just an idea

on how fleet movement in solar systems could be improved

So I've been playing beta 2 for a bit, and on the whole I really like it, but there is a few things I would like to comment on.

First is the way solar systems are handled. I really don't like the fact that there is specific jump lanes (I'll call it that, even though I'm not sure if it's the right in game name) from certain planets to others (but the way traveling between different suns is implemented is great). Not only is it a bit restrictive, it also just doesn't feel very 'spacey'. So here is how I would like to see it, without departing to far from the way the game works now, technically:

All the planets/asteroid fields in one solar system should be connected with each other through jump lanes. These would be invisible to the player, except if you select a fleet and hold the mouse over a different planet. Then the jump lane connecting the two planets should light up and you can move the fleet in the regular way. For game play purposes you could not travel through, or close to the sun. Not all planets are connected with each other because of this so some traveling around would still be necessary, but for logical reasons in stead of seemingly random jump lanes. There could even be a tech that allows your ships to travel closer past the sun, thus giving you a tactical advantage! Discovering new planets should not occur by flying blindly through a jump gate, but maybe with fleets having a 'line of sight'. Or perhaps all planets in a solar system should be visible, except you can't see precisely what it is. There could also be a movement penalty to fly to an undiscovered planet (say, because navigation is harder if you do not have the exact coordinates). So there would still be exploring to do, but in a realistic way as opposed to artificially masking planets before you've discovered some random other planet. Also planets and asteroids could be placed around the sun more realistically.

The purpose of the above is to give the game a much more space look and feeling, without needing a large change in the way the game is programmed now (although AI-pathfinding might become a bit more complex).

Ah.. long post already so I won't bore you with other stuff What do you think?

regards,

spregger

PS I haven't browsed the forum a lot, so if this idea is already floating around just ignore it!
4,371 views 26 replies
Reply #1 Top
PS I haven't browsed the forum a lot, so if this idea is already floating around just ignore it!


Devs had a lane-less system in place once upon a time... it wasn't fun. Jump lanes are here to stay!
Reply #2 Top

Hi Spregger, thanks for your thoughts. I know the forums are a bit daunting but there is a really big thread regarding the phase lanes hiding somewhere - it's probably one of the biggest ones we've ever had. If you ever make your way to it you will find many ideas regarding how to change them including the one you suggested. Without repeating the full explanation of why your version didn't work (we tried it about a year ago) it basically came down to whack-a-mole and no choke points, both of which are problems for a strategy game. We also had realistic positions for planets and asteroids where the hot planets were closer and colder far away but we decided to randomize it because it became too predictive where things were and unbalanced multiplayer sessions.

We do agree there are some problems with the way some things connect and we have some solutions in the works.

Finally, there will be a way to mod the map to the way you suggested (fully connected) even if it is not the default.

Reply #3 Top
There might have been ways around the 'whack-a-mole' gameplay with an open map (maps where all gravity wells are fully inter-connected) such as fuel ranges, radar detection of incoming enemy fleets, friendly fleets travel more quickly between friendly colonies, or whatever. But Ironclad found the game to be too much about offensive strategy with little/no defensive strategy (ie, strategically unbalanced).

Anyway, they decided to go with the Phase Lane travel concept. They have no intention of changing the present system for inner star systems (planets/asteroids). Let's just hope they eventually decide to go with the 'any star to any star' travel system (this still is being debated).

*I personally think that 'any star to any star' would be more easily explained in the lore AND would shorten games somewhat.

I suppose the Phase Lane concept works well enough if they can explain the Lore in a plausible way. For example, they could say that conventional space travel (as we know it) takes so long as to be useless. However, huge gravity wells warp space/time enough that artificial tunnels can be created between each other (use standard technobabble for how they actually do this).

Unlike stars (hopefully), planets/asteroids are only connected by specific phase lanes because their gravity wells are pretty shallow compared to the stars they orbit and are therefore somewhat obscured. That is why planets and asteroids can't all be reached from every other gravity well location. You need to be in a position that allows a good enough 'lock' for phase space travel to be possible.

Reply #4 Top

'any star to any star'  has been implemented.

 

Reply #5 Top
'any star to any star' has been implemented.


YEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you Craig, you just made my month.

I am guessing we will see this change in the new patch.

I am pretty sure that this will help balance out things in multiplayer. With the previous daisy chain star system, the guys who started in the edges of the map would likely have a big advantage. With the Any Star to Any Star system, everybody will be equal targets and nobody will start with any massive advantages.
Reply #9 Top
really hot, but random
Reply #10 Top
???
Reply #11 Top
  
Reply #12 Top
Imgppaq, what was the point of that?

Damn, don't tell that SoaSE is going to get dumbed down so console players can have a go too.
Reply #13 Top

Damn, don't tell that SoaSE is going to get dumbed down so console players can have a go too.


./screams in terror and faints dead away.

Para, you just gave me nightmares. For the next couple of months.
Reply #14 Top
I doubt that we have to worry too much about console game 'dumb down' syndrome. I think it is safe to say Sins will remain PC only.

Not even Microsoft can turn in depth PC strategy games into console games with any success. 1) Most console gamers don't want to play in depth strategy games, and 2) the controls/TV resolution/multiplayer support just don't suit that type of gameplay as well as a PC.

Hehe, can you imagine playing Sins with a controller pad???
Reply #15 Top

Hehe, can you imagine playing Sins with a controller pad???


Hence the screaming nightmare fit
Reply #16 Top
they had starcraft on the n64
Reply #17 Top
Umm...actually Sins does work with the Xbox 360 gamepad for Windows....   
Reply #18 Top
Oh well, I'll be sticking to my keyboard and mouse.
Reply #19 Top
Umm...actually Sins does work with the Xbox 360 gamepad for Windows....   


yea, bet you can't get the pink space ponies to work on it! and what would SoaSe be without the space Ponies?
Reply #20 Top

Umm...actually Sins does work with the Xbox 360 gamepad for Windows....   


./goes into another screaming fit
Reply #21 Top
*huggles Ron*

itll be OK honeybumpkins
Reply #22 Top
well, since the point is settled anyhow, I take the liberty of threadjacking with an idea of my own.

first off: didn't have enough time to get and test the game, so don't flame me if it already exists. what I think of is basically a construction ship slightly the way homeworld used to have it in the form of a carrier. mind it, this is not supposed to be a carrier as it exists in the game but - apart from possibly repair and service functions a ship which can replace losses of smaller vessels. as all classes are supposed to be used even at the end of game, this could proove to be a valuable part of a fleet in lenghtier campaigns. or think of an expedition to a new star system where reinforcement would potentially take a good while to come by. if for example you were ambushed there and outnumbered, you could hide in a nubula (an option which indeed I would like to have, but more terrain features have been promised if I am not mistaken, so I just shup up about that one) and rebuild, counterstrike and so on. if that ability is too powerful you can always balance it out by making production more expensive or lengthier than at orbital shipyards.
Reply #23 Top
Interesting idea Shadowhal, definitely worth looking at, IMO
Reply #24 Top
the idea of a mobile factory has been brought up, and largely shot down. never really got the reason from the devs as to why...
Reply #25 Top
well, worth mentioning anyway.