Official SWGB 2 GB.com Thread

[Lex]

um have u checked any AoM community board yet? everyday at least 10 people complain about the unbalance, now after the patch norse are overpowered, be4 that pacth Ra was overpowered be4 that üatch greek were overpowered ect ect ect....ok, graphics maybe 3D....

[Guest DarthMaulUK]

The one thing total war has over all the current 3D RTS games is superb graphics/engine.

 

The only question mark is that the warfare style is old fashioned Romans/Medievil etc so I am not sure if a Star Wars game could fit into it because the playing area is so vast, trying to see what all your units are doing would be a nitemare, especially with the way the AI reacts sometimes.

 

However, the Total war series are prehaps (bugs apart) the best RTS series around and Rome Total War leaves me speechless as I love the Romans!

 

DMUK

[Rogue15]

I wish they'd use a highly modified force commander engine for it. you know, fix all the probs it had, which weren't too many imo...but that's just me.

 

Galactic Battlegrounds is an awesome game. I need Clone Campaigns, so the next thing I'll buy for my PC is Galactic Battlegrounds SAGA!

[lukeiamyourdad]

SWGB2 will have to be 3D. Or else it will be marketing suicide.

 

And a totally new engine is the best thing for SWGB2.

[CorranSec]

DMUK: I agree; the fact that Medieval: Total War is specifically designed for medieval combat would make modding for SW a daunting task indeed.

 

Lex: People complain about unbalance in practically every game. Most of the time, they just don't like a certain aspect (eg Hades' toxotes), or think something should be made better to give them an edge (eg Joe always complaining that the Empire isn't good enough).

I consider these to be mere birth pangs. It's obvious that quite soon, good patches should turn AoM into a great well-balanced game.

 

Rogue 15: You'd probably save some money by just buying CC by itself.

 

Luke's dad: Aye to both.

[Admiral Vostok]

Corran, I just think the points-spending thing is messy, and after all it is an RTS, not an RPG. And the Heroes I'm talking about will only be in the campaigns or available in the scenario editor. Therefore, the fact that they might be slightly overpowered won't matter. You won't be able to wield them in MP games. You're the one that doesn't want characters from the movies, I'm saying in a RM game I agree.

 

So you'll be able to buy Jedi, who have Jedi powers, and Officers, who have Officer powers. Some heroes, like Luke Skywalker, Darth Vader, Count Dooku, Mace Windu, etc. will have access to some of both (but not all of both). This makes them very powerful, but as they only appear in campaigns it's forgiveable.

 

The point system is clumsy in that you can't make a proper Jedi Officer with a stat line the way it should be. And Gameplay>Realism, so we'll have to let go of the Realism that there are Jedi Officers and let the Gameplay take over.

[CorranSec]

Vostok: The points-spending thing is a rather unmessy addition. What's messy about it? It's just some points that you can put into stats. And it doesn't turn the game into an RPG any more than having unique civs does.

 

These Heroes can be present, and I think that it would be good to have some movie characters with really great abilities. However, people will want to use the movie characters in RM games, and so we also have the option of having them as Field Officers.

 

So you'll be able to produce non-character Jedi, who have Jedi powers, and have character Field Officers, with Field Officer powers. You'll also have Heroes, some of which are greatly improved versions of Field Officers. This makes them quite powerful, but as they don't appear in campaigns or RM games it's forgivable.

 

The point system is clumsy because...... okay, your line of reasoning has completely lost me. You want 'proper Jedi officers,' and yet later you quote Gameplay>Realism. You can have a Jedi-ish stat line by reducing the range to zero, thus giving them a lightsaber.

 

And Gameplay>Realism, so you'll have to let go of the realism that Jedi can't be Field Officers and let the gameplay take over.

[Lex]

Corran: It's a difference if one person complaines about 1 civ, while @aom 100+ persons complain about the whole game! fact is, that even if they arent right, and I doubt they arent coz i played AoM myself 3 months and got 1750+ rated, they destroy the community by messing around, and same will happen to every game with to much difference in civs...GE is IMO 3rd strongest civ, good rush and strong late game...at least i dont see countless posts about unbalanced **** here...

[lukeiamyourdad]

SWGB is not unbalanced because it uses a generic tech tree(purely generic). You can't achieve perfect balance. At least not yet.

[Admiral Vostok]

No Corran, this is what I meant by Gameplay>Realism:

 

REALISM: There were Jedi who were Officers, so would best be represented by having both Jedi Powers and Officer Powers, or at least Officer Powers with Jedi Stats.

 

GAMEPLAY: Having Jedi Officers done properly creates massive unbalance.

 

SOLUTION: If you can't do it properly (which the point system won't really allow) don't do it at all. Have Jedi and Officers separate.

 

 

There is no way you can balance the Jedi's large HP and Attack into the Officers low HP and Attack. The range difference will not allow for this. As such, the Jedi Officers will be less survivable and less effective in combat than normal Jedi, who are supposed to be their inferiors.

 

Using a point system for a character doesn't fit in an RTS, it is more like in an RPG. RTS are supposed to focus on the whole army, not just one person in the army. By having to construct your leader, you are focussing on him/her too much, where you should focus on the army. I'd prefer to just chose my Officer skills, and those skills be usable by any Officers I build. It's more balanced that way and requires a lot better Strategy to use effectively.

 

And also I'm confused - before you didn't even want movie characters in the briefings or storyline, and now you want them in every aspect of the game, including MP? Well I'd prefer to keep the amount of characters in MP the same as SWGB1 (ie zero), and instead have more balanced and playable Officers for my civs.

[joesdomain]

If they have fortresses in the sequel. They shouldn't put the unique units, deployed cannons, or air cruisers. I think a cool assortment of different species of bounty hunters for each civilization. Each bounty hunter could have special ability and they would have different hit points, attack, armor, and cost, etc.

I think it would also be cool if they had different species of jedi/sith in the Jedi Temple/Sith Temple buildings. Each species with different abilities, cost, hit points, armor, etc.

[CorranSec]

Lez: Average people can complain all they like, but average people are inferior in knowledge to game reviewers, and AoM is widely recognised as one of the best RTS games in existence, , if not the singular best.

 

Vostok: Well, it seems you have your ideas of gameplay>realism skewed.

Your realism: Okay, sure.

Your gameplay: Precisely, so we do them in a way that doesn't create massive inbalance.

 

Let me bring something up from the dredges of the past. The Gunship. Yes, that's right, the Gunship.

About June last year, Windu started campaigning for the inclusion of the Clone Gunship as another Republic UU. He believed (quite correctly) that the current version of the Gunship (the Republic's fighter) is nowhere near what it was like in the movies, and would prefer to have something more realistic and more fun to use. Now, this is all well and good, but the primary argument of his opponents is that it would play havoc with the balance. And this is completely correct. The current Gunship does not play havoc with the balance, and even if it's not like what it was in the movies, it's still functional.

 

The argument isn't quite the same applying to GB2, seeing as (hopefully) everything will be a lot of fun to use, including a vaguely movie-like Gunship.

 

There is no way you can balance the Jedi's large HP and Attack into the Officers low HP and Attack. This is completely correct. So we don't give Jedi Officers high HP and Attack.

 

Realism: Vostok wants Jedi Officers (like the main characters) to be quite powerful, like they really are.

Gameplay: This would screw around with balance.

Solution: Don't screw around with balance, and make them like normal Officers.

 

 

There is no way you can balance the Jedi's large HP and Attack into the Officers low HP and Attack. The range difference will not allow for this. As such, the Jedi Officers will be less survivable and less effective in combat than normal Jedi, who are supposed to be their inferiors.

 

Using a point system will simply make the characters a little more unique. In AoM, is the gameplay focussed on your Heroes? No. It's like that. It's just a bit of fun customization which gives you more of the feeling of having a real, unique person there, rather than a generic replacable Hero.

Oh, and you can choose your skills too. Of course.

 

No, I don't want movie character in the campaigns. But they can be in the standard games (RM, DM, etc) and thus be in MP. And you can't even think about taking Field Officers out of MP RM.

[Admiral Vostok]

I think you misunderstand me. The argument with the Gunship isn't entirely relevant because we don't NEED a representation of Jedi Officers but we do NEED a representation of the Gunship.

 

I believe that having leaving an unnecessary unit out of a game is preferable to having a poor representation of that unit.

If the Gunship was absent from SWGB1 it would raise more complaints than it's poor representation does, so it stays. If Jedi Officers are absent from SWGB2 not many people will care (except maybe you).

 

The Jedi Officers I'm suggesting won't screw up the balance, because they are not buildable. They will only appear in the campaigns and in the scenario editor. Balance only needs to be maintained in MP, not in anything else.

 

Realism: Vostok wants Jedi Officers (like the main characters) to be quite powerful, like they really are.

Gameplay: This would screw around with balance in Multiplayer Games.

Solution: Don't make them buildable in MP games, but only have them available in campaigns and the scenario editor (but still not buildable, you start the scenario with them).

 

 

I'm suggesting the gameplay will focus too much on the heroes because you have to build their stats. AoM doesn't suffer from this because you just click a button and you have a hero, you don't have to specify his stats with points.

 

I don't want field officers out of any aspect of the game. I want heroes and officers to be separate entities.

 

No one complained that you couldn't build Luke Skywalker in a RM game in SWGB1. SWGB2 won't suffer if you still can't build him. All I'm saying is heroes should stay where they are in the toybox.

[Lex]

Corran there are not only average people complaining, go and read some AoM forums if u dont believe me damnit!!

[CorranSec]

You do not need a Gunship, neither do you need Jedi Officers . However, you can have both-a Gunship that is similar to the original purpose, and Field Officers that also happen to be main-character Jedi.

 

Most people didn't even notice that the Republic fighter was the Gunship, and there were no complaints other than Windu's, which did motivate many people. If your version of Jedi Officers are absent from GB2, not many people will care.

 

Only appear in the campaigns? Do you care nothing for the balance of the campaigns? Above all else, they must be painstakingly balanced, and seeing as there's not going to be any real 'main characters' in them it's a lost hope anyway.

Balance only needs to be maintained in MP-are you mad? Is single-player just an afterthought, a bit of extra on the side? Everything needs to be balanced, and there should be no difference between single-player standard games and multi-player standard games.

 

Okay! Sure! I'm not against uber-powerful Jedi Main Characters in the scenario editor. But I am against them in the campaigns, and I'm for main character jedi Field Officers.

 

Realism: Vostok wants Jedi Officers (like the main characters) to be quite powerful, like they really are.

Gameplay: This would screw around with balance in Multiplayer Games... er, no, this would screw around with all kinds of balance, not your obviously worshipped MP game.

Solution: Don't make them buildable, period. Instead, have Field Officers. What's wrong with that?

 

The gameplay won't focus too much. It doesn't make Jason (an AoM hero) more powerful if you have the ability to customize his stats. A customized Jason will still be perfectly balanced with the original Jason. It just adds more uniqueness to the Field Officers, and could specify them for a certain purpose.

 

I want Field Officers present in Standard Games, and possibly to have the key characters in the campaigns to be Field Officers as well (possibly with a few extra powers).

 

No one complained...... sure. But people would like it. 'Heroes' will still be in the scenario editor, there's just different versions available for normal play, just like everyone would love.

[Admiral Vostok]

Balance is for Multi-player games (or single player RM games against the computer). This is so it is equally possible to win as any civ.

 

The campaigns are not balanced. In some scenarios the enemy gets units that you do not yet have access to, and in a lot you only get a small raiding force against an enemy base that can rebuild lost units.

 

There was a Wookiee mission where you had to get Han and Chewie to escape out the back of the base across the water. There was a large Imperial base elsewhere on the map that kept attacking you. Try attacking the Imperial base. You are not meant to be able to beat it. (If anyone has managed to defeat the Imperial Base, I'd be very impressed).

 

Campaigns are not entirely balanced, so are the perfect place to use powerful heroes.

 

Having the heroes constructed through your point system is not the best way to do it, in my opinion.

 

1) You won't remain true to the abilities of certain characters, especially Jedi, whose high survivability and attack can not be balanced with an officer who is a non-Force-user.

 

2) If you can build an equivalent of Mace Windu with the Republic, surely the Gungans deserve a similarly powerful hero, otherwise it is unbalanced. However, allowing the Gungans to build a powerful Jedi as an Officer goes against the character of the civ. You could overcome this by attaching a resource cost to the character, but as you want them available from the start of the game this won't work.

 

3) Programmatically it is error prone. How do you know when to represent the Jedi with a lightsaber? When they have a range of zero? What if they also have a low attack? Then it won't suit a lightsaber. To overcome this, would you have animations you could select to be your Officer? If so, this takes away from the uniqueness of having your own made-up character, because in the end you still have to use a generic animation.

 

I wouldn't mind being able to build heroes AoM style, with differing prices relative to their abilities, but building your own made-up ones just poses too many problems.

[CorranSec]

Balance is for everything. Single-player, both standard games and campaigns (campaigns especially), need to be balanced just as painstakingly as MP.

 

The campaigns should still not be too easy or too hard. I mean, they start easy and get harder, but you still shouldn't overpower any one player.

 

But that same Wookiee mission had to be balanced so that it wasn't too difficult for Han and Chewie to escape, while at the same time the Wookiees couldn't just beat back all the invaders and even destroy their base.

 

Campaigns aren't just some testing ground for overpowered things, you know! They're the worst place possible to put unbalanced heroes. However, as I said before, some of the key characters may have special powers.

 

Heroes constructed through points is far more preferable to non-unique, template-made heroes.

 

1) Of course you won't remain true to the abilities. But you are incorrect- Field Officers who happen to be Jedi can indeed be balanced with normal Field Officers. Why can't you stretch your mind around the fact that balance is possible? And by the way, this is more a gameplay>realism and abilities thing, and really has nothing to do with the points.

 

2) You cannot build an 'equivalent' of Mace Windu with the Republic. Windu is probably the best fighting Jedi in existence, and it would be unbalanced to even approach his true power. However, you can build Mace Windu as a Republic Field Officer. Jar Jar Binks with the Gungans would be equally powerful.

 

3) If the range is set to '0,' and the character is a Jedi, they have a lightsaber. Their attack number represents the damage- it has nothing to do with the lightsaber. Each particular officer in-game avatar will have two battle animations: a ranged attack (blasters mostly), and a melee attack (lightsabers, vibroblades, force pikes etc). It's not nearly as error-prone as you think.

 

Heroes in AoM don't have abilities, and the only true heroes are people like Arkantos and Ajax, who you most definitely can't build.

[darthfergie]

Using a point system for a character doesn't fit in an RTS, it is more like in an RPG. RTS are supposed to focus on the whole army, not just one person in the army. By having to construct your leader, you are focussing on him/her too much, where you should focus on the army. I'd prefer to just chose my Officer skills, and those skills be usable by any Officers I build. It's more balanced that way and requires a lot better Strategy to use effectively.

 

Who says we have to be RTS purists? The RTS genre is VERY broad and gets more and more complex as more elements are brought in from other types of games and the like. All of this is working towards a super hybrid. The point system on Officers is a good way to include hybrid elements.

 

Heros don't have to use a point system. Their abilities can be set in stone, but many might have officer abilities (i.e.- Leia with a major moral booster, etc). THe officer you create has points. Now if you want a more complex and kewler officer you go for no officer building (the officer is you) or if you like lots of officers the point system will have to be cut down to a managable size and abilities will be sparser. (or else there will be no customization and these guys end up being totally generic with the package of moral boosts that can be upgraded via research). In my opinion option 2 sucks and sounds just like GB 1 would do. The first propostition of making officers complex appeals to me much more.

 

As for giving Jedi abilities to officers, if you want to take on Jedi abilities you are restricted. Many powerful moral boosts are canceled out with any exploration into force powers. Jedi officers can grab a lightsaber ability (big ATK upgrade, but also limited to melee). Non-Jedi have acess to higher lvl troop boosts, etc...plenty of bonuses to keep you going down a non-jedi path and plenty to intice you to go down it...

[Admiral Vostok]

1) Well give me an example of how a Jedi Officer could be balanced into a normal Officer. I just don't believe they can. The only way I can see it is to limit Officer abilities the Jedi can have, and if you head down that path you might as well just have Officers and Jedi as separate entities.

 

2) So you're saying we can build Mace Windu but he isn't what Mace Windu should realistically be? See this is my greatest dislike, because we're losing realism in a major way when we don't need to. People don't care about the unrealism that airspeeders don't have harpoons but are still good against mechs because that is a small part and not very important. But I'm assuming that we want buildable Officers to be an important part, something like Heroes in AoM. If gross unrealisms are committed in something as central to the game as Officers, I fear bad things will happen. Especially when my alternate provides better realism and better gameplay.

 

3) How do we know they are a Jedi if they have no Force powers? How do we differentiate between Jedi with lightsabers and high HP, high attack people with a force pike? Trust me, coming from a programmers background this has programmatic problems.

 

4) Concerning Ajax and Arkantos - that's what I'm suggesting for SWGB2! We have buildable Officers that are just like the heroes. You can't customise them, because slight stat changes don't matter in an RTS of SWGB2's and AoM's scale. But then in the campaign only you have some units who are still Officers/Heroes, but are slightly more powerful with special abilities. So AoM buildable Heroes = SWGB2 buildable officers, and AoM Heroes like Ajax and Arkantos = SWGB2 Characters like Luke Skywalker and Mace Windu. Of course they will be somewhat different (activatable special abilities, only one type of Officer is buildable rather than 3/4 heroes, etc), but put basically AoM is a good example of what I want.

 

Especially when our "Heroes" (Officers) are not resurrectable and are not capable of taking down entire armies on their own, I think it is a bit of a waste of time to spend points on all your Officer's stats.

[joesdomain]

I would like to see more planets in the single player mode. Besides the planets offered in Galactic Battlegrounds and Clone Campaigns. They should also have Coursacant, Cloud City, Mos Eisley, Bespin, Kamino, Tipoca City, Datonnie, Ord Mantell, Alderran, etc.

 

The fortress (if they have that building in the sequel) should only build bounty hunter units. Make each civilization have the ability to build certain species of bounty hunters with different hit points, attack, armor, etc.

 

That means no more undelpoyed cannons or aircruisers.

 

They should have a building that is designed to make the unique units or special units of each civilization. They should be able to build 5-6 UU or SU per civilization.

 

They should add Ewoks, Kaminoians, Mon Calamari, Imperial Remanent and New Republic civilizations.

 

The maximum population of each civilization should be at least 300 units.

 

Get rid of the Tech Levels.

 

The Jedi Temples should be able to make Padawans, Knights, and Masters at the same time. The Sith Temples should make Appretice, Kinghts, and Masters at the same time.

[Admiral Vostok]

Joe - I'd like to see entirely unique unit sets rather than just a number of unique units. This would be way better.

 

Ewoks - no, too underpowered. Only as a secret civ.

Kaminoans - no, they make armies they don't keep one themselves.

Mon Calamari - no, the most exciting thing about them is their spacefleet which we won't seen in Galactic BattleGROUNDs 2.

Imperial Remnant & New Republic - If we have EU civs they get my vote but I'd prefer not.

 

 

 

 

Unrelated comment: Where did the thread that I was discussing EU with CorranSec on? I hear you all say "which one?", well, all of them, but specifically my logical deconstruction of Corran's flawed argument. Have they been moved? Have they been deleted? What's going on?

[CorranSec]

1) It's quite simple. You just give a Jedi Officer the same amount of points as you would a Politician Officer, or a Typical Gun-Totin' Officer, or a Main Character Officer, or whatever. The differences are theoretical only.

 

2) You can build Mace Windu, but he won't be exactly real. You can get an as-close-to-fictionally-real-as-a-game-can-get Mace Windu in the editor, but he'll have great health, great speed, great powers, and absurd lightsaber damage. We need to lose this 'realism,' because this Windu will be absolutely godly. And we don't want this.

You want to talk about heroes in AoM? Wow, you've opened up a whole new line of argument for me.

Okay. The Mystic Age hero for Zeus (or maybe Poseidon) is a guy who rides a Pegasus. Now we all know that Pegasii can fly, and you can even build flying Pegasus scouts. And some might expect this Pegasus-riding hero to be able to fly. But he can't! Do you know why not? Because that would be godly (completely overpowered), even though it would fit realism better.

However, he still has a power relating to his steed. The Pegasus can leap (with aid from its wings) into battle, letting the hero close with his targets quite effectively. This is by no means overpowered. The same applies to the Mace Windu Field Officer having officer powers.

 

3) Joe, I'm sorry, but I've heard it all before, and most of it's either nonsensical, not suited for the game, or has been suggested by another person and accepted.

 

4) Well, Ferg, I'm not sure about a 'super hybrid,' but thanks for the support about the points system.

 

5) I don't think we're talking about Heroes here. I think Heroes will be rather godly realism-influenced main characters available only in the editor, and won't be built with points. However, they still might have officer abilities, and your Leia idea would be fine.

 

6) Complex and kewler officer? No. Having the officer as 'you' ruins the whole concept of the officers. You are not 'in the game.' You are the god, the commander, the whatever. You are not-NOT-a character! You may be referred to by the characters (ie Commander, make sure those units get to that location safely) but you're not in the game. And if there was no 'officer building' (I assume you mean stat building with points) it would be less complex and less kewl.

 

7) I don't like lots of officers. There will be one key Field Officer, with a couple of Subordinate Officers. The point system will still be managable, and the abilities won't necessarily be sparse (three pretty good abilities seems like a lot to me). Sure, your option 2 is pretty bad. But so is your option 1. My sole option is much better, and still involves 'making' your main Field Officer.

 

8) Unrelated comment: Yeah, I'm quite confused about that too. And angry. Where's the custom mission thread? Where's the alien jedi poll? Where's all our lovely chaotic OTDC threads?

 

You know, it strikes me as odd that the last time I was on these forums, Sith said something like "They never close threads like these.... only threads with abuse, or threads in which there is nobody posting, or things like that." Perhaps some mod has a twisted sense of humour....

[Admiral Vostok]

1) It's not that simple. If you have enough points to make a Jedi with comparable lightsaber damage and health points to even a Padawan, you're political/normal officer will be much more powerful than they should be. Balancing a Jedi in with a normal person can't be done! Well that last sentence is simple.

 

2) But you can rationalise the guy on the pegasus. "He can't fly - maybe it's because he doesn't want to fly high above the armies and prefers to be amongst his troops where his presence will be put to better use." But with the incorrect Jedi you can't rationalise. "This Officer Jedi is only as powerful as a Padawan because... well he just is."

 

3/4) -

 

5) Okay, too many meanings for the word "Heroes". From now on the term Heroes refer to those units in AoM, while the term Characters refers to Star Wars characters that are only available in the campaigns and Editor. I suggest you won't be able to build these characters, along with any Jedi Officers, just like Arkantos and Ajax. However you will be able to build other Officers, similar to the buildable Heroes in AoM.

 

6) Agreed.

 

7) I do want lots of Officers. Of course anyone who has more Officers than the rest of his/her army will not go well, since Officer powers are not cumulative and don't effect other Officers.

 

8) Unrelated comment: Does it have anything to do with the fact that all the OTDC members have taken out the "Proud OTDC Member" part in their signatures? If the threads were deleted don't you think we'd know or be told?

[CorranSec]

1) Yes, it is just that simple. In the current GB's editor, can you change a Jedi Master's health and attack to be equal to a villagers? Yes.

 

You don't have that many points. However, if you just put points into attack, then you're obviously going to have a pretty good attack.

 

2) No. That's a really weak argument, and sounds like a bit of a last-ditch effort to me. If you can fly, you're damned well going to fly! Think of it- you can cross cliff faces, fly over walls and avoid the powerful attacks of those without bows. But no. He stays on the ground. Why? Balance>Realism. If I thought hard enough, and cared enough, I could rationalize the Officer, but I'm not going to. Here's the simple explanation: Gameplay>Realism, as shown with the pegasus rider.

 

3/4) Mhmm.

 

5) Um. Here's something simpler: "AoM Heroes" are buildable heroes in AoM, "GB2 Heroes" are the godly editor-only heroes in GB2, Main Characters are main characters from SW (hero, field officer, whatever).

 

6) Woop woop woop.

 

7) I hope you mean "I want lots of Subordinates."

 

8) Oh... this is getting weird. I didn't remove that from my sig. And I don't think the others did either... what's going on!!

[swphreak]

about #8) a [cough]SuperMod[cough] didn't like it and shut us down, lets leave it at that.

 

Before I even think of what GB2 is gonna be like, I think they should do something to make their own Mulitplayer place like Battle.net. Or tell the Zone to move their butts and do something about games being played in wrong rooms.