Quotes/citations would be good.
I don’t remember reading about stations/outposts and I’m pretty sure the resource system and modding will be part of a stretch goal rather than in the minimum spec.
I’ll remove that one and add notes on the stretch goals, have no idea why I have them remembered…
/edit
Date of the kickstarter?
I found the station reference, that it will be destroyable and that it might be ~30km in size.
2 Likes
A great … “research” 
First of:
3 Likes
Can I suggest adding links to sources on the list?
eg
- At least one station, destructible and possibly ~30km in size [source]
1 Like
Doesn’t describe scale. Lacks the word “Solar system”. I don’t really have a good alternative. I guess “Solar system wide multiplayer focused space fighter combat”? Still gives the impression that it only involves outer space combat. Is “Interplanetary” a word?
Only describes environments with different game mechanics.
Just pointing it out due to the amount of “space shooters” that have popped up years since Battlescape was announced. Most notably due to the amount of failed ones.
Oh buy new ones. At first I thought buy existing ones. Like neutrals.
2 Likes
Alright, added solar system with POI and free roaming as stretch goal.
Battlescapes vs Whole Star System
Not sure what you want me to state for atmospheric/space combat though.
Only mentioned atmospheric/space combat because they don’t convey scale or transition between the two.
Now that I think about it “interplanetary” is most definitely a known term. “Interplanetary space combat” is almost perfect, but still lacks direct involvement of planet surfaces. Anyways I am probably looking too deep for a short description for Battlescape.
The reason I’m so picky about it is that around every month I check the Video Game campaign projects on Kickstarter. If the description doesn’t grab my attention I don’t even check out the main page. The last space combat sim campaign from now was launched on around 13 May and is called Project Orion with the description:
A first-person space combat experience featuring epic large-scale battles, an in-depth story, and extensive ship customization.
Doesn’t rise up as anything unique to me with hefty promises from a student project, that hopes to release the game in two months.
1 Like
Problem I see with interplanetary is that it implies free-roaming and it looks like IBS will be POI based.
As for atmospheric, I think seamless might fix the subtle problem you have with the term.
For an instant, I thought it was a campaign for reviving the other Project Orion. Now that I would have backed without second thought!
1 Like
“Will have,” seems a little confident.
While much of what we’ve discussed we’d like to include, the features you’ve gathered thus far are dependent on the funding tier we reach (as others have already pointed out)
“Could have” would be more fitting, as the details could change as gameplay testing and balancing comes into the picture.
@cybercritic It’s good to have this information all in one place 
thanks!
4 Likes
And of course space whales.
https://www.google.com/search?q=space+whales&sa=X&biw=1360&bih=657&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&ei=aQNlVa6AMvHfsAT4uIHIAg&ved=0CB0QsAQ
This is a joke, only a joke. Please return to the commonsense portion of the expected forth coming game.
3 Likes
Nice work there! That will come real handy when answering new comers
4 Likes
We’ve been told that Battlescape will be like the ICP but with a larger arena so we should be able to assume that some features of the ICP will carry over to Battlescape:
- 6DOF freedom of flight with full newtonian physics model.
- At least four strengths of “blaster” weapons.
- At least one type of missile weapon.
- Shields that prevent hull damage until they are depleted.
- Locational component damage with ability to disable individual weapons, thrusters and other components.
- Locational hull damage so that individual parts of ship such as wings can be destroyed (was in ICP but not confirmed for Battlescape)
There are also some features of the ICP that I expect would be redesigned for battlescape and unlikely to be carried over in their original form, they include things like bounties, resource collection and the method of docking with capital ships to resupply,
2 Likes
That was only on one ship iirc.
1 Like
At least two ships had it, the Varden and the one that Kaboom made. It shows that the feature was implemented, even if not utilised by all ships.
I noted that it was unconfirmed because I’d be surprised if it was worth the effort of implementing in Battlescape. It was nice that it was there in the ICP, but if you lost any of your wings you were effectively dead anyway.
1 Like
3 that I can recall. Walrus, Varden, Lancet
Screenshot for reference. 
3 Likes
Those ships still look good today…
I’ve added the features @Crayfish mentioned as “inferred from ICP”, also looks like devs don’t have much problem with that post, the more info the better. 
We might have a damage skin/decals, but I doubt a very complex damage system (mesh), especially for the min funding.
1 Like
Given that, as Crayfish said, losing parts of your ship is deadly crippling, it’s not a feature that would be really missed, gameplay-wise.
It would certainly nice and immersive to have ships breaking apart when dying, though.
1 Like
A lot of thing$ would be nice.
6 Likes