Page 1 of 2

Metal Fatigue

Posted: 06 May 2008, 12:44
by Final
Did anyone ever play Metal Fatigue.
Image
It was mildly based on TA, and had some wonderfull features such as 3 lvl playing fields (ground,underground,Asteroids)
and krogoth(ish) robots with interchangable parts.

Read about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_Fatigue

If I ever get round to making a mod, this would my subject matter.

Just interested to know if anyone ever played it?

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 06 May 2008, 12:55
by rattle
Played it, liked it, don't like the fact it refused to run on my "new" computer 6 years ago.

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 06 May 2008, 12:58
by Final
I managed to track down a demo of it. And after a playing around, managed to get it working.
Shame the Demo is only the first 3 lvls :(

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 06 May 2008, 13:28
by Comp1337
FUCK YES
I just havent found it anywhere, looked in shops everywhere when it was released bu no dice :(
Guess ill acquire it

Aw man I loved that demo

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 06 May 2008, 13:49
by [Krogoth86]
Well you can download it from the underdogs (version without videos though) as they call it "abandonware":
http://www.the-underdogs.info/game.php?id=1975

I also loved the demo back then but when I played it again about a year ago it just was ugly. I'm not talking about the visuals but the controls and imo the "tech-tree" kinda sucks later on...

I also wouldn't say it's that much inspired by TA but much more from all the well known japanese mech mangas & animes... :wink:

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 06 May 2008, 14:46
by Pxtl
It was a nice concept, but everything had so damned much health that most of the fighting was just watching things bonk against each other for hours on end. If it had a more TA-like damage model, it would've been a fun game.

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 06 May 2008, 14:57
by Erom
I was super excited by this game back in the day, but totally let down for the same reason as pxtl said. It was the slowest, most maddeningly frustrating RTS I've ever played.

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 06 May 2008, 15:08
by KDR_11k
Pxtl wrote:It was a nice concept, but everything had so damned much health that most of the fighting was just watching things bonk against each other for hours on end.
I call that AOE syndrome.

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 06 May 2008, 16:07
by rattle
It's one of the few... okay not so few games I bought. The melee combat was awesome in it...

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 06 May 2008, 17:41
by j5mello
yeah but any match against the AI devolved into you spending hours trying to clear the underground section (with only vehicles no bots underground) of the 8 billion buildings and vehicles the AI would build...

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 06 May 2008, 19:31
by zwzsg
I played the Rimtech and Neuropa campaign.

I even played one or two multiplayer games on Gamespy. Twas super extra hard to get a game going, lots of disconnection issues, and when it happened, I got mauled before even getting my first combot.

I quite liked that game, it is not perfect but still rather well executed, and also original. While not all the originality in it really paid of (for instance the layer were a bit too disconnected, I was just playing on one layer at a time instead of having fight on all them at once interacting), at least it tried, and with a very enjoyable result. I'm getting tired of how nowadays ALL rts think they have to be a carbon copy of either C&C or WCII.

Unlike Pxtl & Erom, I had no problem with the health / damage ratio. Maybe it's just I always attacked with more than one combot.

I also disagree with j5mello, as with the recon pole it is very easy to locate the underground enemy buildings. There's even a long range recon pole cannon, that make it even more an ease to dispatch them! And well, if only the underground layer remains to be cleared, directing all your economy toward there you get an unstoppable tank army in a couple minute. Maybe like too many RTS players you didn't think about getting multiple factories where needed and producing en masse. I remember a hugelong time ago, at a friend who was playing TA campaign, I enqueued five Jethro and he was like "zomg five at once??? You are crazy! That's is so much to much!". I'm sure it's common trend, especially with all the bad RTS where it's the only possible way to play, to severly limit your production instead of getting a TA-like explosive expansion.

Unlike Krogoth86 I found the control pretty ok. Granted, they are not as powerful as Spring's control, nor even TA ones. However, discarding TA and TA-derivative, Metal Fatigue controls are in the top best RTS control. Even today you have game with less control. And indeed, Metal Fatigue control and way of playing bears some similarity to TA, like having a continuous economic system.

The graphics are of course not as cool-FX-saturated as 2008's games, however, beside the Milagro and some factory which are too cubic, they were excellent for the time, and are still bearable nowaday. There's all sort of jet boots flare, translucent shields, lightsabers,
...

As for the teching up, no way, severing enemy's combot limb, grabbing them with a cons, bringing them to a tech center to study, and then mass producing it was awesome!! (Or you could also mount the severed foe limb at once on one of your own combot, the good old immediate reward vs delayed greater reward dilemna.)

My own qualm about Metal Fatigue is about the way ressources are gathered. At first I went like, bah, lava pool get depleted too quick, the only sustainable source of energy is solar. So I just quickly wiped the asteroid plane, and massed solar panel there (come to think of it, the lack of grid when placing building made maximising space use when placing solar tedious). And I did a whole campaign like that, worked but was rather boring. Only when re-taking the game later for a second campaign did I notice that hunting underground lava pool first gave me a much stronger economy much faster. So after all maybe the economy is ok too and it was just me who took a bit to grasp it fully.

Oh yeah and also the non-combot unit, and especially the planes, are too worthless. Undergound plane forced the use of vehicle, but since combot can have wings or jetboots (which I used on all my armies), plane felt very superfluous. Though by playing only the campaign, maybe I have a flawed view of the balance.

Picture related:
Image

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 06 May 2008, 19:54
by manored
This game looks fun, will give it a try. I suppose that all games have boring parts or balance flaws, but nothing is perfect :) And it sounds really original with that combination of 3 battle planes, savaging enemy tech and custom units.

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 06 May 2008, 20:32
by KDR_11k
IIRC tjhe balancing flaw was the mobile turrets, you could just build a crapton of those and slowly sweep across the underground.

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 06 May 2008, 23:29
by Argh
IIRC tjhe balancing flaw was the mobile turrets, you could just build a crapton of those and slowly sweep across the underground.
QFT, they were easily the most powerful ground units, and easily protected against aircraft. Kind've like giving a MRPC treads... only they cost a lot less :P Maybe there was a real counter in MP, with the remote-strike stuff, since they couldn't fire if mobile... dunno. It's a game that never seemed to catch fire for MP play, so I doubt if those nooks and crannies ever got fully explored.

I thought Metal Fatigue was a game full of neat concepts, but it wasn't very tight on balance, imo. Definitely one of the most experimental RTS designs ever, though, and while I was a bit disappointed with some elements, I have to give them major props- the three-world concept was exceptionally interesting, what with being able to dig out walls, etc. underground, whilst being limited to certain types of unit in the sky realm.

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 07 May 2008, 00:16
by Fanger
Couple issues with that game:

1. Lack of Mission save feature, cannot save during a mission or skirmish or whatever.. made it extremely annoying to play large games..

2. Aircraft death explosions.. the aircraft when crashing would cause MASSIVE DAMAGE.. more so than their actual attacks at times.. it was lovely..

3. Inability to easily clear the undergound area due to HP of buildings being balanced to deal with combots and not other stuff

4. Random naming conventions for AIs made it hard to tell which one was easy/med/porc/attack.. etc..

Other than that the game was great.. and no Z the aircraft were not superflous they could be easily spammed and were much faster than flying combots and could swarm those easily. Flying combot parts had next to nothing for HP so unless you had some sort of other high HP component on em they would die horribly. On the surface combots raped all in swarms especially in melee where they did crap tons of damage. It took next to nothing for them to kill buildings.. Additionally once you secured the whole orbit and filled it with solars you basically had Infinite resources for the rest of the game. wouldnt say it wasnt balanced well, just that the underground was tedious and annoying to clear, because you couldnt use Combots which were the main attraction of the game..

Also for Neuropa.. Shield Arm + Energy Saw Arm + decent torso + speed legs in clumps of 4-6 made short work of anything that tried to attack..

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 07 May 2008, 01:23
by Final
Being able to retrieve and research the corpses of enemy combots to steal their technology was a nice touch.

A popular online map had an alien(non playable) combot corpse in the centre, which people would fight over, in order to research. But It was horribly strong and unbalanced.

Still lots of fun.

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 07 May 2008, 08:41
by Wolf-In-Exile
Oh yeah, I found this awesome game early last year. Its still installed on my comp btw. While the gameplay is indeed really slow and the interface is somewhat cumbersome, its upsides more than make up for that.

Customisable mechs, capturable parts, cool melee anims (yeah, sliced off your arm biatch!), transferring pilot veterancy, sky/land/underground battlefield layers... I really wish an updated version of this game is made... wonder who holds the rights to it.

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 07 May 2008, 12:04
by Final
Just out of interest.

Would a unit with detachable arms be possible in the spring engine? perhaps using lua?

And how about the ability to take items to a building and "research" them, adding that item to a factory list?

I will make the assumption that having 3 lvl playing fields would require a complete engine rewrite. :roll:

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 07 May 2008, 20:58
by manored
Fanger wrote:Couple issues with that game:

1. Lack of Mission save feature, cannot save during a mission or skirmish or whatever.. made it extremely annoying to play large games..
I think you must have some problem with your copy, cause I can save on mine.

I played this game some more and I am impressed with the playing ability of the AI... I am assuming that it is not receiving bonus (maybe yes cause I am on hard), since it builds all the buildings and expands and stuff. Mission 3 of the blue faction (dam memory) ended up becoming a skirmish where no side can overpower the other... :)

Re: Metal Fatigue

Posted: 07 May 2008, 22:03
by Evil4Zerggin
Final wrote:Would a unit with detachable arms be possible in the spring engine? perhaps using lua?
This can be COBbed. You can "hide [piece]" / "show [piece]" pieces of a model using COB; if you want an arm flying off you can use "explode [piece] FALL | [other flags]". Making a dropped arm into a discrete unit/feature might a bit tricker* though, although I'm not sure exactly what you want.

* Read: I'm pretty sure it's possible, but I don't know how to do it myself.