Space Battle Graphics

[erikmistal]

I looked at the screenshot if the space battles, and to be honest, they look really bad. there is hardly any detail. These aren't finalised graphics... are they?


I'm not trying to sound rude or mean or anything, but they look like they're from games made 4 or 5 years ago. There's no star background, and the planet looks all pixelated, etc.


other than that this game sounds incredible. I think i'm going to get it when it comes out.

Erik

[Master Marcus]

I can tell you that the recent battle movie on Gamespot shows a real promising graphic engine for a pre-alpha TBS game in development. But I agree they have made so far a more impressive sound coding. And considering the number of ships involved at the same time, within a huge galactic map, I bet that the game would not run properly under a PIII 500. We'll see.

[Aqa]

At least Rantz (art director) posted on the "official" forums that the battle graphics were far from finalised. Can't imagine why they post so outdated pics tough...
Just downloading the vid... And I hope that the game will run on my PII450, or I'll have to buy a new computer soon...

[erikmistal]

Originally posted by Aqa
At least Rantz (art director) posted on the "official" forums that the battle graphics were far from finalised. Can't imagine why they post so outdated pics tough...

YAY!!!

Thank god!

I'm being completely honest when i say that those graphics are on par with 1998 games. releasing a game with those graphics, even if the game is not entirely graphics based like this one, is wrong in every sense of the word.

[Grumbold]

I'm more worried about the seeming lack of intervention needed by the user. The great variety of gadgets and special weapons that can really turn a battle around are going to be very hard to include if this is the battle format. I enjoyed playing Imperium Galactica 1&2 but their combat looked very similar to this. Your only involvement was in getting your ships to group their fire on a single opponent at a time and to try and retreat heavily damaged ships out of harms way. No tactics like using long range weapons and repulsors to defeat hordes of short range ships were possible. Of course this strengthens the computer opponents because they often have production bonuses and rarely know how to use smart combat tactics.

[CICSMaster]

It's a Strategy Game!

In case you haven't noticed.
This is a strategy game. You will not be able to direct anything less than a fleet in the battle screens. I don't even think you can direct a fleet to fire, just merely change the fleets orders and conditions of battle.

The whole point is to design your units/ships so that you have a fleet that follows tactics that the units/ships were designed for. You should not have to intervene in the battle to affect the outcome, if you have done a good job of designing the ships and composing the fleet and giving the fleet orders.

So all you arm chair generals, this might not be the game for you.

[Spaced Cowboy]

So things like capturing ships are orders given at the beginning? Or would this be the case of waiting until the combat is on the edge of being done and then redirecting ships/fleets to capture?

However, I do believe that you should be able to do the "missile dance." The AI should be able to counter it with its own "missile dance."

[Grumbold]

I'd only be too delighted to play a "strategy" game where all you had to do was develop a sound grand strategy and the AI subordinates were then capable of effectively employing the complementary tactics. In my experience no computer game to date has successfully managed that. Perhaps you can point me to one?

I loved MOO 1 because it allowed many different ship building strategies and the AI were pretty clever at using a number of them against you. The virus rush where a thousand mini ships would eradicate your planets because your big beam weapon ships could only destroy a handful of them per turn, for example. Some of the fun combinations needed a human touch to employ successfully. Unless the AI has improved dramatically such weapons are going to be completely useless in a computer controlled slugfest.

Now if MOO3 has fleet strategies of 'don't let the opponents close on you, use those repulsors to stay at long range!' then GREAT. Let the computer do the hard work. All I saw from the movie was a fleet of missile ships firing salvoes and a fleet of beam ships zapping them. The missile ships didn't seem to want to stay out of beam range and the beam ships didn't seem to care about dodging the missiles. It looked like a static duel at 20 paces utterly devoid of strategy or tactics. Perhaps you would care to point out whose strategy was working and whose was not?

[Carver]

Originally posted by Aqa
... And I hope that the game will run on my PII450, or I'll have to buy a new computer soon...

That's what I did for Civ3, my AMD K6-2 couldn't handle DirectX v8. The crazy thing is I don't even play many computer games other than Civ3, MOO3 (when avail), SimCity, Warcraft and I might buy pc Madden. Other than that my computer is just internet machine and word processor, something any computer can handle.

[Aqa]

Originally posted by Carver


That's what I did for Civ3, my AMD K6-2 couldn't handle DirectX v8. The crazy thing is I don't even play many computer games other than Civ3, MOO3 (when avail), SimCity, Warcraft and I might buy pc Madden. Other than that my computer is just internet machine and word processor, something any computer can handle.

Well my computer can handle civ3. Only big maps and many civs are problem as AI moves takes a lot of time. But I'm planning to buy new computer, XP2000+ or P4 2ghz, haven't decided yet which.

[CICSMaster]

Originally posted by Grumbold
All I saw from the movie was a fleet of missile ships firing salvoes and a fleet of beam ships zapping them. The missile ships didn't seem to want to stay out of beam range and the beam ships didn't seem to care about dodging the missiles. It looked like a static duel at 20 paces utterly devoid of strategy or tactics. Perhaps you would care to point out whose strategy was working and whose was not?

The following is from the Space Combat Data Dump:

Before every space battle, there is a "planning" segment where both sides select their strategy in approach and intensity to the battle (among other things). Essentially, it is "the plan" your forces go in with. Your job, as Grand Admiral on-the-spot, is to watch the plan develop. (A common military axiom is that "no plan survives contact with the enemy.") So you need to keep an eye on things and be ready to make adjustments if you feel they will help you achieve your goal in that battle.

No, how rapidly your Task Forces and their individual ships respond is a function of many things, including training/doctrine, Leadership, and morale. Of course, if the enemy is shooting at them, that has a deleterious effect on implementing commands, too (except the "withdraw" command, of course!)

When you look at everything that will go into a space battle in MOO3, you'll see that is hasn't been done this way before, so I can't really give you another design so you'll have a frame of reference. A battle is something you first PLAN and then ORCHESTRATE. Think of what Yamamoto or Nimitz was feeling, and that's the kind of experience we're shooting for at the higher level. (Of course, you can also get down and watch a couple of Task Forces going at it and see the spectacle. It will not only on be an amazing light show but, as previously mentioned, darned informative because all of the effects have a concrete game meaning in terms of firepower, damage, etc.).

Hope that helps.

[Grumbold]

Interesting. Maybe the two fleets had tactics whose effects were not visible to the (untutored) naked eye. Sitting at 20 paces and getting 20% less damage or dealing 20% more because you chose paper to your opponents' rock isn't quite what I had in mind (like the BoTF charge/circle/evade stuff.) If it turns out they have the sort I mentioned before like 'use repulsors to keep all short range ships at long range' or 'close to short range and beam over assault squads' then it will be fun.

[Xentax]

I can say that there are ship and task force designs that mandate variously-ranged weapons.

One thing I don't know is how missile ranges compare to early/late beam weapons, or how beam weapon ranges vary over time, technology, and/or mounting.

But remember that there's a tradeoff between maneuver and firepower -- in the sense that, if your ships have forward-facing non-turreted beam weapons, you won't be able to both attack and "stay back" at the same time, if the enemy is trying to close with you. I assume that was the sort of thing that led to the battle we saw in the video.

Hopefully, the AI of long-range units will endeavour to keep out of the range of enemy ships (if possible) and otherwise close to maximum effective range (if not).

[Kc7mxo]

I ussually don't judge a game by its graphics, but sometimes its hard to get past it. And for all of you with systems under 500 mhz. . . i just don't see why you don't upgrade. Honestly, with current prices dropping lower than the cost of some new GAMES (an amd duron 1100 is only $40) i don't think people should complain that new games don't run on their old p2s.

I had high hopes for moo3, and while i still hope it will be a FUN game, its most definetly not going to be a succesful game unless it is the BEST star strategy game in the history of pcs, the graphics shown so far are going to hold it back.

[playshogi]

The Space Combat Data Dump was written by Alan Emrich, who was "let go". Everything he wrote sounded great, but it's almost the end of the 3rd qtr 2002 and substantive info from QS has dried up.