fantstc1

[edited]

Just got this started. Will upload more soon. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4Cdfv6BoV1YafaEN2RuJFw Need to work out the video quality issues. I used shadowplay, and then used premiere, and rendered using H264 codec. Obviously didn't come out so terrific (looks terrible on retina monitor). I'll cont

[quote who="Orachin" reply="2" id="3646611"] you actually got to keep in mind that you can for example get additional 13% of attack for 200-500 quanta at high upgrade lvls (if you alredy leveled your attack), or get a 13% hp for 100 quanta for lower lvl upgrades in defence (if it is not leveled). Its all about tradeoffs. [/quote] So wait... you get more HP boost for less quanta? How is that not a better deal?

Storage doesn't seem worth the effort. And I've never upgraded radar ever. Seems like it would be useful, but I don't get enough qunata to waste it on something that's just a nice-to-have. Not when my opponent could be claiming a weapon upgrade at same time. Maybe consider switching radar upgrades to buildings? (antenna building upgrades?)

Haven't refined my play to that point. I know you need ~60. And I know you start with enough for one logistics upgrade. I am assuming a rush would want to spend that on weapon upgrade.

What is the best course? I'm curious which option is more effective? I've heard that "defense is less efficient" but I don't quite see the logic there. Are there things to consider when choosing which course to take?

This morning, I've been pondering whether that the current starting unit capacity, and the connection of logistics to quanta, actually forces a certain opening. Essentially, I am FORCED to build a few quanta refineries in early game, just to progress. But if the initial unit cap could be raised, or logistics could be separated, it might add a strategic layer. I could build a few more units and then rush, or I could head down the quanta path. &nbs

howabout a control that is partly screen and partly keyboard driven? Ex. Tab key is the fixed "cycle" key, and I have access to a widget that controls what the tab key is cycling through (ex. unoccupied engineers, supply blocked production buildings, etc.)

What happens when you have an armory, and you have insufficient radiation to power it, but plenty of metal? My impression is that production on the armory essentially freezes. So then I am wondering what happens with the metal that would have been spent on the armory? Does it just sit there, as resources associated with a failed "tick forward" for the armory, or is the metal re-allocated elsewhere, if possible (ex. a Factory). I en

I can't necessarily commit, but would be happy to contribute a bit to the writing on ashes wiki. Depends on what you have in mind, and how the project would get organized. I can churn text pretty quick... obviously. :)

[quote who="DasUnding" reply="35" id="3646334"] I am concerned about the last posts I read that you will focus more singleplayer? ... I would never buy the game now if I would only focus singleplayer. [/quote] I've been very worried about same, and I have a suggestion. Check out my posts (original and a couple of followups) at this thread: https://forums.ashesofthesingularity.com/479045/page/1/#3646230

No, it's not an MMO. But I think I might see where SD is coming from. Development costs manhours, which must earn $$. They love the game, but are still in business. We love the game too, and we want it to survive as a MP experience (at least I do, very much). From the game perspective, that probably will require more players and an interesting platform to attract them. There are also probably some important esport consideratio

Proposition: Expandalone: purchase once and play as much as you want, 1vs. CPU, private environment, only have access to story/campaign and features in your expansion; when oyu purchase expansion, you get a free month of MP (maybe a variable amount of time assigned to each expo, depending on cost of the expo and its contribution to MP) MP: $2-3 per month, with one year commit; re-commit annually; everyone in MP has same content; You always ge

Oh. That's it? So game dev just continues targeting the new product? And dev on old product then becomes more limited? That seems totally normal, and I'm not sure why the folks on steam are having fits. I do think there might be a difference, though. I'm pretty sure that you had to buy the previous versions of starcraft to play HOTS. Doesn't sound like that will be the case for Ashes? So code

Howabout considering an optional SaaS model to give players the option of maintaining an optimal codebase??? Maybe a good idea for MP? Then our 3% are worth a little more??? :) I'd be willing to do $2-3 per month, maybe. With at least a 1-year commit (annual re-commitment). That would be a pretty good shot in the SD arm to ensure MP attention, I would think. Not sure. This could certainly kill it too, if it scares off

I'm wondering about the expandalone concept. Exactly what makes it an expandalone, vs. a traditional expansion. I understand that it is a significant branching of the game. I also gather it would be "way way too expensive to just have in an update (several man months of work)" [quote seems to be from a SD representative writing in the steam community]. (grumble.. ok...) So what does this mean, though? Other games

There have been other posts about control of units. Some people have recommended unit "stances" and "modes," so that units will behave more consistently and in-line with player with expectations. I'm not arguing... Some of that would be nice. But I have what I think is a good idea that is fairly light weight in terms of UI/UX: Essentially, just enable players to add a keypress (maybe alt, or ctrl,

[quote who="DanailLazov" reply="6" id="3646113"] Unless stopping at target range and forcing stationary behavior air is random and annoying to use [/quote] I agree and I don't. It's great supplemental damage. If you can mass-up bombers, they can be really destructive. It adds a layer of strategy and decision making, because if opponent risks no air defense, they will get serious

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="24" id="3646076"] Throw in a future diplomacy feature or two and you could get some really interesting stuff going. [/quote] Wait.. this is RTS right? Strategy. Tactics. Armies go boom. I don't want to make peace, and don't want to trade. When did this become Galciv?! [quote who="Frogboy" reply="24" id="3646076"] anyone suggesting that we should have diverted resources awa

You'd need the "invite" controls too. (for private, otherwise you just have a public league/tourney, like SC2)

Am assuming you would need to be able to set multiple reinforcement rally points... assuming that's the winning idea.

Intersting thoughts. Right now, it obviously doesn't seem like you can lock rally points to moving troops. Once you do that, though, this would seem to suggest that ALL units will move to the army (like in starcraft 2). I agree that this is PROBABLY a good way to deal with the issue... simply adopting the starcraft trope. You basically produce to the rally point. Always. <

Not sure that I concur with your final assessment, but i saw someone do something similar to me last weekend. Still haven't figured it out. They swarmed with an unbelievable number of units in a relatively short time. Stretched credibility a little. I don't know. I don't think the person who did it to me was cheating. But maybe.

Just a quick thought. Is there any possibility of seeing Ashes create regulated mechanisms for private leagues and tourneys? Think private community ladder. I'd love to see that. Starcraft/Blizzard never did it. But I always wanted it. (Perhaps they don't want to fracture player base, but I think it would be an awesome addition) Also, something else that I always thought might be fun is a corporate league.

No Replays. Big -1 on that decision. that's how you learn where you went wrong in multiplayer. Sadness.