Spring RTS Engine

-- I would really like a feature that allows you to define a path for your units not only by clicking spots, but also by defining through which area(s) they must pass to get there. I would use this (among other things) to keep units close to a cliff while they move, so they are sheltered from enemy fire.

Actually maybe this is already implemented: all commands are supposed to have an "area" version, so you can give area-move commands. If I hold shift, give a point-move command, an area-move command that covers the whole zone to be crossed, and then a point-move command, will the result be that the units will move from the first point to the second point, restricting themselves to the defined area?

Being able to rotate the selection box would be very useful for that purpose, if I want my units to follow a diagonal path.

-- (This assumes that selectable formations are implemented) If you're assigning waypoints using shift and select a different formation for your units, this should be interpreted as the formation to be used on the way to the next waypoint you click. What's important is to be in the right formation when you meet the enemy, so this way you should be able to tell your units: "OK, move as a column across that canyon, but then deploy in standard 'strong units at the front, weak/ranged units at the back' in case we encounter opposition on the way; when in range of the objective, long range units should move in front so they can target the turrets from outside their range, without exposing shorter range units."

yeah, that would be useful.

I think a combination of the queable OTA interface, combined with Spring's formation AIs would let you do that. I certainly want to see it in the game.

i would like to c some kind of way of supressing an area with artillery, not just a single point but an actual area

I thoguht I already explained that? Commands in Spring can be dragged to become area commands

well iam just saying. also, seeing some of the maps i think units should be given more range to make it a little bit more realistic...maybe have areas which are unobservable foged out with a heavy fog...

Blackliger suggested using real fog but the response was it would generate too much lag for some systems

have it as an option, at the min it looks really crap with units just appearing when they get into line of sight

Then fade them in

good idea, check out the suggestions thread.

How about a more TA like look to the fog of war. Turn the terrain and feature's colors into a grayscale, or just desaturate them somewhat. It at least puts a nice line from which they appear, and makes it easier to know what you can see. This picture I've built in my head seems to work from any angle... Of course this could be another option to full out fog.

I think it would be easier to place down a dashed white line on the map where LOS ends

dithering looked fine in OTA> How about just dim the colours and have no movement or effects active beyond LOS. Would even help ppl w lower processor power play They can't have as many scouts though, so more incentive to use radar targeting

And what about keeping ennemi building in fog of war. Wreckage are not hiden, why not building?
And it will reduce micromanaging. Follow the planes is painfull and the use of the recorder to remember where the bertha is, is painfull too.

Sorry for my english

If you send in a loada scouts over enemy territory that inr adar to see what the blips are then if you see a factory then once your gone your gonna know that blis a factorys, so why bother changing to a blip? Why not keep it as a factory but faded out untill the blip dissapears? Though I suggest this only for if you see it with the camera, saves you just putting up radar everywhere then sending scouts out and getting the locations and types of every buildings in seconds, saves abuse of the feature

Rather than considering it "abuse" of the feature sending out scouts to find the locations of buildings and then being able to see them despite fog of war, why not make it into a feature? Create some decoy building units and you can lure enemies into traps, cloak your real high-value buildings or build them "underground" so they're harder to spot, etc. I've always thought it was kind of silly that with all the high-tech command and control technology the Arm and Core had they couldn't keep track of immobile structures on the map.

BeeDee wrote:I've always thought it was kind of silly that with all the high-tech command and control technology the Arm and Core had they couldn't keep track of immobile structures on the map.

Sure, your commander can remember where all the tree are, he can see the explosions, the emplacement of all wreckage...but the most important, the ennemi building, he cannot.

BeeDee wrote:Rather than considering it "abuse" of the feature sending out scouts to find the locations of buildings and then being able to see them despite fog of war

I don't think it's an "abuse". Why must you have the camera on the plane to see what it see? In multiplayer, it'is a pita to use the blip of ta demo recorder.

BeeDee wrote:Create some decoy building units and you can lure enemies into traps, cloak your real high-value buildings

In all case, really good idea.

BeeDee wrote:or build them "underground" so they're harder to spot, etc.

You already can cloak them. I don't think adding possibilities to hide your units is very good..at least, it will confuse me.
(If you attaque with 20 kbot and the half are for detection hiden unit, underground unit, etheral units etc...it's not good)

sorry for my english

why bother building the unit anyways? just start a building and make sure its seen, then cancel it and move it somewhere else before it gets anywhere into the construction process.

I agree with buildings remaining visible even after fog of war covers them - really nice feature.

Now to get back on track... Any more comments on the original subject of this thread?

They should stay, but not be updated, it was one of TA's minor flaws that the buildings disappeared after they left los.