One aspect I find very lackluster is warfare. Generally it involves chasing enemy stacks around until you to whack their fleet and invade at will. I think some of the following changes would really improve the tactical aspects of warfare and add a lot more flavor.
Espionage: Totally missing from the game but is very active in every other Paradox grand strategy title, and 4x titles in general. A variety of covert operations could be possible and linked to technology.
Logistics: Some type of system is needed to make warfare more dynamic. Fleets could have supply storage (part of making ship design deeper) that would let them range freely for a time. Ships would automatically regenerate supplies in friendly territory to cut down on micromanagement, but when in enemy space a string of supply ships would automatically trickle in from the nearest friendly starbase or planet (Each fleet would simply have a button to turn this feature on or off. Much like in HOI, logistic capability can/should be limited either through having a maximum amount of supply ships or by having them spawn at a limited rate, thereby making their use calculated.) This would allow weaker empires to play a defensive game by intercepting supply lines while bogging down superior enemy fleets and armies. Combined with the trade mechanics discussed below, it would add a lot of strategic depth. Players could design ships with a lot of supply storage for the purposes of striking deep into enemy territory while short-range combat focused fleets hammered away at the front-line. All of this could combine with the espionage mechanics when keeping track of enemy fleets. Ideally, this would encourage several types of ship designs and fleet compositions: Fast, lightly armed raiders for disrupting trade and supply lines, slow troop transports/bombardment groups designed to fight planetary sieges, and heavily armed hunter-killer groups that track down and destroy enemy fleets. All these features would encourage more ship designs, more thought about fleet composition, and emphasize different strategies and philosophies on waging war.
Trade: In the predictions for patch 1.3, it was said that npc ships moving in between planets would add life to the game world. While this is an excellent idea, I propose giving those ships actual importance. Trade centers could be built either in star bases, on planet surface tiles, or asteroids. Alternatively, trade ships could automatically be generated between worlds producing energy and even automatically move excess food. This would improve the importance of blockades during wartime, as important food importing worlds could be cut off and starved out. Migrant populations could even be assigned these npc ships so that they could potentially be intercepted during wartime (should be a option to allow migration during wartime, maybe happiness hit to individualist pops)
This would lead to strategic decisions about how to wage war? Slog it out against defended perimeter systems in order to build up forward bases and supply, or boldly strike into the heart of enemy empires to disrupt trade and rob them of vital resources? There are the kind of decisions I think grand strategy games are built for and which players really crave.
Army/Invasion: Currently, this is one of the shallowest mechanics in the game but with a lot of room for improvement and depth. Invasions could be a built-in mini-game (as much as I hate that term). Planets wouldn't fall as quickly and armies would be tied to planetary tiles. Defenders without an army on that tile could still fight with the base population (with awful combat stats, but maybe improved based on traits). Different armies and attachments would be good at different terrain types and maybe buildings could add an urban element. This would force players to build different army types to go against different planets. Tile blockers could also be interesting here. Mountains could provide defense bonuses, active volcanoes and aggressive wild-life could inflict attrition. A combination of these features would make ground combat much more important. Invasions could conquer parts of planets but get bogged down in difficult terrain for example. This mechanic could also be used for planetary uprisings when some pops turn hostile and duke it out on the planet map. This would also give us the opportunity to have some neat 2d models for different army types. Simple mechs, hover tanks, or giant aliens would give a lot more personality to an otherwise stale part of the game.
Dynamic Planet modifiers: Something that could create a much more dynamic interaction and lead to a greater feeling of immersion would be to have planets develop their own modifiers over time. For instance, if a planet builds lots of ships, the populace becomes good at it and gains a modifier making building cheaper or faster. Another example would be that if a planet is bombarded or invaded repeatedly the inhabitants become militarized. Armies recruited here might fight better, or the population itself might become resistant to bombardment if every house needs a bomb shelter. This is already in the game with the static planet modifiers and I think those should have more flexibility, be able to be removed through technology options just like tile-blockers are currently.
Espionage: Totally missing from the game but is very active in every other Paradox grand strategy title, and 4x titles in general. A variety of covert operations could be possible and linked to technology.
Logistics: Some type of system is needed to make warfare more dynamic. Fleets could have supply storage (part of making ship design deeper) that would let them range freely for a time. Ships would automatically regenerate supplies in friendly territory to cut down on micromanagement, but when in enemy space a string of supply ships would automatically trickle in from the nearest friendly starbase or planet (Each fleet would simply have a button to turn this feature on or off. Much like in HOI, logistic capability can/should be limited either through having a maximum amount of supply ships or by having them spawn at a limited rate, thereby making their use calculated.) This would allow weaker empires to play a defensive game by intercepting supply lines while bogging down superior enemy fleets and armies. Combined with the trade mechanics discussed below, it would add a lot of strategic depth. Players could design ships with a lot of supply storage for the purposes of striking deep into enemy territory while short-range combat focused fleets hammered away at the front-line. All of this could combine with the espionage mechanics when keeping track of enemy fleets. Ideally, this would encourage several types of ship designs and fleet compositions: Fast, lightly armed raiders for disrupting trade and supply lines, slow troop transports/bombardment groups designed to fight planetary sieges, and heavily armed hunter-killer groups that track down and destroy enemy fleets. All these features would encourage more ship designs, more thought about fleet composition, and emphasize different strategies and philosophies on waging war.
Trade: In the predictions for patch 1.3, it was said that npc ships moving in between planets would add life to the game world. While this is an excellent idea, I propose giving those ships actual importance. Trade centers could be built either in star bases, on planet surface tiles, or asteroids. Alternatively, trade ships could automatically be generated between worlds producing energy and even automatically move excess food. This would improve the importance of blockades during wartime, as important food importing worlds could be cut off and starved out. Migrant populations could even be assigned these npc ships so that they could potentially be intercepted during wartime (should be a option to allow migration during wartime, maybe happiness hit to individualist pops)
This would lead to strategic decisions about how to wage war? Slog it out against defended perimeter systems in order to build up forward bases and supply, or boldly strike into the heart of enemy empires to disrupt trade and rob them of vital resources? There are the kind of decisions I think grand strategy games are built for and which players really crave.
Army/Invasion: Currently, this is one of the shallowest mechanics in the game but with a lot of room for improvement and depth. Invasions could be a built-in mini-game (as much as I hate that term). Planets wouldn't fall as quickly and armies would be tied to planetary tiles. Defenders without an army on that tile could still fight with the base population (with awful combat stats, but maybe improved based on traits). Different armies and attachments would be good at different terrain types and maybe buildings could add an urban element. This would force players to build different army types to go against different planets. Tile blockers could also be interesting here. Mountains could provide defense bonuses, active volcanoes and aggressive wild-life could inflict attrition. A combination of these features would make ground combat much more important. Invasions could conquer parts of planets but get bogged down in difficult terrain for example. This mechanic could also be used for planetary uprisings when some pops turn hostile and duke it out on the planet map. This would also give us the opportunity to have some neat 2d models for different army types. Simple mechs, hover tanks, or giant aliens would give a lot more personality to an otherwise stale part of the game.
Dynamic Planet modifiers: Something that could create a much more dynamic interaction and lead to a greater feeling of immersion would be to have planets develop their own modifiers over time. For instance, if a planet builds lots of ships, the populace becomes good at it and gains a modifier making building cheaper or faster. Another example would be that if a planet is bombarded or invaded repeatedly the inhabitants become militarized. Armies recruited here might fight better, or the population itself might become resistant to bombardment if every house needs a bomb shelter. This is already in the game with the static planet modifiers and I think those should have more flexibility, be able to be removed through technology options just like tile-blockers are currently.
- 1
