Jump to content


WFG Retired
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Chakakhan

  1. I had a lot of the same feelings shadow had when I first started playing this game. I have decided to take a "wait and see" attitude. I think a lot of the details will change when we introduce a working tech tree. Part of the decision making process with tech is deciding how we are going to develop it. We can choose to invest in a single tech path and go deep, or to invest broadly and not as deep. Part of that tech investment in other RTS games has been the cost of the buildings that support that tech. Having the Civ center be so versatile in unit production probably seems strange to people who are used to other RTS games (especially the Age series). It changes the early game focus a bit. I actually think it might be a nice change if we can balance things out properly. Obviously, these Civ center fighting units are going to be very weak against the professionally trained troops. So you have to decide if you are going to get a bunch of these to fend off an early attack or if you are going to save and invest in more advanced troops. Also they have the ability to gather, which is another interesting feature. You can get a lot of these guys and they can be put to work while you scout and figure out what your "real" army needs to looks like. All interesting situations that have to be taken into consideration. Having combined buildings makes it harder to scout your opponents tech path. I don't like this. Maybe we add small things to the buildings to indicate additional information, maybe we don't - not sure about this. I do think that a lot of people are going to want something along these lines. In most RTS games scouting is ultra important and I don't think we want to make scouting worthless in our game. Anyway, what I really wanted to say was that I don't see anything being discussed that is outside of the planned engine capabilities. This includes adding buildings associated with different techs (if we felt we really needed to). A lot of the things Shadow mentioned would make nice version 2 features and probably fit better in that era. My two biggest concerns: Scouting and Game Pace (too slow currently). I don't want us to develop a turtle fest game. Keep the ideas flowing!
  2. It would be helpful to know the version of thew video driver you are using. On Win 7 Goto Control Panel -> System and Security -> System. On that panel the top left corner there should be a button called device manager, click that. On the device manager page you will see "Display adapters", open that, right click on your display adapter and select "properties". From there select the "driver" tab - let me know what the Driver Version is. (there is probably an easier way to get this, but this is what I know) ;-)
  3. Hi Lexa, Good start! Looking forward to seeing how this develops. Cheers!
  4. I like it, seems like it has the potential to generate a lot of territory related strategies. This might be tough to balance, so keep all the knobs easily accessible ;-).
  5. Hey Seb, Yes, we have to keep working on the core engine stuff as we add more functionality. So some releases will feature more behind the scenes stuff than others. The next release should have a few more visual additions and more game play enhancements as well. Thanks for your feedback.
  6. Yes Osron, the installer is supposed to setup shortcuts. What OS are you using?
  7. Oh Yea, we want you to be able to ally, betray and trash talk with the AI.
  8. Gimp 3.0 will support 16 bit formats. Currently I found that Cinepaint: http://www.cinepaint.org/ (free / open source) supports some 16 bit formats. There are quite a few tools that can manipulate 16 bit bmp files.
  9. Yep, I think you are right, it tends to balance out.
  10. Inside positions would be the red and the yellow if you were playing with 6 players.
  11. Ok Michael, that sounds good to me then. One thing that might be interesting/nice to consider for multiplayer is that the inside positions are much tougher to defend because you can be attacked from three side (as opposed to two). Perhaps they get something to balance that out? Perhaps that is a map makers job, just thinking out load...
  12. Hmmm, organic to a point, but it needs to be pretty darn close or it is just unfair and people don't think unfair is fun. Small deviations make things interesting, but larger deviations make things not fun. Are territories a game type option?
  13. Yep, thats on our ToDo lists! Boat pathing/movement needs some loving. Thanks for the picture Kao.
  14. Very well Mrjeremister. Your advice and opinion will suffice! Welcome! The guide is a great start. I hope you keep adding to it as we change things.
  15. I was referring to your premake patch you attached earlier .
  16. Hello Christian, Schön, dich kennenzulernen! I am glad you are interesting in spreading the news. Look forward to seeing your site. Cheers
  17. Hello Susan, glad you are here, welcome!
  18. Hi Yves, did you merge my changes for Visual Studio in with your patch?
  19. Not familiar with that, please elaborate ;-)
  20. Hi Jubal, Philip, Brian and I were profiling the simulation code at startup to see what was slowing things down. It seems the idle villi code is at least part of the problem. I went into a little more detail on the ticket #888. Cheers!
  21. Agree, should be distance based.
  22. So bartering is like market trading in AoE - there is a "value" attached to a resource and that value goes up or down based on supply and demand. In AoE the values are gold based so you sell a resource for some amount of gold and you buy another resource for some amount of gold. I read the barter link and it seems similar - why not just use gold based trading like AoE? What are the advantages of direct trading over gold based trading? That actually seems pretty straight forward if that is what you are referring to. Trading seems like an extension to AoE trade routes where instead of it just being gold, you can gain other resources. Again, why not just have it gold based? Seems simpler.
  23. In all seriousness I do think the partial reveal on spy death would be cool and unique.
  24. Hmmm, bartering - tell me more or send me a link to the design discussion. This seems like an interesting concept.
  • Create New...