ShaggyMoose
Savant
That is what I originally searched for on Steam as well...
anyone play that?
Eurgh... Another "space" capital ship game where you fight at speeds of tens of m/s, at distances of meters. And it looks like carriers are as manoeuvrable as fighters.
Sometimes I get the feeling that people are choosing space theme because it requires less assets and work on terrain, instead of actually caring about things being in space properly. Take this game for example. To me, it wouldn't be as jarring and stupid if instead in space it was in luminous aether, the carrier was more of an age of sail wooden thing (not a 1-to-1 transplant of actual sea faring vessels, but something designed in same vein, so not Disney's Treasure Planet, but some less crazy Spelljammer, or even WH40k style without all the skulls), and the fighters were more akin to small muscle/steam/aether powered subs. More Verne, less dollar-store plastic "space ship" models. That way you could still get the asset benefit of large empty spaces, but the whole thing would make more sense and piss off people like me way less. In fact, I would play the shit out of such game.
Eurgh... Another "space" capital ship game where you fight at speeds of tens of m/s, at distances of meters. And it looks like carriers are as manoeuvrable as fighters.
Sometimes I get the feeling that people are choosing space theme because it requires less assets and work on terrain, instead of actually caring about things being in space properly. Take this game for example. To me, it wouldn't be as jarring and stupid if instead in space it was in luminous aether, the carrier was more of an age of sail wooden thing (not a 1-to-1 transplant of actual sea faring vessels, but something designed in same vein, so not Disney's Treasure Planet, but some less crazy Spelljammer, or even WH40k style without all the skulls), and the fighters were more akin to small muscle/steam/aether powered subs. More Verne, less dollar-store plastic "space ship" models. That way you could still get the asset benefit of large empty spaces, but the whole thing would make more sense and piss off people like me way less. In fact, I would play the shit out of such game.
A simple way to do so would be to have combat happen in hyperspace. Hyperspace can work with whatever magic constrains you want. There was an anime in which most fighting happened in hyperspace (Banner of the Stars I think). It can even have a totally different geometry, and would make more sense than most of the SciFi combat we have (as we could also make hyperspace "smaller", in which something the size of the Atlantic Ocean could map to a whole galaxy in real space.
Honestly, at this point, even real life combat happens at distances that humans can't really see anything at. The reason everything happens at unrealistically short distances, even when it's individual dudes with guns, is because the action no longer fits on the screen otherwise.Eurgh... Another "space" capital ship game where you fight at speeds of tens of m/s, at distances of meters. And it looks like carriers are as manoeuvrable as fighters.
Yeah, I've thought about that idea also. Of course, at that point you have to question whether it's a SPACE game anymore. Is it really space and sci-fi if it is not actually happening in space as we know it?Take this game for example. To me, it wouldn't be as jarring and stupid if instead in space it was in luminous aether, the carrier was more of an age of sail wooden thing (not a 1-to-1 transplant of actual sea faring vessels, but something designed in same vein, so not Disney's Treasure Planet, but some less crazy Spelljammer, or even WH40k style without all the skulls), and the fighters were more akin to small muscle/steam/aether powered subs. More Verne, less dollar-store plastic "space ship" models. That way you could still get the asset benefit of large empty spaces, but the whole thing would make more sense and piss off people like me way less. In fact, I would play the shit out of such game.
Honestly, at this point, even real life combat happens at distances that humans can't really see anything at. The reason everything happens at unrealistically short distances, even when it's individual dudes with guns, is because the action no longer fits on the screen otherwise.Eurgh... Another "space" capital ship game where you fight at speeds of tens of m/s, at distances of meters. And it looks like carriers are as manoeuvrable as fighters.
If you wanted a space game fought at realistic speeds and distances, you would essentially no graphics cuz you couldn't see jack shit.
CoaDE is really more of a theoretical space combat simulator than a game, in truth. No fucks are given for balance, it's really more of an attempt to discern what space combat would realistically be like by inventing it from first principles.Wouldn't Children of a Dead Earth be the only game to qualify then?
That wouldn't be too different from Rules of Engagement, which looks pretty great. It could work if it were more a game about captaining a ship(like Bridge Commander or FTL) than piloting it.CoaDE is really more of a theoretical space combat simulator than a game, in truth. No fucks are given for balance, it's really more of an attempt to discern what space combat would realistically be like by inventing it from first principles.Wouldn't Children of a Dead Earth be the only game to qualify then?
But if you want semblance of range-realism in a space combat game, you pretty much have to go back to the really old text games where it WAS possible to have battles fought at 40K km or more, because there was no need to visually depict the combatants together. Or at all. It occurs to me that this would save bigly on your graphical budget, but the question is: Would you like to play a game where your enemies will never be more than blips on your radar display?
I actually had an ancient project like this, from back in the MUD days, that I wonder if I could pull together into something, slap a graphical interface on it so the text readouts can be displayed visually rather than polled for by telnet command, and turn that into a game.That wouldn't be too different from Rules of Engagement, which looks pretty great. It could work if it were more a game about captaining a ship(like Bridge Commander or FTL) than piloting it.
Now I'm suddenly drawn back to this concept setting I thought of, where civilization has been destroyed and the survivors of humanity are the ones living in the submarines that helped end civilization, "We All Live In A Nuclear Submarine".A much more appropriate setting would be the actual fuckin' water, since clearly "a naval carrier group experience" is what all of these folks are shooting for. Hell, have it all take place underwater.
your visions of "realistic space combat" lack one aspect: sensor scrambling. while stealth is pretty much impossible, overloading sensors is quite easy and achievable. once you make fool of sensors you must use visual confirmation to hit targets, and that means that any long range approach is fucked, or at least you go the macross route "shoot 100 missiles in the hope 1 would land" which is still extremely weak against point defense.
by the way, any "realism" would be based only on our current technology level. 130 years ago the concept of "air battles" would have been the most retarded fanfiction ever.