Weapons of mass destruction and technologies

I had the idea to add Weapons of mass Destruction like big anti-matter bombs who can like destroy a entire solar system. And i also had the idea of including technologies to research kinda like civilization or empire total war wich will give us access to more powerful and Advanced technologies.hope u like my idea.

Research is out - no technologies, apart from T1, T2. Take a read over the Confirmed Features topic

A bomb that wipes out the entire solar system doesn't sound fun.

I think the fun part is going to be crushing your opponents under a sea of tank tracks and gun barrels. Building something that just goes flash and ends the game seems a little boring.


And from what the developers have said, there's deliberately no research and upgrades.

If you've been waging a war for 1,000 years, I think all your technology is going to be pretty well researched already.

There already will be weapons of mass destruction in the game. The smallest is the nuke (feels weird saying that). Next is an asteroid fitted with engines. Even larger than that is a moon with engines (can someone confirm this? I got the impression that the devs were toying with the idea of being able to push moons around too). Finally, there will be the "metal planets", which are really massive space stations with huge anti-planet weapons.

From what I gather, battles will be fought across a solar system, meaning that a weapon which destroys an entire solar system would not be desirable as it would only force a draw. The galactic war is a meta-game over the top of that where games will be played in order to capture territory across the galaxy.

Once a system is fought over, there is no legitimate reason to keep it on the map. The natural course of battle destroys the maps and eventually makes them unplayable. In terms of lore the victor would have already razed the system for every possible resource, and there is no way to take a dead world with you. The best option is to completely obliterate the system, tossing everything into the sun, so that enemy Commanders with outdated maps gate into the void with nowhere to go and no way to escape.

Incidentally, that also makes the most valuable galactic resource a highly updated galactic map. There's no telling what dots in the sky have already been destroyed or when, at least not without dueling a Commander who's 3 Kevin bacon strips away from having been there.

In terms of gameplay, basically you use the game's random map generator with a few presets such as number and type of planets. Whoever wins the most and highest stake battles wins the galaxy... what's left of it.

As far as I remember there won't be planets with engines, they can have orbital bombardment from a moon to smash hell down upon the planet it orbits though

no I think that is part of the plan as well as "smashing planets into each other"

Planets are too large for engines.

Looks like you need bigger engines then

Planets are, moons are not.

Mavor did say that you could move moons in a interview.

But its now a rather old interview, so it might not still be accurate.

http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/08/15/plane ... interview/

Or a astroid could be the "moon" mentioned (Since a astroid in orbit could be definied as a moon).

Indeed, however I have noticed a few people going from that to assume that planets could and inevitably should also be movable.

Moving planets seems a bit too much for me.. I mean, they should sort of stay the static bases you either blow up or conquer. Moving moons already is a bit.. eh, dunno. Moving asteriods would be awesome though to use them as carriers.

Lever!


(No, that is not a giant leveler that shoots planet. Silly people.)

>Planets.
>Static.

Oh you.

It's more than possible that uber will go for a somewhat realistic orbital system in which planets, moons and asteroids are all moving on their separate orbits and thus remain highly non-static.

Yeah, don't do this. That sort of behavior belongs on image boards.

You misunderstood the topic here. We are not talking about planets and stuff moving on their orbits (they already do it, by the way), but about players artificially moving planets from their orbits.

They already move around the sun. Zoom out far enough and you see that the planet slooowly moves around the sun and the moon slowly moves around the planet it belongs to. I didn't mean literally static, more like "not-moveable-by-players". Sorry for using the wrong terms.

Thanks, noted. I would've preferred a PM though. :/

All good. And damn that's cool. As it is, I don't have alpha, so I obviously wouldn't know such things. It makes me really glad to see this already in game.

Personally, I don't see any reason gameplay wise why planets shouldn't be allowed to be moved around if you build an immense amount of engines. It might even be a great (but obviously not quite economically viable) way to dodge asteroids.