The Future of Supreme Ruler Development / SR Next Generation

General discussion related to the game goes here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Post Reply
Rosalis
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 233
Joined: Sep 07 2019
Human: Yes

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

Post by Rosalis »

sulley wrote:
Jun 26 2020
dax1 wrote:
Jun 26 2020
sulley wrote:
Jun 25 2020


[...] the player to decide, and not the developers.[...]
what u mean??
Simply this: the player should have autonomy and the developers should therefore limit, where possible, game mechanisms that infringe on that autonomy unnecessarily. This is something they have nailed throughout their games and in my opinion, forms the core of what an SR game is.
Yah well as you can see in the linked topic, there is not much left of the autonomy of naval borders. In my opinion they didnt nail anything. So what are your ideas for an solution? Or you dont care and just want to annex your neighbours 1 by 1 and only use alliances for exploitation? If the whole community thinks thats the way, i guess im the one wrong here and we just keep seeing our ships getting sunk in naval borders for SRNG, atleast i do.
SGTscuba
General
Posts: 1985
Joined: Dec 08 2007
Location: Tipton, UK

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

Post by SGTscuba »

Proper carrier/amphib landing/paradrop/missile support within proxy wars
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:

http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040
SGTscuba
General
Posts: 1985
Joined: Dec 08 2007
Location: Tipton, UK

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

Post by SGTscuba »

A way to decide which consumer of a resource gets priority on goods in case of a shortage. For example I might want my military to get oil first, then industry goods then civies for example. It would help when you start as a country and end up being cut off/the world isn't producing enough yet. Maybe this could also be used to provide a way of building up a resource reserve at the expense of civilians but would come with a happiness penalty perhaps (as well as losing on the sales).
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:

http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040
ArthurDesmond
Warrant Officer
Posts: 38
Joined: Jul 14 2020
Human: Yes

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

Post by ArthurDesmond »

I know it would be extremely tedious, but where possible real life pictures of the available units and a brief IRL description of them. And a sortable encyclopedia of all units in the scenario. I often have no idea what I am building and am just going by pips and year. I love that SRU has obscure garbage cold war Chinese tanks, but a simple black and white photo or artist rendering with a few words about uses or gun caliber would do wonders for immersion.

I am sure that by most laws these ancient images of Cheng Kai Sheks knockoff SPART would be in the public domain m
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20519
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

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

Post by Balthagor »

We would never be able to get consistent quality images across all regions, all units, all eras.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
ArthurDesmond
Warrant Officer
Posts: 38
Joined: Jul 14 2020
Human: Yes

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

Post by ArthurDesmond »

Balthagor wrote:
Jul 21 2020
We would never be able to get consistent quality images across all regions, all units, all eras.
I understand, and that creates a problem fot aesthetic regularity, but even if it was a 'mod' due to problems like that I would prefer it immensely. For example, I'd rather have a fuzzy photo of a Yugoslav bomber next to a crisp Blue Angel's photo than having no idea what this plane is supposed to be.
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 »

How are things going when it comes to the next generation of the game?
Will we see anything on that issue this year?
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20519
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

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

Post by Balthagor »

Nothing about the SRNG timeline that I can share.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
User avatar
CertainDeath
Sergeant
Posts: 18
Joined: Jul 18 2020
Human: Yes

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

Post by CertainDeath »

Kristijonas wrote:I think it depends on what technologies we believe will be there in 20+ years. If we are not talking about revolutionary innovations that would make space travel easy, then more or less same limits would apply as they do now. I personally do not know why warplanes do not fly very high (what makes their altitude limited) (except for thin air) but maybe someone knows why, and that would help answer the question.
For another game i learned a lot about aviation from ww1 till modern day, and one reason why planes in modern combat szenarios tend to fly ultra low instead of space high (which would be prefered in a ww2 szenario, the higher you are the better) is missiles and the fact that space/the sky is cold. if youre up there, there is litterally no way to hide you from heatseeker missiles (even if you are in a stealth plane, IR could see you up to 40km+), your basically dead when it comes for you. On ground level you 1.) are detected much later and 2.) your countermesaures combined with higher surface temperatures of the planet as visual background of the missiles seeker gives you more likelyhood to decept or evade.
So beeing able to kiss the ground while flying, and beeing a low flying aircraft of any sort should add to your stealth and defensive values (more or less... a comanche is less stealthy then the german eurocopter, which is designed to work from behind cover with only the rotor tip peeking to observe enemy)

From game design perspective, the question if we wanna keep the low/mid/high altitude classifications? Yes we want. But may i suggest changes?
low/mid/high should not be fixed unit stats, but mission parameteres that not all aircraft are able to fullfill... f.e. eurofighter can execute low to high altitude attacks. the eurocopter can only fly low to medium alt missions (medium would be suicidal if the enemy has aa capabilities... but against primitives like Islamicstate you can do that to improve your helicopters sensor & attack values).
  • When choosing low altitude mission, your unit gets additional stealth value multiplied on top of its existing value, but its own spotting stats decrese drastically. top speed goes down by a margin (heli has to fly from cover to cover, plane has to contour fly valleys etc)
  • When choosing medium altitude missions your spotting value is the best, you may get bonus to attack values as well, as your ability for delivering precise strikes increases + you are flying more efficient = more sorties in shorter time.
  • When choosing high altitude missions your spotting stat decreases (if you wanna recon from high alt, you need specialized equipment on the plane to overcome issues to see the enemy), your stealth stat decreases, and initial your speed is lower, as the aircraft has to climb. But you are out of range for simple aa missiles and guns.
When units deploy or going to land to refill, they start low/have to get low, and need 1-2 ticks to reach their altitude.

The AA Systems should also keep their different attack (and sensor) abilities against different heights, so that not every equipment fullfills every niesche. LR AA should not be effective against low flying targets, at least it needs external radar guidance to track low flying targets over distance. Also the damage a LR AA does to high flying aircraft was ridicilously low (in SR 2020). as with many stats, this needs balance fiddling, but thats not prior concern.


Balthagor wrote:A 3D map is not something we have the resources to create.
I strongly agree with the voices calling for a 3d projection of earth.
What ressources would be needed? do i need to buy the game before release as a kickstart? 50€? Im in. How many of these packages do you have to sell to do it?
I think when we invest early in such core concepts which will define the games borders, the game can become more popular afterwards, you could first concentrate to provide us a stable working basis, and pre release it as beta with not all content in it, but only one well balanced and playable campaign + sandbox (quality content), so you get income of it, and the players will know that stuff is going on and be forgiving about initial lack of content?
If you create a solid basis now, it could generate income for a dozen years. 64 bit allocation, multi core usage, 3d map projection, deep modability + a souber+clear and informative user interface (the patchwork one now is no way near modern standards) + as said one polished timeframe capaign+sandbox is a very solid basis to sell the product and has a lot to offer for additional content (so a lot of further business opportunities). New campaigns could be sold as addons, while financially providing for free extra content like advanced sandbox start options (as many here tend to like sandbox games), or delivering the basis for side projects as a political simulator (which some guys seem to wish)

As i know, that with a small studio it would be too much to create a whole 3d battlefield with that amount of units etc ... so i would be 100% fine, if we place 2d stuff etc on top of a 3d sphere playing ground for the beginning.
the hex system also works perfectly fine as a 3d surface!
this article may be interesting for inspiration: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/467 ... gonal-grid
There are programs, codes which can produce such surfaces too.
So basically all the effort to create a sphere shaped hexagonal playing ground is to do the math for a decent size and hex count (or use thumbs with 3d editor^^), and getting the best satellite image we can get onto this surface? Camera should be easy, as you move the object and not the camera, object always faces north, and you cant turn over the poles to make it even easier.
So the creation of such a Map is not a real problem... i guess you could contract a person for 500 dollars to do the 3d object and the texture for you. tip of the zuckerberg would be when we could get hands on a decent world heightmap and overlay that globe with a heightmap (have to be somewhat heigher then in proportion, cause in such a scale real life proportion mountains would be barely noticeable. but one has to be careful to not overdo it or it will look like comic picture).
hell i would love to help edit map/hex properties, if thats whats holding you off (i sadly cant create the sphere itself, at least not without doing research), together with doing research on real world ressources and population, i am cheap :D i know nothing besides some modding for my personal needs, but i am smart enough to learn.

Is it way trickier then i think, cause the AI would not work anymore, or what is the issue? Cylindric maps are so 20. Century :P :D Lets make SR Next Gen, not SR U+
ok... excuse me... i have finished, sorry for that all rambling, i may got a bit overexited
evildari
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 501
Joined: Aug 10 2017
Human: Yes

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

Post by evildari »

One can get high quality "satellite" images even of non-terrestrial bodies as far as pluto for free (well your own pc, internet-connection and time not included)
https://astrogeology.usgs.gov/search/results?q=MAP2
For Height map information look for the term digital elevation model (DEM)
Iam pretty sure there exist even better quality imagery (although not as free) for earth too.
Although a sphere would be just better than flat earth - potatoe fits better.
my mods
http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=25932 (even techs and units for everyone - AI will own you too)
http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=29326 (MARSX2)
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 »

The influence of an economically and militarily superior country. Looking from World War II the influence in the military and technological development of a country that is in an inferior influence by the two bipolar countries in this world was mostly enjoyed by the countries that classified those countries in their scope of influence. This is noticeable in the example of Israel, Turkey, Japan, the former Yugoslav countries, the former Eastern bloc ...
The future of technological development should be sought in the direction in which the country is moving. Special attention should be paid to the situation in the world.
in peacetime the country will turn to its allies for the advancement of military power for greater social benefits.as we can see with the American and Russian air programs.
In a situation of total aggression the countries will be turned to themselves and their capacities. which in research concepts should be decent. Bespite broken alliances, my side of sympathy is on the side of the victors in World War II.
This does not mean that I think that losing countries should be inferior to the winning side. But only if you look through their view of the technological aspect that you are affected only by the countries of that group, no one from another group. It would be best to look at the equipping and development of a single country only from its perspective.
this means that the choice of development units should be such that it should be interesting to play with each country that can be played with. and not to make countries crippled in the choice of development units.
User avatar
CertainDeath
Sergeant
Posts: 18
Joined: Jul 18 2020
Human: Yes

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

Post by CertainDeath »

Better User Interface Layout.

This is just a proposal for making better UI Layout, quick and dirty, not much detail.
In the suggested Layout all most critical informations are always on your screen, while compressing the interface to be compact and informative.
everything you see is information, no useless decoration like headphone jacks to distract your view.
with the conserved space, we are able to add further information onto display, without taking away more screen space.
Colours shoud be clear and not blurred grain, to add to readability.
I have not made new icons or colour layout, but for easyness just copied existing stuff and stuck to the given colour pattern, to not make it look odd. i am sure the colour pattern is further improveable, to look more clear.

Image

all country critic informations (menues, statistics, message board) can be found on top left corner
all unit critic info on bottom left (while managing your unit menue you can easily have eyes on the minimap, which also will alert you bout critical war related stuff)

this gives you space in between this 2 window blocks to show a lot of information on user request, like statistics, build menues, lists of tech, units, whatever,
while most part of the screen still shows a coherent image of the main window with map and everything, even if you open all the menues!

Image

I have not rearranged the old units managment window, just removed spending and ministerial control settings from this segment. there is sure a lot of possible improvment in this window.
Same as i have not rearranged the menues below the country stats.

Where i am uncertain, is if its better, if the map centers to the middle of users monitor, or to the middle of the space between right edge of menue area and right edge on monitor.
i noticed that it sometimes feels a bit weird, when having a menue open on a whole side of a screen, but the map on the other side centers around the monitors middle, instead of the "new" middle of the map area.
SGTscuba
General
Posts: 1985
Joined: Dec 08 2007
Location: Tipton, UK

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

Post by SGTscuba »

Supreme Commander 2 had a feature where you could place an automatic transport point with a pick up and drop off point and then assign transports to it. You could then tell units to go to it or assign deployment locations from barracks to automatically use it.

In SR I think this would be great for long range deployments of units on completion or moving a large reserve around on a start of a war.

The transports could probably benefit from having a day delay on arrival before moving back out so they pick up as many troops as possible, and also units should be able to stack up ready to be moved.
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:

http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040
SGTscuba
General
Posts: 1985
Joined: Dec 08 2007
Location: Tipton, UK

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

Post by SGTscuba »

More worldwide units to help out minor countries if they advance to become major powers. Extra units could also help to pad out the tech trees for these countries too. This becomes quite noticeable for the defeated nations of WW2, but also to other countries that are independent in the CW/2020 sandboxes.
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:

http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040
Nerei
General
Posts: 1126
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

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

Post by Nerei »

Knowing BG if they add fictive vehicles we will get stuff like the Sd.Kfz.25 "Kuh", Panzer IX "Ente", Jagdpanzer XIV "Hund" or say the J-97 Shinhoto Chi-ha III for our 1950's fictive vehicles.
That said if more fictive units are added I would hope we get more region groups so it becomes less blanket designs and more specific for each region.
Right now a significant problem I have with the game is that beyond a certain point when the regions become sufficiently blobbified their main defining character is the unit list and making everything more or less identical erases this.
Also from a personal perspective more region groups means more options for regional textures.
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion - SRUltimate”