Minimap idea

[AF]

Let's just leave it to that the SY's may implent this as a OPTION. This would make both sides happy, right?

GGRRR, see AI forum, I've released NTAI v0.25 and I've included the spring.exe and settings.exe with the option to turn ghosted buildings on and off.

Anymore arguement is about as fruitful as wether marmite is tasty or disgusting. Turn it off if you dont like it!

[Min3mat]

marmite is tasty!
that was a bit out of place xD

[Vehementi]

Alantai: I'll argue about this because I enjoy it.

Gabba: Yeah, TA easily has a magnitude less micromanagement than, say, StarCraft. As I said earlier, there are so many interface limitations in StarCraft that are just not present in TA, and you can control your forces much more efficiently. Instead of having to have a retarded standoff with all your units vs all their units, you can constantly move your guys around in combat while they continue to shoot. But most micromanagement in TA *is* the combat, and that's the only micromanagement I'm in favor of. TA's micromanagement consists more of positioning, movement, and outmanoeuvering rather than clicking 3 times a second on the enemies and moving my hurtin' dudes away at low health.

I was going to suggest a RA-style shroud thingy as well, or something that hides units from appearing on radar even with LOS, etc. so you can more easily have stealthy bases and such.

SecurE: You're still neglecting the fact that with ghosted stuff, players now build missile towers and fighter patrols to keep peepers away. So it's not "impossible" to keep the enemy out of your base, nor is it "free" to get intel, nor is the intel "perfect."

When I said you were "wasting time scouting", I did not say that scouting was a bad thing or that it was useless. I said that you shouldn't have to waste your time actually following units around the map when you could be doing other things and while the "looking at the enemy base" can be accomplished by a very simple interface feature that has been in every RTS before and after TA.

Your "we should have full LOS!" suggestion does not follow from my logic. Obviously, scouting is a good thing. Obviously, LOS is a good thing. The topic of this debate is whether you should have to micromanage and watch your scouts scout, or whether you should be able to just tell them to go into the enemy base, and if they succeed on their scouting mission, be rewarded with the scouting information. Much like how if you tell your units to blindly run into the enemy base, if they succeed on their mission (kill everything) with their auto-targetting AI, you are rewarded with a win. In both cases, micromanaging your units will clearly give you better results (fly peeper around missiles/dodge them, or have your units not get stuck on terrain or target poorly) but it wouldn't be impossible to act without focusing your attention on them.

As it stands, scouting *is* hard against a player who intelligently puts AA on the outskirts of his base, as I said on the previous page.

Kixxe: So yeah, no, TA isn't mostly about micromanagement. There is micromanagement in TA, but it is by far not the overwhelming factor. Anyway, rock paper scissors, micromanagement, flanking, etc. are tactics, not strategies. The way you build your base is a strategy. The micromanagement of implementing that is minimized with the ability to queue up orders - can't really get more simple than that. Maybe better hotkeys for the menus, but that's about it.

Units auto-withdrawing? I dunno if i'd like that, mostly because it'd be impossible to implement properly. Planes that automatically stay away from AA? That would mess with your tactics, but if I could have the option of telling the plane, "ok, when you shoot your missiles, retreat immediately to this location and then go again" with some special sort of attack/queue command, that would be helpful so I wouldn't have to issue a bunch of move orders manually.

[Storm]

Sorry but IMO that isn't a good example, ghosted building didn't removed that much really.. it removed babysitting your scout. TA was so good because u didn't had to babysit your units all the time, and now its even better as u don't need to baby sit your scouts any more...

You just don't see the point of my analogy, which is why it seems weak to you.

Owh and u should really try spring sometime again, its a lot better now really it is..

I've played with ghosted buildings. It annoyed the living shit out of me.

And spring doesn't hav to be a complete copy of TA. It's has the feeling of TA but it plays a lot better imo, it's focused more on strategy, and no i do not play XTA..

It's not a copy of TA. It's a copy of principles of TA... Those that you are to break.

TA, unlike SC, is supposed to be about strategy and economy and battle tactics - not fighting the fucking interface to get your job done.

First of all, I want to thank you for filling in yet another slot in my "OMGROFL U WANNA SELECT UNITS ONE BY ONE ALSO U NOOB!" -quota.

Now to the point, which you blatantly failed to understand. I'm not fucking out to make the game harder at any price possible, like inducing your strikingly retarded D-gun example. I'm trying to preserve an element of the game. Quieing units one by one is tedious and stupid, but removing a whole pillar of a RTS is equally so. An extention of this developement would mean that the game automatically scouts for you. Would you not agree that would certainly require less micromanagement for that designated game area? This thing is an artificial limitation that has an actual purpose.

adversion towards this stems from beeing a elitist, right?

Answer

By mentioning StrarCraft or being average.

By mentioning starcraft. Starcraft requires some of the most micromanagement of any RTS ever. Units don't formation at all, they need to be run back all the time, most of them have special abilities that need to be manually controlled. If you are removing the nessisity of micromanagement in your RTS you are making it less like starcraft, not more like starcraft.

What? I'm completely clueless... how does any of this prove me to be an elitist?

Your analogy is flawed. Having to watch your scout go through the base to his death is *micromanagement.* Having extra units (sea units in this case) has nothing to do with micromanagement.

The thing is as I see scouting as micromanagement, in the same way I see handling naval bases as micromanagement. It's a necessity and a vital part. If cut out, the game would suffer a hit to the strategic complexity and you'd find many other posts to whine at microman on.

As I said in my earlier, post, no. Because it's just UI micromanagement. Again, I could make it so you have to use a voice command to d-gun instead of merely hitting the d hotkey. Then, a player more able to d-gun will be the player more able to manage his base and combat, but additionally be proficient at using awkward voice commands.

So let us then bring up the non-scouting example I made just recently. We completely abolish it alltogether and you wouldn't have to lose to players that can handle it.

This is meaningless, since any tedius action that must be multitasked in with useful actions will require skill to operate successfully.

No, this in turn is meaningless. Monotone actions should be cut, like queuing units one by one, but when scouting, you're deciding what is worth to know and what is not. It's an active choice and should therefore not be automated.

So ive have had the chance to "taste" the ghosted buildings... as everybody since that release... i like them, and have seen NO single person to whine about it.. no one!

Haven't you heard? We left. You don't hear because we don't play anymore.

Storm, the thing is, go play for a bit, and show some evidence of your "evilish" influence of ghosts over gameplay, a replay could be very handy.

There is no way to record any of the things I mean in a game because it's bound to the gameplay, not the strategy. As I said, I've played with ghosts and was disgusted.

I still have one bone to pick with you Storm. See just cuse something is added that you dont agree with dosent mean you should just pick up and leave! NEVER DO THAT! The only thing to do is to argue even louder!

You didn't read the eleven pages of rampant flames? I left because I didn't feel like my time is worth spending here where there's hardly anyone like me left (which means auto-resistance to anything I say).

Yet because time is so valuable, most players despise having it wasted when it doesn't need to be. I think that is why so many people like the ghosted buildings.

It's not a waste, it's an investement and since so many people can't differ between the two, they go for the part that is easier.

Spring = TA in an improved form. It dosent have Rock papper sissor relations.

Since when did Old TA has a RPS-relation? WTF are you talking about?

Spring is what it is now. If we change to much of it, it will not longer be spring.

Spring 0.62 is nothing like Spring 0.42 in terms of gameplay, but yet it is Spring. The argument is void.

Let's just leave it to that the SY's may implent this as a OPTION. This would make both sides happy, right?

I still have the obvious right to discuss what I think is best (or worst) for the game. That's what the forums are here for in the first place (feedback). If you don't like reading us arguing petty points, don't.

[Vehementi]

TA, unlike SC, is supposed to be about strategy and economy and battle tactics - not fighting the fucking interface to get your job done.

First of all, I want to thank you for filling in yet another slot in my "OMGROFL U WANNA SELECT UNITS ONE BY ONE ALSO U NOOB!" -quota.

Now to the point, which you blatantly failed to understand. I'm not fucking out to make the game harder at any price possible, like inducing your strikingly retarded D-gun example. I'm trying to preserve an element of the game. Quieing units one by one is tedious and stupid, but removing a whole pillar of a RTS is equally so. An extention of this developement would mean that the game automatically scouts for you. Would you not agree that would certainly require less micromanagement for that designated game area? This thing is an artificial limitation that has an actual purpose.

This is meaningless, since any tedius action that must be multitasked in with useful actions will require skill to operate successfully.

No, this in turn is meaningless. Monotone actions should be cut, like queuing units one by one, but when scouting, you're deciding what is worth to know and what is not. It's an active choice and should therefore not be automated.

Thanks for yet again not compherending the blindingly simple fact that your preference for having to manually click on things to scout them is exactly on the same level of mundaneness as having to single-queue your units or not have hotkey groups. The person who presses T on his scout planes when they go through the base and holds ~ and double clicks the fastest on more buildings on the screen gets better intel? Please.

Artificial limitations with purposes? Let's throw out a few more:

Units should not automatically fire - that way, the person who watches his units in battle (while multitasking between all the other things in TA, remember) and right clicks on the enemy models most frequently and efficiently will be the victor in combat (this is especially true with vamps). Combat is a pillar of the game and automatically firing dumbs it down so even newbies can be effective in combat.

Units should not automatically lead their targets - I am now much less rewarded for my awesome manoeuvering in combat and setting up my artillery and normal fire from such an angle that the target will be hit despite moving. This was an element of TA, and Spring removed it!

Construction units on patrol should not automatically repair and reclaim things: reclaiming as a defensive measure is surely a pillar (albeit a small one) of TA - letting your con bot automatically do it all without having to click on them all is removing an element of the game; keeping your defenses alive during a battle is a similarly important aspect of the game.

Your analogy is flawed. Having to watch your scout go through the base to his death is *micromanagement.* Having extra units (sea units in this case) has nothing to do with micromanagement.

The thing is as I see scouting as micromanagement, in the same way I see handling naval bases as micromanagement. It's a necessity and a vital part. If cut out, the game would suffer a hit to the strategic complexity and you'd find many other posts to whine at microman on.

Your analogy still holds no water. The micromanagement in watching your peepers fly through a base and clicking on stuff is far more mundane than planning out your naval base. Yes, I feel that due to water movement, water bases are kinda irritating to manage as well, and I would be in favor of something that made that less irritating; but otherwise, water bases are on the same level as ground bases - the same is not true about clicking on stuff while scouting.

As I said in my earlier, post, no. Because it's just UI micromanagement. Again, I could make it so you have to use a voice command to d-gun instead of merely hitting the d hotkey. Then, a player more able to d-gun will be the player more able to manage his base and combat, but additionally be proficient at using awkward voice commands.

So let us then bring up the non-scouting example I made just recently. We completely abolish it alltogether and you wouldn't have to lose to players that can handle it.

That is not a logical continuation of the "spotted buildings should ghost" line of argument. The issue is not, "I can't handle clicking on stuff; remove it," but rather "Clicking on shit while watching your well-navigated and well-placed peeper fly above the base is irritating and should not be necessary."

So ive have had the chance to "taste" the ghosted buildings... as everybody since that release... i like them, and have seen NO single person to whine about it.. no one!

Haven't you heard? We left. You don't hear because we don't play anymore.

Out of curiosity, who is this "we" exactly? Did they all quit because of the ghosts? If not, why? If so, why would they quit over such a trivial thing that in the end doesn't make a big difference over the way you previously scouted (with notes and whatnot or lots of peepers at the required times?) Don't sound much like hardcore old-timers to me.

Storm, the thing is, go play for a bit, and show some evidence of your "evilish" influence of ghosts over gameplay, a replay could be very handy.

There is no way to record any of the things I mean in a game because it's bound to the gameplay, not the strategy. As I said, I've played with ghosts and was disgusted.

I know plenty of people (most likely more) that a) have been introduced to the game and think that the ghosts are a good idea; b) have been playing TA the entire time and are now less annoyed with the interface since the ghosts are there; and c) did not quit when ghosts were implemented.

Yet because time is so valuable, most players despise having it wasted when it doesn't need to be. I think that is why so many people like the ghosted buildings.

It's not a waste, it's an investement and since so many people can't differ between the two, they go for the part that is easier.

He meant "waste" in the sense that he's spending time doing something that should be automated for him. He has done the hard part - gotten scouts around the defenses, etc. The tedium of clicking on shit to remember where it is should be removed. Obviously, it is an investment. Manually firing your units in combat if automatic fire were available is also an investment.

It's clear that the difference here is in the preference for the level of micromanagement involved in scouting, so I seriously doubt we're going to come to an agreement on this.

[Zoombie]

11 pages eh? Good work, hit the showers!

[Vehementi]

11 pages eh? Good work, hit the showers!

Thanks boss!

[Zoombie]

Not you! But your welcom!

[Vehementi]

D:

[SwiftSpear]

Ugg, how can you argue that ghosted buildings are preferable to manual scout spotting? I hate the ghosting, it's basicly the reason that the current scout is a useless pile.

Right now it's not fair to allow the scout to have enough HP to make a pass over another players base... expecailly if they are on the ball and have put up AA defence. If scouts did have free reighn then the whole base would be ghosted in a matter of seconds and you could sergically remove the fusions and other important structures with brawlies or berthas without even haveing to take the time to look at what your scout was doing. THIS IS ABSOLUTLY SKILLESS. Why can't scouts take some smarts or skill to use? the straight line rushes just suck, and the things are way to easy to kill. Simply remove ghosting and you can signifigantly boost scouts which FAR better suits XTA being that it has so many elements of paper rock scissor balance.

[Storm]

Thanks for yet again not compherending the blindingly simple fact that your preference for having to manually click on things to scout them is exactly on the same level of mundaneness as having to single-queue your units or not have hotkey groups. The person who presses T on his scout planes when they go through the base and holds ~ and double clicks the fastest on more buildings on the screen gets better intel? Please.

So I'm saying to you yet another time, since you seem to miss the critical point of my argument. If we abolish the scouting alltogether, we would skip all the hassle of building planes and sending them to their death. Look how much awesome time we get free to build our forces.

Artificial limitations with purposes? Let's throw out a few more:

... and then I'm ignoring all the retarded asshat suggestions because you simply can't differ function from gameplay.

Your analogy still holds no water. The micromanagement in watching your peepers fly through a base and clicking on stuff is far more mundane than planning out your naval base. Yes, I feel that due to water movement, water bases are kinda irritating to manage as well, and I would be in favor of something that made that less irritating; but otherwise, water bases are on the same level as ground bases - the same is not true about clicking on stuff while scouting.

It's a bit exxaggerated, which is why you might have troubles to grasp it, but if you see Water, Land and Air as the three pillars in War, removing one of those would severely injure the complexity. Removing the Intelligence from War and Expansion would harm the gameplay in equal way.

The key point in the analogy, just to make you understand, is that we haven't removed Intelligence, we're only halfway there.

That is not a logical continuation of the "spotted buildings should ghost" line of argument. The issue is not, "I can't handle clicking on stuff; remove it," but rather "Clicking on shit while watching your well-navigated and well-placed peeper fly above the base is irritating and should not be necessary."

So a better extension of the comment would be "Let's kill scouting alltogether because it just takes up time I could have spent killing stuff".

Out of curiosity, who is this "we" exactly? Did they all quit because of the ghosts? If not, why? If so, why would they quit over such a trivial thing that in the end doesn't make a big difference over the way you previously scouted (with notes and whatnot or lots of peepers at the required times?) Don't sound much like hardcore old-timers to me.

Go to /s irc.gnug.org #bored (most of us from here have moved to a different server) and then #gnug and see just about half the list around 01 AM CET (that's when most americans are online). Then we got more other people from the forums. I didn't say they left because of Ghosts and neither did I, and if I managed to give you such an implication, I'm sorry. We left because we got disappointed in the game. When a game is not fun, it's not worth to play anymore.

And if you still manage to consider Ghosts as a trivial thing, then I can understand why those people don't sound as hardcore old-timers to you. In fact, I think only the old-timers really care about that. People newly introduced accept the feature as part of the game, without knowing what there was before or why.

He meant "waste" in the sense that he's spending time doing something that should be automated for him. He has done the hard part - gotten scouts around the defenses, etc. The tedium of clicking on shit to remember where it is should be removed. Obviously, it is an investment. Manually firing your units in combat if automatic fire were available is also an investment.

Tedium clicking? Why? You're just in search for key buildings and the large picture. If you find four fusions within a fink line of sight, you might wanna click a little faster, but can't recall any situation I had to do that in. You have to blatantly ignore all the structures that are in the way, like solars or MTs and really search for the things that could be worth losing bombers for. With old scouting, you just got a glimpse of the vast amount of information you get for free now.

As someone said, to make Scouting even, you would have to brutally sack the armor of the planes, just because information should cost you.

[Kixxe]

Let me reprashe my previus statement.

Firsly, Micro mangement is a PART of TA, sry, i did'nt make that clear.
The micro mangement part being NOT to babysit your units so they don't to stupid things... no, about moving your units so they do more damage under battle and thus can be more efftive. offcourse, this draws away time from Exspanding, scouting and all the other things, witch is why TIME can be a resource to.

What i meant to say when i replied to Vehementi's post was that Micro mangement is a big part of TA. Not maybe as big as any other, but still a prety big part. You can ignore it completly, bye using brawlers, Berthas, nukes and other things that are esay to use and still is much about strategy, but ofen you need a good ground force and you need to lead that ground force. Or else you die. I just got angry when he said the mircomangement is'ent strategy and i said that spring has plenty of micromangement in it that is not tedios or hard. just time demanding and effetive. (or atleast tried =/)


Also, what i meanth with the corny statement of IMO was that he those not relect the veiw of rest of the community. I think most of us can agree that mircomangement is a part of strategy, correct?



Also, some of you say that you would try the weird AI i descrided. Well, the thing is, i just took that as a exatrated statement of what spring might become. Let me put it this way.

We remove the need of looking when you scout. "Wow, you don't have to memorise where your units have gone, thats great!" Then we make so that units automateckly find a right path and ignoring enemy infested areas. Hell, lets make to they move to a collectors spot and gather a defenice circle. "Wow, great, now i don't have to move my units!" Now we make an automateic formation system that puts units in a best formation of the time. "wow, now i don't have to sort up my units!".

How much of the game is left? We removed most of the game alredy, and noone has complained, since all changes have happend gradualy. We are all gonna try, think it's handy and use it, and in the end, we have a game witch after a while seams boring. Then pepole who like the old game better the new and improved version will argue, and the develpors will choose sides and half of the community will vanish. Where some plays the old and the some the new.
Hmm, that sounds familjar in some way...

Since when did Old TA has a RPS-relation? WTF are you talking about?

Hmm, well, i guess you put it better when you said:

It's not a copy of TA. It's a copy of principles of TA... Those that you are to break.

Damn i post stupid stuff sometimes... should't be on computer that late really...

[Lindir The Green]

Well, I personally like the ghosted buildings, and I agree that clicking on important buildings while holding down ~ doesn't add any strategic complexity to the game. What it does do is force players to prioritize their time, but it makes TA like a cheap flash game where you have to click on as many enemies as possible in a small amount of time.

TA is supposed to be about strategy, not reflexes.

I think that quick reflexes shoulkd provide an advantage, but good strategy should always trump it.

And reflexes are also used in many other tactical situations. If you have an army of tanks and light anti air headed towards your enemy, and suddenly brawlers appear and start attacking, you have to quickly decide whether to press forwards and hope that you do some damage, or to retreat back to the flak towers in your base.

the difference between quick decision making here and quick decision making when scouting is that the scouting requires almost no tactics to pull off. Just click on every fusion, MMM, bertha, or factory that you see.

Basically every building that looks cool.

There are plenty of good things that test reflexes, but I prefer to keep them out of my strategy games. That is why I don't play starcraft anymore.

[Gabba]

OK, this is my last post on this topic! It's just drawing out and it seems we can't please everybody. In the end, I think that the best system is: the people who contribute to the core of the game, i.e. developers, decide!

Anyways, just to reply for a last time to a few points people have made:
@SwiftSpear: Yes, peepers can't have too high HP if we use the ghosting system. But you can use a stealth fighter as a high-end scout, he'll survive much longer since he's not visible on radar. Or we could add a lvl. 2 scout, as I was suggesting. However, I don't see why a scout should be able to fly all over a well-defended base - under either system that's really giving the advantage to scout micromanagers. They should have a small advantage, but not a critical one.

@Storm: I like your avatar. I like your dedication to the TA community. I don't like the way you're degrading yourself and others by calling everyone and their ideas retarded. It seems clear to me there are different tastes for what is good gameplay in this discussion. Maybe they can't be reconciled, but none of them is "retarded".
Anyways, I don't think building and sending planes is a hassle, because you're actually choosing how much resources to dedicate to this, where to scout, and so on. However I prefer the "army general" feeling of things where you assign a mission and your troops make a full report afterwards, than having to manually follow the plane.
Would it accomodate you if scout planes only gave a partial report (i.e. only "ghost" random buildings) instead of giving the full picture? Or if we added interest to the issue by allowing only lvl. 2 scouts to give you a ghost image, and adding lvl.2 or 3 buildings that protect an area of your base from ghosting?

@Kixxe: You say "We removed most of the game already"?? I'm sorry if this is the case for you, but it's not for me. Obviously, we were not enjoying the same parts of the game, or we're not looking forward to the same things. In my opinion
, Spring is evolving towards a more strategic style of gameplay. However, the current units and especially the maps are more geared towards the old style of tactical gameplay. This may make the game subject to growing pains, and seem boring to some people. To me its significant that old TA was (is?) played online mostly on flat maps, because terrain got in the way more than anything else. I think new interest for this game has to come from a more detailed playing world, where you can use complex terrain to your advantage, to hide, to determine attack avenues, etc. Then, having things such as scouting slightly more automatized will be a relief, because planning your attacks and such will me much more involving than selecting a big bunch of units and clicking on the enemy base (a lot of people, including me, play like that, because the game doesn't encourage much careful planning, but rather acting really fast - at least that's how it feels for me in-game).

Anyways, guys, try to enjoy the GAME. And give it a chance to evolve. I'm sure the SY have a vision, we should allow them to go forward with it. And remember: to have an OTA-faithful version, all it takes is one developer to maintain options and tweak a base unit pack. Just make an option out of every new feature that annoys you. In the open-source world, you might disagree, but if you don't get involved, you might as well talk to the walls.

[Kixxe]

Ah yes, past tence. My one true foe. What i meant to say was "AFTER we removed most of the game" or smilar.

I really don't think spring will change that much... the SY's are still trying to model spring after OTA, not a totaly new game. They are not blindly following their steps. Offcourse, if pepole slowly and shorly keep removing bits of gameplay... we will never know.

Also, I NEVER, EVER, say to my units to just rush in there. I ALWAYS, mirco my units, and make em 60% more effetive. I lose lot of time building my base and mangeing my defences, but i get an effrtive attack. if you play like that, many of your units will die in vain. (unless your useing brawlers or something).
And im sure alot of pepole play like this to... like i said in a previus treadh, a good player has balance in micro and macro.

[FLOZi]

My suggestion > this whole thread/idea/off-topic nonsense.

[Warlord Zsinj]

Vehementi, your habit of describing opposing arguments as "meaningless" is unconstructive and makes you come off as rather arrogant. I suggest rethinking your mode of argument if you do not want to offend the opposing side; otherwise we will just be yelling at each other, not listening to each other.
I realise Storm is no better (probably worse), but I think it's just his passionate mode of communication as opposed to any real intended offense. I've argued with him many times in TAU (politically we are at polar ends); he usually has some worthwhile things to say once you get around the swearing and name calling - perhaps he has online tourrettes?

To those who post unrelated things such as:

My suggestion > this whole thread/idea/off-topic nonsense.

marmite is tasty!

Shouldn't read this thread. If it annoys you that the argument appears to be going nowhere, just stop reading this thread, and don't litter it with unnecessary things.

[Storm]

I don't like the way you're degrading yourself and others by calling everyone and their ideas retarded.

It's a dirty job, but someone got to do it. If I don't sack an idea, I feel no one will. Just look at this topic... it was "uh, kinda for, whatever" before I entered and blowed up into a nice discussion topic in the end.

Would it accomodate you if scout planes only gave a partial report (i.e. only "ghost" random buildings) instead of giving the full picture? Or if we added interest to the issue by allowing only lvl. 2 scouts to give you a ghost image, and adding lvl.2 or 3 buildings that protect an area of your base from ghosting?

Yes, sure anything. As long as it pushes up the cost scouting from free to costly.

TA is supposed to be about strategy, not reflexes.

TA is about overview and control and secondary about strategy. There are a lot of reflexes tied to control even if you remove scouting alltogether.

he usually has some worthwhile things to say once you get around the swearing and name calling - perhaps he has online tourrettes?

Hey I don't swear that much now and I've mainly dropped name calling alltogether.

[Masse]

you ppl do remember that this is not TA its SPRING its suppose to have/get all new fancy features some are usefull more than others... but every feature "should be" included and be ON/OFF able from lobby by the one who hosts game...

betalord... please make some advanced options button that brings up huge list of options

[jcnossen]

Spring 0.62 is nothing like Spring 0.42 in terms of gameplay, but yet it is Spring. The argument is void.

What has changed since 0.42, apart from the ghosted buildings? I never played 0.42 so I what have I missed?

TA is about overview and control and secondary about strategy. There are a lot of reflexes tied to control even if you remove scouting alltogether.

I completely agree, also, if you want a game of strategy only, play a turn-based strategy game.