I was taking a gander for information releating to the demo of theis fantastic project..I saw the faq from the year 2004. Is the demo still ALPHA..did the requirements change to run it......Hoping that development is going strong! look foreward to hearing back.

Hi. Yes, the game is still in alpha. There's a bunch of new stuff though. The art guys have been busy, and there's new music too. Also, we now have orbital bombardment, agents, new orbital batteries and planetary shields, a system overview screen, new shipyards with some rotating models of ships, etc. Still a WiP though.
Mike likes to keep up with new tech, so expect the reqs to change.

Welcome Byeohazard
I am looking forward to the function of diplomacy and espionage.
It would be best now to run the game on Windows 7.

I would add that Mike says he is taking some holiday time to really crank on programming. So we'll see what happens! Merry Christmas to us, if a lot happens.

Supremacy has been natively designed for Windows 7, so it actually runs better on 7 than on Vista from what Mike has told me.

The BOTF2 project has indeed been running since 2004, but Supremacy only came into being in late 2006. Prior to that we were building a different game, but that game collapsed and died a painful death when what the programmer was making was revealed to be nothing more than hot air. As you can see, Supremacy is not hot air since we have a playable demo. Ok, we've not publicly released anything since May 2009, but there has been many staff-only builds since then to develop and test various new game updates. And if you don't believe me, well here's my game folder:


So yeah, i've got more than a few copies of the game on my hard drive lol.

Hey, I just found this game and this forum and I'm prob really behind but I was wondering if I'm not doing something right. The AI still doesn't do anything right and I'm not allowed to attack planets correct?

The AI is being left to the end because there is no point in building it when other components may change before the end. There is no AI. You can't do any diplomacy with the races you discover. You can just explore, build and develop.

We are really hoping this will change soon.

Oh ok. Thank you kindly

The current build already supports attacking planets (both orbital bombardment and ground combat), so most likely you'll be able to do it in the next public build.
As for an AI, I guess the most we can hope for at this time is farm building so that pop doesn't starve.

Sorry if any of my questions seem stupid, this is my first turn at this kind of stuff never really got into it before. But, should I be able to attack the minor races now or do I have to wait for the next update to the game to do this?

Glad to have you posting. There are no stupid questions. You can't attack minors in the current public build. I know... bummer!

Yeah, that is a bummer. From what I have seen of the game so far I am def looking forward to whenever in the future. I especially like the much larger galaxy from the first.

...and it's a small thing, but in the first game, I always wished you could plot a nonlinear course with your starships. In this game you can. If you don't know how to do that, see the manual (in my signature), page 14.

It's kind of a matter of personal taste. Me, I think linear courses make more sense, but I might be in the minority.

My assumption is by non-linear you mean the ability to divert your course through empty space (or possibly empty space) to reach your destination without using a straight-line path.

Linear for the sake of strategy makes it easier to control systems and to guard them. It also makes Player and Computer actions easier to predict making coding it slightly easier, especially when designing pathing AI as well as defensive options and intercepts. Games like Masters of Orion 3 used star lanes which is even more strict since you could control choke point systems and were forced to use them if you ever wanted to get anywhere in a reasonable amount of time (not using them was like 10x longer or greater).

However using your guide example (see image) lets say you want to avoid a black hole just to the right of Alpha Australis and you wanted to get to Aectok, the option to go around it without having to visit one possibly more systems first makes more sense. This would also be the case of wanting to travel between 2 planets while avoiding crossing enemy territory that might partially be between your systems and destination.

I probably don't want to bring too much reality in to the discussion because technically you can move in 3 dimensions and unless the game is being panned for a 3D map that I haven’t heard about then...

I guess it depends on what makes more sense and what is more fun.

In that situation you described, non-linear pathing makes the black hole useless as "space terrain", since it takes the exact same time going around it as going through it.

Depends on if diagonals are the same value as vertical/horizontal moves (should be about 41-42% extra movement). But I see your point.

However even if the time to move is the same the black hole square isn't meaningless:
- It provides a blocked tile (or semi-blocked, I’m not sure how its being handled)
- If implemented it might interfere with nearby sensor data in adjacent squares
- Might reduce movement in adjacent squares
- Provide a risky hiding spot (or maybe not at high tech levels)
- etc.

Somehow forcing a player to move through a black hole seems not right, at least not after it is discovered; first time surprise is one thing but after that it should be an avoidable hazard that provides a minor navigational nuisance.

I don't think Pythagoras was included in the game Not sure if it's going to be.

The full effects of black holes not having been implemented yet, from what I understand, you can enter one such square, but the chances the ships are destroyed are high. They'll probably be a source of research points (like other special spatial bodies) for survey ships to collect. They interfere with sensors, but currently only in their own sector (other bodies affect multiple sectors, like pulsars).

Notice I was only talking about movement (BHs as terrain). And you're not forced to do anything. You could go straight to Aectok passing through the BH, or take the safe route and go to Botein first and then to Aectok, which in this case would just take one more square.

I've never been a fan of free movement in this type of game. It's too prone to gaming the system IMO. I much prefer moving to systems (or other bodies) only, and like you said it has the benefit of making it easier for the AI. Not talking about choke points, mind you.

Yup I don't mind either way honestly; both have pros/cons.

Yeah when I was using that example from the manual I noticed someone would say go to Botein first to go around, but theoretically in several situations (not the majority but enough) you could be blocked by a black hole so that the only route is to go through it, assuming linear travel only. The only way I can see that happening with non-linear travel is if there were multiple hazards (like 2 black holes).

Like I said that might be a good thing, but since black holes can completely (with chance) destroy a ship, there should be a method to avoid them (with a cost to circumvent it). Heck maybe have the black hole be an encounter with a prompt that asks: "Sir we have enter a sector with a black hole, to safely go around it, it will require XYZ extra time to give it a wide birth, however we could risk the fleet by taking a less broad route. How should we proceed Sir?"

How is movement calculated currently?

And yeah I'm not sure its worth the trouble (some players may not understand the extra diagonal cost intuatively). Did the original BOTF cost more for diagonals (been so long since I played it)? For me it makes more sense for it to cost more but I would even notice if it didn't probably.

Currently, any square costs 1 MP, including diagonals.
In BotF I can't really recall either, but range markers are not squares, they have the corners cut off, so that might be an indication of diagonals costing more MPs. I'll check that when I get the time.

BHs are pretty rare (either a 5% or 10% chance, can't recall), so you might get 1, maybe 2 per quadrant. I'm not sure they should affect sensor readings in adjacent sectors. Currently they don't, and in their own sector (which is a large portion of space) they have one of the lowest sensor interference values (-8 IIRC, with nebulae @-4). Seems ok to me, neutron stars and pulsars have much higher values (up to -64).

I don't know how that will be implemented, but it could be interesting to have the chance of destruction depend on the ship's propulsion level. And use shield level for other hazards that affect ship components (except nebulae which negate shields of course).

Yeah I think you are right, when BOTF1 calculates sensor range/fuel range it treats diagonals as greater distance. Where as Supremacy does not for territory (nor does it appear fuel ranges do either), hence why you see square territorial areas and the yellow fuel range indicator. I'm not even sure how BOTF1 calculated territories, because they look odd sometimes.