|
Alpha Centauri Forums
Old Test Forums Info Direct from the Horse's Mouth on USEnet |
Author | Topic: Info Direct from the Horse's Mouth on USEnet |
PawtheUnstuk |
posted 12-19-98 06:42 PM ET
comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic has ALOT of posts directly from Brian Reynolds. I strongly reccomend you all go read it. |
Patrick2 |
posted 12-19-98 06:50 PM ET
how do you get there |
Thue |
posted 12-19-98 11:39 PM ET
use outlook express if you have IE or message center if you have netscape I must admit I use IE because (shock) if works _better_ than netscape - it has fewer bugs (who would have thougth it possible ) Anyway it IS really recommendable reading the newsgroup; I read there will be orbital facilities and combat - never knew that! |
Thue |
posted 12-19-98 11:58 PM ET
another thing - there will be two demo-versions; one with sound (20MB) and one without(10MB) ups - I forgot the second (and most importent most will say) thing! drums please... Bryan Reynolds says SMAC will be out ca. feb 9. a relevant post: 100-turn limit, no techs higher than level 5, no more than 10 bases. Saved games are compatible with the full version, so if you get Brian Reynolds
|
Jimmy |
posted 12-20-98 12:10 AM ET
Sounds great. 100 turns looks like it will be enough to build secret projects, meet in the council and such. How many techs does tech level 5 correspond to? Well, will see pretend soon. |
MikeH II |
posted 12-20-98 09:16 AM ET
I read that multiplayer was in, what have you all heard? |
DJ RRebel |
posted 12-20-98 09:28 AM ET
I have no clue !!! From what I've heard, it doesn't look like it, but those are only rumours, although I doubt they could fit everything needed for multiplayer in under 10 megs with the restof the game !!! Same goes for the wonders, I doubt they'll be any of the secret project movies in the demo !!! |
Lee Johnson |
posted 12-20-98 11:21 AM ET
It's not a rumour: It was in one of Brian's Usenet posts. |
DHE_X2 |
posted 12-20-98 04:41 PM ET
Level 5 techs would probably corespond to mid-renaisance techs in Civ2. Like the Smac equivalent of gunpowder, physics, theology, etc. (in terms of complexity) |
SnowFire |
posted 12-20-98 05:40 PM ET
More cryptic posts from Brian: It depends on (a) how many people (b) internet, lan, or modem (i.e. how much latency can be expected). ------- If you're lucky enough to have a LAN, or have a very good connection or Brian Reynolds Non-Simeltaneous movement? We thought there was none! And you're recommending the fast way for short games and the long way for long games? Huhhhh? That makes no sense! -------------- Social Engineering -> An earlier prototype of SMAC had the social Brian Reynolds So we have to hack our rules in order to create custom faction, and balancing them is up to us. Uh-oh. I was hoping for an easier system. And the "earlier prototype" he was refering too was the beloved conscript army vs. volunteer army system. Noo! And lastly, I absolutely have to post this one: A single-turn saved game of SMAC is pretty large, since SMAC maintains As we receive input from players, we may decide to add some additional Brian Reynolds
A response from Brian. Oh yeah! Too bad he said no. Ah well, at least there's good reason behind it. |
Octopus |
posted 12-20-98 05:55 PM ET
"And you're recommending the fast way for short games and the long way for long games? Huhhhh? That makes no sense!" I'm assuming that there are performance problems with internet multi-play (not surprising, since this has plagued every recent FPS game lately, like Unreal and I believe Shogo). In simultaneous movement mode, there is constant back and forth communication between the machines. If there is a slow or laggy connection in the middle, it could seriously worsen gameplay. However, in a traditional turn-based mode, all the information is sent in one big batch chunk, which is probably easier to handle. I'm assuming that this is what Brian means. As to the non-simultaneous option, I was surprised as well, considering all the posters on these boards a few weeks ago telling everybody that hotseat and PBEM would be impossible because the only way you could do multi-player was in simultaneous mode. I'm hoping that Firaxis will explain multi-player to us a bit more once they return to the boards, since that is the one feature we won't be able to sample in the demo. |
PawtheUnstuk |
posted 12-20-98 06:17 PM ET
First of all, just to clear this up, he's said there is no Multiplayer in the demo, I can't rember where, somewhere on the Usenet. In any event, I'm predicting a disapointing multiplayer feature. Its really not adaptable to this kind of game. Inless you have a LAN, IPX, or something much faster than the internet you proabably won't have the speed nessecary for simulatenous mode, and turn based makes you spend a lot of time waiting. A modem 1on1 w/ 56.6 might or might not be playable, I'm guessing it will be, but that's still only two players human out of 7. Here's hoping PawtheUnstuk |
Thue |
posted 12-20-98 10:28 PM ET
Another cool post: Resources work somewhat differently in SMAC, since SMAC's world is fully There are single-square "bonus resources" spread across the map, but There is a fairly elaborate Scenario editor built into the game, which Combat system includes special rules for long-range bombardment, long Brian Reynolds
|
Thue |
posted 12-20-98 10:50 PM ET
I really would prefer if Brian would give this information on his own forum/webpage |
Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.