Tweet
should smac2 be liberal or conservitive?
i was over at cIV forums and was posting OT stuff about tileless maps and simultanious turns,and it got me thinking on smac2.on one hand,theres the players i encountered in that forum that basicly say they want the same old civ,which imho is a style pushed to far.4x is great,but civ2 was 1994 and this is now 11 years later.the same old(updated) model has undergone no serious improvements,but the
whole rest of the world has changed.
i was thinking (1)tileless,(2)real time,(3)full 3d map and maybe other things i havnt thought of yet.and with that statement alienated 99% of the smac community
(including myself if i read this 2 days ago). on an agreeable note,(4) an innovative anti ICS
(1)tileless.im sure everyone is familar with the probs of tiles.faster diagonal movement,maps that are blocky(relative to resolution),and all those other things.a tileless system might remove all that and bring in even more complications,needless to say increased complexity
Campaign
map
raildroad tycoon
these are 2 games that use a ''tileless'' system.of course,they still have tiles,just smaller and less noticable,if shown at all. if you look at either of these maps,you will notice a much better world,real mountains,almost an ariel photograph of terrian. of course,unit movement gets more complicated,but the total war system of stacking units to form armies would be great,but take out
the generals(rpg'ish) and etc.this way if you have 4 impact rifles,3 rovers and a former you can move them all with one click,or just select the rovers and move them out from the formation in a new
formation of their own)the rtw system of moving units on the map seems adequate to me.one thing should be stressed,this WOULD NOT be rtw AT ALL. the way i envision it,units have a radius about them and entering that allows you to attack the unit. maybe all the terrian(trees,elevation even buildings) could play into
the fight.
(2) real time.im sure this is the biggest bone to pick,and visions of frantic button clicking and speed games pop into your head. let me reassure you,i have played starcraft,warcraft3,aok:tc, and by
no means would i mean to say it would be anything like that.not that i didnt have fun playing those titles,but that just isnt smac,period. those kind of games give real time a bad name.i have yet to play it,but EU 1 or 2 may have what i mean by 'real time'(anyone confirm these games as good real time models?)
also to help out here,player made ''scripts'' for unit behavoiur or more prefferably selectable intelligent scripts that come with the game(yeah right). say i have 2 impact inf heading along a ridge.they spot a hive rover in the valley below to their right.they check the script i selected for unit behavoiur in that position,and move along(at a sneakier pace) the opposite side out of sight but with elements on the ridge to keep the rover in sight,instead of simply moving foreward blindly.
this raises an interesting point.should they be allowed to attack from where they are with rifles on the ridge,or need to move down into physical contact as it is now? being able to attack from range would require a much zoomed in map(no longer measure tiles as 100x100 km but say,1x1 km).
(3) full 3d.this fits in with my prevoius point,and only included because of that.if sush a system would be implemented,a free roving camera(with a lowest height limit) might be good. im no fan of fancy graphics,myself.heck,i prefer civ2 graphics to civ3 this might mean a system reminescent of 'ground control'
[http://www.igrograd.com.ua/images/81-141/ground/4.jpg]
[http://igrozone.com/pic/screen/groun...l%202/gc07.jpg]
preferably implement the best from many current games and designs,and hopefully leave behind all the weaknesses in the examples i have shown.i know every point of mine raises up as many issues as it solves(or more) and the games i offer as examples have some serious drawbacks....
(4) innovative anti ICS.bear with me since i havnt played any new titles in last year or so really,so maybe this is done already. my idea would be to have energy,nutirents,minerals,with real physical quantities,so that having 3 bases on the same river(1 tile spacing) would use up so much of the limited food supply in to fast a time which would result in famine. IE in a closed system there is 20 food,10 minerals,10 energy. 1 base at size 5 could get say 10 food at a constant rate(ten food per month,system regrows that much per month) but 3 size 2's would take 12 food,IE outsripping local resources.also pollution(harder to dispose of wastes) and other things would hamper close spacing.just look at india or china.they are ICSing like mad all through history,and loosing.
*collapses exhausted* will spellcheck later if i did something to bad
whole rest of the world has changed.
i was thinking (1)tileless,(2)real time,(3)full 3d map and maybe other things i havnt thought of yet.and with that statement alienated 99% of the smac community
(including myself if i read this 2 days ago). on an agreeable note,(4) an innovative anti ICS(1)tileless.im sure everyone is familar with the probs of tiles.faster diagonal movement,maps that are blocky(relative to resolution),and all those other things.a tileless system might remove all that and bring in even more complications,needless to say increased complexity
Campaign
map
raildroad tycoon
these are 2 games that use a ''tileless'' system.of course,they still have tiles,just smaller and less noticable,if shown at all. if you look at either of these maps,you will notice a much better world,real mountains,almost an ariel photograph of terrian. of course,unit movement gets more complicated,but the total war system of stacking units to form armies would be great,but take out
the generals(rpg'ish) and etc.this way if you have 4 impact rifles,3 rovers and a former you can move them all with one click,or just select the rovers and move them out from the formation in a new
formation of their own)the rtw system of moving units on the map seems adequate to me.one thing should be stressed,this WOULD NOT be rtw AT ALL. the way i envision it,units have a radius about them and entering that allows you to attack the unit. maybe all the terrian(trees,elevation even buildings) could play into
the fight.
(2) real time.im sure this is the biggest bone to pick,and visions of frantic button clicking and speed games pop into your head. let me reassure you,i have played starcraft,warcraft3,aok:tc, and by
no means would i mean to say it would be anything like that.not that i didnt have fun playing those titles,but that just isnt smac,period. those kind of games give real time a bad name.i have yet to play it,but EU 1 or 2 may have what i mean by 'real time'(anyone confirm these games as good real time models?)
also to help out here,player made ''scripts'' for unit behavoiur or more prefferably selectable intelligent scripts that come with the game(yeah right). say i have 2 impact inf heading along a ridge.they spot a hive rover in the valley below to their right.they check the script i selected for unit behavoiur in that position,and move along(at a sneakier pace) the opposite side out of sight but with elements on the ridge to keep the rover in sight,instead of simply moving foreward blindly.
this raises an interesting point.should they be allowed to attack from where they are with rifles on the ridge,or need to move down into physical contact as it is now? being able to attack from range would require a much zoomed in map(no longer measure tiles as 100x100 km but say,1x1 km).
(3) full 3d.this fits in with my prevoius point,and only included because of that.if sush a system would be implemented,a free roving camera(with a lowest height limit) might be good. im no fan of fancy graphics,myself.heck,i prefer civ2 graphics to civ3
this might mean a system reminescent of 'ground control'[http://www.igrograd.com.ua/images/81-141/ground/4.jpg]
[http://igrozone.com/pic/screen/groun...l%202/gc07.jpg]
preferably implement the best from many current games and designs,and hopefully leave behind all the weaknesses in the examples i have shown.i know every point of mine raises up as many issues as it solves(or more) and the games i offer as examples have some serious drawbacks....
(4) innovative anti ICS.bear with me since i havnt played any new titles in last year or so really,so maybe this is done already. my idea would be to have energy,nutirents,minerals,with real physical quantities,so that having 3 bases on the same river(1 tile spacing) would use up so much of the limited food supply in to fast a time which would result in famine. IE in a closed system there is 20 food,10 minerals,10 energy. 1 base at size 5 could get say 10 food at a constant rate(ten food per month,system regrows that much per month) but 3 size 2's would take 12 food,IE outsripping local resources.also pollution(harder to dispose of wastes) and other things would hamper close spacing.just look at india or china.they are ICSing like mad all through history,and loosing.
*collapses exhausted* will spellcheck later if i did something to bad
actually americans suck. i only know a few people i really like. the others embarrass me. im not sure what i did to earn the hostility in your post 
Comment