Paradoxnt Paradoxnt

Phase Highways in space is a bad game concept!

▼

Phase Highways in space is a bad game concept!

from Sins Forums
I really don't like the beta's Phase Highway system. There should be no artificially forced space highways in the game. Okay, I've said it. My friends and I were really hoping that this game would use a less constricting movement system more like MOO or Rebellion for traveling between gravity wells.

The Phase Highway concept has been bugging me since I've started playing the beta. I've been quiet about it till now (mostly) because the beta has a lot of potential in other areas. But if we don't say anything about the Phase Highways now, they will be guaranteed to be included in the final release.

Also, these developers really want to hear us. They don't want us to say "yeah, the beta is just awesome" but then we don't buy the final release because we don't like it.

Games like Space Empires and Empires at War have their own versions of Phase Highways. The problem is that they kind of suck because of it. The concept of Phase Highways has been done to death in past games. Modders especially complain about them (check out the recent modding posts in the Space Empire Forums), because forcing players to use space highways mean that they can't make proper mods for Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5, Battlestar Galactica, and so on.

By getting rid of Phase Highway limitations, SoaSE will be purchased by ALL of the space modders out there. I know for a fact that the talented Evillejedi from the Homeworld 2 Star Wars mod is keeping his eye on SoaSE to see if it has any potential. The game would also see a serious increase of its shelf life because of all of the modding potential made possible.

The Phase Highway concept is used because game designers think that players need short term goals in order not to get bored/discouraged. They also think that the average player's intelligence can't handle too many choices at once. They really should acknowledgment that SciFi gamers are smarter than other gamers and that we would welcome more choice and potential. Besides, players can still choose to play on small maps if they want.

Let's briefly examine how the game could work without using any Phase Highways and instead allowed ships to travel wherever they wanted to go. Of course, Phase Space itself should still be the means of traveling between gravity wells as it is a good game concept.


-To see the other destination gravity wells in your home star system, Astronomy could become a researchable technology. The higher the level you have in Astronomy, the further your planets/asteroids/ships could see possible gravity well destinations.

-Allies should share gravity well destination points. Hmmm, maybe you could even sell/buy gravity well destination points in the trade menu.

-Stars should probably always be valid destination points regardless of your Astronomy Tech level, since they are so easy to see. Hmmm, you might make it so you have to jump to another star before you can initially see any of the planets in its orbit (somewhat realistic even).

-There should be an option to turn off Astronomy and allow players to see all planets/asteroids. Players would then be able to jump to whatever destination they wanted right from the start. This would mostly be used by modders and professional multiplayers.

-Some people might worry that defensive strategies without Phase Lanes would become impossible. This simply isn't the case. With sensors (and audio warnings), you can be warned of incoming enemy fleets as the beta already does. Defending players should be able to see the destination point of the incoming fleet. If they are trying to reach your inner planets by bypassing your outer worlds, you'll be able to send a suitable intercept fleet to the contested system. Your fleet is going to be closer and so will arrive first. If certain ships can be equipped with Phase Space Inhibitors, that would prevent invading fleets from endlessly jumping around in your back lines. Of course, you could also build Phase Space Inhibitor platforms in your back lines as well to prevent leapfrogging hostile fleets.

*Modders should have the option of removing the long range warning sensors that show incoming enemy ships to help them build more accurate mods. Or possibly make them a research option.

-If people have trouble dealing with multiple incoming fleets...well, they realistically should have trouble sending interception fleets to deal with multiple attacking empires at once. Still, SoaSE has a good AI, and your ships can handle themselves while you are focusing elsewhere. So handling multiple incoming attackers at once won't be as fatal for you as it would be in other lesser games.

-I suppose that Phase Space travel speed could be slowed down a bit if players find they have trouble organizing multiple defense and attack fleets. You might even allow a research tech that messes with Phase Space and slows travel through it. Or your ships might be allowed to travel a bit faster when traveling in Phase Space inside your empire's borders (they would have a better grasp of local phase space conditions).

-Finally, if absolutely necessary, the distance ships can jump in Phase Space could be tied to a tech level. The higher the tech level, the further your ships can jump. I know you don't want to use Anti Matter as a limiter for Phase Space jumps, so I didn't bother mentioning a fuel range.

So, please remove the Phase Space Highways. They are standing between this game being a good game, and one of those all time great games that set the benchmark for years to come. Please tell me Blair that you guys are considering doing this.

Posters who've read this and agree with me, now is the time for you to speak up. They might be able to make a serious gameplay change like this now, but they won't be able to do it when the game nears release.
75,884 views 211 replies
Reply #26 from Sins Forums Top
Damn, JSInvader made a good point. Can you imagine the problems forced Phase Highways are going to cause in multiplayer. You could play Team games and never see or be able to reach your teammates. Imagine how the poor player who gets stuck between two hostile teams with no ability to expand or reach his own teammates is going to feel.

Even regular non-team multiplayer is going to suck with forced Phase Highways. One guy starts at the end of a highway, and has an opponent in the next planet over. This second guy just fortifies his homeworld a bit while expanding into other nearby empty planets/asteroids. Soon, he has enough over whelming force to turn around and crush the trapped first guy who never had a chance.

Alliances in standard multiplayer make absolutely no sense with forced Phase Highways. You have to go through your neighbor to get anywhere anyway, so why not just take him out. It is too dangerous to ally with him and leave him behind your lines. Otherwise, the guy allies with you, you go through his system to attack somebody's far off colony, and then he sends his fleet to take over your undefended colony that he is supposed to be protecting.

Gone are the usual multiplayer unspoken agreements of mutual non interference because they both HAVE to go through the other guy to get anywhere.

Also, don't forget the threat of stalemates that forced Phase Highways offer us. Sure, weapon platforms aren't super powerful, but they add punch to a defensive fleet. Not to mention that the defending fleet will already be positioned properly to maximize their power. Also, defending fleets will be able to pick off the earliest attacker ships to arrive with massive focus fire since the attacker fleet never arrives at the same moment. All of this is to say that the defender will have the advantage = stalemate.

Forced Phase Highways are going to kill any multiplayer interest in this game.


Some posters are worried about fleets attacking all over the place (Yarlen mentioned Whack-a-mole tactics hehe). This can be avoided by reducing transit speed for ships not using Phase Lanes (this means you'll have plenty of time to have ships in place to meet invaders if you make your own phase lanes between colonies using some kind of Phase Lane Generator). Also, limits could be placed on the range of Phase Jumps without Phase Highways. Maybe these jump range limits can slowly be reduced with research.

I do like how most people agree with the optional Phased Highway concept. I for one would love to see an original freedom of movement concept for this game. We really don't need another Space Empires V/Empires at War with updated graphics and real time play.

Reply #27 from Sins Forums Top
I personally would prefer to stay with a system with limited travel, and the potential for strategic points. Certainly there could be a high-end tech that may allow the opening of additional lanes, or circumventing such choke points by some means, but IMO that should be the exception, not the rule.

Without the lanes, there is very little "terrain" to the map, which is a vital thing for strategy in an RTS, I think. Without the potential for choke points, you would need to build up defenses at every location and keep a significant amount of your forces (all of which which you'd have to pay upkeep for, BTW) on call to deal with incursions at random points. I personally wouldn't find that fun at all.
I dislike the idea of having interplanetary travel restricted by a random number generator at game creation. It lacks an explanation.
It should be reasonably easy to come up with a lane-construction-/interplanetary-travel-system that makes sense in a gameplay/strategy/territory-way and is believable. Took me 5 minutes, you I guess Ironclad will manage .
Star Control: Origins
Reply #28 from Sins Forums Top
It sounds like there's a large amount of support for the dismantling of the phase highway system, though some people are concerned that this could make for easy invasion behind the front lines of your system. There are a few ways to counter that particular difficulty:

1) No jumping through wells - This means the enemy fleets would have to roll all the way through a gravity well to the far side, letting you see where they would be jumping to. This is especially potent if the gravity well size is increased, and each gravity well is given more celestial bodies (moons and asteroids for instance).

2) Phase jumping outside of the lanes requires power from shields - Maybe a long phase jump outside of a space lane requires you to divert an amount of power from your shields. Thus when your fleet arrives at the end of a long jump, you need a moment or two to recharge the shields, giving the defender time to notice the 'attacking fleet' message and form a defense. The possibility of running into a heavily armed fleet lying in wait would also add to the riskiness of this particular strategy.
Reply #29 from Sins Forums Top
Many people here seem to have good ideas. I think the simplest things that need to be updated are ships jumping through the gravity wells and the ability to control where you enter a well. Just looking at enemy trade ships, they will jump in to your system, sit on one edge, then jump on to the next system, without travelling through your system at all. This tends to make inhibiting trade through your system difficult.
Additionally, the restriction of ships entering the gravity well at a certain location but able to leave from any location also seems wrong. Although it may make defending a planet easier as you know the exact direction your enemies can access it from, there seems to be a level of realism that is lost. I understand the arguement that terrain is an important aspect of real time strategy, but if I wanted to defend choke points, I would play a land based game.
The limitation on smaller class ships not being able to freely jump between systems (without additional researches, structures, or possibly a dedicated ship to assist them), as well as a travel time penelty for not using established (direct) travel lanes seems as it would restrict the manuvering of ships in a fashion similer to a "normal" terrain layout. For example, if you really wanted to conduct large scale warfare against a single planet, using a good mixture of ships (frigates, cruisers, and capital ships), you would effectivly need to use established space lanes to do so, as the dangers of moving through non-standard lanes would carry some stiff penelties.
Examples of penelties might be drained shields, damaged hulls, drastic (+or- 75% the nominal time) changes in arrival time, or even losing a ship to phase space. Various research could mitigate some of the dangers (ie better navigation) to allow for progression and escalation in the game, but the end result is the gamble that must be taken to move large fleets long distances over short periods of time.
By varying the level of danger present, each game could be tailored to how the terrain is layed out (like specifing more water or land/continents or islands in Civ2). Space lanes would be as follows: the area of phase space that is bound by the near side gravity wells between two planets, along with a tangent line from each well to the other (kind of like two basket balls sitting on the ground with a board on top of them).
Reply #30 from Stardock Forums Top
I'd also like to see less use of jump lanes in the game. Kryo, I can definitely see your point. However, I think that with sufficient tweaking in other areas, optional or non-existent jump lanes should be possible. Combinations of many of the suggestions in this thread could make it more than viable. Slower jump speeds, weakened ships, etc. Even new ideas, like technologies that slow incoming jump forces. (Didn't MoO2 have these?) Or generators that extend a 'no jump through' field beyond the gravity well of a planet. (essentially blocking ships from jumping past it to core territories) The upkeep system could even be tweaked to allow for some defenses to be built before ramping up the costs. This would also open up strategic decisions regarding how much of a fleet a player wishes to send on offense. They might forgo the defensive force to make a more sizable invasion fleet, at an obvious risk to themselves.

In any case, I question if space highways are truly the ONLY way. I think that with some experimentation, better alternatives can be found. And I would encourage IronClad to do exactly that -- experiment. It's a beta, we're here solely to be guinea pigs.


--LordPixie
Reply #31 from Sins Forums Top
Also, defending fleets will be able to pick off the earliest attacker ships to arrive with massive focus fire since the attacker fleet never arrives at the same moment.


Paradoxnt you can set your ships to arrive at a gravity well at the same time. And it do work.

On the multiplayer note. If some guy gets traped behind someone elses space. Dosent that simply mean that he was to slow? is that any different then a rush tactics in any other RTS?. And who says that the bigger guy who have him locked in is going to attack him? imagin if he is also being attacked from the outside.

So far im hoping for keeping phase lanes while allowing players to open up there own with some kinda of semi expensive structure.
I agree with Kyro i think it was that said that a RTS needs some kind of structure to its map. If you even in late game is simply allowed to go every where, then where is the strategy   

Reply #32 from Sins Forums Top
Allowing faster response by defenders doesn't negate that problem at all, it just lets you move the 'on-call' fleet faster. You still would need to build defenses everywhere, amass an on-call fleet, and pay upkeep on all that regardless.

Yeah, but I actually think it would be a good think for mye core planets to always be a possible target. But I really do believe the long travel time will make it very unattractive to launch such a long range assault. For the attack to have any chance of success you would have to send a major fleet (since the defender will have lots of time to muster a defence), and who would want to have large part of their fleet essentially wasted in phase space for such extended periods? Your ability to defend yourself would be reduced, so both the guy you're attacking and other players could launch attacks, while you would have to wait for your fleet to arrive, then either stay and fight or spend the same amount of time retreating back to your territory again. It's alot safer to attack nearby worlds, and if these things are balanced correctly thats what most players would do most of the time I think.

If this isn't discouraging enough there could be expensive structures that further increased the travel time to your worlds, making it even less desirable to launch these long range strikes. Such structures could even have a non-linear effect depending on the distance the attacking fleet has to travel, so that the longer the attacking fleet has to travel the slower it will go. Or maybe this could just be a law of nature, the further you try to make a jump, the slower it will be.

I'm just trying to propose ways to get some reasonable borders between empires without using set phase lanes like now. I just don't like the idea of artificial choke-points. Increasing the travel time like this will make it less likely that an enemy will attack from a long distance, but it's still possible, and it's a gamble I think it should be possible to make.
Reply #33 from Sins Forums Top
Thanks LordPixie. You mentioned MOO2 in your post and yes it did have tech/research that could slow ships in hyperspace (as well as tech/research that offered teleportation or the ability to change ship orders during hyperspace movement). MOO2 is pretty much the grand daddy of all space empire games, and was the benchmark for a long time afterwards.

I'm thinking that if Ironclad removes forced Phase Highways, SoaSE might be the next big benchmark for Space Empire games as well (instead of being a Space Empires/Empires at War real time knock off).

That doesn't mean that they can't allow tech for colonies to build Phase Space Highways to link up with each other. These colonial Phase Highway links would allow ships to move amongst colonies at a MUCH increased speed. Just by doing this, the developers would take a large step towards balancing game offense with defense.

Include the dozens of suggestions offered by our fellow beta testers in this forum post, and I am sure Ironclad can manage a SoaSE without "Yellow Brick Roads" in space. I just get upset when someone tells me that I can't get to Venus without going to Pluto first.
Reply #34 from Sins Forums Top
On the multiplayer note. If some guy gets traped behind someone elses space. Dosent that simply mean that he was to slow?


The way the map is currently generated, probably. The game seems to set each system more or less equal for all players in it, so the only way you're going to get bottled in is if you don't get out to the "open" part of the system before someone else has made it all the way around the "hub" of inner planets.
Reply #35 from Sins Forums Top
I've started on the end of a Phase Highway line playing the beta (ie, only one direction in which to go). If a player started on the next gravity well over on that line, I would have to go through him or die. If that player defends his homeworld (with fleet and platforms) while sending out a tiny force to take empty planets/asteroids further along that line(s), he can expand while containing me. Then he can crush me easily.

To say it is my fault the game placed me in a trapped dead end at the start of a game is ridiculous.

Anyway, a game with optional Phase Highways could give a trapped player more options and make it less of a death trap.
Reply #36 from Sins Forums Top

I've started on the end of a Phase Highway line playing the beta (ie, only one direction in which to go). If a player started on the next gravity well over on that line, I would have to go through him or die. If that player defends his homeworld (with fleet and platforms) while sending out a tiny force to take empty planets/asteroids further along that line(s), he can expand while containing me. Then he can crush me easily.


Paradoxnt, you have to see it as an advantage as well. The player who may be in front of you would be the one to be attacked first. Their is always an advantage and disadvantage to placement in strategy games. The key is to learn how to turn your disadvantage into a advantage.
Reply #37 from Sins Forums Top
Thats true, you can find a way around it.

I came up with another way to limit the highways. How about making maximum ranges for the ship travels, that way they cant just skip through a bunch of planets to your core worlds, but would have to establish a foothold on one at least.
Reply #38 from Stardock Forums Top
I don't like the space lanes.

It's why I haven't been able to get into Space Empires and other games that use it.

Gal Civ 2 is great in that there are no space lanes that restrict how you get to a planet.

I relish how the AI will go a long way around my empire to avoid my sensors and surprise attack me.


On the mention of chokepoints, we should be able to create them ourselves. Not be forced to use preset ones.

How? Well, in another thread there was talk about structures allowing phaselanes.

Well how about this. Free travel, but you can built phaselanes for faster travel.

For 'natural' chokepoints....wormholes! Yes, I love wormholes. (I blame my fanatical love for Stargate)
Reply #39 from Sins Forums Top

I love the passion and the well thought out arguments however I really want to avoid getting into a full debate and detailed analysis of gameplay issues such as this since the focus on beta 1 is more technical. However, I do have a few comments that might help.

First, I can understand a lot of the points against Phase Lanes and I would probably make many of the same arguments if I was only presented with what beta 1 has to offer. The complete picture is not available to you so I can't blame you. At the same time I can't give anything away but some of these ideas already exist in our version.

Secondly, we spent almost a full year testing the fully connected model which is essence means no lanes and the ability to jump to any planet at any time. This was the original design for Sins because like you, that sounded the coolest and there are plenty of great arguments for it. Unfortunately, it just didn't cut it, and boy did we try like madmen to tweak it to get it to work. When we made the switch,  the current system was unanimously acclaimed as more fun, especially when so directly contrasted against the previous system. At a later date, when our focus is on gameplay issues I will elaborate on the details of what was wrong with the fully connected model but here is a very very very short summary of the top problems in no particular order.

1. Reduced sense of meaningful exploration. Difficult to explain at this time without giving future elements away.
2. Reduced macro strategy due to lack of terrain and key objective locations. Chokes points, front lines, bottlenecks, supply lines, trade lines, sieges etc are critical.
3. Whack-a-mole. Neccessary to maintain defenses and fleets at every location. Very frustrating. Reduces strategy to the Ender's Game model for offense.
4. Not compatible with real-time gameplay. So many potential targets and locations to defend stresses even our best tester's RTS micromanagement skills and ability to multi-task.
5. Many multiplayer balancing issues. One example: without terrain, it is much too easy to throw a combined effort against singular targets and overwhelm them especially since players are forced to distribute defenses so broadly.
6. More at a later date.

We tried a lot of creative ideas including some of those listed in this thread to alleviate the issues but ulimately they didn't add up. We had to look at more complicated solutions (it is much easier to implement a fully connected network than the Phase Lane system).

Thirdly, we very quickly realized there are problems with the elements of the Phase Lane System that was presented in Beta1 that are independant of the additional elements you don't have access to. Some of these include the jumping thru well problem and the starting position problem (which is particularly bad if you start with a large number of players on a small system). They will all be addressed.

Fourth(ly?) We do intend to provide a fair bit of galaxy customization at a later date. Even if those options fail to satisfy, if you've been following the sins IRC channel, you would know there has already been a large amount of progress in how to mod Sins - even without the tools we will eventually be providing.

Fifth, nothing is locked in stone and we are always open to ideas. Heck, we've changed a lot in the last week based purely on forum feedback and there is much more to come. Even by the time I finish posting this there should be another patch up full of forum recommendations to "try out".

Finally, until the full picture is known I know its going to be a difficult ride for some of you to accept the Phase Lanes as they are in Beta 1. Give them a chance for the moment, its only a technical beta. With a bit of patience and some healthy dialogue I'm sure the final product will be more than satisfactory.

Thanks again for the enthusiasm, passion and well-thought out constructive criticism. It does have an impact

Reply #40 from Sins Forums Top
The easiest way to get rid of phased space lanes is to take away upkeep on gun platforms - this would allow you to build quite a few and perhaps reduce all other defensive structures upkeep - That way you can reasonably defend EACH system. Lets face it in almost all SciFi every inhabited planet has SOME kind of defense system. Currently none are in place simply because I only defend my choke points and NOT my core worlds.

Reply #41 from Sins Forums Top

The easiest way to get rid of phased space lanes is to take away upkeep on gun platforms - this would allow you to build quite a few and perhaps reduce all other defensive structures upkeep - That way you can reasonably defend EACH system. Lets face it in almost all SciFi every inhabited planet has SOME kind of defense system. Currently none are in place simply because I only defend my choke points and NOT my core worlds.




Yeah I just don't use them because they have so much upkeep for as many as I would like to build and most of the time they only fire 2-3 times before the ships are out of their range.

Thanks for the post Blair, I can't wait to see what else you guys have in store for us!
Reply #42 from Sins Forums Top
Maybe just make it so that ships can't jump through gravity wells...I find that really annoying.
Reply #43 from Sins Forums Top

There shouldn't be any "choke points" in space.


I disagree.

I personally would prefer to stay with a system with limited travel, and the potential for strategic points. Certainly there could be a high-end tech that may allow the opening of additional lanes, or circumventing such choke points by some means, but IMO that should be the exception, not the rule.

Without the lanes, there is very little "terrain" to the map, which is a vital thing for strategy in an RTS, I think. Without the potential for choke points, you would need to build up defenses at every location and keep a significant amount of your forces (all of which which you'd have to pay upkeep for, BTW) on call to deal with incursions at random points. I personally wouldn't find that fun at all.


Personally I'm in support for a solid, interesting gameplay mechanism with a competent AI behind it, and that would be more possible if some kind of strategic movement restriction is applied in the game. I'm against a free-wheeling universe full of idiotic AI rivals.

*I doubt it's practical to play SOASE online as it is in beta1, because it would take too much time to finish a round. In that case I'd vote for making the single player gaming more challenging, instead of the "everything is possible but everything is so lame" route.


Reply #44 from Sins Forums Top
Thank you for your quick response Blair. It really was neat to see how many people responded to this topic.

I really just needed to hear from you that Ironclad understands the problems that we are seeing with the present Beta 1 Phase Lanes. Now that I have a better understanding of what you are trying to achieve, I am sure whatever Phase Space system you finally implement will be fine.

**Here is my last suggestion about Phase Lanes that will actually satisfy EVERYONE:

Simply make it possible for us modders to tweak the game to run with the fully connected maps for our mods. This way, standard single player/multiplayer gamers will be happy with the standard maps AND modders will be happy with the modding potential offered by using fully connected maps.

EVERYBODY IS A WINNER THIS WAY AND SoaSE STILL ENDS UP BEING A BENCHMARK GAME! YAY!
Reply #45 from Sins Forums Top
Thank you for the response Blair, and thank all of the posters for keeping this thread civil Allot of good points were made on both sides of the issue.

I dont understand how the fully connected map broke the game for you guys, but ill take your word for it. I can live with the lane system as long as it makes some sense. You shouldn't have to travel to a planet right next door via a planet on the other side of the map. Im glad you guys are working on fix's for it.

If it is possible to mod in fully connected maps then i will be a very happy camper.
Reply #46 from Sins Forums Top
Fourth(ly?)


yep, thats gramatically correct
Reply #47 from Stardock Forums Top
Thanks Blair.

Wormholes!
Reply #48 from Sins Forums Top
I dont understand how the fully connected map broke the game for you guys

I seriously can see the issue with this. think death by 1000 papercuts.
Reply #49 from Sins Forums Top
I agree with Jamaldrn, it should be the scanner range / jump range principle. Its all about freedom of choice, the world is your lobster etc.

Sounds like it is too late for a major overhaul like that.
Reply #50 from Sins Forums Top
actually, the devs have said that there are techs that exist for the free jump system still in there. Like a principle i would guess, so maybe it is not such a big overhaul as we think.