Terrain damage...

[Storm]

While watching video 15, I came to realise how difficult late games become because of the map deformation. I mean, it's enough for one assault through a pass to wreck the ground so much that no Bulldogs can ever dream of getthing through. So I would like to suggest to ease up the deformation a bit. Keeping the same area of effect, but one fifth or even one tenth of the damage impact would keep the game playable a bit longer.

A common 2v2 game on Comet Catcher involves at least five hundred dead units and an unknown multiply of rockets, missiles, debris and other explosions, which would render the midfield completely unpassable after 30 minutes gameplay.

Also, on the side note, I've hosted the latest videos here and here.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Well, there's the restore terrain feature. Also, such terrain deformations are sometimes a good tactical advantage, so there's no point in having them reduced. The main issue I currently see with the deformations system is that the outer ridges of the crater rise too high, and it creates spikes when multiple projectiles hit one spot.

[Redfish]

Yes maybe the entire map has to be raised a bit when a crater is formed instead of the ridges.

[Storm]

Just because it's possible to restore, doesn't mean you can in the midst of the battlefield. Check vid 15 again and tell me if those tanks had even the slightest chance to pass after a while. They all got stuck. Of course there's a lot of strategy in deforming terrain, which is why I'm absolutely positive we should keep it, but at the current rate, the entire Gods of War map will be underwater within ten minutes and that just ain't interesting.

Really, use your spring version and play versus the AI on Comet Catcher. You won't be able to get to the enemy at all after a while, unless using aircraft - which would be a harsh decimating of strategical tactics. It's a-ok to have the map riddled with corpses and craters after two hours of intensive gaming, but to have such harsh deformations as now would most certainly kill half the fun of the game. All you'd need to do is to build a lot of MTs and force-fire them in front of your base for a minute or two. If even one tank could make it past the ridge, consider it pure luck.

[Gabba]

Good points Storm. I think an interesting solution could be that heavy tanks actually have a flattening effect on the ground. That effect would be proportional to the "deformability" of the ground, therefore if it's easier to mess up by firing on it, it'll be easier to flatten with heavy units.

I think that only tank-like units should have that effect, but on the other hand kbots should have an easier time crossing a messed up battlefield.

[Storm]

Gabba... really, is it worth to make such a roundabout just to prevent maps disappear in matter of minutes? Seriously, what you are suggesting would most effectively fuck up movement over natural hills and mountains completely. The game itself, from as far I can see on the videos is mostly flawless. I like the fact that units have a rougher time to climb up than roll down, that they affect each other and so on, but the deformation is simply off the scale... I know when we blew up landmines in the military, they sent a large iron box 50 meters in the air (in pieces), but left a crater not more than half a meter deep.

[Gabba]

Ok, ok, Storm. First, the flattening effect from tanks should only apply to very irregular terrain = shellholes. So it won't affect natural hills. Second, I agree with you that the current deformation effect is too strong. Each map-maker should be able to adjust it for his own map, and ideally we need a "deformation map" (similar to the metal concentration map) which defines which areas are harder to deform (mountains) and which are easier (beach...).

Does it sound good this way?

[Mars Keeper]

I like it the way it is.

[AF]

TA is at least 40,000 years in the future, their attempt is not to throw the enemy into the air btu to first vaporize it ebfore throwing it itnot he air. Remember your thinking on the scale of peewee= man not peewee= house

[Charlemagne]

The question is, if you have a large mountain and starts shooting into a point close to the base, will there be a rather unnatural lookin "hole" in the side of the mountain, or will the upper parts adjust as well, and in that case, where will the matter go?

[AF]

The upper part will fall down at the edge untill ti reaches the bit just below where you're shooting and then whats immediatly behidn will start lwoering and so on till it shoots through the mountain

[Storm]

Does it sound good this way?

Yes indeed, this is an excellent idea if it can be implemented - to be able to choose in the settings of a map if the terrain is rock hard or just loose gravel. However, the tank flattening would probably cause a number of major bugs all over the place, so I wouldn't reccomend it.

I like it the way it is.

Insanely pointless remark from a person not understanding a word of what I said.

TA is at least 40,000 years in the future, their attempt is not to throw the enemy into the air btu to first vaporize it ebfore throwing it itnot he air. Remember your thinking on the scale of peewee= man not peewee= house

Could you cut the bothersome crap that doesn't mean anything? I don't come here to listen to figments of your imagination and hear you proclaim how we all should view TA. If it's truly 40 000 years in the future, these things would have developed a bomb large enough to combust the Universe and we wouldn't have a game to start with!! A game I'm really trying to improve.

And Jesus Christ, you spell like a hobo! Why am I even answering you?

[[K.B.] Napalm Cobra]

Maybe some shots of a buzz saw ripping up a hill would be informative?

[Shade]

Could you cut the bothersome crap that doesn't mean anything? I don't come here to listen to figments of your imagination and hear you proclaim how we all should view TA. If it's truly 40 000 years in the future, these things would have developed a bomb large enough to combust the Universe and we wouldn't have a game to start with!! A game I'm really trying to improve.

And Jesus Christ, you spell like a hobo! Why am I even answering you?

Finally, someone said it. I haven't been here a week and I already want to kick him in the... well, never mind.

But I think there's a good point with the matter dissipation... But it seems a moot point, if nothing else. A game is kinda like VR - it's only going to get so real until it becomes overkill.

[Redfish]

A vulcan just doesnt do the trick. It's too inaccurate. You can have it fire on a mountain for like 3 hours and still it's not level. Most vehicles are tracked, and kbots can climb nearly everything, so i don't think it's much of a problem. Only ballistic weapons and plasma do significant damage to the terrain.

[Storm]

Redfish, unless you magically missed what I said, watch video 15 again. Then, after you've done so, return to me and tell if the tanks that tried to cross the pass had a chance.

No.

They were stuck like fanboys in a manga store.

And that, after just a few minutes battle with quite few units and weapons.

[Shade]

Just out of curiousity, does terrain type have an effect on damage? I mean, one would think a metal map would be less subject to damage than another...

Now, I don't mind the damaged terrain idea - it's true in a real battle-field isn't it? "Drop a nuke in a bughole, you got a lotta dead bugs" - but you also have giant craters. I think that it would add a hell of a lot of more interesting gameplay (i.e. aerial transports needed)

What I would love to see is desert maps - now that would be amusing. Imagine the commander sinking in quicksand. HA HA!

-Shade

[Sean Mirrsen]

A possible solution: tanks should only level disturbed soil above the original terrain level. That way they will easily level artificial hills, and crater ridges. They will still have problems climbing out of the holes though, but it's inevitable in any case. Maybe have them keep some sort of inertia, not just slowing down when climbing a hill. Or better yet, have them retain their speed until they reach a certain degree slope.

The worst thing I've seen so far is that tanks and other units caught in areas of difficult "moon landscape" tend to lose coordination and stray away. Kbots pass any hills with ease, actually. I think this brings a new use to otherwise useless (sometimes) units, since Kbots can travel on rough terrain easier, and have higher fire points to shoot from inside craters. Hovercraft, on the other hand, have a lot of difficulties passing any uneven terrain, especially when making beach landings.

[Gabba]

Just out of curiousity, does terrain type have an effect on damage? I mean, one would think a metal map would be less subject to damage than another...

Right now we don't know - that's precisely what I was proposing. I bet the SYs will implement it, though. Eventually I hope we'll have a "terrain map" which will allow for different terrain types within the same map (such as beach, plain, mountain, road and lava), each with its own resistance to deformation, and its own effect on units.

A possible solution: tanks should only level disturbed soil above the original terrain level. That way they will easily level artificial hills, and crater ridges.

Yeah, that sounds good. Although it don't see why leveling these ridges could not "fill" a little bit the holes in front of the tank. It sounds better because then the dirt will always end up somewhere, as it does now.

[Min3mat]

I think this would be cool, as early game (DUH) vehicles will be used as the main attack, after a while (from guardian fire etc) the terrain will be impassable. If K-Bots are given a (much needed) buff then u can attack with the K-Bots MORE and flank with the vehicles (until that is impassable) i think its cool! anyway Admin people could u send us a video with a buzzsaw (or a vulcan if u must never liked 'em!) tearing up a mountain/big hill? please ???