Overall game design from YOUR perspective

The land-based version of Allegiance, under construction.
sambasti
Posts: 1054
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 12:55 am
Location: the SF hiding in your home

Post by sambasti »

If you want alleg on wheels, will just add a floor to the alleg code, chage all the ships to tanks, and call it Quantus. That will take 3 months tops.

You yourself stated how pointless it would be to make it only vehicles. It would simply be alleg with a different look. We want to create a DIFFERENT game that has an alleg feel to it, (Stratagy and no pointless shooting) not an alleg clone.
zdude1994
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 7:19 pm
Location: Like hell if I know.

Post by zdude1994 »

Eeek!! No pictures! Someone should draw a picture... Will there be any type of planes whatsoever? And... there will be gravity, right?
Last edited by zdude1994 on Sun Feb 08, 2009 6:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
juckto
Posts: 2332
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 7:00 am
Location: NZ

Post by juckto »

QUOTE
Hey, I'm trying to HELP. GTFO, or do it yourself.[/quote]
Right, because challenging the current direction of the game developers, and presenting an alternative complete with explanations and examples, in a thread entitled "Overall game design" is unhelpful.


I thought this thread was going to be discussing how the game is going to work and feel before the developers do a whole bunch of work, instead of getting bogged down in the details, but apparently you'd all like to discuss minor things like how a sniper is going to take down a miner. madp said it well:
madpeople wrote:
QUOTE (madpeople @ Feb 6 2009, 05:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
it's that people are debating what colour to paint the wings, and not whether to attach the wings to the plane or not.
Image
Usually though, "skill" is used to covertly mean "match the game exactly to my level of competence." Anyone who is at all worse than me should fail utterly (and humorously!) and anyone better is clearly too caught up in the game and their opinions shouldn't count.
sambasti
Posts: 1054
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 12:55 am
Location: the SF hiding in your home

Post by sambasti »

The whole sniper thing was slightly off topic, but it just came up when I was making an example of what a typical stealth mission might look like.
finnbryant
Posts: 360
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 11:18 am
Location: England

Post by finnbryant »

juckto wrote:
QUOTE (juckto)
Oh wait, I forgot who I'm talking to.

which seems somewhat insulting from my POV too...

QUOTE (juckto)
Disagree with what? You haven't made any clear points.[/quote]
I clarified my position on where i thought infantry would be in the game.

You mentioned the lag issue, is that the only problem with infantry in your opinion or are there others?

please try not to get so aggressive, it makes others aggressive too and then the discussion turns into a flamewar, which will in the end hurt you most, since your the one who is trying to convince me to change how the game will work most.

QUOTE
I thought this thread was going to be discussing how the game is going to work and feel before the developers do a whole bunch of work, instead of getting bogged down in the details, but apparently you'd all like to discuss minor things like how a sniper is going to take down a miner.[/quote]
noted.

but anyway, getting back to the important stuff...

lag could be an issue for infantry combat, and not an issue I had spent much time thinking about tbh, I had assumed that considering the number of fps games around it shouldnt be problematic but thanks to our world wide community here and its small relative size, lag is going to be bigger than most fps games (most people play fps on local servers, we dont have enough players to do "local"). I will have to do some testing before i can say for sure, but juckto may have a point about that...
then again, only infantry-infantry combat would suffer, as other types would probably involve AOE weapons or vehicle targets. also, if we aggressively send data about whoever you have targeted that might reduce the problem to reasonable levels.
what is the worst lag anyone gets playing alleg on broadband? (in case no-one had caught on, I am NOT even going to even TRY to deal with dialup)
Last edited by finnbryant on Wed Feb 11, 2009 7:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Virex
Posts: 129
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:42 pm

Post by Virex »

I've been thinking about base desing, especialy when compared to Allegiance.

In allegiance, a sector contains at most 3 buildings and maybe several towers and mine fields located near alephs. Since spacecraft need a lot of space to dogfight effectively, and there's only 1 kind of chokepoint in the game, an aleph, this is a logical setup, lending itself well to furious craft-to-craft combat.

However, for a land-based game, a crowded terain with lots of cover makes for better gameplay then open fields. This means levels should have multiple chokepoints besides just alephs. Therefor, turrets and mnefields can be deployed on other places then just the aleph.
Another thing to consider is that base desing that offers a lot of cover should be encouraged, because this probably gives rise to more interesting games. The way to do it is by makign it advantagious to build multiple buildings close to eachother. To make it that way, there should be multiple reasearch buildings and production buildings, as well as several municipal buildings like radar stations or storage silo's.
If entering building is implemented, buildings could also have gun ports from which infantry or turrets could fire.

The idea to implement an engineer class has already been raised. I'd like to support this idea, since it enables the deployment of turrets at strategic locations, without needing to send a constructor there. This hopefully causes furious fightning along the frontline.
WhiskeyGhost
Posts: 1014
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:15 pm
Location: Gulf Coast, guess which one?

Post by WhiskeyGhost »

Or, you could just have add-ons for existing structures to lower the need for multiple buildings, in a similar way to how techbases get "upgraded".

Rather then building lots of structures, just have a limited amount of slots per structure for upgrades, such as enhanced scanners (to give better sight range around the base).

Incidentally, you could also need certain requirements, such as needing your outpost to be level 2, so you can add said scanners to one of the slots
Image
Rand0m_Numb3r wrote:QUOTE (Rand0m_Numb3r @ Aug 9 2007, 12:27 AM)CURSES I HAVE BEEN DEFEATED!
Virex
Posts: 129
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:42 pm

Post by Virex »

WhiskeyGhost wrote:
QUOTE (WhiskeyGhost @ Feb 12 2009, 12:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Or, you could just have add-ons for existing structures to lower the need for multiple buildings, in a similar way to how techbases get "upgraded".

Rather then building lots of structures, just have a limited amount of slots per structure for upgrades, such as enhanced scanners (to give better sight range around the base).

Incidentally, you could also need certain requirements, such as needing your outpost to be level 2, so you can add said scanners to one of the slots


That would certanly be an option, but the reason I talked about having more building is because more buildings means more cover, means more tactics in combat, hopefuly meaning better gameplay. Though I can see the point that forcing the comander to build more would push to many tasks into his hands. So we'd need to strike a balance between them.
fuzzylunkin1

Post by fuzzylunkin1 »

QUOTE
The idea to implement an engineer class has already been raised.[/quote]

The engineer could be a "nan."
Virex
Posts: 129
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:42 pm

Post by Virex »

fuzzylunkin1 wrote:
QUOTE (fuzzylunkin1 @ Feb 14 2009, 06:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The engineer could be a "nan."


I was thinking that the best way to use the engineer class would be to have it mount a nan, and be able to deploy fortifications, bridges and small turrets on the battlefield. The buildings and turrets would come in packs that have to be bought, and they're heavy and take up quite some space so a few engineers can't just litter the area with turrets. But they could add a few turrets and trenches to a chokepoint to fortify it. They'd also be tasked with naning vehicles and the structures they have deployed.
Post Reply