 |
|
|
I think this has to be an RTS. Look at Starcraft, and why it's so popular. It has good multiplayer. If Firaxis wants it so people still play it after the player masters beating the Firaxis AI(Shouldn't be too tough.) Of course, Firaxis should ban all mucho money maps on its server.
|
|
| |
|
|
Monkey
|
|
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Apr 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
Why does everyone want it to be a RTS? This game is supposed to be part of the sweep of time trilogy. What would people think if the trilogy had two turn based games and one RTS? That Sid has turned his back on turn based? If that ever happened it would be the end of civ and probably TBS games as we know it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
As much as I like turn based games. It's really going to depend on the interface and feel of the game. For example, CivII would not work as a RTS. StarCraft would not work as a TBS.
For Civ, I think TBS outweighs the importance of itself over RTS, simply because strategies are a thinking game, we are not super-beings that can think instantly like you would need to in a RTS game of CivIII.
Not only thinking, but the game will lose interest after a far shorter time than you would over a TBS game of Civ. All because RTS games are quick. Wheras TBS can take weeks.
Unfortunetly with TBS, you don't get a lot of action, and that can be quite dull. You have to admit, looking at your units just standing there stiff is really dull.
This wouldn't be hard to fix though, you could easily have the unit animate while it waited its next turn. It could be watching out for enemies or training or eating or sleeping. That would make more sense than just having the unit stand there stiff has a bone. And a hell of a lot less dull aswell.
Here's an idea, say you have a Triceratops (My Fav) standing in a dry area waiting it's next turn. And one of the other players moves one of it's dino's closer to mine, through some bushes which makes a rustling sound. Suddenly while it's still the other players turn, my Triceratops turns towards the sound and is now in "suspicion" mode or something. (Moving his head around in that direction)
So really, you CAN have a lot of action like a RTS in a TBS game. It just needs a lot more thought and work. But it would definetaly be worth it.
[This message has been edited by L o k i (edited December 21, 1999).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kris Huysmans
|
|
Belgium
May 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
I didn't saw yet any RTS with as much strategy options as civ and colonization.
It is just making long-term complex strategies that makes civ and col the best games ever.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adm.Naismith
|
 |
Milano - Italy
Oct 1999
time: 06:14
|
|
Vanguard point is correct, if only you can focus on events on tactical level, not on the whole planet.
Let me explain: if I have to look at only a tribe of dinosaurus (or any kind of units on different RTS, for that matter) I can give them order, let them move, eat, fight, whatsoever. If things go wrong I can have an eye firmly on them (the area of events will be quite limited), then I can react quickly enough (pausing the game, redoing any orders, restarting).
If I have to check what's happening to the whole Pangea area and borders (or Africa and South America and Asia) I will need a very good alarm system to catch my attention where is needed. Think about fighting on two front into same time. In real world different general keep their finger into the different mud for you, the Global strategist. In RTS often you must compete with computer AI on its strongest point: speed, because the PC can be everywhere on the map (it is its full - limited - world after all, isn't it?  ).
Then programmers can have easy life to forget good AI programming mess and go straight for simple, dumb but fast routine coding.
OTOH, LOKI suggestion is refreshing to me, because he try to keep most of advantage of turn base pace with movement and more cause/effect feel of real time. I don't speak only about graphic effects, I think about suggestion of gaming effect as dino raising alert if another dino is approaching not enough sthealthy.
My add to these two worthy Apolytoner is to consider the "contemporaneus turn" approach.
I really played it only on Blue Byte's Battle Isle (1) on Commodore Amiga, but I liked a lot: every player plans (simultaneus each to the others) units' move and actions but they are grayed out till the end of turn. When you end turns all action become effective and you can see on simultaneus view (as in real time) every effect: do your units get ambushed? Do they kill some wandering enemy scout? Do your artillery catch enemy with some preventive bombarment of a narrow mountain pass?
The computer can be a good referee to resolve some unaccettable action (i.e. two mutual enemy units trying to move into same square will end in a fight or the retreat of the weakest one). The whole game, from turn to turn, will looks more living and appealing, like real life or a movie, than slow and sliced as a chess game, without losing on strategic possibility (no "click fests" needed).
Anyone would like this different approach?
Merry Christmas
------------------
Adm.Naismith AKA mcostant
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kris Huysmans
|
|
Belgium
May 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
Adm.Naismith your idea looks me raisonable because you have still the good points of turn based games.
But that is pure theory how will it works in reality ? I didn't saw any game like that.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adm.Naismith
|
|
Milano - Italy
Oct 1999
time: 06:14
|
|
Hmmm, it's difficut to explain for me, because I haven't played so many different computer games to try another example if you have not played Battle Isle 1 (almost 8 years old).
To add trouble, english is not my first language, you can see it, and this doesn't help 
In brief, I'll try to describe strictly what I have seen in real games, not what I suppose Firaxis should achieve with current tech and PC power.
During a turn of Battle Isle (BI for short), one player has the right to move units, the other should assign fire, repair or production order. The map show where units will be at the end of movement, or where it will fire. If you are moving, you aren't sure the movement will take effect (the enemy should destroy you meantime), if you are firing you aren't sure about how many damage will you produce to attacked unit: you can't use the common tactics of turn based game of fire an enemy defender until it's destroyed, then use your units to blitzkrieg through the hole in defense. You must guess in advance how many attacker units you must assign to crush the defenders.
When you and the AI faction end's order, you must hit the button of end turn: then the two set of orders are resolved (fight take place, movement occurs) with a continuos animation (you can't interact, like in a movie). When all order are executed the next turn begin, with faction exchanging phases of movement / fire etc.
The BI's rule of separating between movement and fire phases is not mandatory, IMO, if only a game designer plan well a set of orders and automatic reaction (like the ability to set your artillery on counter artillery mission, then if an enemy artillery fire in range, your unit counter attack automatically).
You can still borrow commands used in RTS (like Patrol area, waypoint movement, etc.), but add to them the pace and strategical deepness or TBS.
Oh well, just finished to prepare my childrens' gifts under Christmas' tree (1:00 of 25th december here in Italy), now I'm ready to go to bed to be ready for this morning grand opening fest
Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas
------------------
Adm.Naismith AKA mcostant
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Darkstar
|
 |
Huntsville, AL, USA
May 1999
time: 23:14
|
|
It's going to be RT. Sorry folks. Look at all the prep work they are doing. Look at all the suggestions when they are trying to sell us (Civ and TBS snobs) on how much BETTER it would be real time. And finally, remember they have ALREADY done a TBS Civ style version of this game. It's the Dinosaur scenario in Civ2: Fantastic World.
I am sure this will be a GOOD game if it's designed by Sid. I'd expect they'll use the Getty/Ant engine, tweaked, improved, and modified to suit THIS game's needs. I'll just not buy this game as soon as it hits the shelves... Why? Not to my taste. But I might pick it up later, when all my Real Time friends start recommending it. I'm not a total TBS snob. (I just don't have the reflexes anymore to play RTS competitively or to their full depth, which takes away from one's enjoyment of the tactics possible in the various click-fests...)
And I'd say to start looking for it around Q4 of 2000. (I expect they'll TRY and target Q3 and have it slip back on them). They'd love to spend longer making it, but they couldn't get anyone to help/back them without a market reasonable timeline, according to what the Firaxians leaked earlier this year. Even though it was Sid...
-Darkstarr
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Darkstar
|
|
Huntsville, AL, USA
May 1999
time: 23:14
|
|
Oh yeah...
The Sweep of Time is not an interlocking system of games (ala Caeser/Cohort). It's merely a brand name. That's right. They'd LIKE to have made it that way, and there has been TALK of Civ3 launching SMAC, but the Sweep of Time is merely ALL Sid games, past, present, and future. Including Pirates, Colonization, etc... after all, they ALL fit into Sid's Time Line of Fun and Adventure...
-Darkstarr
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SWPIGWANG
|
|
the country we call canada
Aug 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
Adm.Naismith I've seen a newer game with a similar system as you decribed. It a KOEI game thats never reached the english world (never translated...and yes english is my second langrage) Its a empire builting TBS(set in ancient(all close range combat) China(lots of people...like 4 armies 20,000 each)) with a semi TB/RT style combat.
The combat system have simultaneus turns(3days a turn) and is resolved in real time. Fighting take place when two units of different sides get close(even when they are moving away from each other). The duration of combat depens on the time both side stay close each other.(by the way enemy can block your way but friendly units can be stacked unlimted times) It doesn't have big tiles as in most TBS(it does, but its so small its like a RTS), it looks(and plays)like a RTS. Basic commands like move aside, there are more RTS commands like chase attack and Goals for each unit once the commanded objective is reached(ie. killed the unit you commanded to kill) There are also commands like set-fire that takes more thought(because you'll have to guess where the enemy will be when you set the fire).
Its a fun game....only if the Ai doesn't rush past my army and take my ungurded cities....AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lemur866
|
|
Seattle, WA, USA
Dec 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
First: The "Sweep of Time" trilogy doesn't seem to be a literal trilogy. Rather it is a brand name, to fit the games Sid/Firaxis cooks up.
Second: I wouldn't mind a good RTS. But please, for god's sake, could we have a RTS where you don't harvest resources, construct buildings, climb a tech tree, and crank out units? Just because they did it that way in Warcraft, does every single RTS out there have to fit the same pattern? It works for Star/Warcraft. But look at how it's shoehorned into, say, Age of Empires. Most of the scenarios are supposed to represent a single battle. But since they are locked into the *.craft model, battles last for thousands of years, you go from the stone age to iron age in the battle of Marathon, etc. The best scenarios are ones where there IS NO BUILDING. Luckily, this is how Gettysburg works. Each previous battle should affect the next, but the gather/build/attack model is waaaaay to tired.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14.
Apolyton Time is 00:14. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-12-1999 07:30
|