Page 1 of 5

SuperNova II: Space War Discussion

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 5:34 pm
by KnockOut
Read the latest blog. I was thinking rather than selecting galaxy size, etc. You chose from a list of scenarios. Each scenario has it's own story. For example, maybe in 4210 A.D. a lot of planets became uninhabitable and became extinct. Then in 5000 A.D. planets became habitable again. Maybe in 3000 A.D. the galaxy was a lot smaller due to black holes blocking expansion but in 3050 A.D. technology was invented that enabled black holes to be explored.

This option gives the feeling of more of a story to the Red Legion and Blue Army. The menu you have now could be part of an editor for future scenarios. Of course, you could add a story option for exposition to explain why the galaxy is the way it is.

So you'd have 4000A.D. year of the large galaxy. 5000A.D. year of the great war. etc.

However, an editor is what is increasing the longevity until the release of Tower of Destiny so perhaps it is best to hold off on scenarios until future upgrades.

There's no way you can get around having to code A.I. for battle mode but I'm curious as to whether you're planning to have AI in Simulation(Guns versus Butter) mode. You could just have random and set points for enemy expansion. The challenge of simulation mode would be managing your resources versus random events. Having a thinking opponent would be more interesting but is it worth extra code?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 7:42 pm
by jack1974
The scenarios idea is interesting, but as you said probably is better if I keep it as expansion pack. I have already lot of ideas right now about the game, but I'm deciding now what can be included in the main game and what is best kept as expansions.
An example is heroes: similarly to Master of Orion 2, or more recently, Civilization IV, you have some special heroes (that aren't only generals but also scientist, etc) that you can hire and place on certain star systems or planets to increase some values. For example a hero scientist could boost the science value of that planet/starsystem, and so on.

Regarding the A.I., I want to implement an interesting thing: a difficulty that automatically adjust based on player's skill. That is, if you play badly, the game becomes easier, while if you play well the game becomes tougher. This way I should be able to prevent too easy battles, which in the long run can be boring and reduce the gameplay value.

Since I'll be using for the map fog of war I'll be able to make some interesting A.I. choices like sneak attacks from the computer, and so on. The simulation/management part probably can be done in 1 month of work, what will be very hard is the battle itself, because I want to make a very good turn-based wargame 8)

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:30 pm
by Astral
Regarding the A.I., I want to implement an interesting thing: a difficulty that automatically adjust based on player's skill. That is, if you play badly, the game becomes easier, while if you play well the game becomes tougher. This way I should be able to prevent too easy battles, which in the long run can be boring and reduce the gameplay value.
This sounds like the perfect A.I. for Tower of Destiny, as well. :)

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 10:24 pm
by jack1974
Yes indeed. It's good because programming both games at same time, I'll be able to implement same common features like this one :)

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 11:22 pm
by KnockOut
I don't like the fog of war thing. I liked the whole idea of a space war board game. Sort of Warhammer 40000 in Space.

Basically what I'm saying that my ideal game would be AntWar meets Warhammer 40,000 in space.

I don't really want a Civ IV type game.

SuperNova started out with a board game idea. The board game was a good idea. Basically, this post is a plea for no fog of war and keeping the board game portion for battles.

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 7:48 am
by jack1974
I don't understand how you associate fog of war=civilization ??
By adding fog of war, I just mean that when you encounter enemy and you pass on the "board game" screen, you won't see completely the battlefield with all the units revealed. This will only help the difficulty that otherwise (I'm sure) someone would instantly complain "computer is too easy" :lol:
You would have some units (the classic scouts) to explore the map. I would make fog of war limited, I mean once you cleared a zone you can see it and the fog doesn't reform again. This would just help me to add some difficulty, because of course don't pretend to be able to make an AI that can be very challenging without some "tricks". Even the big games with 2-3 programmers that work only on A.I. use tricks like fog of war, higher number of units to the Pc, faster production, and so on.

Anyway I can always make it optional :)

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:54 am
by deverindeverin
i don't understand why knockout is being so critical of your games. i am sure i am not the only person that is finding this a bit much. i have to give you alot of credit for being so patient with the many commits knockout is saying about your ideas and games. keep up the good work and hopefully others members will follow suit and let you know how much we like your games.

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:52 am
by jack1974
Haha don't worry, it's fine. I understand his point of views. He seems a bit too much critic but he's honest about what he thinks of my games, so for me is ok. Of course I don't follow blindly what he asks, but I carefully thinks about each suggestions. Sometime he gives what I consider "bad" suggestions, but very often he gives interesting ideas, like the Supernova 2 one.
I never played ant war before so his suggestion about making a macro-management game is very very good, wouldn't have thought about it before if wasn't for him.
So no problems - as long as someone doesn't insult me in forums, is fine! lol :lol:

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 6:58 pm
by KnockOut
Look at it this way, I'm only harsh on having the game be turned into a stereotypical TBS game because I loved the board game idea so much from the first game. Fog of War and Board Games are not hostile to each other, stratego and battleship use sort of a fog of war.

I came to the conclusion of fog of war equals civilization because civilization uses fog of war and you mentioned civilization as one of your influences. I just got scared that you'd do the typical TBS and have players put power points and then make tank producers and then make missile producers and then resource producers, etc.. When you mention CivIV as one of your influences it scares me that Supernova II might end up like that! :shock:

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 7:18 pm
by jack1974
No, beside the fact that I wouldn't be able to "clone" a game like Civ IV anyway :lol:
I'm more inclined to do a sort of "Advance Wars" in space. Don't know if you played it, but is very good example of board game IMHO. Every units has its own purpose in the game, and there's a good system of paper/rock/scissors (in other word each units has another "bane" unit that can kill it easily).
But - there's plenty of time before I am at the point of making the board-wargame part... :P