End of nations : the first MMORTS ? - Page 3

End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post just about everything that isn't directly related to Spring here!

Moderators: Moderators, Moderators

User avatar
Vimes
Posts: 45
Joined: 27 Sep 2007, 14:05

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Vimes »

The PvP is present already with faction fighting amongst the rebels for resources and key strategic points. Iirc there are three main alliance factions within which player created guilds will exist. This may change as gameplay tests it out but it sounded workable from my experience of very long term strategic play.

To clarify - PvP exists and is a main feature - possibly making the war against the Order secondary given the supply implications etc.
0 x

User avatar
Vimes
Posts: 45
Joined: 27 Sep 2007, 14:05

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Vimes »

Not sure about end game really, Im sure I will find out the possible outcomes shortly but all is subject to change. If the game could be certain to last a year or so then I would possibly agree to a reset but I would prefer and ongoing campaign where a dominant faction becomes the order. At this point I would introduce a form of susceptibility, a weakness based on corruption etc which would average out some of the, no doubt, huge asset store the winner would have. Like boundless where fuel limits the ability to mass n zerg. Not exactly like that - but if you wish to take this idea to the game forums you will find the petro devs posting on there openly. Im sure someone has already started such a thread.

As for the fluff n social stuff - thats just business reality. Lets compare the 7k members on here with beyond protocols 26612 registered paid players so far in 18months. This is still not enough to satisfy the money freaks who lent dse enough to realise their 16 year dream. They are indies btw. For EoN to break into the AAA title race enough to sustain a population and dev activity - how many do you think they will need? It all gets rather critical and publishers and financiers will demand attention mid development based on share price and other forms of gambling.
0 x

User avatar
JohannesH
Posts: 1793
Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 12:43

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by JohannesH »

Wtf is your point with all this rambling... Do you actually know how a proper RTS game works at a high level?

This on the other hand, seems more about casual brainless gaming, you go smash some tanks with your friends, if youre high level maybe you can bash some bigger tanks even!

I'll take a fair fight with 2 players or teams any day over that crap... Where skill & strategy matters instead of amount of grind you put in

Keep it civil.
0 x

User avatar
Teutooni
Posts: 717
Joined: 01 Dec 2007, 17:21

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Teutooni »

Vimes wrote:Big players are moving into the genre now - dont get left behind. I loved Unreal Tournament (GoTY version) but had to move on eventually. I bet when most folks here picked up a RTS they wondered why the turn based bunch still bothered. And those wondered why the table top bunch still bothered. And so on.
Wait, what? Is our guest strategy expert stating TBS is outdated and not worth it anymore? :D
0 x

User avatar
Vimes
Posts: 45
Joined: 27 Sep 2007, 14:05

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Vimes »

JohannesH wrote:Wtf is your point with all this rambling... Do you actually know how a proper RTS game works at a high level?
lol... soz - thats it reply wise. Not worth more.

re TBS - no, small dedicated groups still play Quake 2 - doesnt make it shit or outdated gameplay wise. Was just an observation you are removing from its context.

And I didnt say I am a strategy expert but, compared to all here given replies - I guess I am a mmorts vet. My point on the strategy side is that, compared to whats now possible with endless games and games taking months, the traditional model of RTS strategy has become whittled down to the equivalent of a battle not a war. Thus tactical. You know the limit of whats possible in the map and focus effort to overcome map limitations as much as your foe. This doesnt taint mmorts in any way the same amount. Each occurence has long term needs that must be considered before placement. In RTS you need only do this once or read an account of a win and you know aspects of, lets call it fate or future, gameplay thats shouldnt be known. What battlefield has defined walls n edges? Dont tell me you dont taint your strat with gameplay knowledge.

When RTS or mmo players enter mmorts games they seek out these edges and, typically end up abusing some aspect of gameplay placed in to make the game balance ok enough to support a paying community such as a shielded base or offline status. Or they play 24/7 for a small period then lose everything. Those playing within the game dont need to do this. Those playing against the game do.
0 x

==Troy==
Posts: 376
Joined: 29 Oct 2008, 15:55

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by ==Troy== »

I think you are spending too much effort advertising this game Vimes.

First you accuse spring community of being dumb.

Then you start pushing how good you are

Then you start telling us not to miss out and not to be left behind...


What do you want here?.
0 x

User avatar
Vimes
Posts: 45
Joined: 27 Sep 2007, 14:05

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Vimes »

Thats not what has gone on at all chap - dont try and derail the thread again please. If you dont like it read another thread.

Im not advertising this game beyond the carrying i do for all games in the genre. In fact the AAA nature means I have little to do as I normally give extra leeway to indie devs over publishing houses.

I saw a opening discussion on a game im featuring and went to it. I discovered a bunch of typically childish remarks and had a deja vu moment from before. I then apologised and tried to stay on topic but each post is followed by another 2-3 trolls who arent interested in the thread but bashing me.

The community who showed up acted dumb - sorry but ive seen more sophisticated and adult discussion of strategy games by mmorpgers, and probably teenage ones at that. Felt embarressed for the OP.

I spend a lot of my time discussing mmorts and the issues surrounding the genre. Nearly every post here has shown a blinkered quick look at a video n maybe a frontpage given the replies. This is a carbon copy of the boundless thread the members here flamed - with one not even being able to click the website help and about menu items given his replies. I am beginning to think its a tradition here or something - mmorts also have depths of strategy and gameplay and, tbh, im beginning to think this is just evading you down to your gameplay preference.

Not to miss out/left behind? Another analogy taken out of context. It was about how each wave of gamestyle/mode is born out of the last. Nowhere did I say that UT(GoTY) was crap. Its a progression thang. There is just no need to disrespect it. Id rather have faith I was talking to someone who knew of which they speak rather than someone using blinkers.
0 x

User avatar
Teutooni
Posts: 717
Joined: 01 Dec 2007, 17:21

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Teutooni »

Don't know much about MMORTS specifically. I agree RTS games aren't really strategy. All MMOs I tried were mindless grinding 90% of time, nothing to do with strategy whatsoever. Now combine RTS (no real strategy) and MMO (no strategy either) what do you get - epic deep strategy? Seems about as much strategy as "lets attack that faction while they are busy farming resources!". I could be wrong if there is some deep metagame with espionage, research, thoroughly planned invasions etc (not "lol lets maek party n kill those noobs"). Rather like what 4x games have.
0 x

User avatar
Vimes
Posts: 45
Joined: 27 Sep 2007, 14:05

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Vimes »

Teutooni wrote:I could be wrong if there is some deep metagame with espionage, research, thoroughly planned invasions etc (not "lol lets maek party n kill those noobs"). Rather like what 4x games have.
This exists in Beyond Protocol for sure and Mankind. The epic scale one server non restarting games encourage very long term planning. Imagine the corps in eve - with small countries rather than pilots. Just chck the games forums and you will see the outcome of huge wars planned months before.
0 x

User avatar
Vimes
Posts: 45
Joined: 27 Sep 2007, 14:05

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Vimes »

Teutooni wrote:Seems about as much strategy as "lets attack that faction while they are busy farming resources!".
This is way off chap - ive been hit by an entire guild in multiple locations with mixed fleets, each hitting a key objective. Whilst responding to this I was able to move fleets to counter other attacks and message my allies who jumped into the permissioned alias account and took over the rts aspect in that location. Meanwhile others counter attacked, leaving half the foe to switch to rear lines to reinforce their gamble and so on. Espionage is present and not only tech achievements able to be stolen but lists of allies, aliases and key colonies. Misdirection in chat/forums and by whisper play a huge part in a live war. i could go on but seriously - get into the forums and check out the player testimonies. 2+2=5 sometimes (if you've hidden but not excluded the decimals lol)
0 x

User avatar
Gota
Posts: 7151
Joined: 11 Jan 2008, 16:55

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Gota »

Oh ffs...
Vimes I was somewhat interested in this project but now since it is associated with you i dont even feel like exploring into it anymore...
You are very bad at advertising..
This is not that game's board It's Spring's Forum.
You ARE acting like a fanboi and you are acting like a Troll.
Most of the members here play and played many other games including MMOs so spare us...
If this game is gonna be some amazing breakthrough with unbelievable depth than i will be extremely surprised,though obviously happy about it.

Why are you trolling an open source engine community?OK so this engine is outdated and whatever negative things you want to say about it but obviously we still enjoy it.
If there was a slim chance of you arousing interest it was lost after you started insulting practically the entire community as if us saying something bad about the game somehow insults you...
You are not a dev so why are you so offended?(notice me writing your a fanboi earlier)

People here tend to have high standards cause they are not complete dribbling morons and are also not your average casual players...
In MMOs it is about massive grind where your actions dont matter much unless you play it for years,hours on end,getting to be the leader of some clan or whatever...
I,personally,dont care there is a gigantic war going on if my contribution is minuscule and i also hate grinding and think its completely moronic.
Spring is about smaller instanced games and its a completely different experience so i totally don't get your attempt to try and say that RTS games are obsolete since there are now MMORTS games...
It is like saying that Single player RPG games are absolute since WoW exists...give me a break..

If you are so smart and experienced yet still fail to understand these simple things than don't expect any respect.

None of your posts so far have been rational or meaningful because like you yourself stated you have not played the game and only seen alpha footage oh and you'v talked to the devs... :roll:

A rational post by you would have been if you Made the OP's post...
I suggest counting to 10 and taking that "amazing" trailer and promises with a pinch of salt...
0 x

User avatar
maackey
Posts: 490
Joined: 02 Jul 2008, 07:11

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by maackey »

Ok. I just stumbled upon this thread, which apparently has been cleaned up a little before I even arrived, so I'm not entirely sure whats what and I apologize beforehand for the length.


First off, about presentation: Good presentation matters. A lot. While you may think it's shallow, it is intrinsic human nature to prefer shiny things that look good.

I like pretty games more than I like ugly games.
I like pretty cars over ugly cars.
I like pretty girls more than I like ugly girls.

Does that make me shallow? No. There are many things which factor into my interest. Being pretty is just a part of those, but it is not exclusive to all else.

Given your communities ranting n flaming over mmorts I in the past I am not suprised you should act this way again. Enjoy your tiny maps and limited instance gaming folks - you can ...
Aside from the veiled vehemence to the community at whole (which certainly did not put you in a pleasant light), I enjoy small maps and "limited instance gaming" very much, thank you. (otherwise I probably wouldn't be here)
I've never been a fan of mmo's. They focus on leveling up a character through grinding away at menial tasks which may or may not be fun at all. Whereas most games on the Spring engine focus on tactics, base building, and fun (if not arguably strategy as well).
Compared with the complexity of strategy to cope with long term goals and aims ...
I'm curious as to what your definition of "strategy" is. I'll take a long shot and say its similar to "grind" as thats what most mmo's are.

There are a couple things which remain unclear to me still after reading about End of Nations that pique my interest.

1.) How many units can you control at once? I only saw screenshots with not more than half a dozen. You're capped at some arbitrary limit to preserve "balance". What happens when one of your tanks die? Can you build new tanks on the battlefield (or have reinforcements come in via some other way) or is it just a small scale tactics battle with a horde of random players controlling handfuls of units?

2.) You have a secret headquarters that noone can attack. I'm assuming all your upgrades and units come from here, but then they aren't really part of the battle (nothing can attack/destroy it). Any strategic options you choose wouldn't really be in "real time" so every single aspect you tout as being epic and strategic really has to do with the secret base which isn't part of the actual battles. So the strategic elements would be more akin to RTW's strategic gameplay (which is *not* RTS) Unless I am completely mistaken because I don't know much about it -- perhaps you could enlighten me?

Furthermore, have you heard of Planet Wars? It is currently undergoing some overhauls at the moment, but when active it was a very intriguing system which allowed large scale strategic elements spanning an entire galaxy. It wasn't "real time" per se, but it was a persistent world (group of worlds actually) nonetheless. All the general complaints and distaste against Spring are just as, if not more unfounded than those made against End of Nations.
0 x

User avatar
JohannesH
Posts: 1793
Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 12:43

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by JohannesH »

Vimes wrote:And I didnt say I am a strategy expert but, compared to all here given replies - I guess I am a mmorts vet. My point on the strategy side is that, compared to whats now possible with endless games and games taking months, the traditional model of RTS strategy has become whittled down to the equivalent of a battle not a war. Thus tactical. You know the limit of whats possible in the map and focus effort to overcome map limitations as much as your foe. This doesnt taint mmorts in any way the same amount. Each occurence has long term needs that must be considered before placement. In RTS you need only do this once or read an account of a win and you know aspects of, lets call it fate or future, gameplay thats shouldnt be known. What battlefield has defined walls n edges? Dont tell me you dont taint your strat with gameplay knowledge.
So proper RTS is a more restricted playing field... So what? That's not a taint by any means. You know roughly what options are available to you and your opponent, and from there you work to outplay/outsmart your opponent.

If I dont base my strat around my gameplay knowledge, what would I base it on then...

And it doesn't really matter at all if a game lasts months or minutes, or features 10s or 1000s of units, when evaluating how "strategic" it is... We're not talking about a real war, but games. In a proper RTS long term thinking is 10 minutes ahead, in your game it might be months or whatever... But that just means that those over-arching strategy decisions have to be made faster in RTS (and longer game has more time available to focus on the tactics of it). Would you call chess a tactics game for example, and not strategy?

Though I must admit that Im not really sure wtf you are trying to say, it comes off as fanboy rambling.
0 x

User avatar
KaiserJ
Community Representative
Posts: 3113
Joined: 08 Sep 2008, 22:59

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by KaiserJ »

lol easter island head

the game is in alpha, i'm sure i'll play it if it gets stellar reviews, its not like the red-faced guy has completely turned me off the game...

you're coming from a different perspective; i think a lot of people here -prefer- the limited scope of games on spring... by a set map and set arsenal of units, victory lies solely in the hands of the person with superior strategy; wheras games with large persistent worlds are by nature designed to make some players stronger than others. tainting our plans with gameplay knowledge... we LOVE doing it!

of course, if this doesnt have PvP, then i suppose my point is moot (and at the same time, for me it's a strike against EoN, because PvP play is what i really enjoy)

to me, honestly, the whole concept seems like crap, but i'm willing to check it out again when the whole thing is ready for me; plus the fact that you're defending it so adamantly, maybe theres something there for me (and if not me, perhaps some of my mmo playing friends)
0 x

User avatar
Vimes
Posts: 45
Joined: 27 Sep 2007, 14:05

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Vimes »

JohannesH wrote:Though I must admit that Im not really sure wtf you are trying to say, it comes off as fanboy rambling.
back at you chap - you said nothing bar your preference for a historical use of a term, before the need arrived to be more accurate. Most folk regard chess as a game not strategy. Like tetris. Myself I probably would define it as tactical now- no resource production or supply chain - start with defined units - achieve reward units upon completion of task - no point in planning more than a handful of moves ahead as you purely react to your foes responses.

Well, you asked. Ive been playing chess for 34 years and have been known to be quite good.

Kaiser3 - punch with brains - I can take that in the spirit. When it comes up I will come looking for you and remind you to join ;)
0 x

User avatar
Vimes
Posts: 45
Joined: 27 Sep 2007, 14:05

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Vimes »

Gota wrote:Oh ffs...
Vimes I was somewhat interested in this project but now since it is associated with you i dont even feel like exploring into it anymore...
You are very bad at advertising..
This is not that game's board It's Spring's Forum.
I didnt start the thread or begin the trolling and bitching.
Im not advertising - trying again to explain mmorts to those watching who would otherwise just read kiddy posts about a respected developer.

Its springs board idd- and not dwarf fortress and many other games and god bothering posts I see in off-topic. I didnt post - your community member did.

Again folk getting off subject after a mod has had to intercede. Just nitpicking....

[EDIT] I am not associated with the game just the genre in general. I run one of two genre sites. Simples!
0 x

User avatar
Gota
Posts: 7151
Joined: 11 Jan 2008, 16:55

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Gota »

Spring games have both a strategical and a tactical aspect to them.

strategy Is a matter of scale and complexity(complex situations with many parts and entities need a general,abstract,guideline that twinkles down and allows for both a coherent structure yet also regional flexibility) but most spring games have more than enough scale and depth to make you plan certain general approaches.

Even the action of picking out what unit to build at a given moment can be seen as a strategic choice and the engagement of that unit later on with enemy units would be the tactical phase.

The strategic phase is the planning,the tactical,the execution of the plan.
0 x

User avatar
Vimes
Posts: 45
Joined: 27 Sep 2007, 14:05

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Vimes »

maackey wrote:Ok. I just stumbled upon this thread, which apparently has been cleaned up a little before I even arrived, so I'm not entirely sure whats what and I apologize beforehand for the length.
Kids bedtime etc - will respond to this post later if you dont mind after i check out some of that which you mention.
0 x

User avatar
Gota
Posts: 7151
Joined: 11 Jan 2008, 16:55

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Gota »

Vimes wrote:
Gota wrote:Oh ffs...
Vimes I was somewhat interested in this project but now since it is associated with you i dont even feel like exploring into it anymore...
You are very bad at advertising..
This is not that game's board It's Spring's Forum.
I didnt start the thread or begin the trolling and bitching.
Im not advertising - trying again to explain mmorts to those watching who would otherwise just read kiddy posts about a respected developer.

Its springs board idd- and not dwarf fortress and many other games and god bothering posts I see in off-topic. I didnt post - your community member did.

Again folk getting off subject after a mod has had to intercede. Just nitpicking....

[EDIT] I am not associated with the game just the genre in general. I run one of two genre sites. Simples!
Yeah you are not the original poster but you started defending it like it was your baby.
If your post would have been as innocent as the OP's everything would have been fine.
People make the assumption that this game is nothing special because guess what,most games aren't,just deal with it and i hope you wont be disillusioned when the game is actually released and you spend your hard earned money on it.
0 x

User avatar
Vimes
Posts: 45
Joined: 27 Sep 2007, 14:05

Re: End of nations : the first MMORTS ?

Post by Vimes »

Are you blind?

Seven posts followed the OP from your community discussing a respected RTS developer like kids.

Two posts then followed showing a hugely blinkered dismissive view based on lack of fact. ie the continued mention of lack of PvP when I have pointed out the core role of PvP within the game.

Then I post two posts - both very mild and tongue in cheek.

Then things did hot up - mostly after YOUR post.

Rest is history really... I try n return on topic and I get folk wading in trying to please the community with my head. LOL. None are capable of that :p
0 x

Locked

Return to “Off Topic Discussion”