Modding combat mechanics possible?

from GalCiv2 Forums
Ship building within GalCiv II is wonderfully varied and complex while still kept simple for those not wishing to really dive into it. In essence, it is only as complex as you want it to be.

As wonderful as the ship building aspect of the game is I feel that the actual ship to ship combat mechanics, while elegantly simple, are too simple. In theory how far can the base combat mechanics be modified?

Specifically I'm looking to do the following:

Add a third value to the associated Weapon classes (Damage/Defense/Targetting). I assume this would include modifying the UI.

Split the resolution mechanic into two seperate rolls per weapon; a to-hit roll and a damage roll.

And likely the most involved...

... modify the combat resolution hierarchy. Currently all ships in a fleet target the 'most lethal but most easily destroyed' ship in the defending fleet. To do what I have in mind each hull size class would first prioritze ships of their own class before moving on to other ships.

Thank you for all replies!

For anyone interested the intended result is to split targetting from the current all-inclusive mechanic to allow a few more strategic/tactical shipbuilding options and tech additions. The more far-reaching goal is an attempt to keep each and every hull size relevant within the late game (in my experience Tiny-Small hulls become necessarily obsolete in the current system) through targetting mechanics and a modified resolution hierarchy.
modding
5,981 views 7 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
This was intended for the modding forum. Hopefully changing the sub-topic through edit moves the post.
Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I actually use the small ships as "picket" ships (though there is no such thing). I give them high defense with one special weapon (expensive with very high attack), and they are attacked by the enemies to no avail due to the extremely high defense.
Start11 - Customize the Start Menu and Taskbar in Windows 10/11.
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Hmm..

Anyone else getting the piciture of Galciv 2 done D&D Style?

I'm sorry but I'm pretty damn sure that integrial systems like combat cannot be changed, The closest you will get is by modifying the defenceive or offensive values of each weapon..
Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I'm assuming as much currently. It's a bit unfortunate because the system is so simple that adding a single other variable value would add quite a bit of technology tree, ship module, and strategic depth. It's like they were looking for a simplicty vs. depth sweet spot and went just one notch too far.

I wouldn't completly write off the concept however. The mechanic isn't much different than the one already in place... and really the one in place is ridiculously trivial.

Attacker damage type value rolled against defender defense type value roll + square root of secondary defense values. Result over 0 is damage. That's it. I apologize for the below... I'm neither a programmer nor all that educated in mathematical notation.

RandomADVtype (Range 1 to ADVt) - Random DDVt (Range 1 to PDDVt + sq rt SDDVt + sq rt TDDVt) = Damage
DHP - Damage if Damage > 0
Alternate between Attacker and Defender until one side's HP is reduced to 0.

That's GCII ship combat for you.

To keep it as close to the above system as possible... hmm...

I'm thinking a similar mechanic that determines a damage multiplier with a range of like .25 to 1.5. Modifiers would be targetting computers, hull size, speed, things like that. The system would slightly favor smaller hulls. This would in turn be offset by the fact that larger hulls can mount considerably more weaponry. I need to be up in a few hours and to be perfectly honest I can't think about it right now. ><

The d20 System analogy is pretty accurate for what I previously described. It's a simple mechanic with plenty of mathematical data and theory readily available to make balancing issues a bit easier.

I suppose targetting computers and such could be modded in if ship modules can be given a +% damage modifier. But that leaves alot to be desired. It would just widen the obsolescence gap.
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
You could always mod the game so that some weapons give defensive bonuses against other weapons:
Point Defense Laser: +1 beam attack, +1 missile defense
Expanding Sphere Generator (from SFB): +5 beam attack, +2 cannon defense, +3 missile defense
Armored Depleted Uranium Cannon: +1 cannon attack, +1 cannon defense
Phased Polaron Beam: +3 beam attack, +1 beam defense (from phased energy distortions)

And just a thought... can ships (or at least weapons) have negative defense values? Because what if your SuperMegaAnimeDethSpazerOMGWTFLOL Beam gave +30 beam attack, but -10 beam/cannon/missile defense because it requires SO much power the ship has to stop motionless for 30 seconds to fire? Or a B.U.T.T. Missile (from Star Control): +5 missile attack, -2 missile defense (due to exposing engines!)

But yeah, I would like to see a bit more depth in the game engine too - how about % chances to hit, for one thing?

All that work put into the ship design and it just comes down to a bunch of pretty graphics... seems like a bit too much time was spent there and too little time spent on combat mechanics if you ask me
Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Compared to Galciv1, I think the combat engine is very good. When it works, at least.
Reply #7 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I don't have any experience with GalCivI at all.

Hadn't thought about equipment with combined attack/defense. I'm not sure it's even possible. Not only is the combat system ridiculously simplified, and therefore ship design rediculously simplified, but most of it seems hardcoded.

And yeah... it's like there is this penultimate glorious visual shipbuilding system... and then the actual ship stats/combat was like 30 minutes worth of coding. Ever watch a large fleet battle? The ships 'bounce' around the screen in a desperate attempt not to collide with each other.

I'd love to change this aspect of GalCivII... and it would require some real coding. Unfortunately I'm a designer and not a coder. :/ Such is life.