ takes up hundreds of thousands of lines of code and was developed by a huge dev team.
    Really? Do you have real data for it?

    I am trying to be helpful. CIV is very well researched by its game funs and combat system is well documented. It is much easier to mimic existing scheme than to come up with a new one.

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by SG7 View Post
    Really? Do you have real data for it?

    I am trying to be helpful. CIV is very well researched by its game funs and combat system is well documented. It is much easier to mimic existing scheme than to come up with a new one.
    The proposed scheme isn't particularly novel. Aside from random target selection, it sounds like a zillion RPGs I've played.

  7. #17
    I don't see an issue with "probe spam". You would only do this is you couldn't build anything better (due to limited object count), and from my experience I'm maxing my object count with cruisers by day 3. If someone needs to defend against that, and all they can build are probes, all the more power to them.

  8. #18
    1) Probe Spam

    I'm guessing the "issue" of probe spam would be fixed by their proposed priority list for each ship. I'd assume probes and trade ships would probably be placed at the bottom of every ship's priority list in that case.

    I also don't think the the core issue of building certain types of (possibly) lower quality ships is much of an issue in an environment where each ship has defined, balanced priority lists. Depending on how priorities/ATKSPD/Initiative are implemented, it can make for more interesting strategic decisions as opposed to "just build as many of the biggest ship you have".

    2) Planets, Planetkillers, Super-Capital Ships, and ATKSPD

    Also to address the concern about ATKSPD = 1 ships. In my mind, Planetkillers are more of a specialized super-capital ship designed to one-shot other super-capital ships and (of course) kill planets. From that standpoint, having a huge ATK value but only ATKSPD of 1 makes sense.

    For other super-capital ships, I think the previous poster's comment on them having more than 1 as ATKSPD has some merit. These ships (presumably) are built to take out the standard capital ship (Dreadnaught) as well as fight other super-capital ships effectively (and be less effective against medium-class, and even worse against fighters).

    What I would suggest for these super-capital ships then is for them to have ATK value that is just enough to take out a Dreadnaught, but maybe ATKSPD of 5 and 10 (super-dread, monitor). So battle would play out like this (with some imaginary numbers):

    A Super Dreadnaught (ATKSPD=5, ATK~=DEF of Dreadnaught) would take out either:
    - 5 Dreadnaughts per round (most ideal target, basically almost all of ATK value used up on each ship, taking out the same number of ships as ATKSPD value)
    - Some percentage of another super-capital-class ship (next ideal target, doesn't kill, but also doesn't waste much or any ATK value)
    - 5 medium-class ships (not as ideal, perhaps half of the ATK value used up on each ship, only taking out 5)
    - 5 fighters (worst case, lots of wasted ATK value on each fighter, still only taking out 5)

    And you could use that similar model for all other ships in terms of balancing the numbers so that each class is most effective against the previous "tier"-class of ships (super-capital > capital > medium > fighters > super-capital)


    Sorry for the lengthy post, but it's very exciting to see you guys willing to make needed changes to existing systems. My one last suggestion would be that whatever is done, make sure there is a very detailed and written out manual on how combat (and any other game system for that matter) works

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Nateo View Post
    My one last suggestion would be that whatever is done, make sure there is a very detailed and written out manual on how combat (and any other game system for that matter) works
    I already told those two that I'm not doing anything until I see it written down in explicit detail, with all the mechanics worked out, so not to worry on that score.

  10. #20
    It should be pretty easy to mock up a combat test script to simulate a variety of different scenarios. I hope you can do something like that to test outcomes before anything is put in to the game itself.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •