AoWFever

[quote who="tatsujb" reply="34" id="3599226"] Quoting eviator, reply 32 This may not be a good idea, but I'll put it out there anyway: what if the Logistics tech upgrade also upgraded access to the next tier of units? A little bit like aging. First logistics allows you to build T2s, second logistics Dreadnoughts. Logistics is already a necessary

Great back and forth in this thread. I'm not much of an artist, so I will leave the mock-ups to those who are more graphically talented. A few quick thoughts/personal wish list items for what I'm going to call the strat map: On Topic: As cool as a spherical map would look, I think the strat map should be flat. Spherical maps do not allow you to see what's happening on the side of sphere/planet facing away from you. Thus, flat is the w

This is an intentional dynamic within the game. I like the way it works now, personally. It was ridiculous before they made this change with units flying all around and never engaging in pitched battles. These are massive floating battleships. Once you fully commit them to a battle the assets are committed. You can still interact with your units by issuing specific move orders, firing orders, etc. I find the units to be very responsive to these kinds of o

[quote who="tatsujb" reply="24" id="3597778"] Quoting AoWFever, reply 23 The empire tree images are way too big right now. They need to be smaller like in Sins so more useful information can be packed in. too few people understand that smaller is better. (that'

[quote who="abiessener" reply="21" id="3597731"] This is great feedback, thanks all. Regarding the empire tree, I've been banging on it a bit internally and I think it can be useful in Ashes for a couple things: 1. Seeing which battlegroups/controlgroups are in combat quickly 2. Getting a very quick sense of relative battlegroup/controlgroup strength 3. Seeing what you have lying around as "loose" (non-battlegroup) units at a glance <b

[quote who="TAG_Utter" reply="20" id="3597723"] [e digicons]k3[/e] [e digicons]:P[/e] . And empire tree have to go,and be replaced for something else. We just cant have the tree if we dont use it. [/quote] I don't know that I'm ready to throw out and replace the Empire Tree completely. I think it has a lot of potential to work in AoS. For the uninitiated, the empire tree in Sins was critical for navig

My PC was down for a while so I'm just now getting back into the game after a brief hiatus. After playing for a few hours last night, I think this thread is single most important one in the forums. First for the good. One of the first things I noticed in the game last night is how VASTLY improved the meta-unit AI is. I feel much more comfortable letting the meta units arrange themselves for and engage in battles without extensive micro. I was blown a

Just in time for my Birthday ;-).

[quote who="Gr_Ad_Kinz" reply="41" id="3580468"] Hi, new to the forums here but I have read over this entire thread and have a few opinions on the topics at hand. Regarding Resources, I think not going to complex is a good thing. I played Supcom, and still do FAForever!, and the metal/energy resource aspect is easy to understand and use. However, even in it's simplicity there are a ton of strategies revolving around it. Different combinations/build orders

I'll mirror everything said above. The devs are also committed to this game for the long haul based on posts I've seen in the Founders area. If you like this style of game, becoming a Founder should be a sound investment.

[quote who="shurtugalll" reply="35" id="3579544"] Q: Will you let us build stuff even when the amount of a resource is fully depleted? A: We are still debating this. It’s a really tough call because we are trying to keep people from wrecking themselves by over spending. I think what will happen is that once the UI catches up to make it easy to tell what is sucking up your stuff and turning it off we’ll have more options. 2) Please please plea

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="29" id="3578939"] One thing I can definitely say is the the founder feedback has been very helpful. A lot of these things are on the table. I wish you had our current build. It can't be sent soon enough to you guys. We aren't married to a particular game mechanic. What we are married to are certain broader concepts such as: Infinite turtling / rewarding the player who doesn't expand. Originally, the goal of

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="20" id="3578649"] We used logistics to great effect in Sins. Infinite turtling is NOT something we want to encourage. Turtling is a valid strategy to a degree (fortifying regions and such). In our internal build, we've modified the logistics array to provide a lot more logistics so that you won't be building very many. We are also entertaining the idea that controlling regions may directly increase logistics. Rat

[quote]What else would you like to know? [/quote] So far we have arid and temperate environments. Are others planned and, if so, what kinds (barren, winter, tropical, etc.)? Given the scope of some of the maps you are planning, will large maps feature multiple types of environments (e.g., snow to the north/south, desert/temperate in the middle, etc.)? I feel like this would help set AoS apart from other RTS games. Have you considered

[quote who="Kollok" reply="33" id="3573918"] Best thing for bugs is to have clear repro steps, I'll ask the QA guys what they want us to do about screenshot uploads. Also, sorry we've been quiet lately, we've been working on a pretty big update which hopefully will come out this week, possibly including a new benchmark mode and D3D12 support. We're looking into ways of pushing builds out to the founders at a higher rate - we'll let you know more soon!

[quote who="Kollok" reply="15" id="3571266"] Quoting AoWFever, reply 14 Researchable satellites might be fun. It seems like they could make sense for something of AoS's size/scale. It would be cool if you could choose between deploying stationary satellites and ones that "orbit" the planet you are fighting on an

Researchable satellites might be fun. It seems like they could make sense for something of AoS's size/scale. It would be cool if you could choose between deploying stationary satellites and ones that "orbit" the planet you are fighting on and move across the planet surface realistically. This would give you a limited "window" to view locations on a map every so often. It would also add an interesting recon element to the game. I found

Got it. I figured it was something like that, but the suspense of not knowing had been killing me ;-).

I have been scratching my head about the whole "seeding" process since Alpha started. The "Backstory" part of the main website describes the seeding process as follows: A "seed" will materialize on a suitable world. A second, third or fourth seed may materialize moments later. Post-humans and the Substrate will fight to the death to control the computronium generators to take possession of that world. This makes it sound

[quote who="X-Astra" reply="5" id="3567852"] I agree with this completely, I'd much rather have Fog of War while still being able to see the map. I suppose a unique and cool way they could do it would be to do a wireframe landscape that loaded the actual map textures as you advanced. That way you could see the whole map, get the sort of feeling like "the computer knows the terrain is like this" but then as your troops on the ground can actually see it you can as wel

[quote who="Kollok" reply="32" id="3569483"] Personally, given that it's a basic computation unit, I think it should be named after Alan Turing. Maybe Turinium, or Turnips The substrate faction could be obsessed with passing the "Turing test". [/quote] I spat out my coffee laughing at the "Turing Test" comment. Turinium sounds cool, but no fair because you're already in the credits ;-) ! On a somewhat unrelated note -- the recent movie about Alan Turing

Random-ish maps Sounds like fun. Faction names and marketing I love stuff like this and the more ideas people throw out the better it will work. Here are my initial contributions -- I don't think they impinge on other people's ideas, but I read through the posts quickly, so consider anything I repeat a vote for the first poster's terms ;-): Substrate Brainstorming Session 1 : "

[quote who="Kollok" reply="30" id="3568106"] Quoting AoWFever, reply 27 Quoting Kollok, reply 10 Regarding your desktop,

[quote who="Arcturus314" reply="23" id="3566357"] When you command a unit / group to move or attack, you get a little blue icon where you clicked. Its really hard to tell whether the unit will be moving or attacking. How about a system more like Homeworld? When you click to move / attack you get a dotted red or green line (to indicate attack or move respectively) leading to the target. This could also show the unit's path to the target. What do you guys think? [/quote

[quote who="eviator" reply="54" id="3567245"] Okay, I never tried the ALT+MMB, will give that a try, thanks! [/quote] My bad -- it's "Shift"+MMB; not ALT+MMB.