View topic - BA DSD why it works, how it is good and you getting over it.



All times are UTC + 1 hour


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 66 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 07 Jun 2011, 08:53 
User avatar

Joined: 27 Feb 2006, 13:49
Location: Core Prime IA
Nice story smoth, really ;)

Since BA lacks some decent single player campagin where noobs could learn slowly DSD type games are good for teaching basics and even get big guns out.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jun 2011, 15:00 
Journeywar Developer & Mapper
User avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2006, 21:12
Location: Never go full Retro-ard! You just don't do it.
I guess thats one of the biggest hidden motivations. nubs want to see everything. The idea of having stuff missed, enemys escaped, cars, tanks, toys untested, is unbearable for the human hamster nature.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jun 2011, 00:04 
User avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2007, 22:37
I'd like to add something:

Look at Starcraft 2 : it has one of the best matchmaking systems, where the more you play, the highest the chance you'll be facing an opponent of your strength...

But people still bitch about the system! Why? Human nature! Starcaft 2 matchmaking system tends towards a 50/50 win/loss ratio... it should be considered the best system you can make... but 50% losses is still too much for some people... they want to win!


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jun 2011, 00:38 
Zero-K Developer
User avatar

Joined: 10 Sep 2008, 02:11
Location: Bayesian space monkeys
People like winning. People don't like losing.
Let people win and feel like they deserved it, and you've made a Good RTS Game.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jun 2011, 00:48 

Joined: 17 Sep 2008, 03:36
Location: your imagination
I think a lot of the criticism towards SC2 matchmaking early on was that people didn't realise that it was driven by a hidden ranking, not your league ranking. So often people in lower leagues would get matched against people a league or two higher, with both sides given equal preference to win, so would think it broken.

In general though it was really awesome. I don't think I ever waited longer than 15 seconds to get a game. :D


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jun 2011, 05:53 
Journeywar Developer & Mapper
User avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2006, 21:12
Location: Never go full Retro-ard! You just don't do it.
maybe the real problem is that we have a strategy-game.. sort of a really advanced chess.

We didnt just take the old version (like Starcraft did), balanced it up for 3 parties and rereleased it with a protop cut off sub-competition like who-can-do-the-most clicks per minute.. or who can play additional tic-tc-toe-while-doing-a-handstand.

Maybee all we need is a disclaimer. Stranger be warned, real strategy awaits you, like you maybe never have discovered it before. It gives you logistic problems, tatic problems - and a steep learning curve. We dont feed you success with a spoon, you are not good, just by right of birth.
Do you accept this?
[]Yes and []No leads both to go.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jun 2011, 12:35 
User avatar

Joined: 27 Jun 2006, 16:55
Location: Australia
Just because a game is slower and bigger doesn't mean it has more strategy. A lot of losers here think starcraft is about tactics not strategy, wrong. A strategy is a solution you have to a problem, tactics relate to the conduct of that solution.

Both games have strategy.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jun 2011, 12:53 
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2005, 06:16
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand
Remember that we're not using the standard meaning here. In RTS games, especially this community, strategy refers to the overall war plan and tactics covers the engagements of individual units or small groups. A bigger/slower game gives more time and room for 'grand strategy'.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jun 2011, 13:19 
User avatar

Joined: 07 Feb 2005, 21:30
Location: Cheese factory
Well BA has a lot of intricacies that Starcraft does not, and vice versa. It's apples and oranges. That's why applying map design from Starcraft is not going to make a good BA map.

In Starcraft a unit's cost is deducted from your funds when you begin to build it. To build faster you must build more barracks or w/e structure unit uses. But you also have to time things to ensure full production.

In BA the cost is gradually transferred into the unit. You can m-stall, e-stall, you can increase/decrease the build rate. You can pause construction at will.

In Starcraft you research upgrades.

In BA there are no upgrades - your units will never have any advantage over the opponent's units(except for experience, which is a tiny factor).

In Starcraft you only need to expand to the crystal field on your doorstep, then you are pretty much set for half the game or more.

In BA you must expand all over the map as much as you can.

In Starcraft units can use special abilities. Unit value is the main determinant for which unit beats another.

In BA the special ability(advantage) is the knowledge of correct application of the huge array of units and weapons(such as the commander or nukes for instance).

In Starcraft units and buildings leave no wrecks.

In BA things leave wrecks and reclaiming those wrecks is of huge importance.

Can't even compare bombers and ships because Starcraft doesn't have them. BA is more of a full-fledged war simulation whereas Starcraft is a RTS with a more confined stage of war.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jun 2011, 16:15 
User avatar

Joined: 27 Jun 2006, 16:55
Location: Australia
Hrm good point.

I propose a few things to make ba more rewarding for people who appreciate real strategy (the tas community.)

Make all units twice as small. Most small RTS games only have life sized units, by making our units smaller we create the illusion that individual units are not deciding the war (most other RTS games only focus on small scale battles, we focus of large scale wars) and we can fit more units into the war zone making it less of a tactical click fest and more strategic think fest.

Slow speed by half. By slowing the speed you allow the player more time to think about his or hers grand strategy instead of being forced to make small scale tactical decisions.

If wrecks have not been reclaimed after 1 minute send notifications to all players reminding them about the wrecks. Not many other games leave wrecks, but ba does. Plus wrecks can decide a lot of games so it's vital we remind players about wrecks and there importance.

Allow the player to zoom out even further. Currently TAS only allows you to zoom out to see the entire map, unfortunately this forces the player to feel like he's still in the battle and many of the players decisions are influenced by that. By allowing the player to zoom out so far they can't even see the map we allow the player to detach them self from the pressure of feeling like they're on the ground allowing them to make clear and concise strategies.

Commander has hair that goes grayer as the war rages on. All other RTS games focus on scale in size, we need to focus on scale in time. By showing physical changes in the commanders appearance we can show the player the gravity of what he's doing, he's playing BA, no small scale RTS but BA.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jun 2011, 16:23 
User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 01:02
Location: cheap kitchen
i agree with all of that and also if you look at the most popular game right now, that is farmville.
You might think farmville has nothing to do with rts, maybe, but it does many things right:
First off, interaction between players.
In TAspring the interaction is limited to the battles.
Yes, there is planetwars but but compare that to farmville where players can send each other presents and horses. zeroK lobby already has a friendlist (like facebook, myspace etc) so it should be easy to allow players to trade units like pok├®mon.
The second nice thing about farmville is how everybody is always updated on all important events like "xy has planted a potato tree".
I guess it would be possible to have chanserv bot annouce recent advances in all channels (or maybe just the games specific channel?) like "xy has dgunned a krogoth."


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jun 2011, 16:25 
Community Representative
User avatar

Joined: 08 Sep 2008, 21:59
Location: small cars
steven some very valid points; although surely for BA some massive maps might suffice instead of altering sizes/speeds of units

zooming out :
Image
I am tired of being caught in the tangle of their lives.

lol beards


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jun 2011, 16:29 
User avatar

Joined: 07 Feb 2005, 21:30
Location: Cheese factory
Lolsquad_Steven wrote:
Hrm good point.

I propose a few things to make ba more rewarding for people who appreciate real strategy (the tas community.)

Make all units twice as small. Most small RTS games only have life sized units, by making our units smaller we create the illusion that individual units are not deciding the war (most other RTS games only focus on small scale battles, we focus of large scale wars) and we can fit more units into the war zone making it less of a tactical click fest and more strategic think fest.

Slow speed by half. By slowing the speed you allow the player more time to think about his or hers grand strategy instead of being forced to make small scale tactical decisions.

If wrecks have not been reclaimed after 1 minute send notifications to all players reminding them about the wrecks. Not many other games leave wrecks, but ba does. Plus wrecks can decide a lot of games so it's vital we remind players about wrecks and there importance.

Allow the player to zoom out even further. Currently TAS only allows you to zoom out to see the entire map, unfortunately this forces the player to feel like he's still in the battle and many of the players decisions are influenced by that. By allowing the player to zoom out so far they can't even see the map we allow the player to detach them self from the pressure of feeling like they're on the ground allowing them to make clear and concise strategies.

Commander has hair that goes grayer as the war rages on. All other RTS games focus on scale in size, we need to focus on scale in time. By showing physical changes in the commanders appearance we can show the player the gravity of what he's doing, he's playing BA, no small scale RTS but BA.

Sounds a bit like NOTA.

Didn't you say widgets were imba before? Then why reduce speed? Before widgets we had to have higher APM to do our chores. Halving speed means APM would nearly be halved too. Will players really think more? Take Speed chess for instance. Some of the best chess players were also good at speed chess(Kasparov is one example). High pace forces players to have a more efficient mental process to stay competitive.

Wreck notifications idea is good and it sounds like a widget. ;-)

Zoom out so they cannot see the map? C'mon, are you trolling now? :-P Players can just turn off their screens if they feel that stressed..

Commander appearance thing sounds like trolling to me since everybody knows robots don't have hair. Or do they?..!


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 10 Jun 2011, 22:59 

Joined: 25 Nov 2010, 20:47
can we implement medals and awards? and maybe limit starting points of new people to a couple of specific spots on a map?

the medals and awards would be simple task/mission orientated things:
have x metal/s and y energy/s within z time frame.
build x number of y units in z time frame.
build a mine on x spot and defend it for y seconds. (how long before they pay for themslfs?)
killing a larger unit with smaller units (how to efectivly control a swarm, formation drawing etc)

having a few hint tooltips - how to chat, how to team chat, how to draw on the map, how to place markers on the map, how to get out of FPS mode when in it.

warnings:
you're in metal debit, you're trying to build too much with not enough income!


these could be done while in normal regular games - but some medals and awards would be map specific.

We also need to come down hard on people who rage and rant againsed noobisim and are compleate arseholes in game.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 10 Jun 2011, 23:29 

Joined: 09 Sep 2007, 20:05
Cheesecan wrote:
Lolsquad_Steven wrote:
Hrm good point.

I propose a few things to make ba more rewarding for people who appreciate real strategy (the tas community.)
...
blablabla taking stuff seriously
...


Son, you really dont get it do you?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Jun 2011, 04:22 
User avatar

Joined: 19 May 2007, 08:28
Location: YOU WILL REGRET THIS
se5a wrote:
can we implement medals and awards? and maybe limit starting points of new people to a couple of specific spots on a map?

the medals and awards would be simple task/mission orientated things:
have x metal/s and y energy/s within z time frame.
build x number of y units in z time frame.
build a mine on x spot and defend it for y seconds. (how long before they pay for themslfs?)
killing a larger unit with smaller units (how to efectivly control a swarm, formation drawing etc)

having a few hint tooltips - how to chat, how to team chat, how to draw on the map, how to place markers on the map, how to get out of FPS mode when in it.

Zero K has had these things for ages. It wouldn't be much work to put the widgets in BA.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Jun 2011, 04:32 
Modeler
User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 15:53
Location: at front, llt pushing
actually zk got none of these things ? (but yes, it got awards)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Jun 2011, 05:05 
User avatar

Joined: 19 May 2007, 08:28
Location: YOU WILL REGRET THIS
It's got awards, it has Nubtron for help. It only needs slight modifications to get what se5a wants for BA.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Jun 2011, 05:20 

Joined: 25 Nov 2010, 20:47
ZK has these things at the end, if you had them during the game it might help prod new dudes in the right direction. if it's a widget it could detect maps it's been set up for, and prompt the player to do specific things on that map depending where he's placed himself. DSD would be good for this as it's well played and most the tricks are well known, so a new player can be sort of given a recipe to follow and he'll hopefully contribute to the fight.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Jun 2011, 02:45 
User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2010, 14:49
8v8DSD is not that different from speedmetal really, in regard of its effect on community. In both cases you have separate playing styles in a way, you just cannot apply 8v8 or SM experience properly into 1v1 or 2v2 on a normal map (actually 8v8 SM and 1v1 SM play more alike than 8v8 or 1v1 DSD). So you get a gap between those who play 8v8 or small games. If someone who starts with DSD wants to try playing more competitive BA he basically has to learn a new game, instead of just doing the same thing he did before but better.

For uncompetitive players who don't care about improving but just seeing things blow up, you don't need this 8v8 shit. They just need to play each other, no matter the gamesize. And that gives a better learning ground for someone competitive starting out too, to fight these players and eventually beat them and move against harder opponents in a similar game.

And there's no reason why more defensive maps would be bad fit for BA.

Also, @people taking Stevens post at face value, what's wrong with you?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 66 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


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.