Clash Demo 4, with Isometric Graphics, Is Now Available!

[Mark_Everson]

Clash Demo 4 is Out! No more looking at little colored rectangular boxes for military units!

You can get it at the Clash Web Page, just follow the link to Demo 4 at left.
And Please at least Look at the manual and reference!
If you ask a question that makes it clear that you didn't read either, I'm not going to answer it!


What's New:

Well, the big story here is Graphics! The graphics you see are in No Way final... But they are Much Closer to our final target. The TF/Unit Box is just a first primitive stab at functionality and eye candy for working with what's in an individual square. Things aren't really smooth yet with respect to the interface. However, this is an area that needs alot of thought and discussion, and I didn't want to invest too much time on my individual approach to the interface. Johnmcd is still working on a better TF representation for the main map, but for now we're just using the single unit graphic.

The AI has been improved only in that it is harder to lock AI forces into positions with feints. I changed that because LGJ and Glak were beating the crap out of my poor AI because the support routine was dumb. I also reduced the player starting forces and population to the same level as the AI had. Before player started with 80 pop, and AIs with 65 IIRC.

We would most like to hear from you about how all the new things are working. Are we going in the right direction?

Do you like the way the graphics work in general?

Do you think the TF box is okay? (The TFs will eventually look like real formed military units, as opposed to strung out as they are now) Are the supported map scales going to be enough?

Do people like what they are beginning to see of our ideas to Reduce Micromanagement, and Streamline Play? For instance, you can easily set up pickets with sentries so that the sentries will automatically defend a territorial boundary, and then return to position when the fight is over. This allows the player, when they get to a boring stretch, to just press the "10-turn" button, and let things go by quickly! This is just a first hint of what is to come in terms of streamlined play. What you think of it?

How do you like the power rings? And if you don't like them what better implementation can you suggest?

How do you think we should arrange the main interface? (There is a whole thread devoted to this topic, join in!)
What other things does the manual need?

Anyone else, feel free to ask your own Big questions.

Post your comments and questions here, unless there's a more appropriate thread that already exists!

Mark

[This message has been edited by Mark_Everson (edited December 28, 1999).]

[Lord God Jinnai]

Actually there is something I want to know...what is the ratio of sea/land units when you make TFs so they'll become amphibius?

[Mark_Everson]

Well, Chris that's our first big miss on the manual!

One boat carries up to 2 land units now. So a max amphib. TF has N boats and 2N land units.

[monolith94]

What are the system requirements for this thing?

[Mark_Everson]

Should run on any Win 95 or 98 box. It will come up very slowly on like a P90 (~2 min), but will still run ok. The graphics are laid out for a 1024x768 screen, so you may need to resize if you have some other screen size.

For another OS... we will figure out how to do it eventually, but unless you are a java coder, the easiest thing is to try loading it in your browser once Clash_D4.jar is a local file. It works with IE 5.0 and later, but hasn't so far with Netscape. We will figure out what's causing the problem with Netscape by the next release.

[This message has been edited by Mark_Everson (edited December 29, 1999).]

[Lord God Jinnai]

Ok cuz the prob with my amphibius TFs was that they weren't amphibus most of the time. They were just seafaring. I could usually get 1 to be amphibus but after that none others would, unless i had atleast 2 boats per land unit.

[Mark_Everson]

Basically if a boat doesn't show as the graphic for the TF on the main map, then it isn't amphibious. There are occasional glitches in the form-TF routines. If it doesn't do it right the first time, just push the ~A~ button again.

[Chris Wilkinson]

About sending TF's to sea, it is actually in the manual under the Naval Unit section!

I'll add it to the bit about Task Forces as well to make it clearer.

Chris

[astrogator]

I like the graphics and the over-all approach. Some things will take a little getting used to, such as the new combat model and the production menus. The power rings are a good idea, although I would like to have the option to toggle them off/on to get a more realistic view.



One thing I would like to see is an easier way of moving around on the map. In Civ2 clicking on the small map caused the main map to recenter. Also, clicking on the main map caused it to recenter on the tile selected. This seems like a good system for Clash.



I like the "extra map" although it appears to be just for show in the demo. If it was fully functional (i.e. you could play on it) it would be a great convenience.



On my system, the demo seems to run a bit slow. I am wondering if that is inherent to Java or merely a temporary condition due to the fact that the code is not yet fully optimized. Or do I need to buy a faster machine?



It is looking good, guys. Keep it up!

[Mark_Everson]

Astrogator:

Thanks for checking it out! There would be no problem implementing most of the things you suggest, we're just not quite there yet. Others have suggested pre-centering the map. Personally I don't like that, so that's why I didn't put it in first But it can easily be an option.

The "extra map" Is functional. Did you even try? The only thing is that the graphics don't show, because the scale is too small for them. We are thinking about much smaller icons that we Might be able to use, but we aren't there yet. But you can right-click on any square to select it for moving, and the correct task forces will be shown in the TF box.

In response to your question as to whether its Java that runs a bit slowly, that the code isn't optimized, or that your system probably needs upgrading, the answer is Yes.

Thanks for the feedback, and if you end up with some spare time, please consider investing it working on clash! With more people, things will go a Lot faster...

[Glak.]

I've only played the demo for 20 or so turns so I don't have much to say. I did notice something strange though when I hit the 10 turn button. I didn't have auto AI turned on but next thing I knew my army was almost ten squares deep into enemy territory.

As for combat I think it would be nicer if any unit that has been in the square for 2+ turns got the defensive bonus, instead of the people who control the square. That way if you are defending a square you've owned for a while you get the bonus same as always. If it was this way then if you take some place they can take it back quickly. It would also make longer seiges less horrible for the attacker since they would only suffer the defensive penalty for the first turn. If the defender can't gain a significant edge over the defender in the first turn (not combat round, I'm talking full turn) then he probably doesn't deserve to win the war.

As for the graphics I'd make the forests darker. The power circles make sense for the most part but I don't see why there is a circle for the actual population of the square as well as the military units in your territories. Also some of the colors are hard to distinguish when military units cover the squares or the squares are small.

[Lord God Jinnai]

Listen, i know the economic model is going to be changed but i think i need to post this so the next version doesn't have this fatal flaw.

Ok, any civ that decides to build up economy and not expand will become stonger than any other civ (enemy 1 usually does so) This is fine since that civ is usually quite small. However the flaw comes if they decide to expand. If they do they can of course overrun a whole lot of area really quickly being so well fortified, but the thing is even if they become extemely huge, bigger than all the other civs or bigger than the previously large one, there economy is still shown to be atleast double or tripple that of all other civs. This isn't right since except for a few squares they started in they really haven't had time to develope the rest of the land and this really makes for a major imbalance.

[Mark_Everson]

LGJ:

Well first, all the AI parameters are now set randomly within a range, so nobody usually does anything... it may be that in a few games that you have played they have happened to be that way.

Also, there is nothing unfair about the old economic model. There is no instantaneous development, they must build up conquered territory step-by-step. However, if you conquer territory from a civ it is generally better economically developed than territory conquered from a culture. This takes significant resources and some time. The old economic model is actually very detailed. The problem is that it is a top-down model like in civ, and I just thought that it was too artificial. By the way, is it the guys to the South that you're talking about?

It's possible there are some bugs involved, but I haven't seen any behavior like this. How many games are you basing your statements on?

[korn469]

ok i have played over a hundred turns myself and i have let the AI play maybe a thousand turns or so...the graphics work, obviously they are going to be better but for a demo they are good enough...now i have two problems with the game

one is that some of the military results odds don't seem reasonable

for example when attacking unoccupied squares with a fairly large power ring there have been times when i have lost two foot soldiers out of seven to just a fairly large but not huge power ring

and my second problem is how do u determine when new military units appear?

my enemies seem to rapidly rebuild and strengthen their armies while my forces remain small and get smaller with almost every attack and even when i sieze most of the land around me my supposedly strengthened economy doesn't churn out more troops (and tweaking my economy doesn't help any, in fact it and research seem to have no effect on the game)...the purple bad guy civ below had a much smaller economic base in one of my games but still seemed to be out producing me in new troops...

one more suggestion
instead of taking a square and getting a defensive bonus on who owns the square make it where you have to assimulate the square into your culture (which always takes time) but like glak said if u are in the square for 2+ turns then u get the defensive bonus...once i didn't defend in depth and the AI took the square that represents rome with an amphibious force and then they had the defensive bonus when i was trying to retake my homeland

korn469
[This message has been edited by korn469 (edited January 09, 2000).]

[Lord God Jinnai]

Mark:
I'm basing this off of every game in which i did not defeat them right away. More than 66% of those cases that is what happened. At most they'd take 2 or 3 squares then wait for about 300 turns then attack. Like I said, those squares would be much greater economically, but the rest would just be the same (actually less because invading armies tend to deter economic activity so athough you might have 8 really goods squares the rest for the most part aren't that great and because it seems to be applied on a civ-wide basis that is what makes it unfair.