I'll be asking quite a few questions in this thread...
First off, which is better, when saving/loading mobiles..
using client/New() and mob/Logout(), or mob/Login() and mob/Logout()?
Which would be the "preferred" gameplay structure:
1) Having a "commander" unit, which, if destroyed, will destroy all that players buildings/units, and set the player into watching mode (they would lose, obviously)
2) Having a command building, which, if destroyed, same as above happens. Just the building would be stronger than the unit, but could not move.
3) Losing the command things in general, and just having all the buildings (and possibly units) destroyed, causing the player to lose.
4) Having a command building you could create multiples of, thereby extending your life, but still giving you strategic "instant death."
I will update this thread in a bit...
ID:153870
 Nov 19 2002, 5:42 pm
|
|
Good idea! I always hated losing a game because of some rear attack with like ten guys when I have a massive army all out assaulting someone. (ok I admit, that was poor strategy but c'mon, I congratulated my opponent on that win, it sucked) That would be an interesting feature. Or how about there being different modes. Most online RTS games have different winning types. Canar
| |
Yeah, having 'Protect the VIP', 'Take out the Anti-Aircraft Turrets' or 'DESTROY!!!' modes makes RTS games worth playing more then once.
If you have AI Opponents you could rig up a whole Campain Mode, that would be sweet. -DogMan | |
Due to the fact that RTS AI is some tough stuff to build, I'll be getting the basic online multiplayer bashing stuff in first.
| |
I usually despise it when games have "self-units" at all -- in all (modern) wars, the real fighting is done by the junior officers and the enlisted personnel. Senior officers and commanders usually stay far from the battlefield.
That's what wireless communication has given us -- the benefit of disengagement. =P In the pre-radio days, senior officers had to lead their troops (how else would they tell them what to do?), of course. I'm more of a fan of modern or science-fiction strategy, though. (Not necessarily wargames, but strategy in general.) | |
Rather then "Instant Death" maybe when your commander unit/structure is taken down, your units dont react very well to your commands.
So maybe it takes a few seconds for the unit to do what you tell it too, or it doesnt always do what you tell it too.
To simulate bad communication/organisation of your units. It would put you at an extreme disadvantage. Its annoying when you clearly could destroy your opponent, but they take down one building by chance and its game over for you.
-DogMan