Galciv2 has open space (as has the new 4x space game Distant Worlds), while other games such as Sword of the Stars, 2526 Armada, SINS and MOO2 have starlanes. I prefer starlanes as they provide natural choke points and planets are usually the only interesting things in the galaxy to fight about. Why would you fight in the middle of space? Unless your attacked en route I suppose. I wonder what Galciv2/Sins/Homeworld/(insert your favourite game) players prefer?
FYI, 2526 and Moo2 were both 'open space', merely 'enhanced' with wormhole connections. Sword of the Stars has starlanes for one species, artificially generated starlanes for another, and open space (of various types) for the rest of the races.
Personally, I prefer star-lane oriented approaches; they provide chokepoints and make interesting tactical decisions a necessity. Edit: That said, SOTS 'limited range, with the ability to extend via tankers' makes a nice middle ground; the enemy generally can't penetrate deep into your empire without weakening his combat forces in favor of support ships.
I think the "starlane"-style approach is certainly interesting; however I am absolutely DYING to know what an open-space system would feel like.
More than that however, I think that a perfect middle-ground would be: open-space star systems, with said systems connected by starlanes. Hopefully something that will be considered for Sins 2 eh?
SotS does not have starlanes, other than for 2 of the races. SotS actually has 6! different movement systems, though 2 are very similar (humans and Zuul), 3 are related (Tarka, Liir, and Moriggi) and the Hivers use gate ships to instantly jump their ships from system to system (though they move very slowly to new systems without Gates installed).
I prefer star lanes generally, though the SotS system is also very interesting, and it does indeed provide an additional challenge when you know that your opponent has more movement options than do you (especially true if playing Human/Zuul).
Ron-
Realize that at a certain tech level penetrating deep into a system is not an issue due to refinery ships, however, ships still have a range limit, to overcome it, EACH ship in the fleet needs to have the extended range mission section which does indeed largely destroy their offensive capacity.
SotS already has this to an extent. The tactical battles are real time either at systems or interceptions in space. There is open movement for some races, though you still cannot really park your fleets in deep space (well you can, but you have to game the system a bit to do it, so I don't).
Now the real time battles are a turn off for some (myself included), but the design of the game and the number of different galaxy types you can create to play in make it well worth checking out if you have not already.
They are currently working on SotS2 I believe, though I've not seen alot of details about it so far.
Distant Worlds should also be interesting, it definately gives me a MoO3 feeling though, so that could really go either way depending on how well they handle the auto routines to take care of the micro.
My biggest problem had more to do with tying UI functionality into research, which really ticks me off.
Yeah, that was an interesting design choice.
It didn't bother me that much though, since I normally skip those techs anyway and autoresolve a lot
Behold! The new armored fist of SolForce in SotS2:
Theyr'e working on a sequel already? ... I need to pay more attention, none of my newsfeeds brought that to my attention. I need more newsfeeds I guess
*yawn* Not particularly impressive unless you are very primitive.
Whiskey, how about calling it "utilitarian" instead of "primitive"? Metal boxes with engines are cheaper and easier to build than ST saucer-ships. By the way, I am so glad SolForce is ditching their previous army-camo-green paintjob, which was just disgusting.
And Ron Lugge, SotS2 was first announced at PIC 2010 in January in Stockholm of all places. It was later formally confirmed on the Kerberos forums by head SotS honcho Martin Cirulis.
Holy shit that looks great Sparda! Wow I also missed this too.
Whiskey- Primitive... how?!
Well, at least it was a 'recent' development.
@Sparda- ST "saucer" ships are noob dinner plates.
I prefer the elegant, skyscraper-internal, fusion powered vessel complete with a derivative of the Bussard Ramjet.
@GJ- the entire design is completely imbalanced and probably has the internal arrangement of a passenger airplane. Thus, while under acceleration everyone will be turned into a delicious-looking tomato-like paste against the wall that is in the direction of the propulsion systems.
This is the advantage of a skyscraper arrangement- the human body can take acceleration better when the direction of said acceleration is moving from the top of the head to the feet. The next best position is to lie on one's back and face towards the direction of acceleration.
Well, all of the acceleration is hand-waved away in the SotS-verse. I think the fastest STL travel that ship is capable of going is .5c with a year's worth of acceleration. So "smashed to tomato-like paste" isn't very likely.
Personally, I think this design is a massive improvement over the ones in SotS1. It looks far more robust and beefy, and dare I say, even more deserving of the term "metal box".
Hmmm. When SotS2 comes out I should probably make the boxiest ship design possible for the humans, and call it the Rhino.
Rhino=pwnage.
Razorback=ultra pwnage
Predator=turbo pwnage
Land Raider=uber pwnage
Sorry. Couldn't resist the '40k notation of "Rhino".
Speaking of 40k, any new DRW40K comics come out?
While I don't have a particularly strong opinion either way, I do tend to prefer open space travel in my 4x games. Partially because I don't like restrictions, and partially because starlane-type travel seems to favor human players over the AI (more so than open space, anyway).
That being said, I'm not that picky overall. I can handle either type of travel, so long as it's balanced well and complements/enhances gameplay.
Only Sins and SotS (to an extent) have starlanes. In the other games, travel mainly occurs in open space.
Starlanes are far easier to code an AI for. That's a directed graph. There's a whole library of algorithms (e.g. mincut, random walk, partitioning) already researched and developed for directed graphs, and the subject of white papers, articles in ACM, doctoral dissertations, etc.. To do open space, an MSCS postgraduate would probably formulate starlanes dynamically out of open space and incorporate in some fuzzy logic. Much easier if it's just starlanes to start with. Of course, this presumes that you have postgraduates coding the AI for games, which does not usually seem to be the case.
That said, I tend to prefer open space as a player. I probably would as an AI coder, too--I want the challenge. No fun in coding algorithms that have already been done.
Actually Whiskey, I was referring to this little YouTube video about Rhinos and "METAL BAWKSES!!!!!!"
FYI, that is an actual line from Soulstorm. If you are playing as Chaos in the campaign and attack the SM stronghold, Firaveus Carron says that line when the Blood Ravens start sending troops in Rhinos at you. Ironically, since Chaos uses Rhinos as well he could be in a Rhino when he starts yelling about them being "METAL BAWKSES!!!".
Friggin' HILARIOUS!!!
Also, it seems that every thread that you, me, and/or someone else who's into 40k/DoW1 seems to have a little Warhammer 40,000 sprinkled in.
Well, what's funnier is that it seems like Relic is trying to forget the abomination that was Soulstorm. In the campaign for DoW2 your squad leaders are talking about what happened at Kaurava and Cyrus says this: "Kaurava was a mistake. Let us never speak of this again.".
That is pretty funny. If only Soulstorm could have been developed by Relic instead of outsourcing to Ironlore. Then it would be at least as good as Winter Assault (DC is probably the best one IMO).
I think we're drifting away from the topic . Apologies for some of the errors I made. Some of the games I mentioned I didnt play (or only a demo or saw some videos). However, my preference are not changed.
Moving back on topic-
My ideal space 4X game would be an RT4X (like Sins ), have a highly realistic spaceflight model, have a separation of entities (frigates and capital ships, a la Sins) with larger, more important entities capable of "leveling up" (also a la Sins of a Solar Empire), and also being able to have targetable subsystems/realistic battle damage effects (this wouldn't be done for less important units because it would probably be 1) annoying/infuriating/frustating and 2) bog down system resources); it would have a starlane style system for connecting solar systems and within said solar systems it would be an open-space design.
This satisfies the fact that I absolutely would LOVE to experience an open-space system (with orbiting planets!), and the fact that I like the tactical/strategic options of starlane-style travel. I just want those options on a larger, interstellar scale instead of a small interplanetary scale.
And you've never played SotS?
Sure it's not *exactly* what you asked for, but seems to me that it's as close as you are going to get.
I didn't really like the SotS demo. The UI was to cramped and uncomfortable for me to use, and it was just overall difficult for me to enjoy. I will say that it is an innovative design, but I just don't really like it very much.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
