Random Encounters, Random Objectives, & NX Project!

posted on March 24th, 2014, 4:32 am

(I don't know how much of this can be done on the current engine, so you can consider these ideas for NX Project too)

Random Encounters – To make the game feel a little more like Star Trek, I think we need true random encounters on the game map. This wouldn't be set triggers that are the same every time you play on a map, but instead truly random that are pre-developed for the game to pick from. You could even have a notification message for when this happens.

Example: 1 vs 1 (Borg – Feds), Romulans warp in a few ships into the sector, ect.

Random Objectives- Armada 2 is to much about war... having some random objectives to do during instant action or multiplayer could also really make the game feel like Star Trek. These could be simple things as having a ship scan a planet/ship/station or taking control of a certain ship/station from the enemy, exploring a unknown sector of the map...ect. For example if your playing as the Feds, the missions would be ordered by Starfleet and by doing said objectives you could get extra (supply, dilithium, ect) from the cargo ships in v4 or few free warp in ships. You could even tie this in with Random Encounters... such as a damaged ship warps in and the objective is you have to send a repair ship or crew over to it to help it.

NX Project – As we look past Armada 2, I would assume NX Project will be it's own game engine with FO ported over. I think as we look towards that we should also look at making FO more of the Star Trek game we all always wanted, and less of the Armada 2 we should have all gotten.

By that I mean the game should naturally expand from more than a simple skirmish strategy game.

One idea I had was splitting the game into 2 sections, one being the instant action we all love and the other being a more strategic map view similar to Starfleet command. Instead of just being on one map and playing... you would start in a strategic map view with each map being shown as a hex (or square) and in each hex you can place ships/stations ect. You would be able to click a button in each hex and see that hex's map (ie this would be the normal view we see now) to place ships/stations. But instead of playing on one map, you would have to play on many maps. Each hex would belong to you or the enemy, and you could take/lose them. You could then also have such things as trade agreements, dipomacy, alliances... ect. So say in hex A you may have a starbase and a few ships, but in hex B you may have a fleet yard.

This could totally replace having any sort of campaign, as most of us wouldn't play that more than once or twice anyway. The instant action part would of course still be there for those who just want a quick skirmish strategy game.

If you have read all of this, I thank you.

posted on March 24th, 2014, 12:51 pm

Hi Xanto,
I like your idea with the stratetic part and I aggree with you that it would be better as a campaign.
Hope the Dev-Team think so too.

posted on March 24th, 2014, 4:09 pm

Random encounters sounds like a cool idea Dunno if it could be implemented so easily, but that depends mainly on the dev team. On the other hand, would you like to have in multiplayer match the random objective and encounter? I personally am not sure, but i think, that most of network players would just disable this option, cuz it can turn tides in otherwise balanced battle, and therefore it will be a little bit about luck... what if ship, that need to resuply, would warpin right next to your expansion? You will be able to complete objective more easily then you oponent. So it sounds like nice idea, but for singleplayer only...

posted on March 24th, 2014, 4:15 pm

Hi Xanto,
I like your idea with the stratetic part and I aggree with you that it would be better as a campaign.
Hope the Dev-Team think so too.

Thanks, defiantly would give a better re-play value than a campaign.

Random encounters sounds like a cool idea Dunno if it could be implemented so easily, but that depends mainly on the dev team. On the other hand, would you like to have in multiplayer match the random objective and encounter? I personally am not sure, but i think, that most of network players would just disable this option, cuz it can turn tides in otherwise balanced battle, and therefore it will be a little bit about luck... what if ship, that need to resuply, would warpin right next to your expansion? You will be able to complete objective more easily then you oponent. So it sounds like nice idea, but for singleplayer only...

I think it could work for multiplayer, but I think that is the whole point of it being random... you would just be lucky if a ship warped right in next to you... but you could also be unlucky because the same could have happen to your enemy or the ship could be an enemy.

Regardless, I do think single player should have priority over multiplayer, I know devs don't feel the exact same... but from what I can tell single player is played a lot more that multiplayer in FO. Regardless having an option to turn it off would always work too.

posted on March 24th, 2014, 4:53 pm

I don't think that Armada II is "too much about war," it is a war game after all. I think these ideas would work for a campaign, single player, or even co-op game but not in vs multiplayer. I'm sure we can come up with various challenge maps and mini campaigns, as the options will be greatly expanded in V4 last I heard. Just last night crisis was showing me his mod that randomly spawns ships around the map, although it requires an AI player to go in a special slot on a special map. I don't know what it would take to enable that kind of thing as an option for any map.

posted on March 24th, 2014, 5:45 pm

By that I mean the game should naturally expand from more than a simple skirmish strategy game.

One idea I had was splitting the game into 2 sections, one being the instant action we all love and the other being a more strategic map view similar to Starfleet command. Instead of just being on one map and playing... you would start in a strategic map view with each map being shown as a hex (or square) and in each hex you can place ships/stations ect. You would be able to click a button in each hex and see that hex's map (ie this would be the normal view we see now) to place ships/stations. But instead of playing on one map, you would have to play on many maps. Each hex would belong to you or the enemy, and you could take/lose them. You could then also have such things as trade agreements, dipomacy, alliances... ect. So say in hex A you may have a starbase and a few ships, but in hex B you may have a fleet yard.

This could totally replace having any sort of campaign, as most of us wouldn't play that more than once or twice anyway. The instant action part would of course still be there for those who just want a quick skirmish strategy game.

So a kind of Empire at War or SFC approach then?

posted on March 24th, 2014, 9:01 pm

By that I mean the game should naturally expand from more than a simple skirmish strategy game.

One idea I had was splitting the game into 2 sections, one being the instant action we all love and the other being a more strategic map view similar to Starfleet command. Instead of just being on one map and playing... you would start in a strategic map view with each map being shown as a hex (or square) and in each hex you can place ships/stations ect. You would be able to click a button in each hex and see that hex's map (ie this would be the normal view we see now) to place ships/stations. But instead of playing on one map, you would have to play on many maps. Each hex would belong to you or the enemy, and you could take/lose them. You could then also have such things as trade agreements, dipomacy, alliances... ect. So say in hex A you may have a starbase and a few ships, but in hex B you may have a fleet yard.

This could totally replace having any sort of campaign, as most of us wouldn't play that more than once or twice anyway. The instant action part would of course still be there for those who just want a quick skirmish strategy game.

So a kind of Empire at War or SFC approach then?

Basically it would be a mix of SFC and Armada 2. Fleetops has already taken small steps to that with some it's features... I'm proposing making it much larger. You would have the real time battles but it would be on a much larger scale when it comes to the micro-management and strategy.

posted on March 24th, 2014, 9:12 pm

I don't think that Armada II is "too much about war," it is a war game after all. I think these ideas would work for a campaign, single player, or even co-op game but not in vs multiplayer. I'm sure we can come up with various challenge maps and mini campaigns, as the options will be greatly expanded in V4 last I heard. Just last night crisis was showing me his mod that randomly spawns ships around the map, although it requires an AI player to go in a special slot on a special map. I don't know what it would take to enable that kind of thing as an option for any map.

It a war game, but I think it distracts from the feeling of Star Trek... while war was a large part, that wasn't all they did. It could work in multiplayer if it was balanced between what each player can actually randomly get. Besides were talking small gains here, nothing large that can really change the side of war.

posted on March 24th, 2014, 11:22 pm

honestly i like the idea of this well done i hope this works out as it gives the game some more flavor and sets it apart from any other strategy game or mod

posted on March 24th, 2014, 11:37 pm

honestly i like the idea of this well done i hope this works out as it gives the game some more flavor and sets it apart from any other strategy game or mod

Thanks, and I agree. I'm not sure how hard it would be to do this with the new engine, but practically it should just be a matter of re-working how the AI and game works. The maps and all that would still basically be the same.

May have to have a loading screen when clicking between strategic map and the regular map for real time battles... think Total war games if you have every played them. But that would be fine with me.

I don't know, not that expect it to happen but it was an idea I had and wanted to share.

posted on April 7th, 2014, 12:10 am

if you was to have random events in the skirmish/multiplayer that were objectives then here are a few things that could happen and the rewards they could give

events
*ships in distress from pirates
*damaged npc ships in need of repair
*temporal anomalies to scan
*nebulae to scan
*anomalies to stop (could be threatening a planet/station)
*ship stuck in an anomaly for rescue
*diplomatic issue between 2 ships that doing something will give you something else in return for solving the issue
*escorting a ship to a location safely
*deliver supplies to somewhere

rewards
*get amount of dilithium
*get amount of trilithium
*the npc will scout for you
*you get sensor data of a part of space (shroud reveal but still fog)
*you get the locations of resources nearby reveled
*you get given a ship
*you get given a station
*you get a new thing to research
*the npc will hassle the enemy (tho only weak ships)


that's all i can think of for now but there is probably more that could be added

posted on April 7th, 2014, 12:18 am

Technically speaking, a lot of this is already possible using random replace weapons on a timer. You can use universal event notifications like from stock for temporal stasis or transwarp conduits to let players know when and where they appeared.

I think they should be like the ferengi though, and be optional. They would be great for Player VS AI games, but could throw PVP matches out of balance.

posted on April 7th, 2014, 12:27 am

yeah it could very easily throw a multiplayer game in someones favor. it would have to be an option to turn on/off