Username:    Password:    Remember Me?         

Reverie World Studios Forums - View Single Post - Diversity to gameplay, to game objectives + Troops prod AI
View Single Post
Old 04-16-2008, 05:59 PM
Ovocean Ovocean is offline
Elven Sect:
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: France
Posts: 74
Ovocean has a default reputation

Thanks for the answer and all the good news Joseph!

Originally Posted by Joseph Visscher
I disagree with that concept and hopefuly will never be added to the game.

This is a R.eal T.ime S.trategy game and muti-tasking is what separates the pros from the noobs and is the back bone of the RTS Genre. If you can manage your resources and your army at the exact same time and the other player cant, you will have the upper hand in defeating his army, or defeating his economy. In any other RTS you will see this, and if you don’t, trust me it will get boring very quickly.
I don't think the concept wouldn't ruin anything. Think of car races: you can try to drive an automatic car, but you will only be able to reach the best speeds if you drive a not-automatic car (hand gear car, I don't know how you call it).
Same thing here: the newbs (like me) and lazy people (like me) will go the easy way with the presets of troops, but if they want to really master the game (like I'll do after a certain amount of time) and be relevant against pros, they'll have to learn to manage everything simultaneously.

As for your last argument, no it won't be boring. Since Ground Control, there has been plenty of strategy games where there's no base building and economics at all, and it's not boring.

What is boring to me is if I have to manage so many things that I don't have a single second to think of good and complex strategies during the game.

But yes, I understand that it would perhaps modify a lot the way we play the game, and if it's not appealing to the devs, well... too bad for me.

Originally Posted by Joseph Visscher
Losing and Winning is apart of all RTSs, if you don’t lose a few you wont win a few either, so what’s a point of playing a game if you can only win?
Sure, I was only speaking of the particular way of loosing when I know 15m before the end of the game that I'll be defeated and I can only contemplate my city being destroyed piece by piece. This I can't stand and I do prefer playing some more peaceful games than living this. Well, maybe I've grown up, maybe I can now... But it's human nature...
Though, I have no problem with losing in other conditions. So that's only a suggestion: diversity in LAN modes. It can only be a good thing, right?

Originally Posted by Puppeteer
Not sure how popular the economic objectives will be, but if any objective map is to be implemented above all else it should be a freebuild mode. Though, actually, thinking about it, is that really such a good thing as this game's fortress building revolves around build plots (for the conventional humans, and elves, at least).
Yep, the economic objective is not a good idea. It was an example too quickly thought up.

Last edited by Ovocean : 04-16-2008 at 07:06 PM. Reason: Added answer to Puppeteer
Reply With Quote