PDA

View Full Version : Community idea's for a possible SW:GB 2


Pages : [1] 2

Darth Windu
06-27-2002, 04:26 PM
This thread has been opned to collect the idea's from the community on what they would like to (or like not to) see in a possible SW:GB 2. Before i post my idea's though, i would just like to ask people to refrain from posting anything derogatory about anyone else on the board, and to keep the discussion to this topic.

1. Engine - Age of Mythology
2. Walls - make it so the ONLY units who can fire over walls are air, anti-air, artillery, canons, cruisers, and grenade troopers.
3. Unique Units - exapnd the number of unique units for each side, and add the Republic Gunship as the second unique unit alongside the Jedi Starfighter (please dont discuss this issue here)
4. Change the graphics of the Jedi to look more like...Jedi. Also, have the colour's of the lightsabre's for Jedi a 50/50 mix of green and blue. Change the Sith Master to have a lightsabre (think Dooku) and make the Sith Knight's sabre a single.
5. Keep the current civs, but change them so that some are denied certain weapons (ie no rebel/naboo assualt mech, no trade fed/empire adv fighter/bomber etc)
6. Change the graphics so that the canon unit is the ultimite form of upgrade (ie adv fighter = x-wing, N-1, TIE intercept etc) just to make the game more fun and 'realistic'.

Now i would like to see the idea's of everyone else here...

polaris_crd
06-27-2002, 08:04 PM
I like your idea about the walls. Ground units shouldn't be able to fire through them until the wall is destroyed. Except for cannons, artilery, ect.

Hopefully Lucas can cut another deal with ES and Microsoft to use their engine for AoM.

Here are some suggestions for the civs

Trade Federation- Their battledroids should cost less, be faster to produce, and slightly weaker. Trade Federation should be able to have economic advantages over the other civs. After all they are the "Trade" Federation. The Trade Federation's assualt mech should have a lower attack then most civ's mechs but be able to produce battledroids from their mech. All the Trade Federation buildings would be slightly weaker but cheaper to build then most civs. The TF should also have the droid control ship as a capital ship and be able to add to the population limit.

The Empire. The Empire should be good with Air and have the star destroyer as a capital ship. Their star destroyers have a good attack and can also produce TIE fighters. The Empire's At-At can hold more men then other mechs and they add power to the At-At.

The Rebels. The rebels should have the strongest troops and buildings. They should also get good fighters but weaker capital ships. But Rebels can produce Jedi.

Jedi should be on the top of the tech tree. They should be like a super powerful unit that doesn't have a unit that can pick em off so easily. (Bounty Hunters)

simwiz2
06-28-2002, 12:07 AM
I think they should make their own engine. It might silence the reviewers who call the game an AoK ripoff. And if they do use the AoM engine they should at least make it less obvious, by making the units different. One can tell immmediately that pummels=rams, cannon=trebuchet, fortress=castle, turret=tower, and it shouldnt be that way IMO.

Also they should keep all existing civs and add some more, such as the new republic and a few others.

Compa_Mighty
06-28-2002, 12:32 AM
I don't think they'll do SWGB 2, and honestly, I'd prefer another expansion pack with say, 6 more civs, even if we had to pay for it as a new game. That would leave the game with 14 civs, it would be just great.

Paragon_Leon
06-28-2002, 01:33 AM
i'd say keep the current engine, but make units more accurate in scale amongst themselves. That was one of the biggest gripes reviewers had. (i.e.: make men smaller)

also, i'd recommend some kind of veteran-system for units and buildings that survive attacks.

oh, and create complete living and breathing cities that you can walk in and smash.

am i expecting too much ?

Fishflesh
06-28-2002, 01:41 AM
GB2 it wil be no aom engine

Kryllith
06-28-2002, 02:18 AM
Said it before, I'll say it again: Multiplayer (co-op and/or vs.) campaign/scenarios. And toss the multiplayer option into the campaign/scenarios editor too so players can design them. Oh, and in vs. campaigns, design winner/loser scenario trees with multiple endings so the path of scenarios taken through a campaign is determined by who wins the individual scenarios.

Kryllith

Jedi Dad
06-28-2002, 09:26 AM
If they do an other game, it would make better sense to use the AOM or some other RTS engine. The reasons:

1) Engine will be well honed and mostly bug free by the time they get it.

2) Lots of development time and money saved by not building your own engine

3) Using an engine that lots of gamers have used leads to familiarity and allows more gamers to get upto speed. Tweaks can be made, but not a complete overhaul. Trying to be to cute or unique with the UI can lead to disaster.

4) Don't listen to reviews that complain about being a clone but with different units. If the game plays well and is enjoyable, that's what should matter. After all, look at all the doom clones we have today (unreal, half-life...). Yea the graphics are better, but it is still a doom clone. I personally think reviewers have played so many games that they all run together and they have a hard time getting excited about certain types of games. Another reason to disregard some reviews(ers) is that months in advance they will hype a games uniqueness and then complain and rate it poorly because it didn't have the same features as the current standards. MAKE UP YOUR MIND!! Enought now on this subject.

5) having a ready made engine allows you to start testing different art, units and AI early so as to be better balanced in the end.

Only good can come from using a pre-exsisting engine IF you pick the right one. Ensemble has a good RTS track record and unless they shoot themselves in the foot, the AOM engine would be a safe and successful bet.

The bigger issue would be is this: Is there enough new or unique material to even create a SWBG 2? I don't really think so. I would like alot of enhancements and civs made to the existing game now rather than a new game. Build a strong base now so a SWBG 2 can be released after Episode 3.

Compa_Mighty
06-28-2002, 10:19 AM
I agree with ya Jedi Dad

theStupid1
06-28-2002, 11:50 AM
I would like to see mass destruction attacks along the lines of those portrayed Red Alert 2. You wouldn't need to add capital ships to the game just add a tech that calls in aerial bombardment from the capital ships in space, they would cause massive damage over a large radius! And have it regenerate over time. I think that would be awesome! It would open up several new avenues of strategy! :deathstar :deathii: :deathstar The empire could call in a small scale of the death star laser, each tech would have its own capital ship. It would be beautiful.

Crazy_dog no.3
06-28-2002, 03:49 PM
OK, I will now once again be the one to annoy everyone with my stupid remarks.

1) Engine: AOM - Well I suppose it could work.
2) OK
3) sorry but ...
The gunship would be way to powerful as a second UU. It could only work as a cheat unit or a hero.
4) There is no real argument against this, exept it just doesn't look right.
5) Why deny some civs certain wepons? Just becuase we didn't see them in the movies doesn't mean they don't exist! This would also make the game unbalanced. The less developed civs, like Wookiees, would have a disadvantage.
Besides, even if there is no Naboo assualt mech, it still looks like a Naboo vehicle.
6) The Cannon is stricly a ground vehicle. The airborne cannon is the cruiser.

Darth Windu
06-28-2002, 04:09 PM
Crazydog - just remember that this is a thread where people can put down their views (ie, what you would like to see), not a forum for debate (i would like to keep the thread as civil as possible). Oh yeah, what did you mean by 'the canon is strickly a ground unit'? I know that, and it still would be able to fire over walls, besides I put down the cruiser and air cruiser as well. Having said that, i would like to clarify some of my previous comments.

1. The use of the AoM engine would give continuality for players of the first game, gameplay wouldnt be radically different from the first game, and the game could be played by more people, faster.
2. I dont think anyway has disagreed about this, self-explanitary anyway
3. Istill like this idea, but of course they would all have to be balanced, and i for one would LOVE to see a balanced gunship in the game.
4. This has been rather annoying to me since i got the game...
5. The main reason for this is to have greater diversity with the different civs. Peronally, i think 8 civs is plenty, but perhaps merge the gungans/naboo and the trade federation/confederacy and add two new civs. The exlcusion of certain units from certain sides would help to make every side very different, and would reflect their abilities (ie rebels on the run, no time for heavy, slow weapons)
6. Another thing that's annoyed me since i got the game, besides, i love seeing N-1's and TIE do combat...

DarthMaulUK
06-28-2002, 05:33 PM
When Lucasarts used the AoK game engine for this game, it still had lots of bugs in it on release. Since the AoK engine was 'tried and tested' I thought it was unforgiveable to release a game with some of these bugs.

Clone Campaigns has certainly improved the game in lots of areas and the addition of toy box units makes it alot more fun.

AoM seems to be coming along very well but I think Lucasarts need to move away from Battlegrounds and focus on a new Rebellion/Supremacy game.

Rebellion was a SW Space RTS game will so many options of attack, spying and was very addictive. I played it for 3 years and still do sometimes.

Personally, I think that this is the best SW strategy game out there. Ok, it had bad graphics and a silly control interface for commanding battles but it was excellent.

Why? The element of suprise. Using the spy net work to find out about your opponent, not knowing if the information is correct or, by the time you arrive to attack - out of date.

I even set a trap like in Return of the Jedi. Allowed my opponent a chance to attack my HQ planet (which I left undefended) but a couple of days before he arrived to attack me, I moved my entire fleet over - so engage him in battle. Of course, he had no idea of my fleet until he arrived.

So, it took hours to play it - but thats strategy for you. Battlegrounds lacks strategy in alot of areas - especially with 'rushing'. It's like a mad race to see who can hit Tech 2 or 3 then start attacking - game ends inside 30 minutes.

Ok, so i was pretty good at Rebellion but thats not the main reason why I liked it so much - it offered alot more than battlegrounds does in terms of real strategy.

People want to have long battles and struggles where the balance of power can shift during the game.

Rebellion 2!!!!

DMUK

Fishflesh
06-28-2002, 07:01 PM
I totaly agree that Rebellion was one of the best RTS games out there!

and i stil play that somethimes online
the only problem whit rebellion was bad reviews and 1 online game thakes to long almost a hole day to finish
somethimes even more!

but i sertenly agree that a rebellion 2
would be a goddes gift

only with the bad reviews i dont think tay wil make a Rebellion 2
maby a MIX of Rebellion and GB would be a good idea!

Rebellion is 1 game that is forever in my hart!

J-5
06-28-2002, 10:23 PM
I thought you'd never ask.....





1) A unique engine- 2d or 3d, but 2d allows for a larger pop cap right?

2) There shouldn't be more races than players available (such an 8 player game with 16 races). The same races are fine with me, but more diversity is a MUST. There is no way a naboo trooper should be capable of taking down a 8 ft tall wookie or a super battledroid. But he can because all troopers are created equal.
Trooper Diversity examples:
- Gungan troops can camouflage with trees or swamp marsh as long as they stand still, which renders them semi-invisible to the enemy (can see slight outline, but mostly invisible).
- Wookie troops have a melee attack, more hp, and move faster (in early tech lvls, later they get the bowcaster).

3) Aircraft changes:
- they land when they are idle, which means ground units can sneak up and attack them. If enemy unit enters the l-o-s of the aircraft, it will take off.
- they swarm around the unit they attack.
- transports can hold 10 troops, 5 mechs, 3 heavies etc

4) More unique units.. no two units should be alike :mad: !
Example:
- Empire get star destroyer, it can create tie fighters which attack for it (Protoss Carrier), also has a cannon used for building destruction (no other cruiser get these abilities).

5) Bounty Hunters cost carbon, food, AND nova, and are less effective against Jedi. They should get a special ability to cast a net over target unit, which entraps that unit for set period of time.

6) Jedi get spells such as force lightning, force speed, and such.

7) Frigates get repeater-like weapons that mows down troops.

8) Anti-Air units can attack ground, but are best used vs. air.

9) All Buildings are LESS DURABLE. And speed build come with some type of price.

10) Less workers are needed to field an army, prefabs equal +10 pop, not +5.

11) All units get unique names... Stormtroopers are called stormtroopers, not trooper recruit, etc.

12) Races receive some type of identity. Example "I'll chose this race for its rushing abilities, this race can mass units better, this race has the most raw power, this is a hit-and-run race, blah, blah, blah".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with all of Polaris_crd's ideas.
I agree with all of Darth windu's ideas except about the lightsabers.

Kryllith
06-28-2002, 10:36 PM
The ability to suggest treaties... opponents who will give you materials or join your side if you quit pounding them....

Kryllith

CorranHorn328
06-29-2002, 12:35 PM
I like the current engine, outdated or not. I agree that I'd rather see another X-Pack with more civs, units, and heroes.

Darth Windu
06-29-2002, 12:46 PM
nl_ackbar, darthmaulUK - i would appreciate it if the posts in this thread were kept relevant to the thread, that being a place for people to post what they would like to see in a SW:GB 2, not about other games.

To everyone - there are some great ideas coming out here, keep them flowing...

Also i definately agree with many of J-5's points, such as names like 'stormtrooper recruit' instead of 'trooper recruit', and 'stromtrooper' instead of 'trooper'. Makes the game more 'starwars' to me.

Darth Windu
06-29-2002, 05:29 PM
some points i forgot to put down-

7. Make the repeater trooper a deployed hvy trooper
8. make air transports have different unit quotas (ie 5 infantry, or 4 strike mechs, or 3 mech destroyers/heavy weapons, or 2 assault mechs etc)

more to come soon...

Sithmaster_821
06-30-2002, 07:12 AM
Yeah! Another pointless thread by Darth Windu!

I doubt that Lucasarts will make their upcoming RTS a sequel to Battlegrounds. Sequels are usually made when the name is well known and will draw people. If the make a fresh name for the game with civs that have a unique set of units with different purposes. A very different game that is as balanced and as fun as GB would be excellent.



nl_ackbar, darthmaulUK - i would appreciate it if the posts in this thread were kept relevant to the thread

Seeing the current stae of your other threads, this one is a closer on topic.

Darth Windu
06-30-2002, 02:15 PM
Sithmaster - this thread is for the community to express their idea's about what THEY want to see if a sequel, not a forum to abuse other members. If you have nothing constructive to say, dont say anything at all. You, and everyone else, are most welcome to express your wants for a sequel, but please do not post anything else here.

Sithmaster_821
07-01-2002, 06:23 AM
I doubt that Lucasarts will make their upcoming RTS a sequel to Battlegrounds. Sequels are usually made when the name is well known and will draw people. If the make a fresh name for the game with civs that have a unique set of units with different purposes. A very different game that is as balanced and as fun as GB would be excellent.
this thread is for the community to express their idea's about what THEY want to see if a sequel, not a forum to abuse other members. If you have nothing constructive to say, dont say anything at all. You, and everyone else, are most welcome to express your wants for a sequel, but please do not post anything else here.
I was submitting ideas. I just said they probably wont call it a sequel, but instead make a new franchise. SWGB was Lucasarts testing the water. Now that they know what makes a great RTS, then they will be able to start fresh with their OWN state-of-the-art engine, incorporating many of the GB ideas with more mainstream ones like unique unit sets so AT-ATs can be AT-AT and you can finally get your beloved gunship.

jcb231
07-01-2002, 10:04 AM
Before you read my post, know that I am not a huge Expanded Universe fan, I just think these civs would be fun and different to play in GB...

I think that SWGB2 should have:

-20 Civilizations (16 released in SWGB2, 4 in an X-pack)
I. The Galactic Empire
II. The Rebel Alliance
III. The Royal Naboo
IV. The Gungans
V. The Trade Federation
VI. The Wookies
VII. The Confederacy Of Independent Systems
VIII. The Galactic Republic
plus...
IX. The Geonosians (split off from confederacy, not like in CC...could send out picadors to capture animals, etc)
X. Hutt Clan Desilijic (Jabba The Hutt's forces as a full fledged civ)
XI. Bespin Security (Cloud City people: can build in the air, have superior air units, etc)
XII. The Mon Calamari Defense Force (Admiral Ackbar's ppl...can build underwater, etc.)
XIII. Black Sun (like in Shadows of the Empire)
XIV. The Ewoks (technologically simple, but have many advantages like the ability to move through forest areas, stealth, and fast reproductive rates, etc...air units are gliders or simple blimp-like vehicles, boats are sailboats with catapults, flaming arrows, etc)
XV. The Maruaders (like in the Ewoks movies...stranded band of galactic pirates with mix of high and low technology...were stupid in movie but would be fun to play in GB)
XVI. Trandoshan Slavers (like in some campaigns, but as a full civ...could enslave other civ's workers, etc.)
plus 4 x-pack civs....
XVII. The New Republic (more advanced than rebel alliance, sort of a combo of republic and rebels)
XVIII. The Imperial Remnant (rebelified version of Empire...lower tech, better hit and fade abilities, etc)
XIX. The Yuzahn Vong (much like the Zerg from Starcraft)
XX. The Karrde Organization (a smugglers union....trade advantages, etc)

In addition to all of these civs, I think there should be a better control interface that allows for more specific mission commands...such as ordering a bounty hunter to attempt to assasinate one hero character and then retreat immediately, or ordering a bomber to hit and fade several targets in a row and then fly back to base, or ordering a slaver to capture some workers and flee while another troop destroys an animal nursery and confiscates the banthas...you get the idea.

I also think there should be more spy and secret agent units....bothan spies and the like that could sneak in undetected and gain recon info or sabotage stuff.

I also think that any civ that can make standard battle droids...Confed, Geonosians, or TF, should be able to research an option that allows the manufacture of two droids at once (sort of like zerglings in starcraft) for a slight bit more of a cost than just one droid....example 60 food for two droids versus 50 for one or whatever.

The rest of my wish list rounds out like this....
-fully rendered cut scenes
-more toybox units
-the ability to "hire" bounty hunters and mercs rather than building them....you hire a specific hunter for a single job or for a merc detail, expending only nova crystals
-more unique units for civs and also unique techs and special skills for each civ, such as the ability for Bespin forces to pull gas from the air to make ore or something like that...maybe Gungans could cross water by swimming, etc
-"space" units that fight in a plane above the ground and could be used sparingly for orbital bombardment or to attack each other
-the ability for soldiers to storm and capture enemy buildings.
-increased team bonuses
-better balancing on the aircruisers, so that you can't win just by building a swarm of them
-more sensible civ designs, like no human jedi for the gungans or wookies, etc....perhaps even replace Ewok and Gungan Jedi temples with some sort of shamans
-undersea farms
-improved AI, with more intelligent choices and more levels of difficulty
-environmental factors....and the ability to adjust your play to them. Imagine snow storms on hoth, dust storms on Tatooine, lava flows on a volanic world, etc....certain civs could, for example, build special cold-weather troops that would have an advantage in snow, like the snowtroopers in Empire Strikes Back, or special desert troops and so on.
-the ability to allign with "mini-civs" such as Jawas or Tusken Raiders or so on
-A simpler, easier to use scenario editior with a tutorial explaing how it works
-Larger maps, also maps based on "actual" SW locales that are layed out just like in the movies
-population limit of 400
-no housing required for droids
-Jedi should not be able to turn droids.
-Only appropriate units can shoot over walls.
-Units can shoot while moving....allowing for better hit and fades, starfing runs, etc.
-troops can "dig in" to make trenches...or trenches could be built by workers or something. Basically I'd like to have seperate repeater troops that could make little machine gun nests to support trench warfare, WWI style.
-better diplomacy options
-troop names that actually are the name of the unit...ie "Stormtrooper"
-more units per transport....also better scale on units
-air units that don't hover all the time......landing pads or something?

That's about it....yeah, I know nobody probably read it all but I just got carried away....I've given this a lot of thought ever since I first played GB.

Man....I've been thinking about this for too long now. Too bad it'll be FOREVER before it ever happens, IF it ever happens.

In the meantime, how bout another little x-pack featuring the Hutt civ, the Mon Calamari or Bespin civ, and some general civ enhancements and such? I'd stop my whining for that, good Lucasarts people.

Let me know what everyone thinks......how about some ideas for more unique units or special civ abilities or techs, people?

Sithmaster_821
07-01-2002, 11:25 AM
Lonnnnnngggg post. Hi, welcome to the forums here.

Doubt Lucasarts will add that many civs because of overlap, but a few more than those we have couldnt hurt.

I like your ideas though. It would make the game more diverse for the civs they do include. However, some of your ideas would add a bit too much micro.

Welcome again!

Oh and Windu, since you're so upset about people going off topic, I'll do exactly what you want and address your ideas at the top:

1. Own engine please. One of the main reasons the community is so small is that they copied the engine.
2. Make walls way too unbalanced and it makes them hard to defend.
3. Please dont mention your gunship in yet another thread!
4. I agree that there should be multi colored sabers but Dooku was just a knight in the sith order.
5. It would be better if they included a unique set of units per civ so that you dont have to worry if this unit isnt exactly like the generic one (eg. you and your gunship). Also it differenciates itself from battlegrounds if you include a different unit balance.
6. Read 5
7. Make repeaters separate in the other game and dont ask them to screw with our current one.
8. Just like before, good in the other game, hard to implement in this one. Also for sea transportation too. Always wondered how they could fit 5 ATATs in a trannie but only 5 troops.

Crazy_dog no.3
07-01-2002, 03:39 PM
BTW guys what do u want the engine to be like?

DarthMaulUK
07-01-2002, 05:57 PM
There will be a patch released either sometime this week or early next week for Clone Campaigns and addresses a few balance issues in the game.


I have some details but I am not allowed to release them yet, so watch out for the thread.

As for my thread Windu, it was my view that LA should move away from SWGB. Maybe I should have put my reasons in but although there is still a chance of another add-on pack, but it won't happen as LA have not mentioned it in their up coming releases.

Clone campaigns was popular as it had Episode II content. As for a SWGB 2 - I am yet to be convinced by 3-D RTS games - although the new Medievil Total War engine looks great (makers of Shogun) and maybe the engine used for Cossacks.

Remember, the engine has to allow to you control many units in a short space. One thing I would LOVE to see removed from SWGB is the farming. Totally pointless. Shelters could be counted as farms and yield food as it becomes a chore having to re-farm when they have become useless - something you forget to do in the heat of a battle.

Also, SWGB 2 should remove the ancient way the units march into battle. Using medievil formations should be ditched in favour of maybe smaller squads which don't need to move around in a formation as such.

DMUK
www.galacticbattles.com/clonecampaigns

MM-86
07-01-2002, 06:37 PM
The trade federation should have better aircraft, and the droid starfighters should be able to fly down and walk on the surface.

Replace the trade federation worker droid OX9 with the PK-droid.

Trade federation assault mechs should have place for 20 infantry units instead of 10, after a cheap research, "Droid rack" or something.

Trade federation mech destroyers should have doubled attacks attacks after a research, "Proton torpedos"(?).

Imperial AT-AT should have a shield after a very expensive upgrade.

Trade federation navy should be bad.

And most units should be able to fire while moving.

Well, thats all for now.

Darth Windu
07-01-2002, 06:54 PM
good idea's everyone, i'm glad that everyone (well almost) is getting in and posting their idea's.

sithmaster - funnily enough, i actually agree with some of your ideas. With the Sith part of my original post, not to worried about that, but i do want the Jedi change, also if a new engine can make things more unique, and add the gunship im all for it :). Also, of course there would have to be changes to walls, i just find them somewhat useless, it would also increase the importance of the units that can fire over walls, and of course i find it a little ...odd that a trooper can fire straight through a wall at another trooper.

darthmaulUK - i dont mind you posting that, i was only making my statement because it seemed that your previous post was all about that rebellion game. Also, i would like SW:GB 2, if released, to be released after episode 3 has been released, so we can take advantage of all of the movies and units.

More ideas-
-keep the 8 races, but merge the gungans/naboo, and add the hutt's as a playable race (sandcrawlers, jawa's, mounted sandpeople etc)

Fishflesh
07-01-2002, 07:01 PM
Souldent this tread be in the develpers form?????

Darth Windu
07-01-2002, 07:28 PM
um...no. It is a thread for SW:GB player's to express their views on what they would like to see in a possible SW:GB2. How would we be able to find out the views of SW:GB players in the developers forum?

jcb231
07-01-2002, 09:11 PM
I'm curious as to why so many people seem married to the idea of 8 races only. Is this some sort of magic number? Age of Empires I and II both had more than 8 races...who cares if there are only 8 players in a game? I can tell you that rarely do I find 8 player games in which every person picks a different race anyway, unless that was specifically requested in the rules at the start of the game. Maybe having 20 races is a little impractical, but isn't this a wish list sort of thread anyway (speaking of which, c'mon people...wish a little more...everyone's wish lists are so simple)? I think the game, IF its ever made, should have at least 12 races, so as to give a little variety to games. I also don't care if there's some overlap between races...I think that adds "realism" as some of the races have similar units and methods...its not like they're exact clones of each other, they're just tweaked enough to change a player's tactics. AoE/AoK had a TON of civ overlap, and no one seemed to complain there.

Basically the thing I'm most annoyed by in SWGB is the lack of a Hutt civ....I mean, c'mon....Wookies? Chewbacca was really the only element of Wookie culture to appear in the movies at all. Even the Mon Calamari had several memebers of their race, some of their ships, etc appear in the movies. Not that the Wookies aren't fun to play, but overlooking the Hutts for the sake of Wookies was a mistake.

I also DO NOT think that Gungans and Naboo should be combined. The cultures are shown as being very distinct in Episode I, and I think the differences are clear enough to warrant two civilizations. Sure, they are allies in the movie, but that doesn't mean they are one homogenous culture. I also think, as per earlier in my post, that the last thing the game needs is LESS civs.

jcb231
07-01-2002, 09:16 PM
Oh and Sithmaster?

Just out of curiosity, which of my ideas do you think would be too much micro?

I'm not challenging you or anything, I'm just curious so maybe I can change something around to try to figure out a better way it could be done.

jcb231
07-01-2002, 11:57 PM
I've got a couple more ideas to throw out there....

What if there were traps? Like minefields, or the crazy Ewok traps from Return of the Jedi? It might be a cool way to protect your perimeter or guard a narrow passage thru the forest...ambush central. The spider mines in Starcraft were a great idea and its a shame they haven't carried over to many RTS games.

Also, what if, as part of the correction to the walls problem, certain civs or units could scale walls or dig under them? Maybe Wookies and Ewoks or such could all scale walls, whereas only special commandos or some such from other civs could do it. And maybe Geonosians could burrow under the walls easily, or bury themselves in the ground somehow.

Man, I love these sorts of threads. Fun to play "What if?"

DarthMaulUK
07-02-2002, 12:05 AM
If SWGB 2 was to be released after episode 3 - there is NO WAY on earth it can use the Age Of Empires game engine. It would be far too old and by then RTS games will be into 3-D.

So, if LA are planning another RTS star wars game it should be:

1) Produced by Garry Gaber (cool guy and has made the 2nd best SW RTS game - first being rebellion/supremacy)

2) 3-D
3) Have more of a Star Wars feel to it


There you go
DMUK
www.galacticbattles.com

jcb231
07-02-2002, 12:28 AM
Even more ideas from me.....

-"Officers" that slightly boost the reaction time, coordination, and "intelligence" of the troopers around them. Promotions could be earned by field experience, bought at the command center for a high cost, or perhaps some officers could be constructed directly, sort of like an ROTC, but very expensive. The cheap way to get promotions would be to survive a lot of battles.

-The ability to pirate trade routes by intercepting and capturing or destroying cargo ferries.

-"Hover Trains" that could haul large amounts of trade goods, resources, troops, etc alond pre-determined routes. Just like real trains, they could not change course and would be easily destroyed if an enemy broke up the route or attacked the train. They would just be a way of easily moving large numbers of items in peaceful areas. Along these lines, I think that tribute should have to physically travel to your ally.

-Ground-based Ion cannons that could temporarily disable air cruisers or large space vehicles (not small fighters/bombers, etc) This would give your units time to escape or attack the cruiser at leisure.


And posters, how about some actual GAMEPLAY ideas instead of just endless debate over the engine type or when a sequel might come out? I'm sure if we all pool our heads we can come up with some amazing ideas here.

Sithmaster_821
07-02-2002, 12:59 AM
jcb-The more options you give units, the more micro is involved through holding keys/hitting buttons. Also, they were going to add a Hutt civ into CC but they ran out of time and wanted to stay consistent with the AOTC theme.
The ability to pirate trade routes by intercepting and capturing or destroying cargo ferries.
They tried doing that in AoK:TC but it didnt work out right."Officers" that slightly boost the reaction time, coordination, and "intelligence" of the troopers around them. Promotions could be earned by field experience, bought at the command center for a high cost, or perhaps some officers could be constructed directly, sort of like an ROTC, but very expensive. The cheap way to get promotions would be to survive a lot of battles.
I dont know about every one else, but i dont like those moral/commander helps moral RTS's. Also, that whole idea about gaining units through promonition was in AoM, but they cut it because it didnt give the player control of when and where they get specefic units. But they said that they kept a part of that idea for the Norse herisirs (Greg Street hinted it would be revealed in the Odin Showcase this Friday)
DMUK, i agree. This game has to feel less like a medival make over and more like Star Wars

jcb231
07-02-2002, 01:17 AM
Thanks for the input, sithmaster!

Perhaps I should clarify....
None of these "special" actions would be necessarry to perform. They would just be availalbe if a player WANTED to use them. So if a player wanted to simply click and attack, they could, wheras another player could micro-plan an elaborate offensive.

I'm sure the pirating thing could work if someone tried hard enough.

And the officers thing would be subtle....a player would still build and research troopers, trooper recruits, heavy troopers, etc.
The difference would be that say you sent 50 stormtroopers into battle....3 return. You hook those 3 up with another battalion and send them out again, maybe only 1 survives. He would have gained "experience" for his kill tallies, and could be considered a "Stormtrooper Officer" who would slightly boost his skills and those immediately around him or oredered under his command. Basically the only way you would notice is that if you put him head to head with a novice stromtrooper he would beat it, and his troops would have better target prioritizing a be a bit more orderly in their assaults. It would, like so many of my ideas, just be a subtle, but hopefully cool, little touch. Maybe a light change in the units' icon could refelct his rank, such as colored stripes on the clonetroopers. Basically the player would still have complete control over the types of units produced, just some of those troops would improve a little bit with experience...just a little bit.

While we're discussing changes that are largely cosmetic, I think that the appearnce of Jedi, Bounty Hunters, etc should be a bit varied.....some alien jedi, various boutny hunters etc....maybe just a few per civ. Maybe also female troops for Rebels or such. That would add just a little more variety to the game.

Crazy_dog no.3
07-02-2002, 01:26 AM
Ok, I'm back :evil1:

1) Merge Ganguns and Naboo?! WTF?
2)I like the Officer idea
3)jcb, The reason for less civs than AoK is AoK used less art. There were 5 castes (with the X-Pack) : Mezo-American, Mongol/Hun, European, Oreintal and Middle-Eastern. So GB already contains more art than AoK AND it's X-Pack

Sithmaster_821
07-02-2002, 01:30 AM
Not to mention the fact that AoK uses a generic unit art for all its units whereas SWGB has six different sets of unit art, and the xpack adds two more.

jcb231
07-02-2002, 01:37 AM
Yeah, I understand why it's difficult to make more civs, I just don't understand why any one wouldn't WANT more civs, unless of course you're the poor schmuck assigned to programming them.

I think that while we're on the "more civs" subject, two more civs to add to my list would be cool.

XXI--The Corellians (would have amazing and cheap air strength, piloting skills, powerful air cruisers. Would have weaker troops and navy, would also have stealth cargo ships (blockade runners) that could fly)

XXII--The Sith Empire (Ancient Empire shown in comic books....would be primitve in some ways but have phenomenal dark side abilities and the ability to enslave workers)

Also, I think that the ability to mine spice would be great...only "illegal" civs could mine it as it is a drug, but they would gain huge cash bonuses from it. However, it would be exceedingly rare and would eventually kill the workers that collect it.

That's it for now.....I'm around this computer for work practically all day so I'm sure I'll come up with more. Toss out those ideas, people!

jcb231
07-02-2002, 02:12 AM
Oh, oh!

Another idea.

What if workers could "harness" beast of burden animals like dewbacks or banthas and use them to increase the amount of materials they can carry?

Or what if thee were special mining vehicles, like mobile versions of the carbon processing center or some such that could process and collect materials? These could be very expensive and slow moving things.

Along those same lines, I think it would be cool if utility trawlers had more uses....like the ability to gather carbon, nova, and ore from some type of underwater sources, or build underwater buildings for certain civs, like the gungans and the mon calamari.

A special type of flying worker would be cool too....maybe just for the Bespin civilization or something.

Also, I think that having two Faambas together would be cool, as they could reinforce each other like in the movie.

Later.

Crazy_dog no.3
07-02-2002, 05:12 AM
OK u are talking right now. I also do not understand why players WONT want more civs. I was simply explaining WHY the current situation is.:)


BTW u can edit posts to put more stuff into them. It will make the mods think better of u.;)

Compa_Mighty
07-02-2002, 05:57 AM
Originally posted by Crazy_dog no.3
OK u are talking right now. I also do not understand why players WONT want more civs. I was simply explaining WHY the current situation is.:)


BTW u can edit posts to put more stuff into them. It will make the mods think better of u.;)

I agree, Crazy Dog, we need betwen 2 and 6 new races.

jcb231
07-02-2002, 06:02 AM
I would like, at a minimum, the 8 current civs plus 4 to 6 more. Ideally, there would be somewhere around 30 to 40 races but that will never ever happen.

And yeah, I should have just edited my posts.

Darth Windu
07-02-2002, 03:35 PM
I am opposed to the addition of more races for one simple reason. Variety (and balanced, and distinctiveness). Ok, to explain, i think that at the moment, some races (Rebels and Republic) are to similar already, not trying to offend anyone, but about 20 races is insane. What i would prefer is to have about 8 races (10 max) but make them have bigger differences to each other, so that each has their own distinctive playing style, that would be impossible with 20 races. The only reason i suggested the gungan/naboo mix was to give a slot to another race (hutts i want) and i chose those two because they are from the same planet, and would now to working together.

Crazy_dog no.3
07-02-2002, 03:39 PM
I see your point. But there might be 12 civs instead of 20. AoK even had 13+

Darth Windu
07-02-2002, 03:53 PM
Ok, ill put it a little differently, i will support the addition of ANY number of new civs (as long as the hutts are one) as long as they are SIGNIFFICANTLY DIFFERENT from the existing civs.

jcb231
07-02-2002, 08:05 PM
I think that many many many civs could be made....although I can think of only about 16-22 total that I would really want.

I think it is very easy to make civs that offer different playing options and experiences. That is why I think SWGB2 should offer a wider array or civ-specific abilities, so as to further vary the gameplay.

But on the flip side, I don't see why it matters if two civs are a little bit similar, its not like you're paying by the civ (and besides, aren't we just imagining the dream game here?)....any difference is still a difference, and it adds a little variety, and no one's forcing you to play a civ you don't like. In a perfect world there would be thousands of civs, each one custom tailored to be exactly what each player wants down to the slightest detail, but all I'm saying is that about double the current number would greatly improve the game.

To be perfectly honest, I think that even if civs were just a little bit different in terms of gameplay, the cosmetic changes alone in the appearance of the races would be cool. And really, isn't the Star Wars look of the game half the fun of playing GB? That's why the toybox is so much fun.

Think of it this way....in a perfect real world war game you would be able to play as every major army on Earth. Of course, many of those armies would be strikingly similar, but that wouldn't negate the fun of having the option....(I want to play Canada!)

I hope that all made some sort of sense....it's early in the morning and I'm a little groggy.

And to get off of this civ debate for a little while (maybe we could start a seperate thread for it?).....what does everyone want to see in terms of unique units or civ-specific skills in a possible sequel?

Darth Windu
07-02-2002, 09:06 PM
"Ideally, there would be somewhere around 30 to 40 races but that will never ever happen."

I'm sorry, but that's just plain silly. If the game had that many races i wouldn't even both buying it, since they would all basically be carbon-copies of each other and really, there is no way you could have 40 races that offer significantly different playing styles from each other, i would say 10 as a max. Also, this thread isnt for a 'dream game' it is what you would like to see in a possible SW:GB 2, but try to be realistic and dont post so many consecutive posts in the future. Thanks.

jcb231
07-02-2002, 10:50 PM
No...your own initial post clearly said this thread was to collect ideas on what the community would LIKE or not LIKE to see in a possible sequel. I'd LIKE to see a lot of civs, and I'd LIKE them to all be different and offer different units, styles of play, special skills, etc. And they could be as varied as you want, use a little imagination. The possibilities for this game really are endless.

And by the way....are you honestly saying that if SWGB2 came out tomorrow with dozens and dozens of civs for a reasonable market price (say, $50 or so) you wouldn't buy it just on that principal?
No one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to play as every civ....or are they? If so you've got problems, my friend. :)

If there's a civ you don't like, you don't have to play it. Simple as that. I for one rarely if ever play as the Wookies, Gungans, or the Rebel Alliance, because I don't like them as much as the others. I'm not saying they shouldn't be in the game, I'm just saying I don't care for them as much as say, the Trade Federation, Republic, Confederacy, Empire, or Naboo.

By your logic, extending into another gaming type, all online FPS style deathmatch games should have only one character to chose from, since essentially the different skins are just cosmetic and don't have any differences from one another.

Let's you and I start another thread to continue this discussion, shall we? I feel like this is turning into a tangent. Let's all get back to sequel wants/don't wants discussion here.

Sithmaster_821
07-03-2002, 10:36 AM
Windu, dont flame people just because they're new.
Jcb, the problem with too many civs is that many civs get left behind. Take AoK for example, no one plays anything in RM but Huns, Mongols, Goths and maybe a few Spanish and British (except simwiz, get over it Koreans are for DMers):) . It would be just like the other civs werent in the game in the first place. Not to mention the fact that they would all be terribly similar, another problem that plagues AoK. SWGB did it right with different equally used but few civs to chose from.

Also, for some of your ideas (like the tribute one), take in acount that gamplay>realism. Tributing isnt very common in games, and when it is done, it is usually needed right away.

Darth Windu
07-03-2002, 01:32 PM
JCB - yes, i am saying that if there were 40 civs i wouldn't bother with the game, since there would be almost no variation at all. As sithmaster said, a lot of civs would get left behind. I also dont see the need for a lot of the civs you are proposing, and also, can you imagine the amount of time it would take to create art for 40 different civs? They would have had to start producing it about a decade ago. This thread is for what people want to see in a future SW:GB 2 like you said, but please try to be realistic in what you're asking for.

Sithmaster - i wasnt flaming anyone, i was stating my opinion on an idea.

Everyone - again, (and this goes for me too) please keeps the posts relevant to the issue at hand, and try to keep everything else off this thread.

jcb231
07-03-2002, 04:11 PM
I should give up. I really should. I should just drop the whole thing about multiple civs because I didn't come here to argue. But I feel like I have to make one last post on it before moving on, hopefully. My wishlist for the game includes 20-22 civilzations (the 40 I brought up was just an idle dream....I realize there's got to be a practical limit somewhere in terms of programming time and artwork). Your wishlist may be different, but don't tell me that someone couldn't make 22 different civs and have them all be different and all offer different play styles and lots of variation...it just shows a lack of imagination.

And to once again state the rather obvious facts, no one forces you to play a civ you don't like. Every civ is going to be liked by someone, so why take that person's favorite away from them? If a civ gets left behind by the hardcore gamers who cares? They're not the only ones who play these games, you know. Some civs will be popular with hardcore folks, some will be popular with casual gamers, some with kids, etc. If someone wants to play as Gungans then dammit they'll play as Gungans, whereas a dozen other people might prefer the Republic. Are you somehow spending your personal time and effort to add civs to the game? No...unless you work for LucasArts, that is. I could see your point in not bothering with the game if they charged more for having 20ish civs, but if they didn't, if it was the same price as a standard game, why would anyone want less? As my final plea I refer to your own quote....

"Ok, ill put it a little differently, i will support the addition of ANY number of new civs (as long as the hutts are one) as long as they are SIGNIFFICANTLY DIFFERENT from the existing civs."

See? You said it yourself....IF they were varied, you would support any number of civs. I'm proposing about 22 civs, all varied, and suddently that's not "ANY number".....weird. I keep refering back to the fact that I am proposing variation in the civs, but you always seem to overlook that when you post and keep saying that there would be no variation. Is that your only concern? If there were 22 varied civs you still wouldn't buy the game? I still don't get it, and I'm not going to get it, so let's all move on....I think we've both stated our case more than enough.

This thread has gone nowhere pretty fast, now hasn't it?

Instead of telling me what you don't want or what can't be done, why doesn't someone post what they would like to see or what they WOULD want in terms of a gameplay ideas...then we can all give some feedback (constructive, hopefully). There was a good but brief round of discussion about the engine, but very little talk of actual gameplay. Am I the only person with a wishlist for this game?

DarthMaulUK
07-03-2002, 06:05 PM
Let's all be a little more civil please here people.



DMUK
www.galacticbattles.com
*** new look coming soon ***

MM-86
07-03-2002, 06:43 PM
Some more ideas from me.

Confederacy.
-geonosian warriors should be able to land and walk on the surface.
-An upgrade for the anti-air mobile, so that it can attack ground targets, but with less effect than against a air target.
-The repeater trooper should look like a normal SUPER battledroid, since they actually got repeaters in the movie already.

Galactic empire.
-Mech destroyer should be very bad and not being affected by mech armor upgrades.(Just watch Ep.6 when 2 logs smashed the AT-ST!).

Gungans.
-A expencive upgrade that allows infantry to swim.
-Underwater naval yards.
-Blue colour on their "boomas".
-bad aircraft.

Trade federation.
-Battle droids should be able to undeploy into a non-attack stance, so that you can fill transports with double as much droids.
-The best mech-destroyer in the game.
-Special upgrade for the strike mech, "STAP engines"10% faster.

I will come with more...

jcb231
07-03-2002, 10:28 PM
YES!

Now we're talking.....

I agree about the landed troopers....I wonder if these could be a seperate, cheaper troop or just an option in the existing ones?

Definately upgrade the anti-air mobile for confeds....in sort of the reverese of how the AT AT was upgraded for CC. In the movie the halifire droids can shoot an AT-TE...they should be able to do so in the game. After all, that's why the At-Ats got the upgrade...people complained it wasn't like the movie.

Repeater Troops as Super Battle Droids....I've actually thought that the Super battle droids should be seperate from the regular battle droids, and that the confeds should be able to build both like in the movie. It would be cool if the repeaters were seperate from the regular troops and were supers.


I agree with your underwater naval yards for gungans....super cool. I actually think that many civs should have submarines. Mon Cal AND Gungans should be able to swim....I think from the outset rather than an upgrade, though.

Definetly the TF extra droids in the transport thing.

Darth Windu
07-03-2002, 10:59 PM
JCB - i've finished with that discussion, as it goes against my own rules, but i would just like to say that none of my comment were meant to offend you (or anyone else) in any way, and if you were offended by them, i appolagise in advance.

Back to the topic at hand-
I would like to see some terrain changes in the form of-
1. 'rolling hills' instead of the 'stepped hills' we have at the moment, make the terrain 'flow' better and look more natural
2. 'rough seas' or something similar, impassible water terrain

I would also like to see changes so that, for example, the TF's troops are naturally cheaper, quicker to produce, but less hitpoints and attack than most other civs (Republic possibly quicker)

Also, deny some civs units and buildings such as denying the Gungans and Wookie's jedi (like the Macedonians in AoE), deny the rebels the assault mech, deny the empire/tf/confed the advanced combat aircraft upgrades etc to reflect their strengths/weaknesses in the movies better

jcb231
07-03-2002, 11:40 PM
Yes....I'd like to overall terrain improvements. Perhaps as part of a general graphic overhaul.

The rough seas idea is interesting....I suppose if there were submursible units they could dive under it? I wonder if rough seas could change somewhat randomly over the course of the game, like weather.

I agree with no Gungan Jedi. They could have some sort of shaman mystics that could perform some of, but not all, of the jedi functions....ie they would not have lightsabers or cloaking or anything but would be able to convert units and heal troops or something. Wookies could have something similar, as could any other new civs that might not seem right to have jedi.

The only trouble with denying certain civs items is the balance. I suppose, though, that as long as every civ GAINED something, they could trade off for it by being denied something else.

I agree, as I've stated before, that the TF should be able to pump out the troops easily (as should the Confed, and any possible Geonosion civ) the troops would be a little weaker, but they'd have numbers on their side. Once again, think of the zerglings if you're a starcraft fan. The Republic should also have good troop cloning facilities, but not quite at the speed of the droid factories. Clones are shown to be a slow process in the movie. Perhaps some sort of additional Kaminoan upgrades could improve the speed......And while we're at it, why not add a few Kaminoan units? They could act as medics or otherwise enhance the performance of clones around them. Maybe the flying mount seen in the movies could make an appearance.

Also, how about a troop academy building to research advanced troop enhancements and train officers (if, like me, you'd like to see offricer units)....

Kryllith
07-04-2002, 12:50 AM
Originally posted by MM-86
Some more ideas from me.

Confederacy.
-geonosian warriors should be able to land and walk on the surface.
-An upgrade for the anti-air mobile, so that it can attack ground targets, but with less effect than against a air target.
-The repeater trooper should look like a normal SUPER battledroid, since they actually got repeaters in the movie already.
I can see them landing, but I don't really see a point behind it other than to make them more vulnerable since ground attacks would be able to affect them (then again, maybe when they've landed, then AA units couldn't hit them). A decent speed boost for the AA artillery might be good too


Galactic empire.
-Mech destroyer should be very bad and not being affected by mech armor upgrades.(Just watch Ep.6 when 2 logs smashed the AT-ST!).
Laugh! No :P Those were very big logs and they hit the AT-ST just right (like how one might squeeze a soda can). It probably would have had the same affect on an AT-PT or AT-AT (the head at least) if it had hit them the same way too.

Gungans.
-A expencive upgrade that allows infantry to swim.
-Underwater naval yards.
-Blue colour on their "boomas".
-bad aircraft.
Actually their aircraft are bad (though their ability to heal counteracts it). I would like to see the aircraft of others, like the TF and Confed, improved a little. I suppose if you want to Gungan aircraft worse though, you could remove the highest fighter/bomber upgrades. Btw, I like the idea of swimming infantry, especially if they could dive like the gungan frigates do.

Trade federation.
-Battle droids should be able to undeploy into a non-attack stance, so that you can fill transports with double as much droids.
-The best mech-destroyer in the game.
-Special upgrade for the strike mech, "STAP engines"10% faster.
Yeah, maybe special upgrade for the TF Assaults that allows them to carry double droids. I'd have DDs fill up two slots in such a case though (20 troopers or 10 DD or a combination of them).

Kryllith

Crazy_dog no.3
07-04-2002, 01:41 AM
Confids makin' battle driods? CRAP!!!! That would take away the Trade Fed's uniqueness.

jcb231
07-04-2002, 01:55 AM
It wouldn't discount their uniqueness...they'ds still have unique mechs, destroyer droids, and all other units. They would also have unique heavy and repeating troopers since those would be super battle droids for confeds. Basically only two units (recruit and trooper) would overlap, and the confeds would be slightly different anyway (ten years worth of tech later, ya know)....maybe a "standardized parts" tech could be researched that would then allow TF troops to ride in confed allies' transports or something. Could be cool.

MM-86
07-04-2002, 06:52 PM
2 logs wouldn't even scratch a AAT, even if they smashed in from both sides like in Ep.6.

All civs.
-assault mechs should be able to drive/walk through forest.
-the mechs could be a little bit bigger, atleast Wookies, a Wookie infantry unit is almost bigger than a mech destroyer.

Royal Naboo.
-Why have their royal crusaders shield? no shield please. instead they could be cheaper.

I have more to come...but i don't have time right now.

jcb231
07-04-2002, 08:38 PM
Personally, I don't care for the idea of mechs being able to move through forest.....maybe scouts, but mechs seem to big to make it between the trees. I think, though, that Wookie Infantry, and Ewoks Infantry if they were a civ, should be able to move trough the trees.

simwiz2
07-04-2002, 11:33 PM
Half the things now being suggested would be nearly impossible to balance. All civs mechs go through forests? No way! The empire would be unstoppable, and civs that lack good mechs will have mechs hitting their troops from range in the forest and they won't be able to get to the mechs!! Wookiees and Ewok troops go through forest? That would make them unstoppable on forest maps, for example, and useless on flats maps. Having gungan infantry swim might work, but it would only help to make the gungans more of a water-map only civ, while the goal should be to make all civs equally useful on as many map types as possible.

jcb231
07-05-2002, 12:04 AM
I think that giving certain civs bonuses on certain types of terrain would not effect the balance. Every civ would have some sort of special ability, so they'd be even in that regard.

Also, I think that only scouts (possibly for all civs) and only wookie/ewok workers and infantry (no mounties) should be able to move through the woods....but not fire until they hit a clearing, as the lasers would just hit the trees anyway, or they'd be in an invincible spot and that WOULD effect the balance. Imagine though, ways to balance this even farther....Mon Cal/Gungans workers and infantry could swim, Sullustan workers/infantry could burrow into the ground, Bespin workers could fly, etc......maybe not those specifics but you get the idea.

And I don't see why this would make them useless on plains maps....they wouldn't have a disadvantage there, they'd just lose the ability to take advantage of the forests. Also, they wouldn't be stronger just because there were trees, they'd still have to build up a decent army to move through that forest. And troops alone don't make a strong force. It would just provide some cool bonuses here and there. I also don't see why swimming Gungans would make them water map only....they'd be the same civ as before, just with some water perks. You could play them on a desert map if you wanted to.

Kryllith
07-05-2002, 02:11 AM
Originally posted by MM-86
2 logs wouldn't even scratch a AAT, even if they smashed in from both sides like in Ep.6.

All civs.
-assault mechs should be able to drive/walk through forest.

I have more to come...but i don't have time right now.
I'd say it depends on the size of the logs :). And again, I'm only talking about the head, not the body.

I don't know about driving through forests, but I do think they should be given a ground attack ability like artillery, cannons, and bombers. If they're dishing out enough power to accidently blow up trees when they shoot something then they should just be given the option to shoot directly at the forests...

Kryllith

Xirion
07-05-2002, 07:29 PM
Windu your Idea is good

Damn its been edited l;ets just say i dont agree withyour attitude to others :)
*edited by DMUK*

simwiz2
07-05-2002, 11:44 PM
Originally posted by jcb231
And I don't see why this would make them useless on plains maps....they wouldn't have a disadvantage there, they'd just lose the ability to take advantage of the forests. Also, they wouldn't be stronger just because there were trees, they'd still have to build up a decent army to move through that forest. And troops alone don't make a strong force. It would just provide some cool bonuses here and there. I also don't see why swimming Gungans would make them water map only....they'd be the same civ as before, just with some water perks. You could play them on a desert map if you wanted to.

Because... to balance this out they either have to take something away from the civ, or give something to all the other civs. Either way the civ loses ground on maps where its specialty is not useful. You would end up with "ultimate water map civ", an "ultimate forest civ", an "ultimate asteroids/space civ", etc. And the burrowing underground? That means that they could insert an entire force anywhere, unbeknownst to you, in your town, pop up, slaughter all workers, and when your army comes they just go underground again. That would be nearly impossible to balance. Think what 40 uncatchable repeaters could do to a town, just hitting and running over and over again.

jcb231
07-06-2002, 12:29 AM
Ever played Starcraft? Many Zerg forces can burrow into the ground to hide.....perhaps I was misleading in my post. I didn't mean they'd be able to travel underground, just burrow straight down and hide. Although they should be able to tunnel under walls, maybe. But I think every civ should have at least one unit that can go over or under walls.

And yes, every civ WOULD get some sort of a bonus or penalty to balance the game. Perhaps Gungan swimming ability (seeing as how it only effects workers and foot soldiers) would not be that big of an advantage. Strong Imperial Mechs or strong Rebel Air or fast TF manufacturing times could off-set this, especially if the gungans had to wait until they were onshore to attack, and swam slowly....making them very vulnerable while actually in the water.

By the way (and don't take this as an insult, I really want to know)....are you in support of ANY changes to the game for a sequel?

simwiz2
07-06-2002, 11:40 PM
Yes, I think changes are good, but I am just trying to consider how they would affect game balance. IMO giving certain civs benefits that apply to certain maps would cause civs to be very map-specific. If they were small bonuses it could work however. The burrowing underground just to hide and not to move is good, and since it is not really specific to any map it could be balanced across many map types.

I may be opposed to some ideas because I am worried first about game balance. The reason why CC is my 2nd favorite game while AoC now collects dust on my shelf, despite the fact that they are almost duplicates of each other, is game balance. AoC has very poor balance, certain civs useless on all but one type of map (which some of the bonuses mentioned might cause unless carefully balanced), Paladins the all-around uber-unit, fast, high hp, high pierce armor, high attack, high regular armor, etc. Battlegrounds has had, since the beginning, almost perfect balance. In AoC there are 3 civs played by all the experts, and the other 12 or so are n00b civs. I just want to avoid that happening to GB2. If Gungans are the ultimate civ for any map with water in it, Wookies the only civ for densly forested maps, etc, it is poor balance. It would be nice to include noticable similarities to the movie as far as the civs' preference of habitat, but only those that are not map-specific AND can be balanced. The troops burrowing just to hide is a good example. Not necessarily would it be all or no civs having these bonuses. Some could (the balanceable ones), while others get military bonueses to make up for it.

Darth Windu
07-07-2002, 01:15 AM
Well with the swimming Gungan troop's idea you could make them a second Gungan Unique Unit and keep the troops the way they are, and so keep gameplay reasonably balanced.

Kryllith
07-07-2002, 01:53 AM
Or limit their swimming in one way or another. For example, they might not be able to attack while swimming, or might only be able to swim in relatively shallow water (deeper than what troopers can currently walk in but say, not out in the middle of an ocean... wouldn't be a problem for rivers but certain island maps might be a problem.) Or they just might move slower in water. Of course, there is always the hazard that they'll fall prey to the various water monsters.

Kryllith

jcb231
07-07-2002, 02:22 AM
What if all civs could researcxh map-specific abilities, but some civs started with them?

Like a "Forest Ranger" upgrade for Imperial troops or something.

Darth Windu
07-07-2002, 05:49 PM
Just thought of some more things-
-give the option of transferreing your forces to someone else, like in the 'Star Trek: Armada' series

-instead of killing units and destroyering units you dont need anymore, make them 'decommision' or disassemble of something like that, so that your workers take it down and you can get back some of the cost of the unit/building, look at the C&C, ST:Armada etc series

jcb231
07-07-2002, 11:09 PM
Good ideas, both......but, I'd like to see salvage ability as a special research option or skill. This would combine the ability to recoup your investements on old units with the ability to steal materials from destroyed enemies.

While we're talking on this....I think that a possible Hutt civ should not have the ability to auto upgrade units....this would give their forces the "motley" appearnace of Jabba's troops, and would force a player playing as the Hutts to manage troops much more closely. They could make up for it by having incredible trade and economic options and bonuses like cheaper units or highly effective bounty hunter upgrades...perhaps in spaceport trading they could have a researchable option or starting skill called "Skimming off the Top" or some such which would let them get a little extra Nova. Maybe they could also send stealth cargo ships to steal from enemy spaceports, essentially allowing them to trade with everyone, whether the other player wants to or not. Perhaps they could also research a spice mining option to get extra resources.

I've said the transfer to another player thing before...I think someting like this would also help in online games where one player leaves and his forces just sit there pointlessly.

----------------------------
But now, we dance.....

:monkey4::elephant::monkey4::elephant::monkey4:

Darth Windu
07-09-2002, 02:21 PM
I was also thinking that bounty hunters should be excluded from the game, except as the hutt unique unit assuming the Hutt's get into the game as a civ, although that's a 'take it or leave it' sorta thing.

Not sure if i mentioned this before as well but i want to see the rest of the Jedi Council in the editor (Adi Gallia, dude with long neck, short dude with pointy ears and scar over one eye etc).

Finally, get rid of the Jedi Starfighter's delay before firing. I don't mind the delay between shots (though being a little shorter would be nice) but the delay before starting is a killer.

stormtroop
07-09-2002, 06:31 PM
How about they make the jedi starfighter fire faster but increase the cost or you could have a dear upgrade like rapidfire where there are no gaps between shoots.and were talking about starwars time the logs wouldnt evenj damage the aat as the armour would be made to absorb shocks.

Kryllith
07-10-2002, 12:04 AM
I'm not talking about shocks, I'm talking about weakening the structural integrity of the cockpit.

Kryllith

stormtroop
07-10-2002, 11:37 PM
yeah i suspose if the structre collapsed the mech would i now personally think the tree thing is a good idea putting it by your gate to base would be good.very good indeed

Kryllith
07-11-2002, 02:45 AM
*grin* Well if they ever made ewoks into a civ, maybe they could make a specialize worker unique unit that would do nothing but build various sorts of traps. :)

Kryllith

jcb231
07-11-2002, 09:13 PM
I think that traps should be a standard defensive option....maybe ewok traps would just be more effective and better hidden.

I'd love to see minefields.

Kryllith
07-11-2002, 10:18 PM
Yeah, I've thought about having traps as a special option for all the units before. Maybe in addition to it they could have a upgrade for scouts that would make them effective at locating traps (or certain types)

Kryllith

Darth Windu
07-11-2002, 11:54 PM
I'd also like to see a 'scout' option for units instead of just using waypoints.

Legacy_Of_Sith
07-12-2002, 12:13 AM
:fett: I think a great new civ to play as would be the Mandalorians. :jango:

CorranSec
07-12-2002, 09:28 AM
Hey people
My personal 'wish list' for SWGB 2 is:
(some of this is realistically achievable, some not)
1) Air Dogfights! Air stuff was the reason i bought GB (well, not really, it was just the thing i was just looking forward to the most)
and what do we get?
Ships sitting around shooting at each other.
Maybe there's some weird waypoint triggery thing that happens when an aircraft attacks; it swoops, dives, twists, etc. It would make space stuff way more fun. And before I get critisism about unbalancing ("they'll be able to dodge AA!") AA stuff is sorta homing........... maybe they won't do the tricky stuff against ground troops.
2) On the same note of 'interactive combat,' not just sitting and shooting, maybe some special units (eg. bounty hunters, heroes) could dodge, roll, etc. while on the ground? Maybe this is completely unachievable. But you asked.
3) A little bit of StarCraft- as in some completely different stuff between the civs. eg. consider the SC basic warriors- zerglings were quick, cheap and could burrow (with upgrade), marines were cheap ranged cannon fodder, Zealots were expensive hand-to-hand people. GB basic warriors- all guys with guns.
I guess what i'm suggesting is sorta an engine change. I wouldn't mind that. AoK engine is old-ish, and really can't portray the SW universe accurately. (eg. the whole dogfight thingy.)
4) New races; well, I'd like some EU stuff- i.e. after the movies, during some books. Maybe the Imperial Remnant, New Republic, Yuzhan Vong- they'd be hard to do though, a bit unbalancing-and another nonhuman civ, perhaps...... Mon Cal, like everybody is going for?
5) I'd like to consider the issue of races. The game seems to portray that there isn't a single nonhuman in the rebels, republic, naboo- and there isn't a single human in the wookies. APART from Jedi, and I SERIOUSLY HATE the fact that all jedi are human. And all sabers are blue/red.
Couldn't the rebels have sullustans flying their fighters? Mon Cals in the Air Cruisers? Even- this may seem crazy- adopting the Wookies into the Rebels and becoming their Laser Trooper? (i'm going to get hammered on that one....)
The Republic- definitely a multicultural society. Look at coruscant! every single race in the damn galaxy is there! But what does the republic have? Clones. And some jedi and bounty hunters.
Can it be reasonable not to have clones for EVERYTHING??? They get really really really really boring. And surely, at least Republic Jedi would be the most mixed bunch of all.
Empire I can understand- the NhM (NonhuMan) policy shows its effects quite obviously in the game.
Naboo- if it's based on showing them After EP 1, maybe have some gungan influence on their sea? Just to show the two cultures mixing?
Gungans- Naboo influence on them, maybe.
Wookies- possibly absorbed into Rebels, they weren't shown in the movies at all, even EU doesn't show them having anything military.

......... whoa...... big post........ anyway that's all for now.

Crazy_dog no.3
07-12-2002, 03:42 PM
Whoa u are probably one of the few reasonable people on this thread. Exept Ganguns with Naboo influence. TPM shows them clearly as 2 different cultures.

CorranSec
07-12-2002, 03:48 PM
Me? Reasonable? How do you figure that????? :D
i sorta expected everybody to say i was crazy. Nice to know somebody who doesn't think so.
Gungans-Naboo; Yeah, two different cultures, sure. But is there no intermixing at all?
At the end of TPM, you see them holding the big shiny ball thingy. All peaceful and happy. During the movie, at the Gungan Sacred Place, both races acknowledged that they couldn't survive without each other.
And if they're so close together, how can they be so utterly different in their civs?
I'm not suggesting naboo have better ships, or gungans have better jedi- though perhaps realistic, this would completely unbalance the game. No, what I'm saying is just a different look of some of the stuff. To show that the two cultures intermix and bits rub off on each other.
No real game effect at all. Just looks good.

Darth Windu
07-12-2002, 03:51 PM
Well i dont think changing the wookie's is a good idea, but i think merging the gungans/naboo is a good idea (new peace treaty = friendly relations, same planet)

With the non-human thing you have to remember a few points-
1. Humans were flying the rebel fighters
2. The clones were from a human
3. The jedi i have a big issue with. There should be lots of different 'art' things for jedi that are chosen at random (ie species and blue or green lightsabre)
4. I would like to see the Hutt's. The mon cal are a small part of the rebel's.

CorranSec
07-12-2002, 04:04 PM
Ok, Windu, thanks for the creative critiszms.
As i said to crazy dog- i'm not merging the naboo/gungans. They're rather different and are nice civs by themselves.
Non human stuff-
Ok, maybe at Yavin, cos the rebellion was rather small. Also i don't think Lucasfilm could be bothered making alien suits.
Seriously, they didn't do aliens cos they COULDN'T do aliens. In some cases anyway.
But consider Endor!
Copilot of the Millenium Falcon? Nien Nunb, a Sullustan. Sullustans are renowned for their flying skill. They also excel at making fighters and freighters. I think. (SoroSuub is sullustan, and they make lots, not just fighters.)
Consider Bothans! Other than the damn spynet, which ANY civ can get, and Utric Sandov (who has a very weird voice, Fey'lya would be laughable with that voice), they aren't there. A bothan-albeit a stupid bothan, but hey- led the rogues to Blackmoon. Bothans have their own government and their own cool planet, which is shown in EU.
Just look at the Rogues! Twi'leks, shistaven, a bothan, sullustan, Verpine... ah! Yes! Verpines! Rebel techs! But they're not in GB at all!
Mon Cal- part of rebels, correct, but very large part. Admiral Ackbar anyone!!!! (an ALIEN who commanded the entire fleet)And if you consider EU- which I think we must- most of the Rebel fleet is either captured star destroyers or Mon Cal Star Cruisers, or whatever they're called.
IF somebody could incorporate Mon Cal into rebels- eg. Air Cruisers, to say the least- I'd be happy. But a whole civ would be just great. You could include Quarren too, and make them good at air and sea.
Ok, clones, sure. But must there be clones in the fighters? Clones in the mechs? Clones in the ships (sea ships)?
At least give me the Jedi. I would hope that everybody sees the stupidity in having ALL jedi human. Give me a straight-out explanation for that.

Oh..... and, by the way....... is that a Nemoidian in the Trade Fed transport??? If so, how about more nemoidians? And even some Commerce Guild, Banking Clan, Techno union... seeing as they DIDN'T put that stuff in the Confed....

Darth Windu
07-12-2002, 04:17 PM
I see many of your point's, about the whole alien thing and all. I think having a mon cal star cruiser as the rebel air cruiser would be nice. Also with the clones, the answer to your question is yes. You have to remember that the clones ARE the republic military, so of course there is no one else who could or would operate their equipment.

CorranSec
07-12-2002, 04:24 PM
Awwwwwwwwwwww. :( :( :(
I think clones are boring. And unrealistic. Don't sound the least bit like Jango Fett.
But that's just my private thingy, in game terms you're completely right. I surrender to your expertise.
Do you agree with me on all the other stuff though????:D

Edit: I just looked above and for your scouty thing, I've seen this done before; i think it was Empire Earth, you click 'scout' and the unit randomly moves around the map. That what you're looking for?

But on another point, lots of stuff here is just wishing. Very hard to achieve. Are we looking at wishing, or serious thoughts?

Darth Windu
07-12-2002, 04:30 PM
Most points i do, they really should make each civ multi-species, except for the republic and wookies. The jedi should also be changed. With the Naboo/Gungan thing, to me, i think it should be a 'all or nothing' approach in that lucasarts should either merge the civs, or leave them as they are, but thats just my opinion.

CorranSec
07-12-2002, 04:45 PM
So... what exactly is wrong with merging rebels and wookies?
Republic should be multi species, in the form of Jedi.
Empire shouldn't. I think i made that clear. The Emperor's NhM policy clearly forbids it.
All or nothing..... well I wouldn't like all. Nothing I could deal with. I just don't think nothing is realistic.

jcb231
07-12-2002, 08:38 PM
I like Wookies as a seperate civ....Chewbacca is the only Rebel Wookie shown in the movies.

I'd also like to see civs that were more movie influenced instead of heavily EU-based or, in the case of the wookies, have their culture just made up by Lucas Arts. I think it lends more of a SW feel to the game if every civ has at least a goodly number of its units taken from the films.

Kryllith
07-12-2002, 10:40 PM
I'd also prefer to keep EU out of it as much as possible. As for limiting the races in units, consider the movies. Yes the Mon Calimari were quite prevelant in the space battle around the second Death Star, but we didn't seem them down on the Endor Moon with the rest of the strike force... or on Hoth... or on the Yavin Moon. We only saw humans (and chewbacca). Granted that a fair bit of this is probably because making all the costumes would have been too time consuming (if the original trilogy were filmed using todays CGI, then perhaps it would be different). Similarly, we see the Calimaris in the command ships, but not in the various fighters.

For the republic we ONLY see clones as troopers, gunship pilots, etc., which I think is fine. Afterall, they were commissioned to represent the Rep's military... Personally I'd love to see random jedi races being pumped out of the jedi temple, but I doubt LucasArts wanted to deal with having to making 20-100 more animations to represent different jedi, and have to deal with setting up a random generator. Might be a nice addition if someone can code it though. :)

Kryllith

simwiz2
07-12-2002, 11:35 PM
I think the AoK engine already has a random generator because you would get male or female villagers randomly in AoK. However, I guess there is a difference between 2 different possibilities and 2 weapon types, 20 race types, etc.

Kryllith
07-13-2002, 12:06 AM
Of course, if we really wanted to go overboard with Jedis then we could set it up so that you chose "form" jedis each time. That way you could have jedis specialized against fighting jedis, against fighting troopers (give them the shot deflection ability), etc. :)

Kryllith

Crazy_dog no.3
07-13-2002, 01:18 AM
What I would like is a kinda merge between Rebellion and GB. U know what I mean.;)

CorranSec
07-13-2002, 07:02 AM
Jcb-- Chewbacca is the only Wookie shown in the movie, period. The civ was practically made up by LA, as somebody just mentioned. Not that I dislike the Wookies, i just think that if we consider the whole 'race' issue i discussed a little while ago, the civs need to be shown with more than just one race, and having wookies as some form of Rebel troop would fit the bill entirely.

Kryllith-- My problem with the whole clone thing was what did the Republic have before clones? I'm sure they had an army, navy, air force, everything. They only just found out about the clones and started using them. I know they must have had something before that and as such, that "something" must still exist.
I suppose you're right about the clones, but does anybody know what that "something" is??
If you think about it, GB is EU. Not in the movies. Most of the campaign stuff aren't, most of the characters aren't, most of the technologies, warriors, even an entire civ isn't. EU has amazing potential and if we utilize the information within it, we'd end up with a great game.
And I seriously do think that costumes is an issue.
Ok, we're not going that overboard with the jedi. That'd screw up game balance and i don't know if the AoK engine would handle it.
But if we move to a new engine, we could have multi species jedi, multi form jedi, whatever.

Crazy dog-- I don't know what you mean, having never played Rebellion. What's it all about?

Kryllith
07-13-2002, 09:30 AM
To be honest, I don't think the Republic had a military. If they did, then Palpatine would not have had to make building an army his first act. I'm willing to bet there might have been a token force made for the defense of Coruscant, and that for the most part, the various systems took care of defending themselves. But as for an official republic army... Course is does make you wonder where they got all the vehicles that the clones used. Guess they must have had someone building those as well too (probably says in the novel...)

Kryllith

CorranSec
07-13-2002, 10:10 AM
So there wasn't a single battle during the entire history of the republic?
Maybe not a full-scale war, as that Naboo politician guy (Sio Bibble?) said, but surely they'd have sector fleets, peacekeeping fleets, and in those fleets are mechs, armies, fighters.........
So what did those systems defend themselves with?
If I had no help from the Republic in terms of military defense, I'd seriously consider not joining.
But that's just me. :D

Darth Windu
07-13-2002, 12:17 PM
Corran - think of it this way-
Republic = United Nations
Coruscant = New York
Galactic Senate = General Assembly/Security Council
Jedi = UN peacekeepers

Of course as we saw in ep1, the Republic has unarmed transports etc, but it has no military, just like the UN. Also, the members nations (planets = countires) have the responsibility to defend themselves.

I still dont like the wookie/rebel idea, as it was said, chew was the only wookie seen in the rebels. But if you want to get picky the wookies should be part of the republic (see them in the senate in ep1)

CorranSec
07-13-2002, 12:32 PM
Ah. I see.
By the same token, though, Wookies would definitely not be part of the Republic military.
Chewie was the only wookie seen, period.
Maybe you could keep the wooks as a civ, just make the rebel laser trooper a wookie with rebel gear.... maybe.....

jcb231
07-13-2002, 12:47 PM
Wookies are quite clearly seen in Episode I in the senate scenes....watch the widescreen version on a nice large tv and you will see and hear them.

For all we know from the films, Chewbacca was the only wookie ever to join the Rebels. But there could also have been a hundred thousand of him ruinnin garound, we don't know, so both arguements are valid. I for one think that the wookies were an odd civ to include, but have grown to like them a bit and would prefer they stay as they are. I like the Rebel troops basically as they are, although a few changes like Sullustan pilots might be cool.

And yes, the Republic had no army before Ep II and the clones. They relied on each planets own peacekeeping forces and the Jedi. This is the whole point of the army-raising controversy. It would be like the UN suddenly deciding to raise an army and attack someone. Countires join the UN for trade purposes, political advantages, and the promise of aid to one another in times of crisis, among other reasons. Planets join the Republic for similar reasons. It is shown in Ep I that the Republic causes controversy through taxation....this can be taken to mean that the planets feel the republic may be overstepping its bounds. So you see, an army is not avaialble to the republic before the clone wars....otherwise they could simpy have used it to end the Naboo crisis quickly. As for where the At-Tes, gunships, etc came from, I'm sure the novel explains. I think that it is likely they wer all contracted in a method similar to the secret clone army. Perhaps the Kamininoans built the clones, the Whatevers built the gunships, and the Whozamawhatsits built the At-Tes....as an example. The Republic did have some weapons of course....the Jedi starfighters, the transport ship form ep I, etc....but these were not major weapons of war...they were for peacekeeping missions that might need that extra punch of defense.

Or maybe the warships seen in ep II were pulled from planetary defense forces. Perhaps some planet somewhere in the galaxy uses gunships in its own army, or something. Point is the army was raised at the time of ep II and consists solely of clones, support droids, and jedi. There was no other Repbulic army before that.

CorranSec
07-13-2002, 01:00 PM
I saw the Wook senators. I meant the only wookies seen with military power.
The senators didn't seem that much of a fighting force to me. :D
I understand the 'no army before clones' thing rather well now, thankyou to about three people for repeatedly clarifying.
At least you agree on the Sullustan thing. :cool:

Darth Windu
07-13-2002, 01:04 PM
Actually, according to the starwars databank, the Jedi Starfighter was flown only a few weeks before the battle of geonosis, and the kandimonias had a partnership with a neighbouring system, and they developed the republic army's weapons (ie gunship, AT-TE)

jcb231
07-13-2002, 01:05 PM
Thanks Windu...so there ya go.

Crazy_dog no.3
07-13-2002, 08:01 PM
Corran- Rebellion is a space empire RTS

Leto
07-14-2002, 12:18 AM
hello ppl.

this might be OT and seem wierd but maybe we can get away from the whole tech lvl thing. use a techtree system like RTS games from Westwood or Blizzard. I know it's un AoK and AoM like but it might work better.

as for the engine. if u want 3D I'll go for the Empire Earth one or C & C Generals. both allow air to air combat and the bombers actually fly over their target to drop bombs rather then "hovering system". I think the air units in AoM only hit ground units?

I'll comment more later

Leto

Crazy_dog no.3
07-14-2002, 12:50 AM
NOOOO not EE. As for Generals, I am looking forward to buying this game.:D


BTW what does ppl stand for?

Leto
07-14-2002, 05:20 PM
"ppl"? i means people.... shortented

I'd rather like the "follow" command in RA 2. maybe they can add that in plus the up close zooming allowed in EE. I know you prob won't be playing around with the camera angle and stuff while u're having a battle but heh


maybe an upgrade for the scout? like the scouts in AoK where they eventually became hussars (sp?). now that I've played CC I think it's not needed. comments?

Leto

simwiz2
07-14-2002, 11:49 PM
I played the EE demo, it has such horrible graphics... the walls looked like they had a carpet runner on the top, the battlements were screwed up, and the buildings all looked terrible. I think if GB2 doesn't use its own engine, then it should use the RoN engine, which will have some creative ideas for managing air combat and will also have great graphics.

Crazy_dog no.3
07-15-2002, 03:08 AM
Yeah, Rise Of Nations. Maybe very cool, but how are u gonna incorporate cities?

simwiz2
07-15-2002, 02:04 PM
That depends what GB2 is going to represent. If it is going to represent 2 (or more) armies making temporary bases and battling it out on a planet, then the concept of cities would likely need to be thrown out entirely. However, if it was to represent the entire factions at war (which admittedly does not fit well on a single planet) then cities and borders would work fine.

Darth Windu
07-15-2002, 02:47 PM
Just thought of another change i'd like to see,
change the rebel adv bomber to the B-wing.

also, what is 'Rise of Nations'?

Crazy_dog no.3
07-15-2002, 03:41 PM
Rise of Nations is an RTS to be released in 2003. It will have 18 earth-based civilisations , each with thier own unique build style. It has cool features like cities instead of one huge powerbase.


Check this out for more BIG HUGE GAMES (http://www.bighugegames.com)

Darth Windu
07-15-2002, 07:04 PM
yeah i just had a look at it looks GREAT! It would be good to base SW:GB 2 on RoN as it incorporates many features already in SW:GB such as mechs and heavies (tanks, artillery) as well as combat aircraft. It also looks better in the borders, enhanced villager AI, excellent graphics, expansion instead of just conquer etc.

Leto
07-15-2002, 08:49 PM
mmm some of the EE graphics does look crap but I'm only suggesting using the game engine

RoN... looks good from the SS (screenshot) I've seen...

wasn't the b-wing a fighter and bomber?

Leto

Darth Windu
07-17-2002, 01:17 PM
no, pretty sure the B-wing is the Y-wing replacement. Also, after reading reviews and seeing screenshots, i now think that RoN would be an excellent base for SW:GB 2 because RoN includes
-moving borders
-infantry and armour (mechs/heavies)
-aircraft
-rolling hills, realistic terrain
-ships that sink instead of just blowing up
-a more 'empire' feel to it
-larger scale
-fantastic graphics
-less micro-management
-more tactical gameplay (eg using elevation, flanking, ambushing, assasinations etc)

jcb231
07-17-2002, 06:26 PM
No...you're both wrong. B-Wings were designed to assault capital ships. They are not bombers (although they can be armed with bombs) and are not ideal dogfighters (although they do have lasers and weapons for this purpose if need be). They are armed with ion cannons and very powerful lasers and are meant to be escorted into battle by swifter, more agile dogfighters that can occupy fighters while the B-Wings take out the big ships.

I think that B-Wings could be extrapolated upon to make various types of fighters and bombers for a posible Mon Cal civ....perhaps a lightweight B-Wing could act as a dogfighter, a heavy B-Wing could act a s a bomber, and an ordinary B-Wing could be some sort of unique unit to kill aircruisers with.

Darth Windu
07-19-2002, 06:11 PM
JCB - in the context of the game, the small ships are either fighters or bombers. The B-wing would seem to fit the bomber category. I was thinking the RoN engine would also be good because it uses missiles for strike aircraft instead of bombs in GB. This of course means that the attacking aircraft can stay out of range of possible AA defences (depending on their depth) and still hit the target.

VE_Strange
07-19-2002, 10:42 PM
You guys have hashed out so much stuff I dont feel I could add anything, except the desire to see Lucasarts continue with working on the game, improving it, and not letting it die out as they have so many others.

Strange

jcb231
07-20-2002, 09:40 AM
Windu....why couldn't a B-Wing fall into a new category? It could be a special anti-air cruiser, anti-transport weapon or something.

Like I said though, for a Mon Cal civ maybe various types of fighters and bombers could be designed based on the general feel of the B-Wing and other Mon Cal stylings.

CorranSec
07-20-2002, 02:05 PM
If RoN has space dogfights i'd say yes.
Screenshots look nice.
Borders... cities........ not SWGB style though. Would it be legitimate for a strike team to land on some planet to infiltrate the enemy city- but find out that it's actually a country composed of heaps of cities!
RoN is big-scale. GB seems more focussed on smaller battles.

The toybox b-wing should in no way be compared to any proposed b-wing. B-Wing is anti-cap ship, so maybe in SWGB2 there could be more cap ships (air cruiser variations) and b-wings are good against them.

Darth Windu
07-20-2002, 02:50 PM
CorranSec - but then i think that would be good. Assuming SW:GB2 is based on RoN, in the battles, you wouldn't be fighting for a city, you would be fighting for a planet.

jcb231
07-20-2002, 05:14 PM
I like the engine the way it is....better graphics and sound would be nice, but I like the fundamental concept of the game....I don't want to increase the scale to planet level. I like the idea of fighting small, base-to-base battles.

Crazy_dog no.3
07-20-2002, 07:41 PM
It could work like this: On a RM, u select which planet u want to be on and select your civ. Then u can build the civ's bases on that particular planet.
I mean a Naboo player on Naboo would get towns like New Centrif and Theed, while a Rebel Yavim 4 player would get Falcon Base and Massasi Base.


The engine could be easily licenced considering Microsoft's deals with LA.

Leto
07-21-2002, 04:43 AM
hmm dunno, fighting on a planet scale seems a bit..... big?

if it's planet scale u'll need a larger pop.... then again y not elminate the pop thing. games like EE Red Alert 2 etc didn't have a pop..... well it did but it was so large u never bult up to it

yes mb in SWGB 2 we don't have a pop limit anymore

CorranSec
07-21-2002, 04:50 AM
OK. Would it be possible for somebody to elaborate on the AoM engine for me?
Are there fights between small units? Eg. bands of troopers, archers, whatever? does the view change when two bands meet? Would air units be possible?
I see the advantages: The Death Star attack, Battle of Mon Calamari, Battle of Coruscant, are suddenly possible.
Disadvantages: I, always thinking about air combat, am wondering if it will just be cap ships and no fighters?
Do units stop and form up into those irritating lines? Are there heroes? What's the pop cap?
...... i need to know more about this game.

Darth Windu
07-21-2002, 05:39 AM
corran - if you want more info, go to the official site. Also, RoN would be much better because it uses aircraft as an integral part of the game, AoM doesn't.

Leto
07-22-2002, 06:03 AM
don't think there's air to air combat in AoM........ prob like Warcraft III and SWGB where the planes hover and attack......

heaps better if the engine was built to accomdate (sp?) air to air combat.

anyone seen the videos for RoN? looks pretty good IMO.

Crazyus Dogus
07-22-2002, 01:40 PM
About the city problem: I think it should just be similiar to GB. After all, u can't build planets.

General Nilaar
07-24-2002, 02:10 AM
Basing a Star Wars game off of the Rise of Empires engine might be a good idea, but it wouldn't be GBII. That's a totally different scale it sounds like. Let's keep this to the traditional RTS type game.

1. First I'd like to see Lucas Arts create their own engine for the game. Hopefully a semi-3D map like we saw in Total Annihilation. The terrain looks natural, but it doesn't interfere with gameplay like the true 3D games. No zooming in or out or twisting the camera. Just a default "commanders view". The only useful view in a RTS game IMHO.

2. This engine should allow air-to-air combat, fighters that swoop and make straffing runs. Like we saw in Total Annihilation and Force Commander.

3. It should de-emphasize the economy aspect. We want to fight battles not run a city. There should definetly be some kind of economy, but I shouldn't have to run back to my base and plant farms in the middle of an epic battle. The epic battle is what the game is all about, anything that subtracts from that should be gotten rid of.

4. Improved graphics, but don't get carried away, we still have to be able to have players play this on a 56k modem. Too many companies forget that. Graphics can impress without being full 3D.

5. Time to move away from the Zone. Create your own client in the style of something like Battle.Net but hopefully even better. Microsoft is holding LA back, they are a competitor in the RTS genre after all. It's not an accident that the Zone has been slow to respond to needed changes.

That's about it. And no I don't want to see Star Destoryers participating in ground battles. That's just silly. If you want that then what you really want is a space based RTS game with capital ships as the main unit. A cool idea. I would like to see that too. But as a completely seperate game.

CorranSec
07-24-2002, 02:58 AM
OK. To respond to Nilarr's points.

1. ummm.... sounds ok, but view change would be good. What if one of your wonderfully rendered 3D mountains gets in the way and you can't see your men! not good....
2. Yes! Yes yes yes! Yay! Go air to air!
3. So you're thinking a "warcraft 3"-ish kind of thing? ummm.... I wouldn't support it. This kind of style is popular for some, but for others, economy is what RTS is all about. Have you seen the thread on these forums about warcraft 3? Some people hate it, some like it, but everybody who did post is a GB player. What we have now is fairly balanced, and an economy/military game, with equal emphasis on each, is what I think would appeal to the general populace.
4. Yes.. the graphics on GB and even CC aren't exactly great.
5. This has been discussed before, and correct me if I'm wrong, but most people are getting extremely displeased with the Zone and would support a Battle.net sort of thing.

Hey! cap ships are fuun! Sure, maybe an SD would be a little weird, but in space that'd be good, and there's heaps of smaller ships- freighters, frigates, maybe some cruisers, that could easily deal with being in atmosphere. Surely you can deal with the present "air cruisers?"

aand....... basically, most of the stuff you've discussed has already been raised. Don't waste your breath-uhh, typing fingers-on completely going over a point that's already there.

jcb231
07-24-2002, 07:07 PM
I think the balance between economy and battles is pretty good right now....although I would like the ability to put some things on auto-pilot, such as farming....can't my farmers just automatically replant the farms without my having to queue them up all the time?...I hate that.

Also, I like the idea of some capital ship usage....perhaps, like the ghosts/nukes in starcraft, a specialized unit could "call in" an orbital strike on a target. The orbital strike would cost money and time to build, so you couldn't just rush of ten in a row or something...they would be big, decisive actions.

Ansible
07-26-2002, 02:18 AM
Game Engine: Empire Earth

CorranSec
07-26-2002, 03:55 AM
Mmm... Jcb, I agree with you. The balance now is good- it's a tried and tested and working mix of economy micro-management and battle.
Farms, though.... some people only want to farm for a little while, what if you need carbon quickly (and you've clicked the replant farm button heaps,) you can undo it all, and so on. This is part of the economy part of things. Some things just require careful management.
Well... I liked ghost nukes. very fun. evilness.
but this shouldn't stop us using cap ships! at least the smaller kinds.... if they're small enough to dock on planets and maybe stations, they can be in ground maps. That's my opinion anyway...

jcb231
07-26-2002, 04:55 AM
CorranSec--what I'm proposing for farming (and many other management tasks) is an option that allows a player to auto-pilot them....so if I want I can tell the worker to just replant endlessly, without having to check my queue each time. And the carbon is just deducted automatically each time, until I run out, and the game lets me know that the farm hasn't enough carbon to replant. That'd be cool. Other resource collection tasks are automatic (workers wander to the next tree/crystal/berry bush/ore patch after they use one up), so why not farming? If a player wnated to micromanage their farms they could, or just set up a limited replant queue, or they could just put the autopilot on for a short while, and turn it off when they wanted to change the farm or wanted to conserve carbon.

In terms of capital ships, I prefer the option of air cruisers, plus maybe slightly larger air cruiser type ships, and some orbital strikes executed as per my previous post. I don't want to move super star destroyers and such around the battlefield.

Darth Windu
07-26-2002, 07:03 AM
I was thinking, i would also like to see-
-unlimited building queue's like in AoE: Rise of Rome
-tech upgrade queue's so you dont have to constantly check on what you have and havent researched.
-merge the Anti-Air Mobile and Mech Destroy, and replace the Mech Destroyer with a 'mini-assault' mech

Ansible - Empire Earth has already been surpassed in terms of gameplay, graphics etc. Other games such as Age of Mythology or Rise of Nations would be much better, but stillo they should create their own engine.

jcb231
07-26-2002, 09:22 AM
Windu--I agree with your first two points about unlimited building queues and some sort tech checklist, but I still (as on the other thread) disagree with the mech thing.

I also seem to be one of the few people who thinks the engine for this game should NOT be a 3-D engine...I just think that the "commander of the battlefield" type view seen in the current game is the best possilb eway to view the action and contians all the info a player needs.....I don't like having to deal with camera movements and such in 3-D engines, as evidenced by my dislike of Force Commander. I want to be able to easily spot all my units in an area with one click on the map.

Darth Windu
07-26-2002, 11:12 AM
Well in respect to the engine, i would like a limited 3D engine that gives you a 3D world, but not so much that you have to move the camera around all the time. There is a compramise in an engine similar to the Star Trek: Armada 2 engine where you could use either 'tactical view' which was full 3D, or the 'strategic view' which was 2D.

eizo131
07-28-2002, 03:50 PM
After ten minutes of reading I said screw this so I will post something. Like someone said let some civis be able to dig under walls.seing over walls with troopers is cheat artillary units should only be able to do that. Make Jedi masters attack weaker. I was killed by 10 jedis in my last game....... And fix the names of things ie someone said insted of trooper stormtrooper. last but not least ad more civis like MANDOLORIANS and add more unique units like gunships.:fett: :jango: :slave:

Kryllith
07-29-2002, 12:21 PM
Nah, don't even let artillery see over walls. If you want to make it so a ground unit can see over walls, make it so the scouts can. This makes the scouts more valuable in the later tech levels and gives more weight to their roles as scouts.

Kryllith

Kryllith
07-29-2002, 02:08 PM
Actually, now that I think about it, I'd suggest a couple collaries to only having the scout see over the wall (other than air units, of course). First, I'd suggest that any unit should be able to see a turret or fortess behind a wall, since these are usually large enough to be able to fire over the wall anyway (at least, I would have them be this way; it's a bit pointless to build turrets just behind a wall if it can't fire over it). As for artillery (and perhaps assault mechs), maybe they could see over smaller walls... say light walls and medium walls (or maybe just heavy artillery and heavy assaults could see over medium). Thus come Tech 4, artillery would be reliant on scouts (or air) to fire over heavy-shield walls.

Leaving the scout next to the wall wouldn't even need to be a requirement. If the scout passed close enough to see buildings, the artillery could then target the building even if the scout wasn't in visual range anymore. It's not like the building is going to up and move, afterall. But if you want to use artillery against troops behind a wall, the scout or air will have to be there to keep the artillery updated on troop movements...

Kryllith

General Nilaar
07-30-2002, 06:24 AM
No, camera view changes wouldn't be needed with a semi-3D terrain like Total Annihalation. The mountains didn't get in the way with that game. It wasn't anything like Force Commander.

No, I don't want the game to become like Warcraft 3. I don't mind economy building, but if the game lasts till tech 4 and I have plenty of resources I don't want to have to worry about econmy. I'd rather be concentrating on my battle plan. I should definetly have to worry about it in the early game. I really like that automatic farming and research queueing suggested above. That's the kind of thing I meant.

Someone mentioned the Madalorians up above. Wasn't the idea of the Mandalorians done away with? There's just Jango and Boba Fett in the canon Star Wars universe. Or am I wrong there?

As for new civs, I'd like to see the Chiss myself, but I think we really have enough civs to be honest. I'd suggest working on making them more different from each other. Though CC has already done that somewhat.

I have no problems with Air Cruisers, but that's as much as we need I think. Don't need to get any bigger than that in a ground based game.

General Nilaar
07-30-2002, 06:31 AM
How about changing weather? If your on a desert world you might have to be careful of sandstorms, on an ice world there would be snow storms to worry about and water might freeze over (and may have a chance of breaking if you try to move something heavy over it). Some plantets might have Ion storms which could ground all aircraft.

A day/night cycle might shorten the sight ranges of all units (except units specially equipped with night vision). You could then equip your towers with spotlights to help with base defense.

Many of the above are ideas stolen from Tiberian Sun. Good ideas that could have been implemented better.

How about fighting in a more inhabited area? With small towns or cities? There could be useful buildings in those areas worth occupying.

Darth Windu
07-30-2002, 08:53 AM
Those are some good ideas. Really what i think Lucasarts needs to do is look at the warcraft series, Command & Conquer series, Age of Empires series along with some of the new games such as Rise of Nations and Age of Mythology, take the best elements from each series and blend them together in a lucasarts built engine made specifically for star wars.

Crazyus Dogus
08-01-2002, 02:53 PM
I like the weather idea. Like long ago there was a fan- made mission set in the desert were units took damage from " sandstorms". Maybe a more advanced system.

Also disable units seeying through walls.

Kryllith
08-04-2002, 07:28 PM
I think it's important to note that if we put a limitation of units seeing through walls, then there should also be a limitation for units firing through walls. The notable exception, of course, being those buildings that would stand higher than walls (fortresses and turrets).

While we're at it, why limit it to just walls? Forests, mountains, and the like should also be impentrable to both sight (except for scouts and air, through the jedi "sight beyond sight" would probably work too) and fire (except for "attack ground")

Kryllith

Darth Windu
08-05-2002, 09:41 AM
agreed about the walls. I also think that the only units that should be able to fire over walls are those which have weapons that have a parabolic course, and of course air units. I also think that the canon should be removed from the game, and in its place increase the range and firepower of artillery (assault mech beats it in every field) and of course increase cost.

Darth Windu
08-10-2002, 02:44 AM
Come on people, let us know what you like and dislike about Galactic Battlegrounds, and what you want, and dont want, to see in Galactic Battlegrounds 2!

CorranSec
08-10-2002, 04:52 AM
Whoa. I completely forgot about this thread. :confused:
Anyway...
I think weather was a great idea. No matter where you go, what races live there, whatever, it's always broad daylight!
While we're on this topic, I propose that the editor (and therefore all the campaigns) terrain is run like StarCraft... there were several tilesets to choose from, and they all looked completely different- there were desert worlds, 'badlands' worlds, jungle worlds, TWILIGHT worlds... This sort of represents weather. But a weather generating engine would be good. Has anyone played Battle Realms? That had rain, and when it rained everything went darker and overcast... WarCraft 3 has a day/night cycle... but none of these fantastic and realistic ideas are present in SW:GB.
They must be in SW:GB 2. I guess this is part of the 'new engine' debate, and as such, I believe that these must be incorporated into the new engine (or take an engine that already uses them).

Nilaar, and anyone else who believes that the game is 'ground based'- I personally believe that the new game should have it more evened out in every field. The majority of battles in the movies were in space or atmosphere. The majority of full-scale battles in EU (i said full-scale because everyone knows that Jedi go around killing evil groundside) are airborne. That's what the SW universe is based around, an as such I believe that it should be greatly empowered in SW:GB 2.

I don't think anything (apart from fortressses and turrets, Kryllith said) should be able to see over walls. Artillery and the like should have to use their 'attack ground' function to damage suspected enemy buildings and units inside the walls.

I think assault mechs should have an 'attack ground' function. There are some things that you just couldn't be bothered getting artillery for, and in literal terms assault mechs could do it. eg. blast a hole through a forest, fire just in front of a gate to kill incoming/outgoing units, etc.

The cannon does have a role, and it is exceptionally useful when conducting a long-range siege on an enemy base. They can take out enemy structures, especially walls and turrets, from long range without any risk to themselves- and if the enemy sends out troops etc. to destroy your cannon, YOUR troops can engage in combat without having to worry about coming too close to the turret.
I'm not sure if that made sense... but it's my strategy.

General Nilaar
08-17-2002, 09:04 AM
I agree that space battles have played a more important part in the movies and books (well at least the classic time period stuff) than the ground based battles. And I would LOVE to see a space based RTS game. Something kinda like homeworld I guess. But it still doesn't belong in a ground based RTS game like Galactic BattleGrounds. What we have now is about all we really need I think. Except the fighters should be able to swoop around and strafe enemy targets instead of hovering.

A single game can't do it all. If you try to do everything you'll end up doing nothing very well. You have to find the focus of your game and concentrate on that. For the Galactic Battlegrounds series that is ground combat. If they release a Galactic BattleFleet game then that game's focus should be on capital ships. You just can't mix the two scales very well. I'd love to see either or both of those games. I just don't want to see them together that all;)

Kryllith
08-17-2002, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by CorranSec

I don't think anything (apart from fortressses and turrets, Kryllith said) should be able to see over walls. Artillery and the like should have to use their 'attack ground' function to damage suspected enemy buildings and units inside the walls.

I think there should be a scout upgrade that allows them to see over walls using advanced technology. Of course, they'd have to drive near the walls for it to work. Doing so would allow them full view of whatever is on the other side (buildings, units, terrain, resources). When the scout pulled back, only "permanent" structures would remain viewable. This would allow artillery to fire upon buildings or grounds attack resources if they want to, but prevent them from targeting units and preventing them from knowing whether the building/resource has been destroyed or not unless the scout is still next to the wall (in which case it would probably be killed quickly). Of course, as it is, people can simply use fighters for the same purpose... so I'd probably give scouts a few more changes..

Kryllith

DK_Viceroy
08-21-2002, 09:22 AM
SWGB 2 should be Similar to Imperium galactica 2 alliances but differenet like it should be galaxy wide with each civ having a starter planet and a small fleet in orbit of that planet .{i do admit for some civs they would have to be made up for a space fleet}
Each civ having about 20 Unique Units NO pop limit but pop would grow depending on morale and what their cities are like say if about 200 ppl had houses and none for the rest pop would grow slowly. For ships and mechs and things u wouldn't be able to build them unless you had a certain amount of unused ppl to crew them as well as resources.Their should be something like 100 planets 20 civs it would rock any one who has played imperium galactica 2 or any game similar would definetly agree with me. It would take the game into 3D in too ways. it would make the gameplay more free going o fighting is not confined to one battlefiled per game and it would be in 3D graphics who thinks it would be a good idea. Also it wouldn't have a scenario editor it would have a galaxy creator which would allow you to create the galaxy and say whether a planet was rich in resoources or otherwise and would have premade scenarios like senate.

jcb231
08-21-2002, 12:03 PM
PLEASE Viceroy.....use some freakin' punctuation and paragraphs or something....
Jeez you're hard to understand.

simwiz2
08-21-2002, 03:11 PM
I think a few improvements could be taken from other games. Farms never running out improves gameplay drastically. No more coming back later and finding 10 idle villagers and the queue run out. Also, no hard pop limit, instead having it based on controlling certian strategic locations. Turtling would be harder, and there would be importance to controlling more of the map.

lukeiamyourdad
08-21-2002, 04:45 PM
Hey guys,

Im new here so please don't flame or insult me unless what I say is really stupid.

I' ve read this thread from the start and I think some of the changes would only complicate things. Althought some are really good. Remember that this is an RTS and not everybody are experts. If the game is too complicated or has need for a lot of micro management, the rookie players will just get bored. For example: If anybody ever has played Alpha Centauri, you'll have noticed that it attracted great reviews... from the hardcore gamers. I played it for half an hour and got tired because it was too complicated. And by the way, they should add a comsat station like in Star Craft. It could help you see over the walls when you're using artillery just like when you use Terran Siege Tanks in Star Craft.

KoL ShadowJedi
08-22-2002, 07:03 AM
I like the concept of 3D, that would make it cool but remember it would take time to make a completely new engine, i would also like to see bigger maps. You might have guessed that im a scenario player and to be honest when i make a senate map the biggest map you make is tiny, cap ships are cool but it would ruin the concept of battlegrounds, maybe if the cap ships were in the toybox..... then i would agree. I hate the way the AT-AT is weak, I thought that in the films AT-AT's were the Strongest ground unit ever built (as 5 of them took out echo station) and in the game its a job for 2 AT-AT's to take out a turret. Hmmmmmm that bit needs work. :atat: night/day enviroments are cool, if it could go through day to night on 1 game that would also be cool, Tiberian Sun wasnt a great hit but it had a good concept with search lights etc. I dont agree with having more than 10 - 12 civs, perhaps in the toybox they could have more species.

Thats all i can think of right now so laters.

lukeiamyourdad
08-22-2002, 02:35 PM
To KoL Shadow Jedi

I totally agree with you about the AT-AT. In the movie, a big bunch of Snow speeder have a really hard time to get rid of 5 AT-ATs and they only destroyed one! (The one that luke destroyed does not count in my post because he wasn't in his Snow Speeder) In the game, a few snow speeder can get rid of a lot of AT-AT. I think they have some time to develop a new engine although I am not for it. If they ever make a SWGB2 it will out around Ep 3 and that is not before 2005. Tiberian sun was a good game anyway. It had some good stuff.

Crazyus Dogus
08-22-2002, 05:56 PM
Remember, it has to be b-a-l-a-n-c-e-d.

Airspeeders degraded mean a serios disadvantage for Rebels vs Empire missions/ scenarios/ matches.

eizo131
08-23-2002, 03:56 AM
I think that SWGB2 shoulkd still be on one planet, have a wheather generator, night/day, no cap ships unless their are 2 planets, more civis, infinite farms and auto-reaserch.

Darth Windu
08-23-2002, 07:06 AM
viceroy - i really dont think thats a good idea. GB is a ground based game, i think if there is going to be a game based on what you're suggesting, they should make it a new one.

With artillery, i think there should be two sorts, strategic and tactical, sorta like the balista and catapult in AoE. The tactical artillery would be quick, cheap with a short range, while the strategic would be slow, expesnsive, powerful, and have a long range with a large area of effect, and also replace the canon.

simwiz2
08-23-2002, 02:40 PM
Originally posted by Darth Windu
With artillery, i think there should be two sorts, strategic and tactical, sorta like the balista and catapult in AoE. The tactical artillery would be quick, cheap with a short range, while the strategic would be slow, expesnsive, powerful, and have a long range with a large area of effect, and also replace the canon.

Strategic should not get area of effect. It was rediculously easy to mow down massive armies with onagers in AoK. Unless they had cavalry they would rarely reach the onagers to counter them. And in GB, it is rediculously easy to kill an army of almost anything with a few aircruisers.

lukeiamyourdad
08-23-2002, 03:42 PM
It depends on what kind of rts you're playing. In GB, you have aircraft that can counter both the artillery and the air cruisers so they have at least a big weakness you can easily take advantage of.

KoL ShadowJedi
08-23-2002, 07:04 PM
I have to say that AC's are fairly easy to destroy if you have the right force for E.G. 3 AC's attacking ur base they have 5 AA troopers wiv em and 4 aircraft (preferably fast fighters) u send in (if you have around that number) 7 fast fighters 2 troopers and 2 AA.............. then u get a defense again etc...


You see the fast fighters would get their air cruisers while ur AA is getting their fast fighters and your troopers are getting rid of their AA..

Im not sure if it works cos i havnt had a chance to try it.

simwiz2
08-23-2002, 09:27 PM
I know they are easy to destroy. The problem is, by the time you have destroyed them, your army is lying in a shattered heap upon the ground. Yes, your opponent lost 1800 nova but your army is gone. Giving that kind of potential to much tougher, less expensive ground units would be a problem. The only way to give them area attack would be to give them low attack, so that they damage alot, but don't destroy any unless you have several. And there are certain situations where AC's can deliver carnage and be completely safe.

Kryllith
08-23-2002, 09:43 PM
Originally posted by KoL ShadowJedi
I have to say that AC's are fairly easy to destroy if you have the right force for E.G. 3 AC's attacking ur base they have 5 AA troopers wiv em and 4 aircraft (preferably fast fighters) u send in (if you have around that number) 7 fast fighters 2 troopers and 2 AA.............. then u get a defense again etc...


You see the fast fighters would get their air cruisers while ur AA is getting their fast fighters and your troopers are getting rid of their AA..

Im not sure if it works cos i havnt had a chance to try it.
If I were in this situations with the air crusiers, I'd level the enemy ground force of 4 units with my air cruiser (one or 2 should do the trick). While the fighters are attacking my aircruisers, my fighters and AA would be attacking their fighters. Given the odds, I'd stand a fairly good chance to destroying the opponent without losing a unit...

Kryllith

CorranSec
08-24-2002, 02:42 AM
OK. I went on holidays for a week, so obviously I've missed a lot. Please accept my most humble apologies. (Last sentence said the way Kub'ar Mub'at would say it... ;))

ShadowJedi, Kryllith, simwiz, the fact is that Air Cruisers were designed to be easily countered by fighters and AA while still being able to hand out hefty amounts of damage to ground troops.
Fighters can intercept them en-route and knock them out of the sky, while AA's can do the same thing. AA turrets and the like can even outrange them, so they are balanced and should remain the same.

Luke's dad, ShadowJedi, the At-At thing is a matter of
Gameplay -->> realism. The fact is that many things you see in the movies will not work the same way in the game- if they did, the game balance would be thrown out the window. This would overpower At-At's, and even if it was done to all assault mechs, turrets and airspeeders would become rather useless in this area.
Airspeeders were designed to wreak absolute havoc on mechs, representing their skill against At-At's in the Hoth battle. Their tow cables etc. could not be shown, so they just increased their laser power. Makes sense to me.

Luke's dad- Whoa, I wasn't suggesting anything amazingly complicated aka Alpha Centauri style. Swooping and twisting fighters, etc. is just graphics. Freighters and frigates etc. would just be another thing built at the Airbase, or some such. And so on, and so forth. What exactly has been proposed that would excessively complicate the game?

Viceroy, plus whoever wants a purely space based/purely ground based game, I believe this would make the game boring and narrow. The whole point of an SW game is to portray battles and the like occuring in the SW universe- and these are not just air OR ground battles, but a mix of both. If you want to look at the movies, every SW movie released (with the exception of ep 4) has had a large ground battle AND a space battle. Doesn't this show that a mix is necessary to accurately show the SW universe? And isn't it obvious that a broader scope would bring in a broader consumer base?
I've played IG2, and though it was fun, it is clearly one thing and one thing only- a space RTS. Now this is ok for a made- up world like the IG world, but not appropriate for the SW world, as I said before.

simwiz2
08-24-2002, 11:55 AM
Originally posted by CorranSec
ShadowJedi, Kryllith, simwiz, the fact is that Air Cruisers were designed to be easily countered by fighters and AA while still being able to hand out hefty amounts of damage to ground troops.
Fighters can intercept them en-route and knock them out of the sky, while AA's can do the same thing. AA turrets and the like can even outrange them, so they are balanced and should remain the same.

Yes, it is mostly balanced. I am just saying that if that kind of destructive potential (a "large" area of effect with long range) was given to a more difficult-to-destroy ground unit, it would be unbalanced. Also I am assuming strategic artillery would not cost 600 nova, so it could not have that ind of destruction. Btw, AA turrets do not outrange AC's unless you attack them directly. But why attack them directly when you have a several-tile blast radius?

However, there are rare times in a game where AC's can become near invincible. A few forward AA turrets and your aircruisers are quite safe unless they decide to kamikazee their entire air force - not recommended. AAM's, troopers, AA troopers - suddenly the second their army steps in front of their AA turrets its life expectancy plummets. No other unit can do this, and it can become a stalemate fast because you need troopers/strikes to stop grenadiers from making short work of your cannons that are removing their forward base. *Air Cruiser(s) Fires* Entire covering army gone. Grenadiers come and destroy cannons 1 by 1, or a few more AC's demolish the whole group. Spreading your units out only delays the inevitable and buys your units a few seconds. In late T4, with homing sensors and adv AA, If you have a few covering AA turrets, a few AC's can kill almost any attack instantly, and then it's just a matter of mopping up the few units that escape. Someone could kamikazee 40 fighters into the AA and kill two, if they are lucky. And if you have a few covering fighters as well as AA, forget it. The ONLY unit that can take down AA + fighter covered AC's cost effectively is Airspeeders. They take 3 AA hits and for some reason their attack vs AC's isn't half bad. Starfighters too, until your opponent learns about sentry posts. AAM's work to an exent, but it's a micro-intensive process of making a "bait" group and making the "revenge" group, making sure the other person only sees the bait, letting it be destroyed, and persuing with the revenge ones after the AC shot is already used. And grenadiers will make quick work of the AAM's.

They are not really overpowered, but sometimes I wonder if creating stalemates was what LA had in mind.

jcb231
08-24-2002, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by Darth Windu
viceroy - i really dont think thats a good idea. GB is a ground based game, i think if there is going to be a game based on what you're suggesting, they should make it a new one.

With artillery, i think there should be two sorts, strategic and tactical, sorta like the balista and catapult in AoE. The tactical artillery would be quick, cheap with a short range, while the strategic would be slow, expesnsive, powerful, and have a long range with a large area of effect, and also replace the canon.

Don't we sort of have this already with the heavy weapons factory artillery as the tactical and the cannons as the strategic?

lukeiamyourdad
08-24-2002, 03:09 PM
Corran, I said that it was complicated a little bit for rookie players and my reference to alpha centauri was just a exemple. Maybe you read me wrong or it is me that did not explained myself clearly enough so sorry...:D

but on another thing about the air cruisers and the possibility of having new units in SWGB 2 (if they ever make one).

I have been thinking about the possibility of some kind of fighter/bomber that fires a rocket or torpedo against it's enemy.
It would have bomber speed and attack bonuses against turrets and air cruisers but against everything else it would just suck( to balance it out). Every civs could get one. It does not get shields however but has about 50 hp(or lower). Unlike bombers, it would have a better range and Im proposing this because when your playing a civ that depends only or mostly on their air force(like the Naboo on non-water maps) it gets frustrating to lose a big bunch of bombers to destroy a few Adv AA turrets since it needs to close in on the turret first( 1 is not a very useful range). I figure out that we would need a aircraft that could deal big damage on the turrets without the need of closing so close. We already have the air cruiser but i don't think it's worth the cost against turrets (Adv AA can outrange ACs and they get killed in less than 5-6 shots which is not enough time for the aircruiser to destroy that turret). Remember what I said it sucks against everything except the turrets and air cruisers( it means it would do 1 damage to everything else and would be weak against all aircraft and AA stuff. oh and it would have a long reload rate, as long as the jedi starfighter's one)

Please tell me what you think about that. If everybody things it's stupid than I'll just back out...unlike some people(not pointing out anybody:mad: )

lukeiamyourdad
08-24-2002, 03:12 PM
By the way I forgot,
Corran I was talking to everyone when i said the stuff about Alpha Centauri and the rest of it not exactly you anyway...sorry:(

simwiz2
08-24-2002, 10:04 PM
Originally posted by jcb231


Don't we sort of have this already with the heavy weapons factory artillery as the tactical and the cannons as the strategic?

Yes. And that is how strategic should be - no area of effect, somewhat inaccurate, possibly a deploy time.

KoL ShadowJedi
08-26-2002, 05:59 PM
hey, if LA read the forums and stuff they shud take our thoughts into consideration after all we do buy the games - if there good

joesdomain
08-27-2002, 10:12 PM
Add those to a 2nd pack to be complete. Keep 6 civ. and increase population from 250 to 500 units or whatever they can increase it too. The more the merrier.
Add Capital Ships Trade Federation Droid Control Ship and Battleship, Royal Cruiser, Royal Yacht, Royal Bomber, Queen's Ship, Imperial Star Destroyer Class I and also class II, Super Star Destroyer, Death Star I and Death Star II, Imperial Shuttle (Lamda Class) to appriopate airbases. Increase all air transport carrying capacity to 25 units. Allow the capital ships to carry 25-50 units. Increase boat transports carrying capacity to 25 units and AT-AT walkers to 25 units. Increase Armor on AT-AT and increase shields.
Add Mon Calamari cruiser, escort frigate, corellion corvette or blockade runners, b-wings, v-wings, falcon, and snowspeeders to rebel airbase. Add Republic Assualt Ship to Republic airbase. Add Admiral Ackbar, Mon Monmotha, Tarkin, General Nadine, General Riekkan, Admiral Ozzel, Admiral Piett and Captain Piett to the game.
Add snowtroopers, imperial probe droids, and scout troopers or speeder bikes as special units for empire. Add Imperial guards and officers that are in charge of the troops.
Add Rebel Hoth soldiers and Rebel Endor Troopers to troop center in Rebels.
As a Space Battle option where you make fleets and duke it out.
Maybe if they had enough memory and advancements to putt each of the important units into the single player option so you can make them like vadar. I don't like using the scenario editor often. To time consuming and i just want to start playing when i put my cd in. :fett: :fett: :fett:

Crazyus Dogus
08-28-2002, 08:05 AM
1) Imps already have Probe driods as UUs and Speeder Bikers are there scouts.
2) "Rebel Trooper" is a general category. Now Hoth Trooper and Endor trooper are the same guys with different clothes. In the game it would only mean a cosmetic change which would make them useless. Same with Imperial Snowtroopers.
3) Airspeeders, snowspeeders, what's the difference? Also why change building?
4) Officers aren't part of the game. If so, what would they do? Units have formations by themselves, and if u didn't do the commanding of your units, there would be no game. The closest thing to your idea is RoN's General unit.
5) You don't build Heroes in normal buildings. Otherwise they won't be heroes.

I think that having too many units would confuse make the game very confused.
Also Imperial Shuttle is already the Imp's transport.
And as for Death Star's, think about it alittle bettter.

joesdomain
08-28-2002, 08:26 PM
I meant the imperial interrgator droid (Star Wars Episode IV) and those speeder bikes on the empire side are storm troopers on bikes. I want to build the imperial scout troopers from Episode VI on speeder bikes or at least as a trooper kind. Maybe add them as toy box units. I want to see all the capital and big ships from Episodes I, II, IV, V, and VI to each side. I prefer them added to the airbase but if they just put them as toy box units i would not complain. I don't like the star destroyer, death star and corvette using those awful cheats. They are under scale and shoot stupid unrealistic weapons. The ships don't shoot one large weapon. The star destroyer blows up when the rebel fighters hit it with 5-6 shots. I mean where is all the armor and shields at. At least the shields and armor are apprioate for the death star cheat.

Crazyus Dogus
08-29-2002, 06:55 AM
OK sounds fair now. I would also have like the stormies replaced by scouties but only only as a graphical change.:)

Yah and maybe the Air Cruisers could be replaced by cap. ships.

As for the Death Star it is very powerful and should be kept as a toybox or cheat unit.

BTW I suggested having the DS in the game at all, and I guess my wish was granted. Thank u LA.

lukeiamyourdad
08-29-2002, 12:30 PM
Crazyus Dogus

I agree with you that the change from stormtrooper to snowtrooper would be purely cosmetic but will add a little fun.

joesdomain
08-29-2002, 02:41 PM
I agree get rid of air cruisers. Why make new units when they didn't use all the units from the star wars universe first. They should add a space battle option or space battle mode so you can make fleets of capital ships, fighters, and bombers. If they do that, Don't leave out any of the ships. I can't stress enough. This game needs more capital ships and aircraft added. I know rebellion game was released a few years ago but it was time consuming and out of date. I think it would be cool to have ground, air, sea, and space battles in next sequel or expansion pack. I mean actual fleets of ships duking it out to see who wins. If they add capital ships make sure they don't use air cruiser attack. Make them shoot 4-5 shots at a time.:deathstar :deathii:

eizo131
09-02-2002, 09:29 AM
sigh... this is the second time I am gonna say this LAMBA CLASS SHUTTLES ARE DIFFRENT FROM THE IMPERIAL TRANSPORT look @ the SW official site database. They should change troopers clothing depending on the wheather ie snowtroopers for snow, scouts for jungle and regular troopers for everything else. And the republic would change their visors like in EP2 they had mirror like visors on their suits.

lukeiamyourdad
09-02-2002, 03:47 PM
Joesdomain, your idea of space battle is cool but i would like to add a little something. You would build the capital ships in space yards and not on ground.

Darth Windu
09-03-2002, 01:32 AM
joe - aircruisers should be kept exactly where they are. However the art should be changed to reflect the capital ships of the different civs as in-
Empire = Star Destroyer
Republic = Assault ship thingy
Trade Federation = Battleship
etc

CorranSec
09-03-2002, 03:53 AM
Hmm. Much development and crazy ideas since I was last hear.
Joe- Your ideas may be cool, but I don't appreciate your canon-only outlook. This is a game. It is not the movie.
LA made the units the way they are because it is a game.
They put air cruisers in to represent some kind of cap ship and to have a powerful air unit.
They didn't put in the stuff you said because it is unbalancing and useless.
Have you considered how these units would fit in the game? How possible UU's would compliment the civ's specialties? How it would be balanced?
Some of your cosmetic changes would be nice, but changing everything else just because 'that's the way the movies had it' is destroying the game.
Remember,
Gameplay --> realism!

eizo- right. Yep. I know.
What's with the visors? My memory is a little blurred... you can't see them up close anyway, but elaborate if you wish.

joesdomain
09-04-2002, 12:27 AM
I like my star wars games appear realistic. I don't like made up units like Air Cruisers. They should of picked one capital ship for each civilation and used that instead of making new units up that i have never seen before in the star wars novels or movies. I say make the laser turrent and anti-air turrent the same thing. Make it shoot both. That way you have more space to add extra upgrades and special units or unique units. I think the sith temples and jedi temples should be the same size as the fortress with better armor and shields. I think the turrents should be more powerful by increasing hit points and attack. Increase the hit points and attack of the command center. I don't understand why a command center can shoot lasers from out of nowhere. The same goes for the fortress. Maybe add a couple graphic pictures of turrents. Make the naboo and trade federation troopers with repeaters. Add armor, hit points, attack, and durarmor to mounted troopers, anti-airtroopers, thermal detonator troopers and regular troopers. Increase armor on imperial probot. Increase armor and hit points on scout troopers. Increase armor and shields on empire, trade federation, confederacy aircraft. Increase armor and hit points on Naboo, Wookie, Confederacy and Rebel Mech's. Increase armor, attack and hit points on AT-AT and Republic Heavy Assualt Mech. Increase carrying capacity of Air Transports to 25 units and increase ship transports carrying capacity to 25 units. Increase attack, hit points, armor, and shields of all ships.
Make the troopers look different in each civilation like snowtroopers in ice or snow conditions, rebel endor troopers in forest environments, rebel snowtroopers in ice or snow conditions, etc.
Most important I think it to add more unique units for each civilation: For Example pick 5 new units for the 2nd expansion pack or sequel-
Empire:
Tie Advanced or Tie Avenger, Imperial Interrgator Droid, Imperial Speeder Bike Scout that can be a trooper or get on his speeder bike and be a scout, Imperial Officers and/or guards, Imperial Lamda Class Shuttle, etc. I know some of those are toy box units but they aren't hero units. The empire could make more than one.
Rebels:
B-wings (then add V-wing as Toy box unit in scenario editor to replace it's spot), etc.
Do that for all 7 civilations.

DK_Viceroy
09-04-2002, 04:38 AM
i was thinking of something similar to IG2 not identical more ground battles than space battles but thanks a lot for the input on my idea it's nice to not be insulted for a good idea.


WINDU THE GUNSHIP IS NEVER GETTING IN THIS GAME

simwiz2
09-04-2002, 11:13 AM
Joe, a lot of the ideas in your recent post would throw off the game balance. This game is already incredibly easy to stalemate, walls do not need any more hitpoints. Same with turrets. They already decimate almost anything that comes into their range, more attack will overpower them. Your strengthening of Confed/TF/Emp air and of Naboo/Wook/Reb/Confed mechs would make the civs much more similar by strenthening their weaknesses. The civs need to remain as unique as possible.

And for every new unit there needs to be a purpose for it to fill in gameplay. Many of your units will not easily fit into the current game, though in a SWGB2 with Unique Unit Sets some of them could work.

Kryllith
09-04-2002, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by DK_Viceroy

THE GUNSHIP IS NEVER GETTING IN THIS GAME
Never say never, especially when you don't have any proof to back up your claim (besides, it's already in the game, just not set up as some desire).

Kryllith

lukeiamyourdad
09-04-2002, 07:41 PM
DK_Viceroy
you are sooo wrong! It already is the fast fighter!:lol: :lol: :lol:

VE_Strange
09-05-2002, 04:12 AM
I agree that the Air cruisers should have been like each civs big capital ship. Would have made having the things more realistic. But then again... with it being a ground based game, wouldnt be too cool to see a Imperial Star Destroyer coming in to hover over your base shooting turbolasers all over your carcass. :)

Strange

emimar
09-05-2002, 08:38 AM
:deathii:

I'm not really bothered about a star wars battlegrounds 2 but would like to see more ailen civs and eu charactors in an xpac.

KoL ShadowJedi
09-05-2002, 01:22 PM
YAY my 50th post!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I very much doubt there will be an xpac.... SWGB 2 maybe

DK_Viceroy
09-05-2002, 04:57 PM
yeah lets mess up a really great game eh let's make it really realistic like put in time line and we can pick different parts so civs have different strengths units weaknesses and while were at it lets' let the empire build all of it's superweapons like the suncrusher death star and world deavastators and don't forget the galaxy gun

ha had you miserable lot going

this part isn't a joke tho
put in time line and we can pick different parts so civs have different strengths units weaknesses like for empire after endor their fighters would be really good but everything more expensive reason behinf good fighters is because thrwan fitted defenders fighters and interceptors with sheilds defender had hyperdrive any way let's put in evry detail make it a huge great big game how bout it

lukeiamyourdad
09-05-2002, 05:14 PM
DK_Viceroy
Thereis a problem with your idea.It would confuse people and if some race was destroyed(confederacy and gungan(they COULD have been wiped out by the Empire)) they would not be available.

joesdomain
09-09-2002, 12:09 AM
I think lucasarts should make the turrent and anti-air turrent the same. Why make separate weapons and take up space when you can have one turrent shoot a laser that could kill air, ground, and sea units. I think it would also be cool if they could add more of the star wars droids to each civilation like use one droid to collect ore, another one to collect nova and so on. There are so many droids from the star wars universe not used that could be used. I also think they should add more weapons, buildings, and other things in scenario editor so we can duplicate star wars locales like hoth base, cloud city, coruscant, mos eisley, mos espa, dagobah, yavin 4, alderran, geonosis, kamino, naboo, ord mantell, and all the other star wars planets.

Crazy_dog no.3
09-09-2002, 03:42 AM
If u noticed:
Hoth, Bespin, Coruscant, Tatooine, Dagobah, Yavim 4, Geonosis, and Naboo are all in the game in some way or another (look out for Dagobah in single-player;) ). Kamino, Alderaan and Ord Mantell can be easily made.

KoL ShadowJedi
09-09-2002, 12:22 PM
dagobah is just swamps, only a few buildings on the entire planet...

lukeiamyourdad
09-09-2002, 05:08 PM
What would be fun is to fight in actual cities. The cities' buildings could not be destroyed and you could place repeaters in them. it would be nice to have a guerilla war in a city...

joesdomain
09-11-2002, 11:08 PM
I know some of those cities are in the game. I was just naming all the planets I knew.

I think if they were to add more new units to the present civilations then certain civilations would not have certain buildings to balance it out. For Example)

Add Imperial Interrogator Droids, Scout Troopers, Tie Advanced, Imperial Lamda Class Shuttle, Imperial Navy Troopers, Imperial Officers, Star Destroyer and super star destroyers, then remove heavy weapons factory and it's units and the shipyard and it's units and also remove anti-air troopers. That would balance it out and not make the empire the most powerful. If you still thought the empire was too powerful then make the empire make only Sith Knights or take the whole Sith Temple Out. Do that for each civilation. Add more movie star wars units and balance them by removing weak units.

joesdomain
09-14-2002, 03:14 AM
Here is another idea:

-Each Civilization gets a Space Depot building (Not sure how they would do the gungan civilization)
-Each Civilization could make capital ships and play a space battle mode (Available in Scenario Editor and Campaigns mode also)
Make the Trade Federation, Republic, Wookies, Gungans, Naboo, and Confederacy have faster building rate and cheaper ships vs Empire and Rebels to balance the game since those 6 civ's don't have many capital ships.
Make the ships have multiple ion cannon or lasers (NO Air Cruiser attack) Shields, armor, hit points and attack would be large.
Make them close to scale.
For examaple:

Empire:
Star Destroyer Class I
Star Destroyer Class II (Has more shields, attack and armor than class I)
Super Star Destroyer

Rebels:
Mon Calamari Star Cruiser
Escort Frigate
Corellian Corvette

Republic:
Republic Assualt Ship

Naboo:
Naboo Cruiser, Royal Yacht, Queen's Ship

Trade Federation:
Trade Federation Droid Controlled Ship
Trade Federation Battleship

Confederacy:
Corporate Alliance Battleship (Just an Idea- doesn't exist yet)
Commerce Guild Battleship
Techno Union Battleship

Wookie:
Wookie Battleship

lukeiamyourdad
09-14-2002, 12:09 PM
Dude, you dont have to mention the same thing 20000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000 times...we got it.

CorranSec
09-16-2002, 04:23 AM
I have a theory. It's rather interesting.
I think joesdomain and DKViceroy are the same person. Mmm, tricky, huh?
No offense to either of you... but your ideas seem to be rather similar. Needless to say, I don't like many of them.
Joe, your interest in space is good, but you have much to learn about exactly how to DO it.
You're saying we make space stations etc. and make many ships from movies. One of those canon-only people, eh? bah. You need a broooaaaadder outlook on life. It's a game! It's allowed to be different in the interests of gaming. And balance. And all that good stuff.
"Everything to scale?" Do you know how big an SD Deuce IS!? You'd cover the entire map. And don't even think about a Death Star...
Argh. I must go. More postage later.

joesdomain
09-17-2002, 10:19 PM
I only mention it a few times.
Star Destroyers can be more to scale. Make the fighters and bombers smaller if they have to. I hate seeing fighters and combers almost the same size as corellian corvette or a star destroyer. I am not sure what canon-only means but if it means I like to stick to the units of the star wars movies then yes i am canon. I also said earlier in many other post that i would like to see EU units also. I don't like made up units. Heavy weapons factory units like pummels, anti-air mobiles and artilery in the rebel and empire civ. should not be there. Lucasarts made that stuff up for their video games. I would not buy a game with units made up just for a video game. AT-PT walkers are cool and I believe those came from Star Wars comics or novels. With the weak fighters, bombers, sith, troopers, shipyard units, and workers in the empire, the empire is very weak. They are only good in Mech and maybe heavy weapons but I dislike heavy weapons so much. They should have Imperial Lamda Class Shuttle and Tie Advanced as Unique units or regular units in the empire airbase and B-wings as a Unique unit in the rebel airbase. Get rid of the heavy weapons factories for both of them.
That is balance to me. If you want balance then just get rid of heavy weapons in empire.

simwiz2
09-18-2002, 12:44 AM
Corran: No, they can't be the same because joe actually knows how to use periods to form sentences. :)

Originally posted by joesdomain
(1) I only mention it a few times.
(2) Star Destroyers can be more to scale. Make the fighters and bombers smaller if they have to.
(3) I hate seeing fighters and combers almost the same size as corellian corvette or a star destroyer.
(4) I don't like made up units.
(5) ...anti-air mobiles...should not be there.
(6) Lucasarts made that stuff up for their video games.
(7)I would not buy a game with units made up just for a video game.
(8) AT-PT walkers are cool and I believe those came from Star Wars comics or novels.
(9) With the weak fighters, bombers, sith, troopers, shipyard units, and workers in the empire, the empire is very weak.
(10) They are only good in Mech and maybe heavy weapons but I dislike heavy weapons so much.
(11) They should have Imperial Lamda Class Shuttle and Tie Advanced as Unique units or regular units in the empire airbase and B-wings as a Unique unit in the rebel airbase
(12) That is balance to me.
(13) If you want balance then just get rid of heavy weapons in empire.

1 - You have mentioned it REPETETIVELY in almost EVERY thread on the board. And you are repeating it again in this post.
2 - To scale, HAH!!! Do you want the fighters to be 1 pixel each on the screen? Considering you seem to be one of those people who like the "fluff" of games, I don't think you would tolerate such simple graphics. Also, it could be a bit hard to see.
3 - You see, that's why they don't have capital ships in the standard games. Because whiners would be saying that they are too small, its not realistic, the sky is going to fall, etc.
4 - We know.
5 - How do you intend to balance air? Oh wait! I forgot, you don't...
6 - Yeah! You see, it's a game, and most people play it to have fun with a bit of fiction, not to get 150 perfectly scaled SSD's and wipe out all the other civs because nothing can counter it.
7 - Then don't buy it. And why, then, if you didn't want to buy the game are you here? Do us all a favor, sell your copy on Ebay and leave. (You DID buy the game, right?)
8 - I'm sure a lot of units are cool and came from star wars comics or novels. That does not mean the game has to be canon only.
9 - The empire is one of the better civs IMO. Maybe you ought to learn how to play, rather than expecting air to be overpowered as in your imagined game, and just pumping out TIE's and trying to win. Maybe we should try a zone game some time. THAT would be amusing.
10 - If you don't like the empire's strengths then DON'T PLAY AS THE EMPIRE!!!!! That's like saying: I hate Jedi and I hate troops and I hate air, I think the Rebels are too weak! I can't stress this enough: learn to play GB, then post!
11 - ...and death stars and uber-units and they should be unbeatable unless their rebel opponent builds Luke Skywalker, and the game should ALWAYS follow the movies exactl... there's just no explaining stuff to you is there?
12 - No, balance to you is... oh wait you don't care about balance do you?
13 - So your great balancing suggestion is for LA to just take out hvy weapons from the empire and the game is balanced? Then they WOULD be weak! Your comments make no sense much of the time, but at least they are in sentences and readable.

CorranSec
09-18-2002, 03:34 AM
Corran: No, they can't be the same because joe actually knows how to use periods to form sentences.
Lol! :D That's harsh, but funny.

Hmm. Simwiz, your style of argument (constant hammering at the other side) makes me think that maybe joesdomain is Windu in disguise....

But yeah. Joe, take notice of what people say about your ideas rather than just charging on ahead and saying them again. Specifically, listen to Simwiz showing you why they are all useless, and then don't just repost them. Kapeesh? :)

joesdomain
09-18-2002, 04:51 PM
This is so stupid. I repeat my ideas for newcomes to lucasforums and in hopes of lucasarts is reading the forums. I really could care less what corran or siwz thinks. I am not windu nor do I know him. I am sorry but unlike all of you who are RTS game fanatics and star wars video game fanatics I like the select few star wars games I buy more like the movies. I have played this game hundreds of times. I don't mulitplayer because it is not fun. I don't play online. I only like Empire and Rebel civ. Games that include Episode I, II, or III material don't interest me. That includes using trade federation, naboo, republic, confederacy, or wookies. My only interest is Rebels and Empire. I wish they would make a Galactic Battlegrounds that just had movie units of Episodes 4, 5, and 6. I guess that won't happen. I am not selling my game on E-bay.

Simz is getting real annoying. I said nothing of star destroyers being the size of the computer screen. I only meant make the fighters a little smaller and the capital ships should be bigger. Just a little bit bigger than the fortress.

You guys are real touchy when it comes to people who don't have the same ideas as you. You might think they are useless but to a normal person who plays Dark Forces and it's sequel and the other first person shooting games it makes tons of sense to be realistic. You don't see pummels or artilley in Jedi Knight or Dark Forces etc.

lukeiamyourdad
09-18-2002, 05:17 PM
You don't see pummels or artilley in Jedi Knight or Dark Forces etc.

And how would that make them dangerous in Jedi Knight and Dark Force?

Besides, they made up some stuff for Dark Force and Jedi Knight. Where else did you saw Kyle Katarn?

Newcomers read everything already so they know!

If you want rebs vs empire only then go play force commander and stop annoying us!

joesdomain
09-18-2002, 05:26 PM
I will continue typing my ideas and you can read my post or whatever. I could care less what any of you think. I post my ideas for people to read and get ideas. You guys are getting off the topic. This is ideas for a sequel to galactic battlegrounds and I am allowed to post them even if you guys think they are stupid, insane or useless. You guys get so defensive when it comes to ideas like capital ships being added. All I ask is a game like Rebellion and Galactic Battlegrounds combined. Quit complaing and enjoy the forums. I have never seen a forum complain this much.

Another thing, There is no plans or release date for a Galactic Battlegrounds 2 so it is all fan speculation and ideas. If you don't like my ideas, fine, then ignore my post and go on to the next. Quit calling people names and saying it is a insane idea or they are stupid. This is not, I repeat not a chat board and I doubt moderators like people flaming other people.

CorranSec
09-18-2002, 07:17 PM
Um, joe, newcomers can scroll back and look at all your posts.

We're not insulting you or having a hard time dealing with your ideas. We are allowed to rebut your ideas. We're not chatting, we're constructively debating. We are allowed to say what we think about an idea, and you are allowed to take notice, but you don't have to if you don't want to, even though I think you should.
Listening to input on ideas is a good thing. That way you can modify your ideas so people like them more. :)
Personally I like the idea of cap ships, but not exactly the same way you do. I'm allowed to do that.

Oh, btw, if i'm not allowed to do any of that, somebody please tell me.

simwiz2
09-19-2002, 03:09 PM
I would just put him on ignore, but most of his ideas are so hilarious that it is worth it to read them just for laughs...

KoL ShadowJedi
09-19-2002, 07:06 PM
uhuh, uhuh, uhuh, joesdomain i completely agree with them! do pls stop repeating yourself.

lukeiamyourdad
09-20-2002, 10:46 AM
joesdomain- it's not that we hate your ideas or everything my only gripe is that you always have to repeat all the time. that is annoying.

CorranSec
09-21-2002, 11:35 PM
OK. I was just really bored so I thought of some more stuff, some ACTUAL ideas for SW:GB 2, not this arguing that seems to be taking up the entire thread.
I've got nothing against arguing, of course... :D
Well. Anyway.

SW:GB 2 definitely needs more stealth units. The amount of stealth units in GB and CC is pathetic, and they can all be easily detected.
This may be unbalancing, I'm not sure, but such techs as "cloaking device" for starships and "personal cloaker" for troops would be very fun. There could be a "cloaking ship" sorta like the Arbiter in Starcraft, which cloaked units below it. Cloaking would of course detract from a "personal energy source" or something (basically mana).
Most sea ships could become submersibles and could fire from below the water, requiring a border of sensor buoys or whatever they're called to defend your base.
On the topic of sea combat, I'd like to see some towers etc. that you can build in the water, in the way you build those sensor buoy thingys

There would of course be more techniques to discover cloaking, but Bothan Spynet would have to be removed, as it makes all such things completely useless and is rather unbalancing. It really detracts from the game.
Instead, I'd like to see some "sensor sweep" techs, rather like the Terrans had in Starcraft, and my personal favourite- an aircraft called the "spy plane" or some such which could cloak but has no weapons, and a "scout ship" which was fast and a detector but has no weapons. Both of these could also fit into another expansion pack. :)

On the topic of air, I've already discussed a whole bunch of ways to improve it, but I'd like to see some more new units. One of these is a Floating Fortress, which is common in the SW universe, but this version basically an airborne tower or some such, which can land to give it a greater attack (sort of like ancient protectors in Warcraft III). Another is an airborne Sensor Buoy- maybe a little too good, but fighters could easily blow it out of the sky.
I don't support the idea of a Space Depot or whatever,
unless there were far more aircraft, including those designed to destroy air structures.

Ground armies could be greatly expanded. AA troopers could be complemented by special Blaster Troopers who could fire at airborne targets. There could be rocket troopers who excel at demolishing buildings. There could be an upgrade which allowed all troopers (AA, laser, etc.) to be mounted.
There could be far more mechs- eg. multipurpose mechs which are good at destroying troopers, fighters and bombers; fast mechs which can carry many units but have a weak attack; slow mechs which can be placed on a beach and used to destroy far-off sea targets; and so on, and so forth.

There could be non-combatants which are useful in combat; eg. fast mechanized units which are skilled at repairing mechs, 'spies' with permanent cloaking but low health and no attack; different workers which excel at different things eg. you could build a Mineral Harvester worker, a Food Gatherer worker, a Carbon gatherer worker; there could be big droids (ie tiberium harvesters) which are like workers, just a lot better and cost a lot more; and so on.

That's all for today. :)

joesdomain
09-22-2002, 12:18 AM
Here is what I would add to an expansion pack, update or patch for this game:

Jabba's Henchmen:
1. All the Members of Max Rebo Band
a. I think there is 12 members of the band.
Slave Dancers (Oola, Rystall, etc.) I think there is 6-7 total in ROTJ.
Salacious Crumb
EV-9d9 (Droid in charge of droids at Jabba's Palace)
Pote Snitkin
Have the two forms of Nikto in the game
Ree-yees (Gran species)
Saelt-Marae (Big nosed Troll on Jabba's Sail Barge)
Ephant Mon
Dengar (Bounty Hunter in ESB)
Admiral Ackbar or at least a Mon Calamari
General Crix Madine
General Rieekan
Mothma
Tarkin
Captain Piett
Admiral Piett
Admiral Ozzel
Captain Needa
Kyle Katarn
Grand Admiral Thrawn

Darth Windu
09-22-2002, 12:52 AM
Joe - STOP REPEATING YOUR POSTS. There is no need for it, and im sure lucasarts would've seen them by now.

As for the stealth units, im not so sure. I think that instead there should be a select few units which can cloak (ie jedi) but have less detector units, so its more effective.

simwiz2
09-22-2002, 01:30 AM
I think this has already been mentioned somewhere but I think in any sequel (or X-pack:)) stealth units should become translucent when they are not detected, and become opaque when they have been detected, so that you can immediately tell if your opponent knows where you are.

Also, I think air combat should be improved, with dogfights (either actually determining outcomes or just for eye candy), huge 3d explosions:atat:, bomber runs (dropping bombs for many tiles along target, not just all sitting around a turret damaging it), strafing runs, etc. This could make that part of the game look and play a bit more realistic and less forced. If they look at how air is going to be handled in RoN and used a similar system it would mean vastly improved air combat.

Darth Windu
09-22-2002, 01:39 AM
I absolutely agree with that, it would be great to see.

joesdomain
09-24-2002, 02:56 AM
You can fight it out on the death star I and/or death star II. And they should add a campaign that deals specifically with trying to go through the death star and kill all the empire or you are the empire and try to defend it from another civilization.

CorranSec
09-24-2002, 03:32 AM
I have another theory. It, too, is intruiging.
I think that after everybody told joe to stop, he just put us on ignore and kept posting his ideas.
Honestly, have you seen him take notice of any of our posts? Other than saying "i'm not taking notice of your posts"? No, he just keeps on posting things.
Even if you don't want to stop posting your ideas, could you have the courtesy to consider other people's ideas?

Simwiz- yeah, there really needs to be some more work on stealth graphics.
The air combat thing has already been raised... by me I think. :)

What's wrong with more cloaking? It would make the game far more interesting, as you'd have to deal with possible cloaked threats, while building your own cloaked units and sending them on secret missions. The whole cloak thing would make the game far more exciting- did anyone not get a shock when in Starcraft a swarm of Zerglings suddenly popped out of the ground in front of your advancing scout force and decimated them?

Crazy_dog no.3
09-24-2002, 03:42 AM
Joe, the Death Star would simply not work as a SW locale. There is no way to simulate it's weapons. Also it would be very hard to put in all the Death Star's corridors.

CorranSec
09-24-2002, 03:55 AM
I've been wondering something for a while, and I just decided to up and ask it right now, cos I'm bored.
This is directed at
JOESDOMAIN.
If he doesn't respond, I'm going to be rather annoyed.
Anyway...

Joe, why do you want all these things? Why all of these movie-perfect campaigns, locations etc? Why all of these useless toybox characters that nobody really will use, because they are non-combat? Unless you decide to arm the Max Rebo band, Oola, and so on...
I don't get it. Please tell me!

KoL ShadowJedi
09-24-2002, 04:29 AM
ive got to the stage where if joe posts a reply i just skip it

joesdomain
09-24-2002, 02:29 PM
Who says they are unarmed? Of course they would have weapons. Max Rebo band is working for a gangster, I am sure they have their own weapons. Adding more star wars locales and more toy box units makes the game more fun. You get tired of using the same buildable units in each civilization. Since there isn't going to be another star wars rts game anytime soon. They need more expansion packs and patches with these new added features. You misunderstood me! A video game can not be totally like a movie. It can be close! With adding more and more units it can be fairly realistic.

Corran I do consider other people's idea and i choose not to comment on them.

Crazy_dog no.3
09-24-2002, 04:15 PM
They all military units exept for heroes. All non heroe units are buildable (most of them anyway). Why would u want a Max Rebo band anyway? Exept to entertain your troops.;)

joesdomain
09-24-2002, 06:27 PM
They wouldn't play music during th game. Maybe they could add it onto Jabba's Palace. It is a shame you can't carry units in Jabba's sail barge and desert skiffs. That would make it a little more realistic.

Maybe they could add Jabba's Palace as a Star Wars Locale. I always wondered what it would be like to go through his palace.

Crazy_dog no.3
09-25-2002, 03:48 AM
Dude given what u are saying, u could say "Rebel Command center" as a locale.


Jabba's palace is in the game, as a building . If ya wont to wonder around buildings that come originally from an RTS, buy C&C Renegade.

CorranSec
09-25-2002, 07:27 PM
joe, crazy_dog is right. It seems that all you want to do is make incredibly realistic remakes of the movies, and wander around in them. Get Renegade. It's fun, in its own way.

Now, onto higher concern.... ;)
I don't know if this has been covered, but here goes.
Here's a list of ship types (which all civs can build) for SW:GB 2.

Cap ships:
Assault Transport (carries troops and can attack, this might be a medium ship)
Heavy Attack Ship (used for bombardment of ground, like an air cruiser)
Interceptor Cruiser (designed for killing fighters, there's a ship that i based this on but i forget its name.... Lancer frigate, maybe?)
Assault Fortress (the flying fortress I discussed earlier)

Medium ships:
Freighter (this is built at the airbase but is basically a trading ship like the one from the spaceport, but with full flight capabilities, but still no lasers)
Frigate (multi-purpose ship, can do some damage to ground (mostly troops), and take out other aircraft. Especially good at destroying other medium ships and interceptor cruisers)
Deceptor (a ship with weak lasers but strong armor, designed as a decoy)
Stealth frigate (the spy plane i talked about earlier)
Civilian transport (current transport)

Fighter:
Space Superiority fighter (same as the current fighter)
Air-to-ground bomber (current bomber)
Scout flier (the scout plane i talked about earlier)
Hunter (a flier designed to destroy sea units)
Assault fighter (an anti-cap-ship fighter, like the B-Wing)

How does this sound?

KoL ShadowJedi
09-25-2002, 07:58 PM
I like them all :):):):):)

MadrixTF
09-26-2002, 05:14 AM
Sorry to interrupt your party boys, but i actually like Joe's ideas. Ok, granted i'm relatively new, but i would like to see a more realistic interpretation of Star Wars. Don't get me wrong - I DO LIKE SWGB because i like AoE, but for a NEW SW RTS i think something new and refreshing would be good. Pummels, etc. just don't fit the star wars makeup.
So, my preference would be to have a Star Wars RTS with more space battles including all the items Joe listed.

CorranSec
09-26-2002, 07:24 AM
Um..... you can like joe's ideas, and we're not partying. ;)
But do you like him constantly repeating them and ignoring everybody?

Do you like my ideas? :D

Crazy_dog no.3
09-26-2002, 01:42 PM
Get rid of interceptor cruisers, assualt transport (too powerful. Transports would not need escorts. I think even joe will not agree to this), Stealth Frigate and Hunter (Sea battles are not a major thing)

lukeiamyourdad
09-26-2002, 02:00 PM
Something I don't understand about ships. When you have aircrafts, why do you need ships(except gungans)?

MadrixTF
09-27-2002, 09:22 AM
CorranSec: Ok, i just skimmed through your ideas now, i hadn't really noticed them before - too much battering of Joesdomain...

I think a combination of your ideas and Joe's ideas would be great, also Simwiz's idea about the Stealth translucency thing.

Your ideas seem to be a bit more generic in their makeup and naming, while Joe has specific ships from the Star Wars movies - but at the end of the day it could amount to the same thing. Example - Flying fortresses? sounds a bit silly to me - i think what you meant is Capital Ships - a fortress typically refers to ground-based.
Other than that you have good balance to your ideas at least.

CorranSec
09-28-2002, 10:05 PM
Thx for the support Madrix.
They wouldn't actually be named "Interceptor Cruiser," they'd be called Lancer-class frigate or something. That's just the class.
They could even have specific names which are randomly generated, and for even more fun, the actual graphics could be randomly generated.
Flying fortresses exist in the SW universe, that's why I used that name. The flying fortress idea was actually based around the Adumari Meteor.

My ideas are actually completely different, if you actually consider Joe's list of ship names as ideas. Sure, a Naboo frigate could look like the Queen's ship..... Rebel Interceptor Cruisers could look like Escort Frigates.... whatever. If slot his ideas for ship naming and looks into my ship classes, we could have some nicely canon ship battles. Then everyone would be happy.

Luke's dad and crazy_dog- in SW:GB 2, (sea) ship battles would be enhanced as well. I think I already put down an expanded list of ship types. It's because of this that we'd need aircraft like Hunters. Oh, and if anyone comes up with a name better than Hunter, tell me..... I just thought of it on the spur of the moment.

Interceptor cruisers would create fun battles eg. 1 interceptor valiantly battling a squadron of fighters. They create more ship diversity and balance. You haven't given a reason why they're bad anyway.

Assault Transport- I mainly put this in because normally in the SW universe, transports have guns. It's just a fact. Their power is compensated for by their expense and the fact that many things can blow them out of the sky.

Stealth Frigates would be cool. Once again, ship diversity, and is balanced by the Scout Frigate plus anything with guns. We need more stealth units, and this is just one of them.

joesdomain
09-28-2002, 11:21 PM
I think a option added in the main menu to be able to turn on and turn off the ability to combine civilizations and make a army with more than 1 civilization army would be cool. What do you think?

Kryllith
09-29-2002, 01:09 AM
Interesting idea, but rather complex. Are you suggesting that LucasArts make the combinations or would you have it set up so that the players can pick and choose which unit they would use (for example, one civs strike mech vs. the other's civ strike mech)? I suppose it could be random as to what type of unit is put out when, or perhaps simply the best unit is created. For example, if the Empire and Republic merged, then they'd use the AT-AT assault but the Advanced X-Wing fighter.

On the otherhand, if it was entirely left up to the players, that could be interesting too. I'd like to have the flexibility of mixing the units, the trouble is that it would tend to throw balance out of whack if L.A. allowed players that much mixing/matching freedom. Maybe if they set up some type of point system for unit selection in the merging, forcing a balance...

Kryllith

CorranSec
09-29-2002, 01:48 AM
That might be intruiging, but what's the point?

It would probably throw game balance to hell if you just put the option in there without LA doing some extensive re-balancing.

It also wouldn't make much sense, except for certain combos. For example, Rebels+Wookies and Naboo+Gungans would work, and so would Confederacy+Trade Federation, but the rest would be rather strange, to say the least. If it was just designed for those specific matchups, that would be pretty cool (provided LA did do extensive re-balancing), but there still needs to be a few changes.

For example, a Wookie+Rebel combo would probably provide that army with powerful troops, great air, pretty good jedi, and OK mechs. Say they were playing a 2v2 against Empire and Trade Fed, which can't combine, well.... we know who would win.

What happened to your canon-only outlook, joe? Firstly it was "I don't like anything non-canon" and now it's "let's combine the Rebels and the Republic!" I really don't understand it.

Kryllith
09-29-2002, 02:07 AM
Guess if they wanted to stick to canon they could limit it to just 4 combinations:

Naboo & Gungan
Rebellion & Wookies
Trade Federation and Confederacy
and Republic and Empire (which I guess could work since the Empire is really just Palpatine's reforging of the Republic.)

Kryllith

CorranSec
09-29-2002, 03:25 AM
Hey, Kryllith, it seems we think the same.
I actually considered the Republic + Empire, but dismissed it because they're too far apart in terms of time. Eg. At-Te's slowly evolved into At-At's, etc. If there was a combination between the two, it would have to include new units. Consider this- you couldn't have stormtroopers, they're new-generation. You couldn't have TIEs, they're new generation. You probably couldn't have Jedi, seeing as it's turning evil. Clones, mechs, etc... We have to see Episode III to find out!
That's basically the main problem. We don't know the exact details of the transformation. Once Ep III is out, it can be done, but not right now.

CorranSec
09-29-2002, 03:28 AM
Oh, btw, I forgot to add:
Hey, Kryllith, what do you think of my ship ideas? :)

Crazy_dog no.3
09-29-2002, 05:49 AM
Yes I know that realistically transports would have guns,but in gameplay terms this is too powerful. 12 transports, each with some 5/7 units, would beat a squadron of some 6 adv. fighters, and still be able to land troops.

Hunters. As joe might also say, in the SW universe there are no such ships anyway. All civs for this use bombers. For destroying ships, the destroyer is used.

Fighters are AA aircraft. All these ideas seem to make fighters obsolete.
Adding too many units is just as bad as adding taking away each non-canon unit.

Kryllith
09-29-2002, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by CorranSec
Hey, Kryllith, it seems we think the same.
I actually considered the Republic + Empire, but dismissed it because they're too far apart in terms of time. Eg. At-Te's slowly evolved into At-At's, etc. If there was a combination between the two, it would have to include new units. Consider this- you couldn't have stormtroopers, they're new-generation. You couldn't have TIEs, they're new generation. You probably couldn't have Jedi, seeing as it's turning evil. Clones, mechs, etc... We have to see Episode III to find out!
That's basically the main problem. We don't know the exact details of the transformation. Once Ep III is out, it can be done, but not right now.
Yeah, I agree with that. I had the same problem with figuring out where the conversion from Republic to Empire would work in unit-wise. The idea would be more feasible in a few years, which would work well if something along the lines of SWGB II were release near the time of Episode III. With a little luck, we'd have a bit of a chance to see any progression in unit evolution by then. Of course, we're still talking about a jump of 17 years or so between III and IV. Maybe LucasArts could just take the progression of the units and surprise us. :)

Kryllith

Kryllith
09-29-2002, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by CorranSec
Hey, Kryllith, what do you think of my ship ideas? :)
I like them, especially the Deceptor. We could crank the speed up on it and use it like a rabbit to lead people into traps. I also like the idea of the floating fortress (or levitating turret, whichever). It kinda reminds me of the minefields in the Battle for Naboo game (man those things were annoying), only on a larger scale. The mines only took a few shots to the destroy, but the flying fortress could be designed to withstand damage like a turret. In that case though, I'd make the anti-cap-ships the primarily means for destroying them, since it would be out in space rather than affixed to the ground for bombing runs (unless the FF landed)

I don't know how much mobility you're talking about in the FF. I kinda pictured them as a turret in space, which might require a ship to go out and build them. If so, I'd like to have a multi-function unarmed ship that would work like a worker in space. It could be used to build the FFs, space beacons, perhaps set up minefields (non-shooting, simply detonators that explode when one gets too close) and possibly sweep/remove enemy mines, perhaps build/repair space stations (if these are included) and repair ships in space. Heck, we could even have them mine resources from space debris if people wanted.

Oh, last point before I forget. Did you have any capital ship set specifically for destroying other capital ships?

Kryllith

MadrixTF
09-30-2002, 06:54 AM
I like the idea of being able to mix civs. i have been thinking about this for a while. i normally play TF, but it would be nice to add some of confederacy units to TF - i like their Mechs better, but i like the TF Fort units, etc.

This should definately be an option that the user has to select.

But you could actually end up mixing units anyway - if you use Jedi to convert factories then you will have those units at your disposal... although i'm not sure if TF Siths can turn buildings?

Kryllith
09-30-2002, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by MadrixTF
But you could actually end up mixing units anyway - if you use Jedi to convert factories then you will have those units at your disposal...
You suggesting this as an idea? Right now you can capture enemy factories, but they still make your units, not your opponents. Of course, you can capture your opponent's units...

Kryllith

jcb231
09-30-2002, 03:07 PM
Along the combination discussion.....

I think that when a jedi master converts a building, the building should produce the other civs units. It only makes sense, really...the assembly lines would be geared up to make the original civs units anyway, not the converting civs units. It woul be sort of like in starcraft how the protoss could convert a terran worker and build terran buildings.

Also, on a similar topic....I think that when you are playing a multiplayer game and your ally drops out for whatever reason you should be able to take over their troops and control them....I've played so many games where my ally has dropped and their troops just stand around wasted pointlessly....I'm sick of that. Another option would be the ability to tribute units to another player...rather than just send some troops to help a besieged ally you could actually tribute the troops to him and let him deploy them how he sees fit.

lukeiamyourdad
09-30-2002, 06:11 PM
jcb231-

the protoss in starcraft were highly unbalanced because of that.
It would be fun of course but hard to balance for the non-master civs...

MadrixTF
10-01-2002, 08:01 AM
Kryllith, i thought that the units in the captured factory would produce that civs units, but i have never done it so i was just guessing. I normally use TF so i don't use Jedi much...

But i think that if you convert a factory it should produce whatever units that factory was producing before - it just doesn't make sense otherwise...

Mixing civs would be fun!

Kryllith
10-01-2002, 12:03 PM
Originally posted by jcb231
Along the combination discussion.....

I think that when a jedi master converts a building, the building should produce the other civs units. It only makes sense, really...the assembly lines would be geared up to make the original civs units anyway, not the converting civs units. It woul be sort of like in starcraft how the protoss could convert a terran worker and build terran buildings.

I think the idea has possibilities, but it also has problems (at least reality-wise with certain civs). Imagine capturing a TF soldier production plant. If we go by how the droids work in the movies, you would be able to make the droids, but they'd still be controlled by the TF command chip. Essentially you'd end spending your resources to make forces hostile to you. Of course, if we skip realism and go all for gameplay then it could work quite well. :)

Kryllith