CSC America

[george moromisato]

In the 2014 Annual Report I talked about the concept of CSC America. I'd like to expand on it a bit here and get people's ideas, suggestions, and wishes.

CSC America will be a real-time strategy game in which you command a Commonwealth Star Carrier and its retinue of gunships. Like any RTS, you'll build new units (on the carrier and/or on allied stations) and will order your units to perform various actions: attack, defend, mine, etc.

The "twist" in the game is that the units you command will have their own motivations and desires. They will perform best when your orders and strategy align with their desires. In some cases they might even refuse to follow your orders. Unfortunately, you will have your own set of orders (from Admiral Decker) and sometimes those orders will conflict with your crew's desires or even welfare. How you deal with that conflict will be a major part of the game.

I don't yet know exactly how this game mechanic will work. I think each crew member will likely follow certain archetypes: some will be looking for glory (most enemy kills); some will just want to make it home (least risk); some will bond with their crewmates (leave no unit behind); some might have a strong conscience (don't hurt civilians); others might be more amoral (raid friendly stations if it helps the war).

And I expect there will be friendships, cliques, and rivalries (and maybe even romance?) among crew members. These relationships will interact with the archetypes. For example, similar archetypes might band together (and be more likely to disobey orders if given a chance to unite).

Individual units will react to tactical situations based on their archetype and relationships. For example: Unit A is getting attacked by a squadron of Sandstorms. You (as the captain) order Unit B to engage the Sandstorms. How will Unit B react? If A is B's friend, then B will head straight in and fight. It might defend A even without your orders (abandoning previous orders, perhaps). But if B doesn't like A, then maybe it will take its time or just take pot shots from a safe distance. It might do the same if B's archetype is to take the least risk (and then feel guilty about it).

Of course, the crew's attitude towards you will depend on your orders. In the scenario above, suppose you decide to sacrifice Unit A to avoid losing more units. Your crew might change its attitude towards you if A was popular (or part of a large clique). How the crew reacts will depend on their archetypes. If the crew loses respect for you, there is a greater chance that they will disobey or disregard your orders.

Lastly, Admiral Decker will put you in increasingly tough situations. Sometimes you'll have to raid friendly stations (the virtuous people won't like that). Sometimes you'll have to retreat from battle (the tough-guys won't like that). And sometimes you'll be ordered to sacrifice some crew members (no one will like that).

A few more ideas:

* Like Transcendence, CSC America will be moddable (using an extended, but fully compatible XML syntax). You'll be able to define your own ships, stations, weapons, etc. I'll (probably) introduce new XML types to define crew archetypes, etc.

* CSC America will probably be less open-world than Transcendence (at least at first). The first campaign will likely be a series of missions. Each mission will take place in a single star system. You'll have a specific objective (and in some cases a time limit) for each mission. The missions will form a story arc culminating in a climactic battle.

* Like a traditional RTS, however, you will have choices in what units to build, how to enhance them, etc.

* I would like there to be some amount of randomness in the mission generation. For example, the star systems will be (often) randomly generated as in Transcendence. Also, perhaps the missions themselves might have some random components.

* I would like the player's performance in a mission to alter the course of future missions, but I'm not yet sure how to do that (branching mission tree or dynamic mission generation).

That's my brief summary of CSC America. These are still rough ideas, so I can't promise that the final game will be anything like this. Tell me what you think and post your own ideas for the game. Thanks!

[JohnBWatson]

"The "twist" in the game is that the units you command will have their own motivations and desires. They will perform best when your orders and strategy align with their desires. In some cases they might even refuse to follow your orders. Unfortunately, you will have your own set of orders (from Admiral Decker) and sometimes those orders will conflict with your crew's desires or even welfare. How you deal with that conflict will be a major part of the game."

I like this. I've always thought about a game that did something like that, but I've never been able to find one.

The rest of the post is also very intriguing. I can tell that Downbelow Station was a significant influence here.

[Song]

Intriguing. Although I can't help but start shipping my future subordinates when I hear "some will bond with their crewmates". That being said, it would be interesting to have character statistics and attributes modelled (especially if this can also trickle into Transcendence at some point in the far future: RPG stats are awesome).


Two (EDIT: three) questions I do have:

1. In the vanilla game, CSCs are rather wimpy (largely down to how the AI doesn't handle gunships very well, plus the fact that the emergency defense TeV9's are...well....TeV9's. Not exactly effective against late-game enemies). Will the America itself be upgradable, or will we simply have to look after it really, really carefully to stop anything getting close enough to attack it?

2. Will the game keep things simple (with factions other than the immediate enemy being mostly static), or will other factions eventually be modelled? So the Xenophobes will be flying around doing their thing, the Ranx will be messing around doing whatever it is they do, and the Gaians are adding insult to injury by harvesting the wreck of your Aquila squadron? This could be interesting if other factions tried to take advantage of what is going on to advance their own objectives, although it's definitely a lot of work. Edit2: Tying the strength and behaviour of the rogue fleet in with the players actions would also be interesting.

3. In the vanilla game, the fleet is severely hampered by the hit detection problems that plague radius and proximity-based weapons, while the Ares equivalents (looking at you, micronuke and warhammer) don't get affected by these bugs to the same degree. This makes the fleet's heavy hitters (the NAMI heavy on the aquila and the NM900 missile pod) less effective, and their main defense weapon (the NAMI mine launcher) virtually useless. Will this be taken into account with the balance?*




*This is way too early to ask this, sorry. But from experience with the fleet weapons I honestly think this will be a serious balancing issue...fleet nukes just do not do damage to large targets.

[bzm3r]

Most RTS games have a direct approach to command: the player commands every single unit personally ("micromanages").

Will CSC America break this trend and perhaps incorporate some "order of command"? So, the player commands a few high level officers, who in turn command pilots. The player does not have to have direct control over the pilots (but perhaps might do something like that occasionally), and instead would generally be more focused on managing officers?

Anyway, CSC America will be challenging in terms of developing suitable/capable ship AIs -- exciting!

[SolarGalaxy]

Would it be possible for your pilots to become better in skills and accuracy as they sortie more?

I also think it would be neat to have a diagram of the interior of the Star Carrier. (Possibly could be the interior dock screen)

One more thing: Would it be possible to encounter a pilgrim at some point in the game? (Chances are that you won't get to micromanage him just like our player characters taking fleet missions. Also he may take all the loot)

[Song]

Will CSC America break this trend and perhaps incorporate some "order of command"? So, the player commands a few high level officers, who in turn command pilots. The player does not have to have direct control over the pilots (but perhaps might do something like that occasionally), and instead would generally be more focused on managing officers?

This could be interesting if combined with a morale system (like X-COM or Xenonauts have) where people will flee from battle if things go appallingly wrong (unless they have traits that prevent this, or someone else has a trait that is influencing them to stay, or they have no option but to fight, etc), or a trait-based system like the original Valkyria Chronicles....where certain people will perform better in certain roles or with certain other people.

EDIT: The main problem with this is that it creates a disconnect. One option might be to have a "bureaucracy" system of sorts: You can automate a task and have officers do it, micromanage it yourself, or just outright command the thing yourself. A mix would be encouraged and the proportion of each that you do would influence your minions. However, that would be a lot of work.

[TVR]

Some ideas about the design.

Code: Select all

Potential Gameplay Modes:

Divided into Stages

Intermission Stage
	Turn-based, week-by-week
	Galactic map displayed
	Navigate between systems through gate network
	Split gunships between systems
	Obtain new ships, equipment and personnel
	Receive missions or launch scouts
	All operations optional

Operational Planning Stage
	Review Mission Details
	Review Intelligence Reports
	Refit Centurions
	Assign Duty Roster - Choose ships to deploy, Choose Personnel for each role in the mission, e.g. radar operator, gunship pilots, damage control team, marines, etc.
	Issue Standing Orders - Initial orders/objective that each unit is supposed to accomplish in the Operation Stage

Operation Stage
	RTS interface
	Issue new commands to replace standing orders
	Dynamic and unpredictable unit behavior, including enemy units
	Watch as the best laid plans fall apart
	All operations can fail without ending game

Debriefing Stage
	Distribute awards, promotions
	Recover wreckage, prisoners, wounded
	Conduct court-martials, interrogations and funerals

Mission types
	Investigate/Reconnaissance
	Direct assault
	Interdict shipping/Blockade
	Enemy ambush - Mission that automatically occurs if CSC is found in the Intermission Stage
	Defend colony
	Convoy escort
	Patrol route
	Supply run
	Raid/False-flag attack
	Capture target
	Diplomacy
	Special mission

Logistics
	CSC can only perform repairs and refits, possibly produce IAVs
	New ships need to be captured or purchased from friendly shipyards
	Need Rins to purchase ships, equipment and fuel

Personnel
	All personnel named
	Character-driven conflicts
	Semi-random named crew character generation
	Each Personnel has distinct traits, skills, XP levels and XP growth
	Recruit mercenaries, gangpress civilians
	Potential spies and saboteurs everywhere
	Crew loyalty mechanic
	Rational actor model - All Personnel have Interests, such as money or survival, that determine their behavior in each Stage

Loyalty mechanic
	Insubordination - Personnel will disobey orders if it contradicts their Interest
	Desertion - Personnel will leave if their morale is too low
	Mutiny - Personnel will revolt in dire circumstances, such as if suddenly ordered to self-destruct

War crimes
	No quarter
	Indiscriminate massacres
	Radiological weapons use
	Genetic weapons use
	Attacking neutral ships
	Abuse of protected markings
	Use of torture in interrogations

Military justice mechanic
	Conduct court-martials to punish disloyalty and/or war crimes
	Possible punishments
		Reassignment
		Corporal punishment
		Brig
		Demotion
		Execution

[pixelfck]

Nice idea. It kinda reminds me of a RTS (don't remember the name, sorry) where you had no direct control over your units, but instead could set 'bounties' (a number of gold pieces) on the heads of enemy units.
The friendly troops then proceeded to use the money they earned to buy food, drink and equipment which made the troops better and helped your economy (tax income) so you could spend money on building stuff and setting even higher bounties.

If your soldiers thought the thread of the enemy unit (say a two-headed giant) too horrendous compared to the bounty you had set on its head, they would just (largely) ignore it. Some units did however decide that an enemy had to be attacked if it was, for example, destroying their favorite tavern.

It may be nice to use some of this incentive building into your ideas.

Cheer,
Pixelfck

[Song]

It would be nice to have a Privateer unit in the game: randomly generated upon creation/hiring, with a setup that might be significantly better or somewhat worse than regular fleet units. They'd be a bit of a gamble, but could pay off at a pinch....like the way the CSCs in D&O recruit the player.

[catfighter]

I think it would also be nice to be able to buy reinforcements from stations. I would certainly help a lot.

As a multiplayer version, it might be fun to actually be the high-ranking officers and receive orders from an AI. Then multiple people would each get assigned a mission to complete or have to work together commanding their individual fleets. Of course there's bound to be conflicting strategies and mentalities, but that's another story...

[Song]

As a multiplayer version, it might be fun to actually be the high-ranking officers and receive orders from an AI. Then multiple people would each get assigned a mission to complete or have to work together commanding their individual fleets. Of course there's bound to be conflicting strategies and mentalities, but that's another story...

...So......Space Station 13, only in the military?

I heartily approve.

[bzm3r]

I think it would also be nice to be able to buy reinforcements from stations. I would certainly help a lot.

As a multiplayer version, it might be fun to actually be the high-ranking officers and receive orders from an AI. Then multiple people would each get assigned a mission to complete or have to work together commanding their individual fleets. Of course there's bound to be conflicting strategies and mentalities, but that's another story...

Oh god. That would not only be amazingly fun, it would actually be groundbreaking. I don't think there's any other game like that. Was CSC America ever meant to be multiplayer though?

[sun1404]

Since I heard this will be made on the Transcendence engine, I think it'll be best to place it fully in the Transcendence universe, with systems that are just like those generated in Transcendence. With basically everything you can see in Transcendence included. Maybe your CSC should start a stage at a stargate, and have to move to the designated mission location. You'll also meet Xenophobes and Gaians, Ringers (which you can hopefully trade with), maybe even Pteravores and pilgrims.

As for the mechanics, maybe units must be requested from the main command (Decker or someone) and transported to you as your carried force diminished. Equipment and items too may be bought at stations or bought from the main command in bulk. (Maybe you can order standard items like Tev9s and NAMI launchers from Decker, but need to find rare items, like Mark VII howitzers, in local stations?) Then you'll need to think about protecting ships equipped with rare items, which would be a great help in battles, but also a great loss if destroyed.

Also maybe you can occasionally call for Aquilae reinforcements? Those ships can't be stored on a CSC right?

[catfighter]

That's about what I had in mind and each commander would use the new point-and-click mechanics to direct their personal squadron from the normal view.

[Song]

Maybe you can order standard items like Tev9s and NAMI launchers from Decker, but need to find rare items, like Mark VII howitzers, in local stations?) Then you'll need to think about protecting ships equipped with rare items, which would be a great help in battles, but also a great loss if destroyed.

It is a sad fact in vanilla Transcendence that Decker is too cheap/too poor/too poorly supplied to get the standard NAMI launcher. The brits use the NM900 pod...which is rubbish (XM900 is bugged against big stuff, and the NM900 has both a small ammo pool, and cannot swap away to the KM550 to do damage against large targets).

Also maybe you can occasionally call for Aquilae reinforcements? Those ships can't be stored on a CSC right?

Yeah, they're too big. I'd definitely love to see them turn up a few times though. Compared with the Ares ships they're not very good (mostly because of that annoying fleet reliance on buggy radius weapons), but they're still really awesome ships.

Especially if we get to select their missile loadout. Mixed S3 and M5 barrages would be pretty neat.

------------------

Edit:

In terms of weapon selection stuff, if the decision is made to allow unit customising (which may not be good, depending on balance requirements), then the current dock-services dockscreen would definitely work well as a selection system for customising individual ships....it's very similar to the XCOM/Xenonauts style of thing. Making us value individual units is probably quite important given how short on resources the Fleet is...we should hate losing ships, especially when we've put a lot of time and resources into the crew and equipment.