Differences to Star Dynasties?

[Stallion]

What will set this game apart from Star Dynasties? From a cursory glance both seem to be seeking to fill a similar niche?

[texashawk76]

Star Dynasties (which is a great game, BTW) focuses almost entirely on relationships and the 'grand scope' of building a multi-star empire through manipulating leaders in other empires. Alliance is more of a traditional '4x' in that you get to build new colonies, outposts, etc, explore stars and planets, build up your military/planets/systems with projects and structures, and generally there is more to do on that end. Both games try to work at the 'macro level' of this genre but I would say SD is more Crusader Kings-like with regard to the relationships, dynasties, family trees, and internecine plots that Alliance is (it focuses on the life and reign of a single Emperor or Empress in very high detail, as opposed to a dynasty or multiple rulers) and the game ends when your character either dies or... something else happens :-) Hope that helps!

[jscott]

I strongly suspect you are going to receive many negative reviews on release, regardless of the game's quality, because of the lack of a dynastic / sandbox option.

Having the game tied to a single character (who apparently can die) is just going to encourage rampant save-scumming and frustration too.

[Alpharius]

I hope not, and I don't think so.
I can't wait to play this and I think it's important that people realise every game is its own thing. Try to wipe other conventions away and look through a fresh lens.

[jscott]

Originally posted by Warsmith:

I hope not, and I don't think so.
I can't wait to play this and I think it's important that people realise every game is its own thing. Try to wipe other conventions away and look through a fresh lens.

I can't think of any 4x or semi-4x game that has lacked a sandbox-type mode. Distant Worlds has a strong story component, but even they let you turn it off. People are going to be very frustrated if they are humming along, and then a story event or whatever kills the Emperor and they are expected to start over. There are just certain things that people expect from these type of games. And if you are missing them, it tends to get people very exercised.

The lack of meaningful diplomacy in Stellar Monarch 1, for example, continues to generate bad reviews. Not meeting a certain minimum bar just causes difficulties.

[texashawk76]

Originally posted by jscott:

I strongly suspect you are going to receive many negative reviews on release, regardless of the game's quality, because of the lack of a dynastic / sandbox option.

Having the game tied to a single character (who apparently can die) is just going to encourage rampant save-scumming and frustration too.

Well, let's be clear, there are going to be several scenarios available, with unique win/loss conditions, as well as an online-tracked 'roguelike' mode where you can compete to have the highest 'reign score' in the world, without specific win conditions.

Regarding the single player lens, turns are one season (3 months) each, and you start at 18, but a big part of the game is actually taking care of yourself, both emotionally and physically, and so if you choose not to take care of yourself and always use maximum AP (Action Points) towards running your empire, you'll die faster, but your turns will have more results. Or you can spend more time on yourself, including upgrading your skills and abilities, but you won't have as much time to focus on the 4X-y stuff, as well as your relationships, although if you're in superior physical and mental health, you'll get more AP anyway, so... it's a balance. We actually consider Alliance internally to be a 4X RPG, to be honest.

So yes, you can die, but properly played you should have about 200-250 turns (4 turns a year, 50-70 additional years) to play, which should allow for plenty of gameplay. Plus, beyond your starting system and planet, everything else in the game is randomized, including your tech, your military setup, the other Houses, all the characters, all the planets and systems, and all of the outside cultures/empires (coming soon!).

[The Hat]

I like roguelikes, permadeath, highsore tables of my runs etc. In a 4x eh. I suspect that the first mod or gameplay option you'll see requested often is a way to continue as a kid or another character. Maybe save the gamestate and allow players to restart as a character in that ongoing game. Unless the gameplay length is something like the last federation and you are done in a few hours, thus ready to restart regardless.

[texashawk76]

Originally posted by The Hat:

I like roguelikes, permadeath, highsore tables of my runs etc. In a 4x eh. I suspect that the first mod or gameplay option you'll see requested often is a way to continue as a kid or another character. Maybe save the gamestate and allow players to restart as a character in that ongoing game. Unless the gameplay length is something like the last federation and you are done in a few hours, thus ready to restart regardless.

We'll certainly be looking at player feedback, and I'm almost certain that there will be mods to let you start as a kid emperor. I'm really interested to see what people come up with! Almost everything in the game will end up being moddable, except for the core engine functions of course, but we're using LUA for game events, milestones(quests) and most likely techs/skills, and XML/txt files for the rest, so there should be a lot of flexibility!

-Steve

[jscott]

I don't think he was talking about mods to let you START as a kid-emperor. He was referring to the ability to CONTINUE a game as a kid-emperor.

I am already cringing at the hate that is going to assail this game if you really stick to the course of having the game just end if the Emperor dies. I understand you are trying for an in-depth look at one reign, but no one is going to find the game fun if they are chugging along, accomplishing something, and then BAM! RNG says the Emperor has died of poor health, poisoning, old age, or whatever.

[texashawk76]

Originally posted by jscott:

I don't think he was talking about mods to let you START as a kid-emperor. He was referring to the ability to CONTINUE a game as a kid-emperor.

I am already cringing at the hate that is going to assail this game if you really stick to the course of having the game just end if the Emperor dies. I understand you are trying for an in-depth look at one reign, but no one is going to find the game fun if they are chugging along, accomplishing something, and then BAM! RNG says the Emperor has died of poor health, poisoning, old age, or whatever.

On the Ruler Summary, you have a large Health display (in the upcoming version) that has your Life Expectency, showing you how many turns you have until you die. It's updated slowly as you modify your behaviors - it takes into account overall average health, sustained injuries during your life, your Guilt level (a new mechanic that we'll be blogging about soon!), your average Spirit in your life (basically your mental health), how hard you work yourself (do you always use all of your APs each turn or do you save some for rest and relaxation), the amount of Inner Circle friends you have, and certain Epiphanies (basically Ruler skills and abilities, like a character skill tree). But it's not decided by a random roll - you have a clear idea of how much time you have left. As far as assassinations, there is always a way to escape (they are all handled by unique story events with multiple choices that offer increased odds of success depending on your core skills), and there are alerts and events that sort of 'foreshadow' if you're in danger of being assassinated. I'm totally with you, jscott - that kind of ending would really suck, and we've worked hard to give players plenty of warning and time to change their circumstances if needed!

[River Otter]

There's a reason almost everyone I've ever played with turns off time dictated endings that are most prevalent in 4x strategy.

I'll save my full opinion until I play it but.. like they said above, I hope you're prepared for an onslaught of disgruntled people.

[BATTLEMODE]

For everybody that hates time limits in games, there's someone who loves it. I think the developer has been quite clear about how AotSS works, it's up to each potential customer to thoroughly examine a game to decide if it's something they want.

There'll always be negative reviews on Steam from people who don't research stuff before they buy it, then expect it to be something it's not.

[jscott]

Originally posted by BATTLEMODE:

For everybody that hates time limits in games, there's someone who loves it.

I would venture to say the number who prefer no time limit vastly outweighs the number who like it.

If you want a recent example, go look at all the hatred that flooded Endless Legend's devs over the winter mechanic. They finally caved and made it mod-able, but the vitriol prior to that decision was quite remarkable.

A forced time limit in a grand strategy game is a mistake.

[BATTLEMODE]

There's a reason for the "food-clock" in games: humans are much stronger opponents than an AI and time pressure not only emulates real-world situations but it makes the game more difficult.

In a game like this, without the time limit you've just got an open, endless sandbox and I'm not sure that would be a fun game.

[Stallion]

For every bad design decision there will be 100 defenders.

Remember that EA is one of if not the most financially successful gaming company in 2021.

[Alpharius]

EA? As in Electronic Arts? *pukes*
EA have successfully destroyed everything they've touched lately :)