KickStarter Terra Invicta - sci-fi grand strategy from Long War mod creators - now available on Early Access

[Infinitron]

 

[lightbane]

Looks quite autistic indeed. On the other hand, you get to conquer protect Earth with your favorite nation of your choice, then defend it from aliens.

 

[Turtle-Zone 3000]

Looks like the Earth based gameplay is more akin to a paradox game, hopefully its robust.

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

Interesting project.

I like how the space combat is hard sci-fi! Rockets!

Wonder how they will do warfare on Earth. I hope we get to play with all sorts of cool exotic old tech, like good ol' Pulse-Detonation Planes, Rocketplanes, Space Planes, the works.

 

[Hooded Horse]

Thanks for the interest in our game! If anyone has any questions, I'll do my best to answer, although my account is new and I got an automated message of a 1 week probationary period, so I'm not sure how fast my messages will be approved.

Wonder how they will do warfare on Earth. I hope we get to play with all sorts of cool exotic old tech, like good ol' Pulse-Detonation Planes, Rocketplanes, Space Planes, the works.

There are a lot of possible techs to develop, and a system whereby factions can devote their attention to general technological advance or specific applications, with tradeoffs either way.

Here's a quote from our creative director on armies: "all regions on Earth have abstracted defense forces that fight at the nation's military technology level. Only powerful nations have one or more armies, which are probably the equivalent of a couple of divisions. They have the combat, transportation and logistical support to actually move around and conquer territory. They are also a significant expense. They also fight at the nation's tech level. ... To cross oceans you also need a navy flag set on the army (and have naval superiority against any military opponents)"

Looks like the Earth based gameplay is more akin to a paradox game, hopefully its robust.

We are indeed a grand strategy game. Players choose a faction with a specific ideological take on how to deal with the aliens (ranging from extermination to surrender to build a spaceship and escape), and then try to influence public opinion to match their approach to the aliens (details on public opinion mechanic here: https://pavonisinteractive.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=28083) and control nations to execute their will (including military actions). This sometimes leads a faction to favor other human factions, sometimes oppose them, but all ultimately want Earth's resources devoted to their specific ideological goal.

You can find more details on the factions at the chart at Kickstarter: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/terrainvicta/terra-invicta , or at the factions dev diary here: https://pavonisinteractive.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=27045

 

[Luka-boy]

You can find more details on the factions at the chart at Kickstarter: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/terrainvicta/terra-invicta , or at the factions dev diary here: https://pavonisinteractive.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=27045

Something about those seven factions feels comfortingly familiar.

Not sure why...

 

[Hooded Horse]

At the conclusion of every interview, we say: "Please don't go. The Drones need you."

If they reply "They look up to you" we know all we need to know.

We will have to find a new test to switch to now of course. Maybe something in MOO2...

 

[Inspectah]

Godspeed to ya, looking pretty fun
This is the kind of autism I can get behind

 

[somewhatgiggly]

You can find more details on the factions at the chart at Kickstarter: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/terrainvicta/terra-invicta , or at the factions dev diary here: https://pavonisinteractive.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=27045

Something about those seven factions feels comfortingly familiar.

Not sure why...

I hope we can fight some of these factions at will.

The Servants need to be killed, quickly. The Academy needs a slap in the face. The Protectorate needs a wake up call.

 

[Hooded Horse]

Yes, conflict between human factions is a huge part of the game. You basically have two levels of competition:

On the one hand, you have to try to get Earth on your side, and that does mean directly opposing other factions. It also means temporary cooperation with some others--Project Exodus might decide it needs the Resistance strong to hold the aliens off long enough to develop technology and build its ship to escape. But ultimately, even those temporary alliances will give way to the fundamental reality that each faction wants the resources of Earth devoted to its specific goal.

But on the other hand, you need Earth in decent shape to face the aliens themselves. And that means that maybe you don't want to go nuking the parts of the planet controlled by your human enemies, because the greater threat is still coming (or, if you are the Servants, then I suppose you'd view it differently, but even the Protectorate needs a strong Earth to negotiate what it wants).

This plays out in military conflict, but also in tons of indirect competition over public opinion and otherwise. For example, tech conflicts, based on how that system works, where basic technological advancement is shared between the factions but investment allows you to guide the direction:

"The seven human factions collectively research three new scientific principles, or techs, at once (the three on the top part of the above UI). The factions can also research up to three private engineering projects simultaneously. The choice is how much to invest in each of the techs and projects at any given point of the game."

"So why not leave the public techs alone and just focus on projects that directly benefit your faction? Three reasons:
• It slows the overall progress of humanity, making harder for all the factions to achieve their objectives.
• The more you contribute to a public tech, the more likely you’ll have access to a project it unlocks, and the faster it will become available for you to research (see below for details on this mechanic).
• Whichever faction contributes the most research to a given tech gets to choose the next tech the world pursues.

The last is critical. Left unchecked, factions like the Servants or the Initiative may steers the world’s efforts toward developing methods of social control, rather than propulsion or weapon systems."

https://www.pavonisinteractive.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=28950

That's today's dev diary btw, covers the details of how tech works in the game. Here's the basic summary:

"The usual formula for research advancement in 4X games is individual players and AIs chasing a single tech at a time. That’s well enough, but we wanted to do something that offers a richer decision set and also:

• Simulates concurrent research in different disciplines in the modern world.
• Distinguishes between science and engineering.
• Reflects how a lot of modern science is actually done in the open, with new discoveries being explored in research journals and academic conferences, while specific products capitalizing on those understandings are developed in secret.
• Creates opportunities for cooperation between factions as well as for prisoner’s dilemma and free-rider problems."

 

[Xamenos]

Yeah, the research system sounds pretty interesting. It's a shame that most other strategy games just copied civ's system without improving on it. Even Alpha Centauri's Blind Research was quietly forgotten. Some space 4X's did have a more involved research with a random tech tree or more than one categories you could research at the same time, but none of them went quite far enough imho. I am curious to see how it'll actually play.

What I'm worried about are the factions. They don't seem nearly as memorable as those of SMAC. It remains to be seen how much the differing personalities of their leaders will show, and hopefully they won't be as bland as in, say, Beyond Earth. But there seems to be too much overlap in their ideologies. They are divided along their response to the aliens and there are essentially only four different responses: Fight, Surrender, Flee, Exploit. This leaves some of the factions in an awkward position. Resistance and Humanity First both choose to Fight, differing only on how far to push this fight (simple victory vs extermination). Meanwhile, the Servants and the Protectorate all choose to Surrender, differing only on the terms they seek (unconditional vs conditional). The Academy is odd, in that I have no idea how they plan to convince the aliens to see them as equals without either Fighting, which puts them in the same box as the Resistance, or negotiating a Surrender, which does the same for the Protectorate. Project Exodus and the Initiative are the only factions with a completely unique ideology that makes it plausible for them to work with or against any other faction at any time. So I see the game as always progressing with those two opposing alliances, and two free agents, fighting the same war for the fate of the earth and I'm worried this will make it more predictable and limit replayability.

SMAC, in contrast, had much more distinct factions, each with a unique deology that did not overlap with another. And they were in opposing pairs that drove conflict. Morgan vs Deirdre, Yang vs Lal, Zakharov vs Miriam with the Spartans in their own little corner. But crucially, outside those pairs alliances were fairly freeform. Most factions had a sworn enemy, but they could pick and choose whom to ally with or fight from among the other pairs according to your social policies and interests. You didn't see the same powerblocks always emerging and it made for a much more interesting game.

 

[Hooded Horse]

Great question! Part of the answer is that the competition and conflict between factions isn't as simple as power blocs competing along a single dimension, like, say, controlling territory or fighting wars (ie the standard 4x arena). Instead the competition is happening along multiple more subtle dimensions as well.

For example, in technological focus, to quote the dev diary above: "Left unchecked, factions like the Servants or the Initiative may steers the world’s efforts toward developing methods of social control, rather than propulsion or weapon systems." So in that dimension, the Servants are aligned with the Initiative, and away from what the Protectorate would want.

Another area of competition is public opinion. Here, let me refer to this dev diary and its associated public opinion chart (while noting the Protectorate was called the Peacekeepers when it was written): https://www.pavonisinteractive.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=28083 As you can see there, public opinion in each nation is modeled along two dimensions: "The x axis corresponds to the degree of support or opposition to the aliens. The y axis represents idealism versus cynicism about humanity and its response to their arrival." So here again, the Servants end up opposed to the Protectorate, as the Servants want to drag public opinion towards idealism, while the Protectorate is on the pragmatic side.

As for the personalities of the faction leaders--you are right, all we've released is a simple chart introducing them. The SMAC personalities we all remember and love were conveyed through a ton of in-game means, including extensive quotes. I think you'll find our leaders memorable if you play the game, but that's the sort of thing that there's nothing I can really point to at this stage to show.

 

[Galdred]

Looks like a phone game.

I'd very much like to see what phone games you've been playing.

Mostly Phooenix Point it would seem
I think it is the opposite: the UI seems overwhelming, especially on the political layer.

Hooded Horse , you quote Master of Orion as an inspiration for space combat, but it seems to also have in common with Children of a Dead Earth (low tech spacecraft, newtonian flight paths). Were you influenced by this one too?

 

[lightbane]

The Servant leader who bends over to the alien overlords is from EEUU, while the Resistance leader is from Britain? Now that's what I call science-fiction.

Will there be a chance to play with specific nations such as say Germany?

Will this run on W7?

 

[Hooded Horse]

Were you influenced by this one too?

Sadly my own personal influences probably aren't that relevant: I'm just the producer of Terra Invicta (I work for both Pavonis Interactive and the publisher of Terra Invicta, Hooded Horse). So I work on the business end of things for the most part.

Alpha Centauri and MOO2 are games I loved and have chatted with others about, and John states that Masters of Orion is one of the inspirations for the tactical combat at the 2:40 point in the KS video (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/terrainvicta/terra-invicta). I've never played Children of a Dead Earth myself, or heard it discussed by the team, but I can't say for certain one way or another. I'd guess though that similarity might be a case of both games drawing inspiration from the same sources: hard science fiction.

Will there be a chance to play with specific nations such as say Germany?

Germany is two regions within the game. The player is never a nation exactly, instead you lead something of a shadowy organization pulling the strings in the background. But you can certainly decide to focus some of your efforts on gaining influence within any nation you like, though often that's a choice that you would make by strategic considerations that present themselves.

Cold War scenario is currently winning the poll at Discord for our next start date scenario to add (Kickstarter is just about to pass the 100k needed to start the new scenario stretch goal in the next day or so), so in that scenario there would be a divided East and West Germany.

Will this run on W7?

Looks like it, for more detail here's the minimum system requirements, bottom of the Steam page (https://store.steampowered.com/app/1176470/Terra_Invicta/)

 

[Xamenos]

Having now read the dev diaries, it struck me how well the Earth grand strategy mechanics would work for a historical game with the factions as various Illuminati-type organizations. I hope this does well enough for the team that they can do something like it with the engine, it would probably be more interesting than what Paradox has been making lately.

 

[Hooded Horse]

Xamenos Thanks, we do hope to capture some of that historical element in the scenarios (including the Cold War scenario we just announced). But yes, I think there's a lot of potential with the engine. From the ground up it was built to be easily extensible by the team.

But ideas like that might not need to wait for future games, as Terra Invicta has been built with modding in mind. Modders can easily go in and change a ton of the game (and in many cases, without even a coding background required, as much is data-driven). Advantage of former modders making a game I guess, modding support is a major thing on their minds. (not really relevant to how the game works, but even I come from a modding background, I created a balance mod for the Viking Conquest DLC for Warband: https://www.moddb.com/mods/vc-balance-mod )

 

[Space Satan]

US$ 109,296
pledged of US$ 20,000 goal
it seems there's still a chance for better graphics and overall art improvement, along with Cold War scenario I am most interested in

 

[Hooded Horse]

Thanks! The Cold War scenario is something we're excited about as well.

The visuals have been a priority over the last year, and we had a recent dev diary showing before/after for several aspects of the game: https://www.pavonisinteractive.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=28868

 

[Trans-Financial-Man]

Looks like a phone game.

I'd very much like to see what phone games you've been playing.

Mostly Phooenix Point it would seem
I think it is the opposite: the UI seems overwhelming, especially on the political layer.

Hooded Horse , you quote Master of Orion as an inspiration for space combat, but it seems to also have in common with Children of a Dead Earth (low tech spacecraft, newtonian flight paths). Were you influenced by this one too?

From a UI standpoint it's clear we're looking at a complex desktop focused Strategy game. Good! I got burned as a backer of Phoenix Point when they decided to consoleize the whole thing with an abysmal UI and over simplified gameplay so they could map it to controller easier. In opposition to what we were actually promised, a true X-Com sucessor.

Where the phone game comparisons come in, is that from what I've seen the 3D models are clearly generic Blender models that have received light touch ups. They look kind of cheap and nasty on their own. A bit like slightly higher rez CK2 models if I'm being honest. And that's not a style you should be emulating. I'm not asking you to fund a whole new artstyle but please consider replacing those portaits with something a little more distinct or at least less uncanny looking.

Regardless, I've backed the game. It looks like the sort of thing I'd be into anyway. All though I'm disappointed the Cold War got voted in. I could see much more potential in an AU WW2 where aliens invade, or even a Victorian War of the Worlds style invasion. Maybe we could have those as DLC?

 

[ArchAngel]

Looks like a phone game.

I'd very much like to see what phone games you've been playing.

Mostly Phooenix Point it would seem
I think it is the opposite: the UI seems overwhelming, especially on the political layer.

Hooded Horse , you quote Master of Orion as an inspiration for space combat, but it seems to also have in common with Children of a Dead Earth (low tech spacecraft, newtonian flight paths). Were you influenced by this one too?

From a UI standpoint it's clear we're looking at a complex desktop focused Strategy game. Good! I got burned as a backer of Phoenix Point when they decided to consoleize the whole thing with an abysmal UI and over simplified gameplay so they could map it to controller easier. In opposition to what we were actually promised, a true X-Com sucessor.

Where the phone game comparisons come in, is that from what I've seen the 3D models are clearly generic Blender models that have received light touch ups. They look kind of cheap and nasty on their own. A bit like slightly higher rez CK2 models if I'm being honest. And that's not a style you should be emulating. I'm not asking you to fund a whole new artstyle but please consider replacing those portaits with something a little more distinct or at least less uncanny looking.

Regardless, I've backed the game. It looks like the sort of thing I'd be into anyway. All though I'm disappointed the Cold War got voted in. I could see much more potential in an AU WW2 where aliens invade, or even a Victorian War of the Worlds style invasion. Maybe we could have those as DLC?

Well after the gameplay trailer I have to retract my phone game comment. Now it just seems like a indie game with high goals. We will see what kind of end result we get.

 

[Hooded Horse]

I'm not asking you to fund a whole new artstyle but please consider replacing those portaits with something a little more distinct or at least less uncanny looking.

Just to make sure, are you looking at the most recent versions? Over the last year we redid all the character portraits.

This was the old (from over a year ago):

This is our new version:

Regardless, I've backed the game. It looks like the sort of thing I'd be into anyway.

That means a great deal. The funds raised in Kickstarter are going to allow us to deliver a better game. Thank you, both for the support and for trusting in us to deliver.

All though I'm disappointed the Cold War got voted in. I could see much more potential in an AU WW2 where aliens invade, or even a Victorian War of the Worlds style invasion. Maybe we could have those as DLC?

WWII is a scenario we almost considered doing as a stretch goal.

But the problem is, a WWII scenario needs an extensive naval warfare system. We don't have one implemented yet, not just for technical reasons, but also because we are unsure of whether players would want that level of scale (ie, go from moving your spaceships from Mars to Titan, to moving your naval ships one region over...it isn't clear the addition would benefit the game). So currently naval warfare is more abstracted in the game, compared to land warfare (ie, naval power is basically a characteristic of nations and armies).

That's an issue we'll figure out at some point, but what decided things for now is that we don't want to let feature creep set in before release. All of our stretch goals are intended as things we can do alongside our current plans, and without creating the need to implement additional features that might lead to problems or delays. A complex naval warfare system would require a lot to make it work right, including AI and interactions with a lot of other mechanics in the game.

So for now, we are sticking with our more abstracted naval warfare system. However, after release it's possible we'd consider implementing such a system, and if we did so, a major draw would be the possibility of a WWII scenario.

Victorian era is an interesting suggestion, and those kinds of more distant past scenarios do have a lot of potential. I'd be willing to bet that some modders will be attempting those sorts of scenarios as well. Hard to say more at this point, as it would be a major technological shift from where we are positioning the scenarios currently.

Well after the gameplay trailer I have to retract my phone game comment.

Thanks! The team has worked hard this year, and made a lot of progress in the visuals.

Now it just seems like a indie game with high goals. We will see what kind of end result we get.

The Gameplay trailer is pretty much the game in its current state. We're headed to Alpha in less than 2 months now (December), and Beta a few months after that (March), so the game is pretty far along. We are still working on several things though. For example, the trajectory calculations for ships moving (a rather complex thing, as our map of the Solar System is constantly in motion, with bodies orbiting the sun and such, and the calculations have to be done with good performance in mind) has a placeholder system, but the accurate one is currently being finished and will soon be added. AI is still being improved, actually that's maybe the single largest development focus now (and on through release, probably). So a lot to do.

But the game as shown in the Gameplay Trailer is already there (and installed on my computer actually--I haven't had time to play since the Kickstarter started, but, well, haven't had time for sleep much either...that should change in another couple weeks).

 

[RNGsus]

The first long war mod was equal parts firaxcom, autism and concentrated x-com awesomeness.
Long war 2 was kinda bad.

This looks a bit heavy on the autism, the screen showing all the stats for a single nation feels like it's already at a grand strategy level, and it's not even the primary gameplay focus. Turn based newtonian space combat could be neat though.

The hell is this? Where am I?

 

[RNGsus]

Looks quite autistic indeed. On the other hand, you get to conquer protect Earth with your favorite nation of your choice, then defend it from aliens.

I'm just following orders.

 

[baud]

All though I'm disappointed the Cold War got voted in. I could see much more potential in an AU WW2 where aliens invade, or even a Victorian War of the Worlds style invasion. Maybe we could have those as DLC?

WWII is a scenario we almost considered doing as a stretch goal.

But the problem is, a WWII scenario needs an extensive naval warfare system. We don't have one implemented yet, not just for technical reasons, but also because we are unsure of whether players would want that level of scale (ie, go from moving your spaceships from Mars to Titan, to moving your naval ships one region over...it isn't clear the addition would benefit the game). So currently naval warfare is more abstracted in the game, compared to land warfare (ie, naval power is basically a characteristic of nations and armies).

That's an issue we'll figure out at some point, but what decided things for now is that we don't want to let feature creep set in before release. All of our stretch goals are intended as things we can do alongside our current plans, and without creating the need to implement additional features that might lead to problems or delays. A complex naval warfare system would require a lot to make it work right, including AI and interactions with a lot of other mechanics in the game.

So for now, we are sticking with our more abstracted naval warfare system. However, after release it's possible we'd consider implementing such a system, and if we did so, a major draw would be the possibility of a WWII scenario.

Personally I don't understand why you don't need an extensive naval warfare system for a Cold War start but need one for a WW II start. I mean in the Cold-War period, navies were an important part of warfare, even if there was never a conflict between peer powers, especially once you get nuclear subs with ballistic missiles, supercarriers and cruise missiles.

Good luck for your project anyway