What do you think

Could be nice IF the AI knows how to handle them and how to use them corectly. And that is a big IF considering how some people are complaining about some AI behaviors for simply leading war, invading planets and handling military starbases.

You got a point, Pnakotus. In "real life space combat" (if there actually was such a thing) there may be not much tactics involved except for manouvering. But look at all those star wars and star trek war scenes with all its asteroids and nebulae... It's a science fiction game after all, isn't it?

#3 by Headhunter Wednesday, April 05, 2006 8:51 AM Trolling Insightful You got a point, Pnakotus. In "real life space combat" (if there actually was such a thing) there may be not much tactics involved except for manouvering. But look at all those star wars and star trek war scenes with all its asteroids and nebulae... It's a science fiction game after all, isn't it?

B5 handeled the space aspect of tactics very well imho...

if yo ulook closely at the tactical readout in the middle/bottom of the combat screen.. fast ships get an extra "sneak" attack.. or so I think...


small changes need to be made.... formations would be good... but graphically... I would ask for another camera view where the ships don't look like they are floating in one spot....

but otherwise, I really like it, because I hated combat in MOO2/3 with the 1xxx.00 ships fighting another 1xxx ships.. combat took tooooooo long to resolve.

True, but surprise attacks? Each square is 4.3 light years away.

May be true... From the center of a square to another. There is not "nothing" between squares, which means, from the leftmost border of one to the rightmost border of the adjacent one it could be just a stone's throw. That the ships are drawn in the center of those squares, does not have to mean they actually are there. Ok - right... Just be able to rush to the adjacent square to surprise the enemy would most likely just make everybods move around those spots...

And a defensive stance, the weapons are locked onto you and never miss. They might not do damage, but they don't miss. The only way that would happen is tactical combat, dodging behind boulders in the hope that it hits the boulder, which will never happen (in this game anyway)

Defensive stance could be transfering some points from weapon-stats to defense-stats.

I don't really need those options, but it would be a nice twist, I think.

However, at least an option -or just a fixed behaviour- where you can set (it is set), that not lame small ships are attacked first but the large, more dangerous ones, would be nice. And thats not really about having to make tactical decisions in combat, its more about the bloody basic of combat-tactic which also an automatic combat system should not ignore.

MOO2 had ship design AND tactical battles that were simple and fun and had player choices that affected the outcome. As great as GC2 is on so many levels, theres just no getting around the fact that GC2's combat sytem is underdevelped and I would love an addition or update that filled the hole. .

MOO2 had ship design AND tactical battles that were simple and fun and had player choices that affected the outcome.

Yes, there was a choice in Moo2.
Do the battle yourself and don't lose one ship.
Let the computer handle the battle and lose half your ships.
IMO not a fun choice.

And Moo2 ship design, that was really "fun" too. It was specially "fun" late in the game when I could wipe out approx. 200 enemy ships (one race's whole fleet) in one fight without taking any losses.