What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital combat)

People keep saying that Uber confirmed there won't be any spaceships or space combat. I would like to see a link please. As I understood it all they said was there won't be any combat in deep space (ninja edit: I don't want any combat in deep space). But assuming I'm wrong and people are correct...

Does that mean there won't be any orbital units that can move or attack other orbital units?

If so, what's the gas giant gameplay going to look like? Are gas giants going to be totally peaceful? And what was the point of that stretch goal?

If, on the other hand, there will be orbital units that can move and shoot, how is that not a spaceship? How is that not space combat?

Thanks in advance,
Ekulio,
Very Confused Backer.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

I'm of the impression that it means "no fighting in deep space, between planets."

Pew-pew above planets will possibly happen (largely because of gas giants).


Ultimately, think of it like this:

• Planetary Annihilation is a game about planets. It's not called Empty Vacuum Annihilation or even Spaceship Annihilation.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

At this point there has been very little confirmed about Orbital/Gas Giant Gameplay, but in terms of Orbital we can basically assume it will consist of Satellites and possibly Space Stations type units, we still know next to nothing about Interplanetary travel aside from what was seen in the Visualization(which isn't Gospel) so it's hard to say with certainty what they'll be like exactly.

Frankly with the Scale Uber wants to achieve to me it makes sense to focus the core gameplay on the "surface" of a planet/moon/asteroid(which includes land, air and naval units) and try to make other areas(such as the Orbital Layer) play out more so in support of the primary surface layer rather than it being as complex as the Surface.

Mike

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

As I understand it, there will be orbital units fighting over planets and such, but no battles between free floating spaceships in empty space.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

That was my impression too. I just wanted to confirm because people keep writing off orbital combat based on something they claim the uber staff said which I have yet to see the link to.

Again, isn't a satellite that can move just a spacecraft?

Orbital is at least going to need to be complex enough to support combat on gas giants.

I think my views differ from yours in that I would like to see orbital gameplay as one of the core aspects of the game (in case you couldn't tell ), rather than just a bonus feature.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

Yes, but why are you assuming the Satellites can move under their own power? Isn't more likely they'll be locked into an Orbit when built/placed?

There's nothing saying it can't be a core component, I'm saying it needs to support Planet based Warfare as opposed to being a "Like Land but in orbit" type mechanic.

Mike

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

Initially they wanted to make special platforms for Gas Giant Planets, so you may build them and make production on them. Basically it's "naval planet", but "air planet". AFAIK, they are not about space, but about air. Though, Uber confirmed that there would be orbital stations/satellites and such (no details yet), but they don't want to do deep-space spaceship fighting "as it require completely different interface". Taking than, moving orbital "naval" around the globe isn't big deal from terms of interface, so why not.

But I'd rather see it as orbital stations shooting into orbital stations. They may have engines, as any satellite, but they also may just shoot rockets around the globe (artillery fight =)).

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

I'm assuming some orbital units will be locked in place, yes. But not all orbital units. How would that work on gas giants if all the units were fixed?

For future reference I'll refer to fixed orbital units/structures as "satellites" and mobile orbital units as "spacecraft."

Agreed 100%.

Really? Personally that sounds pretty boring.

It should matter where the unit is positioned above the planet, and if they can fire anywhere it doesn't matter.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

Thanks. But isn't that stuff all talking about space combat outside the orbital layer?

The orbital layer doesn't require a different interface after all. It's still planetary, just at a higher altitude.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

If you assume that space is a flat plane above planets, then yes.

But flat space is boring.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

It also can end up feeling like an arbitrary limitation, which is bad.

Mike

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

You also a 3D (spherical planet) and then a flat space. Seems like a cop-out to go to the effort of and not use it everywhere.

Hopefully you accept that 3D will require a different interface.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

What are you talking about? A flat plane would require a different interface since everything else is spheres. A spherical layer around the planet would not.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

That's still not the same as moving in 3D space, which is the part that would require the different/second Interface.

Mike

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

I'm very puzzled right now. I'm not asking for that. I don't want that at all. EDIT: OK I figured out what you guys are talking about. RTS with 3D interface is a huge headache. I hated Homeworld (I know I know...gasp) and don't want that in PA.

Aircraft move in 3D space, but it's all along a 2D plane (or in this case, the surface of a sphere) with some leeway to go up or down to avoid colliding with other aircraft. The craft might move in 3D space but the interface is still 2D. Why can't the orbital layer be the same?

And we all learned from when Sonic the Hedgehog went to 3D that being able to move in more dimensions doesn't necessarily make something more fun.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

But then you're just turning the Orbital layer into a "Like Air but in Orbit" type thing.

It's why I prefer Orbital units to be primarily Satellites that mostly fill a support role towards the "Surface" combat(again, Land, Air and Naval) and focusing the game in that regard, because you have similar interactions on Moons/Asteroids.

Also having Spaceships that can't leave orbit would be pretty arbitrary, and wouldn't be ideal.

Mike

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

No, I'm just using air to draw a comparison to the interface and the fact that spacecraft/satellites have a bit of leeway in the third dimension (altitude). Everything else would be totally different.

I also want them to serve in a support role for the land units. But I don't see why that means they should only be stationary.

Could you clarify the line about "because you have similar interactions on Moons/Asteroids."? I missed the context.

Of course there should be some way for spacecraft to leave orbit to move to orbit around other planet(oid)s, just like land units can be transported to other planets. I don't see why not. It would be great for supporting invasions. But they wouldn't be able to interact while in transit between orbits of course.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

You'll need at least satellites that may bombard surface, satellites that may bombard incoming forces and satellites that may bombard other satellites (for assaulting planet). And, of course, recon satellites to send to other planet.

You should add them all + planetary defense against satellites (and that would be platforms shooting at platforms), or only recon satellites. I rather prefer only-recon variant with possibility to take recon satellite down with surface-to-orbit missile.

With that, you can send your satellite to other planet and if it's not occupied you'll get lengthy image of everything going on under satellite coverage until enemy will tech-up enough to shut down your sat. Opposed to just getting your sat immediately shut down by other force military satellite upon invasion.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean?

There's still a major difference between air and orbit. Apart from one tiny ring along the equator, you can't hover in orbit.

An orbital craft might be able to provide lots of support. However, it would have much less choice on where it can provide support. At least, it could work like that in theory. It might be a real annoyance in practice.