Kavik_Kang

I am still really hoping for at least a "supermelee" space hockey done SC-style. Even just a primative version would be great, but a well-done "space hockey on a pinball machine table" would obviously be even better. Base defense and capture the flag would give the game a complete multiplayer with 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 dueling, Space Hockey, Base Defense, and Capture the Flag. Modders might then be inspired to add more multiplayer zones, and the game would have the bare minimum fo

They could just skip to the part where they give us Supermellee... I'd be fine with that:-)

It was a great game. I particularly liked how the ships had momentum even though it was a turn based game, that made it much more interesting than pretty much all other similar games.

Another good but very old space ship game is Renegade Legion Interceptor.

I loved local BBSs before Windows95 and the world wide web. It was more fun having to find them, and then each was it's own little community. There was something about it that was better than the internet in ways. It's been like 25 years and I can still remember many of their names.

I actually have a great deal if experience with alignement systems, that was a major part of how my MMO top down space combat game worked. That's why I said "to do it well" as an adventure game you would basically need 3 different stories. Just following the same storyline with different conversation reactions that have no actual impact on the progress of the story is not "doing it well". For an adventure game, which is all about the story, that's not good enough. &n

[quote who="IBNobody" reply="14" id="3612765"] Quoting Kavik_Kang, reply 12 That is a lot easier to do in an open game than a story driven one like an adventure game like star control. It would be nearly impossible to do truly well in a story driven game since it would basically require a whole different story for ea

That is a lot easier to do in an open game than a story driven one like an adventure game like star control. It would be nearly impossible to do truly well in a story driven game since it would basically require a whole different story for each different type of character you wanted to support.

[quote who="IBNobody" reply="9" id="3612726"] Humans are all over the spectrum when it comes to being good and evil. How should we play our race? Corrupt? Fundamental? Benevolent? [/quote] Humans are always portrayed as "average" with no specific traits. Like a game will have a race of spies, scientists, warriors, etc, and humans are always the baseline "no trait" race. I have a long standing joke that the human trait should be "pesky meddlers". </p

Star Control II: Electric Boogaloo

...and so it begins.

The AI of the original SC that so many people seem so impressed with mostly consisted of "1) attack player, 2) Avoid player if his gun is pointing at you." Individual ships generally had some specific rules they followed based on their weapons/devices but it really was very simple. What gamers call "AI" is usually some type of illusion that is far more simple than the gamer believes it is.

Pattern Recognition Addiction is an aspect of this type of game, one of the things that makes it so popular. No matter how you design the ships or combat environment this aspect will still be there.

The quest I've been thinking of is a fight with a starbase. It should be barely winnable, so there should be another option to not have to fight the starbase for people who don't want to fight it. It could be cool to make it reminiscent of Star Wars. There could be a second solar system within range of the starbase, and that system has some kind of big planet based weapon overwatching the starbase that must be dealt with before fighting the starbase. There coul

[quote who="sendingsignal" reply="4" id="3610330"] That's funny, I've actually felt that the GalCiv clones were more about war than peaceful building and exploration, but maybe those are our play styles! I'd love to have turn based games that were very exploration focused, but I'm not sure I've found one that really hit the spot. [/quote] There is really not much strategy game there if you decide to conquer the galaxy. You just make

I haven't played GalCiv3 either but I did play GC2. I don't really like Master of Orion clones much, it's a game I've played over and over for decades. They are all pretty much the same, Civilization in space, and more about peacefully building than a galactic war. I would be very interested in an actual "Grand Strategy Galactic Wargame" but how to make one of those is kind of lost knowledge at this point and I don't think anyone in a position to make suc

[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="23" id="3610311"] Quoting sendingsignal, reply 22 and the periodic rare loot - ship members? [/quote] Oh, I like this idea. People have mentioned having officers and/or ship bonuses and I haven't really thought that fit

oops, double post

There are shockingly few games featuring space ships. Good recent ones I know of are... Faster Than Light (NetHack in space... just get this if you don't have it, it's a classic) Galactic Civilizations 3 (the current reigning champion of Master of Orion clones) Sword of the Stars (older Master of Orion clone, heavily based on the Star Fleet Universe) Stardrive 2 (a minimalist Master of Orion clone that is pretty good) You might also try th

I'd rather see random events be... random events. 5% bonuses to things don't really fit with such a simple game. For example a 5% bonus to weapon damage doesn't even work, weapons do damage based on how many crew units they kill per hit... 5% of 1, 2, 3, or 4, has no effect. This isn't that kind of game. But "random events" such as "a crystalline entity is attacking a colony, save the colony" could add "life" to the universe and provide little side

More ideas for using system defenses... In addition to enhancing the player combat these could be used extensively to deny players access to areas until they are powerful enough to go there. There are many ways of doing this. If the map is a solar system and these defenses are just on that map then very strong defenses (5 or 6 battlestations) could even largely deny access to an entire solar system. Events later in the game, the assumed ongoing conflict, could then d

[quote who="Awkbird" reply="8" id="3609721"] I'm picturing something a lot more like a dynamic view that zooms in and out based on the situation and surroundings. While we are navigating around a star system, the view will dolly out to show a large overview, but as we approach a point of interest, engage in combat, or even go to Hyperspace, the view will follow us and dolly/zoom in to give a more intimate experience. At least that's what I'd like to see... [/

The pulsar could cause damage if you get too close. Another cool terrain feature might be something that emits a regular gravity pulse so it is like the opposite of a gravity well and flings you away if you are near it when it pulses.

Nothing has changed, it's just that GalCiv is supposed to be a "more serious" universe than Star Control. Games like GalCiv strive for that Babylon 5/Star Trek/Star Wars feel. With Star Control I think they are going for more of an artsy, cartoonish look like Team Fortress has. Personally I like that idea and think it would be a great look for Star Control. I'm no artist, and it's just these three planets we are talking about, but too me they seem "too br

Yes, all those things are true. And against the AI most of the problems associated with map size are not relevant because the AI is programmed to constantly engage the player. The primary problems with a large map arise from a faster player who refuses to engage, or from a concept called "The Kaufman Retrograde" which in simple terms means that a ship running away and firing backwards towards it's pursuer is at about a 3:1 advantage. The retrograde really is a big issue.