Big SciFi 4x (1.1)

I've had this post kicking around for a few months. Not sure where I was going with that, but it's got lots of fibre to chew on.

Anyways, the idea is to make the galaxy big. Big enough that you can't blow it off in a solid 12 hour day of power gaming. Now that you have a really big, persistent
galaxy, you start your fledgling space empire. You have just developed ftl travel. Commence the explore. Look for colony worlds. Watch out for hostile aliens (which may or may not be other players).

The turns should take at least a day to process. That is the system should be capable of handling the maths in short order, but you should then have a day to respond to the changes. Shorter if you're slightly off-center and your work doesn't care about you logging in from your workstation during work. Longer if you need more time to schedule conflicts (and plan). Conflicts should be scheduled as much as possible between players. Conflicts with simulated opponents can be resolved at your convenience. Now that's not all that realistic, but is a concession to the fact that the
average player of these games is often better at tactical combat than the
average simulated opponent (SO for short).

The combat module needs to have layers (like an onion). On the top is the strategic layer. You can have input on this from three perspectives. One is as an aggressive combatant. Two is as a defensive combatant. Three is as an observer. In case one and two you probably want a facility to have doctrine in place ( a common set of rules for encounters) to help you quickly set out your game plan for the engagement.
This will most likely be related to your objective in the engagement. The battle planning sub-module needs to encompass all of the possibilities of the battle simulation. Each side needs to commit it's forces to a plan before proceeding to combat (battle simulation).

Battle simulation should take place in the largest definable useful area, which I figure is a star system. The combat in space around the bodies of the system should take place while the combat on the bodies is occurring. So the ground invasions are occurring while you're fighting in space. Morale needs to be a factor for a "truer" simulation. Not everyone will fight to the death if they are given a more attractive option.

You should simulate the model in 3 dimensions using "pseudo" Newtonian physics in "real time". With the acknowledgement that these things need to scale into a "playable" time frame. Using the Solar system as an example, we probably need to
scale the time frame up relative to the speed and range of weapons. We are dealing with a truly tremendous volume of space. The amount of scaling needs to relate to the achievable speed of the ships involved and the range at which weapons become effective, and perhaps more importantly, the sensors become effective.

I'm neutral on your level of input on what happens on the ground. Certainly, if the pace is slow enough, you could have a secondary UI which allows zone by zone control of invasions, or bombing. I do think that the minimum will be the ability to organize your ground forces into armies and give them objectives. The destruction of planetary targets (weapon control points or ground based weapons and infrastructure,for example) should be one alternative to total subjugation.

I think I was thinking about how I would work a MMOSG. I'm not sure the game community is ready for MMOSGs, or ever will be, but I think it would be neat-o.

(1.1 - Cleaned up extra line breaks. Note to self - do NOT precompose in Notepad!)

100!

This post will have little to nothing to do with it's title. But it is my 100th post.

I'm chewing on a bit of game design philosophy. Here's the rule: No effect, change or alteration to rules "in play" should require heavy or extraordinary measures to counter act. Change should be small and incremental. Change should build over time.

For example, leveling up. Leveling up is a game mechanic that many of us are familiar with, and has varying degrees of effect depending on where and how it is implemented. I think it produces artificial hurdles in the system. At level 5, my mojo is sufficient to take on 3 level 5 monsters, 2 level 6 monsters and perhaps 1 level 7 monster (if I really grok my character and get a few lucky rolls). When I promote to level 6, suddenly that level 7 monster becomes "easier".

I don't really like that. I think your ability should gradually increase from 5 to 6. And when your ability reaches a certain point, your title upgrades, recognizing your increased skill. And how that affects what you do should also gradually increment. So, the level 7 monster starts out being all difficult to vanquish at the beginning of level 5, but you can tell you're getting close to 6 when the same monsters are not challenging you the same waythey once were.

Just a stray thought.

Blender 3d

I can not say enough good things about this tool. I totally blew off another full evening of me time making 3d stuff. And by the end of the night I was making an object that was almost recognizable as what I intended.

It is going to be a while before anything I make sees the light of day, however. What I have decided though, is that it is much easier to transform a 2D picture into something 3D than to invent a 3D object. This is OK because I have a ton of old art just kicking around from all of those versions of G.E.

Eye Strain

I just spent a crazy evening squeezing stuff into the black hole known as my brain. But before I get into that - High school Quest Update!

(Or, if this was WoW, you would be looking at ? ) He actually got back to me. That's kind of a first in years. Not sure what I'll do next year. Meh. (I mean "bah-duhm" level up.)

But back to the front. I just spent my whole evening learning stuff about Blender 3d. Which is more learning in my free time than I've done in a very,very long time.

Blender is a gnu public license 3d modeler/rendering animator. It's supposedly on the order of 3dMax or Lightwave, but free. It's certainly super powerful, and it is free. It also seems very stable, and has a TINY 8 Mb download. And it's free. I'm not used to thinking in an X shell format at home, but it sure is cool how easy it was to model simple stuff. Well, OK, nothing I would actually let see the light of day, but soon, maybe. Did I mention it was free?

Now if I could just distract the kids long enough to get some practice in...

Further Modified Risk

I've been mulling it over and I think you could carry my changes from SW:CW Risk to standard risk. At least if you have one of the latest versions with actual men and horses and cannons.

Here's what to do.

Forget about the cards, except may be as a way to randomly pick a starting country. Each person starts as one country, with 20 men, 5 horses and 3 cannons. Again, each country is worth 1 point. You count your points at the start of your turn to see how many new units you can have. If you don't have a unit on a country, you don't get a point for it. The exception to this will be in the continental control rule, below. Men cost 1 point and use the d6. Horses (cavalry) cost 3 points, but use the d8. Cannon cost 5 points, use the d6 but allow you to bring an extra unit into the order of battle.

Changes to combat - as in normal Risk, the attacker may roll up to three die. Which die he rolls depends on which units from the attack he is including in the order of battle. If he includes a cannon (1 or more) he may add one d6 more, increasing his maximum to four units and 4 die. This applies likewise to the defender, who normally rolls 2 die, but may add a cannon and extra d6.

As normal risk, each rolls his dice and compares highest results. In the event of a tie, the defender wins. The player who has lost a piece chooses which piece to remove from the pieces in the order of battle (i.e. the ones used to determine which die to roll). Other units are considered reserves, which may be brought up on the next round to bolster your order of battle.
As the attacker, you may withdraw so long as you launched your attack from an adjacent country. You may not withdraw along shipping lines (marines always have it rough). If you withdraw, all of your units must return to a friendly territory (one you already control) from which some of your force must have come. You may withdraw after removing casualties and before rolling die for the next round has commenced.

Continent Rules - If, at the start of your turn, you control a whole continent (Australasia, say) you get the bonus production normal for that continent (2 for Australia, I believe). If you have achieved control of a continent, you no longer need to occupy each country to receive its production, you will receive all production for the continent (and the bonus). If, however, someone should "break" your continent, these unoccupied countries return to neutral status until they are later occupied. Before continental domination maybe declared, you must have had at least one unit in each country of the continent at the start of your turn. I think. I'm waffling on continents ATM.

Supply rules - you get a point for each country you control, to spend on new units, at the start of your turn. If you don't have a unit in a country, you don't get a point for it (obvious, I know) - but don't let that stop you. You may withdraw all of your troops from a country.

Fourex (4x)

I discovered that Space Empires V came out while I wasn't looking. Well I wasn't really paying all that much attention, but 4x games don't come out all that often anymore. That would be Explore, Expand, Exploit, Exterminate for the uninitiated (as coined by Alan Emrich in an early article on the subject). Some of the best 4x gaming has been presented in the iconic Civilization series (that would be Sid Meier's Civilization , not Avalon Hill's Civilization , which has it's own merits but lacks the whole computer presentation).

These games usually feature a set of interlinked modules designed to present you with the concept of running an empire, and not always in space. Those modules can include economy, technology, espionage, military (which may have both a strategic and tactical sub module and if it has a tactical sub module that module is often divided into space and ground combat), and diplomacy. The genre has a long history of single player only presentation, multi-player support often added as an after thought - well, honestly who can get their buddies to sit around for literally hours and hours and hours to play a game. The other aspects of the game are common to all games - the User Interface (UI), the Artificial Intelligence (AI or Non Human Opponents), graphical and sound design.

Funny thing is I should just stop reading reviews, as they completely fail to present me with enough meaningful information on these games. I've looked over some reviews, and I now know that the AI may or may not be competent and that the tech tree is deep.

Yes, they have left a bit out. The reviews never cover all of it. And rarely cover the bits I am most often disappointed with once there.

Unfortunately, I find myself at odds with most fans of the genre. Of course, having had several cracks at putting together a design for just such a game, I have some fairly solidified ideas about what I'm looking for.

Lately I've been thinking that a return to the sensibilities of play by email empire games might be the way to go. I vaguely remember a discussion about something called a 'Pit Boss' mode for Civilization 4. I see a download for an application from the Firaxis Web, named such, but I need to do some research to see if it works the way I think it should.

Anyways, the deal is that I can't tell from the reviews if the parts of the genre that interest me are simulated well or at all. I know the thing has a combat model. I have no idea how it works. And being that combat is one of the primary parts of the genre (the exterminate part, usually) that leaves me neutral on reviews that don't bother to mention it. At least there's a demo.

I'll get back to you on it.

Back from Vacation

Vacation.

Should be restful recuperation. Is always me getting really bad flu or cold. At least I squeezed in some gaming. Of which I hasten to point out that my anual pile to acquire grows. It always happens as summer wraps up.

So now we have:
Battlefield 2142 (Demo is good for now, and I still have lots of maps I've hardly played on B2 and SpecFor)

Warhammer: Mark of Chaos (demo is out today, so this may come off or go up)

Warhamer 40,000: Dawn of War - Dark Crusade (wasn't really impressed with the Tau in the demo, but it's the single player campaign I really want to see)

Supreme Commander (in on the closed beta - w00t - but it's multiplayer only. I like my rts off line)

Neverwinter Nights 2 (I'm mixed on this. WoW is really filling the RPG niche for me right now. And the gaming niche. And the not-sleeping-to-game niche)

My PSP kind of rocks. And kind of sucks. I have two anthologies of old arcade games now. And that's cool. But the darn thing is just a bit too wee for my giant hands.

I now have a close enough collection of Republic troops (I think). I'm going to start on rules soon. Or not. I've been printing G.E. (v7) stuff and it's starting to look really tempting to set up a game.

I have to admit though, I don't look forward to 12 hour sessions of gaming like I used to.

Sidetracked

Ack. Well, it was shaping up. I have a small stack of the Star Wars mini's, and I acquired a few more. I want to build a skirmish level game around 35mm scale SciFi. I'll get back to it again. Maybe a solo game? I dunno yet.

I spent most of my design time this week chasing a World of Warcraft role playing game. Now to be ranked among my most disappointing purchases of the year. Maybe even longer. The World of Warcraft RPG is barely more than D&D 3.5 with pictures from WoW. Most disappointing for a project that could have been so much more. There is such a whole huge bin of really cool world there, and they totally wasted it.

I'll just build my own. Except that that's a MAJOR chore, for very little return.

See it's a solo game, based on the Space Hulk map tiles. You put pictures of the tiles on playing cards and shuffle a deck. Then you deal out a map. Your squad or hero has to get from one end to the other. Add a random timer and a flow chart for baddies and -boom- your rockin'.

Yes, I deliberately mashed those two thoughts together. That's just how I think sometimes.

SF Minis

I think I have a basic framework idea for an easy table top war game. It came to me quickly, so I need to sort it all out. And write it down. Some times simply shining the light on an idea can make it go away.