Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

4X Dominus Galaxia - MoO 1 Spiritual Successor

Zeraan

Novice
Joined
Jan 29, 2013
Messages
11
I think this might be a sign that your combat system is bland and overly predictable, rather than a problem with the AI or retreating. If the outcome of a battle is so obvious, then this is the only logical outcome. Real, all-out battles don't get fought between sides that already know what the outcome is going to be in real life, either, unless your opponent is cornered. Space lacks corners, and the only reason the battle occurs at all is because of the granularity of turn-based movement.

If combat and its tactics are so predictably obvious that there is no room to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, then it's also kind of a boring and redundant combat system you may as well do without. The meat of a tactical combat system is to win battles you shouldn't have won. If this cannot happen, why bother having it?

Sorry if I implied that combat is dull. Right now, special equipments such as automatic repair special, pulsars, etc. that could tip the balance aren't implemented yet. The AI will consider the firepower and health of each side, and if they don't think they can win, they simply retreat. Consider the fact that AI also don't attack heavily guarded planets unless they have a superior fleet, but would rather attack other less guarded planets, means that most of the time, combat occurs when the AI is confident it'd win. I'm just saying that the AI is just dang too good at guessing which combats it should tackle, unlike MoO 1. Would you send your 1,000 tiny ships against an AI's 1,000 large ships? No, and neither will the AI. However, we do have fog of war, meaning that data can be outdated, and the AI attacks a planet that's heavily guarded when it thought the planet wasn't guarded.

Since special equipments aren't implemented yet, the formula for winning combat is pretty straightforward as there's only the weapons, shields, armors, and computers. But once the special equipment are implemented, things will be a lot less black/white, and more gray. The game is still in pre-alpha, so balancing isn't really done at this point, but will be done later in development when most everything has been fleshed out.

On the other hand, if there's some combats where the outcome is without question, you can hit auto-resolve (i.e. a scout stumbled onto your homeworld with 100 missile bases) to skip those non-critical combats. It will act the same as normal combat, but with AI taking control of your units, and resolving the combat. So there's no "why are the results wildly different if I manually take control vs hitting auto resolve?" issue.
 

Jeff Graw

StarChart Interactive
Developer
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
802
Location
Frigid Wasteland
Also with combat, it's on my agenda to add a "spool up" time for warp drives, which could then be affected by specials, debuffed, etc. so if you engage in an unfavourable encounter you *will* take losses before you can retreat. Or the enemy might even be able to interdict your withdrawal entirely and decimate your force.
 

Jeff Graw

StarChart Interactive
Developer
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
802
Location
Frigid Wasteland
Quick update:

You can now engage auto resolve from any point in a tactical combat encounter. Eg. if your forces are mopping up and you don't feel like wasting any more time on an obvious outcome, hit "RESOLVE" and the game will instantly simulate the remainder of the encounter. FTL Spooling has been implemented, but the AI still needs to be updated to take it into account (knowing Alex, that shouldn't take any time though).

The GDX demo went really well. While I almost died getting it ready, the build we were able to put together turned out rock solid (no crashes over the course of the two day conference) despite my general lack of sleep. I did notice a very interesting dichotomy where 4X vets praised the interface as simple and efficient, while those without 4X experience tended to remark that it looked complex and hard to approach. I suppose the lack of any kind of tutorial didn't help with things, but sometimes an intuitive interface and an efficient one are at odds with each other. Eg. I would say that nuMoO's interface is very intuitive for those without 4X experience, but is not particularly efficient for the same reasons (eg. fleets moving individually one by one, instead of all at once come the end of the turn). I'm trying to think of ways to make the UI more intuitive without sacrificing efficiency, which is our top priority.
 
Last edited:

Jeff Graw

StarChart Interactive
Developer
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
802
Location
Frigid Wasteland
I've reworked the way users send transports a bit from how it was handled in MoO 1, and I think the new approach is an improvement all around. Basically, there is no more button to "send transports" on your colonies, instead there's a button that is enabled on valid destination sites that changes a bit depending on the situation. Eg. when sending population to an empty world the button shows up as "COLONIZE WORLD", but when sending population to an enemy planet the button shows up as "INVADE COLONY".

Then, the user is presented with a list of planets that can transport to that world (eg. they have a Starport as well as strategic coverage). The user can then select how many people he wants to send from each world all at the same time, and can sort the list based on turns distant or on the amount of population at each sending site. When multiple sending sites are selected that have different ETAs, a "SYNC" button will appear, and pressing it will cause the selected colonies to launch their transports in a fashion where they all arrive at the same time (barring unforeseen events like losing strategic coverage), eliminating the need to do so manually like in MoO 1. The end result is a lot less micro, not to mention that looking at a world you want to invade or colonize and having a button there that lets you do just that is far more intuitive than any alternative.

TransportUI-Final.png
 
Last edited:

Jeff Graw

StarChart Interactive
Developer
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
802
Location
Frigid Wasteland
Nothing set in stone yet. Will definitely have an EA period before any kind of "actual" launch. I only want to call it finished once DG has, in my eyes at least, met the lofty goal of being the least worst designed 4X game of all time. ;)

That said, hoping to do a closed alpha sooner than later.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2012
Messages
6,657
Location
Rape
Can you sign me up? Played MoO1, 2 and 3, long time Space Empires 4 and 5 player and a bunch of other 4x that I can barely remember like Stardrive, Star Lords and even more failed, shittier ones than these.
 

Jeff Graw

StarChart Interactive
Developer
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
802
Location
Frigid Wasteland
Just a quick update. We're currently in closed beta, and planning to do our KS in January. The game is feeling more polished all the time. We've implemented an optional "dynamic AI mode" that is an attempt to make the AI's skill level scale relative to the player's own ability (eg. different AI modes are labelled for the experience you want, like relaxing or challenging). It's better than Oblivion's level scaling by a long shot (The goal is to scale skill instead of boni, although there is also an option for limited boni scaling that takes place after the skill level gets to its maximum or minimum), but it's not perfected yet by any means. I don't doubt that the Codex will err towards the static difficulty levels though.

I have a slight confession to make... I know how discerning and unforgiving the Codex can be, heck I've been that guy more times than I can count, so I've been procrastinating sending out beta invites to Codex members while there are so many areas I know could use improvement. The big thing is that without diplomacy the game feels somewhat incomplete. I'm working full steam on diplomacy right now, and after the initial version is completed (no longer than a month from now, with luck), We'll hand out beta invites to any Codexer who asks for one :)
 

coldcrow

Prophet
Patron
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
1,650
Just a quick update. We're currently in closed beta, and planning to do our KS in January. The game is feeling more polished all the time. We've implemented an optional "dynamic AI mode" that is an attempt to make the AI's skill level scale relative to the player's own ability (eg. different AI modes are labelled for the experience you want, like relaxing or challenging). It's better than Oblivion's level scaling by a long shot (The goal is to scale skill instead of boni, although there is also an option for limited boni scaling that takes place after the skill level gets to its maximum or minimum), but it's not perfected yet by any means. I don't doubt that the Codex will err towards the static difficulty levels though.

I have a slight confession to make... I know how discerning and unforgiving the Codex can be, heck I've been that guy more times than I can count, so I've been procrastinating sending out beta invites to Codex members while there are so many areas I know could use improvement. The big thing is that without diplomacy the game feels somewhat incomplete. I'm working full steam on diplomacy right now, and after the initial version is completed (no longer than a month from now, with luck), We'll hand out beta invites to any Codexer who asks for one :)

I'd like to apply for the beta once you feel it's ready for it.
 

Epsilon

Cipher
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
428
If you're still doing a Linux version, I'd be happy to help out testing it.
 

Beowulf

Arcane
Joined
Mar 2, 2015
Messages
1,963
We've implemented an optional "dynamic AI mode" that is an attempt to make the AI's skill level scale relative to the player's own ability (eg. different AI modes are labelled for the experience you want, like relaxing or challenging). [...] I don't doubt that the Codex will err towards the static difficulty levels though.

I don't know, sound like a good idea actually. And since it's optional there's no reason to complain.
 

MilesBeyond

Cipher
Joined
May 15, 2015
Messages
716
I'm not complaining, but soon MoO1 clones are gonna need their own subforum.

Still lagging behind spiritual successors to MoM by a fair margin.


Also who is Crospy and why are they going nuts with the Fabulous tag?
 

Jeff Graw

StarChart Interactive
Developer
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
802
Location
Frigid Wasteland
Just a quick update: We were mentioned in a video from eXplorminate on their most anticipated 4X games for 2017!



We're putting the finishing touches on the initial version of diplomacy, and once that's done we'll send out beta invites to any Codexer who is interested.
 

Jeff Graw

StarChart Interactive
Developer
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
802
Location
Frigid Wasteland
Alex, our AI developer, has posted the first part of a Lets Play series using the most recent beta build. Keep in mind that this is still beta and won't be indicative of the final release (visuals will be better, and there will be more content and systems), but it does a good job highlighting the stability of the current build, the maturity of the AI, and the more efficient interface versus MoO 1. Have a look!

 

laclongquan

Arcane
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
1,870,144
Location
Searching for my kidnapped sister
That white labcoat chick! Expand on that feature! Easier Marketing! :vivelafrance:

Make a few full frontal image of that chick with some aspect of the game: diplo, intel, counter intel, research. Labcoat, slinky, sexy, serious, uniform... They can serve as eye candy for the marketing PR efforts. Give the various game wallpaper designers on the Net something to expand on, dah?:creamyblood:

A technical note: Can we scroll across the map by pressing arrow keys, or some customizable key? Sometimes I dont want to scroll using mouse, but by KB.
 

Jeff Graw

StarChart Interactive
Developer
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
802
Location
Frigid Wasteland
A technical note: Can we scroll across the map by pressing arrow keys, or some customizable key? Sometimes I dont want to scroll using mouse, but by KB.

WASD works, as do arrow keys. You can middle-click an area to centre on it similar to left clicking in MoO 1. Wormholes have buttons that move the camera to the other side.
 

Endemic

Arcane
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
4,321
Well this is a MOO1 spiritual successor, so 1 planet per system would be keeping in line with the original. Jeff?
 

Jeff Graw

StarChart Interactive
Developer
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
802
Location
Frigid Wasteland
I get that there's a certain degree of simplification necessary in grand strategy 4x, but it's just a bit incongruous to see stars conflated with planets, or that all stars have a single planet. It would do a lot for suspension of disbelief if you abstracted this out so "Sol - Terran" represents the dominant character of the entire system rather than just Earth, and so on and so forth.

I totally get what you're saying. And it's really tempting to go down that route just to make the universe feel more "real," but (in my opinion at least) the two best 4X games of all time, MoO 1 and SoTS 1, stuck with one planet per system and I don't think that's coincidence. It makes everything easier to manage and keep track of, especially when you can do so much on the main map without the need to drill down into sub screens. MoO2 and SoTS 2, which both went down the route of multi-planet systems, have totally worse colony management than their predecessors. The inclusion of multiple planets per system also didn't add much of any, if any at all, strategic significance in either case.

I'd love to figure out how to do multiple planets per system correctly, in a way that keeps things elegant and easy to manage while adding strategic depth, and maybe at some point in time we'll take a shot at. But as our first 4X game, we're starting with what we know works and improving the design where we can. We aren't taking mechanics or ideas that, while cool, haven't (again, at least in my opinion) been done well before based on the assumption that we'll figure out a way to do them justice where everyone else has failed. If DG sells well enough then it could be something we try in an expansion, sequel, or future project (one day I'd like to do a first person 4X game that is real time, and largely based around the communications delay between your avatar and your other holdings), but I feel it would be unwise and risky to do it now.

Well this is a MOO1 spiritual successor, so 1 planet per system would be keeping in line with the original. Jeff?

Well, our approach isn't to take MoO 1 as the perfect gospel. The humble goal is to make the least poorly designed 4X game of all time (almost every 4X game under the sun is non-strategic shit* when you strip it down to the important meaty stuff), and MoO 1 seems to be the current title holder in that regard. Therefore, taking MoO 1 as the base that we build on makes a lot of sense. If we had experience building 4X games previously to DG, maybe we would try something more risky and creative. We do have 20+ years experience each with MoO 1 though, which means a lot of time to think about what works, what doesn't, what can be improved and how, etc. So while it's a good marketing phrase, we didn't actually set out to make a MoO 1 spiritual successor for its own sake, and (development resources allowing) wouldn't have any problem significantly deviating from the formula if we thought it would make for a better game.

*Note though that there's a distinction between a title being a good game and a good 4X, similar to the distinction between a good game and a good RPG. Just as Age of Decadence is simultaneously a bad game and a good RPG, while any particular Bethesda outing is likely to be the opposite, MoO 2 is simultaneously a better game and a worse 4X than its predecessor. When judging a title as a game as a whole you need to take into account everything, tangible and intangible, and how it all comes together. But when judging a title as a 4X you need to strip away everything and ask "how strategic and elegant are these systems?" I feel that the Codex is probably guilty of looking at RPGs only through the lens of what makes a good RPG while largely ignoring everything outside of that. But isn't consistent in holding other genres to the same standards, hence why no one here would be caught dead praising Oblivion, but will praise games in other genres that are to those genres what Oblivion is to RPGs.
 
Last edited:

Jeff Graw

StarChart Interactive
Developer
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
802
Location
Frigid Wasteland
OK guys, we just deployed a new build featuring our first pass at diplomacy. Keep in mind that there's still a lot of rough edges, the diplomatic options are so far pretty limited, we haven't had much time tweaking the AI, and the general presentation could be better (lacks animation and distinct musical themes, UI needs more work). Of course, one can still create a "deathmatch" style game with diplomacy disabled for a more "wargame-esque" experience.

Next up is the inclusion of neutral forces that will reside over high value planets. This will present players with early game obstacles, which is good because the early game is the weakest aspect of DG right now.

As promised, if you PM me I'll start handing out beta invites to Codexians. You'll need a 64-bit version of Windows, and ideally a dedicated graphics card produced in the last five years. That said, even though there are some MoO 1 vets who already tell us DG is their new favourite game, I want to advise keeping expectations in check. The game is still in development, needs a lot of polish, and the combat system needs to be significantly fleshed out still. Also, there isn't much of a tutorial although there are plenty of tooltips.
 
Last edited:

Jeff Graw

StarChart Interactive
Developer
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
802
Location
Frigid Wasteland
Neutrals have been added to the development version and I think they improve things immensely. They certainly make the early game more dynamic and exciting, and less about mindless expansion until running into another race. They also balance out the starting locations somewhat, since better starting locations will have more guarded planets.

One other kind of cool feature I added was the ability to hail opponents before a battle. If all involved sides agree to a cease fire, then everyone can coexist peacefully that turn. If a world is guarded by pirates (one of the neutral factions we added), they may ask for a payment in exchange for vacating the system.

For those of you in the beta, expect a build to go live in the next day or two. For those of you who are not, shoot me a message and we'll see about getting you an invite. The current policy of granting any curious codexer an invite won't last forever ;)
 

Endemic

Arcane
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
4,321
One other kind of cool feature I added was the ability to hail opponents before a battle. If all involved sides agree to a cease fire, then everyone can coexist peacefully that turn. If a world is guarded by pirates (one of the neutral factions we added), they may ask for a payment in exchange for vacating the system.

That's a great feature. Keep us posted :)
 

Ventessel

Literate
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
36
I've been a lurker of the forum for several years, this game interested me enough to actually sign up. Can't seem to PM Jeff though, perhaps my account is still probationary?

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk
 

Jeff Graw

StarChart Interactive
Developer
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
802
Location
Frigid Wasteland
I can PM you. I'll give you a link when the new build with neutrals is out, which will be tonight if all goes according to plan.
 

Ventessel

Literate
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
36
Great! Good luck with the build.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk
 

Jeff Graw

StarChart Interactive
Developer
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
802
Location
Frigid Wasteland
We've deployed the neutral forces build. Things should be good in terms of stability, but keep in mind that neutral forces placement will probably see some polish in the future depending on feedback.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom