The above isn't a full-scale screenshot (it's 75% scale), and it's just a tiny snippet of the screen. But it does give you some idea of what we're up to.
The above is a thumbnail of it zoomed very far out to show a large part of a midsize world with a normal map style (continents and islands and poles and whatnot, and all the season zones). The pale green buildings are ones that have been modeled but not yet painted. Note that also the per-race alien flora isn't yet spreading here, either.
Above is a view of where the north polar zone is butting up against the northern temperate.
Q from relmz32: Regarding how the planet is mapped in SE, how do you guys handle wrapping? The reason why I ask is that cylendrical wrapping, while popular and pretty easy to implement, doesn't actaully do a good job of representing an actual spherical planet.
Above is a view of where the northern temperate is hitting the tropics slightly, as well as showing some resource-rich rocky crystal ground native to the planet.
Q from DrFranknfurter: 1 building per hex is hinted by the first screenshot?
Q from DrFranknfurter: What sort of resources will there be to gather/find/fight over?
Q from DrFranknfurter: 14 races is a lot... considering that how are you planning them to look different?
will they share building artwork (sane) or do they get there own (Good but expensive, 14x the work is a painfully large multiplier) Or will the buildings be coloured with your race colour (cheap but effective) or something else to differentiate them? (Like red spiky crystals/forests surrounding cities of different races)
Q from DrFranknfurter: Will you be trading things with the AI? (assuming you know their language). I can imagine not knowing the other players languages could slow down diplomacy (5 turns to unlock breathing, 5 more to unlock grunting, 5 more to unlock talking) and push you towards ignoring it entirely in favour of conquest. Especially if the other players are actively damaging your terrain through hostile terraforming. That said, it would be interesting to have the diplomacy text be more and more detailed/unambiguous as you understand their language better, much like the spire conversations do in AI War. But perhaps having a little bit of diplomacy available at all times would be enough to prevent that worry from becoming an issue. (firing a warning shot is a solid form of non-verbal communication, giving a gift shouldn't require anything more than dumping valuable gems near their border etc.)
Q from DrFranknfurter: I'm a little sad that the player doesn't get his hands on giant spire floating cities... But as both the Spire and Neinzul weren't the main races in AI War either (by dint of their awesome power) I'm not completely surprised.
Q from DrFranknfurter: Will there be any orbital stuff? I'm assuming there's a reason they're all stuck on the planet together... perhaps a reason that interferes with satellites/spaceflight.
Q from DrFranknfurter: Are the flying spire and neinzul the orbital equivalent - how high do they float? I'm assuming it's just an artistic representation of their buildings... is there any mechanical differences from them floating? (can they move, build over oceans, float over your cities?)
Q from DrFranknfurter: What is planet mood? Will the planet get annoyed with your growth/wars/terraforming? Interactions with the planet was a core feature of Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri (SMAC, the beloved 4x of yesteryear) In it certain buildings and policies harmed the planet - which could then attack you with mindworms- and certain victory conditions involved communicating with the planet. Will the player be dealing with the planet in a similar way? How much of a similarity is there?
Q from ElOhTeeBee: (Relating to Terraforming) YES. About how much of this post do you at least want to try to make work?
Above is a bit of desert and desert mountains bordering one side of it.
If there is no unit management, can we expect to see something along the lines of Skyward Collapse, where the units themselves are simply a product of the buildings whether directly or indirectly, and have a mind of their own?
It's hard for me to imagine a 4X game that doesn't have "units" in the traditional sense. Buildings are important but how will the armies function? Will there even be armies?
Maybe I'm asking you to divulge too much at the given moment, but I think everyone would like to know how the "battle" system works, or if there is even any type of battle happening amongst factions.
<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Q from nas1m:</span> Regarding how the planet is mapped in SE, how do you guys handle wrapping? The reason why I ask is that cylendrical wrapping, while popular and pretty easy to implement, doesn't actaully do a good job of representing an actual spherical planet.
...
Also, I have a question regarding how the planet is mapped in SE, how do you guys handle wrapping? The reason why i ask is that cylendrical wrapping, while popular and pretty easy to implement, doesn't actaully do a good job of representing an actual spherical planet.
So the battles themselves will not be animated or displayed in any visceral sense, but will instead rely on the imagination of the player using statistics screens and outcomes to determine how the battle played out?If there is no unit management, can we expect to see something along the lines of Skyward Collapse, where the units themselves are simply a product of the buildings whether directly or indirectly, and have a mind of their own?The battle system in general is still in various stages of prototyping, but you are correct that there are literally no units, period. It's not like Skyward Collapse where you have units but they are auto-managed. You won't see any giant barbarians moving around the map.
It's hard for me to imagine a 4X game that doesn't have "units" in the traditional sense. Buildings are important but how will the armies function? Will there even be armies?
Maybe I'm asking you to divulge too much at the given moment, but I think everyone would like to know how the "battle" system works, or if there is even any type of battle happening amongst factions.
That said, there are things like military dropships that are shuttling unseen soldiers from one part of the map to another on your command. That's a bit confusing when I'm not more specific, but I'm trying not to say too much that will change later.
Overall, think of the populace as being just like in SimCity. For instance, you have an overall population that is being sustained by the city/empire that you are creating, and you have to house them and so on. There is some concept of position of the populace, in that building adjacencies matter a lot for reasons like desirability, pollution, access to services and transportation, etc. However, unlike the very latest SimCity, there's not a simulation of every last little individual and how they move around. It's a bit more abstract than that here, more like SimCity 4 and SimCity 2000.
The military mechanics are intended to be a seamless offshoot of that. By erecting various military buildings, you project a certain amount of power from them as certain members of the populace are employed there. However, you have to have a supply chain to support those buildings fully. And from those buildings, you can supply things like the drop ships, which then land on kind of "makeshift buildings" that can go next to enemy terrain. These being things like little military camps that you fling up -- kind of like what a US Air Force Combat Controller would do in enemy territory to set up a temporary airstrip in hostile territory, then used for further breaching.
The military portion of your populace then begins the incursion from there (or defends against an enemy incursion if the roles are reversed), and the mechanics there are less finalized. I have a variety of models mapped out there that I think have promise, but which one exactly is clearest and smoothest is something I have yet to decide on. I want something that isn't click-heavy, that doesn't require endless subscreens, and that gives you the power to directly make choices but doesn't require you to micro everything if you don't want to. So that's going to be some more stuff that I'm experimenting with prior to us hitting beta.
The other aspect of military warfare is direct-fire weapons, mainly missiles. These being things where you say "hey missile silo, fire a missile at X coordinate in your range," and then it immediately does it and you see what happens. So there's not really a fight there per se, it's just you inflicting damage on an enemy city based on direct ranged attacks. That might be softening them up for a ground incursion, or a preventative measure to keep them from attacking you with their own ranged missiles, etc. The direct-fire weapons are already in and work just fine.
Anyhow, it's a pretty different concept from most other 4x games, by design. Not just to be different for the sake of being different, but because I feel like most 4x games bog down in the late game because of all the tedious combat. And I don't feel like automating that is the solution, I feel like a model that is actually fun and direct and fast and more in keeping with the rest of the game is the solution. And having giant units wandering around the map has just never really felt right to me in general. This game takes a lot of cues from citybuilders in general, and none of them have ever handled military in a way that I liked, either. So hence something new.
Incidentally, part of my reason for making AI War a game in space was because I like space but I disliked all space strategy games prior to that. It's kind of the same thing here. I love 4x games, but they tend to lose me when it comes to the actual combat. I love the back and forth struggle, but not how it is represented or how the AI deals with it or how I have to manipulate it. It's always felt clunky and awkward, and so I'm trying something more in keeping with the rest of the mechanics of that genre, which I absolutely love. Why can't combat be more like the actual empire-building portions, which are so fun? Etc.
Q from nas1m:
Hey! That question was from *me*! :D
So the battles themselves will not be animated or displayed in any visceral sense, but will instead rely on the imagination of the player using statistics screens and outcomes to determine how the battle played out?
Question from a friend - can you clarify which races will and will not be playable? Specifically, can you play as the Thoraxians?
with co-op multiplayer
There are 6 races that are not-ever-human-playable out of those 14. Those are the Acutians, the Andors, the Thoraxians, the Spire, the Neinzul, and the Yali.NNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Sadness about the Spire seems to be becoming a theme here, hen its not people asking questions.There are 6 races that are not-ever-human-playable out of those 14. Those are the Acutians, the Andors, the Thoraxians, the Spire, the Neinzul, and the Yali.NNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
...ahem.
Right, definitely looking forward to this. Love the title image, by the way :D
Sadness about the Spire seems to be becoming a theme here, hen its not people asking questions.There are 6 races that are not-ever-human-playable out of those 14. Those are the Acutians, the Andors, the Thoraxians, the Spire, the Neinzul, and the Yali.NNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
...ahem.
Right, definitely looking forward to this. Love the title image, by the way :D
Question from a friend - can you clarify which races will and will not be playable? Specifically, can you play as the Thoraxians?
There are 6 races that are not-ever-human-playable out of those 14. Those are the Acutians, the Andors, the Thoraxians, the Spire, the Neinzul, and the Yali. All of these races work entirely differently from all the human-playable races. Each of these races has something like 5-6 unique buildings for themselves, and they use their entirely own economic mechanics, AI, and everything. They aren't playing the same game as you at all.
The Thoraxians were a race that I wanted to have a really cool and unique way of interacting with the world, and giving that to the players would mean essentially (at least) two separate games to balance. You never know in an expansion or something, if this is popular. But for now they are probably Enemy Number One most of the time.
Day one purchase, obviously! Will you support Linux from day one?
Just want to wish you all the best. I'm very happy to see all those questions ended up being useful. (You do move quickly) Good luck and happy Halloween. I'm looking forward to any more teasers and insights as your designs become reality. (especially on planet mood, unique mechanics and anything else you're wrangling over). Thanks again for answering so many questions.
This looks fantastic, I love the bit about planet mood which looks really interesting from a macro point of view. And of course another unique gameplay style from Arcen, can't wait to hear more about it. Great work so far, best of luck for the future, I'll be keeping an eye on it as always.
Right, definitely looking forward to this. Love the title image, by the way :D
Sadness about the Spire seems to be becoming a theme here, hen its not people asking questions.
Expansion idea! :D
So, by extension, the Burlusts, the Peltians, the Skylaxians, the Boarines, the Evucks, the Zenith, the Fenyn, and the Krolin are the playable races. My friend is now sad, but I am not because playing as the Zenith sounds totally sweet.
I love hexes. These are especially pretty hexes. :o
Arcen 4x, clearly day 1.
There is so much imagination in this game, plenty of room for your players to fantasize in. And, this being an Arcen title, I'm sure we are going to get challenge and your best attempt at eliminating what makes 4x so difficult to enjoy sometimes.
I don't know how you plan on balancing this, but creating "infinite possibility" in a world that people don't want the ability to exploit a win is challenging. Diplomacy is probably the easiest to fail at, but what Keith said makes sense.
When you get a little more code to page, and some early gameplay videos out, make sure to let us know so we can spread the word.
God, I don't give a shit what the rest of the game is like if you can pull off the diplomacy aspect.
Space Empires 3? had some really awesome options, but the AI never went for two thirds of them ("And why would I agree to a subjugation treaty?")
Right, definitely looking forward to this. Love the title image, by the way :D
Thanks! It came out of this process: https://99designs.com/logo-design/contests/logo-design-stars-beyond-reach-upcoming-steam-strategy-429511
And of course, day one linux support is a given on our stuff now. :)
Exodus of the Machine: http://99designs.com/logo-design/contests/pro-indie-game-logo-exodus-machine-206605
And now it's on RPS (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/11/03/stars-beyond-reach-announced/)With the reply, "I encourage everyone to further finance their self-torture."
With this in the first comment: "I think Arcen’s games are a cry for help from people who can’t stop making games they find interesting."
My biggest issue with diplomacy in 4X games is that AI will never, ever EVER give up. Even if you own the entire universe and all they have is a rotten moon, they will fight you to the death rather than accept annexation, surrender or subjugation.
That makes for very binary play. I'd rather see races willing to surrender, for now, to survive in the short term and perhaps build power later to break free and fight for independence. Preferrably when the player is busy with another enemy elsewhere.
I don't know about the rest of the game becoming irrelevant if we pull off diplomacy, but we'll see.
It may be worth looking at how paradox does diplomacy. Not that you should copy them, but just to learn from what works and what doesn't. For them, they have a set list of conditions that must be met for different diplomacy events to occur, such as vassalization, and multiple victory/failure conditions and rewards/penalties depending on what happens during the game. For example, if you are in the middle of a war, your actions contribute towards a war score that you can use to achieve different victory or failure conditions. This way, there is a lot of freedom with the ways in which you can affect the warscore without it being exact prescription. This is similar to the last Federation in some respects.I was reading through this thread and had come to the same conclusion just before I read your comment.
It may be worth looking at how paradox does diplomacy. Not that you should copy them, but just to learn from what works and what doesn't. For them, they have a set list of conditions that must be met for different diplomacy events to occur, such as vassalization, and multiple victory/failure conditions and rewards/penalties depending on what happens during the game. For example, if you are in the middle of a war, your actions contribute towards a war score that you can use to achieve different victory or failure conditions. This way, there is a lot of freedom with the ways in which you can affect the warscore without it being exact prescription. This is similar to the last Federation in some respects.I was reading through this thread and had come to the same conclusion just before I read your comment.
The way relationships work in TLF is already pretty similar to how they work in EU4 (though I think the display of modifiers is a little better in EU4), but where it really shines is in the diplomacy of resolving wars. The granularity allowed is pretty awesome, and the peace terms you choose also affect how other countries view you. Extending the EU4 peace negotiations to general diplomacy (where both/all sides can give and take) would be awesome! Having a virtual currency (like warscore or diplomacy points in EU4 or some of the various racial currencies in TLF) as opposed to cash (like in Distant Worlds) would probably be preferable.
Edit: now for my own questions
Are there likely to be any local/neutral buildings not related to a specific race like barbarians/huts or city states in Civ5?
It may be worth looking at how paradox does diplomacy. Not that you should copy them, but just to learn from what works and what doesn't. For them, they have a set list of conditions that must be met for different diplomacy events to occur, such as vassalization, and multiple victory/failure conditions and rewards/penalties depending on what happens during the game. For example, if you are in the middle of a war, your actions contribute towards a war score that you can use to achieve different victory or failure conditions. This way, there is a lot of freedom with the ways in which you can affect the warscore without it being exact prescription. This is similar to the last Federation in some respects.I was reading through this thread and had come to the same conclusion just before I read your comment.
The way relationships work in TLF is already pretty similar to how they work in EU4 (though I think the display of modifiers is a little better in EU4), but where it really shines is in the diplomacy of resolving wars. The granularity allowed is pretty awesome, and the peace terms you choose also affect how other countries view you. Extending the EU4 peace negotiations to general diplomacy (where both/all sides can give and take) would be awesome! Having a virtual currency (like warscore or diplomacy points in EU4 or some of the various racial currencies in TLF) as opposed to cash (like in Distant Worlds) would probably be preferable.
Excellent extra information, thanks -- I will be sure and play that some and get a feel for it, I appreciate the tips. :)
Actually, are there any LPs about this, or video tutorials at all? I have EU4, but it's a bloody beast to get into. ;)
I'd also note that for once, the majority of comments on that RPS article weren't negative. Perhaps even grudgingly respectful in some cases.