Sword of the Stars

from GalCiv2 Forums
Anyone tried this game? I bought it and I must say that GC II beats it in every department except in one crucial thing and that is tactical combat.

The tactical element in that game is very rich with even a possibility to target specific parts of ships.

Why is GC IIs tactical combat part so poor? I mean all that matters is number of hps, attack points and defense point with no way to influence the outcome of the combat in any other way.

Heck even MOO 2 had richer tactical combat. Come to think of it that game offered a lot more tactical options like ship raiding and special indirect offensive modules.
5,359 views 5 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Why is GC IIs tactical combat part so poor?


Because there is no such thing. GC2 does not have tactical combat; battles are just based on attack, defense, and HP, and are resolved automatically, as you say. The combat viewer is basically just a 'replay' that lets you see how exactly each ship performed.

Due to popular demand, tactical combat is under consideration for GC3. The biggest reason it hasn't been done in GC up to this point is simply because there exists no tactical AI in a game that can even remotely compare to a human. Because the tactical AI is so poor in most every game that has one, you can make up in combat for doing very bad in every other part of the game. As well, players feel forced to play out the tactical battles even if they don't want to, because letting the AI auto-resolve them would result in far greater casualties (if it wins at all) than if the player played them himself.

So basically, whether or not future GC games get tactical combat depends solely on whether Brad (GC's creator and AI dev) can make a tactical AI that he is satisfied with--one that can both truly challenge a human, and do just as well against itself as a human would.

If you want to talk about the possibility of tactical combat in GC, or how you'd like such a beast to work, check out the official TC discussion thread.
Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Haven't tried SOTS demo, and after watching the review of the game
on G4's "Attack of the Show" probably won't. It only got 3 out
of 5 stars....Anyway, too busy trying to kill all the Dragins
and Yor b-4 I'm "psychologically" forced to purchase Dark Avatar   
GalCiv 2 is too much of a kick a.. game to spend time on anything else.
Spend your hard earned bucks on Dark Avatar and continue supporting
the great work Kyro and the others at Stardock are doing.
The Political Machine 2024
Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
To say that a human is always a better opponent than an AI is pretty silly..
Over the years I've played dozens of turn-based games against a good AI that always made it challenging..can't say that about multiplayer,, some were good , some were poor and also the AI doesn't find reasons to quit ( go offline ) when you're ahead..
And the AI is always there ready for you.. It's just up to programmers to dedicate the time and effort...
On Space games,,Some of my AI Battles in games like MOO2 and Alpha Centauri were epic..I loved them..
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Hm, "no tactical battles because AI cant perform as well as human" actually makes sense to me but cant that be said about every part of a game?

But as I said it makes sense since Ive yet to play a RTS where the AI was a challenge to me unless they outnumbered you greatly.

But wont you have that problem in Sins of Solar empire aswell, since that game is mostly a tactical game?

Or it seems to be anyway, havent played it yet as Im waiting for my pre order beta