should smac2 be liberal or conservitive?

[Kataphraktoi]

TBS: definitely
Simultaneous: interesting
Tileless: to an extent
Unified resources: this must be worked around a bit.

i am completely unsure of how a turnless system would work.hence the question of if anyone knows a (deep) strategy game with real time.

Some time ago some of us were discussing ways to make Civ more realistic by completely remove the ability to found new cities at arbitrary locations. Instead, towns (cities) will appear as time goes by, at places where conditions are best to attract people to settle.

Though that might not work with Alpha Centauri.

i cant see it making any sense. AC is depicted as a harsh world easy to die in,so devolopment of settlements wouldnt procede like on earth. i cant imagine pitching my tent next to fungus without a whole lot of other people backing me up....

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Cataphract887

i cant see it making any sense. AC is depicted as a harsh world easy to die in,so devolopment of settlements wouldnt procede like on earth. i cant imagine pitching my tent next to fungus without a whole lot of other people backing me up....

Actually that is how population does settle and move on earth.

[Mart]

Re: should smac2 be liberal or conservitive?

Originally posted by Cataphract887
...and with that statement alienated 99% of the smac community

Not me, new ideas are good. From them some good new games may come. So we might have two games, one liberal SMACX2L and the other conservative SMACX2C

(1)tileless....faster diagonal movement,maps that are blocky(relative to resolution)

Diagonal is like 1.41 around of the square side or might be just 1.4 One could multiply move points not by 3 (as SMAC has it now) but by 15 for example. Then moving along side of a square takes 10 and diagonal 14. You have remaining 5 and 1 points, maybe cumulating for the next turn or else. The system might be worked out.
Blocky? Civ 3 solved problem relatively well, they are still blocky, but not that much.
Hexagonal tiles? Some people hate it actually, but there are no diagonal problems any more.

(2) real time.

Smac multiplayer now has simultaneous moves. I would improve it, the way it is now is not very good, I think. I would change the turns into orders giving only. Is it better? I do not know how others would feel about it. Something like Stars! if someone knows this game.

(3) full 3d.

I have seen some 3D games. I still prefer 2D with sprites, which are graphically made better than imperfect 3D objects.

(4) innovative anti ICS.

That sounds interesting, though on the other hand in ICS you just can't have 20 workers in field at present. It kinda makes you in need to supply bases in food in other ways, crawlers, satellites.

[Kataphraktoi]

Actually that is how population does settle and move on earth.

didnt i just say that in regards to another planet it dosnt make sense and that it is how it works on earth?

Smac multiplayer now has simultaneous moves. I would improve it, the way it is now is not very good, I think. I would change the turns into orders giving only. Is it better? I do not know how others would feel about it. Something like Stars! if someone knows this game.

since noone have referred me to a good real time strategy(besides eu,i know) i would assume order giving would be better. havnt played stars.

That sounds interesting, though on the other hand in ICS you just can't have 20 workers in field at present. It kinda makes you in need to supply bases in food in other ways, crawlers, satellites.

thats why yall are supposed to give your own ideas.if i knew how to solve the problem perfectly,i wouldnt be posting here

btw i do like 2d better,but if a free camera or anything is implemented,it seems it might me better. dosnt smac terrain have a 3d aspect to it?

[Maniac]

I want SMAC2 to be socialist.

My two cents...

[GeoModder]

Multiple planets/moons!

[Kataphraktoi]

how would you envision that working?

[Infernis]

I could see multiple planets and moons being used...It'd be a fun way to expand the boundary when it came to war and politics...

Of course, colonize too far out, and you're too inefficient or brutal, you risk having your colony worlds and moons rebelling...New Domai, anyone?


~I~

[Grump]

The original purpose of civilization was to model empire building. The makers of Civ III IMO were so caught up in the series's conventions (created in large part by limitation of the hardware) that they ended up simply modeling their older games.

I want an alpha centauri whose philosophy is to simulate being a leader of a nation not an alpha centauri whose philosophy is to be good at following the precepts of the games that came before it.

[Frankychan]

I say keep SMAC how it is, with tiles/turns/etc. As for the 3D graphics...I'm not really sure. There are some really good 3D games out there with detailed graphics, and other 3D games out there that just suck. But the game should utilize modern graphics technology thats in use now.

I basically want the new SMAC to focus on the main thing that the original SMAC focused on. Ideology of the factions.

(and have a more complex diplomacy interface. although the original one was excellent Better than Civ 3)

[Grump]

If the only reason to keep tiles is because tiles were in the last game get rid of them. Likewise if 3D offers a chance at deeper strategy or more exciting gameplay it shouldn't be ignored just because 3d is unbecoming of a 'real' 4x game. civ and alpha centauri. Games like alpha centauri and civ should be defined by the strategy it requires, and the type of thinking it needs not whether it has tiles or 2d cylinder shaped worlds.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Cataphract887


didnt i just say that in regards to another planet it dosnt make sense and that it is how it works on earth?

Yea, sorry. Your use of two capital letters in that post really threw me.

[Kataphraktoi]

np

If the only reason to keep tiles is because tiles were in the last game get rid of them. Likewise if 3D offers a chance at deeper strategy or more exciting gameplay it shouldn't be ignored just because 3d is unbecoming of a 'real' 4x game. civ and alpha centauri. Games like alpha centauri and civ should be defined by the strategy it requires, and the type of thinking it needs not whether it has tiles or 2d cylinder shaped worlds.

I say keep SMAC how it is, with tiles/turns/etc. As for the 3D graphics...I'm not really sure. There are some really good 3D games out there with detailed graphics, and other 3D games out there that just suck. But the game should utilize modern graphics technology thats in use now.

just to say it again;i wouldnt put 3d in for looks,but for gameplay. for example,the last several unreal tournaments have sucked because of graphics and less gameplay. if i was running the show,i would have focused on gameplay and used same graphics-whatever it takes to make a good game.

[Mart]

My feeling about tiles is that they keep the map and some other things more determined. If I have a unit with 2 move points which is away 6 tiles from some point, I know it will reach that point in 3 turns. If I have (in smac) 20 tiles in the base radius, I know how many workers I can have there.

It is like also that turns quantify time in the game, tiles quantify land area and distances.

[binTravkin]

If I have a unit with 2 move points which is away 6 tiles from some point, I know it will reach that point in 3 turns

That is also a reason why I've never seen a tile-less TBS and never seen a tile-based RTS.

TBS needs scaling and if there's none, it lacks one of the foundation principles of TBS.

Remember we must, chess the root of TBS genre is.