What is the feel?

[ASHBERY76]

Does the A.I roleplay the philosophy in diplomacy,war/peace,guns or butter,ect.

[Tom_Holsinger]

Some "feel" questions based on Sean's statement elsewhere that your homeworld will be your largest colony for at least a hundred turns:
 
1)  Roughly how long does it take to get through the first 50 turns?   My experience has been that, in the early game period for turn-based space 4x games, it doesn't matter how large the "galaxy" is.  Players expand at a fixed rate for a while, and the size of the galaxy doesn't reallly matter for some time.  These games vary wildly in player management time depending on the game system, but are pretty consistent internally.  My guestimate for MOO3 is that it takes about 3-5 hours to get through the first 50 turns.
 
2)  Roughly how many colony worlds will a given empire have after those 50 turns?  Growth rates again are pretty consistent in the early period of these games.  MOO3 empires tend to have about 20-30 colonies by about Turn 50.  After Turn 50 it varies wildly, especially based on galaxy size and the number of empires.

[Aroddo]

In response to Tom_Holsinger
Strictly speaking I'm bound by the NDA to not discuss the game at all. So I'll be general.

1) The galaxy size alone doesn't influence your expansion speed - but the proximity to other races does. And if both are widely configurable it's not easy to answer a question in that regard. In a large galaxy there might easily be clusters of competing races with a few civilizations unbothered by immediate neighbours. The advantages of having (friendly) neighbours are trade and research. And - if you can really really trust them - security.

2) Early expansion mostly depends on the availability of colony ships and availability of planets. And not every planet in the vincinity can be colonized without the proper tech. I gave up MoO3 very early, so 20-30 colonies by turn 50 sounds very excessive to me. However, it depends largely on playstyle (and race choice) if you build lots of small colonies, a few well developed colonies or powerhouse core systems. When both extremes (isolationism and expansionism) are constricted by several mechanisms like the MoO3 "heavy foot of government" or overpopulation, the middle approach seems the most efficient one to me. Personally I tried all of them.


And regarding the general "feel" of the game: It was incredibly easy to pick up and play. And it took quite a while to get into some of the finer points of empire building. Too often my hybris led me to expand like a power hungry maniac, only to be left with a giant on clay feet, which was a very good learning experience for future games.
I prefer the beginning phase of the game, where all the important decisions are made and the core of the empire is founded. A fellow beta tester plays exactly the other way around, playing long loooong games (probably in the hope of causing a buffer overflow by building too many ships or earning too much cash ). He assures me he was fun, too, with his build-wait-trade-kill approach. He found out some pretty sophisticated AI behaviour I didn't even notice. According to him, the "Smile and carry a big stick" seems to work for him quite well.

The game really feels like a space empire conquest game ... and not like a bureaucrazy simulator or Zelda-in-Space or Starcraft 3D.

It's the only game in the space 4X genre that really appealed to me since Master of Orion 2. It has the just-one-more-turn factor, which is about the highest praise you can give to any turn based game.

[Tom_Holsinger]

Thanks, Ardoo, the presence of immediate neighbors makes a big difference in expansion. Does that also affect early game playing time per turn? I'm trying to get a feel for early game pacing.

[AminMaalouf]

The game really feels like a space empire conquest game ... and not like a bureaucrazy simulator or Zelda-in-Space or Starcraft 3D.

Interesting choice of words that speak volumes.

space empire
not bureaucrazy simulator
not Zelda
not Starcraft


Just guessing, but there may only be two moo2 features I will probably miss, one are the individual orders to ships (weapons, bording) and the other are those funny aliens you can set to farm, to build or to research (in the resource management bar of the planets). [:)]

I look forward and I am glad that a game of the old days, Armada 2525, comes back that I haven't played unfortunately as my access to 4xtbs only starts with space empire 2/3 and moo2.

[Aroddo]

I had the feeling that the playing time per turn is mostly influenced by your willingness to micromanage. I'm one of those micromanagers because I feel kinda bad when I lose a turn of production in one colony or such, but with time (and progress in development) I grew much faster in doing "needed" tasks.

Let's just say that 2526 offers a number of ways to lower your actions-per-turn ratio while achieving the same result. Some of those methods - like production queues - are common in every game, but some are truly unique to 2526 (or at least I never saw anything like it).

But the important thing is: They don't take away the fun!
(I'm still suffering from the MoO3 trauma, where I could run my empire on full auto and actually win the game without doing anything other than pressing the end-turn button).

And of course, when aliens are around you should pay a bit more attention to what the grinning Klurgu with his big fleet is doing in your neighbourhood.

[Tom_Holsinger]

Now here are some feel questions, about tedium in battle:

I have played a whole of space 4x games, and most to almost all space battles in each of them have consisted of one-sided planet-bashing, i.e., a big fleet whomps on planetary defenses with the latter being just overwhelmed. Is that any different in Armada 2526? By planetary defenses, I mean those which can engage spaceships, not ground defenses which only engage an invading army.

I don't expect this game to be any different in that regard - it is pretty much inherent in the concept of space 4x games. But, what I am hoping for, is that Armada 2526 either eliminates the tedium of such battles, by safely automating them (and I suspect it does), or jazzes up planetary defenses so those can be more competitive with a large fleet. The latter would require that attackers be able to engage a defending fleet away from the planetary defenses, which is difficult to design effectively. I was the point man for the MOO3 design team on that, and the concept was dumped as too complicated.

I suspect that the Quick Battle and End Battle buttons on the Armada 2526 battle screen are the means by which the game automates one-sided planet-bashing. Is this correct? Can a sufficiently powerful fleet be guaranteed to take no losses in reducing any and all planetary defenses if the planet is not supported by a significant fleet?

Does Armada 2526 have the equivalent of MOO3's "system defense" ships, i.e., ships without any interstellar drives?

Does Armada 2526 have a "quick battle" equivalent for ground fighting, i.e., can a player with an invading army which utterly outmatches the defenders skip having to manage, or even watch, the ground battle when his troops are pretty much guaranteed to win?

[Aroddo]

Huh, don't really know how (and how much) to answer that.

First, an overwhelming force is by definition overwhelming, so I guess 2526 has that in common with about every other game.
And regarding planetary defenses I want to point out the battle mechanics of the precedessor 2525, where an attack on a planet could be met with lots of planet based defenses. Or not, if the defender was careless or too trusting.

2525 also had some ships called E-boats, which were inexpensive and weak defense ships ... they had a hyperdrive but were much slower on the galaxy map. I never built them because I prefered building missiles and stuff, but it's fodder to speculate on.

And regarding the overwhelming ground army "quick battle" thing: This is actually an interesting thing to test.

[SeanD]

I suspect that the Quick Battle and End Battle buttons on the Armada 2526 battle screen are the means by which the game automates one-sided planet-bashing. Is this correct? Can a sufficiently powerful fleet be guaranteed to take no losses in reducing any and all planetary defenses if the planet is not supported by a significant fleet?

Yup, pretty much.

Does Armada 2526 have the equivalent of MOO3's "system defense" ships, i.e., ships without any interstellar drives?

Not really. You have militia which are raised automatically by your colony. The amount of militia are proportionate to your population. These guys can't leave the planet and can only be used in its defense.

Does Armada 2526 have a "quick battle" equivalent for ground fighting, i.e., can a player with an invading army which utterly outmatches the defenders skip having to manage, or even watch, the ground battle when his troops are pretty much guaranteed to win?

You can auto resolve any battle that you want, even the close ones. If you've won the space battle and you'd rather not fight out the ground battle you can click to end the battle and time gets compressed to the point where the battle only takes a few more moments to resolve itself. So, in effect, the feature you're asking about is there.

[martok]

ORIGINAL: SeanD

I suspect that the Quick Battle and End Battle buttons on the Armada 2526 battle screen are the means by which the game automates one-sided planet-bashing. Is this correct? Can a sufficiently powerful fleet be guaranteed to take no losses in reducing any and all planetary defenses if the planet is not supported by a significant fleet?

Yup, pretty much.

On a semi-related note about planetary defenses: Just how beefy (or not) can they get, anyway? Can a well-developed world with heavy defenses stop at least a modest-sized invasion force? Or are they capable of little more than repelling minor raids?

I'm a turtler by nature, so this is a question fairly close to my heart. [:D]

ORIGINAL: SeanD

You have militia which are raised automatically by your colony. The amount of militia are proportionate to your population. These guys can't leave the planet and can only be used in its defense.

Thank you Sean, I cannot tell you how happy I am to hear this. I've always felt colonies in 4X games should be able to spawn their own "National Guard" units for defense against invasion, so I'm thrilled A2526 has this feature!


Also, a follow-up question regarding ground units & planetary invasions: Can army/militia units fire upon assault ships, or do they engage landing enemy (ground) units only? Just curious.

[Ntronium]

At the extreme the offense is always going to have an advantage in a game like this, as you can concentrate the output of 30 plus worlds onto a single one of your choosing, but nevertheless planets can have pretty tough defenses.

Surround your planet with half a dozen, guardian orbital defense stations, each capable of taking on a capital ship.  Now an attacker can isolate them and destroy them fairly easily, but it takes time, and during that time he's getting pounded by maybe a hundred ground based heavy missile silos. Individually, they're not that hard to take out, but there are a lot of them, and a well defended planet will have them covered by an energy shield which is very tough to take down. Oh, and this assumes there is no fleet to help out the defenders, nor have I mentioned the most powerful defensive weapon.

What I described would be a very well defended planet, but certainly not unreasonable if you're playing turtle.

 

[Tom_Holsinger]

Thanks, Sean ,that answers all of my questions except for one which you can't answer - when I can order the game?

[Tom_Holsinger]

Aha! You have a turtle option! That was one of the most requested features during MOO3's public design discussion. Quicksilver's implementation of it died when they didn't follow it up with automatic updates, and hull size increases, in MOO3's orbital battle stations.

I have a major, major recommendation here. Have the guardian orbital defense stations be automatically upgraded with the newest technologies. If possible, have their sizes, once built, also increase automatically as the ability of their world to build hulls goes up.

ORIGINAL: Ntronium

At the extreme the offense is always going to have an advantage in a game like this, as you can concentrate the output of 30 plus worlds onto a single one of your choosing, but nevertheless planets can have pretty tough defenses.

Surround your planet with half a dozen, guardian orbital defense stations, each capable of taking on a capital ship.  Now an attacker can isolate them and destroy them fairly easily, but it takes time, and during that time he's getting pounded by maybe a hundred ground based heavy missile silos. Individually, they're not that hard to take out, but there are a lot of them, and a well defended planet will have them covered by an energy shield which is very tough to take down. Oh, and this assumes there is no fleet to help out the defenders, nor have I mentioned the most powerful defensive weapon.

What I described would be a very well defended planet, but certainly not unreasonable if you're playing turtle.

[Dodanodo]

oh great, I'm a turtler myself and what you just discribed is what I'm going to do alot! thank you, Ntronium.

I have just one more question: is there perhaps something else awesome you forgot to tell us to make this game even better, because right now, that doesn't seem very likely.[;)]

[GShock]

Can I say something? Why doesn't one of the betas publish an after action report ? That's the best way to show what the game is... 

[Wade1000]

ORIGINAL: Ntronium

At the extreme the offense is always going to have an advantage in a game like this, as you can concentrate the output of 30 plus worlds onto a single one of your choosing, but nevertheless planets can have pretty tough defenses.

Surround your planet with half a dozen, guardian orbital defense stations, each capable of taking on a capital ship.  Now an attacker can isolate them and destroy them fairly easily, but it takes time, and during that time he's getting pounded by maybe a hundred ground based heavy missile silos. Individually, they're not that hard to take out, but there are a lot of them, and a well defended planet will have them covered by an energy shield which is very tough to take down. Oh, and this assumes there is no fleet to help out the defenders, nor have I mentioned the most powerful defensive weapon.

What I described would be a very well defended planet, but certainly not unreasonable if you're playing turtle.

Sweet! Thanks. I'm super exicted...super. =D

Of course, the best defense is a good offense; but a good defense can help your possible offense.

Speak softly and carry a big stick.

[Ande]

so it can be difficult to attack a enemy planet, that is very good. But are there any alternatives to attack? traderoutes and such, not to destroy your enemy but to wear him down?

[martok]

ORIGINAL: Ntronium

At the extreme the offense is always going to have an advantage in a game like this, as you can concentrate the output of 30 plus worlds onto a single one of your choosing, but nevertheless planets can have pretty tough defenses.

Surround your planet with half a dozen, guardian orbital defense stations, each capable of taking on a capital ship. Now an attacker can isolate them and destroy them fairly easily, but it takes time, and during that time he's getting pounded by maybe a hundred ground based heavy missile silos. Individually, they're not that hard to take out, but there are a lot of them, and a well defended planet will have them covered by an energy shield which is very tough to take down. Oh, and this assumes there is no fleet to help out the defenders, nor have I mentioned the most powerful defensive weapon.

What I described would be a very well defended planet, but certainly not unreasonable if you're playing turtle.

E-e-e-excellent. [Martok rubs his hands together sans Montgomery Burns]

Thanks (again) for responding to my query, Ntronium; it's much appreciated!

ORIGINAL: GShock

Can I say something? Why doesn't one of the betas publish an after action report ? That's the best way to show what the game is... 

My guess is that the beta-testers are still under the NDA, and are thus limited in what they can (and cannot) say until the game is released.

[martok]

ORIGINAL: Ande

But are there any alternatives to attack? traderoutes and such, not to destroy your enemy but to wear him down?

Good question. I don't suppose there will some sort of option where we can impose an "embargo" on a star system, is there?

[Tom_Holsinger]

martok, the term is "blockade".