The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

General discussion related to the game goes here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by milivoje02 »

What do you think about putting a few units of the US Army at the beginning of the game (World 2020) in Germany, Italy, Bosnia, Kosovo, Poland, Romania. Because there are permanent NATO crews of US army in those countries.
SGTscuba
General
Posts: 2033
Joined: Dec 08 2007
Location: Tipton, UK

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by SGTscuba »

From Discord:
Fitz wrote:for future titles would it be possible to make it so you could choose the amount of missiles you would like to produce? If I wanted 500 for example I'd have to hammer my mouse 500 times, being able to type 500 or press control + click and do in quantities of 10 would be cool?
Also from discord:
Vandaydar wrote:I'd like to see a "build until" option to maintain stock levels
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:

http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20583
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by Balthagor »

Rosalis wrote:
Mar 05 2020
I dont care much for new features. Most important thing for me is love for the scenario. If i look at 2020 SRU campaigns all i see is neglected regions, cant even call them countries. Lots has happened irl, nothing has been drasticly changed besides some pictues of leaders. Economy has suffered because of older scenarios. Besides US and Russia world is hurting to compose a balanced military. So one feature request would be countries which import mass ammount of units get the design or a black market kinda thing where you can buy units. Also world need to be balanced, pretty boring if everyone join US sphere. Every time i play a new game, i want to see new things happen, not every game everyone joining US sphere. Because Russia, China, North Korea are declaring wars and honor the game, US sit in america doing nothing, and if it does something its annexing america. Everytime someone declare war, the other side should declare a war on someone too, no political bias, just keep it balanced. Smaller regions should focus on strengthen alliances cloose to them. That's main issues in my opinion.

Anyway good to hear you guys have future plans after the space game.
@Rosalis - I wanted to ask a bit of clarification on your post. You said "scenarios" but I wonder if you mean Sandboxes? In the terms we've tried to establish so we don't confuse ourselves, we see them as follows;

- A sandbox is a set starting point, few events, free play moving forward. Play from any region, play as long as you like.
- A campaign is a set starting point, play from one specific region, events attempt to create a story narrative to follow leading to a win/loss condition.
- A scenario is a fix historical of fictional event, play from a region related to the event, short time scale to reach a win/loss condition.

I know some of our implementations don't meet all these specific criteria, but I'm trying to restate our design goals moving forward. I'd like to know which of those you play most/value most.

Same question to anyone else too I guess...
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
User avatar
Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2282
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by Zuikaku »

I mostly play sandboxes and I do care very much for new features.
Please teach AI to liberate and colonize instead of only annexing!
SGTscuba
General
Posts: 2033
Joined: Dec 08 2007
Location: Tipton, UK

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by SGTscuba »

I like sandboxes. Some of the economic items could do with adjustment though.

But I also like features. SUT features :D
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:

http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040
Rosalis
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 248
Joined: Sep 07 2019
Human: Yes

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by Rosalis »

I like the sandboxes in SR2020, where you dont know what you can expect from friends and foes. They are called scenarios there. Just a few well known alliances on each side, each time you start a new game there is a change the alliance get dissolved, which gonna result in broken sphere where allies have to choose who they wanna keep ally with. For example in 1 game Canada doesnt want to work with US and dissolve all treaties at the start, then Japan, Australia, etc. might have to choose. Go for trade and prosperity or trust uncle Sam will save them. The bigger you and ai get, the more your allies should be wondering if it is profitable for them to continue the alliance. Trade embargos could take a role here. Both for fixing bad relations during a game aswell as strengthen your own alliance boycotting the enemy of a certain resource. For example Ukraine is first ally of Russia, all of sudden Russia want to strengthen the naval base production because it faces UK and France on an earlier war and declare war on Ukraine, then enemies of Russia should be mostly open to welcome Ukraine into their sphere, especially since it got alot to offer in terms of materials and lots of territory to bring problems for Russia. As soon 2-3 alliances are formed, the rest of Russia allies should dissolve their treaties with Ukraine if they have any left.

Right now, believe me in my mod i made tons of alliances and during the game i make even more, but relations have to have full bars in both diplomatic and civilian before the ally sends help to the region right next to them with a land border. Its too much relations based, not what the region actually need. Ofcourse Poland, Germany, Czech, etc. will try to help Ukraine in my example, cause after Ukraine they are prolly next. If an ally doesnt send help 1 way or another, relations should take a hit. At minimum you can give military goods for a good price or give a few spare infantry units. Im all for AI cheating a bit, like it can scan how many units a region has, so it can make better descisions.

I dont like the campaign in SRU, nothing is happening till the player does something, it is too predictable.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20583
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by Balthagor »

Rosalis wrote:
May 26 2020
..each time you start a new game there is a [chance] the alliance get dissolved, which gonna result in broken sphere where allies have to choose who they wanna keep ally with. For example in 1 game Canada doesnt want to work with US and dissolve all treaties at the start, then Japan, Australia, etc. might have to choose...
This is a design I believe we will be reviewing. Personally, for our next game, I'd like to see more of these "choices of allies". We'll see where the design takes us.

Here's a question - we currently allow you to be allied to two regions at war with each other. I remember in Total War games were you were force to make a choice and stay allied with only one. Would that be more realistic for our games? Better for gameplay? It's been considered before but I think it will get discussed again.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
User avatar
Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2282
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by Zuikaku »

How about declaring neutrality (not connected with spheres) with costs and benefits. Neutral country can be in good relations with everybody and trade with regions that are at war with each other.
Please teach AI to liberate and colonize instead of only annexing!
Rosalis
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 248
Joined: Sep 07 2019
Human: Yes

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by Rosalis »

Declaring neutrality? I mean that didnt work out for Netherlands in WW2. Earned alot of money in WW1 tho. Maybe its a status you can earn when a war is declared and you have good relations with both. Then when the war is over you loose the status. It would actually be a good way to fix some stuff in proxy war situations, no troop crossings in neutral regions.

So for example if someone declare war all regions with alliances get pulled inside it, create a bar with war progress, participation, etc. At the start the region with alliances on both sides, get 3 options, claim neutrality, or break relations and treaties. There might be issues with alliances still figting in the war on each side, but that change gonna be alot smaller. Then when the war starts troops in neutral territory leave the region as neutral.

Worth opening a new topic or not?
Rosalis
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 248
Joined: Sep 07 2019
Human: Yes

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by Rosalis »

I know its a good suggestion, but to keep everyone speechless?

Playing older scenarios i faced lack of dynamic changes. Polution, refugees, climate change, pandemics, etc. any plans for this to suport the requests of revolts? Or trigger population growth and loss in certain cities/regions? I dont know how you would do it, but its kinda needed without throwing the main focus of the game away. They are serious problems, prolly more then facing the risk of being annexed. Now this isnt really supreme ruler like, but yeah just thought i would throw the ball.
For example US has tons of medium consumer goods all over. In the 2020 economy of SRU they are totally obsolete and US is better off scrapping it all, but wouldnt it be logic to spread the jobs so "populations" does not need to travel hundreds kilometers to work and transport all the goods for hundreds of kilometers? Or if you provide jobs in a certain region it will attract more population to the cities. In short a better representaion of population, starting with population casulties in war.

Here is some inspiration to model the problems the world faces, and no its not just corona.

MEGACITIES of the World (Season 1 - Complete)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ULzxD3w_c8
haiswell
Corporal
Posts: 8
Joined: Jun 10 2020
Human: Yes

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by haiswell »

What about create a Central Bank/FED scheme (including a full currency system)? Sometimes, when you make something wrong, you become unable to create bonds; but you are able to do it if you put a 20% interest rate, for example.

If you have this system working, become possible to connect inflaction and government spending, all more logical. And you add an important option to financing wars and huge spendings programs: create money but face inflaction.

You can think it would become too much complicated for the user, but in general, if he do nothing, all the things will converge for somewhere and stay there.
kkania
Lieutenant
Posts: 92
Joined: Nov 14 2010
Human: Yes

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by kkania »

1. Move away from the hex system - with the current unit data, it’s perfectly feasible to run the game on a fully vector-based map. Vector data for the whole world is freely available and includes anything from roads and rail, through terrain and elevation.

The inspiration here is CMANO, but there are other fun games out there doing this, like Logistical, which allows you to set up truck routes on OpenStreetMap data.

With real-world data, I can imagine a scenario where you’re taking out enemy bridges with your air units to stop their supply, or set up on ridges to control a road through a valley. Urban areas would become more varied and irregular.

AI would probably have a really tough time with this, but the game would shine in multiplayer - pair this with an IGYG (I go you go) turn system, where players issue orders simultaneously and progress time in 1 hour increments… mhm, I’m salivating.

This, of course, is way beyond the possible, I think, so the next ideas assume a hex based system.



2. “Indestructible” ground units - there’s a disconnect now between when a game shows a tactical abstraction (ground units), a concrete piece of gear (ships and missles) and something in-between (air units).

Ground units should not disappear off the map when they’re destroyed. We’re seeing a theoretical representation of a few hundred men and gear, and when that unit is destroyed, it doesn’t, in reality, cease to exist administratively.

A ground unit, when it becomes empty of combat-capable elements, should automatically retreat to the nearest barracks and begin reinforcing.

The ground unit reinforcing process should consume more resources the more depleted the unit is, to represent the challenge of recreating the unit’s structure and officer corps, as opposed to a unit replacing minor front-line losses.



3. Re-work the air system - right now, air units are more like ground units, and they should be more like naval units in some aspects. Generally air gameplay should be its own thing.

Every piece of air gear should be represented individually (like the bigger air units currently are).

Air units operate on a different system than either naval or ground and they deserve their own representation. For air units (save helicopters) everything revolves around a base of operations (airport or carrier) and missions, which can be, aside from being ordered manually, pre-planned and continuous, but also triggered automatically.

Waypoints are a key element of an air mission. In its simplest form, a mission has a beginning, end and intermediate points. Air power is based around agility, and being agile, ei. coming over the enemy from a safe direction, can currently be only achieved by manual work.

A mission can be set to continuous , to reflect a regular patrol, as opposed to an impromptu interdiction mission. A mission can also be pre-planned, to allow synchronization with other elements.

Missions have different types of air units assigned to them. A single mission can have both interceptors and bombers, with the interceptors set to only acquire air units, and bombers focusing on ground targets.

Another aspect for ground units is Zone of control. We sort of have this now with AA units that fire automatically at air units within their range radius. Airfields should operate in a similar manner, allowing the commander to set up a ZOC radius or area and assign air units to it. The size of the ZOC, air units assigned and their type, should be related to ZOC control efficiency.

Missions and ZOCs should be visible on the world map. Espionage missions on enemy air infrastructure should reveal enemy missions and active ZOCs



4. Re-work naval gameplay. Much like air, naval gameplay should be about mission planning, using a similar set of tools. Additionally, with submerged units in the mix, there’s a hunting element which should be reflected.

Naval gameplay is all about sensors and detection. While we have sensor information about every unit, we’re not seeing a representation of it on the main map. This has been implemented well in some hex-based games, like War in the Pacific.

Once a naval unit goes out of active sensor range, it’s last known position and direction, if available, should be shown on the map. Depending on sensor strength and unit experience, the trace information could be more or less accurate. As time goes by, this trace becomes grayed out more and more until it disappears.



5. Supply and development - right now, the concept of supply is abstracted to the point it doesn't seem to work. Unit supply and Infrastructure should be two separate systems. Players should have the option to directly impact enemy supply routes.

Infrastructure and overall country development influence building construction rates and facility efficiency. It’s “delivered” like the current supply, via map hexes, and boosted by roads and some units.

Unit supply impacts ground military units’ ability to fight and is distributed from military installations by dedicated units.

Unit supply should be handled by a separate system. Logistic pool vehicles are assigned to follow “routes” the player establishes, to barracks and forward operating bases. These, in turn, have operating ranges that distribute supplies automatically to units in range, with falling efficiency the further you move away.

Enemy supply routes become visible via recon and espionage.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20583
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by Balthagor »

The next SR and GR will still be hex based. That decision has already been made.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
m04sWYEGzS
Corporal
Posts: 6
Joined: Jun 19 2020
Human: Yes

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by m04sWYEGzS »

Relevant games you should take some ideas of:
https://store.steampowered.com/app/553260/Realpolitiks/
https://store.steampowered.com/app/2824 ... m_Edition/

A 3D map:
A real 3D Planet as a map is by far the best thing you could do. It would fix so much problems like Russia being 3x it's size and units lost to the north/south pole. You could show satellites and make it possible to attack them. You could create moons and space stations. There could even be scenarios possible where you could have different civilizations on the moon and the planner with a space war between them. This way you could already lay the path for a remastered galactic ruler. Also real 3D mushroom clouds reaching into the atmosphere are great eye candy. If you ever played on a spherical map, like SuperPower 2, you will definitely miss it when going back to plain 2D.

More political power:
Realpolitiks and SuperPower 2 combined have all the political options somebody can dream of. You want to make a black supremacist country in Africa and oppress all those dirty white little ex-colonialists? You want to do the real stuff as Germany in WW2? You want to legalize gay marriage in Iran? You want to be the craziest and insane despot the universe has ever seen? This is a game, so why shouldn't you be able to do this? Make it possible to enforce your ruling in things like language, religion, race, sexuality, drugs, etc. Make the world as you want it to and live with the consequences of doing so. The harsher your reign, the more your country should hate you, (or love you, depending on your propaganda skills). Friendly annexing should also be possible (like in Realpolitiks). Finance those in favor of you, pull of some propaganda, throw a vote and you got some new inhabitants.

Dynasties:
Nobody lives forever and while the portraits of all my fellow 1914 starters are long gone, I myself still reign my empire in the year 2020. There should be a way to implement a family system, your child should be able to inherit your status or in a democracy flow as party leader. Also if you lose in a democracy you should be in the opposition and no longer able to control units etc.

Expand the time frame:
It would be great if we could play scenarios with the ancient Greeks or Maya. Expanding the time frame back to maybe 3000BC gives us incredible possibilities. We could skip the dark ages and all those throwbacks to maybe reach the tech level of 2020 already in the early hundreds after Christ. Fighting as Persia against Alexander The Great would be a nice upgrade. This is extremely elaborate so it shouldn't be in the base game, but laying down path to make it possible in future DLCs would be awesome.

Free region customization:
One time Germany received a slice of Russia in a way that I had two separate pieces of Russia without a connection between them. It would be great if after I defeated someone or with a treaty request/offer I could freely draw regions that will belong to me, I colonize and/or liberate. Same applies for the AI. Then I could have negotiated with Germany in way that they receive a part on their border and I on my border. Renaming countries, cities, regions, planets, moons and customizing your Flag should also be considered.

Expanded Minister AI:
All those politics, economy and military things are pretty elaborate and consume immense amounts of time, so maybe you should upgrade the minister system to a point, where you can more or less ignore whole sectors of the game or even let things evolve on their own. If you enable all assistance, the game should be able to play itself, not necessary win but play. You could try to balance this with the option to assign ministers from a selection of persons. They'll die eventually, you execute them, they retiere or my even oppose you later on for your decisions.

Realistic upgrades:
Researching something and from one moment to the other it’s there. Every unit just simply swapped their bolt action rifles to assault rifles in an instance. It’s pretty unrealistic to research one thing and BAM! it's implemented for every single unit on the whole planet even, those stranded on deserted pacific islands. Maybe unit upgrades should only be performed when a unit goes back to reserve and is repaired or stuff like this. Same applies for other upgrades, I research the fridge and BAM! every single person in the country has one? Maybe the benefit from it should increase over time, after 5 years we can assume, that most of the population has a fridge and therefore the whole benefit is applied.

Better Settlements:
Currently I have to build some center like military, industrial or agricultural to create a settlement in a desolated place. There should be a way to simple found a city out of nowhere and attract popele to move in afterwords.

Unit type API.
The current engine has some unit type limitations. The Japanese and Birtish have submarine carrier units but they simply don’t work. I have to store the units inside the submarine and then have to release them afterwords. There is no real landing possible for them and I can only load them back inside if I have a dock with an airport. You should implement a system to allow more dynamic unit types. Like a zeppelin carrying airplanes in some steampunky scenario. Maybe only declare the elements a unit travels and things a unit can do, eg “drive on water+land and submerge in water+land”. Submerging and flying should also specify altitudes. Water bombs are useless if a submarine is a couple of km below the surface.

Building queues:
If I pause the game and build a whole lot of stuff, my economy will be destroyed. The game tries to build everything at the same time. Therefore there should be a way that buildings are automatically queued if a defined threshold of strain on the economy is reached. I also should be able to mange this queue to get some buildings done with higher or lower priority.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20583
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

Post by Balthagor »

A 3D map is not something we have the resources to create. SRNG will use a cylinder map again based on the same projection.

Your Build Queues idea has some possibilities, I'll make some notes.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion - SRUltimate”