EE is back in development, Check page 6

[Pxtl]

Harvesting resources in the middle of a combat zone makes about as much sense as manufacturing vehicles a hundred yards from one.

Either way, the simplified TA-like resource model is one of the things I liked about EE. I can see that you have a neat idea, but honestly I think it would be better for your project if you focused your efforts elsewhere - like a single-player campaign (which would help attract new players without them having to idle in the lobby for days) or finally getting NI out the door.

Obviously we're just the peanut gallery, but you wouldn't have asked our opinion if you didn't want an honest answer.

[smoth]

if a singleplayer campaign was really feasible someone would make one. I still maintain that it isn't.

[SpikedHelmet]

Making the actual "missions" is quite easy. Tying them together, so that the completion of one mission brings you to the next, with all relevent UI elements and other features, is the hard part.

[smoth]

yeah, that is what I mean, campaigns, not really feasible. Not right now anyway.

[Pxtl]

I don't think anyone would object if you just set up an external launcher app that launches the player directly into the game. Look at what KP did with it's easy/medium/hard modes, and look at the AppLauncher I made for P.U.R.E. Mix those two approaches and you have a GUI that lets the player choose a mission to play.

Just label the missions "Mission 1: yadda". I mean, it wouldn't be perfect - player is on their honor to play the missions in the correct order, and there would be no saving or anything. But the point is that it would be playable - a user could play through a single-player campaign.

Obviously, the KP single-player levels aren't what you want in a campaign - the're really just comp-stomps. What you'd want would be some Lua that gives the player a run-down of whatever units they're using for this mission and some hints on gameplay, their objectives, etc.

Ultimately you could implement it old Dune 2 style, where the enemy gets a completely pre-built base and a restricted economy, supplemented with troop drops and attacks at fixed intervals. Then you barely have to rely on the enemy player AI.

To me, the real flaw is the lack of tools for making single-player missions. You'd have to code it all in Lua, or develop tools yourself.

[Anarchid]

Map is divided up into grid squares. Control of squares gives you "requisition". To control a square you have to have a unit in it for a certain amount of time without any enemies being present.

Actually, as S:1944 seems to be pure GPL you could just lift their "flag" code, and thus instantly get yourself DoW-style point-capture. For a bit of originality, you could have specialized capturer units that are the only ones besides commanders/builders that are capable of capture and could have some stealth(which is basically what scouts are for currently). It would be 90% similar to the *TA setup for ppl to like it, and would be actually lighter on clicks (a single right-click instead of select extractor>select location).

[smoth]

it doesn't matter what we do with lua etc. campaigns right now are still not going to work right. We can have missions sure.

[Fanger]

My response to suggesttions to use a DOW system are this image:


The point is I dont want a simple DOW copy I dont see the difference between a DOW style system and a mex system and until you can satisfactorally explain the differences Im going to.. Please thoroughly read the concept I posted and understand how it works in its entirety.

Another point, EE having a simplified TA resource system is entirely an issue.. because you see there is a term here that indicates precisely the problem.. TA.. IF I have the same setup as TA why make my game.. its just TA with different paint.. Im not trying to make a differently colored version of TA.. IM trying to make EE which is a game I imagine as the "perfect RTS game" now granted attempting to reach perfection is idiotic in the complete, but thats not going to stop me from trying.. so EE is going to take the limit as gameplay Approaches Fang's version of perfection.. That means I want to try this resource system.

This system as far as it works in my mind attempts to establish a concept I never see properly in RTS games and that is an established FRONT. Generally games just flow into rush and counter rush across the map until somone cannot keep up and loses.. I want a more definite front with a skirmishes across it until someone gains momentum and with battles taking place across the map instead of just in certain places. I think this system would approach this aspect better. Please feel free to post your concerns about the system but lets attempt to stem away from issues that would be I dont like anything but TA, cause if thats your issue then please go play TA and not this since Im going to move away from TA with best possible speed.

EE was never meant to be TA it only used that system because there was no Other way.. not that its possible to use other ways I would like to do that..

[Anarchid]

an established FRONT

Then, you're either stuck with some kind of sector system (would make two of us), or you could just make capture-times low, and all units be capable of capturing.

Anyway, if you go for full-blown capture/sector system, you part with the every current AI in existence - so be prepared to develop your own. I liked how ai's worked in EE before, it was fun. If you can keep them doing that...

[Fanger]

What AIs that worked.. those stopped working after I added hubs and cloning.. there never going to work until those issues are fixed unless I make special AI only sides.. or someone fixes that issue in which case then they can just work on fixing the wont work with sectors issue too..

[Pxtl]

Imho, the games that best establish a "front" are the ones that are very porcy. I mean, some do well by making taking territory a slow process, so claiming turf from the enemy means taking a minute to claim it.... but ultimately, it's often faster to grab a little turf and then go for the kill. I see this problem happening with your Supply Depot approach.

You'd probably have to go for a serious buff of your short-ranged defenses (and restrict their construction to fully claimed sectors), to the point that any and all frontal attacks are hopeless. Then players would have to rely on artillery, subterfuge, and other special tactics to claim territory, and direct combat would be for the purposes of supporting these tactics.

That doesn't sound like the kind of game you want to create.

Alternately, you can make the units semi-static in some way, gaining benefits from being in a defensive position (such as, being within a "defending" sector).

Now, as for the depot approach itself, I like the concept, although I think the "grid" idea seems unnatural.

Fundamentally, the Supply Depot sounds like this: the build-time of a Mex (which is otherwise free) is inversely proportionate to its distance to a supply depot, and any unit can build a Mex. Because you have to plant a mex first to get a supply depot, this extends to Supply Depots themselves.

Also, mexes are invincible when close to a supply depot.

I realize that this is only a partially-accurate analogy, but I'm trying to strip away the sectors idea that keep making people think of DoW.

Mostly, what it sounds like is that you're slowing expansion and rewarding players for claiming territory that is close to their existing territory, as a means to encourage players to have defined "turf" rather than simply capping mexes wherever they can.

This is a good concept, but as I said, it seems no easier to defend, so players will still be free to encroach on each other's turf, and there will be no battle-lines. Moreso, actually, since in TA you have to defend every mex, whereas in SupplyDepotLand, you only have to defend the depots.

That's why I keep dwelling on defenses, or buffing defending units somehow.

[Fanger]

It would be easier to defend because you have:

a) fewer buildings to defend resource wise
b) it takes longer for your enemy to claim territory when hes on the attack
c) if he overextends he leaves himself open to attack as well

[Pxtl]

Will there still be a reclamation economy? How does claiming enemy territory (once you've broken his supply depots) work? Do you have to plant your own depots, or will the presence of your units "de-claim" the territory?

I'm just trying to imagine how an attack works. "my army fights his army, my army gets a decisive win - why don't I just walk over and stomp his home base instead of chipping away at his territory and giving him time to shore up his forces".

Obviously, this is also a feature in every other Spring mod, particularly those that focus on mobility over static units. I just was wondering how it would work in EE, since you talk about wanting to maintain "battle lines".

[Fanger]

You would need to have your own supply depot nearby overlapping into the newly liberated territory, or you would need to build a new one on th edge. Essentially If the terrain is covered by a depot you cannot uncap it, if the depot is destroyed, you can then uncap it. If you have your own depot with radius you can cap it then.

As far as whats stopping you from rushing his base well, nothing except whatever forces he has, and the fact that you might leave yourself undefended if you miscalculate..

At some point I would like to add Ammo to units and require supply vehicles to have to be within the radius of a supply depot or return to them in order to refill your units, so that progressing out of your territory to far would leave you without actual supplies

[Anarchid]

At some point I would like to add Ammo to units and require supply vehicles to have to be within the radius of a supply depot or return to them in order to refill your units, so that progressing out of your territory to far would leave you without actual supplies

That's actually possible with just an hour of tweaking some more out of S:1944

However, it occurs to me that if you make your units depend on your sectors directly (say for refueling and reloading), and make expansion dependant on adjacent sectors, you won't end with a dynamic, tactic-intensive, all-out frontline assaults: you will end up with sitzkrieg rather than blitzkrieg, a contest of Mannerheim lines like those in Fibre.

Hm. It seems like the "design document" advice given to the starter of AeroAssault topic is sound even for credible mods aiming for an overhaul. I strongly suspect that were you to compile your ideas into a step-by-step, front-by-front Structure of correlated statements, it would both be easier to implement, and easier to alter (and as a bonus, way lot harder to misunderstand and miscriticize).

"my army fights his army, my army gets a decisive win - why don't I just walk over and stomp his home base instead of chipping away at his territory and giving him time to shore up his forces".

I imagine that if he has enough territory,the rewards for owning it are suffuciently real-time and large, and production capacities uncapped, striking at his centers rather than peripheries at this moment will give him a chance to out-produce your units that are far from your own centers, and weather them away with determined, 100% spendage resistance. What this means, that a headshot assault in unfavourable econ position could be just as risky as any scv rush.

Ofc, this all ONLY holds if all your units are cappers, the rewards are that high, and his production capacity is uncurtailed by anything else than territory.

[smoth]

Anarchid no matter how much you plan something out it will not work out the same when it is played out. Some of that will need to be emergent when observing players. Therefore if your structure and planning is too rigid you stand to make something that people may draw a lot of issue with.

A design doc should be a best loose. That way you have an idea, x is good for y but you will also need to just go ahead and implement the fuckin' thing. Once it is implemented you can observe how players will react to it. I thing fang has a good rough outline, a doc of sorts with lexicon would help but if he tries to do that here every retard and his brother will just try and force their system on the guy. Along with a lot of DERP DERP MAKE IT LIKE TA.

[Google_Frog]

Can I ask why there is an armor category for each Tier? I had a glance through modit and noticed that every unit does reduced damage to T2 compared to their T1 damage and then even less to T3. The damage done to T3 was usually 60-80% of the damage done to T1. My question is why not remove most(if not all) of the special damages and just boost T2 and T3 hp to compensate?

[Forboding Angel]

If I may point out, established bases have already been done and are extremely easy to set up via this lua:

http://my-trac.assembla.com/evolutionrt ... upport.lua

[zwzsg]

Id comment on the ridiculousness of people who harvest resources in the middle of a combat zone..

I find nothing wrong with that, a game doesn't have to be realistic as in being a copycat of how real war goes, it just have to make sense within its own set of rules.

And considering the playing field is limited by the map edge, I prefer to have my ressources coming from buildings I've planted in the map I'm playing in than having them delivered by some out of map Deus Ex-Machina, or by some abstract "zone" concept.

but hey lack of willingness to adapt is lack of willingness to adapt..

It's not lack of willingness to adapt or else I'd be still playing Cavedog's TA on warzone and would completly disregard EE. It's just I like EE and don't want it to be half ruined by your system being implemented.

[lurker]

If I may point out, established bases have already been done and are extremely sucky via this lua:

http://my-trac.assembla.com/evolutionrt ... upport.lua

FTFY