Spring RTS Engine

Meh. Warhammer isnt like that either

Its a good game, but not OTA........

sparkyhodgo wrote:Are you kidding? Unless you're a noobie, you should have 0 metal at all times. Otherwise, you're not building enough. ...

That's a wrong idea. Having 0 metal and spending more than you're gaining, puts you in nanostall. That's a very bad thing to happen.

What shouldn't happen is loosing metal, that is, gaining more metal than you can store.

WillRiker wrote:... chemical based missile engines ...

Chemical based...?

WillRiker wrote:... i like more of ... cossacks i loved that coz of the detail of the game. i love having thousands of options and i like a slow game, i like big maps which take more then 10 hours to win. i like micromanagment.

Well, seems like you don't like TA, pure and simply.
You are probably better playing other games full of micromanagment like «all-other-games-and-most-of-them-crappy».

Also, changing TA into beeing more alike those other games, we might as well stop making TA-Spring and instead make whatever-Spring.

i dont like CnC style games. i like more of a simulation then game. like cossacks i loved that coz of the detail of the game. i love having thousands of options and i like a slow game, i like big maps which take more then 10 hours to win. i like micromanagment.

You may like/love them but nobody likes/loves you/your ideas. Go play simcity fool.

To suggest to take away features from TA that make ti what ti is, features that are essential to a true RTS, features that make TA an RTS and not a warcraft/AOE clone. Such things are heresy and would count as a huge backwards step for this genre. It goes against all we believe and play for. So dont eb surprised riekr if you get flamed for it by others

*Bruce lobs firey death at Riker hiding in the bushes.*

O, and wreckages should give you metal as you reclaim them, not at the end (but i'm sure that's already in place.) Then we can have another scroll over thing for how much metal/second for wreckages.

Wouldn't that add alot of figures for the engine to keep track of? I mean, having to keep track of and process every wreck on the map? As well as their current values.

nemesisone wrote:

O, and wreckages should give you metal as you reclaim them, not at the end (but i'm sure that's already in place.) Then we can have another scroll over thing for how much metal/second for wreckages.

Wouldn't that add alot of figures for the engine to keep track of? I mean, having to keep track of and process every wreck on the map? As well as their current values.

I don't think so. The engine already have to keep track of wreckage, his hp (you can destroy wreckage), position, type etc...you just have to add an integer for the remaining metal.

Why don't we just have the hp of a wreckage being its metal value, logically if you shoot a destroyed tank your going to destroy some of the remaining metal, or atleast make it unrecoverable and a low metal wreckage would be easier to destroy. It also removes the problem of adding more data to be transfered.

It should display how much metal and its hp. anythign more is useless. When I need to reclaim wreckage and rocks I either automate the process with a plane on patrol or I'm in dire need of metal and I dont care how muhc I want it all as fast as possible. I have no qualms about choosing a wreckage that reclaims faster as they're all getting reclaimed anyway.

You know what's kind of funny? You can't destroy metal in real life that easily. At best you could melt it.

Gave me an idea, I don't know if it's good but it's worth discussing I suppose. Anyway, here it goes...

There is a finite amount of metal on a map; When you harvest metal from an area, it loses metal (very damned slowly!).

The less metal there, the slower harvesting is (therefore it never runs out, just comes so close that it is useless.)

Wreckages have the full metal of the original unit. However, the more blasted it is, the more that metal is spread around in the form of shrapnel.

Very slowly, the metal rusts away - this is the only way to destroy it.

The more spread around a unit is, the faster it rusts.

Being spread around also means that it is reclaimed slower by con units.

If a unit is still in good shape, then any con unit can ressurect it. (so if only just enough damage was dealt to kill it, then that's COOL!)

Well, anyway, It would be interesting to try, but would probably suck.

Thats a baaaaaaaaaaaaaad idea man, infinite resources are one of ta's main features, but the main problem is that on most maps eventually all the metal would be stuck on the most contested areas of the map with no constructors surviving long enough to make a metal profit over their initial cost.

[K.B.] Napalm Cobra wrote:Why don't we just have the hp of a wreckage being its metal value, logically if you shoot a destroyed tank your going to destroy some of the remaining metal, or atleast make it unrecoverable and a low metal wreckage would be easier to destroy. It also removes the problem of adding more data to be transfered.

I agree...but you cannot make corresponding hp and metal. Each type of wreckage must have a "pourcentage of hp lost corresponding to his toughness". I didn't explain very good, I'll try with an example :

A dragon teeth cost 40 metal. If you have to shoot 40 time on it to destroy it, it will loose 1 metal per shot.

A wreckage of kbot with 80 metal. If you have to shoot 10 time to destroy it, it will loose 8 metal per shot.

(Of yours, one shot of bertha is not the same of a shot of peewee)

I think it would be better if metal value and unit hp were kept seperate, but when the unit dies, your method of handling it would come into play.

/edit/ deleteme /edit/

BlackLiger wrote:Meh. Warhammer isnt like that either

Its a good game, but not OTA........

It was the reference to Deep Strike he used...

Speaking of Which... Dawn of War... Ummmmmm

*aGorm gets slaped to oblivion by TA purists...*

I think the courps should just stick with the metal values there given and definatly the metal resorces should be infinate... sorry Doomweaver. It would just mess with the game play.

aGorm

[K.B.] Napalm Cobra wrote:I think it would be better if metal value and unit hp were kept seperate, but when the unit dies, your method of handling it would come into play.

Anyways, it's not an important gameplay feathure...But it could be cool to see hp remaining of wreckage. And the possibility to focus them like ennemi unit. Like that it would be easier to destroy those who annoy you. (Or destroy those who are near the ennemi)

p.s. but I don't think focus wreckage on the minimap is a good idea. I don't whant to focus an wreckage instead of a unit per error.

Doomweaver wrote:There is a finite amount of metal on a map; When you harvest metal from an area, it loses metal (very damned slowly!).

Actually, I would like that idea as an option. Some people will use it, if only for a change (the game can't drag on forever, offensive strategy is even more important). This kind of thing already exists in TA, since people made mutators (for TA:Mutation) that turn metal patches into reclaimable rocks.

PauloMorfeo wrote: Chemical based...?

yes the flames comming out the back of missles thats fuel burning

I dont remember seeing flames, certainyl smoke.

I tcould be a nuclear flame if it is there otherwise it could be ionic in cause.

http://taspring.clan-sy.com/screenshots/screen55.jpg
mussel flash, chemical based

http://taspring.clan-sy.com/screenshots/screen24.jpg
missiles, propeled by solid rocket boosters, aluminum oxide, chemical reaction