Game design flaw

from Sins Forums
After playing the gmae for few days on a larger mapssay 3 starts about 9 players FFA. I found the game has a major design problem. This problem is in fleet support and the number of Cap ships being tie into research.

Take this scenario Player 1 was doing really well he had more resource and is bit futher in tech tree. As player 1 expands toward player 2 and 3 they decided to work together to stop player1's advance. With players 2 and 3 combine fleet support 4000 and 32 cap ship against player1 16 cap ships 2000 fleet support you start to have an issue here where player one get attacked even just on 2 planets his fleet would have to split to meet the full force of player 2 and 3. This soon turns the tide on player1 and there is not much he can do about it except get help from possibly player 4. This game design eliminated any posiblity of 1 VS 2 unless plyaer 2 and 3 is retarded. Controlling more planets needs to give bonus to number of cap ships and fleet support other wise expanding a large empire to quickly just a big fat meat waiting to be eaten by others. It becomes harder and harder as the size of the map and number of players increase.

As we all can see this game is more RTS then 4X you really don't want to tie ship cap into research. IF you want to do it right atleast give players the ability to set ship cap for each map. Take SUPCOM for example you can build as much as you have material for and players can set a unit cap for each map. I wouldn't mind if you tie number of fleet you can create into reaserch but unit cap into research is not the way to go. This has been a big turn off for some of us that wants a larger map on grand scale but your game design simply isn't in the interest of large scale. There should be no limit on number of ship you can build but there can be limit on number of fleet you can create. Very interesting game perhaps needed more beta testing before release.
15,853 views 43 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top
Good god..Not TEAMWORK !! ! ! ! ! !

But seriously, cap ships should be tied. You lose the quantity punch by having only cap ships. While cap ships can be good, I rarely use over 4 cap ships.
Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top
Expanding too quickly? It's called overreaching. You know, stretching your forces too thin?
"In the waning days of its glory the Empire was so vast there was no way for the Fleet to defend all of its borders. That was the beginning of the end."

And of course, when you go up against an alliance, you shouldn't expect to steamroll over them. Get yourself an ally as well, or perish. This will maybe change once we get decent utilities to turn certain sectors into fortresses, but for now, fight fire with fire.
CursorFX - Customize your Windows cursor
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top
so uh...i dont get what you are saying.... 2 players beating 1 is unfair? or uh..what?
Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top
Two players with half the map are significantly more powerful than one player with the other half.
Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top
There's no way to reasonably balance the game in such a way that one player can stand up to, let alone win against, two other players who are as competent as he is (or nearly so).

There are countless strategy games that contain this "flaw"... if you get ganged up on two to one, you're going to lose, even if you're strong and smart.

Also: If you allow people to build more ships based on the planets they control, then "underdog" players (who control less territory) have even less of a chance to make a comeback.

There are two edges to that sword.
Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top
ye thats bothering me too, linking the fleet capacity to the amount of colonies worked so well in the beta's so why take it out?
Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top
ye thats bothering me too, linking the fleet capacity to the amount of colonies worked so well in the beta's so why take it out?
End of quote



that is interesting, that seems a little more realistic and easier to believe. the more colonies/people, and the bigger your empire the more you should be able to maintain. it makes more sense doing fleet capacity that way.

garrett
Reply #8 from Sins Forums Top
However, what happens when your opponent controls 15 planets while you control 8. There is no way you can produce enough ships to counteract the number of ships the opponent has. They can simply steamroll over you with superior numbers.
Reply #9 from Sins Forums Top
ye but its a percentage calculation, u cant defend 50 planets with 16 ships at 2 or 3 fronts, besides if ur opponement has such a vast empire he probably wont mass all his forces toward one enemy colony cause he needs em to guard the rest of his empire.
Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top
the point is u cant be everywhere at the same time so u'll need to choose between to mass at one place and overwhelm from there or spread ur forces and have "security" everywhere
Reply #11 from Sins Forums Top
Here is a hint for you: don't play FFA.

Of course in a 2 vs 1 situation the side with two players will have advantage. But that's Free for all, free to be allied with some players, free to have to call for help to another player, to try to fight everyone alone (or die trying), free to stab in the back another player in the middle of a battle, etc.

Play with locked and balanced teams.
Reply #12 from Sins Forums Top

Good god..Not TEAMWORK !! ! ! ! ! !

But seriously, cap ships should be tied. You lose the quantity punch by having only cap ships. While cap ships can be good, I rarely use over 4 cap ships.
End of quote


You probably haven't play long big game then, or you're not handling your capital ships right since the role of capital ships is undeniable. Again, unless you're playing short and quick game.


I had a group of 8 capital ships, 2 KOLs, 2 Kunovs, 1 Akkan, 3 Sovas each at level 5 or 6, and they're next to unstopable. There is once that they were attacked by 2 AI fleets which in total consists of a dozen capital ships (level 1 and 2) and I think about nearly 100 Frigates/Cruisers. My group of capital ships emerges victorious with not even a dense on their hull.


But yes, at the first 3 levels they're not really good, but at high level they are teh God of the battlefield.







Reply #13 from Sins Forums Top
Here's something I picked up from a developers journal. I hope I quoted the formatting right:

End of quote


anyway, here's the link to it. WWW Link
Reply #14 from Sins Forums Top
I personally like the fleet mechanic, but I also generally play 2v2s or 3v3s, so I have allies to help cover territory.
Reply #15 from Sins Forums Top
I'm not sure why you're complaining. That limit was inserted to stop larger multiplayer games from descending into "who's computer can animate more ships at any one time without crashing". And really, the vast majority of all games will never actually reach that limit.
Hell, if you don't like it, mod it. During the Beta (which was almost a year long. It was very well tested) one of the public testers modded the game to allow 20 000 Kol's. Of course, it slowed their computer to a crawl, even when they wern't doing anything, but it was still 20 000 ships on-screen at once. If that's not enough ships for you, I don't know what is.

Wait a few weeks and I virtually guarantee there will be a "No Fleet Cap" mod released. Then you can merrily try to melt eachother's computers with 20000 ship fights.
Reply #16 from Sins Forums Top
I'd tie military size to economy rather than colony/population count, though often these are the same thing. Say, a certain percentage of your economy may go to military forces. The larger the economy, the larger the forces. The down side to this is that your fleets will be capped at how large you are. The tech research model has the advantage of a player being able to field very large fleets even if they're small so long as they do enough research.

For real world examples, look at the United States. They have the world's largest economy (3rd largest population after China and India), and can afford the world's largest military. Sure they could be ganged up on, but their economy allows them to field a huge military.

Fleet caps make sense in one regard to give other players a chance to come back and forcing a player to split his forces substantially, but it also makes it quite difficult to win the game unless you suck up to everyone constantly. And given the nature of the single player game's diplomacy system, sucking up to the AI is a pain and has only mediocre rewards.
Reply #17 from Sins Forums Top
The title of this thread is rather presumptuous, but I do agree with the merits of the complaint. Is "winning players having an unavoidable 'power potential' advantage over players with fewer planets" really a problem? The game shouldn't punish you for being in the lead in a misguided attempt to help underdog players hang on instead of being put down. The design trade-off has made it extremely difficult to fight uneven teams, even when the undermanned team has a significant size advantage, and "don't play FFA" is a total non-solution akin to "don't play the underpowered race" in a balance discussion.
Reply #18 from Sins Forums Top
@ Satthukaraoke

You, a human, managed to crush two fleets controlled by AIs. You did this with 8 exceptionally powerful ships matched against your opponent's 12. Who was an AI. I'm trying to imagine what kind of conclusion you're trying to draw here... The AI in this game isn't as bad as I've seen in many other games, but Galciv2 this is not.
Reply #19 from Sins Forums Top
The fleet cap is and should be tied to the economy and research and not to how many planets you own. It makes it much more realistic. For example, in a small 2vs2 game I played the other day, I ended up with only four planets, while the enemy owned 6 or 7 planets each. My ally owned something like that too. Still, I was the number one economy(and technology) powerhouse, something that allowed me to have a bigger fleet cap than my enemies while still having a strong income of resources. I managed to take down the enemy closest to me without help from my ally.

In reality it all boils down to economy, and it should be like that in Sins too.
Reply #20 from Sins Forums Top
whati wrote was for blair fraser
Reply #21 from Sins Forums Top
The tech being linked to the fleet size is a good thing but on large maps you spreed yourself too thin to be able to do anything. If your caught in the middle of two enemies and they are hitting on you from both sides your not able to defend yourself as well. What you need is a top tier tech that gives your planets a roll in the number of ships you can have. This way its more end game item to have more planets but doesn't effect it till your top tier tech all done.
Reply #22 from Sins Forums Top
Don't worry friend, you'll be banned soon. :CONGRAT: And you'll probably get banned off GS at some point. The only reason he's here is because he's been getting ripped into on the GS forums, but I digress.... I do find his post amusing, and not for the reasons he intended.

But on the subject of fleet caps, I imagine it has more to do with the player paying to train crews, as opposed to simply getting any Joe Dirt to fly their ships. It's also for game play balance, since players with a lesser amount of planets wouldn't stand a chance if it were planet based. Also, when facing two empires, you should expect to be overwhelmed.

Reply #23 from Sins Forums Top
Should we join together in beta veteran and release newcomer harmony to flame him into oblivion?
Reply #24 from Sins Forums Top
I agree with the OP to a great extent. I much preferred fleet cap being related to the number of planets/roids u controlled and the corresponding level of the colony upgrade, 'fleet support'
Reply #25 from Sins Forums Top
In reality it all boils down to economy, and it should be like that in Sins too.
End of quote


It is right now. only a very potent economy will be able to produce enough money to pay for ships with an 80% reduction in economy, and this is how larger empires, which can generate more money, can outproduce smaller empires.