|
Firgof posted:In truth, I spammed a bunch of flagships for the purposes of the shot. (Please excuse my rampant cheatery) Ahhh ok, so, it sounds like a non-idiotic implementation of a fleet system (looking at you, sword of the stars 2) I rather like that idea. If you're adding fleets, I'd like to request/suggest methods for replenishing their numbers easily. Stardrive makes a good attempt at this but it lacks automation. Basically once you set up a fleet, it'd be nice if you could just whack a button and have it refill its lost members/have it do that automatically. Interesting way of handling the blob of small ships thing that SR1 did.
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 01:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 04:00 |
|
|
On fleets: They've still got a ways to go and we're toying with a lot of ways to make it work best. We do want fleets to somewhat self-manage in aspect (such as reordering ships that they have lost in locations where you have Shipyards). The idea of a 'meta-unit' which is a collective of units which you order and control like a single unit is something we'd like to evolve, however. I want to stress that we haven't really gone into formations and et. al. much at all so all that could change quite a lot. Firgof fucked around with this message at 01:31 on Nov 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
Firgof posted:On fleets: It'd be a cool feature I think, a lot of games have fleet mechanics that let you set up wonderful elaborate formations, but I don't think they get used because you... kinda don't care much about making pretty formations for your rubbish fighters that are going to get shot down really fast. Ways to handle expendable units would be a quite unique feature I'd think, like a sort of build-your-own total war game where you put your own hundred-strong blob of pixels together. Total war does that well generally, I think. you lose hundreds of soldiers in any fight, but as long as the unit survives, they can move on, and replacing units is simple if you have the infrastructure. It'd tie in nicely with the progression too, where what might be your whole army at the start becomes a single unit block in the later game. But hey, it's your game. That's just my experience with fleet mechanics in games that have them, often included, rarely used. I'd love to see it changed. The game looks very pretty by the way, or as pretty as it can with .gif compression, big improvement over SR1.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 02:11
|
|
|
IIRC carriers equipped with construction bays would try to rebuild their lost fighters in SR1. It was a bit fiddly to set up though, and I never quite managed to get it working right. Looking forward to this, that gif is just making the wait worse!
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 02:35
|
|
|
quote:The game looks very pretty by the way, or as pretty as it can with .gif compression, big improvement over SR1.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 06:48
|
|
|
Firgof posted:I'm happy to hear that. We're not anywhere near final art (I must say for the record nearly all the particle effects shown are not in their final state; the impact effect is entirely placeholder, for instance) so that's heartening feedback. I did guess the gunfire effects may be placeholders but even still, the game seems to consistently have stuff visible onscreen, if you get my meaning. SR1 spent a lot of time looking at tiny icons of things rather than the things themselves. It was more like looking at a map, rather than a game, sort of thing. The planet management diary and that gif make the game seem more visual, which makes it look nicer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 13:24
|
|
|
Firgof posted:I'm happy to hear that. We're not anywhere near final art (I must say for the record nearly all the particle effects shown are not in their final state; the impact effect is entirely placeholder, for instance) so that's heartening feedback. Are you using the Homeworld 2 method of weapon fire, where you roll a dice and then draw the projectile hitting or missing depending on the outcome? Considering the scale of the game that seems like the only viable option. However those missiles (rockets?) looked like they were re-targeting when the original target died. Is that just an artifact of the high volume of fire, gif compression and the weapon FX or do you really have missiles re-target while in flight (that eats a lot of CPU)?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 14:02
|
|
|
quote:Are you using the Homeworld 2 method of weapon fire, where you roll a dice and then draw the projectile hitting or missing depending on the outcome? In SR1 you could move a whole galaxy's length away after a bullet was launched and it'd still hit you, 80 systems away. That's because it began with the assumption 'the bullet hits' and made reality bend to match that premise, no matter how unlikely (e.g. impacts on ships which have already detonated and no longer exist (empty space) ). The Starflare Engine -- which we've developed for Star Ruler 2 -- is powerful enough to handle bullets that behave like bullets and missiles that behave like missiles. Though we do roll a die to determine where in the firing cone a projectile might initially shoot toward (e.g. it could be dead-on or it could be 15-degrees off-target) everything else is determined in-flight. As an example: If you're firing at a ship that moves behind a moon, the moon will get hit. If there are escort ships around a flagship and a bullet comes in, if it hits one of the escort ships it will hit the escort ship and not the flagship. You're aiming at ships and so forth -- but your intended target may not always be the one you hit; in fact it's possible to miss entirely if the other fleet simply moves out of the way of incoming fire. With physically simulated projectiles we're opening gateways to many new interesting tactical, blueprint, formation, and fleet considerations. quote:do you really have missiles re-target while in flight (that eats a lot of CPU) Firgof fucked around with this message at 19:07 on Nov 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 19:41
|
|
|
Ah so you're using the Homeworld 1 method - simulating every bullet. I guess depending on the scale that should work - Homeworld could have a lot of individual bullets going at once and that was on (and programmed for) CPUs we'd laugh at nowadays. It's probably going to be hard to find a good distance to fade out bullets that missed that doesn't look off however. Leave them alive too long and you'll accumulate too many projectiles that need to be calculated, kill them too quick and people are gonna wonder why their bullet disappeared just before it hit a different ship than what they aimed at. On Re-targeting, you could make that a selling point for some missile types - if that feature takes up extra space in the hull you both limit how widespread it is and open up possibilities for different missile play styles (a couple of powerful re targeting missiles? lots of dumb-ish rockets?) Since you mention fleet formations, is the game going to be full 3D again in terms of movement? DatonKallandor fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Nov 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 22:48
|
|
|
quote:is the game going to be full 3D again in terms of movement? quote:if that feature takes up extra space in the hull you both limit how widespread it is and open up possibilities for different missile play styles (a couple of powerful re targeting missiles? lots of dumb-ish rockets?) EDIT: Interest check: Would y'all like to see a streamed multiplayer match of SR2 at some point? Firgof fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Nov 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 22:54
|
|
|
Firgof posted:
Absolutely. Part of that is just wanting to know more about the game but it would be fun to watch too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 20:03
|
|
|
We'd probably explain as we play. Since I'm liable to be in last place, I think I'd take the honors of streaming what I'm doing and why. Lucas always manages to out-expand me. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 20:14
|
|
|
Firgof: Beams. not pew pew, but https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_41f7Xp9_A
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 20:18
|
|
|
Firgof posted:EDIT: Interest check: Would y'all like to see a streamed multiplayer match of SR2 at some point? Sure, that'd be really interesting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 20:39
|
|
|
Rhonyn Peacemaker posted:Firgof: Beams. Firgof fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Nov 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 21:10
|
|
|
Homeworld 2 had some punchy beams. Edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-05M3Xt1y8 DatonKallandor fucked around with this message at 23:09 on Nov 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 21:54
|
|
|
quote:Homeworld 2 had some punchy beams. That sounds right, though, now that I think about it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 22:11
|
|
|
Firgof posted:EDIT: Interest check: Would y'all like to see a streamed multiplayer match of SR2 at some point? I would like one at all points, yes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 00:36
|
|
|
Firgof posted:It's been so long since I've played HW2 that I've completely forgotten what they sounded like. The tough part is deciding if you want a ship-length primary cannon or if it is an emitter, or a battery (think broadside). I would love my space-galleon flying up to another and unleashing a broadside of Freespace 2 beams. Friendly fire would be a must in that scenario though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 03:08
|
|
|
I bought the first one but couldn't get into it because the UI felt a bit impenetrable. Make the UI and gameplay as easy as Sword of the Stars and you got a repeat customer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 03:35
|
|
|
I hope you do a lot for accessibility. I like SR1's concept, but after trying it half a dozen times I just plain could not get off the ground. I guess I'm Bad At Videogames but I either expanded too quickly and crashed my economy or too slowly and got overwhelmed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 03:41
|
|
|
quote:I hope you do a lot for accessibility. SR1 was fundamentally flawed in that it didn't really tell you about things until you were already suffering from them and required you to keep everything about how it works in your head. For instance, practically nobody remembered that when a Planet runs out of Ore that its metal mines worked at 20% efficiency; so if they were going full tilt with elec and adv parts then their whole economy would crash as they forgot about it. Queue frantic reassignment of planets, factories, etc. to try and pull their economy out of the toilet. SR2 is much more foolproof, much clearer, and provides immediate feedback and guidance where SR1 did not. Want to expand this planet? Here's the resources you need to find and import to this planet. Don't know what that resource does? Mouse over it. Need to grow your Empire? It'll cost you $100k to colonize this planet and one or two resources to make it generate income beyond its requirements (each of those planets costing $100k as well). We tell you what your decisions will do in advance and how to proceed versus you kind of having to figure it in your head and remember how things work; the game explains itself as you play. The same can't be said of SR1, I feel, as everything is interconnected and weighted on itself: you have to know 'the whole SR1' before you can really begin to play SR1 competently. quote:The tough part is deciding if you want a ship-length primary cannon or if it is an emitter, or a battery (think broadside). Firgof fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Nov 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 05:03
|
|
|
Firgof posted:EDIT: Interest check: Would y'all like to see a streamed multiplayer match of SR2 at some point?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 05:21
|
|
|
Firgof posted:
Sure, it'd be interesting to see what works and what is different.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 05:33
|
|
|
Firgof posted:We hear you. It is much more immediately understandable so, yes, we do believe it'll be much easier to understand than SR1. This is great to read and makes me considerably more optimistic for a game that, it has to be said, I was already pretty excited for. It's also incredibly refreshing to see a dev who can take a look at their work and say something about it was "fundamentally flawed" and really does suggest SR2 is going to be one to watch. Basically I'm saying keep it up!
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 06:01
|
|
|
quote:It's also incredibly refreshing to see a dev who can take a look at their work and say something about it was "fundamentally flawed" and really does suggest SR2 is going to be one to watch. We're still quite new to game development. This is only our second game; our first game where we're all aboard from the start of it. We're willing to make mistakes, swallow our pride, and take measured risks if it'll allow us to make a bigger, bolder, more fun to play game. I think that's sort of our unique edge: we're willing to venture into the unknown to try and bring back things nobody's ever seen or done before; not just to retrieve one unique selling point to help us stand out among our peers, but to try and deliver entirely new experiences. That said, we're doing our best not to tarnish the faith y'all have in us. Firgof fucked around with this message at 17:49 on Nov 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
Speaking of beams, are you planning to use your dynamic hit detection for those as well? Travel time for those would presumably be a non-issue, but there could still be a bit of a cone of fire. Besides, it generally looks way cooler if the beams impact all over the target rather than all converging on its exact center of mass.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
quote:Speaking of beams, are you planning to use your dynamic hit detection for those as well? quote:Besides, it generally looks way cooler if the beams impact all over the target rather than all converging on its exact center of mass. Firgof fucked around with this message at 18:02 on Nov 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
Firgof posted:
This. It provides opportunities where you hit other targets of opportunities that just so happen to fly in-between the two capitals firing at one-another. Bomber run on the way? Whoops, beam zaps the capital and hits the right flank instead and 3 bombers go down. Hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 18:06
|
|
|
Perestroika posted:Speaking of beams, are you planning to use your dynamic hit detection for those as well? Travel time for those would presumably be a non-issue, but there could still be a bit of a cone of fire. Besides, it generally looks way cooler if the beams impact all over the target rather than all converging on its exact center of mass. The reason you see everything aiming for center mass so often (a lot of games do it) is because defining multiple custom aiming points for every model is incredibly hard, because every single one of those points needs to be hittable from every angle. And the farther away from a box your model is the harder it is to get those aiming points right. You can't believe what trouble the Freespace 2 Shivan ships are for example if you tried to port the models to an engine where you had to redefine those points. It's a ton of work that you simply can't write an algorithm to automate, so I wonder how it'll work out for SR2. DatonKallandor fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Nov 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 03:34
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:The reason you see everything aiming for center mass so often (a lot of games do it) is because defining multiple custom aiming points for every model is incredibly hard, because every single one of those points needs to be hittable from every angle. And the farther away from a box your model is the harder it is to get those aiming points right. You can't believe what trouble the Freespace 2 Shivan ships are for example if you tried to port the models to an engine where you had to redefine those points. Huh yeah, I suppose that would make it pretty difficult. Though it seems like SR2 could just sidestep the issue by letting the weapons aim for the center of mass but having the actual shot diverge randomly by a few degrees through their cone of fire mechanic. That way the beam could just end up hitting wherever it ends up going.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 11:53
|
|
|
You could also have it pick a random vertex in the model to aim at, perhaps.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 11:55
|
|
|
Perestroika posted:Huh yeah, I suppose that would make it pretty difficult. Though it seems like SR2 could just sidestep the issue by letting the weapons aim for the center of mass but having the actual shot diverge randomly by a few degrees through their cone of fire mechanic. That way the beam could just end up hitting wherever it ends up going. Yeah cone of fire aiming for center mass is generally a good enough solution, unless the game is small scale enough to where you notice it. It wouldn't work for something like Nexus, where you've only got 3 or 4 ships per side - but a huge scale game like SR2, it's probably more than good enough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 14:55
|
|
|
Do you have any plans regarding automation? My biggest gripe with the 4X genre is how they often devolve into tediously micromanaging the entire empire right down to a single worker. SR1 already had some things to alleviate that but it still felt kinda tedious to me towards the later game stages. I'd love to see something like being able to micromanage colonization for maximum benefit at first and later on just being able to tell some advisor figure to go colonize this area of space automatically or define a fleet template then tell all shipyards to build one of those and have them defend the system etc. I mean, if I'm some bigshot galactic emperor, why can't I just tell some underling to take care of that stuff instead of manually ordering the construction of system defense fleet #231289? While I understand that you might not want the game to play itself so to speak I think that micro that is fun and rewarding in the early game only adds tedium in the late-to-midgame since you don't really care about individual ships and colonies anymore. Also your fleet system sounds really interesting. In SR1 I've always wanted to go with some kind of combined arms strategy with destroyer type ships with lots of flak and battleships with a few huge guns to take out enemy battleships etc. but it always seemed like the only viable choices were a bazillion fighters or an invincible death star. Will SR2 feature some more considerations in terms of fleet composition? Firgof posted:We like the idea of 'slasher' beams, where you're raking a ship along its length rather than trying to punch through a single spot in the hull. I'm not sure if we'll get to actually do those but we both think it'd be cool if they did rather than just trying to melt a hole through something. While visually appealing I imagine it would be awfully impractical considering the game has accurate hit detection for components. After all, wouldn't you rather concentrate fire on one point to punch through the armor and hit the vital components behind it rather than scratch all the armor on one side?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 15:49
|
|
|
Endless space has some amazing things in the planetary manager like 'remove all useless buildings' which scraps all research improvements when you've reached the end of the tech tree--when you have over 20 systems being able to do this at the click of a button is amazing. They also have 2 buttons for mass exploring moons and adding exploits to planets. Endless space is pretty much the pinnacle of modern 4x's in terms of content though its combat is really lack luster.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 21:18
|
|
|
SovietPotatoe posted:While visually appealing I imagine it would be awfully impractical considering the game has accurate hit detection for components. After all, wouldn't you rather concentrate fire on one point to punch through the armor and hit the vital components behind it rather than scratch all the armor on one side? Of course it hugely depends how the implementation of armor/internals and the whole damage system pans out eventually, but that kind of thing is actually not all that inefficient. Consider that with the kind of hit detection we're likely looking at here you can never guarantee that any two attacks will hit the same spot. You could pretty likely end up with a situation where you punch a nice hole into the armor and deal some damage internals to the internals there, but never end up hitting that area again in the same fight and as such may have to wear down the armor in multiple other locations as well. Things like the slasher beams or other "dispersed" damage types might end up being pretty viable in exploiting weak points created by more focused weaponry. As an example, in the battletech tabletop game nearly all weapons are generally divided into either holepunchers or critseekers. Having a good balance between those two is one of the key stones to a good weapon selection. Perestroika fucked around with this message at 21:37 on Nov 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 21:31
|
|
|
Firgof posted:I'm running a pretty average rig that's about 3/4 years old. My "Windows Experience Index" is 5.1 with everything but the hard drive at or around 7. We'll definitely be developing the game so that it can run smooth as butter on our rigs and hopefully great on older systems too. Still no idea what the specs will be by release though; we're still a year out and there's a lot left to be added in to the game for us to be able to provide any reliable spec. guess. I had someone tell me developing for the lowest common denominator possible (specifically in regard to graphical effect scaling) wasn't A Thing on this board. Well, League isn't just popular because it's a good game. Glad you've chosen the path of "we like money and fans" rather than that of "USE AS MANY POLYGONS AS POSSIBLE WHO CARES WOOO HASWELL". Can't wait to have a go at this one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 21:35
|
|
|
Perestroika posted:Of course it hugely depends how the implementation of armor/internals and the whole damage system pans out eventually, but that kind of thing is actually not all that inefficient. Consider that with the kind of hit detection we're likely looking at here you can never guarantee that any two attacks will hit the same spot. You could pretty likely end up with a situation where you punch a nice hole into the armor and deal some damage internals to the internals there, but never end up hitting that area again in the same fight and as such may have to wear down the armor in multiple other locations as well. Things like the slasher beams or other "dispersed" damage types might end up being pretty viable in exploiting weak points created by more focused weaponry. Thats a very valid point you bring up regarding precision vs dispersed damage but please tell me what constitutes "focused weaponry" if not a highly focused instant-hit beam?  I'm all for having AoE weapons that can take out lots of armor/exposed subsystems but thats more something for explosive weapons like missiles and torpedoes rather than beam weapons.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 22:45
|
|
|
So... lots of things have been going on behinds the scenes since my last post. We've come up with some novel ways to make Influence empires not only viable but fun, we've started putting some of our Energy powers in, our Research web is expanding, and we're currently sitting on I think 40 unique resources now (with hopes to add even more). The framework for the random events system is also being prototyped. All in all: We're full steam ahead. Oh. Did I mention the planets are going to be prettier than SR's? Because they will be (courtesy Jon Micheelsen).   We also got around to finally putting sound effects in; this prompted immediate celebration on my part. I'm sure the next galaxy over heard these lasers firing.  We won't be meeting our target of launching Early Access before the year is out, I'm sad to report, but our media should start picking up and more dev diaries should start showing up more reliably. We've been wanting to launch a new diary for well over a month now but some design decisions we've made lately have put a lot of the systems into flux; they're just now settling back down. Lucas and I want to produce some video footage for y'all, too, so hopefully there'll also be that to look forward to. Firgof fucked around with this message at 06:55 on Dec 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2013 06:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 04:00 |
|
|
Shame about the early access, but further updates are something we're all looking forward to I think.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2013 07:22
|
|