fantstc1

fantstc1

Joined Member # 6347223
73 Posts 297 Replies 8,075 Reputation

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

3 Replies 20,253 Views

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

3 Replies 14,510 Views

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

3 Replies 20,253 Views

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

3 Replies 14,510 Views

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,

0 Replies 8,374 Views

[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

7 Replies 29,073 Views

[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

49 Replies 202,488 Views

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. <

4 Replies 26,132 Views

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.

5 Replies 25,487 Views

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.

3 Replies 16,790 Views

I sort of wonder how attacking is supposed to work. When I attack a node, my units do what I would expect (well... for the most part). They attack the node, and wipe out its defenders, regardless of where the defenders move (and then, sometimes, my troops go wandering off to other nearby nodes, but we'll save that discussion for another time). In contrast, when I a-move, I would expect similar behavior... follow and destroy the units that are reasonably in the trai

3 Replies 14,918 Views

One additional thought on this. Maybe think about something like "an a-move that will engage troops, and take any nodes in proximity, and chase within reason"... as a bulked up and more intelligent single macro command to match the macro intent of the game. You want micro control over sance and mode and all that when you need it.. but macro commands would be good too!

11 Replies 17,329 Views

Was playing 1.3 last night. I endeavored to attack move on a group of units. My troops ended up killing a couple of the units, and then they sort of stopped firing. But the enemy was firing on me. This was annoying. When I a-move, I expect my troops to engage more reasonably, and chase a bit once they do engage. ... not just stop attacking. Don't know if this is an issue with 1.3 or a-move in general. </p

3 Replies 14,918 Views

I'm playing the last level of the campaign, and am having a really hard time with it. No matter the size of my army and my fortifications, the computer just keeps rolling me. Now, I realize why. I thought I saw the computer use an orbital attack on one of my nodes where I had built an orbital nullifier. I wasn't sure though. So I re-loaded from my save, and watched the computer do it again. Twice. Any thoughts on why the computer

2 Replies 15,125 Views

Skirmish replayability: Someone in another thread said that some of the scenarios are event driven... like "when the player reaches this waypoint, do X." (no, I haven't tested the theory, but seems reasonable, plausible, and probable based on my experience of the game) Is there a way to vary things up more? like... randomly adopt strategies, instead of using waypoints to determine timing? Just a thought. I find a lot of games do the waypoint

10 Replies 40,204 Views

Alright. I'm not saying that the game should become Starcraft 2. BUT... In Starcraft 2, I select the factory and give it a rally point, which plan be a place on the map, or a mobile unit. When the factory produces, it then sends the new units wherever I have selected, either to the designated location, or to the mobile target unit, wherever it is (essentially following the target unit).

4 Replies 17,674 Views