FIELD BATTLES ON ALPHA C. - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  Old Test Forums
  FIELD BATTLES ON ALPHA C.

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   FIELD BATTLES ON ALPHA C.

ESSETI posted 12-01-98 07:48 AM ET
Why not develop an engine for the field battles between units in SMAC ?
Something like AoE!
DJ RRebel posted 12-01-98 12:26 PM ET
I believe I speak for most of us when I say: HUH ???
I never played AoE, so please explain !!!
WAS posted 12-01-98 03:46 PM ET
Maybe what ESSETI is referring to is a turn based game that switches to real time during combat sequences. Sort of like Lords of the Realm II
Old_Guy posted 12-01-98 03:50 PM ET
I wonder how that would work in multi-player. What if two different players attack your units in different areas of the map? I don't think the real-time battles could take too long or you would have people doing a lot of waiting during turns as individual battles are fought.
DJ RRebel posted 12-01-98 03:59 PM ET
I really don't like R-T coming into SMAC at all !!! It's meant to be a TURN BASED GAME !!!
Imran Siddiqui posted 12-01-98 04:21 PM ET
Um.. Smac will be like about a 5 hour or more game, JUST TURN BASED. Adding the fighting would make the game huge!! The time required to play it would suck. And if they did include I hope they'd add it as an option, because I'd never use it.
Imran Siddiqui
Patriot
The Thomas A Stobie posted 12-01-98 05:45 PM ET
I once played a game of Federation & Empire using Star Fleet Battles tactical rules for battles. A turn took days, weeks and/months ot resolve. Never again. If you develop a good general purpose tactical simulator for field battles, that is a seperate game, I would not want to see it in a strategic game. I do not have years of real-time to put into a single game.
Spoe posted 12-01-98 06:21 PM ET
That sounds scary, Tom. I've seen Star Fleet Battles alone take over a week of playing time to finish.
CClark posted 12-01-98 06:28 PM ET
The tactical portions of MOM and MOO/MOO2 was pretty enjoyable. But it was a very simplified version of tactical combat (and was turn-based).
I wouldn't mind seeing that kind of thing in single-player SMAC. But I wouldn't want to see tactical battles in multiplayer (too long to wait for people not in the battle) and I definitely wouldn't want a tactical battle that was a whole game in and of itself in any mode.
So, my vote: No.
Rang posted 12-01-98 06:35 PM ET
I agree with CCLark. Something similar to the MoM turnbased combat system might be interesting to see in singleplayer. As a matter of fact, I would enjoy it, especially if it were an option. But definitely not multiplayer.
Brother Greg posted 12-01-98 07:27 PM ET
Ugh, a big NO to a separate engine for field battles. I expect a good game of SMAC to take me well over 12 hours to play. I don't want to have to spend another two thousand hours playing out every single battle in a separate combat engine.
What a silly idea (no offence intended).
Brother Greg.
DJ RRebel posted 12-02-98 05:07 AM ET
I agree, I would turn that feature off too !!!
What is MoM ???
ESSETI posted 12-02-98 08:32 AM ET
Well you are right I suggested something really huge for a strat. game ,
but if it would be real it should be really
optional .. this is obvious, becose not every one would like to spent so much time fithing each battle;
But it could be fun to have the chance to
choose to fight at least one great battle when you have many units in a single area or you want to defend your capital city and you don't want to rely only a on a calculation based on difference of number
and power of the units!
what you think about this?
AoE : Age of Empires
OmniDude posted 12-02-98 09:06 AM ET
DJ: MoM is Master(s) of Magic, a pretty good civ-clone set in a fantasy world.
IIRC, it didn't have tactical battle though...Can you please elaborate a bit on how it worked, Rang or CClark, to help my senile OCL (Organic Chief Librarian) search my internal archives?
CClark posted 12-02-98 12:31 PM ET
Basically, when one of your stacks attacked another stack all of your units appeared on a small battlefield (one screen) at the bottom and the opposing forces appeared at the top. You then took turns moving units (up to their movement maximum, the number of boots or wings that appeared in the properties) and attacking. Some units had ranged combat, with varying ranges. (Halfing Slingers were such a pain in the butt early on!)
You could also cast spells during combat. It was a rather integral part of the game, actually.
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: FIELD BATTLES ON ALPHA C.
ESSETI	posted 12-01-98 07:48 AM ET Why not develop an engine for the field battles between units in SMAC ? Something like AoE!
DJ RRebel	posted 12-01-98 12:26 PM ET I believe I speak for most of us when I say: HUH ??? I never played AoE, so please explain !!!
WAS	posted 12-01-98 03:46 PM ET Maybe what ESSETI is referring to is a turn based game that switches to real time during combat sequences. Sort of like Lords of the Realm II
Old_Guy	posted 12-01-98 03:50 PM ET I wonder how that would work in multi-player. What if two different players attack your units in different areas of the map? I don't think the real-time battles could take too long or you would have people doing a lot of waiting during turns as individual battles are fought.
DJ RRebel	posted 12-01-98 03:59 PM ET I really don't like R-T coming into SMAC at all !!! It's meant to be a TURN BASED GAME !!!
Imran Siddiqui	posted 12-01-98 04:21 PM ET Um.. Smac will be like about a 5 hour or more game, JUST TURN BASED. Adding the fighting would make the game huge!! The time required to play it would suck. And if they did include I hope they'd add it as an option, because I'd never use it. Imran Siddiqui Patriot
The Thomas A Stobie	posted 12-01-98 05:45 PM ET I once played a game of Federation & Empire using Star Fleet Battles tactical rules for battles. A turn took days, weeks and/months ot resolve. Never again. If you develop a good general purpose tactical simulator for field battles, that is a seperate game, I would not want to see it in a strategic game. I do not have years of real-time to put into a single game.
Spoe	posted 12-01-98 06:21 PM ET That sounds scary, Tom. I've seen Star Fleet Battles alone take over a week of playing time to finish.
CClark	posted 12-01-98 06:28 PM ET The tactical portions of MOM and MOO/MOO2 was pretty enjoyable. But it was a very simplified version of tactical combat (and was turn-based). I wouldn't mind seeing that kind of thing in single-player SMAC. But I wouldn't want to see tactical battles in multiplayer (too long to wait for people not in the battle) and I definitely wouldn't want a tactical battle that was a whole game in and of itself in any mode. So, my vote: No.
Rang	posted 12-01-98 06:35 PM ET I agree with CCLark. Something similar to the MoM turnbased combat system might be interesting to see in singleplayer. As a matter of fact, I would enjoy it, especially if it were an option. But definitely not multiplayer.
Brother Greg	posted 12-01-98 07:27 PM ET Ugh, a big NO to a separate engine for field battles. I expect a good game of SMAC to take me well over 12 hours to play. I don't want to have to spend another two thousand hours playing out every single battle in a separate combat engine. What a silly idea (no offence intended). Brother Greg.
DJ RRebel	posted 12-02-98 05:07 AM ET I agree, I would turn that feature off too !!! What is MoM ???
ESSETI	posted 12-02-98 08:32 AM ET Well you are right I suggested something really huge for a strat. game , but if it would be real it should be really optional .. this is obvious, becose not every one would like to spent so much time fithing each battle; But it could be fun to have the chance to choose to fight at least one great battle when you have many units in a single area or you want to defend your capital city and you don't want to rely only a on a calculation based on difference of number and power of the units! what you think about this? AoE : Age of Empires
OmniDude	posted 12-02-98 09:06 AM ET DJ: MoM is Master(s) of Magic, a pretty good civ-clone set in a fantasy world. IIRC, it didn't have tactical battle though...Can you please elaborate a bit on how it worked, Rang or CClark, to help my senile OCL (Organic Chief Librarian) search my internal archives?
CClark	posted 12-02-98 12:31 PM ET Basically, when one of your stacks attacked another stack all of your units appeared on a small battlefield (one screen) at the bottom and the opposing forces appeared at the top. You then took turns moving units (up to their movement maximum, the number of boots or wings that appeared in the properties) and attacking. Some units had ranged combat, with varying ranges. (Halfing Slingers were such a pain in the butt early on!) You could also cast spells during combat. It was a rather integral part of the game, actually.