Grand Strategy Stellar Monarch: Turn based 4X space empire builder

[Destroid]

You might consider allowing the player to pre-plan their tech path so they are purchased automatically when you have enough points available - constantly checking, or even having a notification to go buy things would get pretty annoying.

 

[Malakal]

Please, no instant point "mana" granting instant technologies. EU IV did that and Im not a fan. Make it an investment that takes time.

 

[Volrath]

Just make a 1:1 MoO2 clone.

There.

 

[Riso]

Enough Moo2 clones. We need more Moo1 ones.

 

[Galdred]

Oh, and LordArchibald please don't go the Endless Space combat route. It adds a significant luck/gambling element to it.

Care to extend your thought? You mean boring cards or something else?


About combat system:
The basic info how it will work (without details).

- it will be more or less WW1 style (frigates, destroyers, battleships), it's consistent with the planet conquest system (it's a bit like WW1 trench warfare, territory is super important, you don't lose all ships in one battle, the battle might drag on, jout can't 'jump" behind enemy lines, fight on borders, you can use territory to effectively slow down the enemy, important supply lines), escort ships will protect capital ships there will be also fighters and drones.

Fighters+drones would make it more like WW2 combat. In order to make territory important, WW2 naval combat with potent system based naval fighters might be a good start (and most engagements did not result in all ships from one side being destroyed, so it would work for this too). War Plan Pacific is a good exemple of semi abstract WW2 naval warfare with low casualties (the idea is that your ships are based in one harbor, and get a mission each phase, like raid, patrol, intercept, rebase. turns are resolved simultaneously).

- there won't be "submarines in space" (whatever it might mean )

I meant, basing the combat around stealth and detection (ie active vs passive detection, speed vs signature...).

- ground combat will be important (it's not enough to win the space combat, you need to take it over by infantry - bombardment of planets will have limited use, won't be sufficient to destroy the planet), some races (The Hive) will not even have space ships (they will launch big rocks with insectoid troops inside - the player will try to intercept these rocks, a space battle when you get no casualities and all and just try to destroy as many those approaching asteroid as possible, before these crash on the surface releasing hordes if deadly incect warriors)

It is very hard to do that right, unless you want to make planets take several areas. Something like StarCraft : The board game system works pretty well, and is pretty high level ( but it treats space combat like ground combat). You play one card for each of your unit, which determines the strength of the unit (it is stronger if it matches the unit, and much weaker otherwise. For instance, a card might give 8 Att/9 Def to archons and carriers, and 5/5 to everything else, or 6/5 to Zealots and Dragoons, and 4/4 to other units). You get those cards by doing R&D actions (basically, depleting your card pool represents your supplies for the units you use the most going down).

Most WW2 pacific wargames have the same constraint, though (I don't remember playing any space 4x with interesting good combat). World at War : a world divided has both interesting land and naval combat for instance(even though both are somewhat simplistic).

- planetary installations ARE able to ATTACK passing by enemy ships (so typically no planet is defenceless)
- a bigger battle would be 5 squadrons 200 ships per squadron, so 1,000 ships (on player's side only), so all "direction a ship is facing" is out of the question. We are talking here about stacks of units, not individual units (althrough, each unit is simulated engine wise so there is no problem making a complex system where each single ship targets another ship - but the player will be able to see only agregated data of this, like how many ships did what)

What I meant by facing for each ship was to assign a number of each class to screen/flank guard, core.
These determine a fleet point defense (defense against missiles and fighters) and detection, missiles and laser attacks for front and flanks.
There is no mini map, but task force can be given a flanking order. If they succeed, they use the flank values of its target, otherwise (ie they don't try to flank or fail to do so), they use the front value. It gives an element of risk vs reward, and give speed and stealth a point(better chance to succeed in flanking), even without a tactical map.
ships assigned to screen give much higher point defence (anti fighters and anti missiles ) and detection to the front, those to flank gives a much smaller bonus to the corresponding flank values (as they are split between all flanks).

The point of this pseudo system(but I never tested it, it is just something I came up with when I was still considering something else than my current work in progress) was mostly to make some maneuvers you see in Legend of the Galatic heroes possible (one side trying to flank with 4 task forces, while the other tries to engage all 4 task force one at a time).

 

[potatojohn]

I love the interface. It looks like HoI in space.

 

[Chris Koźmik]

Heh, this was more like a general listing of things not yet featured too much in the genre, not a laundry list of things I'd expect you to tackle in your first game. It's great anyway that you appearently plan on having something of each in your game.

Hmmm, maybe you are right, I should try to cut down some secondary features and instead make the game sooner... Yet, what to cut is such a traumatic choice :D
(and I still want a prison planet :D)

You might consider allowing the player to pre-plan their tech path so they are purchased automatically when you have enough points available - constantly checking, or even having a notification to go buy things would get pretty annoying.

I see... actually, that would greatly simplify the research notification system ("you have no techs queued in field X") also solves missclick problems. But to make it consistent there also should be a limit to 1 tech researched per turn max (which kind of half makes sense)?
Anyway, I like it interface wise (a lot).

Please, no instant point "mana" granting instant technologies. EU IV did that and Im not a fan. Make it an investment that takes time.

I'm not sure I fully understood...

I love the interface. It looks like HoI in space.

Gald you like it, althrough HoI is famed for one of the worst UIs (so I have heard, I have no problem with it myself).

 

[Malakal]

Dont make research instant the second you spend the points, make it take time.

 

[Chris Koźmik]

Ground combat (questions, lot of questions)
I have it only partilly designed and not implemented yet, so I'm looking for various ideas on this.

There are two separate branches of the army, regular imperial infantry (defends planets) and elite storm troopers (attacks enemy planets, but might be used for defence too).
* Each planet has defensive priority (partially auto partially manual set - for example border planets by default have a higher defence priority, so you don't need to adjust it manualy, only in special cases). Regular infantry is distributed between planets based on the priorities, it's not instant, so changing def.priority franticly won't work (plus systems under siege are not getting infantry reinforcements anyway). They are quite cheap (especially in maintenance) and sit on the planets waiting for attackers.
* Storm troopers are quite different. They are highly mobile and by default do not station on any planet (they are assumed to orbit unspecified planets/moons on their transporter or sit in military bases on embarked on battleships like some sort of "space marines"), each regiment of stormtroopers is assumed to have their own freighter (so they are capable of space travel, there is no separate transporter ship class in the game). They are a bit costly, also extra costs are involved if they are performing any tasks (so keeping them stationed on a planet "just in case" is not the most economical idea).

Overall, the player does not manage manually the regular infantry (they are auto assigned based on player's hints) while storm troopers are under much more direct control.

Now, I wonder how exactly handle the storm troopers and the whole planetary ground invasions? The assumption is the player won the space combat and controls the orbit, now ground invasion commences (how?)

Unsorted thoughts:
- player has "invade" button and selects how many regiments of stormtroopers to send to the planet, those regiment get instatly dropped on the surface and start slow combat (like 2-3 turns)
- while it's easy and fast to drop stormtroopers on the planet taking them back is much slower (so the player needs to think of keeping reserves, like if an important planet got attacked in the meantime he whould have not quick reinforcements to send there)
- if the battle is lost stormtroopers are starting to evacuate (automaticly), they are assumed to be trained in this (so, actually not that many stormtroopers would die in failed invasion, but they would be disorganized and it would take a while for them to be available for the next operation)
- if the battle is won the stormtroopers are locked for 3 turns as the temporary defenders of the planet (can't leave it), this applies to conquering enemy planet, not defending ones own
- recalling stormtroopers from a planet you conquered is much faster



Other notes:
- there is "morale" (global, whole empire) it reflects the morale of ground forces (stormtroopers get halved penalties for low morale), no clue yet how it should work
- there is also militia (they are tied to the planet and can never leave it), overall a bit similar to regular infantry, not so important
- each army branch (militia/regular/stormtroopers) has a separate screen with possible upgrades, equipment, special trainings, etc. Each branch is treated separately here and as one single body (so there is an average equipment level per regular infantry regiment, identical on all planets).

 

[Malakal]

I really liked how MoO3 handled planetary invasions - picking strategies, conquering region by region, multiple turns to take a world. The idea could be expanded upon to provide some entertainment.

Also the balance between glassing planets and conquering them should be well done so its not better to simply build a new colony in the place of the old one.

 

[Galdred]

If you want to make planetary invasion matter, you have to make them more complex than MOO2 did (MOO3 did indeed have interesting ideas).
I would divide the planet into regions, and have anti space defense depend on regions (ie, most ground to space batteries only cover their own region). Garrisons and fortifications would also be region specific.
Something like 4 to 10 regions/planet would work.
The attacker would then chose one or several regions to land with its dedicated assault crafts, then establish a beachhead and defend it to ferry reinforcements(it would be much easier to reinforce a region on a hostile planet then assault a neighbouring region than to assault from orbit).
Before the assault, the defender would chose which regions to fortify and to garrison, whether to split or concentrate troops, and after, whether to digg in, or try to counter attack the beachhead before more reinforcements land.

 

[Chris Koźmik]

If you want to make planetary invasion matter, you have to make them more complex than MOO2 did (MOO3 did indeed have interesting ideas).
I would divide the planet into regions, and have anti space defense depend on regions (ie, most ground to space batteries only cover their own region). Garrisons and fortifications would also be region specific.
Something like 4 to 10 regions/planet would work.

Completelly incompatible with the game's pace and scope. Imagine you have 200 planets, assume 10 of the border ones have some sort of military operation going on (each turn). Subdividing planets into regions would simply not work with that scale (if there are 200 planets (you control, so there are also aliens planets you want to conquer) and each is divided into 5 regions it would mean 1,000 regions (and even if we take into account only border/near border planets that's still hundreds); player's mental capabilities are simply not sufficient to handle that workload :D).

I would rather go the opposite route, like make some sort of military base that exert power to neighbouring planets.

The rule of thumb: try to think from the point of view if the Emperor, not an Admiral/General. Feeling of being an Emperor is what I'm trying to grasp with this game. Deciding what forces land on which region are not the most grand strategish issues.

As for me wanting the ground invasion to matter, it's a secondary or even tetriary thing. I can resign from it if needed, no problem. I basicly wanted the ground invasion being important (on strategic level, not necessarily operational/tactical) for the sake of the few alien races that have no space forces.

 

[rezaf]

At times it seems you're still a bit at odds with your own concept of having the player as the emperor (more like a political entity rather than somebody who decides the specifics of war or even a general battle).

For example, you appearently decided not to have ship design (which emperor would do that directly?), but you still allow the player to "order" exactly 5 Falcons and 3 Phoenix - which emperor would do that?
Same with deciding how many units of stormtroopers to keep in reserve at which exact place.
I'd say even deciding which planet to invade when would often be something decided by the generals/admirals rather than by the emperor himself. If he were the dabbling type, there should be ways for him to set general policies (be in Moscow by winter), but the specifics should always be a bit of a mystery to him.

His grasp of all situations (military, research, industry etc.) should be based on the quality of the people he assigned to these areas and the feedback they give him (which might be deceiving).

Now, this may not be the game YOU want to make, which is perfectly fine, but I still think it'd be nice to have such type of 4x game at some point.

 

[Riso]

https://imperiagame.wordpress.com/

 

[Destroid]

There's an old game called Imperium where you play an emperor of a space empire, and you can personally can die. It's very old and interface looks like below so I haven't raised the courage to play it yet.

 

[rezaf]

There's an old game called Imperium where you play an emperor of a space empire, and you can personally can die. It's very old and interface looks like below so I haven't raised the courage to play it yet.

I actually sunk quite a bit of time in this one back in the day.
It's not at all a game like what LordArchibald is aiming for - in fact parts of it are micromanagement hell.
IIRC it was quite similar to a later game that was much easier to play ... I want to say Spaceward Ho!, but I'm not 100% sure.

 

[Chris Koźmik]

At times it seems you're still a bit at odds with your own concept of having the player as the emperor (more like a political entity rather than somebody who decides the specifics of war or even a general battle).

Yes... The thing is I do want you to feel like the emperor, but I do not want to turn it into Save the Queen or Imperia. I still want it to be primarily 4X. It's more like I want to remove the boring parts (moving individual ships, manual logistics, trivial choices) as "unworthy of he emperor" but keep most of the interesting parts there (except tactics which really don't fit the game). I guess it's more precise to say that there would be a focus on you being someone like an emperor and the grand admiral (the most top level one).

There's an old game called Imperium where you play an emperor of a space empire, and you can personally can die. It's very old and interface looks like below so I haven't raised the courage to play it yet.

Waaaa!!!! Someone other than me remembers this!!! You know, it's the FIRST forum I ever been to where people actually know what the old EA's Imperium is

I modeled some parts of the game based on the memoried of how I player thye game (mostly exclusion, like for governors I didn't want to have this one huge list of personas I could not remember; but there were also some inclusions like the 3 stats of the personnel where charisma was replaced with corruption, although I won't have Nostrum addicition ).
One thing I liked there, which I don't know how to implement (and if I should), was the resources system. I always loved that my empire was producing 549 heavy machines, 1052 communication things and so on, it was sooo in the mood (I never got what was effect of these in that game).

Yeah, I agree with rezaf it was a micromanagement hell

 

[worldsmith]

Feel like the Emperor, not like a logistics officer

Sounds OK, but I'm not sure how I'm supposed to feel like an emperor unless I get a daily selection of concubines.

Asymmetic gameplay, truly alien aliens and challenging non cheating AI

they do not "play the game" nor try to "prevent the player from winning".

think of these aliens more like of "forces of nature that prevents you to establish the galactic Empire"

Doesn't sound worth playing. Nevermind whether or not playing against opponents who are not trying to explore, expand, exploit and exterminate (you) isn't really a 4x game. Playing against such opponents is likely to suck most of the fun out of the game. There's no real race to do the first 3 x's (explore, expand, exploit) if your opponents aren't even engaged in those activities.

You can try to set up an artificial "race against time". For example, see the game Factorio where the native species are basically as you describe. They get stronger over time (an "evolution factor") so (in theory) you need to build up quicker. But as a game (as opposed to a sandbox to play in) Factorio is (at least for now) a total failure -- since the native species are not actually trying to go all 4x on your ass, it's just too easy (and boring/tedious) to work your way through the game.

I think what really makes a 4x work is that mutual race/competition - an extended period of gameplay time that is a mad rush that just keeps on going because, even though there are various encounters and skirmishes and planets/battles lost/won (and periods of no contact), it's usually quite some time before any one side is strong enough to have any chance at completely crushing another. And it's also often the case that who gets crushed and who does the crushing is determined not so much by the final battles but by the extended race that led to that point. And you know this from the start of the game, so even as the race begins you know it's going to be a wild ride and the pressure will be on until the end is in sight (and beyond if you're on the losing end of that).

So, do you have plans for something that can reasonably be expected to create such a feel? (I would add "or replace it with something just as good", but what could be as good?) And if you do, are they going to be "not lame"? (I.e., not some lame-ass shit like level scaling. In this situation a lame solution would be something like making monster attack strength/frequency proportional to your fleet strength or economic strength.)

Also, submarines. In space.

It's like you've never even heard of subspace.

On a "ha ha, only serious" note: You could restrict subspace to "submarines" (subspace capable ships). Do the display as a simple two-level setup where the bottom level represents subspace. (Maybe apply a graphics filter to ships in subspace so the player can easily tell the difference.) Then other ships could send "depth charges" into subspace, while "torpedoes" come flying back out of subspace at them (or those might be the same thing - the point being whatever the weapon is it has to be able to traverse both normal space and subspace).

Subspace capable ships may not be capable of traveling in normal space. (E.g., maybe it requires a completely different set of engines due to entirely different principles of propulsion. Transitioning between space and subspace may also be an issue a ship must be able to overcome if it is to operate in both domains.)

Most space games are represented as simple 2D. Adding a "subspace" layer would at least add a bit of depth to that.

 

[rezaf]

Doesn't sound worth playing. Nevermind whether or not playing against opponents who are not trying to explore, expand, exploit and exterminate (you) isn't really a 4x game. Playing against such opponents is likely to suck most of the fun out of the game. There's no real race to do the first 3 x's (explore, expand, exploit) if your opponents aren't even engaged in those activities.

I disagree. To date, the vast majority of 4x games start all races at the same point in time, which makes no logical sense whatsoever. BUT having some species with a headstart that are already more advanced (and spread out) at the time another player starts makes equally little sense, since when all players "play to win", the one with the headstart will win (unless artificially limited in some other way).
At least if the entire goal for everyone is "paint the map your color".

Since this game already looks a tiny bit like "Risk in space" it might be a nice way to have (optional?) "goal cards" for each alien species that are chosen from a random pool and thus would differ from game to game.
You could have the uber-advanced aliens that need to build research stations around 15 pulsars to advance to the next level of existence, you could have bug-aliens that need to seize control of 15 swamp worlds as breeding grounds, you could have dabbling races like the Shadows/Vorlons in Babylon 5 that prefer not to get involved DIRECTLY, the possibilities are endless.

 

[Chris Koźmik]

Sounds OK, but I'm not sure how I'm supposed to feel like an emperor unless I get a daily selection of concubines.

:D

Doesn't sound worth playing. Nevermind whether or not playing against opponents who are not trying to explore, expand, exploit and exterminate (you) isn't really a 4x game. Playing against such opponents is likely to suck most of the fun out of the game. There's no real race to do the first 3 x's (explore, expand, exploit) if your opponents aren't even engaged in those activities.

It's not like that.

Maybe I will start from the beginning. There is a legend that once every 10,000 turns a fearsome alien race from another dimension purges the galaxy. Your race is the only one who believes this legend (upon game start there are like 500 turns left, depending on the difficulty, etc; you will get several gradual warnings of the doom timer). So, with this alone there is a pressure

Another thing, at the beginning like 90% of the galaxy will be colonized with you being some insignificant small dot in the middle of all this. While aliens are not expansionistic in sense of desire to take over all the planets (exceptions), there is already more races than desired planets (so it's a middle of an endless war from the start). Also, while you are relatively safe (if you stay low profile) in order to survive long term you are the one who need to disrupt the balance of power. You are to carve the Empire from the territories of other races that got these long before you even started. So, you can either accept the status quo, stay insignificant the whole game and then watch the galaxy go down the drain when annihilators arrive or grab the power, create a powerful empire, subdue other civilized races to obey you (without exterminating them - exceptions - since they might be useful) and then save the galaxy from the annihilators under your magnificient rule.

 

[worldsmith]

So, with this alone there is a pressure

OK.

Is the strength of this alien race known to the player at the start of the game? Or maybe they get information about that strength during the game (in a timely fashion)? (I'm just wondering about how the player gauges their progress. In a typical 4x game you scout or otherwise acquire intel about your opponents, and if you are falling behind you do whatever's necessary - including acts of desperation. Of course such acts tend to be poor choices if you were already "on track".)

Even with such info it will probably be a little harder than typical 4x games to gauge one's progress, because you can't just look at your opponents and compare how you are doing at that moment. So it will be one of those things that a player probably can't do very well until they've played the game a few times.

One downside to this ambiguity about your progress is that you lose the back-and-forth feel that can happen in a typical 4x game (where you were behind but now your seem to be stronger than your opponents, and vice-versa). Maybe, if it could be done somewhat accurately (?), you could have an adviser in the game that can tell the player how well/bad they are doing?

I'm guessing the "fearsome alien race" is essentially a bunch of ships/fleets that arrive and start killing everything? I.e., they don't try to take over and control planets? (Not really important I guess. Though I assume it simplifies the AI somewhat if these guys are just "mad dogs in high-tech ships" when they arrive.)

 

[worldsmith]

Had a few more thoughts...

Another reason you might want to provide feedback to the player (about how well they are progressing) is so they don't experience the following scenario: Build up for many hours. Then get completely stomped in a very short period of time.
It's a much better gaming experience if the player can find out earlier on that they need to find and make improvements to what they're doing and that they might be better off restarting with improved strategies rather than wasting tons of time on a lost cause.

I'm also curious if you'll have the "fearsome alien race" concede or something (maybe send an offer of "peaceful coexistence") if the player gets strong enough. IIRC, Warlords 3 has such a concession feature, and it was a much more pleasant experience than other games that drag out the ending. In fact the game would sometimes surprise me by conceding before I even noticed that power had shifted in my favor (but then I'd review the map and see that that had indeed happened). I've seen other games that in theory have the feature as well, but W3 was the only one I remember where the concession would come early enough to actually avoid most or all of the end-game grind. Other games seem to only avoid maybe the last 10% or 20% of the "you've already won but must keep on playing to really win" grind.

I'm also wondering about this "fearsome alien race". Presumably they have a civilization somewhere, right? But do you ever have access to it? I mean, if they send this fleet to come wipe you out and that fleet doesn't return, won't they just send an even bigger fleet (or at least some scouts to find out what happened and assess what they need to do to eradicate you)? It seems to me the threat isn't over when you wipe out the fleet they sent, but when you take over their civilization. (Or is this "death fleet" supposed to be something like "robots on perpetual auto-pilot" and the civilization itself is long since gone so once you kill that fleet it's over? Cheesy over-used sci-fi twist: The death fleet wiped out the "fearsome alien race" a thousand millennia ago.)

 

[Destroid]

Had a few more thoughts...

Another reason you might want to provide feedback to the player (about how well they are progressing) is so they don't experience the following scenario: Build up for many hours. Then get completely stomped in a very short period of time.

This was the entire gameplay of Reunion, a p cool old game that kinda looks like a 4x but really isn't. It also has a fantastic intro:

 

[Chris Koźmik]

Since this game already looks a tiny bit like "Risk in space" it might be a nice way to have (optional?) "goal cards" for each alien species that are chosen from a random pool and thus would differ from game to game.
You could have the uber-advanced aliens that need to build research stations around 15 pulsars to advance to the next level of existence, you could have bug-aliens that need to seize control of 15 swamp worlds as breeding grounds, you could have dabbling races like the Shadows/Vorlons in Babylon 5 that prefer not to get involved DIRECTLY, the possibilities are endless.

Please post more of these It fuels the imagination.
(later I will post about races)

Also, how exactly these "goal cards" could work? You mean like a race being constructed from predefined random parts?

Is the strength of this alien race known to the player at the start of the game? Or maybe they get information about that strength during the game (in a timely fashion)? (I'm just wondering about how the player gauges their progress. In a typical 4x game you scout or otherwise acquire intel about your opponents, and if you are falling behind you do whatever's necessary - including acts of desperation. Of course such acts tend to be poor choices if you were already "on track".)

Due to asymmetric nature of most races strength would be frequently irrelevant (like parasites will have one planet most of the time, then they will go on a breeding spree with high strength every 100 turns and then die out and go back to their homeplanet to hibernate next 100 turns) and in other cases hard to estimate at glance. Number of polanets and results of border skirmishes should be the most accurate I think...

Another reason you might want to provide feedback to the player (about how well they are progressing) is so they don't experience the following scenario: Build up for many hours. Then get completely stomped in a very short period of time.
It's a much better gaming experience if the player can find out earlier on that they need to find and make improvements to what they're doing and that they might be better off restarting with improved strategies rather than wasting tons of time on a lost cause.

Yes, indeed. I was thinking of a few "survival tests" on the way. Like, you need to get 50 planets before turn 100 of face a rebelion (people see you as incompetent), it would also help in conveying the pace and the scale of the game to the player (if you know from the beginning that you are to get 50 planets during early game you know that focusing on individual planets is not the point).

 

[Norfleet]

Also, how exactly these "goal cards" could work? You mean like a race being constructed from predefined random parts?

I think what he means is that the other races have some sort of objective they wish to do in your game, drawn from a pool of things they might want to do so that it differs from game to game, to give them some kind of motivation for the player to figure out and/or thwart.