PSA - What Galactic War actually is.

i hope the Galaxies in the Galactic war mode, would be as large as the galaxy in Spore(space stage porshan of the game)

I think most people interpret GW as something where they are fighting in real time within a team against several other teams within a whole galaxy.

Bear with me a moment:

• It was noticable that its - with the current UI and for an average skilled player - not possible to effectivly manage more than one planet at once.
• That was a main factor why people got all exited about large games (> 20 players). Suddenly it was possible to have a real fight over a whole solar system.

That is why I think we should drastically reduce the priority of GW and raise the priority of large games on the implementation side because large games was what people thought they are going to get when they heard "Galactic war".

If they interpret the GW as full galaxy Real Time, then they must not have watched the GW trailer or read anything about it.

The GW has always been a replacement to the campaign and a randomized meta game.

However, GW is going above and beyond and will also be an immersive multiplayer experience as well.

Which think... a Galactic War Tournament? GOING TO BE EPIC.

Hi, i'm new here.

Am I right in saying that the galactic war will be turned based when moving units across different galaxies and solar systems, but when a solar system becomes contested you fight it out in real time in that specific solar system?

So in comparison it would kind of be like the total war games, or Dawn of war soulstorm?

Pretty much.

Think of GW as a campaign – but randomized. You take a turn and choose what system to attack. You then start a match and play the RTS game. You blow up the enemy commander, you control that system. Then your opponent chooses a system to attack, you then fight within that system.

They've also hinted at there will be strategy into choosing which system to attack – implying that there will be benefits for controlling certain systems, but we have no clue on that part.

Well they can really be any size you want as you only ever simulate a single system at a time, of course HUGE galaxies could cause gameplay problems in the same way that gameplay was effectively broken on 40 and 81km maps in SupCom/FA.

Mike

Sorry for the bump but not giving buffs for having a lot of systems would be an error, why ? Because in a game where you need to destroy the enemy commander, you would just need to wait for the enemy, then destroy every enemy commander that is sent to the system, game over. Also how are we supposed to move between systems ? The distance between planets in a system is NOTHING compared to the distance between systems, we're talking light years here.

Every fight in the system starts with one commander per player. You can't run out of them, just like you can't run out of kings in a chess tournament.

How are you going to move between missions in a singleplayer campaign if you can't move out of map bounds? That's a tricky question...

But if you loose the comm, the game ends, but when/how do you loose a GW game ?

PA can only hope to be as epic as spore, sadly it does not seem it has what for it mean to be.
let's quickly alert the steam 90'$ community of this.
/sarcasm

When you lose your commander in GW you lose the system he fought in.

Presumably, you lose the game when you lose all your systems.

Nope you loose your commander you loose the galactic war. I imagine retreating from a planet will become very important.

Is this official info, or something you made up? It doesn't make any sense from gameplay perspective.

Devs don't talk about GW a lot (aside from stuff quoted in OP) and our best guess is comparing it to regular singleplayer campaigns and overmaps in games like Total War: Shogun 2.

95% sure he made it up. Everything we've heard on galactic war suggests it is a series of skirmishes that behave exactly like normal matches ie you lose your commander you lose the battle (and system)

We don't know yet how many commanders will be present per player nor what the "victory condition" is within the overall galactic war.

For example I'd think it odd if it was only every 1 Commander per Player, what if I want to play offline against the AI in a big Galaxy with 100 systems? Playing that 1v1 would be boring I'd think due to the low chances of clashing with the enemy commander instead. To deal with that I'd have it such that the player controls a 'Squad' of commanders instead, allowing for much more flexibility.

As for Win Conditions, yeah obviously not having any commanders left is going to a problem, but I'd hope it's not quite that simple overall. For example there has been talk of there being a "Wonder" Victory, either as a game mode or just a 'secondary' victory condition in regular games, and there has been many discussions about what the 'Wonder' could be, and to me the only answer that makes sense is the creation of a new Commander. This could particularly be interesting in Galactic War, especially if you have many commanders going at it for both sides(regardless of the number of players per side).

Obviously these are just my thoughts, we are still missing a lot in regards to details as to how Galactic War will work aside from all the quotes/Dev Comments I've gathered in the first post.

Mike

See, KNight's point kind of joins mine, if you have to send your comms at each offensive and you loose all of them, then it's either game over because you have no commander (and it was a victory condition) OR you have a massive disavantage and you have no commander.

So Like War of the Ring in BFME I & II

So Like War of the Ring in BFME I & II

It is a logical conclusion i came to based on past games from this lineage. You have one commander and thats it.....If he dies game over.

But look at the campaigns from that same lineage.

If you die. The campaign ends. Permanently. And your faction gets annihilated.

Oh wait, I think that never happened in any of the campaigns.