Spring:1944 dev and testing - Page 59

Spring:1944 dev and testing

Discuss game development here, from a distinct game project to an accessible third-party mutator, down to the interaction and design of individual units if you like.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
1v0ry_k1ng
Posts: 4656
Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by 1v0ry_k1ng » 15 Jan 2008, 18:35

xta never had a crashbug except for v9. idiot noobs who played v9 even though v9.1 was out for what, a year- they crashed.
0 x

Kixxe
Posts: 1547
Joined: 14 May 2005, 10:02

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by Kixxe » 15 Jan 2008, 23:20

Eta next working release? :p
0 x

User avatar
Nemo
Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 1376
Joined: 30 Jan 2005, 19:44

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by Nemo » 15 Jan 2008, 23:49

As soon as somebody finds a way to reproduce said crashes.

Which anybody can help with.


On the plus side, by the time we find this bug we'll probably have finished adding in a fair bit of content to the game. Maybe. No promises. But we're working on early aircraft balance now.
0 x

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

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by Gota » 23 Jan 2008, 00:58

These are some things i offered in the s44 channel,they are only suggestions and are here to just give a fresh point of view,if they dont get used perhaps they will atleast serve as inspiration for much better ideas.

the gameplay should go like this..
you try and take as much metal spots as possible while your troops are being driven to the front you slowly build a line of "army maintanance",that is,a supply line that is needed for your forces to advance further.
This can be done by making power lines like in fibre mod(they will start from your hq and go towards the front lines) and in a radius from them you can build supply (logistic porpoganda centers) depots and other things like bunkers for example.
sand bags and such would be buildeable without builders like in c&c all ull need is to build them within a small radius of any of ur troops(without the need of a builder).

when troops encounter enemy they obviously slow down a bit and try to advance.
A certain percentage of troops should become hurt instead of dying and they will need medical support which if not given(not having a medical center in radius,which sends a truck to pick the wounded outomaticly)will cause them to die(that will need ot be tested to see if its better if they only die from further damage or even after a certain amount of time passes)there will also be a propoganda/logistics(supply center) center for troops with a certain radius that will boost moral allowing troops to fight constantly and not becoming "shocked" or tired of fighting(which will result in lower accuracy and speed)(thye will have a power/stamina guage that when totaly empty gives megative effects and replanishes if the troops are within a supply cneter's radius).
(all those buildings will have to be at a certain minimal range from power lines to operate and the power lines must be connected to the HQ).
After troops are supplied with the radius of a logistics center and have their power maxed they enter a phase in which they can for a certain period of time be without the logistics center but remain at max power,that is the time for a good push at the enemy(max power gauge means not losing power for a certin amount of time even when shot at).
killing of supply lines and power lines will also be part of the gameplay to weaken enemy fronts(since if buildings dont have a power grid they will seize functioning or funcion worse).
fronts will move and you can retret your forces by selecting them and pressing a command (that costs a certina amount)that will after a certain period of time will deploy trucks on which those troops will start to outomaticly load and when loading is finished they can move fast and retreat to a better defended back line while the enemy tries to push forwards and advance his troops farward seizing more metal spots(there can be numerous tweaks to avoid a slippery slope game as much as possible without making it a porcy game).

Medical centers=have a redius in which they send trucks to take wounded soldiers
heal them in the medical center and then bring them back to where they were loaded from)the medical centers will be cheap and the healing resources free.
It all means u can revive a certain amount of troops(those that get wounded instead of dying) instead of them dying by haveing a medical center at the back, plus troops will gain experiance making it more important to save them instead of just throwing them away.(after a certain experiance troops might give a boost to soldiers around them for example,but that is a minor issue)

This description does not involve tanks and tank warfare for the moment.

P.S
I do not mean to offend anyone of the developers and the good job they have done on this mod.
0 x

User avatar
clumsy_culhane
Posts: 370
Joined: 30 Jul 2007, 10:27

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by clumsy_culhane » 23 Jan 2008, 01:02

mm i take my point back :-)
Last edited by clumsy_culhane on 23 Jan 2008, 01:11, edited 1 time in total.
0 x

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

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by Gota » 23 Jan 2008, 01:05

Well he saw it already in the mod channel,no need for any flaming.
I just posted it here as well with a few corrections and small changes after discussing about it all with another dev.
0 x

User avatar
clumsy_culhane
Posts: 370
Joined: 30 Jul 2007, 10:27

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by clumsy_culhane » 23 Jan 2008, 01:10

right. i missed it in the S44 channel.. dont know how :P
0 x

User avatar
Nemo
Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 1376
Joined: 30 Jan 2005, 19:44

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by Nemo » 23 Jan 2008, 01:45

In the other S44 thread, I wrote:
Gota wrote:blah blah blah
Please do not post in any S44 related thread ever again. Under any of your forum names.
0 x

SpikedHelmet
MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 1945
Joined: 21 Sep 2004, 08:25

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by SpikedHelmet » 23 Jan 2008, 01:47

You've already posted all of this shit in #s44 and we all saw it and talked about it and came to our conclusions. It's absolutely unecessary to spam it more here, now.
0 x

User avatar
Das Bruce
Posts: 3544
Joined: 23 Nov 2005, 06:16

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by Das Bruce » 23 Jan 2008, 02:24

This is where I stopped reading.
Gota wrote:the gameplay should go like this..
GTFO. :roll:
0 x

User avatar
Pressure Line
Posts: 2283
Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by Pressure Line » 23 Jan 2008, 04:10

Das Bruce wrote:This is where I stopped reading.
Gota wrote:the gameplay should go like this..
GTFO. :roll:
Snipawolf wrote:Damn, lad, go make your own mod, why don't you.

They wanted it this way and that is WHY they are producing their own game.
crossposted for truth. want to dictate a modsplaystyle? make it yourself, or go back in time 8 months, stop being an ass and become a tester.
0 x

User avatar
smoth
Posts: 22298
Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 00:46

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by smoth » 23 Jan 2008, 05:57

dzibrush... the new and less liked.. kixxie.
0 x

User avatar
KDR_11k
Game Developer
Posts: 8293
Joined: 25 Jun 2006, 08:44

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by KDR_11k » 23 Jan 2008, 10:29

Just say Yan, that's easier to type.
0 x

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

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by Gota » 23 Jan 2008, 18:32

Your all mean and intolerant.
0 x

User avatar
Nemo
Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 1376
Joined: 30 Jan 2005, 19:44

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by Nemo » 23 Jan 2008, 18:50

Twice now, I wrote:
Gota wrote:Blah blah blah
Please do not post in any S44 related thread ever again. Under any of your forum names.
To that I would add talking in #s44, but luckily we have a mute button there.
0 x

User avatar
chillaaa
Posts: 234
Joined: 16 Mar 2005, 00:12

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by chillaaa » 23 Jan 2008, 21:36

Gota wrote:Your all mean and intolerant.
Let it go, they've worked for a long time to get S44 where it is now and one thing people who work on something that they love don't like is people telling them its needs to changed to fit their view which is uneducated at best.
0 x

User avatar
Felix the Cat
Posts: 2383
Joined: 15 Jun 2005, 17:30

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by Felix the Cat » 23 Jan 2008, 22:43

Gota wrote:Your all mean and intolerant.
You've really changed our minds with this statement, all of your suggestions have been implemented. Also, we'd like for you to be our new project leader, since you have such a superior game design ability.
0 x

User avatar
Pressure Line
Posts: 2283
Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by Pressure Line » 24 Jan 2008, 00:06

Felix the Cat wrote:
Gota wrote:Your all mean and intolerant.
You've really changed our minds with this statement, all of your suggestions have been implemented. Also, we'd like for you to be our new project leader, since you have such a superior game design ability.
*turns bright red* cant... breathe...

i almost did a repeat of spraying my juice everywhere.
0 x

User avatar
Das Bruce
Posts: 3544
Joined: 23 Nov 2005, 06:16

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by Das Bruce » 24 Jan 2008, 03:07

Gota wrote:Your all mean and intolerant.
Yes, yes I am.
0 x

User avatar
Zpock
Posts: 1218
Joined: 16 Sep 2004, 23:20

Re: Spring:1944 dev and testing

Post by Zpock » 24 Jan 2008, 17:51

I think I'm gonna post my thoughts on plane balance here as noone will read it at the s44 forums:

Currently everyone knows that planes are really not balanced at all and dogfights kind of suck in some ways. The problem is that some aspects of the planes are "made to be realistic", different from normal TA or RTS in mainly this way:

A: Weapons kill really fast and have long range
B: Planes Fly really fast, and maneuver like pregnant woman

However, several other factors are still the same as in TA, and does not model reality well at all:

1. Planes are stuck in glass jar sized maps.
2. Planes are fucking invisible/blind and can't see eachother at 1% the range they could IRL.
3. Plane ai sucks, screws up and dies stupidly.

The result isn't realistic or good gameplay wise at all, the problem is that A&B would seem realistic when combined with 1-3 the end result is just screwed up, and perhaps even more unrealistic and shitty then before putting in A&B. In your "standard RTS" those factors are kind of balancing eachother out (the reason for why they don't have A&B in the first place).

Ok, so that's how I would describe the situation, so lets think about ideas for solutions and improvements. Obviously we don't want to just revert from A&B and go to standard TA style. Instead we will look into how 1,2,3 could be improved upon to better balance out A&B. Altough I do think that A&B needs to be set at some kind of compromise between reality and gameplay as I'm sure everyone agrees. Things like accuracy and how hard it is for planes to aim at eachother needs to be considered.

Lets star with nr2. Ground combat s44 is based on LOS to balance out the long weapon ranges and such, just like in the real world. On the ground it's hard to see where the enemy is with lots of usually in the way, but in the air things are totally different. You could easily spot/hear a plane from all the typical map. Can't just give planes huge LOS to solve this since then obviously it would screw the ground combat over.

However what about making all ground units stealth, planes unstealth when airborne, and then use springs radar for aereal line of sight? There is no need for the whole radar system in s44, and if there was one it would just be used to spot planes all over the map anyway, not ground units. We don't want those green circles cluttering up the whole map, so I guess it would be a good idea to either make sure every player has 100% radar cover of the whole map at all times from some key units wich wouldn't be unrealistic at all, or just give scouts the plane radar along with planes themselves.

Let's move on to nr1, that maps are just too small. There's nothing that can be done about this ofcourse, except maybe playing on stupidly huge maps but even then it would only help so much and probably be pretty boring and laggy. This is probably the one area were you simply have to scale down planes speed to a reasonable level for compensation. The way I picture air in s44, there should be a kind of fight for air superiority going on, and with this achieved you can use bombers to take advantage. What I don't want is your standard TA play of basically sending your planes on instant suicide missions into the enemy base, wich I'm pretty sure is were the current balance would lead.

So AA shouldn't be the primary anti air unit, fighters should be. Fighters needs to be able to properly dogfight eachother as well as shoot down bombers before they arrive at their targets. Increasing the firepower of fighters leads to easier shooting down of bombers but quicker and crappier dogfighting. Reducing plane speed in general however, should make for both more manageable dogfights, reduce the glass jar map syndrome, AND give more time for shooting down bombers. You can also see that nr2, the radar los would help alot with both making sure you can effectively use fighters to intercept the enemy aereal forces. As well as allowing fighters to go into combat eachother with both sides prepared to fight, instead of just one side stumbling ontop of the other.

Nr3, stupid plane ai. I think some improvements could be done here by ways of script. I think it's possible that an evasive maneuvering and perhops more widget is possible to make dogfights more interesting. A more powerful gadget version could be tried as well.
0 x

Post Reply

Return to “Game Development”