Paradoxnt Paradoxnt

Phase Highways in space is a bad game concept!

Phase Highways in space is a bad game concept!

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.
75,912 views 211 replies
Reply #126 Top
Edit: Ignore my previous post. It somehow got all messed up when I posted and I can't edit it .

I am really curious as to how IronClad/Stardock came to the conclusion that the open model failed. How did it fail and what about it wasn't fun? I am sure we can come up with some decent solutions to many of the problems you ran into.

I would also like to add that input from the beta 1 community couldn't be utilized during this full year of testing. Sometimes it is hard to see the forest when you are standing in the trees. A large group of testers is an excellent way to find some very unique solutions to problems that are pretty complex. Sometimes that solution can be relatively simple. I believe that this is the case here with respect having an "open" universe vs one with lanes. This is likely one of the only times this kind of feedback could be utilized since later in the design cycle will be too late.

I have been debating whether or not to come up with a detailed analysis of how realism can be maintained in a space RTS and still keep it fun. Of course, it wouldn't be a small undertaking and I keep asking myself the question....

Is it worth it???
Reply #127 Top
@Tholan - I am also in the same camp. I cant help but think of Stars! and wonder why?...

Regarding the paper idea, I have also considered doing something like that for a long time. Since GCII was announced to be exact. I so want to see a Pax/Stars!/MoO hybrid. If only I could program.... I have simply not had the time to do it in earnest.

As to the question, I firmly believe it would be. Hell do it as a group project. Ultimately it may be a purely academic affair but given the traffic on this site now I'm willing to bet more then a few developers are ghosting around and would likely find value in such an endeavor as I'm sure IG or SD would if not for this title then maybe the next.

BTW: I also hate the fact we cant edit posts after someone else has posted. Additionally I miss having a signature.
Reply #128 Top
I cant help but think of Stars! and wonder why?...

Regarding the paper idea, I have also considered doing something like that for a long time. Since GCII was announced to be exact.


The difference though is that Stars!, GC2, MoO, et al are all turn-based games. You have all the time you like to examine the map, predict your enemy's strategy, and act accordingly; since the player's attention is not a limited resource, the downsides of open travel are diminished.

With an RTS though, things are different, and having open travel would make it exceedingly difficult to stay on top of the situation. Again, I refer to Blair's comments on page 1 of this thread.
Reply #129 Top
ROFL!! I guess it is all how one perceives the situation. I consider the limited time factor the primary challenge in epic RTS games. Shoot worse case situation there is always the universal solution when one cant keep up. It is the "pause" key.

Seriously however, I fully understand your position. I also understand a lot of people that are likely to purchase this title are not looking for something with highly complex interactive dynamics that are tempered by time sensitive prioritizing of tasks. They simply want a beer and pretzels game and not an over simplified space based empire building simulation.

Personally speaking, if one considers the demographics of the current beta tester community it would seem to conflict with the general consumer assumption and related "fun factor". I truly believe there are many simulation lovers out there (lots are in closets) but the commercial market always fails to capture them due to the business practice of catering to the LCD risk variable. But I digress...

Anyway, I hope you guys will consider the happy medium of free travel within systems and lanes between stars. I think that is a reasonable solution that has lots of benefits of both systems.
Reply #130 Top
It is the "pause" key.


Not an option in multiplayer, though.
Reply #131 Top

It is the "pause" key.


Not an option in multiplayer, though.


True enough at present. The real question should be why not? A progressive product could offer a joint "time stop" request option for players to all "vote" to suspend time for a prescribed duration. Shoot the player making the request could even have to pay a small fee in resources to the other players for the "inconvenience".

Now lets take a second and consider the small comment about "redefining the genera" with regards to this title. Hmmmm....

I may be different from other multiplayer gamers but I have no issues with pausing a game to allow a fried or even total strange time to plan to challenge me as long as it is reasonable (for the stranger at any rate).

Reply #132 Top
True enough at present. The real question should be why not? A progressive product could offer a joint "time stop" request option for players to all "vote" to suspend time for a prescribed duration.


"Hey buddy, do you mind if we pause the game for a minute so I can plan how to best intercept that attack fleet you're sending at my homeworld? Thanks, you're the best!"

Somehow I don't see it happening in most cases
Reply #134 Top

"Hey buddy, do you mind if we pause the game for a minute so I can plan how to best intercept that attack fleet you're sending at my homeworld? Thanks, you're the best!"

Somehow I don't see it happening in most cases


You never know... Surely there are a lot of nice would be galactic emperors out there who would like to win knowing they have fully tested their metal against others and came out victorious because of skill and not luck or failure on the part of the opponent to click things fast enough. Hmmmmm... Maybe I'm just an idealist.

Anyway, an option is an option and it always gets brownie points and we know you can never have too many of those bad boys.
Reply #135 Top
No, this pausing in MP is not an option in my opinion. The game should allow the "grand strategy" of fleet management only and micro for the clickfesters. I wouldn't mind at all giving individual commands to individual ships while the rest of the fleet is doing it's artificial best.

On space highways:

I think the system should be redone with limiting the range of jumps so that you know only your border planets are in danger. Like the jump consuming AM and most weapons needing it as well.

This would also enable making jumps longer than border planets but the fleet would arrive without any antimatter, thus becoming a sitting duck for any small defence. If the player chooses to wait until the AM reserves are recharged the defender has ample time to scramble fleets from the border planets.

This retains the incentive to attack (since the dedicated defender is spreading his forces into several border systems erm planets) but the attacking fleet does have less AM than the defenders which should give a fighting chance as well.

EDIT: I changed the post so that the two topics became evident...
Reply #136 Top
"Hey buddy, do you mind if we pause the game for a minute so I can plan how to best intercept that attack fleet you're sending at my homeworld? Thanks, you're the best!"

Somehow I don't see it happening in most cases

It works in DefCon though. Players can vote for a game speed or full pause. I suppose it works well because the game lasts only 20 minutes at most and is divided in 3 distinct part (Defcon 3: place ground and naval units, Defcon 2: order your units around, Defcon 1: nukes allowed).
But yet it works, so maybe it's possible to implement a temporary slow-mo request in the game for players who feel rushed. Maybe this can take the shape of some kind of time-shifting device that eats up a lot of ressource for a short time. I'm sure it can be implemented in a consistent way.
Of course, this breaks the pace of the game which is primarily a RTS. But regarding the scale of the game which is supposed to be epic, in opposition with skirmish games like Warcraft, I think it makes sense.

Yeah, I hate being rushed in games

In addition to Space Voyager post, I think open space travel could be counter balanced by attrition. I think Empire Earth (or is it Rise of Nations?) works that way.
When your units are out of your empire boundaries, they get higher attrition damage the farther they are from your empire. Concerning Sins, I think it could work well if attrition occurs only if your ships are out of your empire boundaries and out of a gravity well or phase lane. Attrition damage could be countered by supply ships or a specific technology (in Empire Earth/Rise of Nations --can't remember which one-- attrition is lowered or nullified with a specific ressource: citrus).
Of course, this have some implications regarding scouting and colonisation that need to be worked out.

Btw, I wonder if empire integrity have any importance. I mean, is there some kind of consequence when your empire is split in half ?

NOTE: I pre-ordered a few days too late for being in the beta so I did not play the game yet.
Reply #137 Top
@Seboss - you can still get in via StarDock Central and TotalGamingNet.
Reply #138 Top
Can I? Sins appears in the games list in SD Central but the Download command doesn't do anything.
In my understanding, Beta 1 is closed since April 4th   

EDIT: ah, I get it know. I did not pre-order using Tokens so I won't be able to get in until Beta 2. I suppose I could cancel the pre-order then pre-order again using tokens to get in but that sounds troublesome.
Reply #139 Top

Seboss - Yes.

Pausing in Multiplayer: Not going to happen. Sins isn't DEFCON. It's not meant to finish in 10 min, nor would the vast majority of players consent to pausing an RTS in multiplayer to issue orders.

Reply #140 Top

...nor would the vast majority of players consent to pausing an RTS in multiplayer to issue orders.




Sounds like a Poll question to me! Although...I do agree with you Yarlen!

(slim runs and hides)
Reply #141 Top
@Yarlen - yeah, we figured as much because it is ultimately not worth the effort. The comment was a light hearted anecdotal one as in "desperate situations call for desperate measures". It was really not meant to be taken seriously.
Reply #142 Top
I'd like to see some device to slow down enemy ships though. Maybe that's already implemented ?
Reply #143 Top
Ok one point that i have seen, people who are often happy with a system don't come out of the woodwork to say "This system is awesome, thank you!" they are too busy playing the game, people who don't like something however can seem like the majority because they are the ones on the board talking. Thus a poll or percentage count isn't very accurate

I, personally, love the space lanes. It gives great tactical options, choke points, and predictability for what your opponents will do..

Though for the sake of argument i have seen one great system that worked, in a game called sword of the stars. It incorporated jump lines fuel and other factors. One race called the hivers didn't have FTL travel on their ships, they had to float from star to star on sub light engines then set up jump gates (one turn from any gate to any other gate, even if on the other side of the galaxy) but the other races had hyper drives that could follow the warp lines to get someplace quick OR they could kick on their sub light drives and try to float across the black to another star, but risk running out of fuel.
Reply #144 Top
It is the "pause" key.


Not an option in multiplayer, though.


Europa Universalis doesn't seem to be suffering at all with this as a working option in multiplayer.

That's even a more detailed game with, essentially larger playing field.


It doesn't seem to be unanimous among the consumers, btw. It would have been nice to beta the open map game too, maybe we could be offering feedback on that. I mean, you're getting feedback for the laned system, right?

Reply #145 Top
True enough at present. The real question should be why not? A progressive product could offer a joint "time stop" request option for players to all "vote" to suspend time for a prescribed duration.


"Hey buddy, do you mind if we pause the game for a minute so I can plan how to best intercept that attack fleet you're sending at my homeworld? Thanks, you're the best!"

Somehow I don't see it happening in most cases



more likely it would be "hew buddy do you mind if we pause the game so i can go to the bathroom
Reply #146 Top
Yeah, even large TBS games will generally have a turn time limit that people can pause if someone has to relieve themselves or something. No reason at all to NOT have pausing or variable speed option.
Reply #147 Top
Well since everyone else is commenting in this thread I will throw mine in. I believe the pausing should be like supcom. You can set the number of times the game may be paused or have unlimited. Example each player starts a game with 2 pauses kind of like timeouts in sporting events.

Concerning what the OP of this thread is about I agree with Firefox99. I love the current system in place. I have not played much yet but I don't want to have to setup defense turrets around the whole system not know where the enemy will come from. When I played last night it was easy right out of the gate to realize how I can use the system as great choke points and I also felt I had a general idea of where to setup my system defenses. My 2 cents.
Reply #148 Top
I suppose this point have been raised a gazillion times but I'd really like that ships travelling through a hostile system had to actually cross the system before jumping away through the phase lanes on the opposite side.

Ugh, that wasn't very clear, let me use a simple drawing. Let's say that incoming ships enter the system on the left side and exit from 'warp' space at point A and are set to phase again through the lane on the right. I think these ships should have to travel all the way around the planet to point B before being able to jump away.

_____
/ \
---(A O B)---
\ /
-----




With the current system, fleets are able to bunny hop from one system to another in a wink which is a tad annoying and makes some battles look like Benny Hill chases.

I know it's the whole point of Phase Jump disruptors but still.




What do you think ?
Reply #149 Top
OR....

Hey another possible solution to the debate (sorry everyone, HEHE!)...

Let's say faction A wants to phase jump to faction C, but another faction (B) is in between...Since we're supposed to be dealing with "3D space", why would the Capt. plot his course through enemy territory? To solve this maybe:

1. Systems need to be spaced randomly around all three axis (x,y, and z)
2. The phase lanes still determine which directions you can go only (yeah, it's artificial and fake, but preserves original dev intent)
3. Now if A goes to C and B is not in the same plain as A or C, they wouldn't HAVE to jump through B just to get there! I would say the ships would be traveling “as the crow flies" (the shortest path, as in a straight line) to get there.

In this scenario, A completely bypasses B (flies over/under/around) to get to C. The only time you would have to venture in another factions space, is if you purposely choose to go there. This idea suits me fine...
Reply #150 Top
@Seboss - in principle I agree as it really reinforces the tactical validity of the "choke point" argument (which I firmly disagree with). However in practice I think it would really slow down the game, which run counter to choke points = enhanced fun factor position.