Capture planets and integrate population

I would like that. (Essentially) nuclear bombardment and starting from scratch each time has always seemed odd as the only way to conquer.

I would be wary of introducing intricate ground combat though. If done right, it would be pretty complex and time-consuming (both to play but even more to develop). If done half-baked, e.g. because one choice is always superior, it will just be a series of mandatory clicks and waiting.

I don't have a great solution. I would envisage abstracting/transforming allegiance into an ownership of planet parameter and that special ships like troop transport gradually change allegiance at an enemy planet through a channelling ability. A bit like siege ships but slower. Allegiance then doesn't so much reach 0 as it turns over to the attacking player.

This would have the allure of integrating with the culture system in making culturally-influenced planets easier to conquer in that way. It could even allow outright remote conquest without ships present.

The other idea in that regard - there is no reason why a planet can have only one player's allegiance ranking. Other 4X games like Civ IV could have player A hold 70% culture and player B hold 30%. Then it could become less a struggle to avoid 0% allegiance and more about having more than other players.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I agree that we are not going to see anything groundbreaking in sins2 when it comes to ground combat, I think homeworld3 will be doing that sort of thing. Something simple but pleasant to watch would be find for sins2.

In it's simplest form Show troop ships launching dropships and have them flow down to the planet. Then it's going to be dice rolls and numbers as the planetary defence forces fight the invasion forces. The first side to reach zero troops or that rolls a surrender loses. In the case of a loss of course then a bombardment would take place in the normal fashion, but you would hope a defence force would have reached the planet by then, because that means it's taken the attacker twice as long to take the planet.

Perhaps during all of this surrendering under terms could be an option for the defender. Perhaps becoming an indipendent or a client faction rather than being fully integrated into the attackers empire. Providing tribute and all the diplomatic levels right away as well as giving you a buffer between you and your enemy.

Capturing a planet this way would be slower than bombarding it but quicker when you consider rebuild time.

+1

Successfully updated karma reason!

Timmaigh

Join Date 05/2009

+76

I have never been a fan of nuclear bombardment of a planets surfsce.

Respetcfully disagreed. This is one of the coolest scifi tropes and should definitely be the way to go. It was cool moment in every scifi show it was on screen - from Star Trek DS9 "Die is Cast" episode through Babylon 5 and Centauri bombardment or Narn Homeworld to recent Foundation.

I am not saying i am opposed to more peaceful alternatives, but given Sins is primary combat focused RTS game and it should remain one, even with further improvements to its 4X aspects, this should still be a default choice.

I only wish it would get graphical overhaul in Sins II, like more visually stunning effects/mushroom clouds of the bombardment itself and temporary visible effect of it to the planets itself, like visible burning on the surface, blue atmosphere turning brown/grey, removal of the city lights on the night side of the planet, etc...

+1

Successfully updated karma reason!

I was not saying bombardment should be removed. Simply that better options should exist.

Graphically sins2 is a let down for me. I think sins1 had more detail and probably better models. I am not a fan of the cartoon like simplified cell shaded kind of stylised srt in game. It seems that these days developers love to let the game engine effects do the hard work, saving polygons on the models.

+2

Successfully updated karma reason!

Timmaigh

Join Date 05/2009

+76

Quoting Norska,

reply 4

I was not saying bombardment should be removed. Simply that better options should exist.

Graphically sins2 is a let down for me. I think sins1 had more detail and probably better models. I am not a fan of the cartoon like simplified cell shaded kind of stylised srt in game. It seems that these days developers love to let the game engine effects do the hard work, saving polygons on the models.

I see and i think that while there might be other options and i am opened to them, i dont believe those are better options. Not for primarily combat focused RTS game, that Sins is.

Regarding graphics, i quite like it. I was kinda critical on Discord about planet texture quality (especially volcanic one) and skybox quality (though i kinda came around regarding that since then, playing more), and apparently that slightly stylized look is on purpose. I guess i would too prefer as realistic look as possible - something along the line of Falling Frontier looks when it comes to that. The game still looks great though and its definitely massive step-up compared to Rebellion - when you say older models had more detail, its simply not true, as the average polycount for capship went from cca 4000 polys to 70000.

My biggest gripe is some lighting errors, especially on the hull plating of ships, where often it wrongly lit in places, where it should not be. I wish the game had raytracing, probably raytraced shadows to fix that.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Well if it’s not true then they are making a lot of smooth surfaces with more polygons instead of drawing in more details. Large capital ships often look like they are made of flat uninteresting sides. Which would be in keeping with the minimalistic art style. For me this is a backwards step. I do however like the new cobal frigate model.

I do think that the fortnite style art is a trend these days that ends with games looking kiddy and looking like they were sketched in 5 minutes. They just don’t seem like serious attempts by passionate people when they are in this style. I know the original sins had to do it to make sure the engine could handle the polygons but now specifically choosing weak cartoon pastels without much texture to them so they are clean and happy looking just does not do it for me.

I am however happy we can now choose two tone colours for our ships. Homeworld of course had a better version of this 20yrs ago. Better than nothing is the motto we go by in the 2020s for most things.

As for discord. Do you think that platform is superior for the ease at which the devs can gather feedback, or do you think the conversations are so busy and replies in real time so fast in conversations that they get lost in the vast trove of noise that is also collected?

I doubt the devs get time to read them all. Heck this forum is so quiet most of what you get are referrals to freebrun or whatever it is by spam bots. Where is the party?

I really wish that game you mentioned, falling frontier, was multiplayer btw. It looked more like what I wanted from sins. But since there was no coop I have never followed its development. No point teasing myself.

P.s. please note the feedback I give is because I care. I imagined a stellar leap rather than a few added bits and pieces with fortnite graphics. I will get over the art style (which I hate even more in stellaris) and if the gameplay in more involed and interesting will be happy enough. I know you art guys probably put endless hours into the art assets, not trying to stomp on the art guys efforts. Just remember the people that like the things are a significant part of the audience. The people that like to see things working. That like them to look dangerous, utilitarian and respectable rather than comical and goofy.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Timmaigh

Join Date 05/2009

+76

Quoting Norska,

reply 6

Well if it’s not true then they are making a lot of smooth surfaces with more polygons instead of drawing in more details. Large capital ships often look like they are made of flat uninteresting sides. Which would be in keeping with the minimalistic art style. For me this is a backwards step. I do however like the new cobal frigate model.

I do think that the fortnite style art is a trend these days that ends with games looking kiddy and looking like they were sketched in 5 minutes. They just don’t seem like serious attempts by passionate people when they are in this style. I know the original sins had to do it to make sure the engine could handle the polygons but now specifically choosing weak cartoon pastels without much texture to them so they are clean and happy looking just does not do it for me.

I am however happy we can now choose two tone colours for our ships. Homeworld of course had a better version of this 20yrs ago. Better than nothing is the motto we go by in the 2020s for most things.

As for discord. Do you think that platform is superior for the ease at which the devs can gather feedback, or do you think the conversations are so busy and replies in real time so fast in conversations that they get lost in the vast trove of noise that is also collected?

I doubt the devs get time to read them all. Heck this forum is so quiet most of what you get are referrals to freebrun or whatever it is by spam bots. Where is the party?

I really wish that game you mentioned, falling frontier, was multiplayer btw. It looked more like what I wanted from sins. But since there was no coop I have never followed its development. No point teasing myself.

P.s. please note the feedback I give is because I care. I imagined a stellar leap rather than a few added bits and pieces with fortnite graphics. I will get over the art style (which I hate even more in stellaris) and if the gameplay in more involed and interesting will be happy enough. I know you art guys probably put endless hours into the art assets, not trying to stomp on the art guys efforts. Just remember the people that like the things are a significant part of the audience. The people that like to see things working. That like them to look dangerous, utilitarian and respectable rather than comical and goofy.

I do get you, but i dont see Sins II to be "fortnite" style graphics game. Maybe it gives that feeling cause it bit too colorful, or maybe because there is not enough contrast between lit and shadowed parts of the stuff. I do agree that some of the moving guns on the capships are perhaps bit too big, making the capships feel smaller in size, than they are meant to be - this is probably both ergonomic related and hardware related. No point in having ton of moving turrets on the model, if you cant even seen them, even when zoomed in, and their number is probably limited from hardware standpoint. Bottom line, i dont think it was made this way with intention to make stuff look comical and goofy as you say.

All in all, i can see where you are coming from, i just dont see it. The game is "stylized" for sure, but not cartoony like Fortnite, there is far more nuance and distinction here in play than that.

If you wish to talk more about the game, discord seem to place to go for sure. Devs seem to chime in there moreso than here. I was avoiding it too, since i prefer regular message board or Reddit for communication, but ultimately its not my choice.

Successfully updated karma reason!