Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Time for 3d Battles!

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Show only dev responses
T

Trexeth

Banned
4 Badges
Dec 27, 2013
72
26
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
ATTENTION!!! This topic is outdated! New topic is here:http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?744810-More-graphical-representation-of-battles

I no longer reccomend 3D battles, i reccomend 2D battles!!! (reasons are in replies)

all the important information and new ideas of graphical representation of battles are in that topic, NOT HERE.
(stop replying to this old topic, better read the new one).






If you still want to read an outdated topic, then here is the text:



Hello, i didn't put this thread in any game's thread as i think that it relates to all Global strategy genre games by Paradox.

We spend 100% of our time on campaign map and sometimes, it feels very dull.
3d Battles will make players to dream about battles and enjoy watching them, what will make the overall game play much more interesting.

I believe that Paradox should make a 3d battles engine, something like TW.
I think it would be a giant step for all Paradox games.

IMPORTANT: PLAYER DOESN'T CONTROL BATTLE (unless ruler is a commander). in 90%+ Cases it is AI vs AI.

War and battles are the most important factors in the Pre-21th century times. War and battles have always been center of attention of all historians. But in Paradox games i find war and battles quite dull.


For the 3d engine itself:
-You can issue starting orders, battle plan and formation only if you are general of the army. (So in most cases it would be AI vs AI).

The battle consists of 3 phases:
-Formation, each general puts his army in specific formations. Poor generals have worse formations than good generals (quite obvious)
-Initiation of movement and maneuvers and Countering of enemy movement of maneuvers. Poor generals would make easy guessed and poorly prepared maneuvers, while good ones will perform fast and unexpected ones.
-The final phase is the battle itself, generals have least of influence on this, and it will be simply the outcome of general's decisions.

Imagine what a thrill it would be to watch you army actually fighting in a close battle!!!

Thanks for attention, looking forward to what you can add.
 
Last edited:
how-about-no-bear.jpg
 
Nevaaaaah!!!!!!!!
 
I prefer the current system to implausibly small scale battles (which are very prevalent in TW games). It is better to imagine tens of thousands fighting in the field than to actually see a much smaller battle...
 
Magyar1988 said:
Another TW refugee... How do you think this would work in Hears of Iron games where there are many battles going on at the same time.?
Click to expand...

Fryslan0109 said:
I prefer the current system to implausibly small scale battles (which are very prevalent in TW games). It is better to imagine tens of thousands fighting in the field than to actually see a much smaller battle...
Click to expand...

Both of these are good reasons for not showing 3D battles.

In Paradox games you can easily have tens of thousands of men on each side in a battle. Its hard for computers to show this, much less to be able to show multiple battles at once. Thats why most TW battles are limited to a couple thousand men.
 
Imagination often makes for better gameplay.
 
This man only has 2 posts and joined in december 2013. Yeah, he's a refugee.

I just love how TW created the idea that what they do is really "grand strategy"

I will give this man a point on "improving" the combat method.

Having two lines of infantry and stuff is quite dumbing it down.

Maybe a system could be employed where we have an overhead "generic" map with preset positions based on the type of general that is leading the army. A much more skilled general could deploy the Inf-Cav-Art in more ways than the "two lines" that are currently used.

And then exceptions could be done on several important or key places.

However this is all clausewitz 3 we're talking about
 
Last edited:
Trexeth said:
The thing is that it is quite outdated. File size is extremely small for modern games and System requirements are low as well.
Click to expand...

I thought this was a good thing :)


IMPORTANT: PLAYER DOESN'T CONTROL BATTLE (unless ruler is a commander). in 90%+ Cases it is AI vs AI.
Click to expand...

There are two problems with 3d battles. First of all it requires an insane amount of art assets so if you are going to spend that amount of time and man hours on a feature it should be very important. But because in our games there can be many battles going on at once and provinces are much smaller (as well as everything running in realtime) you would have to limit player interaction a lot to accomplish this (it obviously works great in TW because its the main gameplay focus and there is only one battle at a time). Because player interaction needs to be kept down it will very quickly be a feature that is completely ignored by players. It might be really cool the first 2-3 battles you are in to be able to zoom in and check it out but after that? you'll be busy with other things you can actually influence. So in short we would spend probably more man hours on something than the rest of the game, that the player can't do much with. Pretty bad bang-for-buck.

Not saying it will never happen, I can imagine a few game settings where it would work (for example a game where you play a condottieri in renaissance Italy or something), but for something with the scale of EU4? nah.
 
Last edited:
Let me start by getting most of the forum to hate me: I love Total War. While certainly not as deep as any Paradox game, it's really good if you want to watch Carthaginian war elephants stomping on Gallic peasantry.
But, I do not feel 3D battles would work in a Paradox game. There is already so much else going on during wartime that 3D battles would just become a pain and a chore. Add this to the fact that two battles can be happening simultaneously because everything happens in (for lack of better words) real-time, unlike TW's turn-based way of fixing this issue.
 
No one hates you for liking TW. It's a different game. Exactly because it is a different game people rage when a "refugee" comes proposing TW stuff to games like Europa Universalis.

People should honestly be going on the TW forums to propose a more in depth representation of games like ROME rather than asking P-Dox to accept refugees.
 
There's no way. One, PDS is a small studio that needs to be economical with its time and resources. There's no way for the battles to be good without detracting from the core aspects of the game. Two, there is no way to integrate it with real-time grand strategy because of the large numbers of simultaneous battles.

If they made prettier visualizations for the unplayable battles, I wouldn't appreciate them much and I doubt many other seasoned players would either. If it isn't more informative or more accessible I'd rather the time have been used elsewhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back