Peter and Andre from Novacore Studios (Legends of Pegasus)

Legends of Pegasus is a new 4X space game that is currently under development by Novacore Studios, with a target release date for Q2 2012. I’ve been following this title for some time now, but apart from a few screenshots I sensed that I knew very little about this new 4X space strategy game. So, I got in touch with the developers at Novacore Studios in order to know more about the title, and to share with you guys what I could unveil about this new promising title. Novacore Studios’ CEO Andre Overhagen kindly accepted to supply some of his time to enlighten us a bit more on their game. Here is what Andre had to say about it:

SS: Where did the idea for developing Legends of Pegasus came from?

Andre Overhagen: My partner Peter Seydel and I have always been big fans of the 4X genre. We’ve grown up with titles like Ascendancy and the Master of Orion series and loved them. So it was only natural that our first game should fall in this category. In the beginning, we chose Pegasus just as a working title, but over time we’ve grown so fond of it that we decided to develop the story based on the name. And this is how Legends of Pegasus came to be.

SS: Tell us more about the different real-time and turn-based gameplay mechanics. How, and when, are they used, and how do they mix together? I mean how is the transition between the two modes achieved?

Andre Overhagen: The game is a classic turn-based strategy title. The only difference is that encounters take place in real-time. This means that if you encounter an enemy faction, you’ll switch to a real-time combat at the end of the turn. Instead of loading an instanced combat map however, the combat takes place right where the enemy ships met. So you may end up fighting next to your settled or upgraded planets, leaving them as well as structures in the orbit open to real-time attacks. Resulting changes to the game environment will be reflected in the following strategy phase.

SS: Please talk a bit about the graphics, sounds and music in Legends of Pegasus.

Andre Overhagen: Our graphics is based on DirectX 9 to make sure that even players with older or less powerful graphic adapters can enjoy Legends of Pegasus. Nevertheless the game offers high resolution textures for impressive graphics that are basically unrivalled in this genre. All sounds and music tracks were created by our own composer in collaboration with external music and sound designers. Our dynamic music and sound system creates a very distinct feeling for each race and offers an atmospheric sound environment for space encounters. A live voice kit enables varying messages from allied ships and background radio messages during combat.

The fact that Legends of Pegasus will have a big single-player campaign is very interesting, since this deviates from the 4X tendency, where games are usually played in sand-box mode. Tell us more about the campaign, and the story behind it (also a bit of the lore). How does that all fit with the game’s victory conditions (the end game)? Is there a sand-box gameplay mode also available? If not how have you planned to tackled a possible lack of game replayability?

Andre Overhagen: During the campaign, you play as the main character “Daniels”. As you guide him through all three factions, you’ll have a chance to try out all playable races in the game. The story is set during an attack war on Earth. You’ll start out with a few surviving human space ships that get sucked through a wormhole, unaware of what happened or why they ended up in a totally unknown galaxy. In the course of the campaign, players will unveil the details and reasons behind this event.

The campaign contains several mission targets that players must complete. However, how you achieve your targets, how many planets you colonize and whether you opt for a more defensive or aggressive approach is completely up to you. Virtually all of the free game features are also available in the campaign mode. The storyline itself consists of three consecutive campaigns with several missions. During the whole story, the universe remains persistent, meaning that your next mission starts of exactly where you ended the previous one. So choose your actions wisely as they will have an impact on your future approach.

SS: I understand that there are different races in Legends of Pegasus. How will they play exactly? Are there different campaigns available for each race? How many races are there in total? Are all of them playable?

Andre Overhagen: Legends of Pegasus offers three playable races. Each race has its own economy system and different flaws and strengths in terms of production, combat power of the space ships etc. Apart from the race, players can choose an origin. These origins all have a different focus and introduce even more flaws and strengths to the races to further differentiate them. Players can even create their own origin to fully customize a race; e. g. set the focus on research, production or trade. These customizations can be saved and reused in future matches.

SS: The ship modularity concept seems fantastic. Tell us more about it. Can ship modules be damaged / targeted individually? What about the ship design itself, Kalypso Media talks about ship design as an “intuitive building system”. What does that mean exactly?

Andre Overhagen: The game contains a ship editor which players can use to freely create their ships. The available components depend on what you’ve researched so far. Based on the general body size (e. g. Corvette or Destroyer) players will equip their ship with different modules. These modules have special purposes. Players can e. g. opt for military equipment to achieve better armoring and more weapon slots or research equipment to improve sensors and scanners. This basic setup offers slots for different components like weapons, drives, scanners etc., which are added by simply dragging and dropping them on the ship. The different components equipped determine the ship’s abilities. As players become technologically advanced, they can specifically target the different systems of an enemy ship. If a ship is hit, all equipped components will suffer damage, impacting and eventually destroying their function.

SS: Will Legends of Pegasus focus more on some aspects of 4X, like space combat, ship design or colony development? Or will it offer a balanced mix of features. Tell us more about the available features. For example, will there be diplomacy options? Espionage? Trade?

Andre Overhagen: Legends of Pegasus focuses mainly on its complex economy management, custom designing of space ships and tactical real-time combat. The economy management comprises expanding and managing colonies, relations and trading with other factions as well as gathering resources. During real-time combat the aim is to command your custom designed ships into battle and put their abilities to best use. Aside from devising a clever tactic, your success also depends on whether you picked the right abilities of your ships and the right constellation of your fleet.

SS: Now, about the research system, what can you advance more about it? Kalypso Media announces “hundred of technologies to research in dynamic and extensive tech trees”. Does that mean that there will be random elements to the tech trees? Tell us a bit more about it.

Andre Overhagen: Each race in Legends of Pegasus has its own tech tree. Depending on the race’s focus, these trees contain some exclusive technologies that cannot be found in other tech trees. On top of that, players can add so called “free tech trees” at the beginning of a game. These trees have their own focus and offer more aggressive or more defensive technologies or boost your research or industry. With this system, players can pick the tech trees that best match their playing style, offering lots of different combinations.

SS: So, we can develop our colonies using a slot (1 unit per slot) system. What kinds of structures can we build in our colonies?

Andre Overhagen: Apart from classic structures like factories, research institutions and defense structures you will be able to build structures that target economy and environmental factors. Players are not only able to build structures on the planet itself, but also within its orbit, e. g. space stations where you can build your ships. This is done via a very simple and intuitive drag-and-drop system.

SS: How will the game be released? Both in physical and digital form? If digital which digital distribution platform(s) are you planning to sell it on?

Andre Overhagen: The game will be available in store as well as online. Digital copies will be available via Steam.

SS: Legends of Pegasus release date is targeted for Q2 2012 in Kalypso Media’s website. Can you advance a more detailed release date at this stage? Kalypso also mentions PC DVD-ROM in Legends of Pegasus’ page, so does this means that LoP will be released exclusively for the Windows PC? Will there be a demo?

Andre Overhagen: Sorry, but we can’t give you a more specific release date yet. We can only confirm that we’re aiming for Q2 2012. I can definitely confirm however that the game will be a Windows-PC only title by the time of release.

SS: Can you tell us some of your lessons learned in developing Legends of Pegasus? Successes, failures and doubts you have bumped into, so that other people may benefit from your experience in developing even greater 4X space games in the future?

Andre Overhagen: My advice is to create a playable version that reflects the basic concepts of the game as soon as possible. Like this, you are able to identify weaknesses in the game design at an early developing stage to avoid major changes to basic elements later on. In our opinion, the key to a good game is combining proven game mechanics with innovative gameplay. You should also make sure to separate the game in main and side features from the very beginning. This gives you the flexibility to react if certain components don’t work out the way you’ve planned it without compromising the original idea of the game.

I would like to thank to the Novacore Studios Team, and particularly to their CEO Andre Overhagen for taking the time out of their busy day to do this interview.  You can check out the official Legends of Pegasus website.  You can also check the Novacore Studios homepage.

Change is essential, we have to keep moving the game forward. We are going to continue to innovate, try new things, some of them will work really well, others you will not care for them quite as much. ~Sid Meier

Gameinformer had a chat with Sid Meier about the current state of strategy gaming and what is Sid’s vision on what we should expect strategy gaming to become in the future.

Sid also talks about his favorite way to work this days, which is “to develop quick and playable prototypes as fast as possible in order to experiment new ideas”.

Asked about if he’s worried about the future of the genre Sid replied that he thinks strategy is fun because “it’s fun to make interesting decisions. That’s really what games are about.”

Sid talks about the constant need to change, to experiment, innovate and always take advantage of the latest technology (UI conventions, graphics detail and better, more elegant and easier to use user interfaces). He says that his formula has been (and continues to be) to always prioritize gameplay and design to art or cinematics for example, that in his opinion take the player out of the game.

Sid states that game design has not really changed much these last years, but before, where technology was much rougher still, he says how he loved the challenge to design games that could challenge the player’s imagination, the ability to use only “a few pixels and 16 colors to convince them that they were truly running an empire that would stand the test of time. Now players are no longer willing to do that kind of investment” – he smiled.

Sid Meier's Civilization (1990)

Asked about what drives him these days, what keeps him motivated to go to work every day, Sid replied that he loves the idea of doing game rapid prototyping, in order to explore and experiment with new ideas. That’s what he said fuels his drive these days.

Asked about Civ Sid says that “the concept is not exhausted yet”. He added that “the challenge is always what not to put in the next Civ rather than what to put”. Asked about what he feels of not being the lead designer of Civ anymore Sid replied that Civ always needs a new lead designer other than himself, so that new ideas and new energies may arise.

Sid Meier's Civilization V (2010)

Asked about Civ5 and the somewhat civ community’ mixed reactions about it Sid replied that “the fans feel they own civ, which is gratifying”. About Civ5′s fans somewhat heavy critique he said that “I can make some lemonade out of those lemons”.

Asked about consoles and how he sees them with respect to strategy gaming Sid replied that for instance he had much fun, and enjoyed the challenge of bringing Civilization to consoles with Civ Revolutions. The challenge he said was to “try to distill the civ experience into an evening since not everybody has 1 week to invest in the game”. He seems to be quite happy with the results.

Sid Meier's Civilization Revolution (2008)

About the new wave of gaming that is already taking shape, mobile tablets, Sid said that he doesn’t approach that market differently.

“Things are changing in a way that favors smaller design teams, more gameplay focused gaming and strategy gaming. That pace of gaming. I think the future will be very interesting, technology is always been one of driving forces of the industry back since we got 16 colors instead of 4 colors” ~Sid Meier

Sid sees now, as he saw before, that technology is always the driving force of gaming and that he expects it to continue to be like that for the future. He sees the mobile gaming interconnectedness, the ability “to have the game with you at all times” as new play paradigms that are just waiting to be explored by new game ideas.

I decided to post about this interview because I found it really interesting, with some nostalgic elements and some interesting points about the future of strategy games. It is always nice to hear what one of the strategy gaming fathers thinks about the genre. I think Gameinformer did a very good job with the questions. Sid answers were also very interesting in my opinion. I hope you enjoyed this little summary I did. You can watch the full interview here.

GameSpy has just published an interview with Stardock’s staff about Rebellion, the new, and highly anticipated Sins of a Solar Empire stand-alone expansion pack. I condensed in this post what were, in my opinion, the juicier parts of the interview. I also added a few personal notes and bits of further information. You can read the entire interview here.

In the interview Stardock clarified that Rebellion will include all the previous titles content, so, all the features included in the Diplomacy or Entrenchment expansions (or in the Trinity pack) will be in Rebellion.

Stardock also provided some details about the 3 new Rebellion (sub)factions. As we already knew each one of the three original races gets split into Loyalists and Rebels. “The TEC Loyalists are very defensive (…) the TEC Rebels are very aggressive”. Stardock also added that each faction gets its own Titan class ship and confirmed that “there are going to be six distinct Titans (…) each has its own abilities and stats”.

Stardock also clarified that regarding more ships offered (from the original Sins’ games) apart from the new 6 different types of Titan class ships there will also be new corvette and capital class ships.

Then GameSpy staff asked the gold question (always have been a Sins debate over this topic). “Are you planning to introduce any kind of single-player campaign?”. Stardock confirmed that “there won’t be a single-player campaign.” although “we are hoping to put some scenarios in, which would be not just stand-alone maps like we’ve had in the past, but a bit more detailed, with specific objectives to accomplish”. So, at least it seems that we are gonna get a few more mission depth with these new promised scenarios.

Now, about the tech trees, and any possible major revamping Stardock clarified that there will be changes that make Rebellion feel a bit more unique regarding research but “probably more of an addition to the existing”. Stardock explained further that the new Rebellion techs were integrated into the existing tech trees (military, civilian and diplomacy).

About the pirate system (a very cool Sins feature btw), GameSpy asked about changes on that. Stardock confirmed that they’ve done some additional tweaks to the pirate system this year. They also added that there will be key differences “the TEC Rebels (…) can actually ally with the Pirates, and use Pirate ships and not have to pay for them”. Now that’s a funny twist.

Stardock then announced that there will be a research victory now. “You have to have researched X number of technologies Then, once you do that (…) a special research condition is unlocked which is really expensive and takes quite a lot of time to research, but if you can do that ahead of anyone else you’ll win”.

About the looks and sounds Stardock said that the UI is not getting significant changes. The only one worth mentioning by Stardock was that each race will have its own UI now. Regarding overall graphical improvements Stardock promised many changes on that aspect. They also added more music and a new intro movie.

About possible AI improvements Stardock replied that “there’s a bunch” of AI areas that were worked on. They add that they have updated the pathfinding for ships so that they don’t try to go over or under one another” or ending up getting stucked. They also stated that they’ve updated the AI to be more effective against exploits like ” massed missile swarms or massed bomber attacks”.

Questioned by release date Stardock replied “As cliche as it sounds: when it’s done“. There was anticipation for a Rebellion release still in 2011, with all the pre-orders and beta announcements. But after a while no more news were heard about that. There are rumors (and only that) in the Sins’ forums that Sins of a Solar Empire Rebellion will (probably) be released this spring 2012.

It’s worth mentioning that Ironclad  Games is helping Stardock on Rebellion’s development (or vice versa, can’t really tell). Thanks to Gamespy for putting up this nice interview. It really was informative and very well structured.

Sid Meier is the director of creative development at Firaxis Games. He is also a former founder of MicroProse and a gaming industry legend. He is not one of the most respected persons on this industry by accident though. He earned his place on the industry’ Titans for developing, and helping to develop, many revolutionary and memorable game titles like Pirates!, Railroad Tycoon, the Colonization series, the Civilization series, Master of Orion I and II, Alpha Centauri and the original X-COM series, as examples. You can’t miss his games easily because many of them start with the prefix “Sid Meier’s” :)

Game Informer, which has an exclusive coverage deal for XCOM: Enemy Unknown (the recently announced new X-COM title), has (cleverly) requested Sid for an interview to know what he has to say about the game, and to clarify what is his role on its development. After all Firaxis is developing the game and he is Firaxis’ creative development director (and founder). He is also one of the persons directly or indirectly responsible for the original X-COM titles coming to life in the first place. So, the interview was a natural one to do.

Sid clarified that he is “available essentially as a resource for X-COM” (basically in a consultant role so to speak), in a call by need basis. So, he is neither behind or leading the game’s design, which in the end means that the new X-COM is not really his project (although the game does have his blessing of course). If it was really his project most probably it would be called Sid Meier’s XCOM Enemy Unknown anyhow :)

Asked about what audience does Firaxis wants to grab with this new X-COM Sid talks about offering something for everyone – “you get some strategy, you get some RPG, you get some action”. It’s of course a clever response but in a sense I do agree with him. The original X-COM games do include a nice blend of these three genres. The original games offer a strategic decision-making process where you need to decide which UFOs, and which UFO’s abduction sites, you want to strike. You also need to think on how to spend your hard-earned cash (should you spend it on improving the XCOM’s base or on buying new gear for your squad?). You also have the natural, and predominant, tactical combat aspect of the game (that although being turn-based does contain lots of action moments) and you do have the squad members progression part. Your team gets experience from battle and gets better at it. That makes them develop their skills, which in a way is like “leveling up”, as in traditional RPG games. So, if the new XCOM follows on the original game’s footsteps it should really appeal to a broad scope of players.

I hope you enjoy watching this quick interview. Boy, how I would love to be in the interviewer’s shoes. Sid is a gaming legend for me, and in a way a mentor. One day I hope l have that opportunity to have a chat with him. Who knows, maybe one day he decides to make Master of Orion IV and perhaps I can get an exclusive interview with Sid here at Space Sector ;)

Anyway everything leads to believe that Sword of the Stars 2 will come out this Fall of 2011.

SpaceSector did an interview with Chris Stewart (Producer and Designer of Sword of the Stars 2) in order to anticipate some of SotS2′s new features.

Here follows the interview we did with Chris. I think it came out great, revealing a lot on what to expect from SotS2. Hope you agree. Enjoy!

1.Firstly, what can we expect from the story in Sword of the Stars 2?

The main thing you can expect is that all the hints and foreshadowing from the first series comes to a point with the return of the Suul’ka. From the very first of SotS1, players have been bumping into alien derelicts, which ultimately proved to be abandoned and damaged chunks of Suul’ka armor.

The second thing players can expect is that we didn’t reboot the story – the game universe reflects the passage of time in a number of ways. All six alien races from the first series are in SotSII from the start. The tech tree starts at a later tech era – no reinventing all the basic techs yet again. We also know where we’re headed with the SotSverse, so SotS2 will set the stage for future expansions the same way the first series did. There are even linked scenarios that tell little pieces of SotS lore.

2. Could you describe a bit the new race – The Suul‘ka?

Simply put, they are ancient Liir. Biologically, Liir are incredibly long lived, limited only by their size. Most elder Liir are very zen when their time comes, but a few seek to cheat death and do so by using their psionic powers, which are very well developed by their age, to dominate the population, and use the population to build them the suits they need to leave planetside and live in space. The Liir rebelled against the Suul’ka, destroying many of them – a few escaped. Now they’re back and just as dark and un-Liir as they were before, maybe moreso.

3. Are there any changes to the existing races?

There are small changes, some have even allied up with one another, so they are a playable faction moreso than a playable race. The biggest change to all the races is that the psionic powers of the Suul’ka have started a psychic arms race, as all the races rush to develop members of their population to act as offensive weapons or defensive shields against the Suul’ka (and more often than not, the psionic officers from the other alien empires.) Psionics are a whole new branch of the tech tree in SotS2.

4. Diplomacy was rather limited in SotS1. Has it been overhauled/improved?

Diplomacy in the first SotS is exactly what one would expect in an era of gunboat diplomacy – SotSII is meant to reflect what comes next in a new era, where empires have already been established and now have to live with one another. So, to that end a lot of the systems in the game, from trade to research to politics now factor into diplomacy in new ways. Your ability to develop provinces, which are internal diplomatic matters, impact things like local trade. Stations can now be developed and modified to suit various needs, including a range of stations with diplomacy in mind. And most importantly, how you play the game will impact diplomacy, as how you act in the game dictates where your government falls on a political spectrum, and depending on where the other players fall on the political spectrum, your ability to deal with them diplomatically can be easier or harder or outright impossible.

5. How does the starmap work in SotS2? Are there any new features, or it’s practically the same?

Starmaps in SotS2 will be familiar to people who played the first game, with a variety of 3D maps of different shapes and sizes. Some changes have been made – for example, certain areas of space are labeled, for new players that need more geographic reference. And the change from the abstracted one star – one planet system of SotS1 to whole solar systems has meant that the overall size of the galaxy maps have decreased.

300 stars in SotS1 meant 300 planets, which was fine for people playing epic games. But 300 stars in SotSII would be a thousand planets at a minimum – that’s way too large. So, overall the scale in terms of planets has been maintained, meaning a smaller number of stars per starmap. Plus we have cool space features, like nebula that players have to travel through or around.

6. About colony management. Do we still colonize abstract systems or individual planets? Are sliders still the primary form of control?

I got into that a bit above – SotSII now models each star as a solar system, with each star having zero to a handful of planets and asteroids. Setting up on them is the same easy-access sliders as in SotS1, and as your worlds develop, you now have more options. Planets can be developed into capitol worlds for a province of planets and stars. You can develop planets more towards specialized gem worlds focused on research and trade, or forge worlds focused on production. And around these worlds you can set up and develop stations, starting with small trade or naval stations that over time you can grow into massive trade hubs, or diplomatic stations or massive military installations.

7. Is ship design overhauled? Will we have more sections to swap out, or are we still limited to three?

Ship design is one of the core features from SotS1 that carries over mostly the same – through research players develop and unlock new ship sections; command, mission, and engine. Player can then mix-and-match the sections depending on the functions they need their ship design to serve. As before, they also get to set which weapons go into which turret banks on the ship. However, in SotSII things go even further  – ships can now be outfitted with modules, which have their own functions. Depending on what players want, they can add even more of a ship’s ability by adding a module, or they can use modules to cover their bases.

SotS2: Ship Design (footage source angryjoeshow.com)

So for example, they can leave out a Deep Scan section, preferring to put a more martial section in there – but they can add a sensor module, which while not as good as a Deep Scan section, does give the ship more than just the basic sensor range. As well, new carrier classes allow players to build, design, and equip a new range of battlerider ships that can be carried into battle. We also added a weapons test sub-screen on the design screen, so players can test out and admire their newly unlocked weapons and sections without having to worry about a raging battle going on around them.

In battle, players will notice ships now have armor, rather than the abstracted hitpoint system of the first game, and a whole interior life involving power-systems, crew, and supplies, which have to be taken into account when managing a fleet of ships, and can be negatively impacted in battles. All things players will want to keep in mind when designing their ships and composing their fleets.

8. Could you detail a bit more the new Leviathan and Battlerider ship classes?

The Leviathan class is the new massive ship class – these ships are as rare as they are mighty. Acquiring one will take a lot of research, time, and money, and as such, losing one will be devastating. Just as in SotS1, players have to remember that the game isn’t binary obsolescence – armor 3 makes lasers 2 useless – a weapon may become less effective, but it will still have an effect. If you can multiply that effect – more of that weapon, either on a single ship, or by having more ships together – you have multiplied the effect. So, a Leviathan is definitely a monster in battle, but a careless player can still lose one to a fleet of smaller ships if they’re not smart or careful.

SFS Leviathan (footage source angryjoeshow.com)

Battleriders, and their cousins the System Defense Boats, are the refinement of the destroyer class ships in the first game. Players can design then and outfit them with weapons as they wish, then assign those ships to a carrier, for battleriders, and solar system for SDB. SDBs have small drive systems for moving around a solar system fast, whereas Battleriders only have basic thrust engines – they cannot move between the stars themselves and have to be carried into and out of battle.

9. In lieu of these larger ships, will combat be fought on a larger scale?

SotSII is definitely more of a capital ship class tactical wargame when it comes to the real-time combat side of the game. Bigger, more durable, more complex ships fighting over an entire solar system means a very different type of combat from the first game – there’s a reason we let you name your ships in SotSII!

10. Besides any new technologies, can we expect other improvements to the technology system?

A cool new addition to the research system is the feasibility study. As in the first series, the randomized tech tree is a key feature for keeping the game highly replayable and avoiding the stagnation you get with static tech trees. So as before, players aren’t aware of what they do and don’t have as technologies (not counting the core technologies that everyone has every game) until they research the technologies that come before.

However, players now have the option to spend a couple of turns on a feasibility study, in which their scientists are able to tell them how hard researching a particular technology will be. This is extremely useful if your plans are betting on a certain technology within a certain period of time – if it’s not going to happen, you don’t want to find out the hard way, mid-plan execution. You want to know in advance and cook up another plan.

11. If you had to choose the one improvement you’re most proud of, what would it be?

I think the MARS2 engine cannot be overlooked. As much as we were able to immerse people in the real-time battles in SotS1, using physics and polygon accurate targeting and weapons fire with an actual presence in the game world, I look at pictures for SotS1 and SotSII side by side and I’m blown away by the new look of the game.

Thank you for your time Chris.

Zachary Cryer has been a SpaceSector contributor since May 2011. Besides having assembled the questions for this interview he also did a review of Sword of the Stars Complete collection. Zachary has done many other reviews on his Gamespot page.

If you don’t have time to read on (which it’s a pity because it’s really worth it) or you just want the juicy stuff here it is.

Sumarizing the Juicy Stuff about the Q&A

The randomized tech tree is considered a core feature of SotS and Martin confirmed that it will be part of SotS 2, with a few twists.

There will be lesser civilizations in Sots 2 that Martin calls “Independent colonies” that may be splinter colonies of the established races but also whole new minor (meaning non-faster-than-light capable) alien races.

Martin announces an improved diplomacy system where “players can negotiate treaties, as well as alliances based on borders, fleet size, and even technologies. You can also expect an increase in diplomatic feedback from AI players, as well as more espionage options and opportunities”.

Martin confirmed that “Instead of having a single health bar, ships in Lords of Winter take damage to individual sections”. “The other most noticeable aspect of this system is the fact that different weapons will remove armor from the matrix in different patterns”

Regarding combat innovations there will be three planes that will allow the player to create 3D formations. Other combat features include “preset combat maneuvers, as well as movement modes that will allow ships to travel faster tactically at the cost of scanning distance and weapon rate of fire”.

Sots 2 will provide a political spectrum that allows eight government styles. The government type will influence diplomacy.

An interesting statement made by Martin: “we are not just making another strategy game sequel with the same old gameplay dressed up in prettier graphics”.

Martin confirmed that there will be a Sword of the Stars II demo. Sots II is targeted for release on Q3 2011.

SOTS2 is the sequel to the acclaimed 4x space strategy game Sword of the Stars and it’s target for release at Q3 2011. To know more about SOTS2 I invite you to read my post “Sword of the Stars 2 Announced”. You can also check out the official Paradox Interactive SOTS2 website.

Checkout the video with SOTS2 Lead Designer Martin Cirulis.

Zarksoft Games was founded in 2010 by industry veterans Tina Lawton, Lee Dotson, Jeff Lawton, and Jeff Williams whose previous work includes contributions to Diablo 3, Unreal Championship 2, American McGee’s Alice, Anachronox, Hellgate: London, Star Trek Online and more titles.

In order to find out more about Empire of the Eclipse I contacted Lee Dotson, ZarkSoft’s President, for an interview for SpaceSector. He kindly accepted. Here is the interview we did. Enjoy!

1. In ZarkSoft Empire of the Eclipse (EotE) press release you say that the game will be released in Q1 2011, can you advance a more specific release date?

We’ll be launching Empire of the Eclipse at the end of March.

2. Why do you decided to develop EotE specifically (and exclusively) for Apple products (iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch)?

When the iPhone/Android generation of smart phones emerged we were immediately excited by the opportunities these platforms provide independent developers in terms of both self publishing and in terms of providing a large body of people easy, portable access to the internet and intuitive touch interfaces. For us creating an online strategy game seemed like a natural fit for what we see as the most exciting aspects of  the current generation of smart phones.

As for deciding to focus on the iOS specifically it largely comes down to an issue of resource allocation. Android as a platform is very fragmented and would greatly increase our testing time due to having to support a much larger array of hardware. Given that the iOS is a new platform for us and making a large scale online game is an ambitious task on it’s own we decided that it would make more sense to focus our resources on making one game really well before branching out onto other platforms.

3. Do you plan to release a PC version? What about other Smartphones like Android and others, will EotE be released for those at some point in time?

We would like to branch out both onto other platforms including the PC and Android eventually but that will have to wait until after our initially release is well established and supported. I will say though that due to the way we’ve design Empire of the Eclipse we will be able to maintain a unified player base so regardless of what platform you’re using you’ll be able to play with anyone else who has a copy of the game.

Honestly, you’ll probably see the game come out for the Mac before the PC or Android because porting the code over from iOS will be comparatively easy.

4. How can the game be bought, where will it be available for purchase and how much (more or less) will it cost?

Empire of the Eclipse will be available from the Apple app store as a free download and a $1.99 a month subscription. This means that you can install and play the game on any number of supported devices while paying for only a single account.

5. EotE will probably be the first MMO 4x space strategy game ever developed that is not browser based (to my knowledge). At some point did you thought at developing EotE as a browser game? What do you think about browser based games in general? In what aspects is EotE superior to those type of games (like Ogame, Cosmic Supremacy, Dark Orbit, Empire Universe II, Orion’s Belt, among others)?

For us EtoE was born out of the type of game that we really wanted to see on the iPhone so making it as a web game never really came up. In terms of what makes EtoE superior to it’s web based counter parts I’d say it comes down to our portability, not having to pay to compete, and the overall feel of the game. In a 4x MMO empires are being built and destroyed whether you’re there or not but this is less of an issue with EtoE since you can check in on your progress and issue new orders no matter where you’re at.

Empire of the Eclipse also offers a more fluid experience than is usually seen on the web. There’s no waiting for menus to load, you’re able to smoothly pan and zoom across the layers of the galaxy, and you see your fleets warping in and out of solar systems instead of only seeing them as names on a list.

6. In the press release you say that players will not be able to purchase their way to victory. What do you mean by that? Will the game offer some kind of micro-transactions where the players may buy bonus features like how its done with browser games?

One of the big problems we see with most of the strategy mmo’s out there right now is that they’re designed to coerce people into feeding them more and more money instead of being designed to be fun. In Empire of the Eclipse there are no micro-transactions for purchasing in game bonuses and all players start the game on an equal footing. If someone wins it’s because they had a better strategy, not because they spent more money.

7. In the press release you say that you (ZarkSoft Games) are fans of games like Civilization and Master of Orion (both 4x Turn-Based Classics) and that you’ve worked diligently to make (EotE) a game that lives up to the standards set by those milestone titles. In what aspects does EotE lives up to Civilization and Master of Orion classic games? In what other aspects does it innovates?

I’d have to say that one of my favorite aspects of both Civ and MOO has always been that even though combat is clearly a part of the game there’s more to winning than simply amassing the largest fleet the fastest and there are multiple conditions for victory. With Empire of the Eclipse we’ve followed that philosophy both by allowing for victory conditions that cater to a variety of play style (conquest, research, exploration, and economic) and with flexible skill trees that allow players to customize their approach to the game even further.

In terms of innovation I’d say the scale of time and players are two of the area where we really start to break away from those titles. Everything in EtoE takes a certain amount of time relative to scale of the activity and that adds a vital component of weight and tension to the game. Let me give an example, in the science tree there’s a technology that allows a player to convert a star into a blackhole – which will instantly destroy everything in the solar system that doesn’t have the technology necessary to navigate near a blackhole. Conversely, this could be a boon if the player does have that tech because that solar system is effectively shielded from any low tech outsiders. So the catch is pulling this off requires building a solar core tap and conversion process that takes 24 hours. During that time you just have to wait and pray that your able to hold off the forces of the system’s inhabitants or anyone else they might try and convince to come to their aid.

We’ve also built in a number of incentives for players to work together which sets a politically complex stage for the game to play out on. As a player you’ll rarely be able to defend all your territories from every possible attacker so forming alliances is a necessary component to staying alive. On top of that Empire of the Eclipse includes options for setting up automated trade routes with any players that you’re on peaceful terms with allowing both players to receive economic bonuses – of course in the end there can be only one winner so you must choose such alliances carefully.

8. Now regarding the game itself. Will EotE have a background story or will the game be completely sandbox where the players are given complete freedom to create their story? Does the game has an ending?

Empire of the Eclipse is more of a sandbox experience. I’ve always found that the most interesting stories in games come from those told by players of their own exploits or of those around them. An average game runs about two months in length with one player eventually emerging victorious.

9. Will EotE have colony management (city building)? Is it possible to custom design ships (customize and upgrade components)?

There are some colony management aspects to the game but due to scale of the galaxy (a large game can have hundreds of thousands of planets) we’ve tried to keep this process streamlined. There are an assortment of structures that can be placed in orbit around a planet to enhance it’s capabilities such as refineries, defense platforms, jump gates, shipyards, etc. and planets can be terraformed but you won’t have worry about the citizenry revolting or having to build housing for the population to grow.

We originally had a modular blue print system in the game for ship design but found that it made the game more confusing for new players. As a general philosophy we want to keep players from getting bogged down in micromanaging every aspect of their empire so they can spend more time interacting with other players and focus on large scale tactical decisions.

In addition to this we currently have 17 ship types that all have a distinct role in the game and being able to recognize the strengths and weakness of each ship type is critical to using them well so clarity in this area becomes very important. An example of this would be that dreadnoughts are great for dealing with destroyers and bombarding planets but are relatively weak against swarms of fighters. Destroyers on the other hand aren’t really intended for planetary siege but are great at cutting through swathes of fighters.

10. How is EotS space combat? Is it “auto resolved” or will it have some kind of tactical battle involved? Are there any pre-battle or during-battle tactical aspects involved like formations or other special orders?

Combat in EotE is auto resolved but not instantly resolved. Behind the scenes a full scale battle is being simulated and depending on the size of the battle and the relative strengths of the fleets may take a while to resolve and during that time those units will be locked in battle. One of the interesting parts of this is that during this time if you or one of your allies has other fleets that are nearby they can be sent in to help push the battle over the edge.

In terms of pre-battle tactical aspects there aren’t formations, but fleet composition is very important and more over doing proper reconnaissance so you can know what you’re up against is also very important. While there aren’t any specific commands issued during battle there are some ships that do have special abilities and are used manually outside of combat such as the planet killer’s planet buster skill.

11. What news can you advance about EotE (the latest we have was on the 5th January press release)? Will you be releasing a beta version and/or a demo?

We don’t currently have any plans for releasing a demo but we will be pulling some individuals from our community once the time for beta arrives.

Thanks so much for agreeing to this interview, Lee. I’m sure many readers will look forward for Empire of the Eclipse. I’ll certainly do!

Thanks also Adam.

1. Tell us a bit about the game. It’s characteristics, features, innovations from other titles.

Horizon is a 4x space strategy game with a heavy emphasis on exploration. It introduces the player to a galaxy that feels alive and more complex than other games in the genre. Playing as the humans you are at the beginning of interstellar exploration but the galaxy is already mature and races much older and more advanced than you inhabit it. There is a great deal to discover while you plot humanity’s course of action and slowly engage in first contact situations, hopefully coming out of them stronger to expand ever more and prosper!

From a more technical view we have designed the game around the concept of making it a more open and more interactive space strategy game. To lessen artificial design limitations on important components of the game with the aim to make the whole more seamless and more ‘real’, to accentuate that exciting feeling of managing a space-faring race in a dynamic galaxy. And let’s not forget to engage in kick-ass space combat!

2. Does Horizon have a main plot or background story? Or is it completely a sand box create-story-as-you-go game?

Horizon does have a background story and it all begins in present time with the Voyager 2 probe exploring the edge of our solar system. Launched by NASA in 1977 it is currently more than twice as far from the Sun as Pluto and moving outward. Until the game is released more information and other reports are available on the web for those curious about Voyager 2 go to this Voyager 2 Wikipedia article or to UK Newspaper or to NASA weekly reports.

To get back to your question, the galaxy and all the races have their own story and their actions are influenced by their history and culture.

3. What type of game is Horizon? Is it a 4x game? TBS, RTS or mix of both?

Horizon at its heart is a traditional 4x game and plays very much like one. If you have played Master of Orion 1 and 2 you will feel right at home.

We designed the game completely turn-based because we feel it gives the player more control in almost every situation including combat and a big part of what 4x gamers really enjoy. There is a certain pleasure being in control of your ship and actually firing its weapons that an RTS based combat system cannot quite deliver.

4. What about the game mechanics? You say in the FAQ that the game will be turn-based, does this means that tactical combat will also be TBS or will it be RTS? Or will it be completely cinematic as in Galactic Civilizations series.

Yes tactical combat is also turn-based. One important distinction I want to make here is that the combat is not a separate phase in Horizon and occurs seamlessly because you are in essence always in tactical view when the game is running (when ships move etc.) After 20 rounds of tactical view the game is ‘paused’ as the turn ends and you then switch to a strategic view to review or make decisions, manage all facets of your empire before starting the next turn.

5. What about planetary invasions. Will there be planetary bombardments? And the assault invasion, will it be tactical or will be completely cinematic?

Planetary bombardments are handled through tactical view. As long as your ships are in firing range of the planet you may inflict planetary damage at any time. Damage is applied to both infrastructure and the population. The standard planetary weapon types all exist in the game so if the always popular nuclear bombs don’t suffice you can always consider bio weapons.

Defending your colonies from such attacks is extremely important because in Horizon we take the view that you can’t just forcibly shuffle population from one planet to another (a method used in many games to increase population on new colonies). So developing and increasing the population on colonies is a long process and they are truly your biggest assets. And your homeworld is your biggest asset of all, orders of magnitude more important than everything else and can never be replaced.

In terms of how invasions work, once your troop transports are near orbit of a colony you can then land troops on the planet for the invasion. You control the logistics and timing of the invasion and then watch the results when the assault is started. Like many other games this part is done in abstract fashion.

6. Could you elaborate a bit how ship design will work?

Our ship design focuses on the selection of 4 ship hull sizes followed by the selection of components from the three groups: Weapons, Core and Specials. Each group has 8 hull slots reserved.

Core systems are automatically populated with default components that every ship needs such as the engines, life support, power generators etc. If you have 2 or more of the same core component then you can choose the desired option otherwise it’s already setup.

For weapon systems the slot positions actually correspond to their mounting location on the ship hull which should be considered carefully when installing large weapons with small firing arcs. Also for weapons you get additional customization options such as the mount size, number of emplacements, etc.

Ship Specials are things like cargo bays, fighter bays, troop pods, colonizer pods, etc. Anything that is not a weapon or core system falls in this group.

7. What about research, tell us a bit how it works. Will it have random aspects, that is, will it unlock random techs at times or is it completely linear?

A pet peeve of mine with many 4X games is how research is handled. I tend to think an advanced space-faring race with a billion+ population would be able to research more than just a handful of projects simultaneously.

With that in mind, each race starts with a custom tech list at different levels. All discovered techs are available to be researched simultaneously. You can also set a focus for each category so techs that you want to advance more quickly can receive more resources. And finally you may disable tech projects you don’t want to develop further.

Research is divided into three phases in Horizon: Discovery, Breakthrough and Refinement. You must first discover or become aware of a technology before you can begin researching. Once you can research a tech you then have a chance to make a breakthrough at which point the tech becomes usable in your empire. Through refinement a tech can also be improved further increasing its efficiency or benefits.

With every refinement level a tech has a chance of unlocking a random new technology. Along with some other discovery methods and the fact that discovered techs are not automatically usable (requiring a breakthrough) these add a lot of variables so no two games develop the same way.

8. Will the game provide random events like space monster attacks or mega events (e.g. plagues, disasters, revolts) that can surprise the player to take action?

We have no plans for space monsters currently while random events are on a low priority list of things we would like to do. We are focused on the core game elements so it may not happen.

9. Will there be espionage options in Horizon?

Espionage was part of our original design but it’s currently in the same boat as the random events so it may not be in the initial release. But at some point it surely will be because I have some great ideas I would like to implement and it would add yet another layer of strategy and complexity.

10. Regarding on how to win, what are Horizon victory conditions?  Time?  Special achievement?  Alliance domination, Full conquest?  Are there specific victory conditions for each race?

This is still a work in progress. Alliance victory is the easiest victory condition and the typical way to finish the game. It is also technically possible to fully conquer the galaxy but it would be extremely difficult if not impossible in practical terms. Other specific victory conditions such as story/plot based we are still considering.

11. In terms of settlements expansion does Horizon allow the player to colonize every system he finds or does it requires the player to unlock special research to allow the colonization of some systems?

This may yet change but as it stands we have not implemented any research requirements for colonizing different types of planets. Currently colonies get penalties if the environment is not native to your home planet.

12. How long have you been developing Horizon, and what are your plans to have it ready for release? Will there be a demo or an alpha version around soon?

A long while… Full-time development of Horizon started in 2001 and stopped in 2006 due to financial reasons. I have since been working on it part-time toward completion. The game has been in alpha (playable but not feature complete) since 2006. My current plans are a return to full-time development within the next 6 months and to continue working on getting all the features completed.

There are no plans for a public demo at this time.

13. Do you need help from the community in some way to contribute to the project? Is this an open source project (open and free to the community)?

As a small Indie outfit (based in Toronto Canada), the support from the game community is a source of inspiration for us and we have had a very supportive and loyal following since we started. For now the continued interest and encouragement from the community is all we ask for. I am sure there will come a point later on where we will need more involvement.

Horizon is closed source software.

Thank you very much for your time Raf.

It was my pleasure and thank you for the questions and interest in Horizon. For those interested in keeping track of our progress via email we invite you to subscribe to Horizon mailing list.

Targeted for release on Q1 2011 SotS2 promises to take the series to a new level at the same time keeping some essential features and gameplay mechanics of the original title. I invite you to watch the video below where Martin Cirulis (Kerberos productions CEO) introduces many of the game aspects, its similarities with the original title and what new content to expect in SotS2.

Check out also some screenshots and also the latest news obtained during the E3 (Electronic Entertainment Event) held at Los Angeles on 15-17 June 2010.

SotS2: Interview with Martin Cirulis (Kerberos Productions CEO)

SotS2 screenshots (click to enlarge)

Some recent media coverage about the game at E3

Big Download got a chance to ask some questions to Kerberos Productions’ CEO and creative director Martin E. Cirulis: “E3 2010: We learn more about Sword of the Stars 2″

Gamespot visited the Paradox Interactive booth at E3 2010 and got the following: “Sword of the Stars II Impressions”

Strategy Informer’s brings you straight to the show floor at E3, where they made an interview with Paradox Interactive about Sword of the Stars 2: “Strategy Informer’s Sword of the Stars 2 Interview“

Don’t forget to check out the official SotS2 Paradox Interactive site for news and developments about this promising 4x Sci-Fi game.

Since then I’ve been in contact with Mike. I asked him for an interview for SpaceSector.com which he kindly accepted. Here is the interview we did. If you’re interested in getting involved in this project helping Mike with your ideas or contributions there are details in the interview of how you can do this. Hope you enjoy the interview as much as I.

I understand that you started the Supremacy project as a hobby and that you intend to release it for free upon completion. How long have you been developing Star Trek Supremacy, and what are your plans to have it ready for release?

Back around 2004, I started thinking about developing a turn-based strategy game.  During the next year and a half, I played several 4X games and filled entire notebooks with notes and ideas.  In fall of 2005, I decided to bite the bullet and make it happen.  I decided to take a video game design course the next semester as a sort of “trial run”.  I’d never developed a game before, and a semester-long project seemed like good practice to prepare me for a much larger game project.  In November and December I gave myself a head start by getting some of the core code written, and in January two of my fraternity brothers and I enrolled in Georgia Tech’s CS4455 “Video Game Design” class.  We developed a 4X game entitled Galactic Supremacy—the predecessor to Star Trek: Supremacy. I began working on Star Trek: Supremacy in June of 2006, after I shared my work on Galactic Supremacy with the community over at the Birth of the Federation 2 (BotF2) project forums.  The BotF2 project had been going on for some time, but had fallen into a state of limbo when its developer vanished along with all of his work.  Over the next few months, Supremacy was eventually endorsed by the BotF2 project leaders as the “official” BotF2, and the community rallied behind me.  Several members of my creative team had been associated with the BotF2 project since 2004 or earlier, and they have volunteered countless hours of their time to help make Supremacy into a game that is truly something to behold.

The release date is and always has been “when it’s done”—it’s strictly a side project, and it’s hard to predict how much time I’ll have to work on it.  Ideally, I’d like to get to alpha status a year from now, spend another year at alpha, and then wrap the project up with a six-month beta and “release candidate” cycle to filter out the remaining bugs.  Then we’ll throw a big party when version 1.0 finally “ships”.  I have continually made “pre-release” versions of the game available for public consumption, and I will continue to do so through its release.  The game is free and open source, so it will always be free to enjoy, and anyone can take the source code and either modify the game or create an entirely new game based off the Supremacy framework.  The most recent pre-release download is rather outdated at the moment, due to some highly experimental work I’ve been doing, but it can be found at the Star Trek: Supremacy website.  The source code and bug tracker are located on CodePlex.

After version 1.0 is released, I plan to work on a couple “total conversion” mods for the game—one set in the Stargate universe, and another set in the Babylon 5 universe.  Supremacy was designed from the beginning to be easily modifiable—nothing is hard-coded, and all of the content can be replaced fairly easily.  A comprehensive editor will ship with the game.  I am also preemptively adding support for some features which may not actually be utilized in Star Trek: Supremacy, but which might be useful for future mods.  Such features include support for various forms of “point-to-point transport tunnels”, which could be used to implement “supergates” in a Stargate mod or “jump gates” in a Babylon 5 mod.  Actually, that particular feature might be used to implement wormholes in Star Trek: Supremacy.

So I see that the idea is for Supremacy to follow on the footsteps of one of the most successful 4X space strategy games of all time: Star Trek: Birth of the Federation. I believe that Supremacy is also known as the BotF2 project. In which aspects will Supremacy evolve and innovate from its predecessor’s legacy?

Indeed, the goal of the Supremacy/BotF2 project has been to create a “worthy” spiritual successor to Birth of the Federation.  Players will find the basic gameplay mechanics to be quite familiar, but with far more depth and breadth.  In terms of breadth, Supremacy spans a longer timeline, has much larger galaxies, more playable races, and over a hundred minor races (with more evolved tech trees).  Supremacy will also offer a more “immersive” gameplay experience.

My overall design philosophy with Supremacy has been focused around a notion that I call “progressive involvement”.  It’s no secret that individual 4X gamers have vastly different preferences when it comes to game mechanics.  There are players who want to micromanage every detail of their empire, right down to the city layouts of their colonies.  Others prefer to “macro-manage” and focus their attention on the high-level concerns of their empire—guiding the war and peace efforts, deciding where to expand, and so on.  I believe that it’s possible to create a game that appeals to players on both ends of that spectrum, as well as everywhere in between.  We can do this by designing the game mechanics in such a way that players can either “opt-in” or “opt-out”.

For instance, we plan to give players the opportunity to advance their empire’s research by building special science ships, which can be sent out to perform research missions.  These missions must be commenced by the player, and may involve tasks like scanning certain stellar phenomena.  Such a feature gives the player a greater sense of involvement in the game.  However, for players who want to focus on higher level concerns, this feature can be completely ignored.  Further, it can be ignored without putting the player at a disadvantage, because the feature will be designed such that the research gained by these missions is roughly equivalent to the research that would have been gained by simply dumping more funds into automated research rather than building the (rather expensive) science vessels required to perform research missions.  Players will also be able to delegate various managerial tasks to an AI.  For instance, players will have the option of setting their colonies on “cruise control” by allowing a “governor AI” to take over and decide what to build.

Does Supremacy have a main plot or background story? In which time frame of the Star Trek universe does the game take place?

There is no fixed plot for Supremacy.  Like Birth of the Federation, the player assumes the role of leader of a spacefaring empire from the Star Trek universe (the Federation, Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians, or the Dominion).  What happens from that point forward is dynamic—no two games will play out quite the same way.  Unlike Birth of the Federation, which spanned only the Star Trek: The Next Generation timeline, Supremacy spans the timelines of every Trek series from Enterprise through Voyager.

Supremacy offers a very nice 2D gridded galaxy map with all different kinds of stars with different colors.  Do the star colors have any meaning in terms of exploration sense?  For instance in games like MOO2 or Armada 2526 the color of the star gives some advance info to the player of how likely it is for it to hold ideal, sub-optimal, dead or barren planets if they contain planets at all.

Yes, there is a complete set of data tables in Supremacy which determine the likelihood of various planet type/size combinations.  These probabilities are affected by various factors including the type of star and a planet’s distance from the star.  Further, each race in Supremacy has different planet environment preferences based on the type of homeworld on which that race originated.  For instance, humans prefer Earth-like planets, whereas Cardassians prefer hot and dry desert-like planets.  Thus, while a planet may be highly desirable to one race (giving it a high max. population level and growth rate), it may be very hostile to another race (giving it a much lower max. population and growth rate).  It is possible to encounter systems without any planets at all, though they will be rare.  Other rarities include nebulae with “rogue” planets within.

In terms of settlements expansion does Supremacy allow the player to colonize every system he finds or does it requires the player to unlock special research to allow the colonization of some systems?

Any system with habitable planets (planets other than Gas Giants) may be colonized, but certain systems may be very undesirable based on the environmental preferences of the player’s race.  At high tech levels, players will be able to unlock special terraforming projects.  These terraforming projects will allow the player to transform a planet into a more desirable environment over the course of several turns.  Terraforming will work very much like it did in Master of Orion 2.

Supremacy presents the following resources: Dilithium, Deuterium, Raw Materials, and Officers.  Can you explain a bit what each is for and how can these be mined or gathered?  Additionally, will all resources be possible to collect only in star systems with planets or also in some special places of the galaxy map?

Dilithium is required for building the warp core during ship construction—each ship requires x units of Dilithium to be built.  Dilithium may be found in any system with habitable planets (planets other than Gas Giants) or asteroids.  If a system with habitable planets contains Dilithium, the player may colonize that system and build a permanent Dilithium refinery to produce Dilithium consistently each turn.  We may also allow players to use mining ships to mine Dilithium from unclaimed systems containing Dilithium deposits on either planets or asteroids.

Deuterium is required to fuel your ships.  One unit of Deuterium is consumed for each sector traversed by a ship, and each ship has an onboard Deuterium reserve.  When a ship is within its “refueling range” (a certain number of sectors from the nearest allied shipyard or space station), a ship’s Deuterium is automatically replenished from the empire-wide stockpile as it is consumed.  Thus, movement within refueling range keeps the onboard reserves fully stocked.  If a ship ventures beyond its refueling range, its onboard reserves will not be replenished, and a ship will become stranded if it depletes its Deuterium reserves.  At that point, the ship will need to be towed back to friendly space.  Deuterium is always produced in minimal quantities at any colony, but production is higher for each Gas Giant present in the system.  Ships beyond their refueling range may also replenish their Deuterium reserves by stopping to gather Deuterium from systems with Gas Giants or Nebulae.

Raw Materials are required to construct the hulls of your spacecraft, and thus each ship or station requires some quantity of Raw Materials in order to be built.  Raw Materials, like Deuterium, are always produced in some minimal quantity at any colony, but production is greatly increased in systems which are marked as being rich in Raw Materials.

The concept of “Officers” as a resource is being scrapped and replaced by a revised personnel system.  I won’t say any more than that for now, but the idea is to create a personnel system that feels like its based more on people and less on raw numbers.

Regarding on how to win, what are Supremacy victory conditions?  Time?  Special achievement?  Alliance domination, Full conquest?  Are there specific victory conditions for each race?

Victory conditions have not yet been finalized, but you can expect to see—at minimum—victory through conquest (controlling a certain percentage of the galaxy), with the option for allied empires to win together.  Time-based victories will likely be implemented to facilitate shorter games when desired.

The current pre-alpha version of the game does not provide space combat yet.  But judging from the YouTube videos these will be fought in 3D.  Will the player be in control of every single spaceship?  In other words will space combat be highly tactical, only allowing the player to set formations and make small adjustments during combat, or will it be completely cinematic?

The YouTube videos you refer to do not actually reflect the combat system that is planned for Supremacy.  They are demo videos of a standalone game being developed by a member of the BotF2 community called cdrwolfe.  Those same videos are erroneously presented on the Supremacy website, and I need to have them taken down.

3D tactical combat in Supremacy will be turn-based.  Since players in online games may be staring at a blank screen while others engage in combat, we want to keep combat time reasonable, and I believe turn-based combat with limits on planning time is the best way to do that.  During each combat turn, players will be able to give orders to individual ships or to several ships at a time, but orders will be limited to a target and a maneuver.  In addition to curbing combat time, this approach will also enable us to utilize all three dimensions in space combat.  Since the player chooses from a list of predefined maneuvers, he or she is not required to plot the actual movement.  It is very difficult to plot courses in three dimensions when you are stuck with a two-dimensional screen and input device, which is why most space combat games are based on 2D or “2.5D” planes.  We can lift this restriction since actual ship courses are projected by the computer instead of the player.

What about ground combat and systems invasions?  What will be the mechanics?  Will special transports with troops be required for the invasions?  Is Supremacy going to offer tactical ground combat, cinematic or just a report is presented in the end?

Ground combat has not been finalized yet, but it will likely be similar to how system assaults were implemented in Master of Orion 3.  Special troop transports will be required for an invasion, and we will probably present the invader with a screen showing his or her forces, as well as those of the enemy.  The player will then choose whether to attack or retreat.  After this selection, the screen will update to reflect casualties and destroyed buildings.  The player may continue this process for a few rounds, at which point the ground combat will be won, lost, or inconclusive.  If combat is inconclusive, this process will be repeated during the next turn.  If victory is achieved, the system will fall under control of the invading player.

Player curiosity and surprises are important factors that a game must satisfy to keep the player focused and engaged.  In your opinion, which features will Supremacy offer to satisfy this?  Will the game provide random events like space monster attacks or mega events (e.g. plagues, disasters, revolts) that can surprise the player to take action?

Yes, a rather flexible random event system will be implemented, and there are already somewhere around 120 proposed random events.  Due to time constraints, only a couple dozen of these are likely to make it into version 1.0 of the game, but many more may be added later on.  As for the type of random events, pretty much everything you mentioned is fair game, as well as appearances by the Borg.

I’d also like to add that I’ve been spending a lot of time recently thinking about how the player’s focus shifts throughout the game.  To me, most strategy games become weakest during the late game, when the map has been completely explored and the tech tree has been exhausted.  I’ve been thinking of ways to keep gameplay interesting by “unlocking” new objectives late in the game.  I’m not ready to reveal any of those ideas yet, but it’s important to me that Supremacy stays interesting up until the end of the game.

I believe that you are not developing the game alone.  Are you in need of help for development?  What kind of support do you need and where should people go to start helping on Supremacy development?

Since the beginning, I have been the only “permanent” programmer on the project.  A couple others have come and gone over the years, but none have stuck around.  Fortunately, there have been many members of the community who have contributed in other ways, like producing graphics, music, dialogue, and other creative content.  This has freed up more of my time to focus on programming, which is what I would rather be doing anyway :).

We are doing pretty well at the moment, but we’re always looking for people with a talent for graphics or music composition.  The BotF2 Forums are a place to go for offering to contribute.

The current Star Trek: Supremacy version available for download is a pre-Alpha build from last year.  When do you plan to release a new version, and what new stuff will that include?  Will it already include space combat for example?

The delay between releases has been largely due to a lack of time to work on the game, and the highly experimental nature of my more recent work.  I’m hoping to get another update out around March or April of this year.  We are also working very hard to get the game ready for basic multiplayer gameplay in time for us to demo the game in a booth at the Star Trek Convention in Las Vegas (August 5-8).

3D Tactical Combat will not be implemented any time soon—the plan has always been to get as much of the game in place as possible before beginning on 3D combat.  This will enable me to shift my focus almost exclusively to combat development, as the rest of the game will be more or less complete.

For which platforms are you planning to release for?  Only Windows, or are there any plans for a Linux and/or Mac version?

We will be supporting the Windows platform exclusively.  However, by the time the game is released, I suspect it will be possible to compile most of the game framework against the Mono platform, which is available for Linux and Mac.  Unfortunately, it is unlikely that the graphical client will compile on Mono.  Thus, in order to play the game on anything other than Windows, a cross-platform client would need to be developed.  I would be willing to assist in the development of such a client as a “consultant”, but I have no plans to develop such a client myself.

I understand that you’re developing Supremacy as an open source project and that it is non-commercial, in other words you plan to release it for free.  Have you ever considered in the past, or currently, the possibility of approaching the Star Trek franchise for a possible game licensing or do you promise the fans that you intend to release the game for free in the end?

This question has come up many times, and many people have encouraged me to find a publisher to take care of the licensing.  However, I am firmly committed to releasing Supremacy as a free and open source game.  Supremacy is a game created by the fans, for the fans.  The recognition of my fellow Trek gamers is compensation enough for me.

Thank you very much for your time Mike.

You’re welcome Adam.

By then Brad Ottoson (main developer) told me that“[Aphelion] won’t be out for a few years still but we have a lot of it done”. Having liked what I saw and after having a nice chat with Brad I decided to invite Brad for an interview which he kindly accepted. Here is the interview we did. I hope you enjoy it as much as I have.

1. In Aphelion: Phoenix Rising (APR) website you introduce the game Races. To help people connect and know a bit more about APR could you make a small preview of the game background story?

Essentially most the races are interconnected in someway. We don’t want to say to much, otherwise we’ll be giving away the plot that will unfold during gameplay so we can tell you the basics. Essentially everything started with an event in the past in which a Brown dwarf (Solar system isn’t old enough for it to exist yet) appears out of now were and is in a collision course with Sol’s sun, roughly 100 years in the future from now. The collision will create a supernova when the Brown dwarf’s gravity sucks the hydrogen from the Sun and it explosively fuses all the hydrogen from the sun in one massive fusion reaction, destroying the solar system.

The governments of earth all band together to create 3 embryo ships to carry humanity elsewhere. These are named the Pinta, the Nina and the Santa Maria and bring with them storage devices, detailing all of earth technologies. Each ship takes off in different direction in hopes of finding a suitable planet to colonize using powerful sub light speed drives. The story continues, thousands of years in the future when an empire created from the survivors of the Pinta emerges. The Pinta arrived at it’s destination a few thousand years late, this was due to the fact that it sustained substantial damage to it’s engines from space debris, slowing it speed. The Pintar began to explore the galaxy and encounter 5 other distinct races. They encounter the Therans who are a peaceful aquatic race who are naive. As a result the Therans are easy marks at first to other races as they are caught unprepared to violence and greed that other exhibit. Also encountered are the Greys. They are an unique species with fragile bodies and massive intellect, but unfortunately for them they are rather irrational and unfocused in their thinking. The Pintar view the Greys with suspicion, because rumors have it that the Grey’s technology gives off readings similar to those that were detected when the Brown dwarf appeared in the past and it is felt they had some part in it. They also encounter the Vitruvians, who are a cybernetic race. This is not by choice though as in the past their race was infected by a complex and deadly infection that they named “the sickness”. “The sickness” bonded with their DNA and became part of them. As time progress the nature of “the sickness” mutated and began to create congenital problems their organs. As a result, they became experts at replacing vital organs with mechanical ones, prolonging their lives while a cure is created. Progress has been mixed and it is unknown if they will ever reverse the damage to become “pure” again, but they have been successful at creating treatments to slow the mutation of “the sickness”, prolonging the survival of their species.

The next two species encountered had an interconnected past. The subterranean Atton and the insect-like Atrox had fought on opposite sides in an ancient galaxy wide war in the past. The Atton were allied with the “Precursors” who they worshiped as gods. Both were losers in the battle when the Atton were beaten back and all but exterminated when their planet’s surface was vaporized in a massive nuclear holocaust. They continued by living underground for countless years until the lingering radiation on the planet’s surface dissipated. They Blame the Atrox for this apocalyptic event and vow vengeance. The Atrox were beat back in a series of massive battles till they were isolated on their home planet.

The “Precursors” in a stroke of tactical genius, altered the course of a planet in their solar system to create a never ending eclipse of the Atrox home world. This rapidly cooled the planet and froze the Atrox in an icy grave. This recently has been undone though, as a massive asteroid has struck the eclipsing planet and altered its course, thawing the Atrox and releasing them back upon the galaxy. Curiously the Atrox and the Atton share Some DNA and show signs of DNA manipulation within their genetics, the Atrox more so than the Atton. There is little record of the “Precursors” in historic documents after the sealing of the Atrox within their prison. It is thought that they left the galaxy to search out a new galaxy to start anew. The Atton await the return of their gods and focus their efforts and religion on reconnecting with them.

2. In the website you mention that the APR Races will have their “own individual tech tree, that is unique to them”. Does this mean that there will be different specific techs (different bonuses, requirements, special abilities) for each race or just a different combination (tech path) of the total number of techs available to all the races? You also mentioned that the tech trees are somewhat randomly generated in each game. Could you explain a bit more how it works?

Yes, all the technologies for each race are completely specific to that race and are not shared with any other race. These technologies reflect each race and give each a distinct feel. To give an example, the Atton are a faction that is controlled by an authoritarian government centered on their beliefs. Many of their “system” technologies revolve around religious decrees. In addition they are distinct as they are the only faction to lack any form of shielding for their spaceships. In contrast, the Vitruvians are a cybernetic race and much of their “system” technologies revolve around increasing society efficiency by joining their consciousness. Also the Vitruvians are quite reliant on shielding technologies to protect their ships, and are equipped with the minimal armor.

3. You also mention that players will be able to colonize planets according to their terraforming capabilities, and that will depend on the right level of terraforming technology. Does this mean that the player will be allowed to colonize every planet or does he/she need to unlock some specific techs first?

There will be a variety of different planets within our game much like there is in the real universe. These will range from Irradiated planets in a semi locked orbit such as Mercury is, to frozen wastelands such as Pluto. Obviously some planets such as these on the extreme ranges of the spectrum could not be terraformed regardless of technological knowhow. In our game we will have inhabitable planet classes such as Barren, Swamp, Oceanic, Arid, and Terrain. These planets will be colonizable without any further terraformation and will support population dependent on class and size. The Therans will receive an additional population bonus on Oceanic planets since they are an amphibious race and can thrive in water. Terraformable planets are either too hot to sustain any substantial amount of life such as desert planets, or conversely too cold such as Arctic and Arctic Desert planets. To colonize these planets, the player must first research specific technologies that allow them to terraform these planets. The technologies will be either “warming” technologies for the Arctic and Arctic desert planets or, “cooling” technologies for Desert planets. Each planet will have a specific level of technological difficulty to terraform. These are represented by “tick” marks and each planet can have up to 7 levels. Conversely each technology will allow the player to terraform a number of levels alone. These technologies can be combined together to terraform more difficult planets. An example would be if you had a desert planet with that needed four levels of terraforming. To terraform this planet you may have to combine a technology that cools a planet two levels with two additional technologies that cool a single level apiece. At this point the planet would slowly be terraformed over a certain number of turns depending on it’s size and technologies used, and will become one of the habitable planet types in the end. Technologies used to terraform cost resources in the form of alloy and Galactic credit’s. Not all technologies are equal and some are faster, or more resource efficient than others. As mentioned before, not all planets are terraformable. Irradiated, Frozen core, Volcanic and and Gas giant planets fall in this class of planets. This does not mean they are worthless since many structures that you build in you system are dependent on these classes of planets and could not be built otherwise.

4. You mentioned to me previously that APR is inspired by various 4x space strategy games like Master of Orion 2 and StarTrek: Birth of the Federation. Taking this into consideration in which aspects will APR innovate the genre and why should the fans be looking forward for APR?

Our original goal was to make a game very similar to Birth of the Federation with new graphics, since we were frustrated that no one had came out with a proper sequel. We then stood back and thought “what was great about this game” and “what did it not do that well”. What we thought was great was the layout for planets and the main exploration screen. BOTF’s planet management was nice in the fact that you managed systems as a whole instead of individual planets, this allowed you to manage many more planets then the typical per planet way. This allowed you the feeling of managing a massive empire without the headaches of actually having to manage every aspect of a massive empire. We felt one of the weaknesses of MOO2 was that you had to build the exact same structures on every planet of your system and couldn’t manage them as a whole.

What we did find that MOO2 did better than BOTF was primary their Tactical combat system. In Birth of the Federation, you built a fleet and then had them battle with an enemy fleet in a battle royal. Though options for tactical maneuvers existed, the most of the time the best tactics ended up being limited to charging in and firing all your weapons at opposing ships. This went against the core gameplay for a turn based strategy game. MOO2 on the other hand allowed the player to move each ship independently and to maneuver to present their least exposed side to the enemy while trying to focus firepower on one quadrant of the enemies. This was exceptionally strategic and plays the core gameplay that our fans enjoy. So we chose to have a style similar to MOO2 in that aspect with a top down view on a grid battle map where each ship in maneuvered individually.

We have innovated and expanded gameplay in many area’s within our game. As mentioned before, we have a unique method for players to terraform planets and research technology. We also like to give the players choices throughout the game, and many times throughout the tech tree the player will have to choose one technological branch over another. Players will not be able to research both branches in these instances. Another instance where we will infuse choice into the game is during events. These can be triggered many ways. Often the player will be given a situation where they must choose one action over another, and the outcomes are not set in place. Often what was determined to be the right choice in one game, brings an entirely different outcome in another game.

In addition we have added much to espionage within our game. Players will train spies and maintain a pool of them. To perform tasks, a player will choose an action and send a spy on a mission. After a certain number of turns this task will come to completion. For each mission there are a vast number of outcomes that can happen, such as the agent could successfully complete his mission and then succeed in implicating another faction in the deed. This would lower that player’s trust rating and cause the friendliness rating between the 2 factions to fall. On the opposite end of the spectrum, your agent could fail and become captured and turned into a double agent. If this happens, you will be notified that your agent failed at his mission and has returned. Any operations following this action will be severely compromised until your spy agency uncovers that there is a traitor. In addition, if your moral is faltering, you can send agents to perform operations to silence critics within your empire, raising morale. Nothing is without consequences though, and these operations could fail and backfire.

One area which we felt was often neglected within our genre that we wish to improve on, is ground combat. In APR, we decided we wanted to implement an engaging, yet brief ground combat system. We did this because we wanted to add more depth to the game, yet we didn’t want to drag the game to a crawl by adding a long in depth battle system which would force other player to wait, while other completed. Our combat system will be engaging and entertaining and the outcome will not be completely predetermined, leaving some suspense. Mostly this will be based on each player’s choices prior to combat. It will also take into account, technologies researched, building built and population for the defending side and numbers of transports used by the attacking side. To help the story line progress, many random events will occur throughout that will uncover portions of the past to give back story. In addition, while exploring the galaxy, players will uncover artifacts on planets that will give bonuses and back story as well. As the galaxy is essentially completely explored by mid game, we devised a way to extend this exploration portion by allowing players to form expeditions to explore inhospitable planets in search of artifacts and secret laboratories. To do this, players must research specific technologies that will enable exploration parties for specific planet types. An example of this would be ultra high pressure exploration vessels for gas giant exploration.

APR is built on what we feel are the strong points of our favorite games, but it has grown to be unique on it’s own, with far to many innovations to list. What I have listed above are just a few of things that players can look forward to.

5. Will APR provide multiplayer capabilities? Hot-seat, LAN support?

APR can be played over the internet with any extra seats being controlled by AIs. Players on a LAN can play, though LAN players will have to connect to the matchmaking server though the internet to start the game. There will not be a hotseat mode in the game.

6. When do you plan to release a playable demo?

We haven’t decided to release a playable demo yet. We’re still weighing the pros and cons of doing so, such as the time required to produce it vs the increased interest it could generate.

7. For which platforms are you planning to release for? Will this include Mac?

The platforms we initially release on will most likely depend on our publishing arrangement when the game is complete. The game source code is occasionally compiled and run on a computer running Linux, and we expect there won’t be many problems getting it to run on Macs.

8. And by mentioning APR release. In September 2009 you mention to me that APR “won’t be out for a few years still but we have a lot of it done”. In the site’s forum, in a 2006 post you mention 2011 as the release date. Is this still the target for APR release?

Much depends on if we receive outside funding through a publisher or other outside source. While this would certainly speed up APR’s development, we are unwilling to sign a publishing deal just for the sake of getting funding. If we must continue to finish the game on our own it may take longer than we anticipated, but we are willing take do this route if needed. Everyday brings us closer to completion and progress has been steady. So far we have not gotten any bids on Jared’s left kidney, but we are still hopeful.

Thank you for your time Brad.

Thanks.

The game is still in alpha stage (version 0.3 on a roadmap to 1.0) with many of its features still in development, so in order to have some more information I contacted freeorion and arranged for an interview with freeorion’s Programming Lead: Zach Laine, which kindly and promptly agreed to share with us some of his thoughts for the game.

Enjoy the interview…

1. When did the FreeOrion project kicked-off?

2003. I was looking around on the official Master of Orion 3 forums trying to find some way of fixing a bug I was running into in the game, and came across a thread started by some guy named Tyreth who said, in essence, “This game sucks, let’s make our own game”. There were lots of other posts in agreement with Tyreth, and some guy had already put up a forum on his own web hosting. In about 24 hours, we started making plans and dividing up the work. Tyreth was official lead of the project for a long time — until about 2 or 3 years ago, when he moved on to other things.

2. According to the freeorion roadmap you are in version/stage 0.3 with many of the game features still in planning and design phase. What are your temporal estimates for the project to reach final product (v1.0)?

I wish I had some. We get things done whenever we get them done, which is occasionally really fast, but usually really slow. The problem is that we have two programmers that do almost everything, myself and Geoff Topping. We both have day jobs, and I now have a kid, so slow is the way things go these days. To answer your question, though… years, probably. :(

3. Some time ago when discussing what should 4x space strategy head next I got the following comment from a fan (zigzag member of sins of solar empire forum): “Really, I just want MOO2 with better AI, graphics and LAN support”. This goes in line with a poll I’m running in spacesector.com that clearly shows that MOO2 is still the reference in 4x space strategy gaming. In your opinion will freeorion live up to these expectations? In this sense will freeorion be an “orion” remake or more an innovative sequel?

In short, no. We’re not just reimplementing MOO2. In fact, our influences are really broad, as you might expect from a community effort over several years. Some of those influences are: MOO1, MOO2, SMAC (Alpha Centauri), HOI (Hearts of Iron) 1&2. There are others too, I’m sure, but I think those are the biggest. The idea became, very early on, to make a new and fun 4X game in the same vein as the MOO series, since there is little indication of the industry’s desire to make one. (There have been a few to come out since we adopted that approach, but I admit I haven’t played many of them. From what I gather, most are arguably not very MOO-like.) Some of the major design guidelines we’ve adopted have been:

1) We don’t care about realism. At all.
2) Micromanagement is not fun.
3) KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) — Ideally, you should be able to explain the rules to an intelligent child. You shouldn’t need a degree in Mathematics, Computer Science, or Accounting to understand the game mechanics of FreeOrion. I’m looking at you, MOO3.
4) Making tough choices is fun.
5) Turning some part of gameplay over to an AI is not fun.
6) This is a strategic game, not a tactical game.

Other people from the project may add other guidelines to this list, but I think these are the universally accepted ones. For example, we have a global production queue (rather than per-planet or per-system ones) because of 2. We have buildings that are more like Wonders from the Civ games than buildings from MOO2 or the Civ games, also because of 2.

4. Now regarding some design concepts of freeorion. Space Combat. Tell us a bit about the freeorion space combat model. Will it be highly tactical like in MOO2 or completely abstract (user intervention completely removed) like in GalCiv2?

Neither — it will be somewhere in the middle. It will definitely be interactive, but you won’t be bogged down with ship-level details like ship facings. The level of interactivity will be largely up to you. Each unit has some things that it’s good at and some things that it isn’t, so each unit will have prescribed actions that it will do in the absence of any user action. For example, if you don’t give your interceptor fighters any orders at all, or they finish their current mission, they’ll start looking for other fighters to destroy, and they’ll attack bomber fighters first. You can queue up orders for each unit, and the unit will do them, in order, to the best of its abilities. When it runs out of things to do in its queue, it reverts to something sensible for that unit type. Also, the combat pace is what we like to call phased-realtime. All combat occurs in turns, but if you want, you can allow the turns to fly by, without pausing at the end of each one. This makes it feel more like an RTS. Or, if you choose pause-after-each-turn, you get more of a MOO2 feel to the pace. We’re modeling this after KOTOR’s turn-based system. It didn’t feel turn based unless you wanted it to. Multiplayer will probably require the no-pause setup, or perhaps a time-limited-turn setup.

5. Concerning the Ship Design Model. Could you advance some of the features? Will freeorion follow the MOO1 model of building stacks of ships, provide tiny ships (like fighters or bombers) as modules for bigger ships classes or will all ships, irrespective of the class, be produced as independent ships like in GalCiv2?

This is one of the ways we diverge the most from the MOOs. Instead of a whatever-fits model, we have a slot model. For a given hull, you get so many interior slots, so many exterior slots, and that’s it. Hulls must be researched. You have a variety of modules, of three types: interior-placeable, exterior-placeable, and placeable in either slot type. Things like shields and armor may take interior slots, whereas things like fighter bays and weapons may take exterior slots.

Currently, we’re shooting for all individual ships, all the time. If the runtime burden proves to be too much, we may start combining ships to cut down on poly counts. We want big battles to have an epic feel to them, and 100 ships represented by a single frigate doesn’t do that very well. ;)

6. Regarding research, technologies and techtrees. What will be the concept behind research? Will it follow the MOO1 model that unlocks random techs as some fields are continuously researched; will it follow MOO2 creative/uncreative traits approach, where after a field breakthrough the player gets all techs if creative, 1 random tech if uncreative or 1 tech pick if not creative nor uncreative? Or will freeorion innovate and create a MOO1/MOO2 tech concept mix or even another approach?

It’s largely based on the Theory-Application-Refinement model from HOI. You research theories, which make other Theories possible, and also may open up one or more Applications of that Theory. Each Application allows you to make an actual piece of tech, like a new hull or a laser cannon, or whatever. Refinements take Applications and make them better in some way, like making them 5% cheaper, or 5% more damaging, or whatever. Or goal with this system is that you can refine something to the point where it is so useful that a heavily-refined early tech can actually compete with an unrefined tech much later in the tree. So, do you choose to spend research points on improving what you have, or finding new techs? If we design the tech tree right, there should be no one right answer to that question.

7. Now how can the community help and contribute to the freeorion project?

That’s easy. They can just go to freeorion.org, and check out our forums. The best way to contribute to this or any other open-source project is to find something that you can do, and that you also want to do (that’s actually a lot more important to getting something done than you may at first think), and then do it. Considering the importance of that second part, figuring out what you’d like to help with is a better way to get involved than asking for an “assignment”. I can’t tell you what you’re good at, or what you like to do! :)

8. In which areas are you lacking more resources on? Do you want to provide some contact links here to where people can apply to contribute?

Progress is almost always limited by our low number of programmers. If you’re a competent C++ programmer, please consider getting involved! Also, we have Geoff, one of our whopping 2 programmers, doing most of the grunt work on all the design stuff. For instance, everyone agreed on the tech model, but Geoff has made the tech tree by himself. As such, it’s barely populated — it’s almost all Theories right now. So if you’ve always wanted to design a kick-ass tech tree, now’s your chance. We could use lots of cool sound effects for the UI effects (we have some now, but meh), we could use some more music, and we could use lots of models for ships.

There’s a “How to Help” page on our Wiki. Programmers, graphic artists, sound artists, and designers can all
find the relevant links there to get started. Note that there is also a subforum for each of those areas of interest.

9. When do you plan to have v0.4 available for download?

I wish I knew. There’s a lot that needs to be done. 0.4 is taking so long because it is by far the biggest single piece of the effort. A realtime 3D space combat system with multiplayer support is just plain hard. I hope to have it finished by the end of next summer, but who knows really? With more programmers, or more free time on my part, it could be sooner… or later. Whenever it is done though, we’ll finally have a version of FreeOrion that is at least playable in some sense. What we have right now is more of a tech demo than a game.

Thank you very much for your time Zach.

It was my pleasure.