Infinity Battlescape: Metagame

Hmm, I wonder how that would work.
Many possibilities and problems could come from this type of game. I have a bunch of questions, and Ill just lay them here, even though @INovaeKeith probably wont be able to answer 99% of them.

  • Will there be more than 2 teams?
    • Are there fixed factions/teams or will there be some type of free for all server where any number of corporations meet and try to win?(just like @TerranAmbass just described)
      • Will players be able to choose between a faction/team when they enter a server, or do they have to choose one faction and stick to it until the server resets?
        • Will servers ever reset?
  • Are these “factories” that the teams aquire, assets that actually make the team better in combat(better ships, weapons, respawn times)? Wouldn’t that result in a disadvantage to the losing team, making it harder for them to turn the tables?
    • Or are these factories just like control points in a type of conquest mode, where the team with the most factories for the most time wins?
  • Have you considering the “moving battles”(see 1- below) that were discussed in the old forums? Or any other type of battles besides just “here is a factory/station, capture/destroy/defend it”?
  • Will maps consist of multiple stations/factories/bases designed to attract players, with the rest of the map/system still accessible for people that want to just fly around or hide(or do non combat jobs)?
    • Have you considered the non combat jobs to be aiding in the war, just like those capturable/buildable factories, resulting in a new gameplay element of players hunting those miners/whatever to prevent them from overpowering the enemy? Or maybe a trading/pirating type of deal?
    • Have you thought of ways to avoid all 100-200 players from just massing on a single point on the system creating server issues? Or to prevent them from just spreading out and not really fighting(just exploring for fun), resulting in one team losing because a bunch of their members where goofing around?(Which is a possibility considering the real scale of the system, noobs, and the beauty of the procedurally generated planets/etc).

1- Which basically revolved into a battleship or dropshipt of some kind moving towards or away from a location, passing through multiple places(like the surface, planetary rings, then a moon) while the ships fight around them.

Aaaaand Im late for class… :clock1:
Those are a few of the questions that I have right now, but since that is already a lot, and some of them don’t quite make… much sense on their own… Ill just leave them here and come back tonight. :wink:

2 Likes

You can use < and >

<a<b<c>d>e>

1 Like

So as far as i understand so far each “server” in IB will pretty much be like a game of Civilization? While there could be a couple hundred players on each server we all will start out small until someone gets big enough to stomp on everyone else and he is declared the “winner” and the map (star system) resets.

You’re focusing on the wrong elements here. The “factories” mentioned will probably be a very small part of the gameplay, and base building/managing will most likely be extremely simple, if not automatic.

The game will most likely(Im guessing here) be similar from start to finish, with the only difference being probably the equipment you can equip your ship. At first maybe everybody gets fighters, then as you get kills and/or your team captures points and the factories get built(automatically, probably) you would get points for better/bigger ships and gear.

Civ Space shooter? That would be awesome.

The way I see I:B so far is basically Guild Wars clan battles in space, but 10x more complex (which is always a good thing :smiley:). I can see how you would associate it with Civ though. Using a similar interface as Civ for planetary interaction would be a really nice feature, since I doubt anyone would want to use a ship to place objects manually.

I agree and disagree.
I agree that base managing and building will most likely be simple, but bases and factories could create huge focal points in battle. For example: a fleet is on the verge of defeat, and retreat to a planet they’re using a base of operations. The opposing fleet thinks they can dive in and finish the battle. Little do they know, their enemy’s base is heavily fortified. Caught off guard, the opposing fleet is wreaked by ground turrets, allowing the weakened defenders to fend them off long enough to repair their ships and turn the tide of the battle.

This seems more like a LoL style of game-play. Not to say I don’t enjoy that kind of game, but I don’t think it really fits I:B. I feel like it would be more appropriate to allow players to earn “cash” through their actions in each match, and use that to upgrade and buy new ships in a hanger outside of the match. Then when joining a game, a matchmaking system could balance out the numbers of higher level ships in play on both sides.

The game is still being designed so none of the following is an absolute. The final design document will be presented immediately prior to the Kickstarter being launched. Playtesting will determine a lot of what the final gameplay looks like so even what’s in the KS design document could change before the final game is released. Lastly everything below is assuming we reach all of our stretch goals. The minimum gameplay for I:B will be very simple if we don’t raise enough money.

No

At the moment the plan is just for 2 faction/teams. We want to allow modding if we raise enough so that opens up all sorts of possibilities and of course there’s always the potential for DLC.

Yes, you can choose and the server will likely auto-balance. The server will reset when one team wins the game.

The current plan is that each team starts with a pre-determined number of factories and space stations. Factories generate resource points over some interval X that are evenly distributed amongst the members of the team. Resource points, which can also be acquired by killing bad guys like in CS (maybe also through healing team mates like in battlefield?), can be spent to buy better ships, equipment, build more factories for your team, or build space stations (and possibly associated defenses?). Space stations come in 2 sizes: large and small. Small space stations can only spawn small ships like fighters and bombers. Large space stations can spawn both large capital ships and small ships. We’re still discussing the possibility of having land bases alongside the space stations.

Yes and players can build new/more stations/factories/bases. The game will have a sandbox mode so ppl who just want to fly around and explore can do so on their own terms without being a hindrance to their team mates.

The game will have non-combat support roles but I can’t provide any additional info on those atm. There will be no pirates or traders as the economic model will be very simple - you collect resource points and you spend them. Perhaps we could allow giving some amount of your resource points or equipment to another player but we currently have no plans for any advanced form of trading.

We fully intend for all 100-200 players to congregate at a single point - how else are you going to have massive space battles? We also hope players will be able to break off and do their own thing like take some of your buddies and do a strategic strike against a cluster of factories that the opposing team thought they could hide on some far off, obscure moon. For those who like to explore they can do scouting missions to try and locate enemy installations for their team mates to attack. We want to be able to accommodate a number of different play styles =). By allowing players to be able to build factories and space stations themselves we hope that will create areas of conflict that will provide players with new and interesting objectives.

If we only raise the minimum KS we will provide the objectives ourselves and the game will be far more repetitive =(.

8 Likes

Thanks Keith for all that information!

For anyone wondering what kind of games are simmilar to the description of Keith, try Planetside 2. It plays quite simmilar, just on the ground.

Sounds good to me. This is pretty much what I suggested on the old forum.

1 Like

Thanks a lot keith, that sounds great. :smile:

The only question I feel wasn’t answered was this one:

1 Like

I’m not entirely sure what you mean by “moving battles” and, well, the old forums don’t exist anymore :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

We’ve talked about them on the old forums. … :stuck_out_tongue:

Pretty much the objective moves so the battle arround/about it has to move too.

Some examples:

  • A capital ship moving to: Attack a Space/Ground Base, Flee, Reinforce a fleet battle. :rocket:
  • A resource rich (Ancient)Freighter / Asteroid deorbiting.
  • A BIG BOMB/MISSILE shot from a attackers base. :bomb:

This forces people to fight while the environment changes around them. Experiencing that what makes the I-Novae engine unique: Transitions.

According to that description we do have moving battles. Players will be able to build factories and stations wherever they want thus creating new locations for conflict. If a player buys a large capital ship that ship will obviously be moving around and the opposing team may want to use a focused strike to destroy it.

1 Like

So many lessons can be learnt from that game I feel, I do hope though that Battlescape will allow for a more dynamic strategy game to play out, rather than having to follow such set paths, while still allowing the new/more casual players to jump into the action and not be too lost as to where to go / what they should do to help.

If the game has the tools to allow those who what to command to be able to make plans and set objectives for those who want to jump into the action, it could be pretty epic.

There won’t be any set paths and figuring out how to make it easy for new players to jump into the action will be a big part of playtesting.

Well, sure, battles can move naturally, but that would be the exception. Most battles would stay focused around a single point(the factory/station).
The idea was discussed so that the interest point that had to be defended would move automatically by the server, be it a wounded npc capital ship that had to be escorted, or a fleet of drop ships that was moving to capture a target. That way you could start a fight on the surface, transition to space, maybe to an asteroid ring, then fight in open space, and maybe even on the surface of a moon, for example. The outcome of the battle(capship destroyed or saved, for example) could then result in extra resource points for the winning team. These could be special event battles, that could actually be triggered by player actions.

Since the winning team(with the most factories) would have an advantage due to having more resources/gear, turning the course of the game would be hard for the losing team. Maybe those special events could happen favoring the losing team, giving them a chance to acquire the resources to try and capture some factories to even things out a bit.

Having the most factories won’t automatically mean you win. If your team spends all its resource points all at once on factories there’s going to be a period of time where you can’t afford more advanced ships and weaponry. That would give the opposing team an opening to come in and destroy all those new factories. The server will only determine the starting location of the initial set of stations and factories. After that players will place them and they have the freedom to place them wherever they want.

A team wins the game by completely destroying all of the stations of the opposing team so that they can no longer respawn.

This isn’t really on the topic of “metagame” but…

I STRONGLY suggest against using auto-balance. It divides up the people who want to play with each other and lessens the team-play experience. Yes, this might lead to some unbalanced teams, Yes something needs to be done to keep things fair, but taking the easy way out by splitting up friends who want to play with each other is the wrong thing to do.

I thought it was discussed on the old forums that you would gain money by playing the game, then you would buy a ship out-of-game using said money, then launch back into the game with your ship using some sort of battle-value system? I may be mis-remembering though. Actually, I might be thinking of Star Citizen. Who knows anymore.

1 Like

If some sort of squadron system is implemented, auto-balancing can be done in a way that doesn’t split up squadrons, corporations, or registered player groups. That would leave the auto-balance to deal with the “independents”, or people who have opted to have their squadron or IPO affiliations ignored.

4 Likes

Looking at the metagame you intend to make (if stretch goals are met), there are strong similarities with Allegiance : building factories for spawning and/or more advanced ships, ultimately building capships, mining resources, varied places of interest separated by long distances…
I’m pretty sure some evoked Allegiance in the old forums, but I’m curious. Did you play it, or was it an inspiration? While their servers are alas quite empty today, some people are still playing and refining it more than a decade later, so there are probably interesting things to learn from it.

I have never heard of Allegiance, I’ll have to look into it.