Spring RTS Engine

Since EE predates that tag, and Fanger probably isn't even aware the tags for custom weapon ranges exist, I imagine they do.

Imho, EE would do well to switch all units to cylindrical or spherical targeting ranges.

they don't work right yet.

I dont think they do, however if someone could confirm.

Ivory as far as the scaled up buildings, Yes I understand where you are coming from, however I have actually tried leaving building scale alone before in a more private pre release setting. Me as well as anyone else who was there for that IIRC agreed that the current buildings look awkward at such a larger scale. So for a scale change to be iniated id have to remodel the buildings so they made sense.

However I think while conceptually it sounds cool if you actually saw it in action you would agree it looks awkward.

I would also like to make sure that the balance is such that games involving relatively equally skilled opponents can progress beyond lvl1.. If this isnt the case PLEASE let me know, what where why how who and when. I will endeavor to fix this..

When I played the last version of ee it took me a game to get used to it but then I was fine. I am not sure if it is a resolution thing ivory or I am just a details guy, and I also turned my icon distance up because I like seeing my units. I do think af's post is mostly rubbish but then again, yeah large buildings might be cool

Anybody have a good list of maps recommended for EE? Most of the BA maps, being designed for vehicle play, gave GD an advantage in that their slightly-more-effective tanks can get everywhere... at least, that's how it was a year or three ago when I last played EE actively. Either way, that may have been the source of the "URC sucks" sentiment.

pretty much most of forbs maps were good for EE.

we played the fuck out of:

giant hills and valleys

hills and valleys

foothills

archers valley

terra

arctic plains

sierra

and map with "hill" "vally" "mountain" "EE" in the name is also a good bet

Yar those maps were made quite specifically for EE and it seems to play quite well in all of them.

Fang's scale alleviates a problem I currently have, and that is the fact that for true epicness you need decent ranges etc etc etc.

Not only that, you need fairly flat landscapes. Now for evo, making a game work in a 16x16 is fairly easy, even 12x12's if there is enough flatland, but 20x20 is pretty much preferred simply because it gives you some time to breathe.

The way that EE is scaled, makes it so that a 10x10 or 16x16 is pretty much absolutely perfect sizewise. Sometimes I struggle with the scale, but only when I haven't played it in a long time.

Microing single units in EE isn't nearly as important as how you manage your groups. The best practice is to find a build order that works well and stick to it (hint, if there are between 13-17 varied units in your BO queue, ur prolly doin it rite). Another issue is that it makes a LOT of difference whether you understand how the units work together, etc.

Basically, yes, your first game or 2 you will suck ass muchly. But you sucked in BA for your entire first month, try giving EE a shot for more than 2 days and see if you still are having trouble.

@IK, xantheterra doesn't work well because of the typemap, URC and aliens get a retardedly jawsome advantage on that map.

terra, a flat map with huge hills

not xantheterra, which iirc is a flat map with dumb movement groups

1v0ry_k1ng wrote:terra, a flat map with huge hills

And HUGE metal income.

Honestly Id like to get away from using metal..

The system Id like to try and implement would function somewhat like this:

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. Additionaly you have a new building, the supply depot, this building can (except for the initial one) only be built in a square you control. You can only capture squares within a certain distance of a supply depot, which would project a square footprint out from itself. The farther you are from a depot the longer it takes to capture a square. Squares that are under your control and within the footprint of the depot cannot be captured by the enemy, however they can prevent you from capturing a square by putting units in it before youve captured it. If the supply depot is destroyed all squares under it remain in your control however they can now be neutralized, or if the enemy has a supply depot close enough, captured. Squares outside the control of a supply depot give a reduced amount of resources such as per say 1/4th their normal output. Additionally we could add vital positions which would be special squares which are more important and as such controlling them would give you increased output over a regular square. Additional possible option would be that squares under overlapping but opposed supply depots can be captured by eitherside at any time without the destruction of the supply depot neccessary.
Of course the size of squares, output of squares, footprint of supply depots, time to capture would all have to be tweaked to reach a proper balance. Also a widget that allows for the queing up of multiple captures would be neccessary so you can order units to capture a square then move to another and capture, waiting each time. Other concepts could be attached on to this system.

play a game or two of spring 1944, can't take their code since it's gpl but you can learn a lot.

edit: clarification: i'm talking about the flags. all you need to do is change a) how they're spawned b) their cap radius c) perhaps cap shape. evorts has something similar but a bit different.

also, after consideration, THIS (it's a mod name if you wonder wtf is 'this') has capturable resources and license should be a bit more friendly IIRC (or just ask kdr.)

EE has gpl code

Personally, I like the current no-makers metal approach for EE. A lot of games are going for the "zone-control" thing, and that's the new way, but diversity is good, and there are already enough mods going that way. If I were going to tweak out the resource-model in EE, I'd just gut out energy and stick to pure metal. Maybe add Starcraft-style "supply" system.

Of course, I'm just talking out of my ass, Fang may have some cool idea on how to differentiate it from the other new sector-controlling mods.

Did you read it, its not the same as the other controlling sectors type nonsense..

this system would be entirely different in feel from, the standard there is a point capture it move on.. Besides metal extractors are actually just point capture if you think about it, the goal is to get resources by having lots of metal extractors which are only in certain places, the only way to control a mex is to build one on a metal patch (some way to add a time/taking sink) and then you get stuff from the point for having a mex there, for the enemy to take that mex spot they must first blow your mex up and then build their own (so first neutralize the point then capture it) so really metal extractor spots are no different from point capture..

This system would tie in wonderfully with AI threat maps. Making AI threat grid sectors the same scale would make things very interesting in EE.

im not saying that would be bad but personally I like the way EE is compatible with spring metal maps

I don't like the idea, I prefer to still have metal extractor. Because metal extractor are tangible things in the game's world, things that makes sense in the strange world beyond my monitor glass, while grid square are an abstraction that would break the immersion, and make me remember I'm playing with a symbolic representation and not a tiny self-coherent world.

Plus, metal patches placed by hand on each maps are usually placed where it is relevant on the map, while the grid thing would fall wrongly on any map with character.

I will wait and see.

zwzsg wrote:I don't like the idea, I prefer to still have metal extractor. Because metal extractor are tangible things in the game's world, things that makes sense in the strange world beyond my monitor glass, while grid square are an abstraction that would break the immersion, and make me remember I'm playing with a symbolic representation and not a tiny self-coherent world.

Plus, metal patches placed by hand on each maps are usually placed where it is relevant on the map, while the grid thing would fall wrongly on any map with character.

Id comment on the ridiculousness of people who harvest resources in the middle of a combat zone.. but hey lack of willingness to adapt is lack of willingness to adapt.. additionally Im sure it would be possible to set up a system that detected metal patches and placed more important squares in that location..