GalCiv III tactical battling

Alstein

Join Date 07/2004

+55

GalCiv III tactical battling

I'm thinking that it should work like a simplified Gratuitous Space Battles after playing it. Nice game, but a bit overdone.

You get your ships, you give them orders, then let them at it. No in-battle guidance needed.

One thing I'd like to see from this is to have more variety in types of weapons with the technologies- like point defense lasers that fire quicker for less damage/range, and mauler lasers that are real slow to charge, but are more powerful.

Mass Drivers and Missiles would have their own varieties also, and their own countermeasures. You could make a game within a game of this.

And let's face it, building things to blow up other things is fun.

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

Why not clone Gratuitous Space Battles for use as the space combat engine? (Yes I realise it's been suggested before). In GSB, you can set policies for your fleet before you begin (to tell damaged ships to fall back, or for ships to shoot the same target at once, fighters to stay close or chase etc) but you have no control once the battle begins. You just watch. If you don't want to watch, I'm sure that a modern PC could accelerate a GSB-style battle so it takes place in a few microseconds!

I've only been playing GalCiv2 for a couple of days. But already something I miss from MoO2 was being able to specify different mounting options for my ship's weapons. Deciding whether to have five heavy-mount forward-arc laser cannons, or just four in larger 360° mounts, added richness to ship design in MoO2. It didn't matter that the graphics were completely symbolic, a fixed bitmap sprite whose weapons always fired from the exact centrepoint.

As for the AI being intimidated by your stack of basic fighters - a more advanced system of evaluating strength would be needed. The AI should ask itself 'Who would win in a fight - one of my navy's fleets vs the other player's fleet?'. This would mean the AI evaluating what of its own ships and its opponent's ships are likely to meet in battle, then run a simulated accelerated GSB-style battle a few times to see who's likely to win. This happening silently, in the background, as fast as the processor can do it. If it discovers that your typical navy unit of a fleet of small fighters can consistently evade the anti-capital-ship turbolasers of its typical cruisers in a GSB-style battle, then a) it should recognise your military strength in diplomacy and b ) it should try to provide defence against your known technology as it updates its fleet. You could have the same AI on your side, as your military aide.

As for ship design - I can't remember if this is in GSB or not (I didn't play that game for very long) - but using the Metaverse, it should be possible for successful player-created ship designs (and fleet strategies, if GSB-style battles are implemented) to be propagated across the Metaverse to be used by the AI in other player's games. By design, I mean weapon and module configuration, not the visual model, and the set of tactics chosen in a GSB-style battle. Amongst other things, this would be a great incentive to own a legitimate copy of the game so you can connect with the Metaverse and have more challenging opponents than a statically-generated AI can provide!

edit: I hate smilies.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting ,

quoting post

I'm thinking that it should work like a simplified Gratuitous Space Battles after playing it. Nice game, but a bit overdone.

You get your ships, you give them orders, then let them at it. No in-battle guidance needed.

One thing I'd like to see from this is to have more variety in types of weapons with the technologies- like point defense lasers that fire quicker for less damage/range, and mauler lasers that are real slow to charge, but are more powerful.

Mass Drivers and Missiles would have their own varieties also, and their own countermeasures. You could make a game within a game of this.

And let's face it, building things to blow up other things is fun.

Wow was going to post this exact same thing...GalCiv2 was disappointing in that there was no tactical battle. I saw a few posts that GalCiv2 was just battling spreadsheets, which I hate to admit was true. Just to support the above, a Gratuitous Space Battles as a tactical battle would be great. Don’t care if it’s AI run or player controlled units (like a dragon age origins in space).

Successfully updated karma reason!

As long as the AI knows what it's doing when it's giving orders. Otherwise humans will find all sorts of ways to exploit the AI behaviour that weren't there before.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting MarvinKosh,

reply 54

As long as the AI knows what it's doing when it's giving orders. Otherwise humans will find all sorts of ways to exploit the AI behaviour that weren't there before.

And this is why I tend to be against the idea. The Twilight AI, bugs aside, is still probably the best I've ever seen for this genre of game - yet people can still obviously find exploits in it. A tactical combat AI, assuming that it didn't dominate the game (which would be bad itself) would likely have even more weaknesses to abuse, which is why the idea of optional tactical combat doesn't really work: for any sufficiently skilled human player, choosing not to fight out the battle yourself would always be the sub-optimal option.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I just want to be able to tell my ships what to attack, so if your outnumbered, you can actually take a couple enemy ships out, instead of just putting each one at half health.

Oh and like have a couple different modules that you can switch power to eg. Reroute engine power(maneuverability drops), full power to shields(def up)/weapons(atk up) or any combination of those. Including this, they should have it so your manuverabilty affects your hit/miss.

Oh and reinforcements, if you have fleets beside each other, but the time for them to get to the fight is dependent on their engine power. As in better engines, quicker they can join the battle. Or make it tech based. like reinforcements 1 lets you get a couple ships from a fleet, the next tech a few more, the last one the whole fleet kinda thing.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yeah it is actually a bit of a pain how you need to manually keep another fleet on top of your damaged ships while you're escorting them home. if you just leave them in the same fleet they are the first to get targeted.

Now you could argue that ships are fairly expendable and that you can always build more, but when all it would take is a few weeks of repairs to get them to full HP and back in the fight, it seems silly.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Is there any confirmation that there will be a GC III? I thought there wasn't going to be one. Is this just wishfull tinking?

For me I would like the option. In the begining when there is a few ships I love having tactical combat, then later I like to use the "auto" button. Why can't we have both? Why do people who who don't like tactical combat say we can't have it? You don't have to use it if you don't want to, that is why it's great to have Options.

I liked what they did for Star Trek Birth of the Federation. You have a bit of control, by telling the fleet what to do, Assault, Flank etc etc, or hit the Auto button. I miss that feature and think it would be nice to have in GC III if there is going to be one.

Successfully updated karma reason!

My thoughts on tactical combat is this...

In the current implementation, ship design and combat are based upon a "rock, paper, scissors" concept. It is simple. Too simple in my book. To me, the fun of designing ships is to design them around a theme and a style of combat. Do I design missile wave type ships that fire a wave of missiles to soften up the opposing fleet then follow them in to finish off the wounded ships. Or do I build a few heavily armored dreadnoughts that literally plow into a opposing fleet, hiding behind several feet of armor and shields to blast the enemy a close range with a mauler type weapon. Perhaps escort type ships that fire a barrage of missiles to cover the retreat of the ships they are guarding.

The point is, that not having some sort of tactical battles takes away many of the options for designing ships and some of the fun.

By the same token, even when I have the option of tactical battles, I don't want to always fight them. If the battle is hugely one-sided, I prefer an auto-resolve function so I can skip that battle and move on to one where my tactical genius can sway the battle in my favor.

I've never played GSB, but from what I've read, I do like the basic concept. Design your ships and establish a formation and basic battle plan, and let them go. It is in keeping with the "strategic" model of the game and I wouldn't think it would be that hard for the AI to handle. Code into the AI game a number of default ship designs and roles and some tactical plans to utilize them. Civs can choose from them randomly or based on the development of key technologies (hard to have a missile wave with out missile tech).

Successfully updated karma reason!