[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/vst/ - Video Games/Strategy

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: timthumb.jpg (86 KB, 902x488)
86 KB
86 KB JPG
Space combat:
>pew pew lasers
>long range missiles
>at same tech, whoever brings more ships wins

Fantasy combat:
>infantry
>archers
>cavalry
>flanking
>damage magic
>debilitating magic
>boosting magic
>summoning magic
>unique units that offer unconventional tactics
>at same tech, small numbers can defeat much bigger armies

Is it just me or is space combat far less diverse and interesting compared to fantasy or even historical combat? Is there a space game with a deep combat system?
>>
>>434283
eve
>>
>>434283
eve
>>
>>434283
ES2 had, as far as I remember, low, med and long attack and shields, armor and point defence for defence. End result was calculated throught some sort of black magic and fuzzy logic,
>>
>>434283
Aurora?
>>
>>434324
imagine actualy believing it
>>
>Is post gunpowder combat far less diverse and interesting
Yes.
>>
>>434283
I think it has more to do with the fact that the traditional battlefield (as in, a flat plane) is a well-studied meme and has been the field of arms evolution for thousands of years.
It is more familiar than space combat which not only is mostly fiction but also is often modeled after naval combat in the open sea which in turn is not particularly diverse either (boils down to a hilarious race of rock-paper-scissors between Speed, Range and Stealth).
>>
>>434521
>>434508

Yeah that's what always irk me about space combat, its modeled from naval combat in the sea which is not really a good representation considering the advancements that a space fleet would have (i dont even think a space fleet would be a thing organization wise), its still fun though but when people call trash a combat system thats already cartoony as shit in the premise idk what to think about, all space combat in games is trash because its based on naval combat on fake premises

the fact that some people take space combat in the naval format as something serious is funny
>>
>>434622
I think the last thing you would do in space combat is cluster shit all together
>>
>>434622
considering space is full of magic invisible jelly the naval combat is a pretty good approximation
>>
>>434283
Sins.
>>
>>434283
>He doesn't play 4x space games exclusively for the masses of pew pew space ships.
>>
File: gigachad.jpg (61 KB, 1122x900)
61 KB
61 KB JPG
>>434283
>enemy fires pew pew lasers
>we block with our superior shields and fire our superior lasers
>enemy fires long range missiles
>we block with our superior point defense and fire our superior missiles
>enemy crushes us anyway through greater numbers but is horribly damaged
>our next fleet with superior weapons finishes the rest off

endless space is probably best example because of the balance between different weapons, counter-weapons, and battle actions
>>
>>434283
Try Children of Dead Earth
Its more light superspeed jousting



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.