An awful thread for devs and no-devs to post their awful ideas for strategy games that will never see the light of day, etc.previous thread:>>2032893>Useful resources for making gamesFree icons: https://game-icons.net/Free HQ textures: https://ambientcg.com/Kanban for organization: https://www.kanbanthing.com/3D modelling program: https://www.blender.org/Pixel art editor: https://www.aseprite.org/Image editor: https://www.gimp.org/Vector editor: https://inkscape.org/Map editor: https://qgis.org/Game engine: https://godotengine.org/Music composer: https://onlinesequencer.net/SFX generator: https://elevenlabs.io/
With ChatGPT it is effortless to create the game of your dreams now.I am using Grok AI for the image generation and ChatGPT for the code and I have made more progress than ten years of solo dev times.ChatGPT is a genius level multi-Phd Einstein at your command. If you do not use it... you are a fool.
>>2322499It has taken me years of experimentation and reflection to consolidate my vision for the type of game I want to develop. And the previous /asd/ thread helped me to ground things, hopefully these threads can help to other anons as well. Another thing that helped was writing and documenting ideas in a game doc.Either way, I'm proclaiming my intentions here, so after 200 days, people can mock me for not having anything to show.My game will be called: Apparent PotentateIf everything goes as planned, it will be a character-based strategy set in an original fantasy setting (with no magic).I'd intend it to be something like 20% CK, 30% M&B, 25% IMP, 20% ROTK, 5% Sengoku RanceFocus will be on the character system and the simulation of generational evolution, and not on military conquest.A lot of the game will rely on appeasing the nobles, and my biggest challenge will be making that aspect fun.The player's goal in this game will be to fulfill their character's dreams. Which might or might not be fun, the point is that is that character's personality will serve as a sort of thematic mission system.
This will be the year
>>2322522I find that grok is good for making new art with text only and chatgpt is good for editing existing images.
if you're gona use ai, don't be tasteless: learn to use stable diffusion or the like
the pendulum is swinging away from ai novelty in my humble opinion. whatever is 'handmade'. however crappy, is still readily identifiable
that said, i feel like i need a UNIVERSITY COURSE to use inkscape properly. send prayers
>>2323766No, you don't.Inkscape is very simple if you have used other vector programs like Illustrator before.
>>2323832Honestly as an Illustrator enjoyer I tried Inkscape once and found the UI quite confusing. They should have just copied Illustrator's UI instead of being special snowflakes.
>>2323954What is confusing about it?
>>2323958The layout's different.>but we don't want to copy Illustrator!!!!!!When something's an industry standard that people are already used to, you follow the existing layout instead of moving shit around for no reason.
I have begun work on my 'dream project'. Something I've wanted to play for a long time, but doesn't really exist or what does doesn't scratch it.It's intended to be "Fantasy XCOM Enemy Unknown". With some inspiration from Chaos Gate, Warcraft 1/2 and a lot of autism.You have a roster of mighty Heroes from across the realms, gathered to fight some imminent great threat that is prophesised but not yet known. Sending out parties of Heroes to deal with threats, and investigating to see if they're linked to the big bad prophecy.The meat of the game should be the combat so I'm working through that first. Trying to get a basic demo of the combat systems done to playtest a bit, and get feedback. Better to do any radical reworks now, and having a strong idea of how I want most of it to work will inform how I design campaign mechanics if I get there.Presently, units are implemented in a basic state. Initiative works, units can be selected and perform basic actions. The most basic mechanics for attacking are in. But I still need to adjust how they work, add a lot more information to the UI, and setup a super basic AI for the enemy side before I could call the bare prototype playable.
>>2324078Interesting, so will units have different weapon masteries?E.g. polearms, sword, dagger?Or were you thinking of more ranged fighting?
Do you sometimes have moments where you wish you had an ideas guy at hand?Being my own ideas guy is hard. I have even started using ChatGPT for brainstorming purposes.
>>2324255brainlets are ngmi
>>2324255Absolutely notI have the best taste and ideas in the world
>>2324180>Interesting, so will units have different weapon masteries?Yeah. I don't know how much weapon choice there'll be, but it will be a bit class / hero locked.IE, a ranger can equip a bow and a longsword. Or a shortsword and torch instead of the longsword.But a Paladin would get say sword and shield, or a greatsword, with no option for ranged weapon.I haven't sketched down every weapon I might want to / not want to include yet. Just have vague ideas of who should be using what.Melee combat will be a big part of it, ranged is more of a backup option for some characters.
>>2322950After about 3 days of work, all I could implement was the skeleton of the caravan system.The idea of the caravan system is that caravan agents will move between settlements.>They will buy certain goods from a settlement and sell them in another>They will also pay toll for every settlement they enter>If the settlement's happiness is low, some of the local pops will join the caravan and depart the caravan once they pass by a settlement with high happinessSo, in other words, the caravan will serve as "bees" that spread resources around. They will be the essence of the trade and migration system.The way the player interacts with the caravans will be indirect.The speed of travel will be based on the quality of roads that erode over time, so roads require maintenance. Poorly maintained roads mean caravans will move slowly, making the distribution of goods difficult.The second matter is the highwaymen. If the settlement has high poverty, highway will spawn on roads near it. The robbers will demand high tolls from the caravans, diminishing their ability to spread resources. Therefore, the player has motivation to clear the highway men out.Probably should come up with another way to interact with them.Either way, the next step is developing the goods/food system.
>>2324370A video of what I have at the moment.
>>2324370Would be interesting if different weapons like polearms had different attack ranges.But then again, I dunno how it would work with a tile-based system>>2324408Already quite promising. Something that comes to mind is elevation. Have you considered it?
>>2324414>Have you considered it?A tile can be elevated which may disallow attacking from down below to the tile.But there won't be height levels and tiles under tiles and such.
>>2324414>Would be interesting if different weapons like polearms had different attack ranges.>But then again, I dunno how it would work with a tile-based systemHaving 'reach' weapons isn't too complicated.Orthogonal movement is 1, diagonal movement is 1.5.Set the reach, the weapon can target out to it's reach value. Picrel is 1.5 range, 2.5 range and 3.5 range.If something had a range of 1 it would be unable to hit diagonals.
I'm using Godot, and every resource I find online explains how to make units using the engines built in physics, while in the same breath saying you should never use physics for more than 100 units since it will not perform.What is the correct way to implement ~1000 2d units?
>>2324612The correct way is to make your own custom physics engine: one that will cut corners heavily to handle only what your RTS strictly need, foregoing fancy stuff like stacking concave crates and shit.That said, even Godot *should* be able to handle a thousand 2d physics objects, unless it's even worse than I thought.Did you try? Premature optimization is the mother of time-wasting, at least with tech you don't already master.
>>2324612Are you trying to make an RTS?Do you need physics?You could likely easily code whatever primitive collisions you may need and the movement of units yourself.
>>2324612Make what you want and then if you really need the performance you can make scripts using C++ instead of GDscript.
>>2324255No, but i have moments where I wish I had a programmer on hand. Ideas come naturally to me and i can tolerate art, but programming is like pulling teeth.
>>2324723I had over a hundred so I guess it can work but it feels bad. It's too smooth.>>2324770I don't need physics, I am just not sure how to make my own collision system that updates in real time.I have made so far>Tilemap with unwalkable tiles>Units path on the tilemap with astar in 8 directionsWhere I get stuck is that at the moment, my units can all occupy one tile. I know I'm supposed to keep a dictionary of tiles, and mark them as occupied or not, to determine the "collisions" in a light way, but I don't know how to do that when all the units can move and also if I order a unit to a tile that becomes occupied before they arrive how do I keep them from spazzing out
>>2325028Every unit needs to mark it's square as occupied, astar needs to know the occupied squares.When a unit goes to move it should check if the tile ahead of it is occupied.If it is it just needs to regenerate it's path, and go back to following it. It won't spazz out if it's target tile is occupied it'll just end as close as it can to it.If you wanted performance astar doesn't even need to know occupied tiles. You could write a simple 'bump' algorithm that tells units what to do to try to get around.Or have an astar that doesn't respect occupied tiles, and one that does. The unit main path comes from the one that doesn't. If it bumps it looks for the next tile that isn't occupied and asks the one that does respect occupation how to get there.This is simpler than you're thinking it is.
>>2325054I think I see what you mean but how can units bump each other if astar doesn't know the tile is occupied by another unit, and the occupancy determines the "collision"?And how should it handle an edge case like two units trying to enter one tile at the same time?
>>2324021Adobe already threw a tantrum back in the day when GIMP looked somewhat similar to Photoshop. That's why GIMP now looks and feels completely different.That being said, I like Inkscape much better than Illustrator. Less buggy, too.
>>2325084>like Inkscape much better than Illustrator. Less buggy, too.Agree. Another reason I like it is that Inkscape feels more lightweight
>>2325028>>2325066A* by itself doesn't really expect this kind of crowd problem. You need to make two separate systems: one for "normal" pathfinding, and one for what is called "local avoidance" (generally some boid-ish algo). Regular pathfinding find you a path from point A to point B, local avoidance try to make everyone dodge each other without getting too far from the intended path.Personally I use flowfields instead of A*, mostly because it scale way better when many agents intend to go to the same place (often the case in RTS), and doesn't need recalculations even if local avoidance tell the unit to make a large direction change.
>>2324401Just have the caravan system respond to a supply and demand market system. Have road erosion be real time and based on the physics of the activities in the environment. Have black market caravans that are run by the enemy, smuggling weapons into the hands of unhappy citizens.
>>2325084>That being said, I like Inkscape much better than Illustrator. Less buggy, too.I've had the opposite experience. Inkscape can't handle large files, such as my game's tile map.
>>2324401The goods system is getting bloated, and beginning to wonder if it is too complicated.So, for my own sanity, I'm trying to explain it.There are six raw goods>lumber>fuel (representing coal and firewood)>oxen (rep. animal resources)>wool>food>ironAnd two "refined" goods>clothes (made from wool)>tools (made from iron)Every site (aka. province/settlement) has a percentage of terrain. There are five terrains:>woodland>grassland>farmland>wetland>dryland>highlandEach site also has a population, and each pop contributes labor capacity, which is tied into the building system.Each terrain type has a building type that corresponds to it.Woodlands have sawmills that produce lumber and fuel.Grasslands have pastures that produce oxen, wool, and food.Farmlands have mills that consume oxen and produce a lot of food.Wetlands have crannogs that produce fuel and iron.Highlands have mines that produce fuel and iron.Buildings determine the number of pops that can work in the building and produce certain goods, but the amount of goods is still bottlenecked by the terrain.Effectively:>number_of_goods_per_month = Min(assigned_laborers, building_lvl, terrain)So, technically, you can have 100 wood mills and 100 workers, but if the site only has 50 woodlands, it will still only produce 50 lumber and 50 fuel every month.Production of refined goods requires their own buildings and transforms the goods into something else.Probably going to introduce more goods later (e.g. salt, weapons, stone)>>2325432>smuggling weapons into the hands of unhappy citizens.That is an interesting idea. But I mean, what would the difference be in caravans just selling them weapons? I guess the price?
>>2325575The player can ban trading items within the territory. Or set tarriffs. Rival states, factions, and independent traders will operate in the black market until unlicked via tech tree. It's a percent chance to create a caracan also participating in the black market, carrying extra untaxed (illegal) goods. Then the player has an expanded market/trade system to include this previously untapped space.The market size and shape could be a result of policies. You could start your own black market trades and bribe traders to break the laws of rivals. Trade guns into a populace and spread propoganda. Have them bring you sex slaves and have full penetration cutscenes picture in picture ai generated with your avatar. Dictate the trajectory of your kingdom from epstein island while banging kids! The real leader experience.
>>2325454Are you using Windows or Linux? I've made the experience that Inkscape runs much more stable under Linux (for which it was and is developed first).
>>2325575>too complicated>8 materials in totalthat doesn't seem complicated at all. not that it has to be, i mean look at homm3
>>2325777Keep in mind that average strategy game player these days is an inbred retard, look at Act of Aggression for example, there are two main arguments for why the game is bad the shitters have, first one is that it wasn't a Generals clone they imagined it to be, and the second one is that it has way too many resource types (3 types)
>>2325785i hear you, but that's a fast paced RTS, and i don't think people want too many resourcess in a fast(ish) paced strategy games. sure, there's cultures, anno, spellforce, the settlers, but most of RTS games have like what, 3 on average?is >>2325575 gonna be an RTS? i was under the impression it's gonna be a turn based gsg. also> average strategy game player these days is an inbred retardyeah, but you wanna make a game for a wide retard audience, or dedicated autists?
>>2325822The most alive and i think popular RTS rn is AoE 2 DE which has 4
>>2325785Your game look like a gsg-ish game, not a C&C-style RTS.People playing those are used to have way more resources types to juggle than just the usual 1-3 in regular RTS. It's fine because you have way more time to ponder resource management and other "bloat".
>>2325906I am not the >>2325575I am just anon voicing my frustration with the general degeneration of average player
>>2325584Limiting is a good trade, an interesting idea too, but I'm not sure if it fits the scale of the game.Initially, this entire resource system was supposed to be completely automated, but I thought players having control of labour and construction might be fun.>>2325777I guess I think it was complicated because the system is like a subsystem, the main gameplay would be revolve around characters like CK's.>>2325822>is (You) gonna be an RTS?No. GSG.
>>2325965gaming iq has declined, but does that really concern us here?>>2326023>No. GSG.then i wouldn't worry about "too many resources", personally, but you do you. for example, stellaris has 4 basic, 2 advanced, 3 strategic, 4 rare for a total of 13(16 if you consider metaresources). EU4 has like 30 trade goods. DF has a milion, just rock has like 50 types.just do what you think would be fun. you can have fun with 5 or 50 resources all the same.
What do people actually want from RTS campaigns? Story? Puzzles? Huge bases? Huge babes?What about commando style missions with a limited force and no building?
>>2326074>What do people actually want from RTS campaigns?Fun
>>2326054>EU4 has like 30 trade goods.Those don't really count because they are not stored, they are essentially just price modifiers.>>2326074Well, I have only played games in AoE and Stronghold, but the appeal in those games for me was the city-building aspect and seeing the game world changing, forests being cut down, etc.
>>2326082>Those don't really count because they are not stored, they are essentially just price modifiers.allright then, my bad. however i think my points still stands, partially.
>>2326074StarCraft basically did the perfect RTS campaign and it's the main reason it became the popular big one (its actual gameplay was kind of mid even at the time). Go play StarCraft and see how they did it.
>>2326074>What about commando style missions with a limited force and no building?Those are fine in *very* limited number, or as optional missions (in which case you can push it very far, see Dungeon Keeper's hidden missions).Otherwise you need to really design the game around it and/or go only half way on the "limited force & no building" like Warzone 2100 did with it's non-homebase missions.
>>2326074Not so much story, but memorable characters. The story only needs to provide a loose context for why you are fighting Orcs today, Humans in the next mission, and Humans and Orcs in the finale for example.Missions variety is always good too.>Standard build and destroy>Deathmatch where you start with lots of money and infrastructure and go wild>Gather X amount of money while also having to spend it to expand and fight>Defend a spot for X time>Dual base mission where they are cut off from one another>Commando/micro mission with fixed forceI'm not a fan personally of the mixed missions where you start out doing commando fixed force shit then you take over a base and it becomes a standard style build and destroy, it just feels tedious to "start" a new mission type mid mission. I'm sure you could mix and match within that small list and get some novel ideas, for example:>A defend mission where you also control a fixed force across the map which is intended to be your reliefOne of my favorite RTS missions of all time is True Colors in the Zerg Broodwar campaign. The Zerg are betraying their Protoss and Terran allies, but they don't know it yet. You get ten minutes or so where the enemy bases don't muster any defense before the alarm is raised and the AI activates, so you can rush one of both enemies or you can use that time to build up safely. It's a good twist on the classic "your ally is betraying you" trope where *you* are the backstabber.
>>2326074i wanted to answer this by writing down why i like specific rts games, and then i listed like 5 out of 20 i wanted and hit the post limit, so here's what i think i find important in rts games>gameplay smoothness - are the units reacting properly, is the game running nicely etc. the gameplay must feel "solid". i don't want to fight the ui, units, mechanics. i'm not a micro king but i'd like to be able to at least control my units properly>balance - doesn't have to be 100% balanced, look at marine vs zealot in scbw - it just has to feel okay>interesting gameplay - both stronghold and supcom are interesting, but for completely different reasons, "can build my own fucking castle" vs "look mum, 1000 units!". both are interesting>passable and readable graphics. a lot of rts games look too generic and too cluttered/unreadable>rule of cool - RA2 isn't a breakthrough in innovation, but it's a fucking cool rts. same with any dawn of war really, supcom experimentals>nice campaign - story doesn't have to be groundbreaking, but good enough. some missions i might struggle, it's okay. some missions i might steamroll, it's also okay. i want variety. also optional objectives. also not too many time limits>pacing - starcraft is fast, stronghold isn't. both are fine, as long as i know what to expect. i don't want to be forced to do "strategy X" just because>doesn't insult my limited intelligence - lets me figure out stuff on my own, i can always restart. also "emergent gameplay", as in something you see in pro rts play where someone figures out you can "abuse" some mechanic for some sick plays. this isn't something you can design thoughand most important of all>cool unit quotes when i click them a bunch of timesthis is MANDATORYthere's more but i'd require me to shit up the thread. notice i mentioned pretty much nothing about resources, unit limits, base building, game speed, victory conditions etct. worked in rts esports, for what it's worth
>>2326074>What do people actually want from RTS campaigns? Story? Puzzles? Huge bases? Huge babes?The gameplay and completeing the missions should be fun. Duh.Different people will want different things, look at the kind of game it is and consider that when making the campaigns. But campaign mode may not fulfill everyone completely.Campaign is for people to get 'hooked' on the game's mechanics and to understand what is fun about the game in a casual manner. If they want to play more they'll do comp stomps, multiplayer, custom games etc. But they won't try any of those if they didn't learn how to play the game and get hooked initially. Pretty much every largely successful RTS is known for it's campaign for good reason.Have a decent variety of missions letting players engage with different parts of the game sandbox. Don't overdo anything too limited. No build missions can be fun, especially if it's an introduction to how a special unit works. But if I'm doing a nobuild every other mission I'm gonna hate it.Try to encourage the player to be active on the map, and not turtle up in their base until they've formed a deathball. Part of that is adding useful things on the map, and making it possible for the player to feel like they can safely walk away with their army for a couple minutes without losing.Try to keep missions engaging as they go on. C&C does have good campaigns but it often has a big problem with frontloading difficulty, several RA2 missions are stuck in my mind permenantly for this. Where the only thing the player needs to do is figure out how to survive the super aggressive opening, and then they can macro up to a deathball and roll over the enemy base which poses no threat other than trickling units in after the opener.
>>232616The same unit combo should not be the optimal solution to every mission. This is partially game balance and design, but also mission design. The game should encourage me to use different units as they're introduced and different combos.Also never, and I mean NEVER EVER.Ever.Introduce a unit and make it bad for the mission.A unit introduction is a time to show how it shines and encourage the player to use it.Never ever should the mission it's introduced in be filled with it's counter and make it practically worthless to build.
>>2326023GUI stuff is taking more time than I expected.I was concerned it would look too crammed, so I spread out things to different tabs.Even though it still probably looks way too spreadsheety.Tinkering GUI is an endless time sink; better not get stuck on it.I have been thinking about the land conversion system. And concluded that having deliberate projects to convert land probably won't work the way I like.So, I have been thinking about buildings transforming land:E.g.>Site is 100% forest>The only thing the player can build is a sawmill>Every year, every sawmill converts 0.1% of the forest into grasslandThe only issue with this is that the world would eventually run out of forests and lumber.So, I guess I have to introduce a building like a "forester's lodge" to offset the conversion.
I've been busy, but have done a bit of work.Although honestly most of it has been rewriting some old functions to work a lot cleaner, and to be able to easily add elements that work like I want.It's a learning process.But I think, at least for a prototype, pretty much all the backend is in and now I just need to bring information into the UI so it's more clear what is going on.
Making a turn-based space 4X. Province management is the most developed part right now. It's quite complex, individual goods have different qualities. So the quality and price of the cloth is dependent on the quality of the cotton and the quality of the machinery you used to build the mill, along with whether the pop is a weaver or master weaver. Is this too complicated for people?Making the AI good at this is also kind of difficult, I'm finding that there's a single meta of 'get rich making high-quality goods and exporting' and it goes against the principle of different AIs having different gameplay styles. Or would nobody really notice, it'll need to cheat anyway to keep up with players?Also, how do people feel about a wargame minigame for planetary land battles, editing division templates like HOI4 but the formation actually matters, you move them around on the map like in panzer general or something? Will people just autoresolve?
>>2328474>Or would nobody really notice, it'll need to cheat anyway to keep up with players?there's a lot of cheating AIs in various games, it depends on the cheating really. if i play against a "impoissible AI" and it catches my dropship through fog of war, that's bullshit. but if it plays fair but gets more resources, eh, i get it, it's supposed to be tough>Will people just autoresolve?some people will. you have total war where the battles are extremely engaging and people still autoresolve in that game because sometimes you can't be botheredthe ui looks pretty nice.
>>2327538People always underestimate how much time rewriting functions takes, but it is kinda satisfying to make something clearer.>But I think, at least for a prototypeThat's a big step.>>2328474Very slick GUI.I do wonder what the purpose of having different food types like Grain and Meat.Do different culture constume different food? Like, if you havea culture of pops that are vegan they only eat grain?>I'm finding that there's a single meta of 'get rich making high-quality goods and exporting'Not necessarily a bad thing. But can't you balance it by making luxury goods more unstable?>Will people just autoresolve?I would. The entire appeal of GSGS is auto-resolves and does not require commanding individual units in battles, at least for me.
>>2328476I can give the current AI a 100 turn head start and still out-eco it by turn 180... Ironically both me and the AI are getting better at the game at the same time so it sort of washes out. I was thinking of handling the AI's incompetence by introducing innately stronger civs. You might choose to be some random adventurers whereas when the Holy Church of the Dragon Empire's extremely well-funded expedition also shows up, they're going to have an edge.Pic related is the AI player's anemic economic growth rate, by the lategame all it wants to build is schools but nobody is even rich enough to get educated...>>2328489The idea is that meat is a luxury resource. You turn a lot of grain into meat at the slaughterhouse, which can use up a lot of freighter capacity. There's a hierarchy of needs that starts with grain and then goes down through housing, cloth, fuel, meat, pharmaceuticals, all the way on to automatons at the very end. So as province prosperity rises and you get pops of higher status like professionals or experts they demand more luxury goods which ideally come from your own production (so you get all their money) or are imported from other sectors (which makes you much less money via tariffs/freighter cost).Also there's no dynamic prices, I thought it might be too complicated if there was a price-range according to quality and also dynamically changing prices. The poor AI will get even more confused... I might try adding it though since it does make sense.
>>2328905>when the Holy Church of the Dragon Empire's extremely well-funded expedition also shows up, they're going to have an edge.that's basically fallen empires in stellaris, kinda>by the lategame all it wants to build is schoolsi think you should look into some sort of state/decision system for this so the AI can shift goals or change direction when some elements are needed/lacking. quake 3 has a nice AI that makes decisions, written by the legendary mr elusive himself, rip. well, fps bots aren't really related to a rts ai that much, but it's an interesting system.
>>2328905>There's a hierarchy of needsThat sounds fascinating.Demo when?
>>2327246Think I might have gone too far.>Pastures produce rawhide>Tanners convert rawhides to leather>Cobblers will convert the leather into shoesThe idea is that city A can specialize in producing rawhides, city B in turning them into leather, and city C converts them into shoes.In theory, that would result in a supply chain.But I mean, I feel like most eco-sins don't bother separating rawhides and leather, but treat them as the same resource.
Any ideas on how to make terrain work for my space wargame? I have asteroids to take the place of forests, but other than that I can't think of anything. Do you think people would find lack of terrain boring?
>>2329393You could innovate and make the first ever strategy game set in multiple planets besides emperor of the fading suns (with their own map where you move units around)
>>2329406Actually kind of a good idea. If you treat space like naval battles and planets like land battles. If i did something like that it would be far later but I'll keep that in mind.
>>2328939Yeah I've got lots of work to do on the AI, right now it's only in a nascent state (doesn't do any research, doesn't expand after its first colony, doesn't do any internal politics, diplomacy doesn't even exist right now, can't build ships). But now I understand why it's so hard for 4X AI to be good, it has to prioritize between so many factors. Even with just one-province economic management and trading it doesn't quite know when to invest more into buildings vs workers, which buildings (cheap schools or expensive pharmaceutical plants?), when to export, when to get pops, when it needs more freighters... My idea is different factions can have their own goals, the Church wants to crack down on dissidents trying to escape, that's why they're here, along with proselytizing. So if you buy these (cheap!) pops to boost your population they'll be angry with you. But that's yet to come. >>2328992Still got so much to do, only just got ship construction working. >>2329393What is it they're fighting for? I have these multi-tile planets, only a few tiles are habitable so factions fight for living space. There are some iron-rich asteroids, rare resources like fuel, substrate, arable land. Black holes are also supposed to be important resource points that forces compete over. There are also trade routes to other sectors that need to be protected/raided (when I implement raiding), so position and proximity is important.I also have no terrain but I try to make up for it in spatial relations. Ground battles will have terrain be relevant though.
