Galactic war improvements

Discussion in 'PA: TITANS: General Discussion' started by cybrankrogoth, September 21, 2015.

  1. cybrankrogoth

    cybrankrogoth Active Member

    Messages:
    191
    Likes Received:
    57
    Hi guyz,

    I have no idea where I should be putting this, so I'm putting it here...

    This is mainly a question for the devs, but also a poll to see who has input/ideas/upvotes.

    Looking at galactic war, from the start I've been interested in a version where the enemy factions re/take territory so you're constantly having to fight for the territory you want.

    I mainly want to know, is it too big an effort to create something like this? even if we start afresh with a completely empty system and it's just fighting for territory without the below benefits?

    Some ideas include a general/decoy commander now it's in titans.

    Remember buildings/fortifications in conquered systems (Or have 1 fortress/base on one planet per conquered system). I know this particular one is problematic because it makes defending a system almost too easy.
    Do people have ideas on input? Invading armies are given 2 commanders/ 2 generals/decoys?

    Some other type of ideas?
    stuart98 and emraldis like this.
  2. V4NT0M

    V4NT0M Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    173
    Likes Received:
    276
    Galactic war is absolutely worthless imo, I don't think there is any way to save it.

    It needs to be scrapped and done from the start as something worth playing. Sadly it's not going to happen and there's no way they can release it as an expansion as it was originally a stretch goal everyone would lose their ****
    stuart98 and tatsujb like this.
  3. cybrankrogoth

    cybrankrogoth Active Member

    Messages:
    191
    Likes Received:
    57
    I think that's a little unfair, it's not so bad as it is. Sure it's not dynamic and not really fluid in it's gameplay.
    But that doesn't mean the whole thing needs to be scrapped.

    As I understand it, Galactic war does have a turn system implemented, just not visible in the conventional sense of the word.
    Surely some ai and programming changes can be made to give ai some kind of ability to re/expand and force you to defend territory?

    But it still leads back to my question of, is it something that can be done practically? Or maybe is it easier to scrap it and start fresh?
  4. emraldis

    emraldis Post Master General

    Messages:
    2,641
    Likes Received:
    1,843
    I really think they should look at GW again. It's really pretty sub-par as a single-player experience...

    Honestly, something like, or even identical to the galactic conquest mode in Star Wars Battlefront 2 would be ideal IMO...
    stuart98, huangth and websterx01 like this.
  5. Phireh

    Phireh Member

    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    47
    I'd love to see something like the old galactic conquest mode in Battlefront II done for the GW in PA Titans. And coop or versus would be a godsend.

    Unfortunately they just want to refine GW as it is atm. I asked jables about it a while ago.
  6. emraldis

    emraldis Post Master General

    Messages:
    2,641
    Likes Received:
    1,843
    Yeah, unfortunately it needs refining as in "adding more challenge by making the AI take turns on the galactic map" and not "balance changes"...
  7. V4NT0M

    V4NT0M Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    173
    Likes Received:
    276
    I just don't see any reason to play GW instead of a skirmish.

    It is just a series of skirmishes.

    They could make it better as other's said by making it more like a game of chess, where one can take strategic actions within the Galaxy to ensure a win. There is no strategy to picking cards as you never know who, what or where you are fighting next.

    OK, so...

    I'm going to try and work with what they have here...

    HHHnnnnnggggg...

    Enemy leaders can take back territory, you can stop this by positioning your allied commanders within systems, these commanders can be beaten but you can strategically use your data cards to divvy out perks to you or your support commanders as you see fit.

    Some systems have persistent bonuses attached to them which you can see without even exploring. Perks that would normally be on cards like build efficiency, This also applies to support commander skill. So you can strategically take systems with perks.

    Systems with gas giants automatically generate extra resources to give you a boost when you start?

    Have scenarios where the system you drop into that the AI has already had time to build up a base.

    Ability to capture enemy commanders?
  8. emraldis

    emraldis Post Master General

    Messages:
    2,641
    Likes Received:
    1,843
    Have the ability to garrison sub commanders in a system you've captured and keep some of (not all) your units and structures alive after the battle, they would remain there for when the system is attacked. the number of units and structures remaining is dependant on the number of support commanders you garrison. Perhaps defeating enemy commanders would automatically grant you a support commander for each commander you defeat? Would make an interesting tactical decision as to whether or not to keep attacking with the support of sub-commanders in your invasion fleet, or to have some stay behind and defend.
  9. cybrankrogoth

    cybrankrogoth Active Member

    Messages:
    191
    Likes Received:
    57
    I'm liking lots of the suggestions, I'm not sure if there was any implications of this but one thing I thought might be interesting
    based off what emraldis and v4nt0m wrote is maybe generating support commanders, or converting enemy commanders when winning. I mean this in the sense that currently in Galactic War you only have 1 commander that can move out and take systems, if we give all players/ai the ability to have support commanders, and allocate them to take or hold a system from the Galactic War map might be interesting even if you don't permit persistent bases between battles.

    This would permit a difference in strategic value if support commanders/colonels to have a decrease in effectiveness, it makes more sense to send out a commander to expand and colonel to hold a choke point for example.

    I'm still not sure how we could implement this, or implement a turn based system that would permit this though.
    Do we have ideas? Or feedback from uberdevs whether this is practical to do anytime soon?
  10. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    Skirmish with different rules is still fun.
  11. emraldis

    emraldis Post Master General

    Messages:
    2,641
    Likes Received:
    1,843
    Except the AI is dumb as a rock and I can win by spamming Ants...
  12. tatsujb

    tatsujb Post Master General

    Messages:
    12,878
    Likes Received:
    5,374
    look at that : my old opinions.

    gw needs to be rebooted. I've been saying it since the start.
  13. emraldis

    emraldis Post Master General

    Messages:
    2,641
    Likes Received:
    1,843
    I don't think I ever disagreed with you :)
    tatsujb likes this.

Share This Page