Spring RTS Engine

.
Is there a option in Spring to end the game if the commander
is killed?


..

Not yet but there's a lobby for it. There's also a push for capture the flag (or capture the commader!) and king of the hill (or king of the crater!)

Commander death ends game takes away my favorite part of the game - the desparate commando op against an enemy who is winning to bring his production down, so you can level the field again =)

That said the option would be cool for commander death: end.

Tsumari

*bashes tsumari upside the face with a two by four*

Comm rushing bastard.

[K.B.] Napalm Cobra wrote:*bashes tsumari upside the face with a two by four*

Comm rushing bastard.

Gah... And don't I know it...

While I don't mind the commdeath!=end thing, it almost always ends up being an 'ok you win' ctrl-a ctrl-d currently.

Perhaps when you have no units or offensive capability left?

Then again, all you would need to do is build decoys...

P.S. I'd watch out, I think Tsu is into that kinda thing...

I have to admit I really don't enjoy getting com bombed or rushed. However it's part of the game. And you have to be honest. If I were a real core commander and I was fighting a losing battle over a planet, wouldn't it make sense to try and destroy the arm commander as well so no one gets the planet? In machine logic I think it's perfectly normal to rush or bomb. It's not very nice but it's reality. The option would be nice to have yes.

Also my idea about commander continues is this: if the commander(which is you) controls all the units who controls the units when the commander(hence the name) is gone? Not very real. Everything the commander does doesn't only work to kill the other guy but is also intended to guard himself. Having 100 flashes increases your chances of survival.

Commander death = end of game also means something important. No matter how behind you are, no matter how crushed you appear, there is always a chance that a desperate strategy of throwing your once mighty production into a few commando bombers will get lucky and succeed in a decapitation strike, snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. And it is a sweet, sweet thing, let me tell you.

Commander death should by default end the game.

Recently I played a game. Some guy lost his commander, which is just careless if you do. And if you do it just means you were not paying attention or something but nevertheless a good player prevents his commander from being destroyed. So Yes i'm a big fan of comm ends as well.

loseing a comander is like loseing radar, or an arm! They are so damn usefull and cool that i think Comander Death sould be a yes. BUT your surviving units would be playe by an AI, so its like your not controlling them (cause your deadish) but they still are trying to win the battle without their brave comander. Or they could simply become a indepedent force, gaurding their own turf and staying out of the way from the big boys.

Game Ends rocks, it makes the game less boring because it gives you a definate aim. I love it, never play without it, it was the second best thing in OTA (after the awsome resource management) and we NEED it to be the default when it becomes available.

I agree, only comm ends games from now on!! Weeee!

Zoombie wrote:loseing a comander is like loseing radar, or an arm! They are so damn usefull and cool that i think Comander Death sould be a yes. BUT your surviving units would be playe by an AI, so its like your not controlling them (cause your deadish) but they still are trying to win the battle without their brave comander. Or they could simply become a indepedent force, gaurding their own turf and staying out of the way from the big boys.

Would actually be kind of interesting... If instead of commander death = ends game, it was commander death = loss of control. The player goes into watching mode and can quit at any time if he wants (but his units will remain). The AI would have to be a non-cheating one, perhaps even one that doesn't build anything new at all. It would just guard its own interests like as if... well as if the commander was gone.

Err, no, I can't think of any player that would enjoy watching the control taken away from him and have an AI losing for him. You lose commander, GG, back to lobby, then a new game.

Err, no, I can't think of any player that would enjoy watching the control taken away from him and have an AI losing for him. You lose commander, GG, back to lobby, then a new game.

Well actualy you would be able to quit the game and the AI would still fihgt. And hell they might win if they make good AI. It would be funny though if EVERY one's comander died, and every one was whatching theses scattared, disorginised and generaly doomed forces bickering about land rights.

Or maby not!

It could be a third choice in multyplayer, like Ends, Continues, and Lose controll.

zwzsg wrote:Err, no, I can't think of any player that would enjoy watching the control taken away from him and have an AI losing for him. You lose commander, GG, back to lobby, then a new game.

I agree with you for a 1vs1....but in a 2vs2, you must be able to stay and watch the end of the game.

How about simply assigning a second unit as a backup commander but entailing limitations that come with not havign the d-gun and res storage etc, but maybe an enhanced nanolathe and build menu unless its something like a fido in which it'd be faster fire rate and speed etc

commander dead = end game

imo

I'd rather play myself instead of watch a stupid AI. Besides I still doubt they could make an AI that can imitate a human player.

The game should end when your last builder/factory is killed, not necessarily when your com dies. Otherwise a lame noob can still have a chance at winning.

Longaxe wrote:Otherwise a lame noob can still have a chance at winning.

Well, that's kind of the point isn't it? I think it's great because things like that make the learning curve seem less steep and new players aren't scared away as easily. It's like Counter-Strike and headshots if you know what I mean