What do you think ct's economy should be like? I just wanted to open up this brainstorming thread so the "mining" thread could be more about the technical gadget stuff. So if you have opinions or suggestions leave them here.
I'll start it off with what I, personally was thinking.
All construction units can mine.
The flagshipbase and some yet undetermined unit/structure will be drop off points.
Storage trucks would maintain their abilities.
Really all that stuff is ultimately sanada's choice, as it is sanada's faction. So I don't have really strong opinions one way or the other.
HOW it's implemented is more important to me.
I vote for a mining modoption that basically turns on spacerocks.lua the harvesting gadget, and a yet unmade that gadget that turns off and on various different units. IE turns on "bminer" turns off "bengineer". Since we are committing in main branch of the game. I would want all of this default off until we get it working correctly.
What do you think ct's economy should be like?
Moderators: Moderators, Content Developer
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
No modoption. Always use spacerock and use it as a selling point of conflict terra.
The meteor storm starts with light hail, that doesn't damage, doesn't leave resource, but merely act as a warning that a meteor storm is incoming.
Many CT structures, like turret and such are deployable/repackable, so meteor storm will make for a good reason to move your buildings.
Then the actual meteor come. They deal heavy damage on impact. They leave minerals.
When deployed, the start unit comes with a huge shield that meteor bounce off. Bounce and then fall nearby, not bounce and disappear.
Another immobile structure projecting an anti-meteor shield can also be built later ingame, make it expensive enough that you only build it when it's too crowed under your shield and really need space for more buildings.
And at a higher-tier, you get an anti-meteor mobile defense system, that destroy meteor before they touch the ground instead of bouncing them.
To get resource, you must harvest mineral with a miner unit. The miner is like the harvesting unit of Dune2, Starcraft, Command & Conquer etc.. It spend some times cutting one/some/partof mineral in a mineral field, then has to unload in a specific structure, and only then you get resource. But more like Starcraft than C&C, in that you have many cheap miner, not one big harvester.
The start unit, when deployed, act as a mineral dump point, and can build miners.
You can also build extra mineral dump point, as a structure called "mineral processing plant" or something, but they are huge and expensive, which makes it impossible to build one next to each mineral field. Well, again, like refinery in Dune2, Command & Conquer, etc... Those mineral processing plant also are the factories that build miners.
The meteor storm starts with light hail, that doesn't damage, doesn't leave resource, but merely act as a warning that a meteor storm is incoming.
Many CT structures, like turret and such are deployable/repackable, so meteor storm will make for a good reason to move your buildings.
Then the actual meteor come. They deal heavy damage on impact. They leave minerals.
When deployed, the start unit comes with a huge shield that meteor bounce off. Bounce and then fall nearby, not bounce and disappear.
Another immobile structure projecting an anti-meteor shield can also be built later ingame, make it expensive enough that you only build it when it's too crowed under your shield and really need space for more buildings.
And at a higher-tier, you get an anti-meteor mobile defense system, that destroy meteor before they touch the ground instead of bouncing them.
To get resource, you must harvest mineral with a miner unit. The miner is like the harvesting unit of Dune2, Starcraft, Command & Conquer etc.. It spend some times cutting one/some/partof mineral in a mineral field, then has to unload in a specific structure, and only then you get resource. But more like Starcraft than C&C, in that you have many cheap miner, not one big harvester.
The start unit, when deployed, act as a mineral dump point, and can build miners.
You can also build extra mineral dump point, as a structure called "mineral processing plant" or something, but they are huge and expensive, which makes it impossible to build one next to each mineral field. Well, again, like refinery in Dune2, Command & Conquer, etc... Those mineral processing plant also are the factories that build miners.
-
bobthedinosaur
- Blood & Steel Developer
- Posts: 2702
- Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 13:31
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
yes, listen to Z. but maybe make a market to sell units back for cash if you get tight.
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
*moved from other thread*
@ SanadaUjiosan
Really? I have to confess that's the thing that confused me the most about CT. I mean, first of all, storage is a global effect - having it on a mobile, deployable unit confuses me, same as XTA's old mobile fusion plants.
Second, it's storage. Storage isn't something that gets much use in TA-style economy game. Now, in the wave-based econ I could see storage being more useful, particularly if you choke up on buildpower - thus, the logic will be harvest after wave into storage and then spend your stuff until the next wave - storage becomes important then. But currently, storage isn't a major component of TA-like gameplay - people basically build just enough that the normal flutter of the bars doesn't smash against the edges, but still generally don't stockpile the resources.
Anyhow, here's my idea of CT's economy:
basics
Energy works as-is. Storages become vanilla buildings. Map starts out with a good distribution of ore piles, created based on the metalmap - the first SpaceRocks storm comes in 5 minutes or so. So you send out your harvesters to claim ore.
builders
Make the resurrection tanks also responsible for repairs, so you have three kinds of worker units - repair/resurrect/scrap tanks, harvesters (harvest ore) and builders - builders are rare and expensive, and fit into the economy more like factories than TA's little conbots. That is, price them like facs. Command ship acts like a builder when airborne.
Thus, buildpower is consistently expensive, instead of being cheap for buildings and expensive for units.
Harvesting
Harvesting is *fast*. As in, the map can be cleared of all resources in less than 2 minutes after players have a decent set of harvesting gear. You snooze, you lose. This works with harvesting as an offensive action - something you do in combat. Your tanks drive out with the harvesters and cover them while they grab the metal, creating tension more like BA's reclaiming gameplay than Starcraft's harvesters-hiding-in-the-safety-of-your-base gameplay.
Economic result
This means that the game is one that is more financially graspable than most RTS games - income is in fixed burps. "I got 2000 metal in the last wave". It all came at once. Then you spend it. You could even make a resource-bar that highlights this visually - your complete queued plans appear as an overlay under your metal, showing you how much metal you have queued to spend vs. how much you have... because unlike in TA, there's going to be a gap between emptying your metal stores and the next harvest.
Spacerocks Damage
Just to make the spacerocks storm more clearly delineate a "round" of play, make them painful. Make only the most hardened, special, pop-up units immune to their damage. And then give each player a set of space-rock defenses that they can build or use as mobile units. Immobile ones are moderately priced, mobile ones are massively expensive. So during the storm, you retreat to safety or you die.
This creates a new dimension of gameplay: taking out the enemy spacerock-defense just before the storm. Make resurrection of broken buildings cheap - possibly especially cheap if they were destroyed by spacerocks (IE building wrecks are immune to spacerock damage). So you take out the meteor-defense from an enemy outpost just before the storm, wait the storm out, then rush out with a swarm of resurrectors and fighters to secure the site to steal it for yourself. This works with CT's incredibly hard buildings - breaking a defense requires finesse, not brute force.
So the game operates in phases - the initial rush to grab all the starting metal on the map (and possibly bum-rushing your opponents) until the map's out of metal, then securing positions with spacerock-defenses before the first rockfall.
Then it goes into a cycle of
tl;dr: what Z said.
@ SanadaUjiosan
Really? I have to confess that's the thing that confused me the most about CT. I mean, first of all, storage is a global effect - having it on a mobile, deployable unit confuses me, same as XTA's old mobile fusion plants.
Second, it's storage. Storage isn't something that gets much use in TA-style economy game. Now, in the wave-based econ I could see storage being more useful, particularly if you choke up on buildpower - thus, the logic will be harvest after wave into storage and then spend your stuff until the next wave - storage becomes important then. But currently, storage isn't a major component of TA-like gameplay - people basically build just enough that the normal flutter of the bars doesn't smash against the edges, but still generally don't stockpile the resources.
Anyhow, here's my idea of CT's economy:
basics
Energy works as-is. Storages become vanilla buildings. Map starts out with a good distribution of ore piles, created based on the metalmap - the first SpaceRocks storm comes in 5 minutes or so. So you send out your harvesters to claim ore.
builders
Make the resurrection tanks also responsible for repairs, so you have three kinds of worker units - repair/resurrect/scrap tanks, harvesters (harvest ore) and builders - builders are rare and expensive, and fit into the economy more like factories than TA's little conbots. That is, price them like facs. Command ship acts like a builder when airborne.
Thus, buildpower is consistently expensive, instead of being cheap for buildings and expensive for units.
Harvesting
Harvesting is *fast*. As in, the map can be cleared of all resources in less than 2 minutes after players have a decent set of harvesting gear. You snooze, you lose. This works with harvesting as an offensive action - something you do in combat. Your tanks drive out with the harvesters and cover them while they grab the metal, creating tension more like BA's reclaiming gameplay than Starcraft's harvesters-hiding-in-the-safety-of-your-base gameplay.
Economic result
This means that the game is one that is more financially graspable than most RTS games - income is in fixed burps. "I got 2000 metal in the last wave". It all came at once. Then you spend it. You could even make a resource-bar that highlights this visually - your complete queued plans appear as an overlay under your metal, showing you how much metal you have queued to spend vs. how much you have... because unlike in TA, there's going to be a gap between emptying your metal stores and the next harvest.
Spacerocks Damage
Just to make the spacerocks storm more clearly delineate a "round" of play, make them painful. Make only the most hardened, special, pop-up units immune to their damage. And then give each player a set of space-rock defenses that they can build or use as mobile units. Immobile ones are moderately priced, mobile ones are massively expensive. So during the storm, you retreat to safety or you die.
This creates a new dimension of gameplay: taking out the enemy spacerock-defense just before the storm. Make resurrection of broken buildings cheap - possibly especially cheap if they were destroyed by spacerocks (IE building wrecks are immune to spacerock damage). So you take out the meteor-defense from an enemy outpost just before the storm, wait the storm out, then rush out with a swarm of resurrectors and fighters to secure the site to steal it for yourself. This works with CT's incredibly hard buildings - breaking a defense requires finesse, not brute force.
So the game operates in phases - the initial rush to grab all the starting metal on the map (and possibly bum-rushing your opponents) until the map's out of metal, then securing positions with spacerock-defenses before the first rockfall.
Then it goes into a cycle of
- harvest/turf-war,
- spend,
- attack,
- hide.
tl;dr: what Z said.
Last edited by Pxtl on 08 Oct 2010, 18:32, edited 5 times in total.
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
Oh I meant the mod option as a temporary thing while the whole thing is still in the "error spam/it might crash" stage of development.
-
SanadaUjiosan
- Conflict Terra Developer
- Posts: 907
- Joined: 21 Jan 2010, 06:21
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
I do not like the idea of having the space rocks be a powerful destructive force. We're trying to make an RTS, not a survival game. It is more a construct for an economy than a construct of destruction.
I honestly only deal with storage because it's in the engine. This whole discussion stems from Snoop's and my desire to step away from the TA styled economy, because we prefer the traditional RTS economy to it. If storage was not an element, the trucks wouldn't be there. But, as long as storage is going to be used, the trucks will be as they are.
I liked zwzsg's suggestion of a light, non-damaging wave to kind of signal that one is about to hit. I'm imagining kind of small red streaks instead of actual meteors. That could be both neat and useful.
The repulsor idea is a neat one as well. It would definitely help fix some of the problems that come with this idea.
I honestly only deal with storage because it's in the engine. This whole discussion stems from Snoop's and my desire to step away from the TA styled economy, because we prefer the traditional RTS economy to it. If storage was not an element, the trucks wouldn't be there. But, as long as storage is going to be used, the trucks will be as they are.
I liked zwzsg's suggestion of a light, non-damaging wave to kind of signal that one is about to hit. I'm imagining kind of small red streaks instead of actual meteors. That could be both neat and useful.
The repulsor idea is a neat one as well. It would definitely help fix some of the problems that come with this idea.
-
bobthedinosaur
- Blood & Steel Developer
- Posts: 2702
- Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 13:31
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
If the commander is an important ship that can not be lost then give it practically unlimited storage, and remove other storage units.
Also if you don't want a meteor to do lots of damage, then maybe meteors are not a good idea. I mean a meteor impact, in any visualization will appear to do lots of damage, and if it doesn't then it might seem a little strange to see.
I think if the commander has proper shielding from meteors when deployed, you give meteors fair warning, and you provide other shielding (bunkers maybe?) for units, then a hostile world environment sounds pretty interesting.
Also if you don't want a meteor to do lots of damage, then maybe meteors are not a good idea. I mean a meteor impact, in any visualization will appear to do lots of damage, and if it doesn't then it might seem a little strange to see.
I think if the commander has proper shielding from meteors when deployed, you give meteors fair warning, and you provide other shielding (bunkers maybe?) for units, then a hostile world environment sounds pretty interesting.
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
assuming that all Lua etc works, these are my ideas.
the numbers are all guide values of course.
"mined by 4 miners" just means "not huge swarms of ant like miners" and not "one giant monster miner"
when i say things "like in Command and Conquer" it is just to give examples and better explain not because something should excatly be "like in C&C."
remove metal extractors
its a old and tired game mechanic in spring.
it might be tempting to leave them in but very useless. but what would be the point.
building & mining similiar to Terrans in starcraft
drop off centers: (where ressources are brought to)
*the flagshipbase (landed flagship) is a drop off
*there is one mobile ground unit that can be deployed to become a drop off
*instead of T2 factories, make T1 factories upgradeable (morph them to T2 that can build both T1+T2)
*ressources on map are not unlimited
*no "magic" ressource generation by buildings, constructors etc.
*wrecks: only "large" units leave wrecks to reclaim
*storage: could be removed. imo its a leftover from TA. just display ressouces: 550 like in age of empires, C&C and the like.
*energy could be TA like with storage etc.
maps:
*more or less use this "cartoon"/clear look like oksnoop2's map
*near the start position players find enough minerals/rock to last them 10-15 minutes
*some mineral clusters could be in location where only the miners can reach them but no truck can deploy next to them: on hills, in ditches, shallow water etc:
step from grass to dirt is too steep for trucks:
miners will actually have to travel to bit from mineral to drop off and back
*minerals are spread evenly/random around the map but usually concentrated in clusters.
*2 to 4 clusters per player
*each clusters lasts ~10 minutes at normal mining speed (mined by 3, 4 miners)
space rocks
*serve as a system to bring new ressources onto the map
*maps can define how strong/likely meteor storms are
*default/normal would be one "cluster" every 10 minutes
*falling rocks are not that harmfull to units: either little damage (ie max. killing a miner with a direct hit) or a warning so units can move away (and near too so you can secure the area...)
*warning could be a siren "warning! meteor storm approaching" or what i like better: some dust/small harmless rocks raining down before the real rocks fall
example gameplay:
*start with flagship
*land and deploy it
*make 4 miners/builders
*3 start mining, 1 makes energy building, radar, mech factory
--some raiding blabla--
-make a support factory and a mobile dropoff truck
-make 4 more miners
-send truck+miners to a near mineral cluster
-send army as well to protect the miners (truck&miners are more valuable than a mex that is easily replaced)
--10 to 15 minutes passed--
-ressources at start base are used up
-space rocks start falling!
-some rocks fall near the front line but you can reach them
-start the flagship and fly it to the front
-because of good HP and weapons, the flagship can mine in this "dangerous" area. I think in Starcraft 2 the Command Centers now have a turret, kind of like that.
also you all post too fast
the numbers are all guide values of course.
"mined by 4 miners" just means "not huge swarms of ant like miners" and not "one giant monster miner"
when i say things "like in Command and Conquer" it is just to give examples and better explain not because something should excatly be "like in C&C."
remove metal extractors
its a old and tired game mechanic in spring.
it might be tempting to leave them in but very useless. but what would be the point.
building & mining similiar to Terrans in starcraft
drop off centers: (where ressources are brought to)
*the flagshipbase (landed flagship) is a drop off
*there is one mobile ground unit that can be deployed to become a drop off
*instead of T2 factories, make T1 factories upgradeable (morph them to T2 that can build both T1+T2)
*ressources on map are not unlimited
*no "magic" ressource generation by buildings, constructors etc.
*wrecks: only "large" units leave wrecks to reclaim
*storage: could be removed. imo its a leftover from TA. just display ressouces: 550 like in age of empires, C&C and the like.
*energy could be TA like with storage etc.
maps:
*more or less use this "cartoon"/clear look like oksnoop2's map
*near the start position players find enough minerals/rock to last them 10-15 minutes
*some mineral clusters could be in location where only the miners can reach them but no truck can deploy next to them: on hills, in ditches, shallow water etc:
step from grass to dirt is too steep for trucks:
miners will actually have to travel to bit from mineral to drop off and back
*minerals are spread evenly/random around the map but usually concentrated in clusters.
*2 to 4 clusters per player
*each clusters lasts ~10 minutes at normal mining speed (mined by 3, 4 miners)
space rocks
*serve as a system to bring new ressources onto the map
*maps can define how strong/likely meteor storms are
*default/normal would be one "cluster" every 10 minutes
*falling rocks are not that harmfull to units: either little damage (ie max. killing a miner with a direct hit) or a warning so units can move away (and near too so you can secure the area...)
*warning could be a siren "warning! meteor storm approaching" or what i like better: some dust/small harmless rocks raining down before the real rocks fall
example gameplay:
*start with flagship
*land and deploy it
*make 4 miners/builders
*3 start mining, 1 makes energy building, radar, mech factory
--some raiding blabla--
-make a support factory and a mobile dropoff truck
-make 4 more miners
-send truck+miners to a near mineral cluster
-send army as well to protect the miners (truck&miners are more valuable than a mex that is easily replaced)
--10 to 15 minutes passed--
-ressources at start base are used up
-space rocks start falling!
-some rocks fall near the front line but you can reach them
-start the flagship and fly it to the front
-because of good HP and weapons, the flagship can mine in this "dangerous" area. I think in Starcraft 2 the Command Centers now have a turret, kind of like that.
also you all post too fast
Last edited by knorke on 08 Oct 2010, 18:45, edited 1 time in total.
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
Oh, in that case you can do that right now - CA did something similar.
You just make the starting storage something obscenely, massively huge. Something way too big to ever reach.
Then you replace the GUI resource bars with something more sensible. Look at StarCraft - they don't have resource bars, they just give you a number "this is how much minerals you have".
I still would want economics tweaked such that
1) I spend slow enough that I'll have most of the rock storm harvested before I really make a dent in the metal I harvested, BUT
2) I spend fast enough that I can spend most (if not all) of the harvest before the next storm.
That way, you can give the user a simple balance sheet of "this is how much you have" and "this is how much you have scheduled to spend" and it be really meaningful. You can look at those two numbers and say "I have enough to queue up 2 more tanks and they'll be out the door before I run out of minerals... and then I've got to hang on tight for the next 2 minutes until the next rockfall".
Thinking it over: reclaiming wrecks breaks this a bit. I'd agree with Z - avoid reclamation as a major gameplay element. Maybe (just maybe) remove it altogether and stick to resurrection instead, and you only get to resurrect buildings... but you'd want a mechanism to sell/scrap your buidlings and units, which is really the same thing, I guess.
You just make the starting storage something obscenely, massively huge. Something way too big to ever reach.
Then you replace the GUI resource bars with something more sensible. Look at StarCraft - they don't have resource bars, they just give you a number "this is how much minerals you have".
I still would want economics tweaked such that
1) I spend slow enough that I'll have most of the rock storm harvested before I really make a dent in the metal I harvested, BUT
2) I spend fast enough that I can spend most (if not all) of the harvest before the next storm.
That way, you can give the user a simple balance sheet of "this is how much you have" and "this is how much you have scheduled to spend" and it be really meaningful. You can look at those two numbers and say "I have enough to queue up 2 more tanks and they'll be out the door before I run out of minerals... and then I've got to hang on tight for the next 2 minutes until the next rockfall".
Thinking it over: reclaiming wrecks breaks this a bit. I'd agree with Z - avoid reclamation as a major gameplay element. Maybe (just maybe) remove it altogether and stick to resurrection instead, and you only get to resurrect buildings... but you'd want a mechanism to sell/scrap your buidlings and units, which is really the same thing, I guess.
Last edited by Pxtl on 08 Oct 2010, 18:49, edited 1 time in total.
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
this is important i think. that players are able to look at a cluster of minerals and now if it is worth the effort or not.Pxtl wrote:You can look at those two numbers and say "I have enough to queue up 2 more tanks and they'll be out the door before I run out of minerals... and then I've got to hang on tight for the next 2 minutes until the next rockfall".
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
Anybody played DragonShard?
Correction to my initial idea: Scratch the refinery part. That's boring. Have miners produce resource as they mine. Have miners still small and frail, but expensive enough that you don't want to build to many of them, that you want to keep them awlays mining, and that replacing a whole miner fleet is expensive.
This way, we should have a gameplay where people maintain a flotilla of miners, and keep them sending at each fresh mineral spot, where you could gamble harvesting a spot close to the enemy at the risk of losing your miners.
Falling meteors should be heavy enough that low tech unit and structure risk dying, but small enough that high tech heavy tanks can just endure it.
But mineral should remain highly instable, detonating at the first shell lobbed at them. And they detonation should be small radius but ultra damaging, kill anything at once, even super heavy units, but except miners who'd have special damage against mineral explosion.
Mineral should be killed by falling meteor as well, so that a meteor shower on a mineral field produce a huge mayhem (much more than the first fall), but in the end leave the field with more or less as many mineral as before. Of course, make mineral immune to meteor and mineral damage for a duration just over the duration of a meteor storm, so that meteor and mineral of the same storm don't kill each others.
This way, mineral would not only matter for resource collection, but as well become a ground dangerous to tread in wartime. Basically a mine field awaiting the slightest spark to destroy anything foolish enough to wander over it. So that shooting the mineral under advancing armies becomes a cool trick to win against superior number. Including leaving a mineral field where you want to trap enemy.
Edit: I was thinking more about localised frequent storm. The previous posters idea of splitting the game into two alternating phase, full-map shower PvE survival, then PvP fighting, could be interesting. But it would make unit travel time and map size very important. Make sure to have more kinds of bunker, shield, and other anti-meteor systems if you go that way.
Correction to my initial idea: Scratch the refinery part. That's boring. Have miners produce resource as they mine. Have miners still small and frail, but expensive enough that you don't want to build to many of them, that you want to keep them awlays mining, and that replacing a whole miner fleet is expensive.
This way, we should have a gameplay where people maintain a flotilla of miners, and keep them sending at each fresh mineral spot, where you could gamble harvesting a spot close to the enemy at the risk of losing your miners.
Falling meteors should be heavy enough that low tech unit and structure risk dying, but small enough that high tech heavy tanks can just endure it.
But mineral should remain highly instable, detonating at the first shell lobbed at them. And they detonation should be small radius but ultra damaging, kill anything at once, even super heavy units, but except miners who'd have special damage against mineral explosion.
Mineral should be killed by falling meteor as well, so that a meteor shower on a mineral field produce a huge mayhem (much more than the first fall), but in the end leave the field with more or less as many mineral as before. Of course, make mineral immune to meteor and mineral damage for a duration just over the duration of a meteor storm, so that meteor and mineral of the same storm don't kill each others.
This way, mineral would not only matter for resource collection, but as well become a ground dangerous to tread in wartime. Basically a mine field awaiting the slightest spark to destroy anything foolish enough to wander over it. So that shooting the mineral under advancing armies becomes a cool trick to win against superior number. Including leaving a mineral field where you want to trap enemy.
Edit: I was thinking more about localised frequent storm. The previous posters idea of splitting the game into two alternating phase, full-map shower PvE survival, then PvP fighting, could be interesting. But it would make unit travel time and map size very important. Make sure to have more kinds of bunker, shield, and other anti-meteor systems if you go that way.
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
no, thats boring and would be the same as reclaiming.Have miners produce resource as they mine.
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
It would be interesting if the buildings all had a shielded mode that can be turned on during meteor showers. Would be an interesting dynamic that could completely fuck and attacker but shut you down at the same time.
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
i would personally think that the harvester and the cons should be different units....harvesters can have like a purely economic value(being targeted by the enemy 2 slow down your production) and cons can be like a building unit(btw, con cost 2 little)
com and trucks should be the only drop off points......
i'am not against economic trucks(actually i'am for expanding their role), i just don't think that the storage/mobile morph thing makes no sense(as i explained in the other thread)...thu u can have the morph option for transforming from a mobile unit into being a immobile a drop off point
all units should give recs, but none should be reclaimable(just disappear after a while)...removing this ta aspect imo is a good thing, when your attacks fail you give the opponent a economic boost(as well a lost in troops)...this should make games more aggressive as well as distance you from the TA econ
com and trucks should be the only drop off points......
i'am not against economic trucks(actually i'am for expanding their role), i just don't think that the storage/mobile morph thing makes no sense(as i explained in the other thread)...thu u can have the morph option for transforming from a mobile unit into being a immobile a drop off point
all units should give recs, but none should be reclaimable(just disappear after a while)...removing this ta aspect imo is a good thing, when your attacks fail you give the opponent a economic boost(as well a lost in troops)...this should make games more aggressive as well as distance you from the TA econ
Last edited by nightcold on 09 Oct 2010, 01:06, edited 1 time in total.
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
That reminds me of that russian RTS game where you could shield your entire base but you had to have tons of energy.
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
This is a double negative, please rephrase.nightcold wrote:, i just don't think that the storage/mobile morph thing makes no sense
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
Maybe if your going for a more micro intensive harvesting also make base building different?
You got your main building and to build more buildings you need to build "infrastructure" .i.e power lines or some sort of ground plates that look like tubes or whatever.
Every building would have to be connected to a power supply to work or to your main building either directly or indirectly through other buildings.
Each building could have a power reserve and if it gets disconnected(enemy destroying you power lines) from the grid it's energy reserve will slowly go down until it stops operating.
To make it look nice you could make the power grid parts look sort of half cloaked.
Units would be able to walk through them but enemies would also be able to kill them.
You got your main building and to build more buildings you need to build "infrastructure" .i.e power lines or some sort of ground plates that look like tubes or whatever.
Every building would have to be connected to a power supply to work or to your main building either directly or indirectly through other buildings.
Each building could have a power reserve and if it gets disconnected(enemy destroying you power lines) from the grid it's energy reserve will slowly go down until it stops operating.
To make it look nice you could make the power grid parts look sort of half cloaked.
Units would be able to walk through them but enemies would also be able to kill them.
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
@ nightcold
Well, the rock fall does give you a nice chance to clear out valueless wrecked units. Give the "resurrection" worker tanks the ability to reclaim wrecks even if valueless, just for the sake of clearing out a mess.
For ones the players don't bother to clear, the rockfalls handle them - make the valueless wrecks vulnerable to a very wide blast-radius around the falling rocks.
@Gota - basically Sim City's power-grid for the buildings? If so, I'd make buildings immune to the falling rocks - building anti-rock defenses would be kind of redundant with powering your buildings, in terms of gameplay effect... build X near buildings or they break. The actual math of tracing out building power could be annoying, too.
I've seen a lot of games with the "power grid" aspect and I don't really see what it contributes to the gameplay outside of CA's overdrive (sorry Smoth).
Well, the rock fall does give you a nice chance to clear out valueless wrecked units. Give the "resurrection" worker tanks the ability to reclaim wrecks even if valueless, just for the sake of clearing out a mess.
For ones the players don't bother to clear, the rockfalls handle them - make the valueless wrecks vulnerable to a very wide blast-radius around the falling rocks.
@Gota - basically Sim City's power-grid for the buildings? If so, I'd make buildings immune to the falling rocks - building anti-rock defenses would be kind of redundant with powering your buildings, in terms of gameplay effect... build X near buildings or they break. The actual math of tracing out building power could be annoying, too.
I've seen a lot of games with the "power grid" aspect and I don't really see what it contributes to the gameplay outside of CA's overdrive (sorry Smoth).
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
Eh...its cool and gameplay wise it means your enemy can hurt your gentle grid to cut off parts of your base...
I dont know,i think it would be interesting and nothing like that has ever been made for spring.
It also shouldn't be too hard to code.
I dont know,i think it would be interesting and nothing like that has ever been made for spring.
It also shouldn't be too hard to code.
Re: What do you think ct's economy should be like?
You could add the tiberium factor- meaning that minerals damage nearby units, and spread for themselves. Meteors are random, randomness is bad, because people hate it to loose because of diceroll. You can however avoid that, by showing a Meteorpreview "were Minerals will be in the next 5 Minutes"-Overlay should avoid the randomness.
You could even make minerals appear, if terrain is deformed, so were artillery shells mountains(Metallzones), the riches appear, which will result in very valueable battlefields.
You could even make minerals appear, if terrain is deformed, so were artillery shells mountains(Metallzones), the riches appear, which will result in very valueable battlefields.