Open Space or Star System based in TBS Space games?

[Human Shield]

Open Space: Like Civ games, Galatic Civilizations had this. You control ships moving around space.

Star Systems: Like MOO games and Space Empires 4. You move ships from system to system.

With how the interface is created in most of these games I kinda prefer the Star System version. It is easier to defend your planets, easier to manage, and creates choke points in space. But with this you can't hit ships in travel.

 

[Fez]

Kind of vauge question.

 

[chaedwards]

I'm not sure I think either is great. I felt one major problem with GalCiv was the map, which felt like Civ in space, rather than battling over a galaxy. It was better if you had the stars spread out, rather than clustered together, but was still a bit meh.

On the other hand, using the star system approach makes everything a bit too structured, and also negates the 'sudden attack' which is such a staple of film and tv sci-fi. What I mean by this is when a fleet or ship jumps out of hyperspace/warp/whatever to threaten some undefended colony - the attack on Hoth and the second death star in Star Wars, the Centauri attack on the Narn homeworld in B5 etc

A good compromise would be a map a la Galciv, but with a distinction between system and starships a la MOO3. Starships could travel to any other systems within range of their jump drive, rather than going through wormholes. So, as your technology increases, you can make raids deep into your enemies' heartlands, but they could do the same to you as well. You couldn't have choke points, but would instead have to decide where to place your fleets - defending strategic systems, or as a rapid response force.

That would be cool.

 

[Oyarsa]

I like chaedwards ideas.

Another spin would be system based but with the ability to bypass the wormhole linkage. Wormholes would be the fastest route between any two systems at the beginning of hte game but new technologies could supersede their effectiveness as an efficienttransport conduit. Systems and eventually ships could be equipped with jumpgates ala B5. Warp and/or hyperspace technologies could be researched and developed to provide the ability to bypass, thus opening up all of the empty space which would be too vast to traverse at the start of the game.

This approach could open up new tech branches on detection and interdiction. Older early warning stations near wormholes get replaced or upgraded to handle deep space, hyperspace, subspace traffic.

Imagine three races going in three directions - Trek Warp, SW Hyperspace, and B5 jumpgates/engines. The gates/engine could be immune to interdiction, but are limited by having gates where you need them or equipping a rather large and expensive jump engine, effectively limiting fleet size. Trek and SW are subject to interdiction, but different varieties. Trek could be traditional interdiction, if you can catch them and convince them to fight - beam weapons would work, but projectile/missile might not, plus firing at warp can be risky for thte attacker. SW can be interdicted by gravity wells and similar events/technologies but cannot be attacked in-flight. Trek and SW technologies would have a lengthier development through achieving smaller, faster, cheaper drives so they would be less effective at the start than the B5. All contain the ability to launch surprise atacks but on different terms.

 

[Sol Invictus]

What about Stargate SG1 hyperspace?

 

[chaedwards]

Am I right in thinking that MOO3 had the option to ignore wormholes and just travel through space, which took massively less time?

I agree with Oyarsa about having two means of travel - warpgates and hyperspace, but I'd like to see warpgates being created manually by the player. Imagine something very similar to B5, where larger ships can create their own jumpgates, but smaller ones can't. So, you send out mammoth ships to build warpgates, which are both expensive to build and maintain and take time to build. When built, they allow smaller ships to travel between connected star systems.

And, in true GalCiv fashion, you can charge other races to use your warpgates {evil grin}.

Exitium, I loathe SG1, so can you explain how its hyperspace works? Thanks

 

[Sol Invictus]

Hyperspace as I understand it is simply faster than light travel in StarGate SG1. When a ship is equipped with a hyperdrive it can travel at this speed. There isn't a constant so while ships of the same class can travel at the same speed and even see each other while travelling in hyperspeed, there are ships that will be slower, or faster than them. They have to plot a course through space in order to avoid asteroid fields, planets and other solid objects. All the ships are equipped with shields, so little particles in space don't collide with the ship and damage it.

The best thing about SG1 is the Stargate wormhole system.

Wormholes

Wormholes are connecting 'tunnels' in space that bypass the distance they traverse, allowing instantaneous travel between two points. Many sci-fi series employ them either all the time or on an ad hoc basis. Some are extremely stable, others are inherently unstable.

Stargate: SG1 gets around the problem entirely by using wormholes to connect two planet's stargates together long enough to transit between the worlds.

from BBC h2g2 ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A1132057 )

I think it'd be cool to be able to build a Stargate system to connect planets to each other, so the deployment of land forces would be possible, as well as the transportation of parts and materials used to build ships. For instance, a ship can be dissassembled on one side, transported through the Stargate and reassembled.

 

[chaedwards]

Could you set up ships to patrol in SG1 hyperspace, or would it take up too much juice? Do ships ever fight in hyperspace? If so, perhaps you could have a separate hyperspace map, where vision was very limited, but chance encounters could occur.

And the stargate system sounds very cool as well.

 

[Sol Invictus]

I dont think you can set up ships to patrol SG1 hyperspace, because it takes up a lot of energy just to go from one place to another. There was an episode where two ships chased each other in hyperspace. I can't remember if they attacked each other in hyperspace but it's plausible given the momentum.

I'd stick with the Stargate system overall, as it's MUCH more fleshed out than anything else they have on the show.

 

[chaedwards]

I like the idea of stargates, but I'm not sure they'd be feasible for really massive ships. Instead, I reckon it would be best used for transporting ground troops/assault craft.

Imagine having separate maps for every world (like in Emperor of the Fading Suns). You invade a world, and secure a beach head, and set up a stargate so that most of your troops could pour through... with the possibility that the gate could be captured by enemy troops, and the invasion reversed. Now that sounds good.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Yeah. I personally prefer ground-based (or deathglider) assault over large space battles. It just seems a lot more closer to reality, as in Desert Storm, and easier to relate to.

 

[chaedwards]

Hmm... I prefer the space battles myself. After all, reality isn't the top of my list when trying to conquer the galaxy. Nevertheless, the two could work well together - you have to control the skies before launching your assault after all.

 

[Mephitus]

First post from a long-time lurker, greetings to everybody.

I think, on balance, I prefer the wormhole/individual system map implementation (ala Space Empires). It allows for a method of faster-than-light travel (which, let's face it, is quintessential to any game of this sort), while still allowing for tactical manoeuvres and manual 'slogging around' within a system, thus keeping the strategic defence of key locations possible.

I'm a fan of space-battles *and* ground-battles, so given the choice, I'd opt to have both. Defeat the defending fleet and orbital defences, and then send in the troops and tanks to capture the planet, if you like. The idea of having individual planetary maps for strategic conquest with troop or tanks also greatly appeals to me. although having both would probably involve a lot of effort on the part of both the player, and the developer.

The idea of progression away from the dependence upon wormholes, possibly through warping normal space using a 'warp drive', or using a 'hyperdrive' to bypass it altogether, is interesting, but I'm not sure how it would pan out in the scheme of things. Imagine having a huge enemy fleet popping right out of nowhere, destroying your capital planet, and thus crippling your economy in one blow. Not a nice thought, so perhaps there should be some kind of limitation in that regard; a large energy requirement, and possibly as a result, an extremely limited range might be in order. But back onto wormholes: natural and discoverable, or huge artificial constructs of small moon proportions? Perhaps both should be possible, and when the technology matures, the ability to build one, or to destroy a natural one should arise, possibly leading to interesting strategies such as wormhole 'choke-points' and so on.

Just a few musings on my part, any further thoughts?

 

[chaedwards]

The idea of progression away from the dependence upon wormholes, possibly through warping normal space using a 'warp drive', or using a 'hyperdrive' to bypass it altogether, is interesting, but I'm not sure how it would pan out in the scheme of things. Imagine having a huge enemy fleet popping right out of nowhere, destroying your capital planet, and thus crippling your economy in one blow. Not a nice thought, so perhaps there should be some kind of limitation in that regard; a large energy requirement, and possibly as a result, an extremely limited range might be in order.

Hi Mephitus

Certainly having enormous fleets pop out of nowhere would change the dynamic of a game, but there are at least two ways of getting around it. One would be to limit the range, as you've suggested - not only because of energy, but also for more mundane things like food and supplies for the crew. This would also make certain systems important as resupply depots, a bit like they are now in SE4. The other would be to use Oyarsa's idea of setting up obstacles that forced ships out of hyperspace - like interdictor cruisers in Star Wars.

And the whole 'sudden death' approach would work both ways as well. If your opponent used his entire fleet to destroy your homeworld, chances are his is undefended, and that you have a fleet itching for revenge. Then we'd have Mutually Assured Destruction on a galactic scale, and maybe a Cold War where wars went on through proxies (like in Galciv) and skirmishes, because a true galactic war would be far too dangerous to contemplate.

 

[Oyarsa]

First post from a long-time lurker, greetings to everybody.

I think, on balance, I prefer the wormhole/individual system map implementation (ala Space Empires). It allows for a method of faster-than-light travel (which, let's face it, is quintessential to any game of this sort), while still allowing for tactical manoeuvres and manual 'slogging around' within a system, thus keeping the strategic defence of key locations possible.

I'm a fan of space-battles *and* ground-battles, so given the choice, I'd opt to have both. Defeat the defending fleet and orbital defences, and then send in the troops and tanks to capture the planet, if you like. The idea of having individual planetary maps for strategic conquest with troop or tanks also greatly appeals to me. although having both would probably involve a lot of effort on the part of both the player, and the developer.

The idea of progression away from the dependence upon wormholes, possibly through warping normal space using a 'warp drive', or using a 'hyperdrive' to bypass it altogether, is interesting, but I'm not sure how it would pan out in the scheme of things. Imagine having a huge enemy fleet popping right out of nowhere, destroying your capital planet, and thus crippling your economy in one blow. Not a nice thought, so perhaps there should be some kind of limitation in that regard; a large energy requirement, and possibly as a result, an extremely limited range might be in order. But back onto wormholes: natural and discoverable, or huge artificial constructs of small moon proportions? Perhaps both should be possible, and when the technology matures, the ability to build one, or to destroy a natural one should arise, possibly leading to interesting strategies such as wormhole 'choke-points' and so on.

Just a few musings on my part, any further thoughts?

Hey Mephitus,
I like the combination of space-based and planetside combat, too. EotFS was a great game and it gave both, though I'd like something a little more involved in choice of combat tactics. Check it out if you haven't played. I think it can be had from The Underdogs. The Space Empire games use the wormhole/warppoint model and include ways to eventually create and destroy the points.

I agree with the concept of having to find wormholes, much like MOO's gave you the option to start pre-warp, this would allow you to start in your system without any efficient means of reaching other systems. Do you research technology that will lead to discovering wormholes (meta-gaming unless wormholes could be set to exist or not exist in a given game without the player knowing in advance) or put resources into researching, building and launching massive cryo- or generation ships to get to the nearest system?

I'd really like to have a game that allowed massive tech trees (if not a more 'real' R&D set-up) that involved a lot of specializing. Where even trading for a technology does not make it an economically viable addition to your side. If your entire fleet is predicated on jumpgates and jump engines retro-fitting to, say, warp technology would be cost-prohibitive due to the large scale retraining of crews, building infrastrucuture to build the appropriate components -and- the actual retro-fit of the ships, etc. But I digress.

As chaedwards mentioned I'd suggested accompanying technologies for interdiction as well as for detection to give advanced notice. Both options allow for strategic points and counterpoints - forcing a battle on the defender's terms and choice of battlefield (imagine going to make a massive surprise assault on an opponent's homeworld but your fleet gets pulled out of warp or hyperspace in a nebula that gives an advantage to the defender because they've got better sensors) or getting advanced warning and assembling a fleet of stealthed or hidden defenders for your own surprise. Also, strategically, jumpgate and wormhole dependent strategies might allow for earlier starts before becoming matched mid-game by the independent travel modes and possibly surpassed by late game. But, would you rather be colonizing using jumpgates or wormholes for near instantaneous travel or puttering along at Warp Two in the early game?

 

[Mephitus]

chaedwards:

Hmm, food and supply, I always forget the obvious...

But yes, a food and/or supply limitation and key supply systems would certainly bring balance to the concept. I seem to have missed the idea of a warp or hyperspace 'interdictor', however, and that's also workable. Of course that could lead to a style of play where one would attempt to strike at such crippling devices, perhaps through covert operations, leading to another complicated and potentially interesting facet of gameplay.

The threat of M.A.D. had occured to me, and indeed lends favour to this idea, as otherwise it could lead to a rather boring method of play - the endless stockpile of forces in an attempt to prevent the enemy from gaining the advantage. Natrually, this would occur to a certain extent regardless, but it might be accelerated through fear. On balance, the frittering away of the enemy's forces through skirmishes over a period of time would be a safer form of gameplay, and would definitely be more interesting for the player(s). A long drawn-out series of strategic battles can be much more engaging than a quick kill.

I do wonder what role politics could play in all this, deceit of your supposed allies, and even of your own people. If possible, perhaps giving the populous of planets their own simple form of 'will' or 'desire' - war fatigue, lust for battle, etc. - might be an idea. Perhaps these emotions could even be affected by one's race's attributes.

This *could* all lead to excessive micro-management, however, which would spoil the gameplay as-is; something which I am led to believe was one of MOO3's downfalls, even though I have not played it myself.


Oyarsa:

Well there could be limitations placed on the usage of natural wormholes - perhaps the formation of a star system could allow them to only form at large distances from the centre of the system? So if you started at a chosen 'pre-warp' setting, you could make it start from an early stage of space infrastructure, or even before it - where we don't even know that natural wormholes *exist*, let alone knowing how to safely use one. This could even be incorporated into the technology tree, forcing the player the research the nature of astrophysical phenomena. Additionally, for a game chosen to start in an early 'age', perhaps the colonisation of the 'home system', and the setting up of infrastructure could be the priority - with manned exploration of the home system, and probe exploration of remote systems occuring alongside (there could be initial limitations upon the size of craft traversing wormholes to aid with this). A 40 year one-way trip through normal space to Alpha Centauri isn't a particularly nice thought, even with some form of stasis or cryogenics, it would still be alot to ask of people; not to mention impractical for gameplay purposes.

I suppose it ultimately depends on one's preferred play-style, but I for one would welcome the option of having to nuture a civilisation through it's very early space years.
Perhaps a bit of history or knowledge for it's own sake, to make for a deeper game, and not neccesarily towards more efficient ways of waging war.

Oh, and I did give Emperor of the Fading Suns a quick try at one point, but I didn't get too deep into it, mayhaps I'll go back to it at some point.

Anyway, there are my semi-coherent and poorly structured ramblings on the matter. I would proof-read, but I'm tired.

 

[Human Shield]

How would space pirates work in the system-level approach, they usually try to ambush ships along the way, should they be able to bring ships out of hyperspace and fight in deep space?

 

[almondblight]

What about something like TOEE which isn't system based but space isn't divided up into sectors? Ships can move a certain distance per turn. Also, you should be able to build outposts out in the middle of nowhere for refueling, or along your border to pull ships out of hyperspace and pummel them. You could also have a Babylon 5 based jump system. Ships have to go through jumpgates, which can be closed if needed, but they take weeks to close and weeks to re-open. The largest and most expensive ships can create their own jumpgates, but if they get damaged or destroyed deep in enemy territory the rest of the fleet is screwed.

 

[Oyarsa]

How would space pirates work in the system-level approach, they usually try to ambush ships along the way, should they be able to bring ships out of hyperspace and fight in deep space?

Good question. Partly the answer depends on if the pirates are treated as a game faction or a random event (rather stay away from those). In Freelancer (the demo) pirates could pull ships out of the spacelanes that were within systems so a similar concept would be potentially feasible/believable with wormholes. Another consideration is how large a given system would be and how easy would it be to control it. Pirates could work by staying in a given system and hitting weak targets en route to the wormholes/gates. This is especially plausible if wormholes are at some point distant from the system center and much more difficult if using gates which would usually be constructed nearer population and manufacturing centers.

If a game faction then implementation in a meaningful way is kind of challenging in the linked system format because good design would entail some kind of operational purpose. Following this it would or at least should be possible for one PC/NPC to have and eliminate a pirate threat while another cannot deal with it. Likewise, and more to the question, pirates would need to possess technology appropriate to the interdicted race/ship. In the case of natural or artificial wormhole or gate modes they would need a means of disrupting the tunnel. Similarly with SW-styled hyperspace (ooh, thought: SW Interdictors create artifical gravity wells - an expensive proposition for pirates, but what about pirates basing near natural gravity points and using something cheaper that either focuses or distorts natural wells). Warp race/ship combos may be more susceptible as they would be running in normal space.

If a random event, then the RNG checks each whatever-time-or-turn-interval and on a successful roll pulls the player into a local space combat screen and the means of doing so can be ignored.

 

[Mephitus]

Edit: Beg pardon Oyarsa, I've just noticed your Freelancer comparison after making this rather large post. No ruthless thieving was involved, honestly!

How would space pirates work in the system-level approach, they usually try to ambush ships along the way, should they be able to bring ships out of hyperspace and fight in deep space?

Well, first of all those pirates are going to need something worthwhile to attack. I really can't imagine a group of pirates trying to take on a military-class vessel, at least nothing larger than a destroyer or perhaps corvette, unless they were *very* well organised. They could attack independent interplanetary or commercial interstellar traders, but I'm not sure how practical such trading would be. The independents would probably be limited to short-range trades of very rare or highly treasured items - with very few actually having access to hyperdrives, if at all. I imagine that they'd be very nice targets for pirates; they won't be trading grain, I can tell you that. They could conceivably trade materials that are extremely hard to manufacture, or rare to non-existent on certain planets - the helium-3 present in the atmospheres of most gas giants is an example I can think of - it is pretty much a trace isotope on Earth, and can conceivably be used for fusion power. To take it into firmly into the realms of sci-fi, even - perhaps the spice melange of Arrakis, or some other substance of unusual yet remarkable properties.

The main trouble I see (if you want to be at least semi-realistic), is that in order to bring even interplanetary travel down to a reasonable journey length, you'll need to equip those traders with *at least* some form of nuclear drive, possibly even fusion-based.

Can you imagine the implications of supplying civilians with nuclear technology? In reality, a powerful engine doubles as an equally powerful weapon. Firstly in terms of raw energy output, and secondly, any object that impacts another at approximately 3km/s is worth it's own mass in TNT - and it only goes up from there.

To give you an idea how powerful this could be, the mass of an average human impacting an object at 100,000 k/s (roughly 1/3 the speed of light), would release energy roughly equivalent to the yield of a 100 megaton nuclear explosion. Not a nice thought.

Perhaps a better idea would be to set up some sort of high-speed interplanetary 'highway' (as Freelancer *spits* did). I believe pirates could interrupt these 'highways' during the game and pull the target back into normal space. It would certainly be an easy fix, but I'm sure that they couldn't be artificially-spaced 'boosting rings' or some such. Planets orbit, and the distances between them change drastically.

Going back to the wormhole concept, maybe fairly small artificially created ones, not-intended for the kilometre plus long capital ships could be the answer. Of course that would leave the option of 'pulling' a ship out of a wormhole journey practically impossible; the journey would be for most intents and purposes, instantaneous

Well, I digressed a bit, but it was in justification of my opinions with regard to piracy.

Now more to the point: nomadic behaviour is probably impractical in space, and so the pirates would probably need a base. But where would they house their base? In an asteroid belt? It may be a good hiding place in terms of it being a remote location, but it's not likely they could organise too well. Real asteroid belts are so sparse that if you were to fly through one, you'd be lucky to *see* an asteroid, let alone get anywhere close to one.

The only place I could really suggest in terms of density is a gas giant with rings similar to that of Saturn, but they are too harsh in practice, and any such gas giant is probably very likely to be home to an extensive hydrogen mining operation. We have to power those *legal* fusion engines somehow, and warp/hyperdrives would need a power source, such as a fusion reactor.

All I can suggest is that the pirates possess illegally obtained warp drive or hyperdrive technology, and strike from extremely remote areas such as an orbital base around planets, at or exceeding the average distance of Neptune.
They would be very cold, dim places with no possibility of solar power; they would have to be almost entirely powered by reactor. Where are pirates going to obtain such highly-advanced technologies?

Don't get me wrong, I quite like the idea of having a criminal element out in space; I just don't think it's very plausible.

It depends on how much you want to contort the physics, I suppose. What's the point in keeping it realistic if it isn't *fun*?

So assuming we're skipping all that inconvenient science...

They would still be better organised attacking from a main base of some sort. It would still need to be remote, and powered by reactor, not solar collectors; if only to appear even superficially plausible.

So I would suggest warp drive/hyperdrive capable pirates, with a main base orbiting a remote gas giant, preferably the one with the lowest gravity, to facilitate the illegal mining operations that would be required to power the reactor(s). This location could also facilitate attacks on poorly guarded commercial transports coming in from other systems. The pirates would have to survey their targets extremely remotely, by some sort of advanced sensory means, and then warp/jump in, strike extremely quickly, loot as much as they could, and head straight back to base as soon as possible. Any dawdling could result in detection, which could possibly result in some sort of tracking back to base; a military skirmish against them would almost certainly ensue. If they did attack capital class military vessels, they would have to be small kinds such as scouts or corvettes, and they would have to be extremely quick to strike any communications arrays before a distress signal could be sent out.

Given such a problem, some form of cloaking device could provide a solution. I quite like the idea of pirates making underhand attacks of this nature.

What about something like TOEE which isn't system based but space isn't divided up into sectors?

The main problem I have with such an 'open map' arrangement is that space is big, really bloody big. Most of the game map is going to be a huge empty space. All the interesting stuff is going to be compacted into extremely small areas, proably as abstract 'stacks' of orbital objects, all in the same objective space. Now, and this is purely my own opinion, I find a stack of objects without any defined locations or orbits to be rather lifeless. This *could* be 'fixed' by having some form of 'zoom' function that locks into the system, but once we have that, we might as well be back to the systems and wormholes structure.

A possible answer is that we have the system/wormholes arrangement, but with technological advances, you can choose to warp/jump to a location in empty space with a specialised craft, and effectively start a new system there, whether a remote outpost or refuelling station. I would certainly be happy with that.

The largest and most expensive ships can create their own jumpgates, but if they get damaged or destroyed deep in enemy territory the rest of the fleet is screwed.

An interesting idea, and one that certainly has it's merits. I certainly can't imagine a small scout being able to house such a device, and a dependency of other craft could create interesting tactical situtations.

Phew! Sorry for making that such a heavy read, but I'm really into this stuff.