Planetary ground combat, ideas?

[Wessexking]

General ideas on ground combat, theories and 'OMG! What ifs'

Will armies get the same focus as fleets? For example will you be able to customize any of it, such as whether your armies are robots, clones, mutants, volunteers, slaves etc.

Or whether your vehicles use wheels, tracks, hover, legs etc.

Will there be Federation armies with the same buffs as Federation fleets?

In addition, with regard to ground combat itself, will planets be a single battlefield or will you be able to fight campaigns with multiple armies on them? I assume based on the size of the planet, and maybe the amount colonized eg. every 5 million population counts as a separate population centre in need of besieging

Will heavily populated planets count as 'city planets' where the default terrain becomes urban? (as opposed to desert, swamp etc. assuming terrain types affect combat.) And will planets thus have the possibility for multiple terrain types? Maybe a selection for initial colony set-up locations.-Or maybe have multiple civilizations end up sharing a planet, even if neither are willing to leave it that way.

Or if this is waaaaaay to big a thing to have for every planet, and thus each is just one 'battle', but does that mean each planet counts as an island and if I lose one battle I lose the army in its entirety?

I know ground combat will prob take a back seat to the pew-pew spaceship battles, after all its a space game, but its still going to be a part of the game, and for me at least, will be one of the greatest mysteries as to how they have approached it.

Any other ideas? or things from films or TV shows that might be interesting in terms of ground combat in a future setting?

 

[Balkri]

maybe something similar to the siege mechanics in crusaders kings, with a minimum number of troops to effectively invade the planet but with chances of "events" in favor of the attackers and the defenders every cycle (like all of the other paradox games). With this losing a space battle will not mean the lost of a system, but will put it in stake, the defender will have time to bring reinforcement, if the invasion force is not totally overwhelming, or the planetary defenses are boosted with infrastructure... or something totally new that we have never see in any paradox game yet

 

[Orctavius]

maybe something similar to the siege mechanics in crusaders kings, with a minimum number of troops to effectively invade the planet but with chances of "events" in favor of the attackers and the defenders every cycle (like all of the other paradox games). With this losing a space battle will not mean the lost of a system, but will put it in stake, the defender will have time to bring reinforcement, if the invasion force is not totally overwhelming, or the planetary defenses are boosted with infrastructure... or something totally new that we have never see in any paradox game yet

I want something simple that I don't have to micro-manage. CKII-esque siege mechanics could work.

 

[JALC]

Maybe tech bonuses for taking a world from a more advanced Civilization? This could give the player reason to risk taking an underdeveloped and/or ignored Colony from one of the older civilizations metioned.

 

[Wessexking]

With this losing a space battle will not mean the lost of a system

I wonder if fleets can planetary bombard, I hope they cant defeat armies all by themselves.

 

[Kollatius]

Throw enough militia grade troops at the enemy until it dies

 

[Gott mit uns]

I think it would be silly not to include planetary bombardments into the game. However, I don't think they'll hurt the actual unit strenght much. I hope combat will function similarly to HoI3, in a way that you can use units to be support in battle, and use various kinds of bombardment against the enemy.
I would like the idea of an army fortifying itself onto a planet and becauce storming it would be obviously too costly, you just bombard them until it's safe to land. Kind of the thing you would do in HoI. And also, small fighter ships being able to provide ground support, that'd be nice.

 

[ashbery76]

In my view it should be a slow process that requires reinforcements and last years.It is very silly in games like GC3 when you basically instant invade.Glassing planets would be easier but you wreck the planet and get a bad reputation unless they are dirty bugs races.

 

[J.P.Cliffer]

I would like a master of orion 3 kind of ground combat with the choice of nbc weapon and the intensity for the player
and let tactics choice to be like heart of iron 3 or 4

 

[echo2361]

Reposting from the last ground combat thread:

I don't need an overly complex ground-combat system, but having some variety in ground troop types and tactics is something I very much want to see. Distant Worlds had a nice amount of troop differentiation between basic infantry, armor (tanks) particularly effective at planet assaults but not defense, planetary defense units good at taking out incoming invasion troopships, and special forces designed to hunt down ground defenses to makes things easier for the regular infantry and armor.

Personally I would add just a few more type of units to that, and then have research to boost the effectiveness of some, or all, of your ground forces as the technological eras progress (i.e. upgrading lasers, armor tech, etc). Having artillery that is good vs infantry but bad vs armor would be nice. Maybe replaced/upgrade armor into mechs of kind.

Besides units, I'd also want to be able to pick the general strategies and tactics my generals would use. Simple things like whether they can use biological weapons, whether they should try to avoid civilian causalities at the cost of more of my troops, etc. Special defensive options like slash-and-burn retreating tactics vs. going to ground for guerrilla warfare responses to invasions. Having spaceships in orbit should give me options as well including sending down airstrikes with fighters or orbital bombardments of either a limited or exterminatus level with appropriate risks to civilians and infrastructure.

In general, I don't need actual control over the ground battles, I just want to influence them through army composition and issuing some strategies and tactics to be used during the ground campaigns.

 

[fabius]

Reposting from the last ground combat thread:

I don't need an overly complex ground-combat system, but having some variety in ground troop types and tactics is something I very much want to see. Distant Worlds had a nice amount of troop differentiation between basic infantry, armor (tanks) particularly effective at planet assaults but not defense, planetary defense units good at taking out incoming invasion troopships, and special forces designed to hunt down ground defenses to makes things easier for the regular infantry and armor.

Personally I would add just a few more type of units to that, and then have research to boost the effectiveness of some, or all, of your ground forces as the technological eras progress (i.e. upgrading lasers, armor tech, etc). Having artillery that is good vs infantry but bad vs armor would be nice. Maybe replaced/upgrade armor into mechs of kind.

Besides units, I'd also want to be able to pick the general strategies and tactics my generals would use. Simple things like whether they can use biological weapons, whether they should try to avoid civilian causalities at the cost of more of my troops, etc. Special defensive options like slash-and-burn retreating tactics vs. going to ground for guerrilla warfare responses to invasions. Having spaceships in orbit should give me options as well including sending down airstrikes with fighters or orbital bombardments of either a limited or exterminatus level with appropriate risks to civilians and infrastructure.

In general, I don't need actual control over the ground battles, I just want to influence them through army composition and issuing some strategies and tactics to be used during the ground campaigns.

I like pretty much all of that.

I'd add that it would be good if some planetary wars last long time, game years even. With need to reinforce attacks or even rotate units out.

maybe something similar to the siege mechanics in crusaders kings, with a minimum number of troops to effectively invade the planet but with chances of "events" in favor of the attackers and the defenders every cycle (like all of the other paradox games). With this losing a space battle will not mean the lost of a system, but will put it in stake, the defender will have time to bring reinforcement, if the invasion force is not totally overwhelming, or the planetary defenses are boosted with infrastructure... or something totally new that we have never see in any paradox game yet

With long battle-wars some scope to change overall strategy during to affect modifiers would be good. Also defender could choose things like insurgency warfare.

The main thing is I really hope they don't make it so planetary bombardment kills all defences. That is dull and always strikes uninspired.

 

[Sinister2202]

I would have to assume that land forces will be extremely mobile across the planet once you take control of the orbit with your fleet. Thus, only deploying troops to strategically strike whatever target (planetary garrison, HQ, certain infrastructures...etc) would be the necessary thing to do, instead of spreading multiple groups of armies across the planet. But that just depends on whether or not the game will have specific deployment locations on the planets themselves. Furthermore, holding siege on a city with ground troops would no longer be necessary, due to the fact that you have the orbit and the sky with your ships - this also accounts for loyalist population suppression/control. And once occupied, you'll obviously be faced with a chance of rebellion/insurgency. Then you deploy your ground troops again to control the situation or, again, strategically deploy and strike the locations of the insurgents.

 

[Aleks S. I]

Seconding the ideas in the above posts. (fabius' & echo's) I think having ground combat be a slow, costly process is an interesting alternative to the instant but destructive method of pointing your entire fleet's guns at a planet and blasting everything that moves and half the stuff that doesn't. I think ships should be able to destroy ground troops if you have enough firepower and are willing to blast entire continents away. However, if you want to capture a planet with some/most of its population and infrastructure intact, you'd have to land ground troops. Even if you have orbital superiority fighting a war across an entire planet would be time consuming and costly, especially if the enemy is using guerrilla tactics and has prepared defenses. I particularly like echo's suggestion of different types of troops and tactics. I'm surprised it hasn't been done in more games already. Ideally ground combat should be as well developed as space combat, as opposed to the usual nuisance of having to spam troop ships then babysitting them on their way to enemy planets.

 

[fabius]

Regarding orbiting ships making invasions Auto - Success affairs.

Easy to imagine scenarios where planet forces have work arounds and defences such as shields, subterranean barracks; or melt into the population and re-join for major attacks Tet Offensive style.

Or just have powerful batteries to knock capital ships loitering too close too long after troop deployment.

 

[Wessexking]

Or just have powerful batteries to knock capital ships loitering too close too long after troop deployment.

Now that would be interesting, armies that can beat back fleets! (sort of)

 

[aitaituo]

Mechanically, it'd probably be best to treat them like naval bombardments that can hit targets that aren't sea adjacent, unless you're glassing the planet, in a manner like some WW2 games treat naval bombardments. Orbital bombardments certainly have advantages over more traditional artillery, but countermeasures will surely be developed to lessen that in addition to anti-space emplacements. I could see ships attempting precision strikes from orbit being vulnerable to lasers.

 

[fabius]

Mechanically, it'd probably be best to treat them like naval bombardments that can hit targets that aren't sea adjacent, unless you're glassing the planet, in a manner like some WW2 games treat naval bombardments. Orbital bombardments certainly have advantages over more traditional artillery, but countermeasures will surely be developed to lessen that in addition to anti-space emplacements. I could see ships attempting precision strikes from orbit being vulnerable to lasers.

Yes, some bonus for orbital superiority/supremacy- much like air superiority; and that it can't win a war alone.

 

[Aleks S. I]

[...] and that it can't win a war alone.

Unless you're willing to blast the planet until it makes Venus look like a nice tropical resort. I feel like that should be an option, just for when that one race that is constantly messing with your plans (read: space France) simply cannot be dislodged through more conventional means.

 

[fabius]

Unless you're willing to blast the planet until it makes Venus look like a nice tropical resort. I feel like that should be an option, just for when that one race that is constantly messing with your plans (read: space France) simply cannot be dislodged through more conventional means.

Well yes. This would be like the Nuke option in today's world. Possible, maybe even with late game planet killers like Death Star etc. But !! The Galactic political fall out should be heavy.

 

[J.P.Cliffer]

Well yes. This would be like the Nuke option in today's world. Possible, maybe even with late game planet killers like Death Star etc. But !! The Galactic political fall out should be heavy.

Or doing like in spore terraform planet in 2 step : sterilise planet and then transform it to gaia