Do you like the mission system?

Talk about all things to do with the sequel to our flagship 4X title.

Moderator: Erinys

Locked
Exitialis
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:44 pm

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by Exitialis » Tue May 29, 2012 1:42 pm

I made a very nice work of art to help simulate certain situations.
Image
The first figure is the current move system, where you are forced to move system by system to conquer the galaxy. The second figure is the system where a move order exists, where you can move from one system to another and therefore bypass and block the enemy, the second system has more strategy too it.

In the second figure, red for example can skip colonizing the middle planets and put up a defensive line at the front planets, and therefore block off his opponent. Blue does a similar thing, but his is more like a raiding outpost.
Also note the few star systems is just a representation, imagine this strategy but with a 100 star systems or some such. (I was too lazy to make 100 coloured circles) ;p

The thing about supply would be like suggested before, that the fleet takes resources from the planets it passes by, and reforge or process it into usable materials, using some specific ship or module. This would limit the movement and make it more rational. So the difficulty with the introduction of this kind of system is not the supply, but the game mechanics and design, and the game would benefit greatly from the addition of such a move system.
Sorry for my rambling. :D

(I also want to clarify, I like the new system, I only dislike the movement limitations)

Styx
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:06 pm

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by Styx » Tue May 29, 2012 2:37 pm

I just think that "supply" should be a refillable property, like fuel wasin sots1 but instead of just being stranded if you run out, the fleet turns for home when it reaches its limit. Then you can have all sorts of techs, ships, supply runs or whatever to effect a fleets supplies and provided tactical options.
Cant react to enemy movements fast enough? Put your fleet closer and set up a supply chain to keep them onstation.
Cant seem to dislodge that enemy fleet on the planet you want to colonise? Go for his supply ships!

How about weapons or events that effect a fleets supply? the possibilities are enormous and having an inflexible go here, then come back mission structure is ignoring a lot of potential.

ForceUser
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 5:58 pm

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by ForceUser » Tue May 29, 2012 3:17 pm

Note: I can not see imageshack images. Attach the image to your post please.

Exitialis wrote:...the second system has more strategy too it.


Unfortunately I can not agree with you at all. Fromt he description the second one requires LESS trategy while the first one (the current system from what I understand) REQUIRES you to implement a LOT more strategy, and actually think how you are going to accomplish a Galaxy spanning extermination/subjugation of an alien species. Not just spam fleets all over the place without caring if the jsut got forgotten at some blasted out rock (I regularly did this in prime)

There is more strategy involved in the current system than the previous system. There is more option, there is more limitation, there is more ways for you to both screw over the enemy AND for them to screw you over once the AI gets going.

Stuff like taking out enemy naval yards to force their fleets to relocate so you can have an easier time conquering enemy planets immediately jumps to mind as a very effective strategy if you can manage to slip enough forces through the enemy lines in tactical combat to kill the naval station. This is a Strategic move that has far reaching implication in both tactical and strategical play. And this is just ONE example of something you can do in ][ that you can not do in 1. You could have infinite number of ships at a system where there were NO planets for an infinite time. This late game was cheesy, unrealistic and boring having to fight turn after turn waves and waves of reinforcements.

Another thing that kind of invalidates you example is that they are going to implement (this is said on EVERY page so I guess I'll say it on this one) a relocate order where you can select a fleet patrolling and relocate it without it having to go back to its home base, so long as the planet/station can support the fleet. This encourages you to research techs to take over enemy worlds (even more so than in prime) so that you can, in fact, do exactly what you want to do.

This is my point, you guys want something that is already in the game but you wont accept it because it's either to much 'effort' or because it's not EXACTLY the way it was in Prime. It's NEW, it's CHANGE. And it's still changing, they are planning on adding a ton of stuff, but they are NOT going to make it like it was in Prime. Even with my trollish remark on baying for the same thing over and over, you still do it ;)

THINK about the system, THINK about how you can use it to do what you want and you will fast realize that you can do whatever you want, better and with less MM than Prime.

Same thing happened with prime from what I hear and just as then, change will drag our asses screaming and kicking into a better game, if we like it or not :)

And I'm practically giddy with excitement.
Perspective Man: Much like common sense, it's so rare it's a gorram superpower.
Agent.nihilist wrote:Ooo! Whats the gesture for ramming!?
Korgan wrote:probably a pelvic thrust
Mecron wrote:oy that is wrong at so many levels...well done! :P

Unthinking_Pain
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 4:25 pm

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by Unthinking_Pain » Tue May 29, 2012 3:19 pm

Styx wrote:I just think that "supply" should be a refillable property, like fuel wasin sots1 but instead of just being stranded if you run out, the fleet turns for home when it reaches its limit. Then you can have all sorts of techs, ships, supply runs or whatever to effect a fleets supplies and provided tactical options.
Cant react to enemy movements fast enough? Put your fleet closer and set up a supply chain to keep them onstation.
Cant seem to dislodge that enemy fleet on the planet you want to colonise? Go for his supply ships!

How about weapons or events that effect a fleets supply? the possibilities are enormous and having an inflexible go here, then come back mission structure is ignoring a lot of potential.


I get where you are coming from.

I just don't want more complex logistics if I can help it. There's a certain population that likes solving logistics problems for fun. :insane: Then there's most of the human race that don't! 8)

User avatar
Heart of Storm
Posts: 862
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 1:19 pm

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by Heart of Storm » Tue May 29, 2012 3:22 pm

Exitialis wrote:IThe thing about supply would be like suggested before, that the fleet takes resources from the planets it passes by, and reforge or process it into usable materials, using some specific ship or module. This would limit the movement and make it more rational. So the difficulty with the introduction of this kind of system is not the supply, but the game mechanics and design, and the game would benefit greatly from the addition of such a move system.


You mean like in SotS 1 where you had Refinery ships which did exactly this?


Exitialis wrote:(I also want to clarify, I like the new system, I only dislike the movement limitations)


Then you don't like the new system. The movement 'limitations' (I disagree that there are limitations, I also think your diagram is pretty darn misleading, you dont have to 'hop' from neighbouring system to neighbouring system in SotS2 given good enough engines and enough planning with supply) are part of SotS II, if you want unlimited 'freedom' to run huge hundred fleet navies around unsupported behind enemy lines for 100 years at a time then boot up SotS Prime, SotS II isnt the original game, it therefore needs to be played differently.

Which in essence is the main point the detractors seem to have, the people who complain loudest about the 'restrictions' imposed by the new system seem to be those who insist on treating SotS II as the same game as Prime. It isn't, you need to learn how to play this game, with its new system, in the same way you should do with any new game.

Borzol
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 4:51 pm

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by Borzol » Tue May 29, 2012 3:54 pm

For reference from pages 6 to 14. Quotes descrribing the benefits of the mission system, as it seems if we read over the pages past we can use some of the constructive criticism.

I also made a thread to help new users asking for help using the mission system and for veterans to explain how to to use the system effectively. LINK

Heart of Storm wrote:


Exitialis wrote:(I also want to clarify, I like the new system, I only dislike the movement limitations)


Then you don't like the new system. The movement 'limitations' (I disagree that there are limitations, I also think your diagram is pretty darn misleading, you dont have to 'hop' from neighbouring system to neighbouring system in SotS2 given good enough engines and enough planning with supply) are part of SotS II, if you want unlimited 'freedom' to run huge hundred fleet navies around unsupported behind enemy lines for 100 years at a time then boot up SotS Prime, SotS II isnt the original game, it therefore needs to be played differently.

Which in essence is the main point the detractors seem to have, the people who complain loudest about the 'restrictions' imposed by the new system seem to be those who insist on treating SotS II as the same game as Prime. It isn't, you need to learn how to play this game, with its new system, in the same way you should do with any new game.


Agree, it just takes more planning versus rushing in games like command and conquer or starcraft series. SotS 2 has much larger gameplay mechanics. SotS 2 is a game of mostly planning and logistics, its easy to find out the turns the patrol will last and the how long it will take the fleet to reach the destination and return to homebase (on the mission screen), Reading that information and planning effectively means that you know when to send out other patrol fleets to locations. All the information is in front of the player, on the UI either by clicking on the fleets or using the mission system, a move to would be useless for the player given the current mission system. I can run my empire much better than I could run it in sots 1, Because of the mission system and sots 2 logistics, not the move-to spamming of fleets.

marshb wrote:
Military units leave their bases for periods well beyond their own endurance all the time. Planes refuel in midair, or make stopovers at temporary airfields. Ships that can carry x months of supplies just call in at friendly ports and reload, even if they have no permanent facility of their own at the port. Thats what tankers and supply ships are for. Crew can be rotated out at any time without the entire taskforce sailing all the way back to their home country. Eventually, granted, the ship itself will suffer in performance and need more maintenance than can be done at-sea, but we're talking about a period many many times the ships actual endurance.
How is this a problem?

But this is what is abstracted in the games mission system with one caveat: most of the missions are to places with no friendly ports with all of the amenities, or ports at all. They are dangerous, often uninhabited, or outright hostile locations, with no infrastructure at all and until you can establish a toehold in the system you wont be able to pull off these feats of endurance you want. Not without a return to established territories at any rate.


Agree and for reference the first expansion with 13 colonies into north america, by the british... But imagine that is millions miles apart versus much much less.

ForceUser wrote:
marshb wrote:
beachedwalrus wrote:That is quiet annoying. I have tried many combinations but they don't work so well when the planet is copping heat. Such that the enemy is sending waves of colonizers and scout/attack fleets. :(

Winning a beachhead takes planning, logistics, and perseverance commander. ;)

And when you pull it off perfectly... man there's nothing quite like it. The harder the challenge the sweeter the victory eh?


:)

apophis wrote:I think that the mission system forces people to adapt to the new mechanic. I understand that people dont like elements of it, but its a mechanic of the game, why do people not just accept and adapt to it? Instead they strongly dislike it but still play the game anyway??


Agree, there have been many replies that explain or help users use the mission system effectively. Considering too that its still being polished is really unfair to judge the mission system as an entire system too as bad.

TrashMan wrote:The current systems seems strange because it's conceptually different. It basicly builds on a different (and more realistic in a military way) way of thinking.
When a president/general is planing a mission, he doesn't go "send fleet X thar".
He first checks what fleets are in range, and if any is suitable for the task. He doesnt' auto-memorze the exact compositon and location of all fleets at all times.

Since so many games have the obvious "click_unit, click destination" it has become our standard. You are used to it.

However in reality is isn't any simpler or more intuitive than "click destination, select fleet in range". After playing SOTS2 I got used to it, and it works nicely.


Alganhar wrote:Because it (SotS 1) had no strategic and tactical depth. The mission system is flexible, and has much more thought required, it requires supply, which is an improvemet IMO. SotS Prime was simply fleet spam... boring after a while. LoW at least makes you think carefully about where you locate fleets, what you do with them, and where you supply and support them from.

Once the bugs are ironed out of the mission system, especially its UI, I am thinking it will be MUCH easier to use than it is now. While I like the mission system, I do agree there are a lot of bugs, especially UI issues that need sorting.

As for illogical? No, it isnt, its far more realistic. Fleet spamming is illogical, because there is no way the worlds can SUPPORT those fleets. Now we HAVE to think about support and supply, which adds a strategic and tactical depth to LoW that Prime lacked.
Last edited by Borzol on Tue May 29, 2012 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
marshb
Posts: 2607
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:25 pm

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by marshb » Tue May 29, 2012 4:11 pm

Unthinking_Pain wrote:
Styx wrote:I just think that "supply" should be a refillable property, like fuel wasin sots1 but instead of just being stranded if you run out, the fleet turns for home when it reaches its limit. Then you can have all sorts of techs, ships, supply runs or whatever to effect a fleets supplies and provided tactical options.
Cant react to enemy movements fast enough? Put your fleet closer and set up a supply chain to keep them onstation.
Cant seem to dislodge that enemy fleet on the planet you want to colonise? Go for his supply ships!

How about weapons or events that effect a fleets supply? the possibilities are enormous and having an inflexible go here, then come back mission structure is ignoring a lot of potential.


I get where you are coming from.

I just don't want more complex logistics if I can help it. There's a certain population that likes solving logistics problems for fun. :insane: Then there's most of the human race that don't! 8)

Guilty as charged. Certified Armchair Admiral reporting sir! ;p

I think what Styx wants is perhaps a bigger "clock" on supply. That endurance seems to short to him. Maybe with more "time', he'd feel more comfortable in setting up fleets on rotation, or establishing a beachhead so fleets can be assigned there? I dunno but maybe we'll see some light at the end of the tunnel when Mecrons new/modified movement commands come on line. :D
Our lives are not our own. From womb to tomb, we are bound to others. Past and present. And by each crime and every kindness, we birth our future.

Orison of Sonmi-451

Borzol
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 4:51 pm

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by Borzol » Tue May 29, 2012 4:23 pm

...and that is why i would like to see this thread locked, for the time they would be finishing the game, they will now instead spend some of the time on a move system to make the complaining stop because people can't use a new system.

People who find it cumbersome just really need to start reading the suggestions from people on how to use it effectively instead of adding to the complaining of the mission system.

Exitialis
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:44 pm

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by Exitialis » Tue May 29, 2012 4:24 pm

Here is the image:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/444/strategyq.png/

So you are saying that I dislike the new system? But I don't, I like it, I like that there are no more forgotten fleets, I just want a move command, I want the abillity to make a forward operating base sveral 10-50 systems ahead of my empire, without the need to colonize my way there.
I want the abillity to send out a raiding fleet behind the enemy lines, deep into their territory, I want the abillity to command covert operations. This could be done in prime. This can be implemented in Sots ][ without changing too much of the core gameplay.

You talk of strategy, everything that removes player choice and puts up limitations, remove strategical value.

I don't want to remove the stations or supply, I don't want to revert back to the prime system, I love the new game, I just want a move order. And the thing necessary to make the move order work (supply). And the logistics of it all does not need to be made complicated, like some fear.

I want to play a game where I manage a galactic empire, I don't wish to play an over-glorified version of space chess.

Now, as has been said before, it's a new system, we will see what happens. There may be additions too it. It's already a good system, and it can only get better.

Exitialis
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:44 pm

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by Exitialis » Tue May 29, 2012 4:27 pm

Borzol wrote:...and that is why i would like to see this thread locked, for the time they would be finishing the game, they will now instead spend some of the time on a move system to make the complaining stop because people can't use a new system.

People who find it cumbersome just really need to start reading the suggestions from people on how to use it effectively instead of adding to the complaining of the mission system.

See my above post, and I disagree with closing the thread.
I know how to use the system, I just want to use it more. A move command would allow that, and I don't understand why people are against it?

Borzol
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 4:51 pm

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by Borzol » Tue May 29, 2012 4:29 pm

Exitialis wrote:Here is the image:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/444/strategyq.png/

So you are saying that I dislike the new system? But I don't, I like it, I like that there are no more forgotten fleets, I just want a move command, I want the abillity to make a forward operating base sveral 10-50 systems ahead of my empire, without the need to colonize my way there.
I want the abillity to send out a raiding fleet behind the enemy lines, deep into their territory, I want the abillity to command covert operations. This could be done in prime. This can be implemented in Sots ][ without changing too much of the core gameplay.

You talk of strategy, everything that removes player choice and puts up limitations, remove strategical value.

I don't want to remove the stations or supply, I don't want to revert back to the prime system, I love the new game, I just want a move order. And the thing necessary to make the move order work (supply). And the logistics of it all does not need to be made complicated, like some fear.

I want to play a game where I manage a galactic empire, I don't wish to play an over-glorified version of space chess.

Now, as has been said before, it's a new system, we will see what happens. There may be additions too it. It's already a good system, and it can only get better.


Deep Space construction... You can do convert operations in the game if you plan what your fleets want to do in a given system right? It just involves thinking differently about planning your strategy? I am confused, how does the mission system NOT let you do this?

Exitialis wrote:
Borzol wrote:...and that is why i would like to see this thread locked, for the time they would be finishing the game, they will now instead spend some of the time on a move system to make the complaining stop because people can't use a new system.

People who find it cumbersome just really need to start reading the suggestions from people on how to use it effectively instead of adding to the complaining of the mission system.

See my above post, and I disagree with closing the thread.
I know how to use the system, I just want to use it more. A move command would allow that, and I don't understand why people are against it?


What do you mean by more? How does a move command add what your can already do with your fleets? You said you liked the supply and logistics system so in relation to that the move to mission does not add to what the fleets can already do.
Last edited by Borzol on Tue May 29, 2012 4:55 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
marshb
Posts: 2607
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:25 pm

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by marshb » Tue May 29, 2012 4:38 pm

Exitialis says:
So you are saying that I dislike the new system? But I don't, I like it, I like that there are no more forgotten fleets, I just want a move command, I want the abillity to make a forward operating base sveral 10-50 systems ahead of my empire, without the need to colonize my way there.
I want the abillity to send out a raiding fleet behind the enemy lines, deep into their territory, I want the abillity to command covert operations. This could be done in prime. This can be implemented in Sots ][ without changing too much of the core gameplay.

I see what you want(?), a kind of "Doolittle Raid" kind of mechanic? (I don't mean to inject too much historical realism into what is supposed to be a fun game). It (the forward base/outpost) would have to be small, semi self-sufficient, and probably disposable? (I think it would have to have specific limitations lest you break the supply/mission system otherwise why use it when you can just bypass it doing this) This will definitely have to be taken up with the devs.
Our lives are not our own. From womb to tomb, we are bound to others. Past and present. And by each crime and every kindness, we birth our future.

Orison of Sonmi-451

User avatar
Agent.nihilist
Posts: 1016
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 8:57 am

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by Agent.nihilist » Tue May 29, 2012 4:39 pm

Exitialis wrote:
So you are saying that I dislike the new system? But I don't, I like it, I like that there are no more forgotten fleets, I just want a move command, I want the abillity to make a forward operating base sveral 10-50 systems ahead of my empire, without the need to colonize my way there.
I want the abillity to send out a raiding fleet behind the enemy lines, deep into their territory, I want the ability to command covert operations. This could be done in prime. This can be implemented in Sots ][ without changing too much of the core gameplay.

You talk of strategy, everything that removes player choice and puts up limitations, remove strategical value.



You can already do everything you just said you can't, right now, without any alterations, barring the never going to exist move command. Relocate IS move, Patrol is move outside of a base.

Want a forward base? Get deep space constructions and build a naval station in an unoccupied system. Want it covert? Use Cloaked fleets and build the station in a system with only an asteroid belt.
Want to hit deep into enemy systems without being seen? Again use a Cloaked fleet, and once secondary mission are in you can hit other system on your way back out. Chaining Strike missions should prove rather effective.

Move can not exist in the logistics paradigm of LoW, having limited supply means the ships will HAVE to come back to base. If you really want to permanently stick a fleet somewhere you can't have a naval base, petition for fleets to use other fleets supply pool. Of course this might already be planned, but the bottom line is they aren't really going to change the supply mechanics much if at all.
Last edited by Agent.nihilist on Tue May 29, 2012 4:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Will the Great wrote:Well, that's probably why you're having a difficult time. Because you made the game more difficult.

Ishantil wrote:BIRD RUSH KEKEKEKEKE

Don't mind me, I'm unreasonably reasonable :twisted:

Styx
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:06 pm

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by Styx » Tue May 29, 2012 4:39 pm

War IS logistics.
The man with the weakest supply chain loses every time, ask everyone who ever tried to invade Russia. :D

marshb wrote:I think what Styx wants is perhaps a bigger "clock" on supply. That endurance seems to short to him. Maybe with more "time', he'd feel more comfortable in setting up fleets on rotation, or establishing a beachhead so fleets can be assigned there? I dunno but maybe we'll see some light at the end of the tunnel when Mecrons new/modified movement commands come on line. :D


I dont think I should need to rotate entirely separate fleets, having admirals shuttling back and forth just to maintain a presence, I'd rather have a supply line system that keeps a remote position viable for longer.
What I really dont want is a game where you have to develop complex, co-ordinated fleet movements to work around a fundamental limitation. I dont see how the same people can stand up and say SOTS2 has less "micromanagement" and then insist on all these labour intensive workarounds.

User avatar
marshb
Posts: 2607
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:25 pm

Re: Do you like the mission system?

Post by marshb » Tue May 29, 2012 4:45 pm

Styx wrote:War IS logistics.
The man with the weakest supply chain loses every time, ask everyone who ever tried to invade Russia. :D

marshb wrote:I think what Styx wants is perhaps a bigger "clock" on supply. That endurance seems to short to him. Maybe with more "time', he'd feel more comfortable in setting up fleets on rotation, or establishing a beachhead so fleets can be assigned there? I dunno but maybe we'll see some light at the end of the tunnel when Mecrons new/modified movement commands come on line. :D


I dont think I should need to rotate entirely separate fleets, having admirals shuttling back and forth just to maintain a presence, I'd rather have a supply line system that keeps a remote position viable for longer.
What I really dont want is a game where you have to develop complex, co-ordinated fleet movements to work around a fundamental limitation. I dont see how the same people can stand up and say SOTS2 has less "micromanagement" and then insist on all these labour intensive workarounds.

I like that quote above! :D

I feel ya but don't know what to say. Maybe automating fleet rotations? (I know Mecrons not gonna like that too much.) it's not like Prime where there are 300 stars to keep track of. ;)
Our lives are not our own. From womb to tomb, we are bound to others. Past and present. And by each crime and every kindness, we birth our future.

Orison of Sonmi-451

Locked

Return to “SotS2”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests