SC2 and SCR

SD should continue to balance SuperMelee using a point system. That is the easiest way to balance ships with the least amount of ability nerfing. Ships can be unique and still have strengths/weaknesses. Everything is evened out when you apply the point value.

To use the Torch as an example, it might have its cost increased to that of one of the top-tier large ships.

You are actually describing how the original game was balanced... it wasn't.  The structure of supermelee creates an illusion of balance which is not actually there.  SuperMelee is balanced, the ships are not.  The most extreme example would probably be the Shofuxi v Cmrrr.  Obviously, this is not a fair fight.  On the other hand... you opponent just pulled out his best ship against your worst ship and when you die you will get to pick a ship that you know is good at beating his best ship.  This is where the illusion of balance comes from.

If this same balance exists in this new version, it will work just fine in multiplayer.  SuperMelee will work essentially the same as before in terms of how it creates balance with the group of ships you select.  If they do scenarios like base defense or hockey, it works there because people are going to choose the best ships for those scenarios.  There will be 2 or 3 or maybe 4 ships that are the best at a given scenario and those are the ships that people will use in those scenarios.

It is not necessary that all the ships be relatively even, that only becomes a problem if you say "ok, we are going to fight a single 1v1 duel with randomly selected ships".  As long as the player gets to pick his ship based on the situation, it doesn't matter if there are several "classes" within that group of ships.  The "best" ship for the situation gets chosen... and that creates balance.

I'd like to table that discussion and elements relating to your other proposed modes because they are not central to the core game or SuperMelee. Plus, they introduce new game imbalances. It's not a very fun game if the same 4 ships are always being used. (I know you are excited about getting them implemented. Push for mods! That's how all of these alternate modes (and MOBAs) came into existence to begin with.)

(And the Chmrr vs the Shofixti? Since a Shofixti self-destruct can cripple a Chmrr by destroying its zapsats, the Shofixti Scout is an effective and cheap counter to the Avatar. (30pts vs 6-7pts) The Avatar is useless without its zapsats. A better compare would be the Avatar vs the ZFP Stinger.)

Do you have any thoughts besides melee? What about the main game?

I would like see those ratios become more even in SCR, that is, combat becoming more relevant to the game as much as, if not more than, alien interaction and exploration.  And I only say this assuming that the number of aliens and their associated quests are pre-determined and thus the number of storyline outcomes is fixed, and also the starmap is pre-determined and there is only a finite amount of space you could ever explore.  Combat with in this genre is the one thing that seems it could be interesting well past end-game.

But why do we want the SCR? Is it because of melee? Aren't there more games on steam and in other places that can give you better melee experience than SCR ever will ( don't get me wrong here - SCR might turn out better than anything already existing when it comes to melee, but I doubt that atm) because they are, so to say, exclusively melee focused?

I want the SCR because of local multiplayer Melee in the vein of SC2. I want a modernized refresh of the melee mechanics. I honestly could care less about the SP campaign or online multiplayer. I want this because there aren't any other games out there like SC2 SuperMelee. I want the same controls and the same ship imbalanced balance. There currently isn't anything out there other than UQM HD.

A multiplayer that can retain an audience is central to the core success of the game, especially if they are trying to create a franchise out of this.  They do not introduce any game imbalances at all.  And it is very fun, players just naturally use the "best ships" for the objective and nothing can ever change that.  All ships will not be good at hockey, for example, 3 or 4 will be and probably a few more that are fun in hockey but won't be used much in "serious" organized league play.  These 3 zones would be very little work to implement, and add incalculable value to the multiplayer side of the game.  There is no chance of SuperMelee alone retaining a significant online audience.  It does not affect the design of the ships at all.  Whatever ships they make, will work withing these three scenarios.

But the Shofixti is not an even match with the Chmrr, it is the structure of SuperMelee that makes it potentially a good ship to use against it, but the two ships are not balanced... SuperMelee is balanced.  Taking this to say, base defense, the Khor-Ah would be very popular in a base defense scenario using the original SC ships.  Mines are very useful in base defense, and when the enemy gets inside and tries to take the base there is a forced close quarters fight where the Khor-Ah secondary weapon would also be very useful.  A ship defending a base often wants to fire down a lane to deny access to that lane... which the Khor Ah also excels at.  With the old ships, the Khor Ah would be the anchor of defending the base and every team would want at least one of them.  It winds up being just like many other games you've played, like Team Fortress, where there are different "classes" that are better at performing each mission.  And this just happens naturally.  No matter what ships they make, certain ones will be the best among that group of ships for the various "missions" present in each scenario.  And those are the ships that will get used in those scenarios.  There would only be 6 or so players per side, all the ships couldn't possibly be used anyway.

This is false. The game is going to mostly be bought by people wanting to play the single player (or co-op) RPG portion of the game, not by people wanting to play "hockey" or even SuperMelee. Yes, there are some of us who like the multiplayer aspects, but we are in the minority. Take a poll of the founders. You'll see that I'm right.

Whenever you have a set of top tier "best" ships that are always used in a game mode to the exclusion of others, you have an imbalance. You can slice and dice it all you want, but that's the textbook definition. Guess what happens to imbalances? They get nerfed. When you add a separate axis of gameplay (base defense), you add another degree that is required to be balanced. You'll start to see ships nerfed in SuperMelee and the SP campaign because they were too good at other game modes. Sorry. That isn't my idea fun.

Plus, there is also the other aspect of the "best" ship. I would rather play a game where every ship had a use on my team than to have a game where only certain types of ships were good in certain gameplay modes. "I don't want to play base defense because I hate having to always use the Kor-Ah." Don't believe that this would be the case? It was present in the SC2 SP campaign with the Precursor flagship. That ship was so good, you had no reason to use anything else. (Wanna guess what I hated about the SP campaign?)

It is not false.  If it is going to just be a single player game that gets played for a week or two and then put on the shelf and forgotten, that is fine.  I will still play it... then put it on the shelf and forget it with everyone else.  The multiplayer audience is not a minority, if multiplayer is done right in a game like this it would attract a large, long term audience.  If they are really trying to establish a franchise, this is important.  Ultimately, the multiplayer audience would be much larger and certainly more long term than those who initially came to play the full game.  The full game attracts them to the game, the multiplayer keeps them playing it.

A poll of the founders would be pointless, these are hardcore SC fans many of us in our 40s.  The whole point of having a full featured multiplayer is to keep the casual gamers who try the game playing it long term.  And, really, it is so little work to create from what they already have, and you get so much out of it, there isn't really a reason not to do it.

Whenever you have a set of top tier "best" ships that are always used in a game mode to the exclusion of others, you have an imbalance. You can slice and dice it all you want, but that's the textbook definition. Guess what happens to imbalances? They get nerfed. When you add a separate axis of gameplay (base defense), you add another degree that is required to be balanced. You'll start to see ships nerfed in SuperMelee and the SP campaign because they were too good at other game modes. Sorry. That isn't my idea fun.

Plus, there is also the other aspect of the "best" ship. I would rather play a game where every ship had a use on my team than to have a game where only certain types of ships were good in certain gameplay modes. "I don't want to play base defense because I hate having to always use the Kor-Ah." Don't believe that this would be the case? It was present in the SC2 SP campaign with the Precursor flagship. That ship was so good, you had no reason to use anything else. (Wanna guess what I hated about the SP campaign?)

 
[/quote]

The ships of Star Control are not balanced.  At all.  They are, in fact, wildly and greatly imbalanced.  The structure of supermelee creates an illusion of balance.  It would be impossible to make any scenario in which all the ships in the game (any game) were evenly balanced in all scenarios.  It has never existed in any game yet, and will never exist in any game in the future.  It can't be done.  There would not be a "best ship".  If there were 12 ships, I'd guess 2-3 would be "league hockey ships" and 2 or 3 more would be used in "fun games".  Probably half would be "top tier useful" in base defense.  Capture the flag would depend on what type of capture the flag they make, but would probably be similar to hockey.  This is no different than any other game that has ever been made.  These are not balance issues, this is how all games work.  Certain designs excel at certain missions and players will choose those designs to perform those missions.

And like I said before, if the ships are balanced well enough for supermelee to work, then they will also work in these scenarios.  No separate balance is needed.  What you call "balance" with these ships is actually a very simple thing.  It's not nearly as complicated or difficult as you seem to imagine it is.  These are very simple 2-system ships.

Ahem...

Just saying... Stardock should polish the single-player RPG aspects and leave these modes up to the modders.

And like I said before, if the ships are balanced well enough for supermelee to work, then they will also work in these scenarios.  No separate balance is needed.  What you call "balance" with these ships is actually a very simple thing.  It's not nearly as complicated or difficult as you seem to imagine it is.  These are very simple 2-system ships.

You are admitting that a limited quantity of ship types would be used predominantly in a particular mode. That isn't balance. That is imbalance. That imbalance stems from the fact that you've changed the goal from "kill your opponent" to "defend the base". You have yet to convince me that this change in goal would still retain an overall game balance. 

Yeah, I think that we have come to the following conclusion (a bit unexpected for me tbh as I have always been under impression that SC is mainly exploration, aliens and combat is something nice to have but not pivotal at all, I would have enjoyed SC even if it had no combat at all, like in "Out There" game) for some - SCR is Melee as linchpin and singleplayer as bonus, for some - the other way around. I prefer single-player to melee. I doubt that devs can equally focus both on the maingame and melee so that the end product is equally good in both parts (again, I hope they will but then SCR might take additional 3 years for development and testing or so, don`t get me wrong here. I do not question professionalism of people, think of StarCraft and relevant development time... horrible... I mean... are we ready to wait so long to get "ideal" exploration and/or "ideal" melee?)

Just as an idea, why don`t Stardok people develop something like "Star Control the Space Battles" - that will focus on melee alone, rankings, upgrades, duels, capture the starbase things and etc. as a separate product and SCR could stay like an old SC2? With simple, easy, fun and unbalanced melee....

You seem to use the word balance without really understanding what it means.  Again, Star Control's ships are wildly unbalanced.  The only way to achieve what you want is if all ships were identical.  It is absolutely not imbalanced and these scenarios have been tested within this genre for almost 40 years now.  I'm not guessing here.  There is no problem, and no balance issue, in the fact that certain ships excel at certain missions within this genre.  It is like an immutably law of physics that cannot be changed.  Every game ever made possesses this same quality, and every game ever made in the future will too.  That's why the concept is familiar too you.  There is no problem or issue with the fact that certain ships would be better than others at the mission and players will choose those ships for that mission, that is exactly how it should be working.  There is no reason at all that every ship in the game be equally good at doing everything, and the only way that would be possible is if all the ships were identical.  Its hard to even understand what your issue is, or why anyone would be against having a full featured multiplayer with the proven classics of the genre... especially considering how little work is involved here.

Modders will not create these zones because if SuperMelee is the only online component there won't ever be enough interest in the online side of the game for modders to ever do anything with it.  The whole reason these extra zones are needed is so that there will be enough interest in the first place to attract modders to make even more such zones.

Finally, these scenarios don't affect "the overall game balance" at all.  Not in any way, shape, or form.  They have no impact at all on the full game or supermelee.  However the ships are designed for supermelee will work just fine for the established classic scenarios of the genre.  As explained before, players will choose the best ships for the mission, whichever those ships are.  That's how space ship games work.  Different ships are better at different things and people pick the ships that are best for the thing they are doing.  It's what makes SuperMelee balanced even though the ships are not.  You keep talking about the "balance" of the ships when there is none.  The ships of Star Control are wildly unbalanced.  That is part of what makes Star Control Star Control, the wildly varied ship designs.  They are totally and completely "unbalanced".  The structure of SuperMelee creates the "balance" where there is actually none.   

I tentatively lean towards Kavik_Kang's side. To put it in context of MOBAs like Dota 2; there are a lot of wildly overpowered heroes in Dota 2 - two things help balance that out: 1. other heroes are also wildly imbalanced (but in other ways), 2. and even more importantly an individual hero's (im)balance is exceeded by the *team* imbalance that he/she faces. The last part becomes apparent when you realize how often "minor" support heroes are the pivotal part of a team's victory.

Without a doubt Stardock will ensure that the competitive component of StarControl will be "balanced" in some way. That does not necessarily require individual ships to be balanced against each other. I'd argue the distinctiveness, and by extension imbalances, are one of the charming features that attracted us to the original StarControls.

I understand what balance means. SC ships are unbalanced, but in the meta SuperMelee game of "kill your opponent", they are balanced. However, when the goal changes to something else, balance is removed. You admitted that yourself when you say that players will choose certain types of ships for different game rules. That is not balanced. 

To use another analogy... SuperMelee has a Rock-Paper-Scissors balance. I will choose my ship to counter my enemy, and I will choose an equal measure of Rocks, Papers, and Scissors. Other game modes favor Rocks, and those are the ships I use. Those are also the ships that everyone else uses in the game. Rocks Rocks Rocks all day. Even though I should be choosing Paper in those modes to counter the predominance of Rocks I encounter, I'm always choosing Rocks. Rocks clearly have the advantage. Why choose anything else? Other people start noticing this and bemoan the plight of Scissors... They don't even stand a chance in a game full of Rocks. Guess what happens then? Rocks get nerfed across all game modes.

As an added "benefit", single players will hate you because you nerfed their favorite Rocks.

In summary... I don't want to play a game full of Rocks.

And adding extra multiplayer content to a predominantly single player RPG would work wonders for the game's online presence? History says otherwise.

This is just wrong.  Changing the goal does not remove balance at all.  The same exact balance still exists no matter what the objective of the scenario is.  I didn't "admit" that, I explained that certain ships will be better at the missions available in those scenarios and players will choose those ships for those missions... which is one of the things that creates the balance of those scenarios.  There is nothing wrong with that, it is not a problem or balance issues.  That is how ALL games work.  It can't be changed.  The only way to achieve what you are wanting is if all the ships were identical.

Like I said.  I'm not guessing here.  These are the classic scenarios of the genre.  They work.  40 years of playtesting says so.

So, in team fortress, if you want to go for the flag you use a Heavy Weapons guy?  No, you choose one of the fast guys to perform that mission.  Nothing needs to be nerfed.  No ship needs to be changed.  However they design the ships, no matter what systems they have, they will just work in these scenarios.  All of your arguments are based on false premises.  

All three of these zones are many times more fun that dueling.  Only 2 or 3 ships would be used in serious hockey games because only 2 or 3 ships would be seriously good at hockey.  Another 2 or 3 (out of an assumed 12) would be used for fun because they have weapons/devices that are fun to use in hockey.  There is no problem with this what-so-ever, and all games work this way.  There is no balance issue or problem.  You are hung up on this weird issue of "well, the Mycon would suck at hockey so hockey doesn't work" which is ridiculous.  That's the same thing as saying Team Fortress doesn't work, and isn't balanced, because the Heavy isn't good at capturing the flag.

These scenarios more than work, they are the proven classics of the genre.

Yes, it would.  And history does not say otherwise.  The online element is not an RPG it is a top down space combat action game.  SuperMelee alone will not attract an online audience, it will just be a thing people do while playing the single player game.  People will play this game for a week or two, then put in on a shelf and never touch it again.  With a full featured multiplayer featuring the classics of the genre this genre could actually become very, very popular online.  People would be playing this game years after they bought it, and Stardock will have that built-in audience to support the franchise they want to create.  Considering how little work it would take to do this with what they already have, it would almost be insane to not make these 3 simple scenarios (and I would actually go all out on hockey and actually put some work into that since it is so perfect for Star Control).

"Balance" is not going to be a major issue in the development of this game.  The ships are brain-dead simple.  There aren't going to be any major problems with the ship designs in this game.  2-system ships will be brain-dead simple to balance with each other.  It would take a really long time to explain why that is, but you don't need to worry so much about the "balance" of the ships because that really isn't ever going to be an issue in this game.

I'm hung up on the "well, the Mycon would suck at hockey so hockey doesn't work" idea because it defines the entire reason why I liked Star Control SuperMelee to begin with. I loved Star Control 2 SuperMelee because it coerced you into playing with a diverse set of ships*. (* As long as you weren't playing as a Thraddash. :P)

Here me out and consider this continuation to the analogy...

Team Fortress is a game of Rocks. You play as one Rock. When your Rock dies, you have another Rock. You choose that Rock because you like to camp the flag and the Rock is good at sitting in one place. It's fun to be a Rock. Your Rock has many Rock-Like abilities that make it good at what it does.

If Star Control were like Team Fortress and had a base defense game, your ship fleet would look like this: Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock. You wouldn't put any Paper in there because while Paper was good at killing Rocks, Paper sucks at defending a base. You wouldn't put any Scissors in there either because Scissors would get smashed by Rocks when they tried to invade the base. And unfortunately, Rocks are good at base destruction in addition to base defense because Rocks were built for the larger single-player 1-v-1 combat game and not for niche multiplayer modes.

Fortunately, Star Control SuperMelee isn't like Team Fortress. I'm given X points to spend, and I'm going to choose a fleet consisting of Rocks, Paper, and Scissors. My fleet of "Rock Rock Paper Paper Scissors Scissors" will wipe the floor with your "Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock" fleet. This works because the objective of SuperMelee is to kill your opponent. My Paper may not be able to destroy a base, but it can sure beat your Rock.

I understand that you want a game where you have a goal other than killing your opponent. Yes, that could be fun. The tradeoff, though, is that you create a system where certain ships are unilaterally better at certain roles, and you have no reason to choose another ship. (For Fun? Hah. Not in a competitive world.) You play a Rock, and that's all you play. I don't want that. That's not the Star Control balance I've come to love.

Does that do a better job of explaining why I'm against the extra modes from a balance perspective?

How can you preserve ship choice diversity when you introduce these modes? So far, your only solution was NOT to preserve choice diversity, and I am steadfastly against that.

(EDIT: I'm not trying to put down TF2. Even though it's a game of Rocks, remember that Diamonds are Rocks too.)

Look, I understand that. If the multiplayer was theoretically deep enough, people would theoretically continue to play. However, we're not going to be able to achieve that. History shows otherwise. Do you know how many single player games have failed multiplayer components? They just don't work.

Here is a brief collection: http://www.gamespy.com/articles/122/1226757p1.html

Also... http://www.techtimes.com/articles/63694/20150625/fallout-4-doesnt-have-multiplayer-but-bethesda-tried-it.htm

Your game modes aren't going to be the silver bullet that makes Multiplayer more appealing. Other factors are going to need to be put into play. Here's an idea: Why not spin the multiplayer modes off as a lower-cost (or free-to-play) game?

"Then we go, 'Yup, we shouldn't do that. That's an awesome idea that is way too distracting from the main thing we want to do, which is single player,'" Howard says. "I could see ways it would work, but development-wise, they're very different experiences." - from the second article mentioned above.

So, what can Stardock guys tell us about SCR, what will be their "main thing"?

Besides, as i have mentioned supra,

I understand what you are saying, but I'm not saying they should get rid of supermelee.  In fact, one idea I had but hadn't mentioned is that you could easliy make all three of these scenarios retain the supermelee point system.  When you run out of ships you are out, if all players on one side are out the other side wins by default and the game resets.  It seems particularly cool for hockey too me, as it provides an alternate means of play of being "bashy" to knock players out and get a man up.  In base defense it would limit the suicide runs that are common in that scenario.  I had actually already been thinking that you could keep these scenarios "star controlly" by retaining the supermelee point structure (which is actually a simplified version SFB's Basic Point Value system).  But even if you did this... the players would choose the ships they feel are best for the mission.

When you play supermelee do you use all the ships?  You mostly use the ones you like best, I imagine.  Or the ones that work well against the ships you know your opponent likes to use.  You can use any ship you want, but you choose the ones you feel are best for the current mission.

I feel like I was being unfair in the last post to just say this will be easy to balance, this might be a long post but I think the conversation we are having is probably interesting to everyone since we have so little info on the game to be interested in at this point, so I'll explain what I meant in more detail.

First, realize what the ships in star control are.  They are very simple.  They have a top speed, and thrust power.  Health represented by crew, and energy (I would recommend separate energy for each system but won't go into that now).  They have a turn rate.  There might be one or two unique ship like Airlou in the first game hat are slightly different.  That's pretty much it for the "platform".  The platforms have no inherent abilities.  Then, I think I saw Stardock say each ship has 2 systems at this point (which sounds great for SC). These two systems mostly define what each ship is, the ships themselves are very simple.  And only having two systems each is also very simple.  This is what makes the ships of star control so unique, the 2 systems almost completely define what the ship is (that, and speed maneuverability).  They all have completely different capabilities which make each ship very unique, and this just happens all by itself because the ships are so simple and possess only the 2 capabilities they have with no "inherent" ones.

Balance, in general, does not come from ships these ships being equal, they are not equal.  In fact, you may not notice it but the "classes" of ships you are familiar with from real world navies are present in SC2.  For example, the Arilou, Spathi, and Mrrmm are essentially Destroyers.  Vux, Yehat, and Syreen are like Heavy Cruisers.  Ur Quan, Khor Ah, and Chmmr are like Battleships.  The ships of star control are not even of the same class, let alone balanced.  Balance in this type of game comes from the player selecting the right ship for the right mission.  Different ships are better at different missions and players pick the best ship for the mission.  You shouldn't expect every ship to be good at every mission.  This also has a self-balancing effect which is a big part of what makes star control work.  The ships don't have to be balanced for their to be balance within this genre, which you've already seen in the first two star controls.

Balance is relatively easy with space ships in the top down environment because all you really have to do is make sure there are no abilities that are so powerful that it doesn't matter what abilities then enemy might have to counter it.  You don't have to worry about a ship that is too powerful among all ships, speed is the only concern with these simple "platforms".  You only have to ensure that the abilities are not to powerful and everything else will just magically fall into place within this system.

It is not an issue that the Mycon suck at hockey, nobody wants to use one there anyway.  It isn't right for that mission.  Hockey really is about the hockey.  You want the best "player" you can get.  That means fast, maneuverable, and abilities useful to the game.  In other words... the "Destroyers".  All ships aren't good at hockey, but all the destroyers are.  Hockey is balanced for destroyers, and all of them will be good at it.  Some better than others, and those top 2 or 3 the ones that would be used in "serious" games.  But really, thats my ultimate answer to your earlier balance issue after having explained all this.  All the DD's are good at hockey, which is why there isn't a big balance issue.  Only DDs are supposed to be good at hockey.  Base defense would see a wider variety of ships being used, but some are inevitably going to be better at it than others, and will get used more.  That's unavoidable.

We've probably talked about this subject enough at this point, the devs will do it or not.  I'll like the game either way... but honestly will play it a week or two then shelve it cause "I finished it".  With the scenarios I would literally be playing this game for years... and I think many others would too.  These particular scenarios are very, very fun within this genre.

The one thing that Star Control had given me that I've never found anywhere else was a game that felt FOCUSED on "talking to aliens" - which is exactly all I've ever wanted. I know a lot else went into it, but I would have loved it even if it was just a long string of alien conversations. Just thought I'd interject that. While it's possible I've put just as much time into playing my friends in melee or just playing against computer, if anyone ever asked what "star control" was about, I would immediately think of and start telling them about how unique talking to the aliens felt and how it felt like I could really make a difference just by talking to them. 

Hello all,

I really do like supermelee as a fan of SCII. But it is true that is not what has attracted and made converts of us.

But it would be nice to have the supermelee as an ipad game app you could play multiplayer with, perhaps link that to the real game as well (gaining stats, renown, and stuff like that).

It feels like there are a million combat games, but very few amazingly written adventure games. While I'm sure there are some people who are all about melee, when I talk to people about SC2 they mostly remember the adventure.

Indeed. Same here. All remember Slave Shields, Spathi, Ultron, Qaisi Space and etc. Melee comes... third.... at best

Actually there hasn't been a top down space combat game made in many years.  There is an opportunity to have a successful multiplayer and it would be very little work since they are already doing supermelee.  The adventure game could be great but no matter how great it is it lasts for 2 weeks and then the game is forgotten.  Hockey is forever:-)

I will be dissapointed if there is no base defense or hockey, I would play them for years.  You guys aren't understanding just how awesomely fun these scenarios are in this arcade atmosphere, I guess maybe I will never get to play space hockey again:-(