Top 11 Improvements to PS

[Weemdog]

Dev Team,

It is important to understand that Battlesector is a Tabletop-like, Faction vs Faction on a battle map game at heart. It is not a risk-like game or a Total War Warhammer-type campaign. Skirmish battles need to remain the primary focus. And Planetary Supremacy should be seen as a way to bridge together multiple distinct skirmish battles in a fun, different, and engaging way. I want each run through to feel new and different. I want there to be impacts as a result of the decisions I make. To this end, I don’t want to see a whole second game developed, as I still want to focus on the skirmish battles and not have the Campaign Map get in the way. But I also want the Campaign Map to feel necessary. As it stands, the Campaign Map only serves to artificially link 1 Exterminatus skirmish to the next, with the choices you make having very little impact on your next battle, your army feeling pretty much the same each run-through, and the overall environment feeling very abstract and uninspired. These are my suggestions and come in 3 main categories…Campaign Map, Skirmish, and Armies.

Caveat: I am not talking about more factions (as that is assumed), or Army Painter/Mods, Co-Op Mode, or a more formal Campaign (as the Devs have already said these things aren’t on the short-term plan).

1. Actual Map Vs Hexes. While I don’t think it necessarily matters in terms of actual gameplay, the current Campaign Map format using hexes is a very abstract design and definitely feels more like a board game than an actual battle for Planetary Supremacy. Using an actual map would go a long way toward immersing the player in the campaign. My suggestion would be to have a handful of different pre-set map types (continents, archipelago, Pangaea, etc.). To simplify things, you wouldn’t need to randomize the map. You could start with 1 type, and add more in the future. And you could randomize start positions.

2. Campaign Map with Obstacles and Tile Advantages. This could be done on either a hex-type map or a more realistic map. Add rivers, mountains, oceans, glaciers, or whatever that block certain lines of assault and make it harder to get to certain hexes. Add advantages to controlling certain hexes. As it stands, there is 1 map, and every time the player starts at the bottom, with the 2 enemies in the top corners. There are no obstacles that protect certain tiles better than others and could make it more important in determining your line of assault. There are no reasons to attack 1 tile over another (except for the army you want to face and the 4 bigger objectives, which are fairly boring in the grand scheme of things). Every single time you play PS, the board is set up the exact same way, which leads to a feeling of repetitiveness.

3. Campaign Map Tile Fortification options. As I said, I don’t want to make this into a second game mode. For example, in Gladius I think there is way too much time spent with dealing with the economics. This game should focus on the Skirmishes. That being said, if you are going to have a Campaign Map, you need to have at least a small number of improvements you can make to the tiles under your control. This could be done in 1 of 2 ways…either you “purchase” the upgrades, or the upgrades are attached to specific tiles. A balance seems the best, as it would give you a reason to have to battle over specific tiles. For example, maybe you can only requisition new units to your army from a tile that has a Spaceport. Or you can only upgrade tech when your army is in a tile with a Lab. Or a Fort comes with a couple of units that can supplement your army if you are attacked in the same area.

4. More than 1 Army. To build on the previous, having only 1 army is too restrictive. It’s also weird that you use the same army to attack any hex on the map, or to defend your base. I also think it’s a problem that as soon as your 1 army is bigger than your opponent’s 1 army, the game is pretty much over. If you had the ability to create multiple armies, you would have to balance whether you wanted to be offensive and use your main army to attack the enemy, or be defensive and use your main army to defend your home base. Have 1 big army, or have 2 medium sized armies. There could be smaller skirmishes throughout the campaign, which is fun. You would have to make strategic decisions about which army to use and where. And in line with the Tile Fortification Options, maybe there is an upgrade type that allows you to trade units amongst your armies. I also enjoy having different types of armies that I can use against different enemies based on specific advantages/disadvantages. And, you wouldn’t need to just delete an experienced entry level unit to make room for a more advanced unit…you could just move them to another army. Maybe certain tiles allow for additional armies, so it creates a reason to conquer a specific tile.

5. More than just Exterminatus. My biggest complaint with PS as it stands, is every battle feels pretty much the same (except the final battles). Start at the bottom, move up the map, kill the enemy units as they come at you, wash, rinse, repeat. We need more battle types. Add Conquest and Strategic Command. Add some of the ones from the BA Campaign where you have to secure a series of points, or save some units that have become separated, or any number of things. Continue to develop new game modes that can also be used in multiplayer.

6. More Battle Maps. I like the Randomized PS maps, but I would like to see more than just this in PS. These maps work great for how they’re used now….in Exterminatus matches. But they may not be ideal for other battle types. The easy solution is to use the ones from the Campaign or the Skirmish maps. The good thing about these maps is they are set and have great choke and strategic points. And there are some that aren’t in the current list of Skirmish maps so would still feel quite new. And if they are just sprinkled into a PS Campaign, you would only see a couple each run-through, adding to the replayability.

7. Secondary Objectives. On our Fan Discord, we ran a Tournament incorporating some Secondary Objectives in each battle. They were fun and helped change things up a bit. Similar to Tabletop, they give each side something else to shoot for other than just Exterminatus. If you had a bank of 10-15, they could be randomized in certain matches, so would feel different and add something to the match.

8. Add a Narrative. There are obviously a lot of folks that want a Campaign. I think the best way to do that here would be to have a bank of “1 paragraph descriptions/scene-setters“ that helps set the stage for each battle. There doesn’t need to be voice acting or a movie. Just words on the screen along with maybe a picture, but even that is not required. Basically just a “why am I doing this battle”. And maybe this exists on the Campaign Map for only certain tiles as you try to decide which area to attack. After all, sometimes you are only attacking to attack. Secondary Objectives or some of the specific pre-created maps could be worked into this, as well. A little bit of set-up would go a long way in terms of immersion. And it would make each run-through different.

9. Expanded Unit Veterancy. One thing I feel I’m missing is some attachment to my army. The current +1 Accuracy and +1% Crit is something. But it would be nice to see some more advancement amongst my army and give me a reason to care about specific units. I don’t think you need much. It could be as little as just being able to change the name of whatever unit was the MVP of a battle (most kills or most damage?). So your Hellblasters squad becomes Veteran Hellblasters. This could be automatic (the game chooses the name) or the player could get to make the change. To make it more exciting, maybe that squad also gets a boon to one of their stats. This could even just be automatic. Whatever unit was the most accurate could get a permanent 5% accuracy bonus. Or the squad that did the most damage could get a +2 damage bonus. Or you could have the option to assign 1 squad Veteran status after every won battle and attach a boon to them. To make it easy, you could even use the Loot Box bonuses from Demonic Incursion as the available boons. Since this is Single Player, there’s really no balance issues. But it would be different every run-through and man it would hurt if you lose that unit.

10. Wargear/Relics. I think one thing this game is missing is more lore-specific wargear/relics. Having this would serve multiple fronts. It would differentiate units from 1 run-through to the next. It would give them a personality. It would allow you to specialize units. For folks who are tabletop players, it would immerse them more. They could also be used as rewards for winning a battle, making winning that battle more meaningful. It could even be worked into the narrative or Secondary Objective…go attack this tile to get X Wargear. This seems like it could be relatively easy to implement. In the original Campaign, there were several tech tree improvements that were basically wargear that improved Armor, HP, Accuracy, etc. They don’t necessarily (for now) need to be new game mechanics. Simple stat improvements would be a good start.

11. Improve AI. Whatever is done, the skirmish AI needs to be improved. Units need to act together. Armies need to be composed of units that can balance and support each other. I think the main thing I’d like improved is not at the Unit-level, but how all the units act together against the player. Right now, they all seem to be acting on their own versus acting as a team.

Just my 2 cents.