Welcome Anonymous!
We host quality Star Wars sites - inquire at The Star Wars Rebellion Network  
SW:Rebellion Network
imminent-bean
 



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:49 pm 
Offline
<!-- Colonel -->

Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:00 am
Posts: 505
Those are some really good ideas. I remember doing detection missions from X-Wing game.

I wonder about limited hyper jump distance, you can go any where but limited to how far you can jump without stopping at a planet for fuel. Also, having facilitates can only to be transported by Large Freighters as containers. It would make the GUI display easier, and the output of Construction Yards can sit there until they are ready to be transported. It would always be a good idea to have an escort for them, or just try to sneak them around the enemy to deploy them at the target system.

It would give a use for the transport/patrol class ships. You can take a prefabricated facility in a freighter class ship along with the task force while exploring a new system to plant down on the surface. Less worrying about the confusion of construction yards timing pumping out what and when and then having them go some where else by mistake in the vanilla game.

The above is for what I am doing, I went the route of the was mentioned "traditional" Rebellion Remake. I understand that this project version is a bit more like Sins or EAW with a 3D zoom-able galaxy and hyperspace route lanes. At least people will have a choice in playing the different styles. I really do not know what people prefer. It seems half and half. They both have good and bad points. I guess just play them both and see whatever one likes?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:48 pm 
Offline
<!-- Admiral -->
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 12:00 am
Posts: 866
The freighter-class ship may be more complexity than required. Perhaps just allow the player to pick whether to deploy there or not. If that planet, its deployed upon completion. If abroad, a freighter is automatically made for it, which is then automatically used up (disappears) when the facility is deployed. The ship doesn't have to be built separately, but can still move from place to place.

_________________
Star Wars: Rebellion, A Field Manual
"O be wise, what can I say more?"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 6:16 pm 
Offline
<!-- Lieutenant //-->

Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:19 am
Posts: 108
Master_Xan wrote:
Which would make patrol craft useful. In Rebellion, nothing from that class of ships was worth while- they were too weak for capital ship combat, and not as good with taking down fighters as light capital ships like Corellian Gunships or Lancer Frigates. Having patrol craft boost chances of detecting operatives would be a fun addition to tactics. But it is, again, more complexity.

Like Sullistan regiments of space? Could be done and I think I will try and work something out.


Master_Xan wrote:
If you wanted to expand things more from another angle, you could make ships or a class of ships designed to increase penetration abilities. You could say operatives working without a ship are booking passage on transports and such, while those on ships have more control over their hiding and are able to better avoid detection (like the cloaking ship from Force Unleashed), or able to bring more equipment with them rather than having to get it in the target system or hide it on a transport (increasing mission success rates). Ships like this could be stored on capital ships (taking the place of a fighter squad) but could carry personnel. Modified freighters come to mind (like the Millennium Falcon, able to blend in but offering more options for escape if detected).

Maybe a class of smaller ships designed for such a purpose? There are more ships that aren't aligned to either the Alliance or Empire in this game due to the new factions I added, and its easy enough to add more.Worth investigating at least

Master_Xan wrote:
Personally, I would think shipping a facility would take larger freighters, and thus be more noticeable. I'd think sending a facility, you would need to control the lane or send an escort to punch through. Unless the facility is shipped on multiple freighters, in which case you could argue its small enough to get through.

For reasons of gameplay, I wouldnt restrict facility movements. If you got your production facilities separated it would ruin your game way too easily I think.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 6:21 pm 
Offline
<!-- Lieutenant //-->

Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:19 am
Posts: 108
Slocket wrote:
The above is for what I am doing, I went the route of the was mentioned "traditional" Rebellion Remake. I understand that this project version is a bit more like Sins or EAW with a 3D zoom-able galaxy and hyperspace route lanes. At least people will have a choice in playing the different styles. I really do not know what people prefer. It seems half and half. They both have good and bad points. I guess just play them both and see whatever one likes?


Perhaps I could try a more traditional approach first up? I'm still not 100% sure if my way is a good way and creating the traditional style would be far easier for me. I will look into it anyway.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:48 am 
Offline
<!-- Lieutenant //-->

Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:19 am
Posts: 108
The more I think about it the more I think I will just go back to the 2D style for now. It just seems the best idea for my first real go.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:23 am 
Offline
<!-- Admiral -->
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 12:00 am
Posts: 866
http://galactic-voyage.com/Ships.htm
http://www.theforce.net/swtc/linksf.html#starwars

The top link has a list of ships (including freighters and other noncombatants). The second is a list of links, at least a couple of which have similar lists of vessels. Should be some ideas in there for other ship classes you can include.

_________________
Star Wars: Rebellion, A Field Manual
"O be wise, what can I say more?"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:23 am 
Offline
<!-- Lieutenant //-->

Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:19 am
Posts: 108
I will be working on the game rather than content. I was helped by someone previously on content so there is a basic amount in the game ready to go. I will get to work on an editor soon enough which I will ask someone to spend some time with for me.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 4:42 pm 
Offline
<!-- Colonel -->

Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:00 am
Posts: 505
Khanti had a decent idea about the economy model, I refer to the post here. It uses credits for maintenance, and to build something it cost credits and resources. Credits come from the population (facilities or refineries mines ) add to population and pay taxes. Then a bonus if in good favor support over say 50% loyal. then resources are needed as hard material to build things. He also uses credit for maintenance cost as you mentioned.

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=27509&p=541337&hilit=credits#p541337

The only real difference in maintenance is in vanilla if you lose a mine/refinery pair it is an immediate 50 point loss. This model it would be an on going negative credit flow, but maintainable for awhile if you have a decent balance. Affects of rebels attacking refineries or mines to hurt the empire mostly.

I think I may try that idea out. Cheers to this idea.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Thu Mar 17, 2011 7:36 am 
Offline
<!-- Lieutenant //-->

Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:19 am
Posts: 108
Would love to implement something more sophisticated however Ill stick with basics for now. Since I have chosen to go 2D things are progressing smoothly and all my lost data(well it cant be replaced) is not so much of a problem now.

It gave me a massive chance to go back and fix all the problems in the orgiinal code and the basis for the engine is much stronger now.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Thu Mar 17, 2011 8:46 am 
Offline
<!-- Colonel -->

Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:00 am
Posts: 505
Sorry to hear about your loss data. I have pictures you can use, I cobbled many off the net or just made them.

3D planets are nice too look at, but I think 2D is more practical for this game. I do not know if the average computer can emulate hundreds of 3D textured planets, and trying to get a feel for the over view may prove daunting. I seen "Free Orion" with 3D planets all over and it runs slow on any thing but a high end card.

The tactical game will be in 3D anyway. The strategic portion is just the set up for the battles, similar to Total War. Your right on, back to basics, keep the eye on ball, to finish the game in some fashion. Then later it can always be improved.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:40 pm 
Offline
<!-- Lieutenant //-->

Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:19 am
Posts: 108
Getting somewhere again. The 2D interface is very quick to put together. While its not pretty and its all just filler at the moment, Ill chuck up a quick screenshot for those interested.

So things I lost (or are changing) and need to redo:
Networking
Universe Generation
Some of the GUI stuff needs to be rejigged to work with my new engine.

Sooner or later, Ill chuck together an editor again as Ill need to get someone to recreate the Universe.



Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:36 am 
Offline
<!-- Cadet //-->

Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 9:42 am
Posts: 5
Location: Vienna - Austria
Hi there.
I'm new to the Forum.
I'm kinda an expierienced programer (but not games .. so that might not be that useful here), but if you really need help I will try to learn that aspect of programing.
Also if you still don't have someone todo it I hereby volunteer to remake your Galaxymap or if you have some other duties to handle I dont know like writing encyclopedia or stuff.
And (as everybody) I have some ideas to improve the gameplay ;).. Maybe you like some of them.

Lets take an approach through strenghts and weaknesses of SW-R to see which aspects are worth keeping and which should be changed.


STRENGHTS:

-Freedom of movement:
I'm no fan of this Tradelanestuff that EaW does. I think its horrible, for the few merrits it produces it limits you in to many aspects. It will always generate jukepoints on the map and makes a map nearly impossible to balance and Strategic Spacewar would somehow kinda feel like WW I: Build Fortresses on important positions, strengthen your frontlines, neglect defense of everything else.
As much as I value it as a strength the way its implemented in SW-R makes it a weakness too. It simply goes too far and puts the Defender in a hopeless position. I think thats a point that needs to be taken care of. Give the Defender a chance to do his job without getting the WW I kind of a thing.

-Characters:

The maybe most interessting aspect of the old game. Develop your characters, you grow attached to them, you "train" them in simple Missions to have them storm heavily fortified bastions and blow up a shield generator so you can bomb the shit out of those imps/rebels, Force training Missions are also very well thought of in that game you trade not having your best characters around for quite a long time for making them even stronger for maybe u later need em.

-The MessageSystem:

Those 2 helpful droids reminding you of everything thats going on in your Galaxy are priceless. But ofc it also could need some improvements. If someone here knows Hearts of Iron 2 it will be clear what I mean. For all the others: HoI 2 gives you the possibility whenever a meesage pops up to decide the importance of that kind of matter and what should be done automatically if such a message pops up. I don't allways need to be notified that a diplomacy- or an R&D Missions didnt produce Results. So maybe dispaly it in the messagelog but dont notify me. A planet of mine gets bombed? Notify me and bring me to the planet. Enemy saboteurs destroy my Shield Generator? Notify me, reduce gamespeed to a crawl and bring me to the planet so I can find a construction site thats close by and rebuild the bloody thing.
The important thing here is that the player can decide how he wants to react to different kinds of messages.


WEAKNESSES:

-Complete lack of Sensors:
Really, what did the developers think on that one?. If I want to know if there are ships incoming I have to run an Espionage Mission? Thats not only impractical, it makes it impossible to have some sort of relieable detection. Some Sensor buildings to warn me of incoming ships would be desperatly needed. (When they enter a certain distance to a Sensorphalanx they show up on my screen). It would also put a little more emphasis on speed. Maybe limit sensor info with distance (Sensor data gets clearer as fleet comes closer)

-Managment:
It's just horrible and everybody knows it.. ;). Too many windows and no tools to support you with the load of data. On a huge Galaxy setting it was simply impossible to keep your empire/New Republic working to a somewhat efficient lvl. There need to be improvements as Planetlists, Productionqueues, Fleetlists that actually contain some info besides the name, some sort of Window managment... and so forth and so on

-Transparency:
Hu? I'm besting the bloody rebels in all the core system and Needa goes traitor?
So how exactly do those detection values work? How many decoys do I need?
Is it better to send many weak decoys (like Commandos, droids) or is it better to send a few strong characters?
Generals, Admirals & Commanders strenghten my units. How? By how much? And is a higher leadership value better in this case or is this just for subduing & instigate uprising missions?
It is nice that units have a detection value of 30 .. but what does that actually mean? How does it translate to the character values?
All of these situations do happen all the time, noone knows why and they are annoying like hell, because of the fact that you don't know what exactly happened there.
Players should be informed about these things.
For example: in my opinion there should be an estimated chances of success on completing a mission (one number for reaching the goal, one for it not getting spoiled) based on the information you have about the System.

-Design Errors:
Here I just want to place some of the things that are really troublesome in SW-R but don't really fit a category:
Bombing a System 5x and jump away in the blink of an eye:
Every action should take its time: Jumping into the System - Moving up to the planet you want to bombard - get in Formation - Bombard - break Formation - leave Mass-shadow of the planet - Jump out of the System.
Packing and moving the Rebel HQ:
Basically the same thing. It should take some time to pack all this stuff and move it somewhere. Furthermore it should show up on Sensors if its moving (maybe as a medium sized fleet) Chaseing the RebelHQ is one of the most annoying things ever to achieve Victory as the Empire.
IMBA-Luke:
Luke becoming stronger by just meeting vader or the emperor is ridicilous. That needs to go.
Emperor.
Fighter Controls:
I hated it. I want the Bombers to stay in the ships in the beginning of the fight and i want to release them after my fighters secured fighter supremacy.
I should be able to tell my fighters to come back AND be able to send them out again. (if it was just me being an idiot and that is possible in SW-R someone plz tell me how)


I'm trying to remember the few lectures about game design I took at the beginning of my time at university and think of something else that might be important.. but for know thats all that comes to mind. Maybe there are some points in all that text that are of some value to you.

_________________
Don't call me a mindless philosopher you overweight glob of grease


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 11:45 am 
Offline
<!-- Colonel -->

Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:00 am
Posts: 505
Some good ideas. I need to keep in mind when I re code the Rebellion Remake project. I also did not like the bombard infinitely during one day then jump out. It will take limited time. One day per bombardment. Plus more detail planet action that all will love and really was missing from the original. Extra material to watch if you wish, or just leave it automatic summary as it was per planet. Trying to reduce the micromanagement, but allow you to get involved for extra fun or that personal touch.

Would it not be neat if your command ship did move around the galaxy? You as the player is actually part of the galaxy inhabitant and move around (King on a chess board). You can over see projects and such. But you may want to build the unique Super Star Destroyer, or Home One (whatever it is called for the Rebels Flag Ship) to protect you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 9:04 am 
Offline
<!-- Warlord -->
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 12:00 am
Posts: 1944
Location: Death Stars are out at night, big and bright, deep in the heart of Texas.
@Slocket: I know you're busy with the graphics of the game & coding such, but this is just a question regarding "game play" so I hope I don't distract you too much from your current task. Currently in the game, resources are generated by mines and refineries, and the "speed" at which these resources are produced are affected by the system loyalty (systems with 100% loyalty produce resources quicker than a system with 0% loyalty + garrison troops): basically an efficiency factor based on system loyalty. My question deals with "efficiency factors": do you think facility "age" should play a factor with efficiency? I just find it a bit strange that a shipyard (for example) can produce the same ship/fighter on day 1, as on day 2000 (given identical system loyalty & resource availability). I would think facilities should maybe have a "lifespan" (+/- some time from a base line), and then start requiring more "maintenance" to keep them going; maybe to the point of requiring twice the maintenance. At some point it would be more efficient to replace the facility with another (or upgraded version) to get the efficency back up. This adds quite a bit of micro-managing to the industrial aspect of the game, but it has been done in other games. When I get far along into a game and have a good portion of control of the galaxy, I usually turn production management over to the AI and concentrate on the game. After awhile, I have so many resources stockpiled, it just makes things ... anti-climatic/unrealistic. I could have a 100 shipyards (from Day 1) outproduce the enemy even though they have 40 advanced shipyards all produced in the last week; it just doesn't "add" some uncertainty to the game that you could still lose. Innovation/modern facilities can always outpace larger older facilities: it's all about efficiency. Maybe there should be an "age efficiency" added to anything manufactured: an X-wing produced on day 1 shouldn't be equal to an X-wing produced on day 2000 (theoretically it's possible, but that's stagnant thinking: in my opinion).

What do you think? Anybody else have an opinion, I'm curious to know what others think?

_________________
Finally, after years of hard work I am the Supreme Sith Warlord! Muwhahahaha!! What?? What do you mean "there's only two of us"?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Remake Ideas Revisited
PostPosted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:47 am 
Offline
<!-- Colonel -->

Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:00 am
Posts: 505
DarthTex wrote:
@Slocket: I know you're busy with the graphics of the game & coding such, but this is just a question regarding "game play" so I hope I don't distract you too much from your current task. Currently in the game, resources are generated by mines and refineries, and the "speed" at which these resources are produced are affected by the system loyalty (systems with 100% loyalty produce resources quicker than a system with 0% loyalty + garrison troops): basically an efficiency factor based on system loyalty. My question deals with "efficiency factors": do you think facility "age" should play a factor with efficiency? I just find it a bit strange that a shipyard (for example) can produce the same ship/fighter on day 1, as on day 2000 (given identical system loyalty & resource availability). I would think facilities should maybe have a "lifespan" (+/- some time from a base line), and then start requiring more "maintenance" to keep them going; maybe to the point of requiring twice the maintenance. At some point it would be more efficient to replace the facility with another (or upgraded version) to get the efficiency back up. This adds quite a bit of micro-managing to the industrial aspect of the game, but it has been done in other games. When I get far along into a game and have a good portion of control of the galaxy, I usually turn production management over to the AI and concentrate on the game. After awhile, I have so many resources stockpiled, it just makes things ... anti-climatic/unrealistic. I could have a 100 shipyards (from Day 1) outproduce the enemy even though they have 40 advanced shipyards all produced in the last week; it just doesn't "add" some uncertainty to the game that you could still lose. Innovation/modern facilities can always outpace larger older facilities: it's all about efficiency. Maybe there should be an "age efficiency" added to anything manufactured: an X-wing produced on day 1 shouldn't be equal to an X-wing produced on day 2000 (theoretically it's possible, but that's stagnant thinking: in my opinion).

What do you think? Anybody else have an opinion, I'm curious to know what others think?


No for these reasons, but you do bring up a very good point that is going to be addressed. First, I want to reduce micromanagement and have a competent strategic AI that understands it. Second, Maintenance does keep things like new, so the age factor is part of the maintenance cost spread out over the average. Thirdly, as you show, the end game for the guy who owns most of the galaxy, is swimming in excess resources. That will change. Fourth, research is another "age factor" that takes time but makes things more efficient.

The vanilla game gave out too much generous mines, refineries, and maintenance points. This also makes sabotage mission of the economic variety rather a poor option. This game is about Rebellion, and the little guy needs a chance to fight back if he continues to play in a galaxy that you own 66% of. Else they will quit if human, or a non-cheating AI is nothing to beat at that point and it is boring.

In the remake, you will value all mines, refineries, and maintenance points. Harder to come by (stripped the galaxy bare). This makes sneaky Economic Sabotage Missions really hurt you especially if your the Rebels (good at this mission) hurting the Galactic Empire (big and bloated having a lot of maintenance cost). Additionally the more systems you own (modified by a bonus +- build up level and civilian happiness and loyalty and size etc) will cost you much more to maintain. Here is where the hidden age factor comes into play, the longer you play and if you are winning 66% plus, the more it cost you to hold on and maintain your huge mega Empire together. Then the enemy who has less own-age of the galaxy (plus a good bonus to building up what he does own to the max) can really hurt using economic sabotage on you rather than a frontal military assault that would end very badly.

Example is the real world. Big country versus little country. They use guerrilla warfare and economic sabotage to hurt the big guy. A direct military assault would be suicidal. As a game balance, the 'little country' will never win the game using economic warfare alone, that must be done military or diplomacy, but it does buy them valuable time to achieve those goals. Time to research a longer path to catch up to you. Example, *** gets the super Nuke. Now it is time to fight. (Death Star for Empire). "Rise of Nations" used this IIRC to end the game.

That will make the end game exciting, you will never know where the Rebels in this case are going to strike next, and you will be frustrated by all the nipping hit and run attacks ruining your giant perfect Empire, just like the theme in the movie. Lea talks to Vader in the opening sequence, the more he grasps the more it slips away. Additionally, you will be worried about the Rebel's super weapon coming to power if given enough time (Luke at the Master Jedi level?).. :D He may just come walking right into your throne room and snatching ol' Papy and Vader away just like the movie.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

 
 
 
^Top 
Home Your Account Forums Downloads F.A.Q. Submit News Hosting Contact Us

© 1999-2008 by SWRebellion.com. All Rights Reserved.
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters.
You can syndicate our news using the file backend.php

    Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group