Darth Windu's Idea for SWGB2!

Darth Windu · 09-28-2003, 07:53 AM

Hi everyone. As you may or may not have noticed, my sig now includes a link to an online version of my idea for SWGB2.

This link goes to my website, and from there, you can choose to either-
1. Look at the idea online
2. Download SWGB2.doc

I cannot express how much i recommend you download the file. The reason for this is that it was created in Microsoft Word format, and uses various internal links that dont work in the online version. Hopefully i will be able to fix this, but at the moment downloading is your best bet.

If there are any questions and/or comments, lease feel free to post them here or email me.

Darth Windu

Frozted_MM's · 09-28-2003, 09:25 AM

hmmmmm it was kinda hard to read clicking on all those links going up and down but i read it some of the ideas are good.

but vong and hutt civs are controversial and joining gungan and naboo no comment

those unique buildings are good some are kind of mini super weapons lol

Admiral Vostok · 09-29-2003, 12:17 AM

Some interesting ideas Windu. Here's my comments:

Some of your unique buildings get amazingly good powers (Confederacy War Room, Ion Cannon, Starfleet Uplink) whereas others give negligible benefits (Moisture Farm). I assume these will be balanced by being available at different stages of the game and costing vastly different amounts of resources. Also it's not clear what the Wookiee one does (Where do the reinforcements come from? Where do they go?). I also assume the Star Destroyer Bombardment destroys a large area of buildings and units.

You're aware of my dislike of the Aircraft limitations, so we won't go into that again here.

I'd suggest for cloaking that it work the opposite way around (ie visible on mini-map but not on main screen). This is because players watch the main screen far more often than the mini-map. I'm guessing here that you're going with the idea we discussed about cloaking in the other thread in that it doesn't really make a unit "invisible", but only makes it impossible to detect on radar. This is all well and good for realism, but I think in gameplay terms it works better the other way around. I'm also guessing eve though you can see it, units can't attack it unless spotted by a detector? Otherwise cloaking seems a bit pointless just to avoid being seen on the mini-map.

Seems a bit weird to have a trooper cost half a population. Why don't you just double all the population costs so a Trooper can take up a whole existence?

As a minor note you spelt cannon wrong throughout the document. "Canon" means a part of Holy Scriptures, and has been adopted by fan bases such as those of Star Wars to mean what is taken as being correct in the continuity of the fan's text. "Cannon" is a big shooting thing. Sorry to nitpick but that's me

Darth Windu · 09-29-2003, 05:01 AM

Forzted - trust me, its worse without the links

Vostok - some good points there,

1. Well i still have to sort out a few, and with the Hutts, i couldnt think of anything more unique than a Moisture Farm (since they will be representing Tatooine). I'm thinking of increasing the amount of funds you get from it.

The Wookiee building calls for re-inforcements that arrive in a Wookiee Air Transport (unbuildable). When you activate the unique building, the transport appears at one of the edges of the map, fly's over to the closest Wookiee Command Center, and drops off it load of troopers. Not sure if i will make the transport targetable by the enemy or not, but at the moment im thinking not.

2. Well, i think it's necessary...

3. The problem i have with that is that, for example, how could a Battle Droid fail to see a Jedi Master standing in front of it? Instead, i was thinking of editing cloaking to make units invisible on the mini-map and making the range at which they are detected halved (ie if a droid sees 6 squares, it would detect a cloaked unit only at 3)

4. I did? Silly me, ill have to check on that.

Admiral Vostok · 09-29-2003, 09:46 AM

3. By that analogy, how could some sort of radar (your mini-map) not be able to detect a Jedi trying to cloak himself? However, the most important thing is that it doesn't make much sense gameplay wise.

5. You still didn't explain why Troopers cost half a population. Do they share bunks or something?

Darth Windu · 09-29-2003, 12:04 PM

Vostok - a few things-

2. I removed the 'range' idea for Aircraft, forgot to do that earlier

3. To me, it makes more sence to have them invisible on the mini-map rather than the main map. Also, i have added the modification where a unit will only be able to see a cloaked unit at 50% of its normal LOS (ie if it sees 6 squares, it will only be able to see a cloaked unit at 3)

5. Well, this is because i want to keep the pop limit as easily understood as possible. I could make them take up one slot, but then i would have to double everything else, so that the total pop slots would be 600, and an AT-AT would take up 8.

It really isnt significant, just a measure of how i do the pop slot thing

Finally, with the unqiue buildings, i have opted for a new type of progress in that buildings will become available over time depending on how much research you have invested. Since they all give good bonus' they would become available on average about 3/4 of your way through building research

Admiral Vostok · 09-29-2003, 09:49 PM

2. But you still have the thing where they need a store of Gas, right? Then I still don't like it.

3. It could work. At least it is an original idea.

5. I don't see what the problem is with doubling. It would be far easier to understand than having something cost half a pop. Thinking from a programmer's point of view, the pop counter will be implemented as double what you have anyway because integers take up less room than floating point numbers.

So you have a max pop of 600. So what? That sounds good for consumers who want more. And you'll still have exactly the same number of units as you have now, so there is now problem there. An AT-AT take up 8? Nothing wrong with that either, especially when you consider some of the units in WarCraft 3 that cost 8 pop when there was only a max pop limit of 90 (as much as I like Blizzard games that combined with the upkeep concept was the worst idea ever).

If having a unit cost half a population is "easily understood" why can't I understand it?

Darth Windu · 09-30-2003, 02:04 AM

Vostok -

2. As i've said before, i've increased the power of aircraft, and so there needs to be something to limit that power somewhat, hence the Gas idea. All you do is collect it from the air (ala Bespin) or you can buy it at your spaceport. I cant think of anything else to replace Gas with, and im not having infantry fire at aircraft. One other thing is that it hasnt been done before, and i think it would be interesting to see how it works.

5. I suppose i could double it...

Admiral Vostok · 09-30-2003, 03:22 AM

2. Hasn't been done before? What about in RoN?

5. Yes you could. It would be silly not to, really.

Darth Windu · 09-30-2003, 04:23 AM

2. No, it hasnt been done before to the best of my knowledge.

Admiral Vostok · 09-30-2003, 04:48 AM

Isn't there some sort of similar thing with oil in RoN?

Darth Windu · 10-01-2003, 12:34 PM

Well i dont have RoN, but as far as im aware, oil is a resource that only becomes available when you enter the 'industrial age', and it is necessary for vehicles and aircraft.
Whether you can buy/sell it or not, i dont know, you'd have to ask someone who has the game.

Even so, my idea with Gas is different, and quite realistic in a Star Wars context.

Sithmaster_821 · 10-01-2003, 07:55 PM

Well, well, well, the truth coms out. Windu doesnt own RoN, but persisted to push it as a great game, and a potential engine. Sounds very similar to another ex-forumer I know, who openly touted RoN, and now lets it collect dust while he continues to play (and complain about) AoM, which he persistently mocked on the forums. Very intresting.

Darth Windu · 10-02-2003, 02:30 AM

I still want to get it, im just not going to pay $90 for it.

DK_Viceroy · 10-02-2003, 01:29 PM

Gas is used in fighters yes that is undeniable but contrary to what everypone is touting in here only TIE Fighters needed it to stay airborne Gas is used to power the weapons no Gas No Weapons. Apart from torpedo's and of course Kamikazee and having aircraft not flying because of no gas is dum unless it's a TIE Fighter i really don't see an X-Wing needing Gas To Fly.

10-02-2003, 02:53 PM

I have RoN and yes its not a bad RTS. However, the gaming engine is older than the original Star Wars (1977!) but it does have some nice touches that could be used in SWGB 2, IF it was going to be a resource driven game.

I would like to see it move away from resources and have territory yeld cash to buy better weapons - almost likw force commander, just not as bad.

DMUK

Compa_Mighty · 10-02-2003, 03:31 PM

So SWGB2 is not resource driven! Hehehe. Sorry man, you've earned it, I will watch everything you say very closely to see if I can get some information!

10-02-2003, 03:40 PM

hehe
I have also heard it features Stormtroopers

;-)

DMUK

Admiral Vostok · 10-03-2003, 12:02 AM

Stormtroopers?! Awesome!

Compa_Mighty · 10-03-2003, 02:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DarthMaulUK
hehe
I have also heard it features Stormtroopers

;-)

DMUK

No kidding! Man, this is awesome, now we can really start our speculations...

Stormtroopers! Who would've thought about that?!

saberhagen · 10-03-2003, 09:32 AM

I hope they're canon stormtroopers and not EU stormtroopers.

Darth Windu · 10-03-2003, 10:35 AM

DarthMaul - you realise that from that statement, you have effectively confirmed the existence of SWGB2 dont you?

Viceroy - what good are fighters with no weapons? Hence, my idea retains realism.

10-03-2003, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Darth Windu
DarthMaul - you realise that from that statement, you have effectively confirmed the existence of SWGB2 dont you?

Ah!

I didn't confirm anything, Garry Gaber did that earlier in the year
;-)

DMUK

DK_Viceroy · 10-03-2003, 12:01 PM

NO Windu That's YOUR CRACKPOT IDEA that's why you would head back to base to get replacment Gas cylinders to power your weapons. How is saying NO GAS IN THE FIGHTER WEAPONS DON'T WORK saying they don't have weapons at all. Oh I get it you realise your wrong and are now backed into a corner cowering before the truth .Embrace the truth climb down the ladder and embrace the truth for it is pure and we shall forget about your blunder.

Admiral Vostok · 10-04-2003, 01:03 AM

As erratic as Viceroy's post is, he has a valid point, Windu. While the battles we see in the movies are shorter than the games we'll be playing, the need for Gas to continually power your Aircraft is too limiting, and will more than likely discourage their use. I want just the opposite, so much as to even encourage the use of weaker Air Forces like the Trade Federation. Reliance on Gas will not help the situation. It is a realism idea, and while that doesn't necessarily mean bad gameplay as many believe, in this case it does.

Darth Windu · 10-04-2003, 01:34 AM

Viceroy - you seem to have missed the point...which doesnt really suprise me.
You say 'gas powers weapons, not engines, so your idea is unrealistic'.
The point i was trying to make was that, without being able to use your weapons, what use are aircraft? Either way, this works for realism.

Vostok - not true. This feature of adding 'gas' as a resource makes aircraft more important, and allows them to be strengthened without adding ridiculous ideas like Stormtrooper shooting down X-wing's.
Furthermore, it adds a whole new level of strategy to the game. For example, if you are fighting the Rebel's, the most powerful air force in the game, your target would most likely be their Gas refineries. Of course, they will do their best to stop you, leading to some ferocious and exciting battles.

DarthMaul - as far as i was aware, Gaber was working on a star wars related RTS. Your statement though indicates that this project is indeed SWGB2

Compa_Mighty · 10-04-2003, 04:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Darth Windu
DarthMaul - as far as i was aware, Gaber was working on a star wars related RTS. Your statement though indicates that this project is indeed SWGB2

He said in another thread he is only reffering to this project as SWGB2, cause we all do... not necessarily because that's the name.

saberhagen · 10-04-2003, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Darth Windu

The point i was trying to make was that, without being able to use your weapons, what use are aircraft?

Well, they're still useful for scouting which can be quite important. Remember not all units should be judged on their fighting ability. Many people under estimate the probot just because it has a weak attack and few hit points.

Quote:

if you are fighting the Rebel's, the most powerful air force in the game,

Not necessarily. What about the Naboo? There was a big debate about this on the GiRL forum and Pompei maintains that Naboo are a more powerful air civ than the Rebs. Although many people disagreed, you can't just ignore someone as clued up as him.

Admiral Vostok · 10-04-2003, 12:06 PM

Quote:

For example, if you are fighting the Rebel's, the most powerful air force in the game, your target would most likely be their Gas refineries.

This shows exactly how your method will weaken air too much. If the use of Air is limited to maintaining an amount of Gas, enemies of Air-strong civs will most certainly go for Gas, as you state and in fact desire. The problem with this theory is that people will not be ecouraged to use Air, because it's use is so dependent on this one thing. The Rebels have a strong Trooper element, and it is feasible (as it should be) to win using the Rebels without using their Air Force. This is of course what people will do exclusively, not using any of the Rebel's Air because they are so hard to keep in the air. My method of allowing Troopers to shoot at Air with non-spectacular results is far more encouraging for Air Forces to be used.

DK_Viceroy · 10-04-2003, 12:21 PM

hmm i'm sory vostok but i'm having second thoughts about troopers firing at air i double checked and they move to fast maybe allowing the units that were formerly mech destroyers to fire at air they would certainly have the targetting systems. I'm not ruling it out but troopers really wouldn't ahve the targetting systems required to get a shot near you'd have to have 50 in one area firing all art once to have a chance i'm sorry but i thought it through and checked i'm not sure what the MGLT to KPH or MPH is but i think it's something like 1 MGLT to 1000 KPH or something like that then again those figures are for in space so i could be wrong i propably am it's propably half their space speed because the unaerodynamic shpes of most of the fighters would rip them apart if they used their space speed. maybe have units like AAT AT-ST Homing Spider Droid fire at air maybe instead or as well?

Windu please realise rockets weren't designed in the star wars universe for troopers to use and for the few bounty hunters that did use them they weren't fired at air please see sense your practucally saying a bow and arrow is star warsy.

Darth Windu · 10-04-2003, 03:12 PM

saber - the probot isnt an aircraft, and its main purpose is scouting...
Also, in regards to this 'Pompei' person, yes, i can disregard what they say. There is absolutely NO evidence that the Naboo aircraft is as good or diverse as the Rebels.

Vostok - i never said the Rebels HAD to use air. Besides, all a smart Rebel player has to do is build lots of troops while ignoring air, then while their opponent is going after gas, hit them with the infantry.

Viceroy - if Lucas thought rockets were un-StarWarsy, he wouldnt have included them in his movies. One last thing-
JANGO FETT

DK_Viceroy · 10-04-2003, 05:25 PM

Like I said The FEW BOUNTY HUNTERS THAT USED THEM in future read all of the post not what you want to see through those rose coloured coke bottles i never saw jango fett fire them at an AIR TARGET only obi.

Rockets were never fired at fighters which goes to say that while they were there they wern't that acurate enough to hit a small and fast fighter yes and he meant rockets to be used against ground targets by a few units unique to some civs you've talked about diversity how is it diverse if every civ {including your Yuuzhan Vong who hate technology and would never use a rocket} DIVERSE it's about diverse as a brown dog with a white spot on it's four paws being thrown into a hall of brown dogs there isn't really many differenmces.

Darth Windu · 10-05-2003, 02:28 AM

Viceroy - if a bounty hunter can use rockets, im sure Clone Troopers (clones of Jango) could use the same rockets, or hadnt that occured to you?

Also, do you actually watch the movies or just daydream about EU? In ep2, the Hailfiredroids were firing rockets at Gunships, and when Anakin and Obi are chasing Dooku, we get-
Obi: "shoot him down"
Pilot: "We cant sir, we're out of rockets"

Hence, rockets are both anti-ground and anti-air weapons, which makes my rocket trooper idea fit in perfectly with realism and the forementioned gameplay.

Admiral Vostok · 10-05-2003, 03:44 AM

Quote:

Vostok - i never said the Rebels HAD to use air. Besides, all a smart Rebel player has to do is build lots of troops while ignoring air, then while their opponent is going after gas, hit them with the infantry.

Exactly. Whose going to bother building air when a gas limitation could render them useless and you can just use other units that have no such restrictions?

Good point about Jango, though he does only have one rocket at a time.

What you (and now Viceroy, who has been turned) should realise is that the Troopers aren't shooting at Aircraft as they fly hundreds of kilometres overhead. I've said that Troopers can only attack Aircraft once they have already been shot at. This represents the Aircraft flying extremely low (since their guns can't be angled downwards) much like the Gunships entering the Geonosis Arena. And you also seem to forget that Troopers don't do very much damage to Aircraft, in fact they get a handicap while shooting at Aircraft. Yes, this makes Troopers very weak against Aircraft... but isn't this what you're arguing for?! Troopers are not good against Aircraft! That's what AA Mechs and other Aircraft are for!

saberhagen · 10-05-2003, 09:12 AM

*finally stops laughing about someone so opinionated about the game who has never even heard of pompa*

Well, I'm not going to split hairs. My points weren't that important and not totally relevant.

I would say, though, that if the rebs have the best air in the game, wouldn't that make them overpowered? They are one of the strongest jedi civs (fwiw) and also have good troopers and at least half decent MDs. Compared to this, the Naboo have nothing but air, jedi and strikes and are probably the worst trooper civ.

Getting back on topic though, in the current game air/jedi civs depend very heavily on nova, and if it runs out they're screwed. As I've said before, when I play as rebs I often end up relying on repeaters/MDs when I can't afford to build any more air.

DK_Viceroy · 10-05-2003, 10:26 AM

I have not turned i'm merely stating that it would take a lot of troopers since the average fighter employed by the empire and Rebel Alliance Republic and the GREAT Confederacy are too fast for ONE trooper to hit but 10 COULD i'm not ruling it out i'm merely saying that it would need toi be balanced somehow maybe like i said we could have mech destroyers firing at air as well.I WOULD HARDLY TURN VOSTOK YOUR IDEAS ARE ACTUALLY REALISTIC AND WHEN YOU REALISE THERE'S SOMETHING WRONG YOU CORRECT IT AND BACK DOWN UNLIKE SOME WHO HAVE YET TO LEARN

Never a thinker are you windu you just proved our point about rockets they are unique to the REPUBLIC THE CONFEDERACY AND SELECT BOUNTY HUNTERS

The Prophet Of Truth

Admiral Vostok · 10-05-2003, 10:48 AM

Thanks Viceroy, glad you realise I'm not as stubborn as some. Glad to hear you haven't turned, and just to put your mind at ease you will need several Troopers to take down even one Fighter, just as it should be. Troopers should not be your primary defense against air, but they can still shoot at it. Just like in the current game how Bounty Hunters are not your primary defense against Mechs, but they can still shoot at them.

DK_Viceroy · 10-05-2003, 11:51 AM

Well Hey The True Way ANd The Church Of Purist Must Stick Together ON This what he claims is in violation of both of our teachings

Be suure to watch out for the 2 new civ's in my analogy

The Prophet Of Truth

The True Way

Darth Windu · 10-05-2003, 02:41 PM

Saber - no, it wouldnt. You have to remember that my idea for SWGB2 is quite different to SWGB. For example, with the Rebels, you get-
- no mechs
- large variation of infantry that can entrench themselves
- large number of aircraft

Vostok - the point that YOU are failing to realise is that apart from infantry weapons having zero effect of shields, due to the elevation of, and power of, aircraft weapons, aircraft can engage ground targets at a far longer range than ground forces can enage aircraft with the same wepaons.

**lukeiamyourdad** · 10-05-2003, 05:08 PM

hehe it's been a while since I posted hehe

Now now now...

Viceroy- Rockets might not be unique to the Republic or Confed only. If you've played any SW flight sims you'll realize that you can use heavy rockets to shoot down capital ships and you never play as the confed or rep.

Infantry shooting air- As rare as this is, I agree with Windu. It's pointless in realism terms to have infantry do 1 damage to fighters.
However, if the trooper had a heavy repeater(the one we get in Gb1), it would actually make sense to use that against aircrafts.