|
Disclaimer: This is a partnered post from Starlance Studios, the developer of ZeroSpace |
On September 12 2023 09:08 Awrysight wrote:As someone who loves Archons, this looks like a really interesting faction. Show nested quote +Do we want merging to be done predominantly pre-combat (in some ways associated with production and planning) or
do we want it to be an active-gameplay ability and allow for decisions to be made in-combat (more adaptive). I think merging would work better as a pre-combat option, because if it is an in-combat feature, it feels like a single missclick could lose the player a battle they would have easily won otherwise, if it means merging (into or out of) something they really shouldn't in that situation. In addition, I have a couple suggestions regarding the base units and merging system that I believe would it much easier both to balance the resource costs for the units as well as to reach the desired number of units: firstly, you could make it so there is more than one unit option when merging the same unit combination, and secondly, not all "branches" necessarily have to reach the highest unit tier, especially if un-merging is a thing. As a random example, a 2 base unit system could look something like: U1+U1=T2A / U1+U2=T2B or T2C / U2+U2=T2D or T2E T2B+U1=T3A / T2C+T2D=T3B / T2D+U1=T3C This kind of system would also remove the need for a specific number of units to be gated behind any number of transformations, and instead allow that decision to be made as development requires. I also believe that having only a couple of merges with more than one option wouldn't be that overwhelming to players, and it's arguably better than having to manage too many base units or transformation tiers.
I think that our game has a lot of cool rules and systems, but each rule that isn't very intuitive to learn creates knowledge gates, it offers some immediate flexibility, but at the expense of complicating things unnecessarily.
I tend to favor the simplest solutions because they create the least unnecessary complexity or "clutter" - the more we can space we can save worth of clutter, the easier it becomes to design for cool and fun complexity (basically; 'good' clutter).
Now the choice on "how much complexity" or "what makes a mechanic / system worth it or not" is very much somewhat arbitrary, especially at this stage - that means we rely on our best judgements and go with them, luckily we're all mostly aligned on this front, that's why for example upon examination of the first 1 base-unit system, my thought is that it's not worth the complexity, even though it could work lore-wise and the system is not full of random roles, it's intuitive, but it complicates the economic management for Xol - this is ALSO not strictly bad, it creates a unique mechanic, but then it has other problems with scaling and we could keep going and solving for each problem, but each additional band-aid type of solution creates more and more complexity and there's no good reason, because the 3-base unit system elegantly solves for all - Of course I'm happy to be persuaded otherwise, if my team all thinks differently or see something I don't and bring it up, happy to be malleable or experiment with other approaches (but that is also development time).
Anyway I guess I'm partial to simplicity when possible, if you have ideas trending towards it and can think of simpler working system than the base 3 unit one, I'm all ears, that one's my favorite so far.
|
Merging with heroes would be awesome this faction is already my favourite
|
Very interesting and unique design, I'm looking forward to seeing more from the Xol
|
Really liking the new idea of merging units. I hope it works out well 
|
I like it a lot! I'm digging the style. To be honest, this is much better than Stormgate and the crap that they did around with "exclusively positive" people.
|
Really appreciate the insight on the current thinking behind the race's mechanics. It sounds challenging to implement and balance, but I'm wishing the team the best!
|
On September 12 2023 09:35 GTR wrote:
wasn't fitzyhere the guy who's shtick at mlg was wearing a helmet during matches?
yep, the helmet wearing, queen buildin, zerg gm
|
Really excited about this game - looking forward to playing all of the races. It will take years before a stable meta gets figured out, should be a really fun time!
|
Very curious how this plays out. Interesting and unique concept
|
Russian Federation11 Posts
So IGP has Xol, it's organic stealth-focused commander. ZS has Xol which is mechanical adaptive "robots". So now we need for SG to also have Xol, which in their case should be some aetheric creatures, because other archetypes are already taken
Kappa
|
Ambusher sounds a lot like a droideka. Can only be good!
|
This is really great! Best of luck! I hope I'm selected for an alpha key
|
Xol, the Phyrexian of RTS!
(phyrexian from Magic the Gathering)
Im curious about the visual design, becuase as humans we associate what we see alot. And its hard to break away from our human nature.
What im trying to say is, Im worried about how the designed "creature" looks on these pictures.
https://tl.net/staff/Waxangel/zerospace/xol2023_sept/2_XOL_Banner.png
https://tl.net/staff/Waxangel/zerospace/xol2023_sept/3_Xol_Concept_Banner.png
Very Simplified: They look human but with extra attributes. [like being robots or three legs] why would shape changing creatures look like humans? Human shape is not very optimized or effective many times.
Attempt To Explain: The first one seem too have the body parts we expect too see from a "humanoid" or human. like for example, torso, arms shoulders head and neck, the basic shapes at least. And i feel like creatures that morph or "shapeshift/changes shape" have so many opportunities too look different and unique instead of yet another "human-like self insert". And my feelings are that it is a more "boring" and "lazy" visually and design with the "modified humanoid shape".
The second creature look kinda like a 3 legged humanoid, with the differences being the "decorations" on it. And i feel like creatures that are non biological or "bio-metalic" should lean away from the "human like" aspects that we humans so often resort too when designing new sentient creature designs. Part of what I like and find interesting are the types of alien races inspired more by insects or aquatic creatures. Examples like: The Starcraft one Zerg, (SC2 have too many "humanoid" zerg in my oppinion), the Arachnids (starship troopers) and tyrranids from warhammer 40k. (I cant remeber many names for species, and all these 3 are insectoids with twists so they are bascially the same and are bad examples)
While writing this I started to wonder if shape and limbs or "mode of transportation" would be a cool way too differentiate the different tiers of creatures,
like for example:
T0 could be larva like or slug like,
T1 could be bi-pedal
T2 could be quadrupeds
T3 maybe serpentine or legless
T4 Could be wheel shaped or use wheels
T5 "Hovering" or "flying"
T6 Tank tracks similar
and so on.
there is many possibilities and I am eager to see more of the Xol's
|
Having most units build by merging is a very interesting concept and i like the idea of allowing them de-merge, but i see one problem with that. Generally speaking air units should have less combat power for their cost than ground units, due to their ability to bypass terrain, but xol would be able to create air units from ground units, fly somewhere (eg enemy base) and then have the units become ground units again. with base 3 system the only way to prevent air/ground transformation would be to have 2 out of the 3 base units be fliers to begin with. Have you thought about the issue and how to address it? Though now that iv said it, i realise im not even aware if you guys are planning to have air units in the game in the first place
|
Reminds me of the Goo. Seems interesting, certainly more interesting than the first 2 factions you've revealed.
|
Xol is kinda reminding me of Mass Effect reapers aesthetics wise.
I love it, can't wait for 4th faction reveal 
|
3 base unit system definitely looks the best balanced and tactically flexible.
If merging with normal units will exist, maybe it would make more sense not to infuse heroes with normal units, but instead use the hero to empower a selected normal unit to provide them with a unique ability, depending on a hero-unit combination.
It could be funny to give Xol a bunker-like defensive structure, that would be augmented with different units which will not just sit inside and shoot, but become a part of the structure itself.
And as to how merging units should be organised, I would say that it should heal units in the process, but not be possible while in combat, cuz that would 1) create a lot of weird micromanagement focused on merging units in the last second, and 2) unwanted midbattle mergers due to a missclick would be such a frustrating issue. And the latter is also why I'm sure that separation whould be free, and (near)instant. "You accidentally pushed one button and now the game is ruined" is not a good thing to happen.
|
I thought about this today a bit and the 3 unit system is the easiest to do. T1 - 3 units, T2 - 3 units, T3 - 3 units. As the crown could be T4 unit merged from all 3 units from T3. It can solve problem with unit count.
|
The really cool thing about this proposed base3 system is that it allows you to be really creative with unit archetypes while being precluded (for the most part) from falling into the cardinal sin of a unit that has all 3 archetypes (offensive, defensive, utility) at the same time - the queen is the most glaring example of this.
It does seem like for base3, though, y'all are looking at not having self merging - i.e. if there are 3 base units A, B, and C there would be no BB unit, just AB and BC. From an aesthetic perspective, it seems like units that merge together should share characteristics - a defensive unit and a spellcaster should probably be a defensive spellcaster, or something like that. Having self-merge might allow for a bit more specialization in some ways - maybe an AA unit is effectively as strong as 1.5A but you save some supply? Certainly could lead some balance issues, and potentially expands the number of potential units significantly, but it does potentially provide another lever to play with?
|
This is SO cool! If you guys pull off even a tenth of what you're envisioning with this race, I'm going to be extremely impressed.
I wonder how Xol are going to work with mercenaries though... It'd be awesome to see them absorb aspects of the merc faction they're with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
