Friendly Fire

[SwiftSpear]

But you see, even that is still regressing to the "trenchbased" WWI combat, where each side has dug in lines, and is trying to break through the opponent (usually with some artillery or other). This is the sort of combat that Spring seems to encourage, rather then a more military-based combat, where the best defence is a good offense, as it was in OTA.

(Which is not to say that TA didn't have it's huge encampments of defences; but they weren't nearly as powerful or difficult to crack as in Spring)

I don't see what you want here. I hear your complaint but from a design perspective I don't think it's possible to address with any game resembling an RTS. A line is always the best possible formation you can meet an oncoming force with, one way or another good RTS players will always use lines, this is not something you can remove or discourage. You're not even arguing against something fundamentally related to gameplay, you're arguing against something fundamentally related to play style. Any time you have one line facing down another line you've got a trench war, the only factor you can manipulate is how easy it will be to push through a player's trench.

"Military-based" combat, by which I assume you mean you must have an active field military that is constantly in motion, is paramount in EE. this reality doesn't mean that you can strategically ignore defensive strategy completely and still win, the common logic of line based defense is still paramount to victory on both the micro and macro scales. "the best defense is a good offense" is innately idealistic, if that were fully true with no regard to defensive methods at all your mod would have to be infinitely mobile, not having "bases" or construction centers of any kind. because you have no method at all for controlling where your opponent attacks, you can only trade off economy and construction capability. The best player in an RTS should be the player who destroy's his opponents economy without his opponent being able to destroy his economy. The reality of this scenario is that against another good player it doesn't matter how weak or powerful the defensive structures in the game are, you are still going to need to at very least channel your opponents forces away from your weak points with defenses.

[Warlord Zsinj]

A line is only the most efficient means of combat under certain circumstances. They used it regularly, for example, in the 18th century. But you would never catch two forces approaching at each other in a line in modern combat (even in the large scale tank battles of WWII, I think you will find a line was rarely used).

Trench warfare exists when two sides have entrenched themselves at a point where no side has the strength to overrun the other. If two lines are advancing at each other, then this is a reasonable means of combat; the two lines will engage, and one will come out victorious. Not particularly brilliant, because you can't really pull off flanking maneuvers, etc, because of the friendly fire issues. But atleast the units are fighting. Currently, if an attacking line advances against an analogous defensive line, the attacking line stands little chance. Thus, trench warfare develops, because in order to break a defensive line, a player has to be numerically significantly superior, which usually requires breaking through to the very economic heartland that the defensive line is protecting.

The reason why this occurs regularly in Spring is because defending is overpowered (because of the FF issues). I am not trying to push an offensive game style on players (though I do think that in a game where resource income is paramount, a defensive battleplan is inferior), but I do want defensive installations to be an option rather then a rule.

Again, I haven't given EE more then a cursory glance (which appears to be my loss, as it sounds quite interesting), so I can't at all comment on it's balance, other then question what you post regarding it.

[SwiftSpear]

TA simulates combat of the 18th century much more closely then modern warefare. It's actually expounded further by the hit point system. Opponents are approached in modern combat in lines still, the importance of the line is just secondary to the ability for the people in the squad to stay in cover. Modern warefare deals with weapon ranges larger then your average soldier's field of veiw in most cases, and 1 hit is effectively a kill (it stops motion in most cases anyways). In such a scenario you still benefit from having more guns aimed at less targets at a given time, but that is less beneficial then not being a large target in your opponent's field of view.

TA units don't duck in cover, they can be hit several times before they are killed, and their weapon ranges are highly limited. This means that the most efficient way you can possibly attack a target is having every unit in your force reach combat range at exactly the same time, EI, a line.

[emmanuel]

see warior king and wkbattles for formations
line column (fast move) triangle for break ennemy lines and round (without mov)for make a defence plot in baatlefield
like this medieval game !(with great reshearch tree with separat ways)

[Warlord Zsinj]

Mmm, but the problem with a line is that it is only as effective as it's maximum width, which can be regularly tempered. There is no way to simulate the "depth" of a line, which is often just as important as it's width.

I think that yes, Spring is unable to show the ability for units to crouch, go prone, and otherwise use systems that ensure that multiple units can fire at once (when not in a direct line) without causing friendly casualties. This isn't helped by the largely inaccurate collision detection spheres, which means units are often unable to shoot within several widths of the unit they are worried about hitting. However, rather then saying "well, this is like 18th Century musket lines, we may as well balance for it, I think it is more a matter of saying "Spring isn't advanced enough for units to ensure that 20 units instructed to move from point A to point B will all be able to fire (short of using lines - and 20 units in a line is a pretty wide line). In reality, those 20 units would be able to fire at once, and seeing as Spring is simulating warfare, there is no reason not to simulate their ability to do that, even if they aren't physically doing it. Which is why the new FF tags are important, especially for infantry based combat such as that in SWS or 1944.

[Argh]

The ability to go prone is coming. Really.

[FLOZi]

?

Even so, I doubt it will contend with the weapon issues of prone units, especially at 1944 scale.

[Argh]

<shrugs> That may or may not be true.

I think you will be able to do it, but prone riflemen must be using ballistic-arc weapons, so that they will actually aim according to the heightmap mesh reasonably correctly. I've done a lot've tests with guns near ground-height (NanoBlobs and the Strider) and they work just fine, so long as they are ballistic weapons. You still lose a few due to terrain, but ... meh... that's stuff that happens in Reality, too. Massed riflemen are missing one another, more often than not... otherwise, combat would be over in minutes, rather than the reality.

[FLOZi]

All AATA smallarms used to be ballistic and we had issues then, too.

[Argh]

With what, specifically? I've solved all of the main issues with NanoBlobs by standardizing scales and doing other things that I've been describing elsewhere. Basically, one of the keys is that the lowest practical scale of an object in Spring (leaving aside the issue of its graphical depiction, which is whatever you want it to be) is a hitsphere 8 units on a side. That's the lower limit. At that scale or above, hit detection for ballistic weapons using models is darn-near 100%...

[emmanuel]

if someone try my notmod test i look for a close combat unit
it s only an script for swords move and weapon have a minimal range <100...
in this case units can do melee !

where are the units same the dozer for ota with a wepon plot located on blade ???

(your ideas about tiny and huge unit for do a second line of fire remind to me the fantasy scen where army in battle hav dwarf human troll giants and dragons
a nice scene will can be modded for taspring if the new suport for takindom units work really(i try for 4 commanders tak add in my notmod test and an error message issue :sound missing not fixable by me)
some one hav use sucefully of ta:k units?

[KDR_11k]

Weapons with range <100 make the unit decide it's too close and should turn around instead of firing.

I think modern RTSes only make sense if you think of each unit as, well, a unit instead of a single soldier or vehicle. A single tank won't take more than one or two hits but an entire platoon will definitely be able to take different levels of damage.

[emmanuel]

yes i look for this result
unit hav red circle attackout of this hit sphere
it attack land but not ennemy:i know what for now!
another noticed value limit=no ground hole at 199 damage but hole for 200

founded the rx79hover(miguel)script =>
a turet nano+a radar popup+a turet gunrecoiling+2weapon slot badly scripted seems+4 rotating helo
this script is the more complet found now( for me in waiting myself scripting )
i think about build with this a lot of vehicle
with new tag noseldamag for a large front explod for crushing tool with the2 empty weapon slots
but problem how to crushing feature without attack by clicking
is possibl to script an permanent attack slot for weapon ???
for represent a dozer blade or a chainsaw
and how attack <100 ?
is a taspring new limit?
maybe hack with this by modelise a 3d model with 100long !?!(16footprint!!!)
i hav found too a script for a bladed warrior commander...

[Zoombie]

Anyone else think that if TA was realistic it would be absolutely no fun?

But a game that models modern warfare really well, from a cover stand point, is Company of Heroes. Its still in beta form, but in that game your squads will automatically adjust to dynamic cover. That means if you put your rifleman squad in a building and a tank blows part of the building off, then your squad members will arrange themselves around the new hole to fire out of there and still not be in plain sight. It also has very long ranged rifle fire (For an RTS) and a bullet going through your soldiers will kill them. Its quite fun, too. You need to keep your units in cover, flank the enemy and support your units with machine guns (Nothing like stealing an enemy MG-42 and turning it on the enemy. Its very satisfying) and tanks.

If Spring could have that kind of A.I behind its units, then it might become more fluid, like how Warlord wants it to be. Or at least it sounds like he wants it to be more fluid. And sometimes it is. Then other times it gets jammed into a 'over the top' like cycle of death and renewal, a la WWI. minuses the snappy gas masks, witch look really cool and menacing now that I think about it.

Sorry about the rambling.

[Warlord Zsinj]

Oh, sure, I'd love that for Spring. The problem is that it is entirely unrealistic. COH has been built intentionally so things work like that. Even if it fit within the design of Spring, it would never be able to operate with the enormous amount of units Spring can field compared to COH.

The reason why FF is so important is that it does more or less what the COH complex scripting does from a game mechanic point of view - but with three lines of code instead of thousands.

[emmanuel]

without FF tag about:
it will be good that unit hav hightrajectory=2 can selfswitch when los is blocked(by friends or others)
(it seems too this tag have only vertical elevation barel as value :
must be 45to90enabled 0to45disabled)

[FLOZi]

Anyone else think that if TA was realistic it would be absolutely no fun?

But a game that models modern warfare really well, from a cover stand point, is Company of Heroes. Its still in beta form, but in that game your squads will automatically adjust to dynamic cover. That means if you put your rifleman squad in a building and a tank blows part of the building off, then your squad members will arrange themselves around the new hole to fire out of there and still not be in plain sight. It also has very long ranged rifle fire (For an RTS) and a bullet going through your soldiers will kill them. Its quite fun, too. You need to keep your units in cover, flank the enemy and support your units with machine guns (Nothing like stealing an enemy MG-42 and turning it on the enemy. Its very satisfying) and tanks.

If Spring could have that kind of A.I behind its units, then it might become more fluid, like how Warlord wants it to be. Or at least it sounds like he wants it to be more fluid. And sometimes it is. Then other times it gets jammed into a 'over the top' like cycle of death and renewal, a la WWI. minuses the snappy gas masks, witch look really cool and menacing now that I think about it.

Sorry about the rambling.

I'm trying to steal as many CoH ideas as possible for '44. They already stole our capturable flags, though

[Zoombie]

Well I'd be happy with just prone...ness.

And keep stealing those ideas, FlOZi. Stealing good ideas is good. Borrowing them is not.

[FLOZi]

Well I'd be happy with just prone...ness.

And keep stealing those ideas, FlOZi. Stealing good ideas is good. Borrowing them is not.

Garrisonable buildings/field barracks and unit upgrades ftw!

[emmanuel]

ideas are free
copyright is for material and names