View topic - Win by objective, not kill everything idea



All times are UTC + 1 hour


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: 22 Mar 2010, 20:08 
Conflict Terra Developer
User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010, 06:21
Location: Tucson
JohannesH wrote:
You dont know how deep something is before you touch the bottom.


Curious question: What would be the bottom in this situation?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 23 Mar 2010, 11:50 
User avatar

Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 11:43
SanadaUjiosan wrote:
JohannesH wrote:
You dont know how deep something is before you touch the bottom.


Curious question: What would be the bottom in this situation?

Perfect play


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Mar 2010, 14:31 
Map Creator
User avatar

Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24
Location: waiting in line for The Expendables 2
JohannesH wrote:
SanadaUjiosan wrote:
JohannesH wrote:
You dont know how deep something is before you touch the bottom.


Curious question: What would be the bottom in this situation?

Perfect play


godde is the closest to acheiving that


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Mar 2010, 02:35 
MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer

Joined: 21 Sep 2004, 07:25
Location: Needlessly hostile.
Scenario unfortunately involves much more than simply adding some lines of code for modoptions but the design of entire maps for specific scenarios, triggers and events and whatnot. Scenario-style games are very hard to do and even harder to make fun, which is why you don't see them very often (and when you do, don't see them played very often).


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Apr 2010, 19:29 
Community Lead
User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 04:05
Location: Finland, 1944
Scenarios and campaigns expend the supermajority of development time and funding in commercial games. It is unlikely we could contend with that even if we had a stable engine, stable game and completely active development team. I'm fairly certain the multiplayer balance would suffer heavily if we attempted to, as it has the several times when Nemo has gone off into scenario land.

The comparative mathematical and absolute complexity of S:44 is not really up to debate. I wouldn't say 1v0ry is unbiased, but he is quite impartial in his critique or defense of just about everything which he feels with confidence he can prevail in the discussion of.

On the "Strategy" discussion... nothing in RTS occurs at a strategic level. Battles constitute operational engagements with operational stances, and different sectors and clashes can be considered tactical along with the base construction element. "Micromanagement" is task based activity, which is the lowest level of military strategem. We may delve into the strategic realm through a metagame but thus far lack the resources to do so. We've tried to increase the scope of operational and tactical activity with the design of 1944, though tasks remain important.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Apr 2010, 20:19 
User avatar

Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 11:43
neddiedrow wrote:
The comparative mathematical and absolute complexity of S:44 is not really up to debate. I wouldn't say 1v0ry is unbiased, but he is quite impartial in his critique or defense of just about everything which he feels with confidence he can prevail in the discussion of.

Sure he's trying to be impartial, doesnt mean he's right though.
Surely its up for debate, but pretty pointless debate at that.
neddiedrow wrote:
On the "Strategy" discussion... nothing in RTS occurs at a strategic level. Battles constitute operational engagements with operational stances, and different sectors and clashes can be considered tactical along with the base construction element. "Micromanagement" is task based activity, which is the lowest level of military strategem. We may delve into the strategic realm through a metagame but thus far lack the resources to do so. We've tried to increase the scope of operational and tactical activity with the design of 1944, though tasks remain important.

No, theres a load of strategy in RTS... Its a game not real warfare mind you, so we dont use military definitions of words, but game definitions.
Also your definition of metagame seems a bit unortodox, metagame = the game played outside the actual game, mindgames and such. So its not something game developers can directly influence.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Apr 2010, 23:09 
Community Lead
User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 04:05
Location: Finland, 1944
No more unorthodox than the assertion that there is actual strategy in RTS titles. :wink:

However, to clarify, I refer to the construction of a secondary or overhead game run through a website or active database where the individual games or matches constitute tactical or operational engagements, similar to what you saw in PlanetWars, though much more complex with overhead political, economic and logistic concerns.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Apr 2010, 00:33 
User avatar

Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 11:43
Wikipedia is cool.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy
"In game theory, a strategy refers to one of the options that a player can choose. That is, every player in a non-cooperative game has a set of possible strategies, and must choose one of the choices."

and you meant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_strategy
which too can be fitted to some RTS's though if you look from the right angle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metagame
"In simple terms, using out-of-game information, or resources, to affect one's in-game decisions."
The thing you're talking of, is a game. :)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Apr 2010, 01:09 
Community Lead
User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 04:05
Location: Finland, 1944
I am well aware of the relevant definitions and wikipedia articles. :P

Computer games and game theory are separate entities, that definition is not valid in the context of this discussion. The key assumption is that RTS games simulate strategy while RTT games simulate tactics - these are both classic misattributions assigned by a community with a misguided sense of scale attempting to use military terminology. I offer my points on military scale of engagement as a correction to the colloquialism, not because I'm unaware of the context. :wink:

I am referring to a "metagame", not the general concept of metagaming. The technical term might be megagame, but that implies that the game is an independent entity. The scope of what I'm discussing makes it dependent upon the actual game - in this case Spring 1944 - and merely a extension/expansion of the core title. Hence meta rather than mega, an abstracted supplement rather than a greater independent game.

Which raises the question, why not merely call Spring 1944 a "minigame" in this context - well, a minigame is merely a dependent game that occurs at a smaller scale than the source game. Spring 1944 is not at all dependent upon the "metagame" and thus the term doesn't apply.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Apr 2010, 02:43 
Blood & Steel Developer
User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 12:31
Location: Has not played *a in years.
Look scenarios would be cool and everything, but that is not what I was originally asking for. I was asking for a multiplayer mod option that allows players to start an uneven game that would allow the player at a disadvantage to win by better over all command rating or unit effectiveness. (So he can get his/her ass kicked by larger forces and win by being more effective).


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Apr 2010, 11:08 
Spring Developer
User avatar

Joined: 22 Sep 2007, 08:51
isn't tactics and strategy only different in scale?
and there is no logical/absolute/natural boundary there i could think of, so the discussion of what is tactics and what strategy is always kind of wishy-washy, and relying on scales more or less arbitrarily chosen by someone in the past?
We could possibly agree on that strategy is used on a broader ("more zoomed out") scale, while tactics is below that, and the scale of switch has to be agreed on in each context/talk, im- or explicitly, and needs to only help in communication, and not adhere to a global/absolute standard.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Site layout created by Roflcopter et al.