New 4x Game In The Works [Archive]

Mecron

24-07-2005, 08:15 AM

Hi all :max:

re: Sword of the Stars

innovative= random tech trees...useful 3-D star map and all the strategic implications thereof...races with different strategic movement tech...real time combat resolved in 5 minute combat rounds between strategic turns...the ability to spy on other players combat also in real time in order to learn about their tech and tactics...the ability to mix and match entire ship sections and loadouts to create everything a fleet needs from a point defence destroyer to a standoff cruiser to a refinery ship and almost everything in between...the fact you do NOT have to click through 150 turns in order to get a ship thats capable of hurting anyone.

Are these innovations on the originality scale of inventing fire or sliced bread to toast on said fire? No. Are they innovations combined in such a way to create a 4X game that is NOT a spreadsheet in disguise. Yes.

For the record, the game is closer to 6 months than a year. As for its not looking as good as HW? Well having worked on both HW and HW:Cat I can pretty much vouch SOTS is at least as pretty in the ways that count. Will we ever have 40 klick engine trails or skyboxes that take a month to make? Probably not. On the other hand if you are interested in being able to see your shield generators come back on line or be able to tell when a turret has been blown off then you might like what SOTS has to offer when it comes to graphics.

If there is anything you are curious about SOTS or its design philosophy, just post your questions here and I would be glad to pop back in and answer 'em when I am not cruising my favourite old games or working on my new favourite;)

--Martin E. Cirulis,
Lead Designer/CEO,
Kerberos Productions

efthimios

24-07-2005, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by Mecron@Jul 24 2005, 08:15 AM
real time combat resolved in 5 minute combat rounds between strategic turns...
Before getting excited, do you mean the battles are similar to Birth of The Federation (if you have played that game), where when there is a battle it is turn based with ordering your ships then watching the battle unfold?

I thought the game was completely in real time. Do you mean that the strategic map is in turn based like most other in the 4X field? (please say yes :-) )

Is there going to be an option for "skirmish" games where you choose galaxy size etc, or is it a linear game in the likes of Imperium Galactica?

I thought the graphics looked great from what I have seen, but is the game going to NEED pixel shaders to work? The reason is that I have a radeon 7500m which has no such ability. I still have no idea how you give orders to your ships and planets, and how large the playing field (ie galaxy size) of the game is. Is it like a star system, several, many like GalCiv Stars! etc.

Thank you very much for taking the time to post here!

Partizanka

24-07-2005, 01:33 PM

Reminds me of Imperium Galactica 2. Should be interesting.

omg

24-07-2005, 01:52 PM

the ships have a kind of babylon 5 look to them. this might be the game that makes me update my radeon 7200. definatly looking forwards to this one :ok:

Mecron

24-07-2005, 07:19 PM

Thanks for the welcome, guys!

Let me get to some of your questions right away and always feel free to ask more. ;)

Before getting excited, do you mean the battles are similar to Birth of The Federation (if you have played that game), where when there is a battle it is turn based with ordering your ships then watching the battle unfold?

Ummm not sure what thought is exciting you but its not like BoF per se. Probably be easiest just to explain the turn system and I will use a multiplayer game as an example but you can assume the same for single player vs AI.
SOTS has turn based strategic play which means all players simultaneous maintain their empire, adjust planet settings, build ships, research and move fleets. When you are happy with what you have done, you hit end turn. Your efforts are then beamed to the server (the player who started the game) and the game arranges all that data together. If the fleet of any 2 (or more) hostile empires is in the same system or has a deep space intercept encounter, then the system notifies the involved players that real time combat is about to begin and you have a choice of fighting it out yourself or leaving it up to the AI. Combat is fully 3-D though we have tightened movement down to a 2-D plain (though ships will leave the plain briefly to manouver over and under each other). This will be familiar to anyone who has played our critically acclaimed but very obscure ;) effort for Disney, Treasure PLanet:Battle at Procyon or the Starfleet Command games. (If you would like a full explanation of the perils of unlimited 3-D movement in a space game, I can do that later). Battles last for 5 minutes or until only one side rules the zone. If the battle is still unresolved after 5 mins, combat ends, simulating a period of regrouping for both sides and the game starts the next strategic turn. Leaving players free to retreat, reinforce or repair before the next combat turn.
The games arranges for as many simultaneous battles as possible to reduce down time for non-fighting players. ie.- If players 1 and 3 have a battle and 2 and 4 also have a battle, they are played out at the same time. THough if player 1 also has a battle with player 2 it will have to wait till his first fight is resolved. Players NOT involved in combat still have access to their empire for planning and can also spy on combat providing they have the right tech.

Is there going to be an option for "skirmish" games where you choose galaxy size etc, or is it a linear game in the likes of Imperium Galactica?

SOTS its a traditional wargame, NOT a HW style adventure game. It is all about picking the galaxy, size, turn or time limit and what race you want to play. We are also including "Historical" scenarios that take the game out of the purely "everyone starts with nothing" basic scenario. Want to feel like the fledgling SOL force encountering the ancient and huge Tark empire, (or contrarily, the harried Tark Sector Admiral who has to deal with an upstart new race AND the outrageous demands of the Emperor?) then there will be pre-set scenarios and maps for that sort of thing as well. :ok:

I thought the graphics looked great from what I have seen, but is the game going to NEED pixel shaders to work? The reason is that I have a radeon 7500m which has no such ability. I still have no idea how you give orders to your ships and planets, and how large the playing field (ie galaxy size) of the game is. Is it like a star system, several, many like GalCiv Stars! etc.

The game looks great with shaders but it does NOT need them;) We are trying to approach a large range of systems and graphics cards with the stree being put on maintaining the level of graphics that let a player make tactical decisions based on visual input, not just numbers and health bars. As far as interface goes, we are peeling the genre back to its roots on this one and going with a lot of point n click and slider bars. We want you to feel like an Emperor and Admiral, NOT a bureaucrat and a number cruncher. Systems are basic affairs of one star and a primary planet that is rated for size, resource base and suitability. ANd galaxy sizes range from 50 to 250 stars right now, and come in various 3-D shapes like globes, spirals, and arms.

Reminds me of Imperium Galactica 2. Should be interesting.

We would like it to remind you of the best parts of games that have been while taking advatange of the power of this generation of comps to take the genre out into more dynamic and graphic directions.

the ships have a kind of babylon 5 look to them.

We are bigs fans of the B5 Universe ourselves, (though there are all sorts of nods to different SF universes in the game) especially those great multi-race battles where there are all sorts of different design philosophy ships firing all sorts of cool and exotic weapons that make you go "holy crap! what was that?" and "Ow! thats gonna leave a mark!" :D We have added essays and data on the Tarka and Hiver on the website over the past couple of weeks (with the Liir soon to come) so feel free to check that out as well.

Great talking to you guys,
--MEC

efthimios

24-07-2005, 08:26 PM

Wow! Great news, thank you for your answers!
Glad to hear about the pixel shaders. :-) I will buy this game.

Two more questions :sneaky:

1) Is it possible to have fleets with several hundrend ships or are the numbers lower? I don't mind either way (though yes I would prefer the larger number :D ) , I am just curious.

2) My guess is the answer to this one will be no (as it reasonably should) but I will ask anyhow. In cases (if any) of very different civlizations, is there a chance of having also very different weapons? Meaning not just different attack numbers but also different type of attacks, beyond perhaps the beam/laser missiles/rockets combo?

Your choices for the game intrigue me very much. The idea of limiting the time of the battle encounter is a very nice touch IMO, I would love to see how it works.
Also the idea of having the feeling of being an emperor etc is a GREAT change IMO. Good, good move. :ok:

Mecron

25-07-2005, 05:50 PM

Great! We love questions down here at the hell-kennel :max: Keep 'em up.

1) Is it possible to have fleets with several hundrend ships or are the numbers lower?

Fleets can be any number of ships. But in order to keep things a little realistic, (and not have to give you ships that are cubes and triangles :sneaky: ) we have taken a page from real navy doctrine and limited the number of ships that can function in combat at any given moment. For instance, you don't see the US Navy showing up at a fight with every single ship they have. It would be anarchy and a friendly fire cookout. We have a C3 support system (and specialized command sections) that sets the upper number of ships you can command in a fight. The fun thing is that we take into account that your possibly massive fleet may be waiting in the wings. So when one of your ships is destroyed in real time another ship enters the frey from your reserve fleet. If you have a command vessel in the fight then you get to choose which ship comes in.

2) My guess is the answer to this one will be no (as it reasonably should) but I will ask anyhow. In cases (if any) of very different civlizations, is there a chance of having also very different weapons? Meaning not just different attack numbers but also different type of attacks, beyond perhaps the beam/laser missiles/rockets combo?

I suppose the answer to this is yes and no. While there is no weapon system SPECIFIC to any given race, the probablities of the random tech tree make some techs more likely for a race than others. That being said, there is a LARGE number of weapon, tech and section options that make the combos you mention somewhat tame. Perhaps an example from last weeks playtest will help...

I have been border tussling with another Tarka player for a couple dozen turns. Fending off some of his small raider fleets. Generally using a class of cheap torpedo destroyers (cheap cause I use old engine tech for them since I dont intend to send them off...just defend planets) combined with my sattelites to make his trip in from his spawn point to weapons range of my planet very painful. I find a couple of his frontier worlds and decide to hit back hard. Assuming he has realized how well my defences work I assume I am going to be facing the same trick. So I design a class of point defence cruisers to shoot down missiles and torps and then a in close knife fighting pair of cruisers and destroyer designs with high speed engines becuase I plan on closing in fast and chew him hard up close and personal with mass drivers and energy cannons.

I head on in with a medium sized fleet...I leave my command ship in the back of the battle and head on in. Check sensors display and yep sure enough here comes the flight of destroyers and they spit out torps at me and hold position. I switch back to reality view, set up flanking point defence cruisers to break up the missiles and torps and then dive on in...when my first cruiser explodes for no apparent reason just as it enters driver range...I mutter "wtf?" and check sensors again. Only to discover the ships around his torpedo group are NOT the escorts I thought but bloody minelayers...

Whackiness ensues.

I get beaten up badly, retreat. I come back mutter "fine, you lil bugger. I have better torps AND better missile warheads...you stand in your lil cloud of mines and I will just pulp you from a distance". The second battle of Korasek II takes place 3 turns later but when I switch to sensors to target my ranged stuff, I realize the sneaky bugger has built a destroyer with a sensor jammer and I can't see his torpedo boats and minelayers on sensor manager and therefore can't target them till I am in visual distance...Luckily I had designed a heavy PD ship that used PD drivers instead of the lighter damage but more accurate PD lasers and was able to do a lil close in minesweeping while I hunted that jammer. I also began to research shields in a hurry.

Does this help give you an idea of the relationships between weapons, designs, tech and real time combat that we have been aiming for?

efthimios

25-07-2005, 06:21 PM

Yes it does help, thanks!
The way you described the battle reminded me a bit of Harpoon and Fleet Command, that is a good thing. :-)

Some more questions perhaps? :bleh:

1) Are battles with more than two fleets possible? You and an ally against a third or third and fourth enemy? If yes, is it possible to have on of the two fleets in reserve so that it surprises the enemy? The last question also in 1vs1 fleets engagements. You said that the amount of ships you can control at any one time depends on your command abilities, can you choose to have even less number of ships against the enemy and have the bulk of your fleet on standby?

2)Are fighters like say in the Star Wars world, or is it more like the Star Trek where you do not have fighters per se?

3)Can you give order to ram a ship?

4) I was going to ask if you can order a ship of yours to get between another and an enemy ship (if for example it is heavily damaged and you want to protected even if it means sucrificing the other one), but if the battles are more like a RTS then I guess the answer is maybe. :D

5) Can you have recon/spy ships to send on their own to recon?

6)How is the diplomacy in the game? Also, are there things like borders?

7)How is the system/planet buld system in the game? Are there limitations for what you can build on a planet?

8)Is there a system where you (or the enemy) can acquire territory and/or ships without actual war? Also, is it possible to capture enemy ships?

9)Is it possible to give a general battle order to your fleet before the engagement so that you will not have to micromanage during the battle if you do not want to?

I don't want to pressure you too much, so I better end this now :D

Doubler

25-07-2005, 06:41 PM

Sounds like a really good game in the making :ok:

You already mentioned sattelites. Will there be (other?) orbital facilities in the game?

And I'm interested in the Hiver propulsion technology. From your site:
it may take them months or years, moving at sub-relativistic speed, to reach their destination. Once they arrive, however, the Hivers quickly set up a massive ring-shaped teleportation device. Should other Hiver ships choose to follow, they can travel instantly to the newly erected ring from any other ring in the Hiver empire.*
Does this mean that when a Hiver fleet moves, they slowly move a short distance out of a system, and then instantly teleport to their destination?
Or does it mean they first have to arrive to that other system, then build a gate there, and then being able to instantly teleport there?
And anyway, how does this work with alien systems? Is it possible to set up and guard a gate in a hostile system, for example?

Mecron

25-07-2005, 09:21 PM

And more answers... :D

1) Are battles with more than two fleets possible? You and an ally against a third or third and fourth enemy? If yes, is it possible to have on of the two fleets in reserve so that it surprises the enemy? The last question also in 1vs1 fleets engagements. You said that the amount of ships you can control at any one time depends on your command abilities, can you choose to have even less number of ships against the enemy and have the bulk of your fleet on standby?
Yes, you can have up to 8 different players in the same battle, and yes with allies. No, everyone who is in the fight is known, no surprise there, but given the fact the battle area is larger than sensors can scan all at once and there is cloaking and jamming tech, many surprises are possible. And no, you have to field the max ships possible, but that still allows you to field your crappy ships first if you are just fighting a delaying action.

2)Are fighters like say in the Star Wars world, or is it more like the Star Trek where you do not have fighters per se?
Given destroyers are just 30 meters long or so, fighters aren't really a factor but we do have a battle-rider class for things like planetary assualt shuttles and bio-war mega-missile.

3)Can you give order to ram a ship?
Not as such, but since there is ship collision and damage from them in the physics engine, you never know LOL

4) I was going to ask if you can order a ship of yours to get between another and an enemy ship (if for example it is heavily damaged and you want to protected even if it means sucrificing the other one), but if the battles are more like a RTS then I guess the answer is maybe.*
Yes you can.

5) Can you have recon/spy ships to send on their own to recon?

Yes.

6)How is the diplomacy in the game? Also, are there things like borders?
Diplomacy is pretty straighforward. You can make or break alliances and non-aggression pacts. You can give monetary support and refuel and repair allied vessels. There are no borders as they get kind of abtract on a 3-D starmap. :bleh:

7)How is the system/planet buld system in the game? Are there limitations for what you can build on a planet?
Here we opted to keep planetary dev simple and straightforward. Your build up of infrastructure and your terraforming work on a new world are controlled by slider bars. Planetary defence missles are built automatically and based on population. There are various technologies that enhance colonization and industrial output but they are applied automaticaly. Once again this is about what role we want to put the player in. And also its about not wanting to make the player build anything that someone can't fly around and blow up at some point.

8)Is there a system where you (or the enemy) can acquire territory and/or ships without actual war? Also, is it possible to capture enemy ships?
Nope, you have to get yoru hands dirty to capture worlds. :sneaky: And you cannot capture entire ships but if you have a science ship in with a victorious fleet, there is a chance to do some back engineering.

9)Is it possible to give a general battle order to your fleet before the engagement so that you will not have to micromanage during the battle if you do not want to?
Yep, you can even use the fleet manager screen to lay out formations and general behaviours as a template BEFORE any battle starts.

and an answer for Doubler in return for his supportive comment :D

Or does it mean they first have to arrive to that other system, then build a gate there, and then being able to instantly teleport there?
And anyway, how does this work with alien systems? Is it possible to set up and guard a gate in a hostile system, for example?
YOu have it right there. Hivers crawl STL to a system. Establish a gate and then can port to it instantly. It becomes part of the Hiver Teleportation Grid. And yes you can use this system to invade. When a Hiver fleet enters and enemy system, first the gate ship has to survive the initial combat round. The next turn you can order it to build the gate. Then the completed gate has to survive the next combat phase and if it does then it is conected to the grid for the next strat turn and every hiver ship in the empire can pop in to say hello. Needless to say Hiver invasions are big, stressful and the defender has to act fast.

In fact I am playing Hiver in today's 8 player playtest :max:

Borodin

25-07-2005, 11:02 PM

Originally posted by Mecron@Jul 24 2005, 08:15 AM
Are these innovations on the originality scale of inventing fire or sliced bread to toast on said fire? No. Are they innovations combined in such a way to create a 4X game that is NOT a spreadsheet in disguise. Yes.

Martin, I'm confused. Are you saying that you don't use a spreadsheet behind the scenes? Otherwise, I'm afraid I don't understand. Any strategy game can be called be perjoratively called "a spreadsheet in disguise," and calling the rest of 4x space strategy games that doesn't make them any more so.

efthimios

25-07-2005, 11:47 PM

Mecron once again thank you for your answers. If you want some more beta testers count me in :D

I have only one minor question now, perhaps I will have more later.

Are there any customization options
1) To create your own race
2) To change "colours" to your ships or any other cosmetic change?
For example you might want your ships to be white in colour (I wouldn't, but)

Yes that wasn't just one question. :bleh:

Appreciated that you come here (not your "home" forum" and post replies to our questions.

Mecron

25-07-2005, 11:56 PM

Martin, I'm confused. Are you saying that you don't use a spreadsheet behind the scenes? Otherwise, I'm afraid I don't understand. Any strategy game can be called be perjoratively called "a spreadsheet in disguise," and calling the rest of 4x space strategy games that doesn't make them any more so.

No real confusion, Borodin. It is a reference to how some games in the genre have become bogged down in detail and number crunching. I did not say "the rest" in any way shape or form and it was not meant as a blanket statement on the entire genre. On the other hand, I can easily defend the point that games like the former king, MOO, have fallen on hard times of late because of too much attention to detail that adds very little to the gameplay experience. IMHO of course. My computer 4X experience goes back to the C64 and boardgame 4X much further than that so you will have to excuse me if I engage in a little shorthand while making a point. I suppose "spreadsheet in disguise" gives away my roots as a reviewer back in the 90's. :bye:

Mecron

26-07-2005, 12:07 AM

Ef, no problem, wherever you find a question about SOTS, I will be there! ta-daa! :Brain:

TO answer your 2 part question ;)

Yes, you can pick a player color and it shows up on your icons and lables in the strat game and as a base hull panel color in combat. The colors are limited to 8 specific ones though as you REALLY don't want to play a 8 player game with 7 people who really like various shades of blue.

As for alien race customization, we went against this for a couple reasons. 1) It has just become standard feature throughout the genre and it really didn't excite us too much. and 2) We have always prefered games where the aliens have very strong characters, play-styles and motiffs. Swapping their characteristics just seems to make them feel generic and not much more than art skins to us. I suppose we would rather have you hate the Liir and swear never to play them in a game that not really know or care about them in anyway except as art.

Jimbo the Legend

26-07-2005, 11:16 PM

had a look at the trailers a few days ago, looks awesome. am very intruiged by your turn sytem.

just a couple of quick questions that im surprised no-ones asked already:

1) any idea what the minimam specs will be, comp is dying a very slow and painful death so its an issue for me on most games :cry:

2) release date? :D :D :D

J

Mecron

27-07-2005, 01:44 AM

Hi Jimbo!

THanks for the comments. TO answer your questions...

1) Min specs are still up in the air. We are designing the LOD system to also adapt to older comps and graphic cards. Older system = game less pretty but we still want you to be able to play. You didn't hear it from me, but filling up to a gig of main memory will help a lot if your machine is a bit elderly.

2) It's up to the publisher we are negotiating with but again, rumor has it within 6 months :max:

Shrek

27-07-2005, 09:06 AM

hey, just wanted to say: WOW, AWSOME... WHERE DO I GET IT? (just kidding :D )

just one thing: did i hear something about a gig of main memory for old machines? if so, i belive some old machines won' t accept that much. but maybe that' s just my concept of "old machine" :whistle:

by the way, i can make efthimios words as mine: if you need more beta testers, you can count me in (and almost all of the people here :evil: ) we all love challenges :w00t:

Mecron

28-07-2005, 08:50 PM

LOL @ Shrek... Well ok, if your machine can't take two 512 sticks...then it may be very very old by my standards :tai:

Thanks for your kind offer for testing but at this stage, like any new franchise, the real thing we need help with is spreading the word. With less publishers interested in PC games and even less interested in strat games that are NOT pure RTS, games like SOTS are getting less and less coverage. Sad but a fact of life.
--Mec

Mecron

05-08-2005, 07:03 AM

Hmmm, its gotten all quiet :cry:

Well for a weekend treat the details of the Liir have been posted.

http://www.kerberos-productions.com/sots.shtml

Have fun and as always, feel free to ask anything that comes to mind.

--MEC

efthimios

05-08-2005, 11:29 AM

Here is a question, (or more :-p )

how does the AI react/play to a human player that controls an empire. Meaning, if one of the races (just generalizing now) is good at missile weapons and peace treaties, but the human player plays that race building beam weapons and making wars, does the AI adapt to the play of the human or does it mainlyplayas how that race would play? ("that race" meaning the human controlled race).

Hmm, also is it possible to have complete reversal of the political situation between empires, and while for some time two were at war, they can have peace and perhaps even alliance?

Is it possible to adjust the speed the RTS battles play at?

Are there going to be "minor" races in the game?

Is there going to be a/more super/uber weapon that once one empire builds it, it turns into almost unstoppable?

If say none of the races are in an alliance, and one of them (human or otherwise) is getting huge and a clear threat to the status quo, will the AI races (or AI+human meaning AI initiated) try to ally against the common threat?

Will there be supplies in the game?

How is ground combat resolved? Or done? Will the player have any tactical control over it? Strategic control? Any control? Is there ground combat?

Is it possible to give orders to a ship to self destruct and hopefuly take with it another , enemy ship?

If ships get experience, is it possible to have their crew (or say just the bridge crew) survive its destruction to be re assigned to another ship?

Will it be possible for anyone to immediately attack the homeworld of another race even if there are several systems between them?

Is there a distance between two systems that matters in how long it takes to travel to or any neighbouring systems are always distance (in terms of time needed) equal to say 1?

Is it possible to order your fleet to ambush one?

Is it possible to have two enemy fleets in the same system but not necessarily fight each other?

I haven't seen any pictures of video of other parts of the game than the battles, so when will we have a look at them?

There is a mention about a 3D starmap, is it similar to Ascendancy's map?

Hey, you asked for a question! :bleh:

Mecron

05-08-2005, 07:18 PM

efthimios, that'll teach me! :blink: Next time I post I'll say whatever you do don't ask any questions! LOL

Actually its a fun way to start the design day, and it lets me put off adjusting the defense platform values...

so lets get down to it then...

how does the AI react/play to a human player that controls an empire. Meaning, if one of the races (just generalizing now) is good at missile weapons and peace treaties, but the human player plays that race building beam weapons and making wars, does the AI adapt to the play of the human or does it mainlyplayas how that race would play? ("that race" meaning the human controlled race).
SOTS is just not this constrained. While there are general behaviours for the races when handled by the AI, in general I have never cared much for overgeneralizations like "Race A is good at treaties, Race B only uses beams." I like tendencies more than rules and hence the AI will NOT expect you to play in any particular way. Its racial rules are there for you to learn and adapt to but not second guess. Yes you can safely assume that a strike against the Hiver homeworld will bring brutal retaliation or that the Liir won't try to exterminate you just for existing, but they all have their own agendas that are dictated by their real situations in the galaxy you are playing at the time.

Hmm, also is it possible to have complete reversal of the political situation between empires, and while for some time two were at war, they can have peace and perhaps even alliance?
That would be a big yes. Alliances are about mutual advantage. And that comes and goes over the course of a game. If you are a big "make 'em and break 'em" kind of player, the AI will notice and be leary about any treaty though like a human would.

Is it possible to adjust the speed the RTS battles play at?
In single player you can pause the action and give orders but in multi-player its just reality, my friend. On the other hand I wouldn't over panic about the speed of play. This is a game about battling starships of the line, not rushing tanks or hopping zerglings. LOL

Are there going to be "minor" races in the game?
There are some random and semi-random encounters with a few mysterious races and lifeforms but no "minor" races per se. I really didnt want to put anything in the game that felt token. And populating a planet with numbers and a funny name that just sit there to be beat on just seemed very token.

Is there going to be a/more super/uber weapon that once one empire builds it, it turns into almost unstoppable?
While there are some very scarey weapons in the game, they are just weapons and I have never believed that a really big gun makes you impervious to harm at the same time. So while the siege cannon Dreadnought can devestate a world in just a few asteroid shots, I have seen it wander into a well layed minefield and then get torn apart by 2 dozen fast attack destroys with mass drivers and pulse phasers. Its the combination of ships and abilities in a fleet I would like players to find truely terrifying. :ph34r:

If say none of the races are in an alliance, and one of them (human or otherwise) is getting huge and a clear threat to the status quo, will the AI races (or AI+human meaning AI initiated) try to ally against the common threat?
The AI will react in its own self interest. If they find themselves falling behind the curve they will tend to stop biting on lesser threats and try to go stop the big dog. On the other hand they also think in terms of self interest so if the big dog is far away but the ungaurded flank of a peer is right next door they may try to tear off a few chunks before the threat gets closer.

Will there be supplies in the game?

How is ground combat resolved? Or done? Will the player have any tactical control over it? Strategic control? Any control? Is there ground combat?
These are easy...Sort of and Brutally. :max: THe first because we have command and control points, repair, refueling and mining but none of those are resource managment per se so I am not sure you would call them supplies. Things like ammunition or crew are below the level of detail of this game. As for ground combat, SOTS takes the view that pummeling from space and genocide are the only ways to be sure :evil: I did not want to take the combat focus away from the fully 3-D realm and so SOTS keeps the action in space. You can bomb, attack shuttle and bio-missle a world clean and repopulate if you want though.

Is it possible to give orders to a ship to self destruct and hopefuly take with it another , enemy ship?
Yes, though not every race is as willing to sacrifice their life as others.

If ships get experience, is it possible to have their crew (or say just the bridge crew) survive its destruction to be re assigned to another ship?

To be honest, crew experience is something I am still kicking around. Philisophically I have always like things like unit quality, design-wise though its just below the edge of the detail level of this game. If it does make it in though, it will be about the ship. When it dies the crew dies. Heck, you can even see a couple of them drifting through space in the game after a ship detonates. :evil:

Will it be possible for anyone to immediately attack the homeworld of another race even if there are several systems between them?
Is there a distance between two systems that matters in how long it takes to travel to or any neighbouring systems are always distance (in terms of time needed) equal to say 1?
These two issues are related as they both revolve around travel time and distance. In SOTS the starmap is a physical 3-D object which means x distance ALWAYS equals y light years. The only thing fluid is what method you use to cross that distance. That means if you were to discover what system was the capital of a player then its up to you how you could get there regardless of how far it was. No sytem is "in the way" per se except if you are human whose node drive forces you to go from system to sytem along certain paths. You can attack any planet any time. On the other hand you can defend a planet with sattelites and your own ships anytime. Not to mention homeworlds are always size 10 and max populations which means they can launch 10 defense ICBM's every 20 or so seconds. THis all translates to Homeworlds are no push over.

Is it possible to order your fleet to ambush one?
Yes, as long as your drive tech is capable of a deep space intercept. And of course, you are fast enough to make an intercept.

Is it possible to have two enemy fleets in the same system but not necessarily fight each other?
2 or more enemy fleets in the same system will trigger a 5 minute combat round. What you do with that 5 minutes is up to you. Go for the throat or wave across an AU of system space.

I haven't seen any pictures of video of other parts of the game than the battles, so when will we have a look at them?
We are just doing our final pass on the main starmap interface after much playtesting and tweaking. As soon as we are happy I am sure a few screenshots will appear. :max:

There is a mention about a 3D starmap, is it similar to Ascendancy's map?

Better. :D And in comes in a variety of shapes and sizes.

Ok, I think I got them all that time! Bring 'em on, I can handle it! :Titan:

Have a good weekend,
--MEC

efthimios

06-08-2005, 12:09 AM

:D Thank you very much!
I will come up with more questions at one point, but for now I just have a request, please please if the game has bugs at the time of release, fix them with patches! I (and others of course) have been burned too many times by a game that could be a 5/5 and stays at 2.5/5 because of bugs never getting fixed!

All in all the game looks like a winner, I hope that who ever is going to be in charge of marketing (publisher?) will put some resources on it to let people to know about what may become the new standard in 4X. Also try not to lose focus (marketing) as to who is the core of almost certain buyers. Nothing worse than for a game to try to sell itself as something that it is not and fail to impress the newly targeted group and also make the "certain" group not "get it" that this game is what they have been looking for in a long time. Good luck, I WILL be back.
:bleh:

Bernie

08-08-2005, 12:49 PM

Wow! A developer actually showed up here :D

I hope this game is really as great as it sounds :) It could definetly end up on my favorite list, if it is :D I really wish you all the luck with this game, and I hope I'll see it in stores around here, if not... then I guess I have an excuse for getting a visa ;)

Anyway, I do have one question for you :)

The biggest problem in 4X games in my opinion is that it always ends up being the bigger players walking all over the smaller ones, and the smaller ones not being able to do a thing. Do players that have fallen behind make any difference? or is it the big ones that dominate?

Doubler

08-08-2005, 04:50 PM

The race sections on your website make for interesting reading, and have made me come up with another (insignificant) question:
Will there be anomalies and singularities in the game?

This, as black holes were mentioned in the text... :unsure:

Mecron

08-08-2005, 05:35 PM

efthimios-- Rest assured, should any bug make it past our rigorous screening, then indeed it will be patched. Though I feel as though I should explain something about the industry as a caveat to this promise. Sadly, patches and their release hinge upon the publisher rather than the developer 95% of the time. Publishers feel any patch to a game with their name on it MUST pass through their Q/A cycle, which means, dear readers, it costs the publisher money and time to put out a patch supplied by the developer. This means if a publisher decides to walk away from a game after publication there is nothing the developer can do about putting out a patch except on the sly and that can result in dire legal consequences. Sad but true. This is why at Kerberos we will always try and maintain as much control over this aspect as possible.
As far as marketing goes, that too is a publisher matter but as I have said before, that still allows us room to get the word out "on the street" as it were and we have always been proud to show exactly who we are making games for. :ok:

Bernie-- Well I won't lie to you and say gettting behind the curve is a great thing or anything but on the other hand it is not the end of the world either. The very large number of tactical choices in SOTS allows a player, especially a disadvantaged one, to sharpen their tactics into a very sharp point and drive home with it. They may not be able to take out a larger opponent over mulitiple systems all at once, but they can harden their own defences while finding ways to make their own attacks cost their bigger oppponents dearly.

Doubler-- Anomalies and mysteries...yes. Black holes and other things acting as instant movement portals (aside from Hiver gates)...no.

Mecron

14-08-2005, 04:58 PM

Hmmmm...everybody must have gone away for the rest of the summer...or are hunkered down watching the new season of Galactica I suppose. :D

Well if anyone is still out there, there are some new screens coming to the site on monday afternoon, the last of the alien race write ups is up, the Liir, and we even have our own msg board chugging along where more secrets are being divulged from time to time. :max:

http://www.kerberos-productions.com/forum/index.php

take care all,
--MEC

efthimios

16-08-2005, 03:41 PM

Well, I am just waiting for the game. I hope there will be a good playable demo (not just the battle parts).

Mecron

16-08-2005, 06:01 PM

When it is time for the demo, it will be fully functional, never fear. Just a matter of choosing the appropriate content level but otherwise it will play the same as the full version.
--MEC

Jimbo the Legend

16-08-2005, 11:43 PM

Who says thats a bad thing? :sneaky:

J

Mecron

17-08-2005, 12:29 AM

Indeed! :evil:

And on the news front, a couple pics of the main starmap interface have been posted on the site. Take a look and, as always, ask about anything you are curious about.
--MEC

http://www.kerberos-productions.com/sots.shtml

blastradius14

17-08-2005, 12:59 AM

Gee. Looks like MOO2 or something, Maybe even MOO3. Only with less people you can be.

efthimios

17-08-2005, 03:04 AM

Originally posted by blastradius14@Aug 17 2005, 12:59 AM
Gee. Looks like MOO2 or something, Maybe even MOO3. Only with less people you can be.
Don't say that! I don't like either of those games.

efthimios

17-08-2005, 03:07 AM

Originally posted by Mecron@Aug 17 2005, 12:29 AM
Indeed! :evil:

And on the news front, a couple pics of the main starmap interface have been posted on the site. Take a look and, as always, ask about anything you are curious about.
--MEC

http://www.kerberos-productions.com/sots.shtml
Oh my. It looks beautiful! (the starmap) Love the looks of it! Just curious, how do you access other things, like diplomacy?
In terms of appearance, it sure looks lovely!

Mecron

17-08-2005, 06:11 AM

Thanks Eft, various subscreens are acessed by various buttons around the interface. For instance that budgeting pie is also a button that takes you to the budget and colony summary screen.

Blastradius- Sorry to hear that...kind of like saying Half Life 2 is just like Doom or Doom 2. But you keep working on that reading comprehension thing and we will keep working on the game, ok? :sneaky:

Mecron

26-08-2005, 05:55 PM

Hey folks,

For those interested there are a couple interviews on SotS out there...

http://news.talkstrategy.com/modules.php?o...article&sid=713 (http://news.talkstrategy.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=713)

http://www.worthplaying.com/article.php?sid=27704

Both interviews have new screens including interface shots.

Also there is a new trailer up with plenty of interface action for you folks sick of that glamorous, combat footage, :ok:

http://www.kerberos-productions.com/sots.shtml

Have a good weekend!
--MEC

Mecron

11-10-2005, 07:39 PM

Hey folks!

Just thought I would pop in and post some update links for any of you that are still interested.

New interview on a spanish site, don't worry the link is to the english version. :D

http://jdejuegos.com/jestrategia/sots/sots_art_b02.htm

And some new screens for said interview.

http://jdejuegos.com/jestrategia/sots/recu...2&y=1&p=1&g=001 (http://jdejuegos.com/jestrategia/sots/recursos_imgs00.htm?t=008&n=000&c=4&r=2&y=1&p=1&g=001)

The human backstory for SotS has also been added.

http://www.kerberos-productions.com/sots.shtml

as well as many more details of the 3 alien races of SotS being discussed in this alien topic.

http://www.kerberos-productions.com/forum/...er=asc&start=15 (http://www.kerberos-productions.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15)

Take care and feel free to ask any questions here as I do keep checking in when I can.
--MEC

Blood-Pigggy

11-10-2005, 07:41 PM

Nice to see this working along.
I've been following progress but I've kept quiet about it. :D

Doubler

11-10-2005, 08:25 PM

You know I'm still interested :ok:
Great new screenshots, by the way :w00t:

Mecron

11-10-2005, 10:44 PM

:ok: Glad you liked the pics, we will have to take a few more screenshots of the full 8 player epic war going on in internal playtest right now.

Doubler

12-10-2005, 03:33 PM

It's good to see some more screens of the interface :). I mistook that screen of the build queue for the design screen at first LOL.
I'll be eagerly awaiting the new screens!
An 8 way battle... :D

Mecron

12-10-2005, 06:32 PM

We are big in commonality of interface for related concepts. So you are not mistaken to see the build and design screen share some elements. The shot of the summary screen allows you to see what kind of info is available at a glance if you notice the tabs at the top.

As for the 8 way battle...well its really 7 way as I am allied with my hiver brethren. :sneaky: (We started next door to each other and realized at our slower pace we had a lot more to gain working together than going for bug armageddon in the first 20 turns.)

Doubler

13-10-2005, 07:33 PM

Will be interesting to see. Did that battle happen by chance or was it agreed on?
Just another question. Will any more concept art be released? I love concept art :D

efthimios

14-10-2005, 03:30 PM

Looking at those ships it reminds me how good I felt when I first looked at the pics of Homeworld. Please please please please don't screw this game up with strange bugs or something. When is it going to be released in the UK?

Mecron

14-10-2005, 06:00 PM

Calls programmers...tells them the cancel the "strange bugs" project. Apparently some crazy english guy doesn't like them. :D

Release dates are determined by the publisher but as soon as we know, you will know in exactly one mesg post later. :ok:

And more concept art....hmmm...I will put in the request. :max:

efthimios

15-10-2005, 02:02 AM

It's is not that I don't like them, more like I hate them. :D
I am greek btw, not english. No harm done. :ok:

My guess (without having no knowledge of course) is that the game is going to be released before Xmas. Which is nice, to have a new good 4X game for the cold cold nights/days/free time of the Winter.

Mecron

15-10-2005, 07:58 PM

Well in the meantime, those of you wiht access to G4TV can catch the SotS trailers on Cinemetech over the next while! Also there will be a ramping up of screenshots to keep you guys happy. :ok:

Doubler

24-10-2005, 08:34 PM

For those who haven't checked in lately: A whole lot of screens, some concept art (Thanks Mecron :max: ) and three wallpapers have been added to the Kerberos site (http://www.kerberos-productions.com/sots.shtml).
:ok:

efthimios

25-10-2005, 08:36 AM

OK, I have to say something. It is not related to the game but to the company's site. I don't know if it is my browser or I just have strange taste but I find the design of the site (with the window inside the window) that narrows so much the viewing eh of the site, very very annoying.
Again, nothing to do with the game or the content of the site!!!

Mecron

27-10-2005, 06:03 PM

Doubler- You know us, we are pleaser people. :ok: There will be more concept art posted over the next few weeks as well. New screenshots are also showing the evolution of things to their final state such as the new gateship fx shown in the new wallpaper.

Eft- I know what you mean. At work on my lower resolution monitor its fine but at home on my big ol 21 inch monitor and its uber resolution I am nagged by the open space as well. A revamp is in the cards but to be honest, all our resources are going into the game right now so super-shiny website stuff is on the backburner. :tai:

TaloN

28-10-2005, 10:59 AM

im confused. is there no real plot to this game? like a campaign mode? or is it just pitched battles of your choosing ?

Doubler

28-10-2005, 11:46 AM

It's 4X, it's story is that of the rise (and/or fall) of an Empire, different each time.

And if you're not familiar with the genre, Ascendancy is available for download on Abandonia. That's 4X :)

Mecron

28-10-2005, 06:01 PM

Yes, Talon. It is a strategic wargame as opposed to a RTS Adventure game. The Homeworld references are more about people trying to describe the 3-D real time combat resolution as opposed to the full game itself. But it is more than just a series of battles just as being in charge of the Americans in WW2 is about more than a series of battles. :max:

efthimios

28-10-2005, 07:07 PM

It is more like Master of Orion than it is say Homeworld or Imperial Galactica (something like that). It has all the good parts of them (great graphics, cool battle effects), with the inclusion of strategic gameplay of Master of Orion, Space Empires, Galactic Civilizations etc, but with more streamline GUI. At least that is what I get so far, I am not a beta tester or have access to the game in any way to know more. BUT, we do have Mecron here who is a kind of an insider guy. :D

Mecron

04-11-2005, 12:11 AM

Hey folks!

First hands on preview is up at...

http://www.worthplaying.com/article.php?sid=29599

Lots of new screens as well.

Partizanka

04-11-2005, 04:09 AM

Continues to look good comrade!

I'm really quite eagerly awaiting this game, and its especially nice to see you having things to show, rather then just hype with little or no content like so many other games in development.

Flop

04-11-2005, 06:01 AM

Hmm, this does look pretty good actually. I've kind of been looking for a good 4x game, ever since the horrible MoO3 was released. I'm definitely gonna look forward to seeing some reviews of this one.

Doubler

04-11-2005, 08:14 AM

Mecron, with every screen I see, with every word I read I get more excited about this game :D

Mecron

04-11-2005, 05:33 PM

Well we have always been big fans of having stuff to show. And the great thing is that there is still tons left to be revealed. Personally I find previews an important step becuase it is the first word you guys get from and outsider who hasn't lived with the game since pre production. True, most previews are cheerleader pieces but at least you get the impressions and first thoughts you might get opening the box at home and installing.

And of course we like screen shots you can pour over and analyze. :ok:

Mecron

15-11-2005, 05:49 PM

Speaking of screens, there was another bunch of new ones up last firday. Shields, and player badges/colors and burning dreadnoughts! Oh my! :ok:

The Niles

15-11-2005, 05:57 PM

Thanks for the heads up. Kerberos-productions.com seems to be either down or swamped at the moment but I'll take a look once it clears up.

Mecron

15-11-2005, 09:01 PM

strange...I have been answering stuff on it all day and never noticed any down time but thanks for the heads up.
--MEC

Mecron

25-11-2005, 10:46 PM

Hope everyone had a good turkeyday. Some new proposal art is up on the SotS sight in case anyone is interested.

http://www.kerberos-productions.com/sots.shtml

Eva02Soul

26-11-2005, 12:32 AM

I have a quick question. You mentioned earlier that black holes and singularities won't be used for instant transport options. That's fine, but are they going to be in there as a form of natural hazard? Like the Sandworms in the Dune series? It could make an interesting variable to think about.

Mecron

26-11-2005, 07:09 AM

I have always felt that a black hole was kind of like a mountain...you don't run into one by accident. :D Our natural hazards a lil more...circumstantial and unexpected.

Mecron

03-12-2005, 07:21 PM

Just for anyone who has trying to get to the kerberos boards or the main site and hasn't been able to, I thought I would point out we got wanged by penny arcade...which is great but did indeed blow up our server and our provider must have run in terror from their facility as they won't answer our angry calls this weekend. :ranting:

Expect things to return to normal as soon as possible but in the meantime, keep feeling free to ask about anything here as always.
thanks,
--MEC

Doubler

03-12-2005, 07:26 PM

I was wondering about that. I could get on, but they were slow as hell.
I'm not entirely sure I get the phrase "we got wanged by penny arcade", though. :unsure:

And what's with http://sots.trackzero.net?

33 Guests :blink:

Mecron

04-12-2005, 08:50 AM

When penny arcade posts a link to you...the incoming rush of people referred from their site has become known as "being wanged". Its like being slashdotted but for gamers. :blink: We had 600K hits on friday alone.

SOts at trackzero was a temp page we put up while the main site was out of commission. THings are somewhat back to normal now. Our number of forums guests has finally drop below 20 at any given moment. :max: Once again, sorry for any inconvenience. But look on the brightside, SotS is no longer a "stealth" project. :ok:

Doubler

04-12-2005, 09:56 AM

SotS is no longer a "stealth" project Let it be known to the world! :Brain:

Mecron

04-12-2005, 06:42 PM

Hey doubler, before I forget, Erinys took a couple llama pics for you the other day. We will try and post them on the board in your honor when things calm down a bit next week. :ok:

aaaaaaaand....while things are still a bit hectic on our site...the NEW gameplay/storyline trailer for SotS can be dloaded from filecloud right now and from our regular homesite later in the week.

http://www.filecloud.com/files/file.php?user_file_id=85046

Doubler

05-12-2005, 03:48 PM

Hey doubler, before I forget, Erinys took a couple llama pics for you the other day. We will try and post them on the board in your honor when things calm down a bit next week. :w00t:
*Speechless*

aaaaaaaand....while things are still a bit hectic on our site...the NEW gameplay/storyline trailer for SotS can be dloaded from filecloud right now and from our regular homesite later in the week. :w00t:
*Speechless again*

(The cinematic trailers really suit SotS, by the way. Just brilliant. It's still a pity the intro isn't up anymore, though, as I lost it some time back, and most of the newer visitors may never have gotten to see it. But I suppose everything has a reason :P )

Mecron

21-12-2005, 10:32 PM

hera ya go doubler!

http://www.protoncharging.com/ign/lama01.jpg
http://www.protoncharging.com/ign/lama02.jpg
http://www.protoncharging.com/ign/lama03.jpg

Merry Christmas from Erynis and the rest of us at Kerberos! :Brain:

http://www.kerberos-productions.com/img/kerberos_xmas_sml.jpg

Doubler

22-12-2005, 05:54 PM

Ah, thanks Mecron! :D
And happy holidays to all of the Kerberos staff too :ok:

SirPeter

22-12-2005, 08:02 PM

I haven't read all pages but I hope the 3D stuff wont affect the gameplay. In my opinion most game compagnies want the games to look pritty but forget about playability.
Trailers looked nice.

Btw someone mentioned freeOrion, newest version is released a few days ago (18-12-05) :)
Haven't tried it yet but if its like moo 1 or 2 then im already addicted to freeOrion.

Doubler

22-12-2005, 09:02 PM

I hope the 3D stuff wont affect the gameplay. In my opinion most game compagnies want the games to look pritty but forget about playability.
I think it's pretty safe to say Kerberos is striving to get high marks in both the graphical department as in gameplay :P
And it would certainly seem they're very close to succes ;)

And if you doubt, from all I've heard thus far, it would seem that playability and gameplay have priority over the graphics at all time, so I doubt there's need to worry :)

efthimios

22-12-2005, 09:53 PM

SirPeter, I think you should read the whole thread, some very good info for you.

It looks like this game is going to be the best 4x in years.

Mecron

23-12-2005, 12:09 AM

And really, we question WHY it has to be either or? Why not BOTH gameplay AND graphics be up to modern standards? :max:

The Niles

23-12-2005, 09:44 AM

Happy Holidays to the Kerberos staff as well Mecron. Hope to see a lot of you guys and your upcomming projects in the new year.

Mecron

24-12-2005, 12:13 AM

Thanks, Niles! And expect a big announcement very early in the New Year. :Brain:

efthimios

24-12-2005, 02:13 AM

Originally posted by Mecron@Dec 24 2005, 02:13 AM
Thanks, Niles!* And expect a big announcement very early in the New Year.* :Brain:

Good news!

BTW, I have finaly bought a new PC (as I am sure the rest of the members here are sick of hearing me saying it again and again), so I have an extra reason to want to play it now. :sneaky:

Happy holidays and happy gaming at Kerberos! (developing that is) :bleh:

Mecron

11-01-2006, 07:14 PM

and as promised....here is your big announcment! :Brain:

http://www.lighthouse-interactive.com/inde...=archive&type=2 (http://www.lighthouse-interactive.com/index.php?nid=47&main=archive&type=2)

The Niles

11-01-2006, 07:29 PM

Congradulations. I'm thrilled to see a Dutch publisher sign for this. Q2 release as well. Hope to see some previews in magazines soon.

efthimios

11-01-2006, 11:10 PM

yes, very good news indeed. I was worried there for a minute with no publisher deal, had some scary thoughts about what happened to the (excellent?) stars supernova.

I read about this on QT3 and I believe you have made a wise choice.
Now, finish the game and release a demo :D

Mecron

12-01-2006, 12:41 AM

Thanks Niles and Eft...next preview you will see will be online at happy puppy sometime in the next week or so. :ok:

Mecron

25-01-2006, 06:37 PM

finally the hands on preview at HP that I referred to. :Brain:

http://happypuppy.com/games.php?action=sho...650&gameid=2137 (http://happypuppy.com/games.php?action=showarticle&article_id=38650&gameid=2137)

Doubler

25-01-2006, 07:19 PM

Waiting get's ever harder :P
Very nice review, and some interesting new screens. :)

Mecron

13-03-2006, 07:53 PM

In case anyone is still out there... :cry:

another preview but this one from a "normal joe" fan who got to stop by Kerberos for and afternoon and sit in on a playtest.

http://www.kerberos-productions.com/forum/...topic.php?t=294 (http://www.kerberos-productions.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=294)

Also there will be a big print interview showing up on IGN today or tomorrow. :whistle:

Doubler

13-03-2006, 08:35 PM

And, to add to Mecron's post, be sure to check out the dev diaries here (http://pc.gamezone.com/news/02_28_06_12_44AM.htm) and here (part II) (http://pc.gamezone.com/news/03_10_06_12_39PM.htm) with more to come :D

Blood-Pigggy

13-03-2006, 10:52 PM

Just posting here for comfort.
I may not comment much in this thread, but I'm very much interested in the game and I check up constantly.

Your site is in my favorites tab.
Keep up the good work, it's shaping up to be a fine game.

The Niles

14-03-2006, 11:54 AM

I'm still out here and interrested. Last year has been a slow strategy year for me. Hope 2006 will make a difference in that and SotS is a good contender for that.

Mecron

14-03-2006, 07:00 PM

thanks guys! Glad you are all keepin the faith. We will try not to dissapoint. Just in the final touches portion of the game now.

And that IGN ariticle did go up last night :D

http://pc.ign.com/articles/695/695501p1.html

SirPeter

14-03-2006, 09:07 PM

Nice, eta is 1 april. When is the demo ready :)

Mecron

16-03-2006, 12:55 AM

We've got the demo pretty much in the can...so you will have to go over to Lighthouse and ask them when they are planning release. :max:

efthimios

28-03-2006, 06:24 AM

SOTS is the game I hope will provide me with the 4X fix since unfortunately Galactic Civilizations II do not do it for me for some strange reason.
I hope you will release it in the UK too, because reading this about April 1st release date, and yet to see anything about it either in Amazon nor Play is a bit well...bad.
And since I have stopped buying new games from the local shops (new releases 40 GBP...yeah, right), online shopping is the only way to go. Please try to sell it through play.com or at least amazon.co.uk

Mecron

29-03-2006, 10:42 PM

Actually if you notice, our publisher is based in Europe so I suspect you will have no trouble finding it in england or anywhere else in the old world. :D

As for release date...Lighthouse has announced they are looking at June 1'st.

Mecron

06-04-2006, 06:08 PM

Oh and the new remake of the orginal opening game trailer is out and about on the web! :help:

The Niles

06-04-2006, 06:51 PM

Thanks for the heads up.

for those who do not like to browse this thread.

http://www.kerberos-productions.com/sots.shtml

efthimios

07-04-2006, 03:55 PM

Well I watched the new trailer last night.

Is there something wrong with the colours? They seem washed out and the graphics seem to be of a different quality (not better) than from the screenshots.

I prefer it as a trailer from the last one. I like the voice of the narrator, she sounds very familiar but I can't pin point how. For some reason I have the word dune in my mind. Whatever, great choice for a narrator.

Mecron

10-04-2006, 08:50 PM

The narrator is Arinn Dembo. She has done voice work in cataclysm as well.

As for the colors and image quality, I suppose it depends a bit on compression and what you are watching it on. The game footage is recorded and then converted so there is going to be a little loss of detail in that process.

Mecron

29-04-2006, 12:30 AM

for anyone looking for a nicely detailed preview there is one going on at talk strat right now :bye:

http://www.talkstrategy.com/

Blood-Pigggy

29-04-2006, 01:17 AM

Getting even more excited.
Can't wait till this is finally out, I've been very pleased by what I've seen from the trailers and previews.

ShadowXIX

30-04-2006, 09:50 PM

Originally posted by efthimios@Mar 28 2006, 06:24 AM
SOTS is the game I hope will provide me with the 4X fix since unfortunately Galactic Civilizations II do not do it for me for some strange reason.

Do you mind if I ask what about GCII didnt do it for you? Ive been reading some reviews for it and they seem to be very good overall. Im thinking about picking it up soon since 4X games are some of my all time favorites.

Mecron

03-05-2006, 08:17 PM

Not to answer for Eft, but from a design standpoint SotS is meant to get away from the GC2 spreadsheet/dry combat presentation thing. I can see people being very happy with both titles but in general SotS was meant as an exploration of the more visceral 4X experience since GC does what it does very well and to be honest, that style has been done to death by other entries in the genre for the past decade.

ShadowXIX

07-05-2006, 08:44 PM

Originally posted by Mecron@May 3 2006, 08:17 PM
Not to answer for Eft, but from a design standpoint SotS is meant to get away from the GC2 spreadsheet/dry combat presentation thing.
Yeah I have read GCII lacks pretty much any bit of tactical combat. I havent played it yet so I could be wrong but I believe combat is decided with pretty much dice rolls of stats between ships and you cant even pick what ships in a fleet you wish to target.

If thats true then that would indeed be some dry combat IMHO as well, no matter how pretty it looks. Though I think I could understand doing that form a A.I standpoint since making a A.I that could beat humans in Tactical combat would have been much more difficult from simple dice rolls.

Mecron

08-05-2006, 04:46 AM

certainly its not secret that the more choices you have tactically and strategically the harder it is for an AI to keep up. SotS has a great, dynamic AI but I will be the first to say that there is nothing like another human to give you an ugly surprise or two. Luckily SotS gives you full multiplayer and makes it easy to join and leave games on the fly as well as just resuming an MP match later.

velik_m

08-05-2006, 06:43 AM

Originally posted by Mecron@May 8 2006, 04:46 AM
certainly its not secret that the more choices you have tactically and strategically the harder it is for an AI to keep up. SotS has a great, dynamic AI but I will be the first to say that there is nothing like another human to give you an ugly surprise or two. Luckily SotS gives you full multiplayer and makes it easy to join and leave games on the fly as well as just resuming an MP match later.
that's crap, if anything - the more options there are the more (properly developed) AI will trive. The problem with AI is usually, that it's static (or almost static) - which means sooner or later you will figure him out. Also too much focus is going towards (easier) tactical part and too little towards strategic - which is where most humans get advantage over CPU.

Mecron

15-05-2006, 07:25 PM

crap? really? Where are you getting this AI knowledge from? Cause if you are correct you must have a helluva GO AI programmed somewhere. Are you aware at all the ONLY "actually better than human" AI is for Chess. A VERY constrained game as far as move and ability choice is concerned. For any game involving concepts more difficult than projecting constrained move choices into the future, game AI's simply become a finite option expert system that one tries to make as robust as possible.

velik_m

16-05-2006, 12:23 PM

First, i would like to apologize, crap might be to strong of a word. My intention was not to insult anyone.

i would like to apologize for taking this thread off topic, so this will be my final response on this subject.

Originally posted by Mecron@May 15 2006, 07:25 PM
crap?* really?* Where are you getting this AI knowledge from?* Cause if you are correct you must have a helluva GO AI programmed somewhere.* Are you aware at all the ONLY "actually better than human" AI is for Chess.* A VERY constrained game as far as move and ability choice is concerned.* For any game involving concepts more difficult than projecting constrained move choices into the future, game AI's simply become a finite option expert system that one tries to make as robust as possible.

i don't even know what "actually better than human" means? Does that mean AI is better than human on average? or always? better than all humans or better than most? Using such a fuzzy definition makes it very hard to argue. Chess was for many years a proof of human superior intelligence over computers, that is why AI research pushed in development of AI chess player. However chess is far from ONLY field where AI is succesfull. AI has proven itself on many fields as superior than human and not just in finitive space.

On the July 4 weekend of 1981, while many Americans were preoccupied with barbecues or fireworks displays, players of an immensely complex, futuristic war game called Traveller gathered in San Mateo, California, to pick a national champion. Guided by hundreds of pages of design rules and equipment specifications, players calculate how to build a fleet of ships that will defeat all enemies without exceeding an imaginary defense budget of one trillion credits.

To design just one vessel, some fifty factors must be taken into account: how thick to make the armor, how much fuel to carry, what type of weapons, engines, and computer guidance system to use. Each decision is a tradeoff: a powerful engine will make a ship faster, but it might require carrying more fuel; increased armor provides protection but adds weight and reduces maneuverability.

Since a fleet may have as many as 100 ships?exactly how many is one more question to decide?the number of ways that variables can be juxtaposed is overwhelming, even for a digital computer. Mechanically generating and testing every possible fleet configuration might, of course, eventually produce a winner, but most of the computer?s time would be spent blindly considering designs that are nonsense. Exploring Traveller?s vast "search space," as mathematicians call it, require the ability to learn from experience, developing heuristics?rules of thumb?about which paths are most likely to yield reasonable solutions.

In 1981, Eurisko, a computer program that arguably displays the rudiments of such skills, easily won the Traveller tournament, becoming the top-ranked player in the United States and an honorary Admiral in the Traveller navy. Eurisko had designed its fleet according to principles it discovered itself?with some help from its inventor, Douglas B. Lenat, an assistant professor in Stanford University?s artificial-intelligence program.

"I never did actually play Traveller by hand," Lenat said, three years later. "I don?t think I even watched anybody play it. I simply talked to people about it and then had the program go off and design a fleet?When I went into the tournament that was the first time that I had ever played the game."

Eurisko's fleet was so obviously superior to those of its human opponents that most of them surrendered after the first few minutes of battle; one resigned without firing a shot.

Afterall i can design an AI for tic-tac-toe that will never lose or make a mistake (which humans do) and so can claim it to be superior to any human.

But all that has very little to do GAME AI. I am full aware of problems of game AI.

What are the problems of game AI?

PROBLEM NO. 1: No matter what game players say they want, what they really want is to WIN. Off course they don't want the opponent to just roll over - no they want a glorious battle in which they have to use all their ("superior") brains, knowledge and experience. And they want to win... There is no fun in losing, especially against a computer. This demands put AI on the losing side from a get-go. It also creates bunch of subproblems:
SCALABILITY - everybody wants to win from newbs to pros, to make a system scalable, it's better if it's simple, using things like state-finitive machines and weighted decision rules.

NO RISK - game AI has to put good fight ALWAYS, therefore he can't engage in high risk tactics (tactics where they either win or lose badly - both unpopular results from players point of view).

IMPROVEMENT - a player wants a sense of improvement, the longer he plays a game the more superior he expects to be. He doesn't want AI that will develope and improve at the same rate as he is. He doesn't want an ever challanging game - he expects that at some point he will "master" the game.
OTHER PROBLEMS:
playing field is not even from the start (eg. in RTS AI can order 100 troops in a fraction of a second, while human has to deal with user interface)

time - not just CPU time (which AI has to share with graphics, UI...) but thinking time: computer player is expected to think fast - in RT game that is a given but also in turn based games: AI taking 1/10th of time human takes for himself will annoy players.

In general players don't want intelligent opponent - they want an illusion of compotent enemy. Afterall CS bots could headshot you everytime they see you but who would to play against them?
In many games AI has to be dumbed down to make the game even playable.

This all leads to simple systems that are based on untested heuristics, cheats and stacking odds against players, which are easier to develope and better suit the purpose.

IN CONCLUSION:
To address your original question: NO, i don't have "helluva GO AI programmed somewhere", but that has nothing to do AI "having hard time keeping up", it has everything to do with it being a GAME AI and it's natural limitations as well as it's goals.

Knowing all this, i rarely knock on game AI (which is getting better all the time), i just wish game developers would make more effort on strategic part of AI (not just tactical and pathfinding), instead of saying it's next to imposible and just do some simplistic model that can be figured out and countered in about 15min of gameplay.

p.s. i apologize for any spelling errors.

efthimios

16-05-2006, 06:52 PM

As a gamer, I do not want only to win. This is not why I play, online or single player.
I do want an intelligent AI/player. Intelligent doesn't mean headshot every signle time, that is accurate and knowing where you are, that is not a matter of intelligence but of design/cheating of the AI since not playing with the same rules.

The joy is not in winning but in playing.

I accept that some gamers see it as you do, but, not all do so, so please don't say that every gamer thinks the same thing/wants the same thing.

I want better AI, not cheating AI. BIG difference.

Mecron

16-05-2006, 07:30 PM

LOL I PLAYED Traveller in real life. A LOT. I even entered the Trillion Credit Squadron contest. Sniff! Me am so old.

It is VERY funny though that as proof of your strategic AI argument you chose and ENTIRELY tactical example. TRAVELLER High Guard rules did NOT contain much about logistics or empire management. The contest you refer to is about ship design for tactical combat. While there were rules about assault ships and marine boarding parties I dont see anything in that article about using them. Now IF it had said the AI then went on to play FIFTH FRONTIER WAR and kick behind at it...THEN your point would have been made. :ok:

Your points about what players want and need from AI's is very good. Your point asking that "more time" be spent on Strat AI's is a gross oversimplification. I agree that often you find inferior strat AI's but that is not always due to lack of effort. I was trained to be an AI programmer. I know the difference between a moment of true AI inspiration and just good guys trying their hardest. There is NO cut and dried path to strat AI programming. It is a wildly unconstrained problem. Sometimes in games like GC2, you can constrain portions of the game itself so the AI can deal with it easier, but that is not always an option. Choosing examples based on MIT research teams is NOT your average game dev situation either. :D And besides...My point was about INNOVATION. Until you get a self aware lil program running. Innovation will always be the human high ground.

But whatever...its not like people haven't made money convincing folks their AI was the be all and end all of things when its was just cleverly disguised average. I could follow the same path and babble on and on about how our AI will steal your wallet and rent porn while you play. Instead I choose to treat gamers like grownups and say the SotS AI is damn good, but the game runs so deep that a human opponent will always be more surprising a year later. (Hence my deep seated belief in multiplayer) Though I know marketing guys wince when I say stuff like that. :blink:

(For the record, while SotS ship construction is not quite so open ended as High Gaurd (which was based on tonnage and percentages, while Sots is based on a large a variety of section choices with relatively fixed attributes) the actual tactical options when it comes to weapon selections and ship performance is at least an order of magnitude more complex. And of course there is the whole actual strategic portion. :whistle: SotS also requires an AI that can handle 4 different drive system rule sets and of course racial tendencies and diplomacy)

gregor

17-05-2006, 05:36 AM

But he was correct on many things. let's say for example C&C:
you start off with a few footsoldiers and MCV. you start building your base. but hey the computer already has the base and all upgrades, yet he decides to send only a fraction of an army to attack you possibly even only his footsoldiers instead of tanks and all. is that intelligence? no. i am sure that is just made to make the game more interesting. because otherwise you would loose immediatelly.

As for more strategic, turnbased games - i haven't seen a good one yet. but then again i haven't played much of the new startegy games. yet i think the built in idiocy is still present - i.e. no attacking human untill human is strong enough to defend and even then - no full scale, risky, suicidal attack.

as for bots in HL mods and others - i don't know much about programming but i was a tester. and no they don't cheat when they give you a headshot, they just calculate it more acuratelly. they calculate better how to counter the recoil and also their reaction time is better. they dont' need a wall hack to do it.
how do i know this? because we gave them same parameters as a human would have (to their weapons, recoil...) but the result was that they were godlike when you faced them and the only way to kill them was to shoot them in the back. they managed to calculate the parameters much faster then you and to counter the recoil of rifles and pistols. so the only way to make the game interesting was to make them more dumb - slower reaction rate, high rate of fire and artificially made recoil and misses.

now that's not cheating. it's a fact that computer calculate faster then humans. otherwise we wouldn't be using them at all.

why would marketing guys be "against" multipalyer? personally, in this time, i believe that single player should be made good, so you can train there while multiplayer is to play with some intelligent opponet that is actually a person. not to mention that multiplayer can bring in quite a lot of money, especially if subscription in involved (e.g WoW).

Eagle of Fire

17-05-2006, 05:46 AM

gregor

17-05-2006, 08:20 AM

actually, even when he knows you are there he never attacks with full force. in many missions he attacks you MCV as soon as it get's on the map. but they only seems to be the guards (they are on those possitions on the start). so when they already know you came they still don't do nothing with their heavy force. how do the know where are your buildings if they never saw them? how can them make airstrikes on them if they don't know where they are? cheating?
nah they are made a bit dumb intentionally.

but i did notice in scirmisch game in red alert that he builds new turrets and may attack even with full force. but the problem is that you start building up at the same time. so his full force in that case is no match for yours. unless you double the number of opponents.

problem is they don't know when to pull out, do strategic simultaneous attacks - frontal attack and a few second later smaller attack on some othe risde...

efthimios

17-05-2006, 01:56 PM

Are you basing your argunment about AI on Command and Conquer? Hardly the best AI , even for RTS.

I am very surprised to read that you have never played a good turn based game. Is this solely on AI performance? GalCiv II can be quite good, Conflict Europe is good, and there are so many hundrends TBS games that you never liked any one? Wow.

Perhaps, if AI is the problem, you should devote the rest of your life to develop a great AI for games. :blink:

Mecron

17-05-2006, 06:35 PM

I say the same thing everytime I see on of those commercials trying to suck money out of young folks to train to be game designers. If they REALLY wanted to help and to get people good jobs in the industry the first thing on the list would be a 4 year course on AI and advanced game theory. :max:

gregor

18-05-2006, 01:17 PM

Originally posted by efthimios@May 17 2006, 01:56 PM
Are you basing your argunment about AI on Command and Conquer? Hardly the best AI , even for RTS.

I am very surprised to read that you have never played a good turn based game. Is this solely on AI performance? GalCiv II can be quite good, Conflict Europe is good, and there are so many hundrends TBS games that you never liked any one? Wow.

Perhaps, if AI is the problem, you should devote the rest of your life to develop a great AI for games. :blink:
Well i am not surprised since a) dont' have much time for games (work & study) and B) have an old computer.

I played many games, but most still have the same weakness. because they need to have it.

What is so good about good AI? does he beats you everytime? does he attack with full force in the begining when you are weak?

TBS
Heroes of might and magic - stupid (divides his army) final mission good side -> enemy has one strong soldier in immediate vacinity of one of your castles - he takes one never goes after the other eventhought his army is much stronger. not to mention that the main boss never moves with his superior army.

panzer - well also not the brightest bulb in the galaxy.

civ3 - better but still... LOL

settlers 3 (RTS) - doesnt' even move untill his force is substancial. you attack with small group or one soldier on one side he send his whole army there while you take over with the real attack the other side of his base.

Alpha centauri - challenging, but only because it cheats

space empires - nice try, long battle but... he doesn't colonise enough planets on the start.

the point is that AI is made dumb intentionally. because otherwise the computer would win (without cheating)

best example of dumb computer is when you make tactical retreat. works every time in battles. he charges from superior position, you outflank him.

why should i develop something.i only want to use it? i still have a choice not to play games with dumb AI or to enjoy defeating them in their own stupidity.

and another point was that you NEVER get an attack in the beggining of a strategy game (unless it's battle type like panzer). is there any game that is really, really hard. i mean that the average gamer can't win with some time and effort? no. because games are build that way. like the poster above said - you can have bots calculate fast (reaction tiem) the recouil and make a headshot every time. that's not cheating that's just fast calculation. but who would want to play such a game? a game when you see someone you get a headshot. i've tried playing it but it's not fun at all. in fact it's frustrating. however behind soon as we gave that bot artificially made recoil and reduce his reaction time - well they almoust seem like humans. in fact i saw a couple of times when people were chatting with them on servers :D (yeah cause bot had built in a chat option - and they were also chatting among themselves, making jokes, giving warnings etc.)

all to make them less computer like and more human like. but to make them more human, like i said, we had to make them dumber.

Mecron

18-05-2006, 06:13 PM

Hmmm when you talk about AI I think you need to distinguish between AI's for real time combat (the "Headshot" bunch) and strategic AI's. RT AI's defintely need to be dumbed down as they have total awareness of a battlefield and in a game where "making the shot" is part of gameplay, they are too perfect becuase it is all about calculation.

In a strat game it is totally different. I think once you get past tic tac toe, checkers and chess, there is no need to "dumb down" the AI. The eternal struggle is to get a Strat AI to be able to fuzzy logic its options. We all have played strat games where the AI does something well but then does it in a situation where that is totally stupid. This is the ugly edge between "routines" and "understanding". And while your routine can be very sophisticated in what parameters it takes into account, in a wide open game, it is still vulnerable to the occasional "not taking reality into account" move.

And as for pathfinding...well that is a different ball o wax again...but since hundreds of millions have gone into 2 cross country AI races over the past 2 years and only got winners this year. I think we can say that telling a computer player how and where to move a unit around a tree is trickier than most people think :help:

gregor

19-05-2006, 07:31 AM

Pathfinding... yeah... we had lot's of troubles form getting the bot's through the door and off the leader in HL engine :)

But still... in strategic games if you are much stronger and offer them an alliance (in strategy games such as Civilisation, Alpha Centauri or Space empires) but they refuse to sign it because you already violated the alliance. mmmkey.... "please sign it i want to cooperate with you. i dont' want to be at war anymore. if we sign we will both benefit". and then they say no. i say ok suit your self - they get nuked! why is that so? why they don't want to ally with much stronger opponent? why do they not beg for mercy? why do they oppose you eventhought it is a lost cause and eventhough this time your intentions are really true.

Remember those late starts in Civ where you had single city with phalanx in year 1900 while you already had nukes and armour. and they decided to oppose you even after warning and beggin to sign for peace.

Or in Space empires where i deliberatelly (personal project) gave my self certain advantage and ebcause of that everyone wanted war with me. i said ok and destroyed their suns (not enough of them, battle still lasted on) but most races got erase evethought my intetnion was to end game with certian years of peace elapsed or with points from colonies (we all started with same colony tech and same amount of them at start). they are rather erased then surrender. no (human) logic at all.

Esepcially in CIV where you can win by launchin a space ship.