Ok, so I''ll jsut assume you didn''t bother reading the links I passed ... so I''ll just summarize them for you, and add some of the thoughts I have on the sucject of battleship conflicts in space.

First off, you have to make a choice. I don''t think you can give the feel of tremendous power and weight of battleships with an arcade interface/graphics. I mean, look at Starcraft Battelcruiser ... we''ll say that this is the kind of stuff you want to avoid. A puny little ship crawling across the screen. What would be damn cool would be something more in the style of the Mechwarrior series. I have always thought that this serie was utterly cool at giving you the feeling of being in control of a 30 tons robot. The powe management, the weapon management, plus keeping your robot going the proper way while aiming at incoming enemies, was just .... raaah And I dont even mention the customisation part, a dream come true.
Some of the elements there could (and should, IMnsHO) be taken. Namely, energy/weapon management, customization of ship.
Graphically speaking, a mere ship on the screen is not enough, you need to give a sense of scale, a sense of weight, of power. For instance, seeing a battleship crawl on the screen is a good attempt (the Starcraft battelcruiser, again), but htere is just something missing ... if you look at the cutscenes, you would expect something MUCH larger. The sprite should be bigger than the screen, or at least be in proportion with the other sprites... One good point is the tremors during shootings, the flashes of light from guns. Theses are cool tricks to use to give the feeling of something big shooting. The nearer to the ship, the more tremors and flashes. Personally, I''d go for full 3D, but of course, it''s easier said than done
I think Homeworld is a pretty cool reference. The only problem I''d see would be again the sense of scale. Being able to zoom out of the action just killed the whole effect. Now on the other hand, if you''d zoom in, you could see some really cool details, like separate turrets tracking their targets, you owuld hear more sound effects like the pilots speaking and the sound of the guns...

Another good way to make the player feel all the power of the ships is to give them numbers, but for this to make any effects, they have to make sense in context. In Mechwarrior, the customization part, I think, give you the opportunity to see what''s inside, to get an idea for yourself of what you are controlling on the map. It''s much more different than using the external camera and looking at your bot running on the map. It makes the robot more tangible. When you are on the map, you know what you are driving, it''s not just a robot with blazing guns, it''s YOUR robot.

As for hard science, I think the only science you should put is the one you need to make the player feel like he is driving something real. That means details on what type of warp drive are you using, what ammo type you''ve loaded, what mass is this ship, or that one, what is the crew, the capacity, etc etc ... the idea being to use details that you would use for something real (like a naval battleship) rather than use scientific details to explain everything.
For one, if we wanted science, we could just drop sound effects altogether (sound in the void ??? since when ?), and forget about all the dogfighting stuff, there is no air in space, so no way to make turns, loops, and all the nice style figures we all love. If you can forget those basic rules for the sake of style, I think you safely go ahead and use warp engine for Faster Than Light travels, and other beam weapons.

Some ideas for the gameplay :
Energy management. You definetely need that. Have your engines be able to deliver a certain amount of energy, if you use them to more than 100% you start taking risks. The amount you can go over 100% depends on the engine type, as well as your technicians on board (think the number of times Belanna or Scotty saved the day in Startrek ...), or things like heating vents (the system cools down faster). Energy powers your warp drive ("we don''t have enough power to jump now, we need more time..."), your normal drive, your weapons ("all power to weapons!"), your shields if such technology is available (don''t make those standards for some interesting ideas later ...)
The problem there would be to make an interesting interface so that you can do this power management easy. I''d personally use a nice layout diagram, where you''d simply set the different levels for the different systems of the ship.

Weapons. Dont control the weapons directly. This just kill the whole thing. You are a captain giving orders. And you should be doing jsut that. Being busy dealing with incoming communication, while trying to figure which bearing to choose, and if you should arm your weapons just in case, or keep them down in sign of peace ... control the weapons in a simple manner. Anti fighters batteries would be automatic. They just defend you from incoming missiles, fighters, eventually corvette scaled ships. Then you''d have the more important turrets (corvette sized ?) to deal with ships more specifically. Lastly you''d have the main batteries. Front, rear and sides should be taken into account (up and down as well ?)
You could even have special weapons. Ion cannons in Homeworld come to mind. But I am also thinking of the Dominator cannon in Space Fleet (see my previous post), a cannon so massive that the ship is basically built around it. Of course, the hard part is to aim ...
Other weapons would be, for a capital ship, to have boarding troops. Ram the enemy ship, and assault !
You could have carrier ships. Less weapons, but a fleet of fighters.
I said earlier to make shields something rare, because you could have ships specifically designed for the purpose of being a shield (taken from th Castellan ship in Space Fleet). The energy required for shield technology is so high that a ship was built with the only purpose of being a shield to other captialt ships. There is no other system on board than a shield generator. The ship also serve as a deminer, simply opening the way through minefields like a bulldozer opening the way on a snowy road...
I dunno why, but I always thought tractor beams sucked ... but grappling hooks, now that''s another story. Ramming action, massive freighters going on a kamikaze run, now that would be cool
Make the ships be a bit more in contact ! That gives you opportunity to make lots of metallic noises, that give you the sense of scale you need. dont just use those clean laser beams, use bullets, shells, ramming prow, boarding ships, etc.

Ok, I think there is quite a bunch already, so tell me what you think.
I have had all this in mind since I discovered Space Fleet, quite a bunch of years ago (9 years actually ...), so there is probably more to say. Reading the links I gave above would help a bit. The ideas for scenarios and subplots are very cool for campaign games.

Anyway, youpla :-P

ps : BTW Wavinator, did I mention I love those ideas of yours ? I dunno for sure what you are up to, but I feel I like it very much

quote: Original post by Wavinator
Thanks! Sure, I''d love some help. I''m trying to nail the design right now, and I want to use this as a proof of concept for a larger game idea.

BTW, does SubSpace have capital ships? I only saw the box, never played, but I thought they just had fighters (which is fine, because I want to do fighters as well)

No, SubSpace did not have capital ships. It would be cool to have a game similar to SS that had capital ships etc...

I''m in the middle of a design of my own; my improvements to a RTS. So... I would prefer to just help with coding If you need some help in this area, just let me know!


Dave "Dak Lozar"Loeser

OK, we can probably all agree on the fact that this idead draws from things. I personally like it. I like the option to modify your own fleet specifications for a very orrigional approch. Im the kind of guy that likes to not run out of power. your idea of being able to ballance the use of power is great. Im also the guy that would funnel his resources into a few small quick corvetes with great big guns and smaller sheild batteries. I think ther should be the ability ot modify technology in the game. say you thing the energy weapons take too much to use. You might want to try your hand at creating a particle projectile gun instead. who knows. that could greatly add or detract to your forces effectivness. also sheilds should not be general. they should be geared toward a certain type of weapon. plasma sheilds would be more geared for plasma weapons and might not be at all effective against beam burst or projectile weapons.

Allow the flaming to begin
Conshape Electronic Arts

quote: Original post by ahw

Ok, so I''ll jsut assume you didn''t bother reading the links I passed ... so I''ll just summarize them for you, and add some of the thoughts I have on the sucject of battleship conflicts in space.

Urghhh! Somehow I completely missed your post!

Okay, I just checked the links. Interesting stuff. The rule set is a bit more simple than what I want, but it gives me nice some ideas.

quote:
First off, you have to make a choice. I don''t think you can give the feel of tremendous power and weight of battleships with an arcade interface/graphics.

The reason I''m looking to do this is to offer interesting gameplay (from fighter to capital ship) using the same engine and UI. The theme is sort of along the lines of working your way up through the ranks (ships).

quote:
I mean, look at Starcraft Battelcruiser ... we''ll say that this is the kind of stuff you want to avoid. A puny little ship crawling across the screen.

They got the movement part right, but the turn rate is completely insane. The thing can spin around like a top!!! Also, it has NO secondary weapons (even point defense turrets obliterating all in it''s wake would be nice). And you never get a sense of a multimodule ship made of many components.

My fix? Slow the turn rate. Add modules / guns / devices with their own hitpoints. Make the BC more of a system of parts, which, when they fail, change the unit''s functionality / use.

quote:
What would be damn cool would be something more in the style of the Mechwarrior series.

I''m thinking aobut the difference between Mechwarrior and Heavy Gear. The MW mechs move more slowly, take longer to fire, and have many more stats to worry about. HG''s Gears are more quick and nimble (especially w/ their roller blades ), and play in comparision more like an FPS.

So I''d compare fighters & cap ships as: Fighters are faster, more manueverable, and have a lot less HPs. Their systems are much more simple, as well. Cap ships are slower, and thus require more strategy and planning. They have more systems, and these systems have more options.

For what I''m thinking about, you can play both, and lots of ships in between. But to do this, the gameplay / interface needs to be similar.

quote:
Some of the elements there could (and should, IMnsHO) be taken.

Taken. The way it works right now is that the power bar and hull / shield bar is common to all ship types. Fighters just take power from the power bar w/o any options. But Cap Ships can turn off components, redirect power, etc.

All ships can pick ordance (missiles, etc) and are upgradable. It''s just that CS can have __MANY__ more modules than a mere fighter

quote:
Graphically speaking, a mere ship on the screen is not enough, you need to give a sense of scale, a sense of weight, of power.

Yeah, this will ultimately depend on interface and playability, and the power of my graphical engine. You have to sacrifice some realism for these, but I agree, BC''s should be a lot bigger than fighters. I am thinking of making the units on the scale of Starcraft, but a BC would be the size of one of your Bases (and thus fighters could target individual modules / systems better)

quote:
Personally, I''d go for full 3D, but of course, it''s easier said than done

I''m thinking of mixing sprites & 3D. The full 3D of Homeworld just seems to be missing something for me. Plus, I think having to muck with the camera makes the game more complicated and detracts from the action feel I want.

quote:
Now on the other hand, if you''d zoom in, you could see some really cool details, like separate turrets tracking their targets, you owuld hear more sound effects like the pilots speaking and the sound of the guns...

Yeah, this is cool. I see it like watching your base defend itself in Starcraft, only a bit more flashy.

BTW, good points about science and internals. Agreed.

quote:
Some ideas for the gameplay :
Energy management.

Nice ideas. I think the way this should work is that you have a reactors that generate power at a certain rate. Then you have weapons / devices that power up at another rate. This can make for interesting trade-offs. So the thing about the warp drive taking time to power fits, and good for tension.

The problem there would be to make an interesting interface so that you can do this power management easy. I''d personally use a nice layout diagram, where you''d simply set the different levels for the different systems of the ship.

What about a top down view where you can somehow see the amount of power a device has? Maybe using light and dark, or different graphics, or a stylish circular power bar?

quote:
Weapons. Dont control the weapons directly. This just kill the whole thing. You are a captain giving orders.

I''m still divided about this one. The one thing I don''t want, is for you to progress from fighter to corvette to frigate to destroyer and up, and have the gameplay be less and less what was fun as a fighter. Yet I don''t want cap ships to handle like slow, bulky fighters… gotta ponder this a bit more…

The main problem is that this is a very focused game, so there''s not a lot of the other stuff you mentioned (communications & stuff). I''m doing this to focus on the CS''s combat gameplay, and as a test bed for a larger concept.

quote:
Other weapons would be, for a capital ship, to have boarding troops. Ram the enemy ship, and assault !
You could have carrier ships. Less weapons, but a fleet of fighters.

Ramming damage will be based on a bit of physics if I can get it right (mass & momentum). And fighter bays are definitely included as a module (unlike Starcraft''s Protoss Carriers, you can "target" bays containing fighter groups like you can Major Batteries)

quote:
I said earlier to make shields something rare, because you could have ships specifically designed for the purpose of being a shield (taken from th Castellan ship in Space Fleet).

Now what if you looked at this on the module level only, and modules had sizes and stats based on technology? I could do this to make the Cap Ships of different races unique. For ex., one race has huge Shield Generators that take lots of power, and therefore must devote an entire ship to being a shield. But maybe they have great engines, or cloak.

This way, you could design ships to spec from fiction, and see how, say, the Protoss would fair against the Enterprise, or whatever.

quote:
Make the ships be a bit more in contact ! That gives you opportunity to make lots of metallic noises, that give you the sense of scale you need. dont just use those clean laser beams, use bullets, shells, ramming prow, boarding ships, etc.

Don''t know if I can do it, but it would be cool to be able to break a multi-module ship apart amidships through ramming or fire. I just like the idea of seeing the two pieces, drifting silent and dark.

quote:
ps : BTW Wavinator, did I mention I love those ideas of yours ? I dunno for sure what you are up to, but I feel I like it very much

Thx! BTW, what would you get if you took Starcraft''s skirmish engine, allowed the player to control a single detailed unit, made it open ended so you could go wherever you wanted, and put in some RPG stuff? (Aside from a heart attack and carpal tunnel from developing and playing it? )

That''s kinda'' sorta where all of this is leading. What I''m really trying to *NAIL* right now is how to make the gameplay of differing avatars (fighters, cars, capital ships, mechs) fun and similar enough so that it''s a matter of swapping out different assets… yet not so similar that it''s all boring.

If I do it right, one day you could fly a ship to a planet, drive a terrain vehicle out of it, and exit that vehicle and walk around on foot. A tall order, so you can see why I want the UI to be so consistent!



——————–
Just waiting for the mothership…

quote: Original post by Ketchaval

How about terrain deformation (like Worms in space)?

I'm not sure what you mean. In space, there's no real terrain to deform. It would be great if the ships themselves were deformable, but that's a bit beyond what I want for my first crack at this.

quote:
Using stars/ planets like Snooker/ 8-ball etc. to attack other ships. Being able to absorb the energy / resources from (un?)inhabited planets.

Hahaha! Now that's a bit more advanced (technologically speaking) than I was looking for. But thx for the idea!



--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

Edited by - Wavinator on October 16, 2000 8:34:50 PM

Read David Weber''s books - each of his major SF series (Honor Harrington, The Armageddon Inheritance, and the Starfire series) deals with capital ship combat, but very different contexts.

Harrington - 1800s ship combat model, essentially replace cannonballs with missiles.

Armageddon Inheritance - Warp missiles where the main idea is to carry out saturation bombardment to overload shields; probably a bit like WWI ship combat?

Starfire series - Lots of ideas here; it''s also written on the basis of a board/miniature game. Contains the lot - missiles, beams, and starfighters.