FAQ Search
Memberlist Usergroups
Profile
  Forum Statistics Register
 Log in to check your private messages
Log in to check your private messages
Moonpod Homepage Starscape Information Mr. Robot Information Free Game Downloads Starscape Highscore Table
Dawn of War vs. Battlescape
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Discussion Pod Forum Index -> Battlescape View previous topic :: View next topic  
 Author
Message
smerles



Joined: 04 Jan 2005
Posts: 23



PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 11:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fost wrote:
I'd guess (and it is a guess - hard to say without testing) that ruthless mode wouldn't actually be something anyone would bother using - do you want to lose units? yes/no? Well, no of course!


Yes, Sir. Sometimes some rapant Squads wiping out everything they see are doing wonders! Wink But only if there's no real crossfire.

@Sorrow: Splash damage is okay, but real ff possible from every own unit? I can't imagine that this would improve a game. It would be a 'feature' more on the list you can print on the packing, but how could this be a real gameplay improvement?
Back to top
View user's profile
Sorrow



Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 146
Location: Australia



PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 8:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i doupt it would enhance gameplay for the regular person just us stradegy buffs who want to ambush and like to take more things into consideration when forming a stradegy Razz
Back to top
View user's profile MSN Messenger
smerles



Joined: 04 Jan 2005
Posts: 23



PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2005 9:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I understand Very Happy Wink

Fost, you asked for other possible solutions to avoid killing own units with splash damage.
How would be this: When a unit which does splash damage is in battle and no friendly / own unit is in danger from it, it fires normal on the enemy. But when own units get in danger/would be killed it tells the user that it stops shooting because there are friendly units whiich might be killed. The user then has to force the unit (by a key combination, eg. strg+left click) to keep shooting and accept the casualties.
Back to top
View user's profile
Fost
Pod Team
Pod Team


Joined: 14 Oct 2002
Posts: 3734



PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

smerles wrote:
How would be this:

Whilst that would work, it would quickly become a pain - you are talking about one unit potentially causing that message every couple of seconds. With a few more it would become unusable. Or even if artillery will only fire at friendlies on their first round of fire - so you could force them to do so when initially selecting target, but not when left to their own devices. You'd still be in the position where you are having to aim and fire for all your units - which would be pretty tedious.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website
smerles



Joined: 04 Jan 2005
Posts: 23



PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2005 7:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fost wrote:
Whilst that would work, it would quickly become a pain - you are talking about one unit potentially causing that message every couple of seconds. With a few more it would become unusable. Or even if artillery will only fire at friendlies on their first round of fire - so you could force them to do so when initially selecting target, but not when left to their own devices. You'd still be in the position where you are having to aim and fire for all your units - which would be pretty tedious.


Hmmh... And when you let the arty keep in mind that it is allowed to fire on the selected target / group / area till it is destroyed, even if friendly units leave the area and come back or more friendlys come into that area? Or isn't that possible?
Back to top
View user's profile
Fost
Pod Team
Pod Team


Joined: 14 Oct 2002
Posts: 3734



PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 6:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, that's possible (anything is possible Very Happy ), but it's another AI state for your units, and another set of orders you need to keep track of.

It might sound like I'm down on the idea, but not really - this is the same process we go through with any feature.

There's only 3 of us (2 programmers and one artist) so we have to be very careful what we concentrate on. It's almost becoming our motto I've said it so many times (check out any of the modding Starscape threads Very Happy )but we don't think it's worth implementing any feature unless we can do it well (better to do a few things well, than a lot of things badly).

Now, you can implement any feature well given time, but then we have to stack it up against everything else and see if it's worth the effort. Right now I'm thinking you gain very little from having ff (in fact I can't see any major strategies forming from its use), and I can see a lot of problems in having it. I think at this stage more research would be required into what additional support the feature would require, and how long it would take. There's potential that it could be fun, but there's potential that it would be an order button that hardly gets used, so it might be better to keep the orders list as tight as possible. Like, I say - more testing required...
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website
smerles



Joined: 04 Jan 2005
Posts: 23



PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 9:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mm'kay, I see that there would be too much problems with implementing ff. I'm looking forward to the first beta Wink
Back to top
View user's profile
Dark Rain



Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 4



PostPosted: Tue Feb 01, 2005 5:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, I noticed Total Annihilation mentionned pretty often. TA implements Friendly Fire quite well. Nukes will harm both your and the enemy units, artillery shells will kill your stuff just as well as the enemy etc.

The implementation is quite simple :
Friendly Fire is only from splash damage from the explosions. Bullets, missiles etc will not hit your units. There is however an exception to this: in multiplayer, your allies units WILL take friendly fire from bullets and missiles. It's arguably a bug but that's how it is.

The way it worked out, is that most units used lasers or weapons with a fairly small damage radius, so it never was a huge issue except in case where the dev obviously meant it to be an issue, like nukes and artillery.
Back to top
View user's profile
Constantin Valdor



Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 3



PostPosted: Tue Feb 01, 2005 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hmm
well first of all, in the cons should be "only 4 races with partially complete selection of units"

then
no flying units because that messes up the game trying to see whats under it and whatnot
even if therer were flyinmg units, flying units dont have hover packs, they cant hth/cc in mid air
the fast attack hth/cc would be, stick ur arm out with a sword, hope it hits the target and doesnt take ur arm off
the weapon upgrades are characteristic to their rtt counterparts

and melee is the ability to intercahnge between hth and ranged
Back to top
View user's profile AIM Address MSN Messenger
Debido



Joined: 05 Feb 2005
Posts: 1



PostPosted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 9:15 am    Post subject: Splash Damage & Stuff Reply with quote

I think splash damage could be played upon to a greater degree when it comes to infantry, as well as the damage type. Let say for instance a large calibre artillery shell landed in the middle of a tightly grouped squad. Troops at the point of impact would be flung like rag dolls in pieces along with dirt/debris/shrapnel, those further out would be thrown from the blast, some flailing their arms as they are flung away, and those just on the outside are knocked over. Those on the outermost of the blast groggily get up and are ready to go again. The troops flung in the air lie on the ground with minimal health and have to wait for a medic to get them up. As for the ones hit directly...well they're now a part of the terrain.

Now that would just be a standard shell, a HE variety would blow the **** out of all the troops. A phospherus one would set them all on fire and they would run around until they died. An AP one would....I don't think you would bother with multiple shell types from the same unit.

If there are air units, it would be nice to see cluster bombs for anti-unit and especially made penetrating MOAB type weapons against buildings

Also when it comes to superweapons, it would be nice to see a change from the usual assortment of nukes, nukes and bigger nukes. The RA series did so nicely, but this isn't the RA universe. Mind you though nukes are cheap to and easy to produce with some enriched U-235. However battlescape it isn't exactly the 21st century. Singularity devices that create a temporary blackhole that sucks in everything in a certain distance than explodes outwards would be nice. Could you imaginen that? The missile strikes near an enemy outpost, vehicles and infantry sucked into the centre, the black sphere growing. Then a white flash as the unstable singularity collapses and buildings torn apart or severely damaged. Also, why do they have nukes and whatever weapon-o-mass-destrustrion explode on impact with the ground? Any physics student on this forum will know what a waste of energy that is and how its always best to do an air burst.

In the end I don't doubt we'll see the return of some weapons from starscape...hm, in the end I guess there has to be some trade-off between fantasy and tangible pseudo-futuristic-reality.

L8r guys
Back to top
View user's profile
Constantin Valdor



Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 3



PostPosted: Thu Feb 10, 2005 1:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wow
u took my idea for my strategy game
and the guy wit the "multi layer battles" idea
its like u guys were wit me at the time
i was discussing wit my employers
lol Cool
Back to top
View user's profile AIM Address MSN Messenger
TrueLore



Joined: 22 Aug 2004
Posts: 9



PostPosted: Sat Feb 26, 2005 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I remember posting a Dawn of War breakdown before... ill see if i can find my post.

Edit: Ok here is my comparison for SC Vrs Dawn of War Cool

Quote:
SC has a ton of bad things, and im Beta Testing Warhammer 40k: Dawn of War right now.. so ill just compare the 2...



Fog of war

SC: everywhere youve never discovered in BLACK, which is annoying. If something shoots you from outside your vew like a seige tank, you see teh tank and anything touching it

DoW: everything you havent seen has a greyish tint, if something shoots you (like a artillery tank) from outside your vision, you can see the tank, but you dont actully get vision of the area

Resources

SC: Minerals, gas, send workers and get those things. Spend half your time on economy

DoW: Instead of minerals or gas, you capture Strategic points, these are areas on tha map taht are strategic to hold, like.. your starting base. Or you could capture Critical points, which give slightly more resources, a criticl point would be at the bridge that seperates your base from your opponents. Economy is at a minimum, you use these resoruces to create troops to fight off the enemy Razz


Rushing

SC: Rushing is king in SC, you rush you win, that simple, ive MASTERED the zerg rush.

DoW: Because rushing is frowned apon by todays gamers, this has been fought back. because there is no economy, it is very easy to fight back a rush, the palyer who ignored all the strategic points and just sends troops to kill the opponent will be fought back, army gone, and no strategic points. So rushing is bad.

Creating Troops

SC: click marine, you get a marine after X secondes

DoW: Click Marine (yes there are marines Cool ), you get a squad of mariens after X secondes, you may add on to this squad by clicking the "Reinforce button" in there menu, you can also give them special weopons to help them kill different types of units (Flamethrower, heavy boltgun, plasma gun, or rocketlauncher)

Mission objective

SC: It usually (and almost always) involves destroying your opponents base

DoW: In the average game, Take and Hold is the objective, where you must control over half the map (via Strategic points) for 7 mintues to win, this is done by getting a squad up to teh point and putting a flag iontop it (which takes time), and your opponent can foil your plans by tearing down your flag (which takes time, less time, but still time)

Stratagey (Close Combat, or CC)

SC: if a zergling gets up to your marine on a 1v1, marine dies. But if like.. 10 marines shoot at the zergling, zergling dies almost instantly

DoW: There is actually a CC in this game unlike SC, if a marine squad with missle launchers are taking down your tanks, you can send some CC specialists in tot ake care of them. while a squad is in CC they can NOT use ranged weopons, and are unable to blow up your lovable tanks.

Tanks

SC: Seige tanks shoot things, things die. If a marine shoots the tank long enough, tank dies

DoW: DoW tanks have much more of a World War 2 feel to them, if a tank comes from around the corner and all you have is a bunch of sticks (rifles), what do you do? no you dont shoot at it like on SC, you RUN LIKE HELL. In DoW, normal weopons simply can not take out a tank, you must use specialist anti vehicle weopons, like missle launchers, or Melta Bombs (gernades designed to take down tanks)

Stratagey (in general)

SC: the rusher usually wins, if the other player survives the rush, nothing much happens, they still have a equal chance (unless the rusher killed somethign important)

DoW: You dont win the game by rushing, sure you CAN rush, but unless your opponent is a newb and isnt smart enough to build a base around the strategic point or put down a cheap turret (that can easily take down teir 1 units), you wont win. If you slowly spread out and grab all tehs trategic points, soon it becoems a battle for the middle, for the person who controles the most locations will get more resoruices, and more troops, and more of a chance to win.

Artillery


SC: Seige tanks are the only artillery i know of, they go into seige mode and shoot things, things die

DoW: Every race has a artillery weopon, its inaccurate fire is dangerous, but its highly usefull if your enemy in entrenched into a position. When a squad is hit by a artillery shell, they go FLYING in all directions, and lsoe moral, in DoW when a squad loses moral, they start dealing less damage. and die faster.

Races

SC: Zerg, a alien race that destroys thing and infests them. Protoss, whith alot of technology and stuff. Terrans, humans... yup

DoW: Space Marines, The Emporeres finest, these are humanities elite specialists in teh wars. Chaos Space Marines, these are humans that went... bad.. They summon demons and things to aid them. Eldar, very much like protoss, but are selfesh and only care about themselves. Orks, greenskins who like to fight a little too much, they are much like zerg, in numbers, but not much else (o and every single one of their buildings secodnes as a turret)
Cool

Incase anyone is wondering, Warhammer 40k is what SC is based off of, not gameplay but the races are based off them, Observe

Space Marines = Terrans
Eldar = Protoss
Tyranids = Zerg
(Tyranids are anotehr race in the warhammer universe, but are not fetured in DoW, both races are VERY similiar)
Back to top
View user's profile
Fost
Pod Team
Pod Team


Joined: 14 Oct 2002
Posts: 3734



PostPosted: Sat Feb 26, 2005 7:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If I remeber correctly, Games Workshop had some kind of out of court settlement with Blizzard due to them basically taking all the designs of stuff from Warhammer and warhammer 40k. I heard this from someone at Games Workshop though, and don't remember hearing it in the press.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website
Weeble
Starscape Jedi
Starscape Jedi


Joined: 25 Apr 2003
Posts: 1143
Location: Glasgow, Scotland



PostPosted: Sun Feb 27, 2005 5:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That Starcraft blatantly steals a lot of the look and feel of Warhammer 40k doesn't make it a bad game, it just shows up some questionable practice on the part of Blizzard. Not that Games Workshop are in any way saintly when it comes to intellectual property. I take issue with most of the other comparisons - the Starcraft side is invariably superficial and innaccurate. If your point is that Starcraft is hard to get into, then I will concede that point, but I suggest that you need demonstrate a deeper understanding of the game before claiming it is deficient in terms of strategy, objectives, variety and interaction of unit types (melee, ranged, artillery, specialist...)

If you sincerely believe the things you said about Starcraft then I can address them in the Starcraft thread where you originally posted them, but if they were only really mentioned to talk about Dawn of War features then I don't feel I've played enough Dawn of War to get into lengthy comparisons.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Constantin Valdor



Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 3



PostPosted: Sun Feb 27, 2005 6:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ya
SC did steal from them
even after GW saying they werent allowed to make a W40k RTS (yes they did ask GW)
and woot!
DoW Expansion coming soon!!!!!!
Baneblade!!!!!!

and u guys took some concepts too
but did wayy better job than blizzard
U guys rock Moonpod!!
Back to top
View user's profile AIM Address MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Discussion Pod Forum Index -> Battlescape All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group