Spring RTS Engine

If you'd like to model the con, afterall it is a single unit, a block with four retractable legs, a nanolathe, and a general purpose weapon that can hover very slowly when necessary.

The Con I'm thinking would be better as a campaign feature, as such we needn't pay them much attention development-wise past a single unit, and they needn't factor into multiplayer much unless there's demand.

In the meantime we need new names for the factions.

Considering how many units BA already has, I really see no point making more, unless they really fill some essential niches.

If you'd like to model the con, afterall it is a single unit, a block with four retractable legs, a nanolathe, and a general purpose weapon that can hover very slowly when necessary.

gogo CT's drones.

There we go, we may want to retexture them or modify them ever so slightly to fit more with BARs models, but otherwise the Con are now almost finished. All that is necessary is Bob/Beheriths blessing, and their inclusion.

( Although one feature of the Con not shown in CTs drones, was that they are essentially blocks that can come together )

The CON

It has been speculated that the Con were the result of a rogue Core construction K-Bot which spent most of the 9k years patroling reparing itself and the remaining buildings of its outpost. Maybe it just got tired and wanted to do something else. They don't have a lot of diversity in their arsenal (mostly 'bricks'). The Con are simple minded and completely irresponsible. Maybe a bit wacky, but not in a clowny way.

As for additional units, The Con wouldn't be for the multiplayer maingame, and they only have 1 unit anyway it appears. As such they aren't to be expected on DSD 16v16

At the moment we only have one faction partially remodelled, so I would assume that a release would only have that one playable faction. If we introduce a simplistic, expandy-overwhelmy faction, that could work well for a single player campaign, if we had one. Or it could even be good for a skirmish-type defencive play, a la chickens (then we would have 2 different type of gaia enemies in skirm, woo!!!).

BAR development looks about as organised as CA was so I think I can safely give this advice: Those that do work will make the decisions and if you really want something done you are going to have to implement it yourself.

As for story you should get Mr.Bob's time estimate for the second faction and then weigh up whether it is worth the wait.

If they set up a SVN where certain people can have commit rigths, like the old CA had, no problem, but you forget this isnt developing a new game, just a remodeling effort, they dont plan to change the gameplay at all. Or to do anything else.

Story wise, its fine using the one AF proposed. Its always good finding some common ground with the old TA.

Make the game first, then a story.
Bad things happen when you have a plot before you have a game.

scifi wrote:If they set up a SVN where certain people can have commit rigths, like the old CA had, no problem, but you forget this isnt developing a new game, just a remodeling effort, they dont plan to change the gameplay at all. Or to do anything else.

There is an SVN:
http://code.google.com/p/baremake/
Anyone who asks for commit rights will recieve it (just pm me a gmail address)
The only thing that will remain (hopefully) is the core gameplay. This is far from 'just a remodeling effort'

Funkencool:
A third faction is out of the question for now - it would only be viable in the form of a 'chickens' enemy.

MidKnight wrote:Make the game first, then a story.
Bad things happen when you have a plot before you have a game.

Judging from the talk in the thread we have a plot already =p It has a lot of gaping '<insert faction name here>' type holes, and makes very little in the way of assumptions.

Beherith wrote: Funkencool:
A third faction is out of the question for now - it would only be viable in the form of a 'chickens' enemy.

I will be happy as soon as we have a second... erm, a first, faction.

Beherith wrote:A third faction is out of the question for now - it would only be viable in the form of a 'chickens' enemy.

not to say you shouldn't model a faction. you should definitely model a faction.

KaiserJ wrote: you should definitely model a faction.

yeah kaiser... didn't you have plans with the legos..

my models are the taco bell of spring. beloved by some, revolting to the rest. easy to prepare en-masse, but after overconsumption, cause sickness and disorientation.

KaiserJ wrote:my models are the taco bell of spring. beloved by some, revolting to the rest. easy to prepare en-masse, but after overconsumption, cause sickness and disorientation.

Can I get a model from you at 2 AM?

How about: A shit tonne of oversized robots decided to beat the daylight out of each other over and over again for no real good reason.

(Honesty is always the best policy.)

Silentwings wrote:How about: A shit tonne of oversized robots decided to beat the daylight out of each other over and over again for no real good reason.

(Honesty is always the best policy.)

Yeah I too favor something like this, mostly I feel the backstory should be simple since the premise of the game is simple too - robots fight each other, that's it.

There are these robots that fight each other eternally, and nobody really knows what for anymore. The grimdark option.

Or another option, in the far future wars fought by robots are a popular form of entertainment. Everyone lives in abundance thanks to the nanolathe tech and they pass the time with competing in robot warfare on spare planets, and watching this stuff from TV.

It already is simple =p

• Enterprising salvagers find a commander from an ancient war
• Commander gets reactivated by mistake and escapes
• Commander goes blowing everything up looking for ancient enemy

But how do you explain the other 15 commanders who are also stomping around with their dguns ready?

how do you explain human beings fighting one another over books and imaginary friends?