Welcome to the Home of Game Strategies and Stories
16 Jan 06
Well, if you didn't notice it, we upgraded the site over the weekend. If you didn't, that's probably good meaning I didn't screw anything up so badly that people noticed. Now Talk Strategy has more room and bandwidth. We'll be looking to add more movies, demos, bonus packs and high resolution screenshots. You may have noticed that downloads section is now restricted to registered users. We're not here to compete with any of the big download sites. We just want our users to have quick and convenient downloads. If you're not interested in this place enough to go through a free registration process, there are plenty of bigger and better places to find your downloads.
I have some other plans to improve this place. I don't know if they'll all work out, but keep an eye out for changes. You may even see some visual changes around here. Thoughts and comments are always appreciated. Also, as usual, if anyone would like to help out around here, let me know. Thanks for all the support and encouragement.
Jason
Read/Post Comments
13 Jan 06
Happy Friday the Thirteenth to everyone. Instead of horrors we've got a treat for you today. Blair Fraser, Director at Ironclad Games has done an interview on their upcoming real time space 4X game, Sins of a Solar Empire one of our recent games of the week. Don't forget to check out the Sins screenshot gallery. Enjoy.
1. TS: Both Ironclad Games and Keberos Productions are in Vancouver and have similar backgrounds. Do your teams know each other? Is it purely a coincidence that you're working on similar games due out near one another?
BF: The founders of both companies know each other from our time at Barking-Dog Studios and Rockstar. Given the culture and work experience we’ve shared, I’m not surprised that both studios are working on variations of space strategy. The Ironclad team has been living and breathing this culture (i.e., movies, television, comics, toys, board games, table top, pen and paper, and computer games) since childhood. This continued through to adolescence and adulthood and we all based our high school lunch hours, university course selections and employment choices on this material, so it’s quite unlikely we would choose to deviate from this path when we became independent developers. When we (Ironclad Games) had the opportunity to move out on our own, we wanted to create a game that engaged our passions, our skill-sets, and our experience in order to maximize our intrinsic happiness and potential success. While I certainly can’t speak for Kerberos, it’s possible they arrived at the same conclusion. As for the issue of timing; I would say that is more coincidental – we have no access to the development schedules of other companies so we maintained our schedule and it just happens to turn out Sins of a Solar Empire will likely be arriving around the same time as a number of other games - 4X or otherwise.
2. TS: The obvious difference between Sins and Galactic Civilizations II and Sword of the Stars is real time play throughout. How did you decide to go space 4X and real time?
BF: Using the same arguments in the previous question, science fiction games, particularly in space, and real-time strategy games are natural fits for our passions, expertise, and experience. The question of how it became real-time 4X (we’ve been calling this RT4X for short) requires some additional explanation. At the outset we knew we wanted to create a space strategy game, so we started a number of brainstorming sessions. Out of those sessions came the following:
First, we loved the Homeworld series and we wanted to explore what the next evolution could be. Our vision for that evolution was a context and environment for those great tactical fleet battles – something where each of those battles was but a part of a larger universe, where the result of combat was the acquisition of a new resource rich planet or the death of millions of people on a population planet and meant something in the overall strategy. Naturally, the sense of large scale space strategy reminded us of all the fond moments we had with VGA Planets, Master of Orion (1 & 2), Spaceward Ho! and other classic 4X games. It was clear that the mechanics these games pioneered and/or refined would become the models for the empire level of our game. Next, its been a dream of ours to play a game that tries to reflect the epic size of space in a seamless environment without any form of discontinuity that could ruin the immersion. We wanted massive solar systems, stars and orbiting planets separated by incredible distances with relatively small stations orbiting planets, even smaller capitalships, and tiny fighters. Each of these objects should be viewable in 3d and should have the capacity to be zoomed in at all scales without any visual discontinuities. Aside from visual discontinuities, the immersion would also suffer if there were any temporal discontinuities ,so we determined there could be no turns and no waiting – it would have to be completely real-time at all levels of the game. Also incredibly important to the immersion, was to ensure that our simulation of the environment affected the game play mechanics and introduced a variety of interesting strategies. How do these distances affect fleet movement? How does the size of a planet affect tactical positioning of the fleet and orbital defensive structures? How do orbiting planets change my plans? How would gravity affect everything? It was decided that the best implementation of these types of ideas also required a real-time environment.
So there it is. We started with trying to create a context for Homeworld-esque battles, which led to large scale strategy and incorporation of game mechanics from our favorite 4X titles. Then, in the process of trying to satisfying our dream of a giant, seamless space environment with relevant strategies and maximum immersion it was concluded it would have to be in real-time.
3. TS: Unless I missed one, Imperium Galatica 2 was the last real time 4X game (though Hegemonia kept some of the IG2 gameplay), did you draw upon it or any other games for inspiration?
BF: Both Imperium Galactica 2 and Hegemonia were sources of inspiration for Sins of a Solar Empire as were a large number of the games we’ve played over the years. If I were to pick the key game influences, I would have to say the board game Buck Rogers - Battle for the 25th Century Game, VGA Planets, Master of Orion (1 & 2), Spaceward Ho!, Dominions 2, the Homeworld Series, Starcraft, and Warcraft 3.
4. TS: Your website emphasizes the flexibility of your custom game engine. What will we see in Sins that we haven't seen before?
BF: The Iron Engine was designed to accomplish a number of objectives, most of which are techno babble so I’ll just speak about a couple – one to demonstrate some new technology and one to demonstrate flexibility.
First, a key portion of the technology is dedicated to handling large sizes, scale and distance in a seamless, real-time environment. We felt this was necessary to deliver a convincing feel for the scale of space. By creating this scale we thought this would in turn, would improve players’ immersion and introduce interesting strategies. I gave a broad overview of this in question 2 but I’ll elaborate.
I'll use a standard terran planet as an example regarding distances. Here are some average sizes.
Star - 50,000m
Planet - 15,000m
Capital ship - 500m
Fighter - 20m
The distance from the atmosphere to the far orbit is on the order of 40,000m.
A single solar system is on the order of 8,000,000 m from end to end.
The distance between the 2 closest solar systems is around 250,000,000 m.
This is all continuous, seamless space. This means you can zoom in from a view that shows you the entire galaxy of multiple solar systems all the way into the smallest fighter without any discontinuities. Often games introduce separate ‘views’ to handle different situations, for example, a star map and combat mode. In Sins of a Solar Empire, the Iron Engine allows the star map and combat mode to be one in the same. Simply zoom out to see everything and then zoom into manage combat.
Of course, big numbers don’t necessarily make for good gameplay so we’ve made sure everything makes sense in terms of strategy whether it be such things as accounting for moving planets, utilizing gravitational slingshot effects in giant gravitational wells or long term planning with distant solar system colonization. The big numbers can also result in some very long games so the user can customize the size of the galaxy to something more suitable to their available time (e.g. fight over a single small solar system with just a couple planets).
This grand galaxy wouldn’t be fun if it couldn’t be populated by a lot of starships. The Iron Engine can handle a very large number of units that are fully simulated at all times. This means, that even if you can’t see it, every object in the universe is still executing its behavior identical to how it would behave if you were watching it. Sometimes, large strategy games will simplify the behavior when you can’t see it resulting in inconsistent results, loss of immersion, and probably most importantly, a loss of strategic depth (think auto-resolve). The actual combat decisions and tactics that could have been made have been reduced to a mathematical approximation. If the ships in a 4X game are simulated at all, it’s often only in a special combat mode and while this is better than no simulation at all, we feel it lacks the full range of options and immersion that a fully simulated real-time system offers.
One of the more flexible features of the Iron Engine is its capacity for modding. While I’m sure most of this has been done before, the Iron Engine is completely data driven, has an embedded Lua Scripting Engine with console access and is supported by the Forge Tool Suite. This set of tools was used in the development of the game and will ship with it. Users will be able to write galaxy generation scripts, create new particle effects, change GUI layout, change colors, insert new meshes, add new textures, change sound effects, add new music, and so on.
It’s impossible to describe all the features of the Iron Engine but that should give a sense of one of its more original features and its flexibility.
5. TS: Tell us a bit about the background of the universe you've created and how it will affect the gameplay.
BF: The Sins of a Solar Empire universe has a very detailed past-history and future-history but this first game in the saga takes place during a relatively short time frame in the grand scheme of things. The once mighty alien Vasari Empire has long since fallen and those few who survived have been on the run from some unknown force for thousands of years. They stop for short periods of time at to rebuild, collect resources, conduct research, build new ships, and move on. After 10,000 years they arrive in the populated space of the Trader Emergency Coalition (TEC) and both sides begin fighting to stay alive. The Vasari population is low, they are desperate for resources and are pressured due to the larger threat at their heels. The TEC, who have devoted all their resources to trade, have no comparable military technology. As the fighting rages, a group of exiled humans, who call themselves “The Advent” have return to TEC space for revenge, destiny and access to the rare resource that fuels their deviant way of life and their powerful PsiTech technology. A key objective for Sins of a Solar Empire was to establish the back story for each race and then to make sure every piece of art, sound, and gameplay matched up. For this crowd I’ll emphasize that the strategic options available to each race are 100% in tune with their story. For example the Vasari have access to powerful technology that makes sense for their situation. The JarraSul Transport allows the Vasari to quickly suck resources out of a planet from orbit. The TEC are quite a bit behind the curve on military technology, particularly energy weapons, but they are expert traders and receive a number of advantages to the various forms of trade in the game. The Advent’s PsiTech technology is largely incorporated into their capitalships – one of the more powerful being the Halcyon Carrier which can deliver a massively amplified Telekinetic Push that throws all enemy fighters back protecting the surrounding area from fighter strikes.
6. TS: You have three races that initially sound a bit unbalanced. What kind of player might prefer each race and why? How the races balance out?
BF: With the number of options available to each race, it’s certainly difficult to determine dominating play styles. If you like less but more expensive units, with more powerful technology and hit and run tactics you probably want the Vasari. For hit and run try using their ability to phase jump closer into the opponent’s planet gravity well, and then using a gravity slingshot to exit out the other side after trashing some orbital structures. If you like crude, brute force tactics and low-tech weapons, heavily armored ships and a powerful economy, you want the TEC. Crude and brute force often means nuking the crap out of planet before you can take it over - it’s fun but doesn’t leave much on the surface to steal ? If you like powerful energy weapons and shields, strange mind-powered capabilities, and swarms of robotic fighters you probably want The Advent. There is nothing like taking an impressive fighter mass, adding in projected illusionary fighters, mind-controlling half the enemies fighter squadrons and sending it to overwhelm the enemies’ capitalship heavy fleet.
The balancing act between the races is a very difficult juggling act – especially since we are trying to ensure everything about each race is unique to only that race. There is no copying of something one race can do and just changing the name and graphics for another race. It’s also important to us that each feature of the races is not a simple +/- modifier of some generic attribute. Most things have specific code that does something special in addition to numerical differences. For us, a key part of achieving balance is to ensure that each race has access to tactics and strategies that serve to counter the strengths of the other races; an elaborate version of rock-paper-scissors if you will.
With regards to the actual balancing we use a number of tools and processes to help hone in on the final balanced result including spreadsheets, in-game statistics, replays, offline combat simulations and human testers.
7. TS: Master of Orion is generally considered the gold standard of the space 4X genre. Why do you think that is?
BF: Master of Orion did a lot of things right, especially for 4X, whether it be the tech tree, the races, the Guardian or the planet management system but ultimately it’s the master because of the elegance and simplicity of the overall game design – it was complicated enough to ensure you had to make cool strategic choices, but not so complicated you were bogged down in micromanagement issues. Certainly, we’ve taken this to heart, and every aspect of Sins of a Solar Empire has to pass the strategy/micro test though it’s a very difficult problem because in a real-time strategy game, time is the most valuable resource, so proper use of it is somewhat a key component of the strategy. We feel we’ve struck a great balance between the two and if a given player disagrees, there are a number of ways for them to adjust the amount of micromanagement they have to deal with.
8. TS: Please describe the tech tree. Will each race be completely different?
BF: Research subjects are organized into two primary classifications: Combat and Empire. These are vertically arranged by tier – the top tier subjects being the most powerful and correspondingly more costly. Each subject can be upgraded multiple times up to a maximum that differs by subject. This means that is there is no separate tree node for something like Laser I Laser II Laser III – it’s all the same node. You progress through the tree by spending research points that are generated slowly from research structures built on or around your planets.
Each racial tree is distinct and is designed to reflect the style, story, and capabilities of the race. For example, the Vasari have a number of key research subjects in phase space technology, the TEC in trade and economic areas and the Advent in energy weapons. Also key to the design is that every research subject has a valuable purpose and there is no key set of research subjects that everyone has to take in order to compete. However, a player won’t be able to compete if he just picks his research willy-nilly. Scouting may reveal the enemy is using a new strategy which your current research build isn’t well suited against so your next set of choices should probably reflect a proper counter plan in unison with your planned battle fleet and defenses. In Sins of a Solar Empire it’s often important to keep a cache of unspent research points, despite the opportunities lost, so that you can more quickly adapt to changing enemy strategies.
9. TS: If I'm reading your website correctly, unit experience seems to physically improve the capabilities of the unit. How will that affect gameplay?
BF: Capitalships improve with experience. Experience is gained through paid training or through combat so both the economically minded player and the combat oriented player are on fair ground. When a capitalship gains enough experience it earns a new level which results in a number of attribute improvements including fighter capacity, weapon damage, armor, hull points, shield points etc. Next, the capitalship can activate new capabilities or improve old ones. The TEC Kol Battleship for example, can choose between Gauss Blast, Flak Burst, Reinforced Armor, and Adaptive Force Field – though certainly not all capabilities are combat oriented. A large number of these abilities can be viewed on the website. As a capitalship levels up, its attributes increase and its capabilities expand, making it much more versatile and powerful. It’s quite possible for two ships of the same class to perform completely different roles. One Kol ship can be acting as anti-fighter defense with Flak Burst and the other as the primary attack vessel with Gauss Blast. A large part of the strategy in Sins of a Solar Empire revolves around these special capabilities. Which abilities you select, how they work together, and when you choose to use them are all important choices.
Another important strategy is to keep your high level ships alive, since if they are destroyed, all your investment in them is lost. You’d best keep some extra cash around for quick retraining if you are being careless with your units, especially late game when your opponents will likely have high level ships. You also have to make sure you are using your most powerful ships in the best possible situation. Is this a job that I need my flagship for or can a couple new recruits handle it? Capitalships are no longer simple mobile weapons platforms with the capacity to just move and attack; they are highly interactive, fun toys with a number of different possible actions and grow over time. The overall gameplay effect is there is a substantial increase in the number of strategic and tactical options and considerations.
10. TS: Tell us about the AI and describe a time when it surprised you.
BF: The Empire level AI is fully adaptive and non-scripted and doesn’t cheat. Given that, he behaves quite differently each game and tries to adapt to the dynamics of the game. During the adaptive process, the AI can employ more human level strategies as atomic units in it’s planning such as diversions, alliance creation, rushes, and ambushes. The Fleet Commander level AI controls the local tactics of combat. He makes sure that the correct weapons are used against the correct hull/shield types, focus fires on weaker targets, schedules fighter layouts and deployment/docking timing and so on. Perhaps the most surprised I ever was, was when I attacked player X and then the AI came in and trashed my undefended last world. That isn’t very surprising as it could have been blind luck but after I looked at the replay I noticed that he had had a fleet sitting in outer orbit around a planet near my last world and he had allied with player X for vision. As soon as he saw my fleet was trashing player X, he mobilized his fleet against my planet – which would he knew would be relatively undefended (calculated by extrapolating last known fleet size over the duration since last seen +/- other detailed factors). He then commenced to trash player X whom I had just beat down for him.
11. TS: How is the strategy/tactical balance? In other words, if a player excels at combat can they make up for being behind strategically? Vice-versa?
BF: The design of the game is meant to require elements of both but, to a certain extent a player can compensate by being better at one than the other. However, if they are playing on IroncladOnline (our multiplayer matchmaking, statistics tracking and player ranking service), its quite likely players will be going up against those who have mastered both the strategic and tactical aspects of the game, and no amount of compensation in one area is going to pull them through to victory.
12. TS: Normally 4X games start slow, have a great middle and a somewhat tedious end game. How did you address this problem?
BF: The early game is really about micromanaging your initial planet and a few ships so that keeps you pretty busy. By the middle of the game, you have a few planets which you occasionally check on as you conduct your empire level affairs (trade, research, diplomacy etc). At this point, you are controlling one or two fleets instead of worrying about the affairs of each individual ship, unless it’s a very important battle that requires your full attention. Late in the game, most of your research is complete, your planets are near fully developed, and any diplomatic backstabbing you did has already screwed any chance of further diplomacy, so it’s really about bringing the hammer down militarily or economically. In our testing, the number one cause of tedium in the end game has been tracking down the remaining forces spread out over the galaxy. We solved this problem by changing the termination condition so that you are alive until you have no planets left. With that simple change the end of the game has become quite enjoyable. The flow of control from single planets to an empire, from single ships to fleets, and everything in-between really helps keep the player interested and entertained in a natural, seamless manner.
13. TS: Take us through the beginning of a multiplayer game. Let's say you're playing the TEC. What do you start off with? What's your first concern? How do you get your empire started?
BF: As the Trader Emergency Coalition I start on a single beautiful blue terran world with a fair bit of metal, some crystal, some credits and a ship factory that silently orbits about the planet. I can also choose which two capitalships I would like to start with and they will construct instantly and without charge. I’ll choose a Kol Battleship and an unrevealed ship that happens to have the ability to colonize new planets. I will then name my two ships “Come and get it!!” and “Please don’t hurt me!!” respectively. As TEC I know my metal production is critical so I decide its best to get another high output source going as soon as possible. It’s a bit much to support a full sized volcanic planet this early so I send the colonizing ship off to a larger piece in the asteroid belt which is likely high in metal. I send the Kol Battleship into far orbit around this planet so he can phase jump to protect the colony ship if necessary and so he is nearby to help defend the home planet if any opponents show up. In far orbit, moving towards the planet will be quick given the additional help of gravity and if he appears on the opposite side of the planet I can slingshot around. On the surface of the planet I’ll begin construction on a city to increase my population so I can start getting some tax credits, a larger workforce, and more population to make it more difficult to capture this planet. I make sure to build this city on a decent terrain like grasslands to maximize its capacity. I’ll then begin construction on both metal and crystal harvesters, placing them on mountain and ice terrain, respectively. I’ll then move into orbit and start construction on an orbital defense gun which will free up my Kol Battleship to start exploring and conquering the solar system. By this point, both ships have reach far orbit and I see the colonizing ship charge up its phase engines for the jump to the asteroid belt now that its far enough away from the planet’s gravitational pull. As it charges off into space, I decide to adjust the initial layout of my Kol Battleship. First, I select its Level 1 ability – I choose Gauss Cannon. Then I adjust his fighter layout to all interceptors since without Flak Burst he will probably be fairly vulnerable to enemy bombers. When the orbital defense gun completes, I send my Kol off to explore. By this time I’ve probably accumulated enough resources to build a research center and my colonizer has reached the asteroid. I tell him to colonize it and as I suspected there are high metal deposits available so I begin construction on more metal extractors. Unfortunately, the asteroid is too small to support orbital defense structures so I’ll just park my ship here until I can arrange for something more suitable to protect it. On that note, it’s probably time to construct a new capitalship and deal with the first enemy my Kol Battleship has found at that remote Ice planet. Unfortunately, the phase jump depleted most of his antimatter and it might be best to delay engagement until he has at least enough to power the Gauss Cannon. At this point, I will continue to explore, expand, exterminate, and exploit until the local system once again falls under TEC control.
14. TS: Describe a recent 'epic' battle or game.
BF: (As told from your perspective)
You are the leader of a growing galactic empire.
Your recently deployed secondary fleet has arrived at the far orbit of the metal rich planet Harcenia – only recently conquered by the Advent so you anticipate minimal orbital defenses. A quick scan of the area confirms your suspicions so you order the fleet to move into near orbit and authorize each ship’s captain to exercise their own discretion in combat.
Returning your focus to empire management, you analyze the status of the local solar system. Your primary fleet is still traveling in Phase Space and construction of a third fleet is nearly finished at your home planet. Your most recent colony is warning you that they will soon reach population capacity so you requisition the construction of a new city. Finally, your laboratories have produced substantial results on propulsion technologies, so you authorize further research into more advanced sub-light speed engines.
An incoming report tells you that your primary fleet has completed their phase jump to the Vasari planet of Jindra. Sensor trajectories suggest that this is the staging ground for his harassment raids against your lucrative trade lines; it’s time to put an end to it at the source. Though well developed, Jindra has few defense platforms. Most of the orbital space has been devoted to research facilities, suggesting that the opponent is making a gambit for superior technology. It also explains why he was constantly attacking the trade lines – to keep you busy while he gains a leg up on technology. Seeking to negate his bid for this advantage, you order your veteran force to destroy the labs. Only when they draw nearer to the planet do you realize there is an operational Phase Gate on the other side of the planet. It’s quite possible an opposing fleet could use it to catch you by surprise and have you trapped. Deciding it’s worth the risk, you proceed with your original attack plan.
A menacing Vasari fleet returns, using the accelerated traveling capabilities of the Phase Gate. A quick retreat order and your fleet begins moving towards the edge of the gravity well and potential escape. Unfortunately, the Vasari use the gravity to slingshot their warships closer to your own fleet, snuffing hopes of retreat. Your fleet is simply too close to the planet and the pull of gravity is just relatively too slow. ”Last stand” combat is inevitable.
You begin combat by moving your battleships to bear the brunt of the incoming attack. As the first wave of enemy bombers zero in for an attack run, your battleships activate their Adaptive Force Fields in time to absorb the missiles and counterattack with Flak Bursts. Numerous starbursts suggest most of them were destroyed. You move one of your relatively vulnerable cruisers closer to fire an Electro Magnetic Pulse at a cluster of enemy ships to drain their antimatter and shields. Sensing an opportunity, the Vasari carrier unleashes a horde of bombers that were held back from the first wave. The bombers’ salvoes of Phase Missiles bypass your cruiser’s shields, leaving it heavily damaged by the time it deploys the EMP. You may have nearly lost a ship, but with a portion of his fleet without shields the advantage is yours. You scramble your own bombers and move the battleships into optimum firing range. Your bombers take steep losses against the enemy interceptors but there is little the Vasari can do to stop the full broadsides of your battleships’ heavy beams and Gauss Cannons. Two of his warships spectacularly explode, leaving burning wreckage floating in their place.
As you prepare to bring your just completed tertiary fleet to reinforce your offensive at Jindra, your warships at Harcenia report the arrival of enemy forces. The Advent have deployed a fleet to defend this world – and they’ve also sent another fleet to simultaneously siege one of your key population planets. With the Advent’s PsiTech powers the population on that planet will soon succumb to their influence and be serving them instead of you. Wishing to avoid such a loss, you tell most of your secondary fleet to evacuate Harcenia and defend them. You decide to leave a single siege capable ship to bomb as much as possible before the defenders close in on him. Large mushroom clouds erupt satisfyingly from Harcenia’s surface as the Raze Planet cannons unleash.
You return to your primary fleet’s fight with the Vasari – with a few of their key ships destroyed it is likely that the tides have turned and you will win the battle. Even so, it is but one of many important conflicts whose outcome will determine the fate of your empire.
15. TS: How is colonization/colony management handled?
BF: Colonization and the conquering of an enemy planet operate in the same fashion. The objective is to shift the planet allegiance and the most basic method for doing this is to take out the cities and place your own with the colony ship. All capitalships have the default ability to bomb the planet’s surface to try and wipe out the cities. Unfortunately, this can cause a lot of damage to the valuable infrastructure that you would much rather keep for your own; unless your goal is to slow down his economy as damaged structures perform proportionate to their health. Each race also has a number of other special planet affecting abilities that process in different ways such as enslaving the population, landing drop ships with ground troops, or executing a massive nuclear bombardment that destroys both the cities and economic infrastructure but could also render valuable terrain unusable.
Colony management is done by selecting a planet and then opening either its surface or orbit management tab; there are no menus, submenus, or slider bars. From here you can select various structures to be built at specific positions. It’s often important to evaluate the best place to build. On the surface of each planet is a random distribution of terrain suitable to the planet type. Each terrain type yields bonuses or penalties for various structures. Mountainous terrain would be great for a metal extractor for example but swamps wouldn’t be. It’s also beneficial to place similar structures next to each other as the synergy and specialization of the planet’s structures yields greater productivity. If you aren’t interested in micromanaging the placement of structures, you can simply have the AI place them in the local optimal position. In orbit there is no terrain, but the placement of structures is still important as these can be directly targeted by all enemy forces. For example, it would be wise to protect your ship factory with a ring of orbital defense guns.
Each planet has limited surface and orbit area available for development and this helps drive the need for expansion. Nonetheless, it’s possible to scrap less important or damaged structures to reclaim resources and free up space.
The total summary of a colony’s status is easily accessible by moving the cursor over the planet or its icon. In fact, this principle applies to everything in the game. Players can simply move the cursor over anything to get its details. All colonies are arranged in a collapsible tree structure at the left of the screen, each under their solar system’s star. The icons contain additional information overlays for quick glance analysis. At the next level of the hierarchy, all ships and structures around a given planet are shown in icon form and can be interacted with in the same fashion as their 3d counterparts. This enables the player to manage both colonies and battles without having to actually have the camera viewing that portion of the galaxy.
16. TS: How does diplomacy work? Espionage?
BF: Diplomacy takes a few different forms. Resource/Credit trade, alliance (no attack/shared vision/synergistic abilities/use of orbital repair bays etc), trade ports/routes, and bounty. Setting up a relationship between human and AI players takes the same route though you can't negotiate with the AI player using chat text. An AI player can ally with other AI players or humans and will respond or make offers based on your history of aggression with him or his analysis of the possible benefit to himself for the alliance. Backstabbing is an AI option and he will NOT respond kindly if he becomes the victim of one.
Perhaps the newest concept is "Bounty" where players can place money against another player and you receive money from the pool for taking out the victim's stuff. This is intended to provide tangible incentive to emergently ally against over powered tyrants, or as a militaristic strategy for economically powerful players (who may not have much of a fleet).
Espionage in Sins of a Solar Empire is about acquiring information and projecting misleading information. For example, the TEC has a probe that can be used to view an area for a duration while the Vasari have Alter Phase Signature which sends false phase jump signatures to a target planet to mislead hostile players into believing that your capital ships are en route. This can alternatively be used on friendly capital ships to mask their phase jump signature, preventing them from being detected in transit by sensors at the destination planet. Perhaps the most offensive is the Vasari’s Subversion where covert operatives seek out and support local resistance forces for a period of time, granting vision of the planet and periodic gains to allegiance on the planet.
17. TS: Let's go over fleet construction. How much control does a player have when designing their fleet? Sticking with the TEC, what's an early assault fleet going to look like?
BF: Fleet design is under full control of the player and begins by choosing from the various capitalship base models. Each capitalship must determine its fighter layout and its initial special capability. The fighter layouts can be adjusted at any time and are only subject to the command capacity of the ship, but improvements and new functions for the ship are only available when the ship levels up. The full capacity and function of each ship also isn’t likely to be reached until the correct research subjects are completed. When choosing a fleet it’s important to consider the base function of each ship, its expected fighter layout, and the ability selection plan. Further, these functions factor into considerations for synergy and complementary roles, research builds, and naturally, the fleet’s desired function. The TEC early assault fleet could take on a number of different forms, but a basic one would consist of two Kol Battleships, one with Gauss Cannon and one with Flak Burst, a Dunov Cruiser with Repair Droids and one unrevealed colonizing ship with Colonize activated. The two Kol’s should build all interceptors and leave them undocked for quick access to enemy bombers. The Dunov should build bombers and dock them and the unnamed colonize ship should build all bombers also docked for protection. This brings the total to 26 ships, 5 capital ships, 8 interceptors and 13 bombers for an early assault fleet. The goal is to protect the colonizing ship so players can take an enemy planet, hopefully with intact infrastructure and zero capitalship losses. The entire fleet will hold its position at the outer edge of the enemy planet’s gravity well. Interceptors are available for taking down a bomber run, a likely tactic for popping the colonizing ship. The Dunov will be left out of combat for the most part and stick to mostly repairing. The Kols will try to soak up and dish out as much damage as possible and if there is a nasty swarm of bombers heading for the colonizing ship, the second Kol Battleship will move closer to the colonizer and try to time his Flak Burst to take them out. After clearing any fleet defense, the bombers should be launched and sent in exclusively to take out orbital defense. This early in the game, the defenses will probably take out one of the capitalships and that’s an unnecessary loss at this point. It’s doubtful any enemy will have specialized racial defense or hangar bays so the bombers should handle the job easily; the defense guns cannot adequately target such agile strike craft. Once that’s done, the bombardment commences and hopefully results in a new colony ?
18. TS: While TS readers will think of GCII or SotS as competition to Sins, less strategy focused gamers might compare it more to Star Wars: Empire at War. Do you see any similarities there?
BF: Both Empire at War and Sins of a Solar Empire feature tactical space combat between capital ships, orbital structures, and fighters, with the outcome of such battles affecting the strategic balance of power in the galaxy. However, from what I’ve read about Empire at War, and SotS for that matter, I would say both build on the model popularized by the Total War Series – turn-based empire management with real-time tactical combat – by adding their own multiplayer variants. We feel we stand apart from all these games by keeping both the empire management and the tactical combat in real-time and without a discrete transition between the two.
19. TS: How's development going and when should we look for Sins of a Solar Empire? Have you considered Steam or other forms of online publishing?
BF: Development is progressing well, and we are investigating a number of publishing options, both traditional retail and online distribution. As far as release dates go, it is contingent on which publishing solution we ultimately choose, and as such I am reluctant to commit to a firm date at this point.
20. TS: Is there anything you'd like to add?
BF: If you want to learn more about Sins of a Solar Empire you can visit the website at www.sinsofasolarempire.com or check out the fan run forums at http://www.websitetoolbox.com/tool/mb/chronos . There is a gold mine of information there. I should point out that we are very committed to listening to the gaming community. A lot of the feedback we’ve gotten from people on that forum has had a very tangible effect on the game. If you want to get involved, drop by, sign up and I’ll hear what you have to say. Lastly, thanks to TalkStrategy for hosting this discussion about Sins of a Solar Empire!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to thank Blair for taking the time to do this interview. You know I always love to see a design team that can share their enthusiasm for their project. As always comments and feedback are appreciated. Don't forget about our space 4X poll going on now in the news section. Let us know how you feel.
Jason
Read/Post Comments
12 Jan 06
My neighbor dropped off a copy of Revenge of the Sith the game for me to try. I haven't played it very long, but nothing about it made me question the mediocre reviews it received. One thing that did surprise me was that it was made by The Collective. I'm beginning to think they've stumbled on the best development model since annual sports games. Of course, I mean best for the developer, not necessarily the gamer.
Let's look at what The Collective has done. They've released the following games: Men in Black, The Game of Life, Star Trek DS9: The Fallen, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Indiana Jones and the Emperor's Tomb, Wrath Unleashed, Star Wars: RotS and they're working on Mark Ecko's Getting Up and Dirty Harry. With the exception of Wrath which didn't do that well on the market, all of those are big licenses.
The Collective's genius was combining those licenses with solid gameplay mechanics to create a licensed game that didn't totally suck. They used a good engine to craft adventures that feel like they're part of the license. Obviously some were better than others, but overall, they've had great sales success. Gamers had gotten so used to licensed shovelware that even games that would be only good on their own seem great in comparison.
You have to wonder about the future though. With games like The Warriors and King Kong pushing the top of licensed gaming up, can The Collective keep up? I think they can. The key for me was Buffy. Without the time constraints of a movie release, they crafted a game that played like the action in the series, but also was written like an episode of the series. Perhaps with the continued success of their formula, they'll have the opportunity to take more chances like they did with Wrath. What can I say? I'm an optimist.
Jason
Read/Post Comments
11 Jan 06
When I mentioned three 4X games this spring, I thought I had them all. It was pointed out to me that I missed Space Empires V. Ok, we have four coming out then. I do remember when SEV was announced. I just hadn't heard anything since then. Maybe it's just me, but Five looks like it's a game for Space Empires fans not gamers in general. It reminds me of the Battlecruiser series where the game keeps getting better and better for people already in love with the series, but that group keeps getting smaller and smaller. I won't get into Joseph Campbell and Holdfast the Tyrant, but it is interesting. I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
My hosting company has offered me pretty good upgrade deal. It would allow me to host a lot more on the site including movies and demos. Of course, the costs would be more, but that would happen soon anyway. I'm going to think about it, but any input from readers would be appreciated. What would you like to see more of around here? I'd love to see some more story contributions, but that's an article for another time.
Jason
Read/Post Comments
10 Jan 06
Sometimes I feel bad doing background work on the site. There's little visual evidence of all the hard work that goes on. Then it's late and I can't give you my best for a column. Sorry. It seems there was a security hole found in Postnuke. I had to implement the fix right away because I can't tell you how depressing it is to see your site hacked. I don't even have a security guy to yell at. Oh well.
Before I go rambling on about something off the wall, I'll get to the game of the week. It's Armed Assault (official site) from Bohemia Interactive Studios. Wondering where Operation Flashpoint 2 is? Well, this isn't it. Confusing I know because it looks like it could be. It's a hyper realistic squad shooter set in modern times with huge maps and access to cool vehicles. It's got a new engine, and it's from the makers of Operation Flashpoint. They're also promising mission based multiplayer with up to 60+ players and bots. It should help tide you over until Flashpoint 2. Look for it in the first half of 2006.
Jason
Read/Post Comments
© Talk Strategy 2004-2006