Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Kelly's Heros

Resource stockpiles and bases

Recommended Posts

Here's another enhancement request - what about resource stockpiles in cities that you loose when the city is captured? That'll put a twist on defending a city. Also, if we have stockpiles we're going to want to move them around.

Bases, what about engineers and building bases where we can get extra defensive bonuses and stockpile resources.

Another resource that would be useful is munitions. Factories should create munitions that can be stored in bases or transfered to other cities. Run out of munitions, can't fight.

Food for thought so to speak :-) I like the ability to create supply routes using transports for resupply. This would create a good use for subs and destroyers. What about trains on land?

I know, more complexity, but would definitely up the strategy elements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's another enhancement request - what about resource stockpiles in cities that you loose when the city is captured? That'll put a twist on defending a city. Also, if we have stockpiles we're going to want to move them around.

Bases, what about engineers and building bases where we can get extra defensive bonuses and stockpile resources.

Another resource that would be useful is munitions. Factories should create munitions that can be stored in bases or transfered to other cities. Run out of munitions, can't fight.

Food for thought so to speak :-) I like the ability to create supply routes using transports for resupply. This would create a good use for subs and destroyers. What about trains on land?

I know, more complexity, but would definitely up the strategy elements.

Thanks for the feedback. I have to admit that I'm a little worried about increasing the complexity of the game too much. I don't want too much of a learning curve for new players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main drawback with increasing the complexity is the effect it has on the AI.

It would be nice to get supply, weather, ... but then you either chew up more processor time or get a less excellent SP game.

If there is a sequel maybe it's worth looking at adding more complexity, but for now, I'd agree with Brit that it's not worth the effort right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brit, I think there is a trade off here. My chief concern is that with the super tech tree covering such a huge period of time that the games chief danger is setting out to be a naval based game but will end up as a air game, or a technology race game.

I do think that the early aircraft vs ships vs land units seems right - 1900 to 1940. However once past that point with the rapid change of relative powers the game has problems. Not insurmountable but it does make a schizophrenic game.

My gut feeling would be to perfect the mechanics so they make sense for the 1900-1940 period. Everyone can read the history books and agree pretty much that naval power ruled in sea based maps in that period. Also with relative simplicity of the period supplylines may work well.

Also you may want to consider land based coal? and oil fields as the ocean oil fields are the most glaring by far piece of unrealism.

Post 1940 everything becomes very much more complicated quite quickly. This could be seen as a plus if you want to include technology in. Run a period 1940-44 for those who want rapid advancement but not ICBM's, or perhaps no nuclear. It could be extended to 1950.

I think once you start theorising as to UAV class 3 versus tank 5 and a proper results table then it opens the game design to people's diverse opinions as to what will be truly effective etc etc. Why go there now?

The base game 1900-1940 seems solid in balance.

BTW I believe an intrinsic supply mechanism was considered in the game design and would obviously add to the "realism" but the decison as to a quick simple but satisying game to a longer complex one is tricky. Empire favoured simplicity and sold a bundle - there may be a lesson in it : )

For even more simplicity one might go back pre-air to sail and steam ..... over 100 years without too much innovation ... and no oil. : )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I've said it once I've said it......

The strength of Empire games is its simplicity. Real frankly in sp games the resources are an annoyance. I haven't done any diplomacy or trading but suspect I won't like that either in sp. Tech for short periods like through ww2 or maybe 1900-1940 would be ok but I would normally play without it. It looks like it will be easy to set up rule sets and I like the idea of setting up several in different time periods. Then they can be used for historical battles also.

And I keep repeating ad nauseum (sorry), things like resources, diplomacy and trade really need to be optional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rich, I understand you may not like some things, but don't go around saying stuff like it's the common truth when it's not. I don't think resources are an annoyance. I think they make it interesting. Makes you want to scout, makes you want to move to some islands and capture those resources. Makes you want to defend the map. War isn't about defending 3 cities, it's about controlling the territory, the roads, factories, rails. Resources do very well here. You won't win the war if you put your whole army in a city. Blitzkrieg prove that if you do so, the enemy will take the world from you, cut you off, surround you and defeat you. And this is a wargame. That a wargame acts more like war is just for the better.

That said, I believe EoS is about as sophisticated as a hammer once you learn it.

If it is possible to make some things adjustable options, so the game can be made as simple as a stick, why not.

If Brit can make an option to turn off the resources, diplomacy and trade in an hour, then maybe it's a good idea. But if he is to spend a week on coding that... I'd rather he worked on crashes, failed saves or had a beer. He deserved the latter for sure ;p.

Back to resource nodes, I think there is a large gap between controlling resources and managing resource lines, depots and all that. Cities are very important as they are. Units take very long to produce and losing a city is always a hit, not to mention that you've just lost a nice defensive point.

All those resource things you've invented would sophisticate the game much more than they would enrich the experience.

That's my opinion, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The resources scattered on the sea perfectly well replace routes. Transfer and management of resources will strongly complicate the game and chiefly will add nothing in the game.

Are destroyers really useless in EoS? Do you want that the opponent's army starved or its fleet has lost mobility? Perfectly, to take sea resources with destroyers and after several turns the opponent will start to die of starvation.

It would be reasonably to add the stock limitation, so that the stock of resources sufficed only for ~5 turns, and the building Depot, which would increase this limit by 1 turn. Capture of a city with Depot would reduce a stock and a limit of resources by 1 turn supply rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rich, I understand you may not like some things, but don't go around saying stuff like it's the common truth when it's not. I don't think resources are an annoyance. I think they make it interesting.

I can state my opinion just as you can. I've been playing Empire games for 20 years and I find resources an annoyance. They're so much of an annoyance for me that they're really a game killer. If you like them, fine. But don't try and fob off your preferences on everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all due respect, that's what you're trying to do.

"Resources are an annoyance", "they need to be optional".

You're trying to force Brit to make the game so you can have your Empire all over again.

All I'm saying is that Brit made a very nice game as it is, let's not make him screw it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off I'm not trying to force Brit to do anything. It's his game and he can do it any way he wants. If I don't like the end result then I don't have to buy it. Simple.

Second, I don't need Empire all over again. I already have it. Empire Deluxe Enhanced from Killer Bee Software is an excellent game and I play it all the time. But I can see a potential here and if it comes to pass then fine.

Now, can you explain how making certain features an option would screw up the game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Developer has to spend a week on rewriting the game so that it can run without stuff he initially took for granted (resources, for instance), then this week is the time the said Developer will not spend on fixing bugs, improving stability, A.I. and so on.

The same about adding a ton of sophisticated features that won't help much anyway.

I have seen a f***load of games that were crashing like mad or had imbecile AI because the devs wanted to add a dozen more gadgets instead of actually making sure the game WORKED.

As I said as well, if Brit can give you the option you want so badly in an hour or two, so be it. DILLIGAFF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your reply makes no sense whatsoever. Adding a check mark to include or not include a benefit would be simple. A week? You're in dreamland.

Tell you what though. I'm going to just keep playing Empire Deluxe Enhanced. You can be king of the fanboys for EoS. Have fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have any idea how hard or easy it is to code what you want? Do you even know anything about coding? Do you know how hard it can be to change a simple program so that it can store numbers with not 52/53, but say 60 bits of significand? The first can be done on doubles, the latter can not. Some functions called in the code may be designed to handle doubles, not larger variable types. And so on.

I don't know how hard it is. Maybe it can just be done with the ruleset editor. Or maybe resources are called in a thousand lines of code and it would take a lot of time to make a workaround.

I'm trying to make you see that what you think is easy and obvious may be a thousand miles from easy from the programmer's point of view.

BUT, if EDE is what you really want to play, I'm not chaining you to this site.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should probably include the "no resources" ruleset mod in the game-setup window. Right now, rulesets allow players to define all the rules for a game, but there's no easy system for tweaking an existing set of rules. A ruleset mod would allow players to tweak an existing set of rules without actually creating a whole new ruleset of their own. I've gotten some other suggestions for ruleset mods - mostly stuff so that the rules correspond to some scenario setup (like changing movement rates, aircraft ranges, etc).

Rulesets mods, by the way, are not currently available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be nice. Other than random games, things like resources, diplomacy, trading make no sense in historical scenarios so it would be helpful if they could be turned off one way or another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Count me in with the preference that this shouldn't be a technology-based game.

I want to go out, build my army, and conquer the world. I don't want to be in a tech race with the other players so that my Dreadnoughts aren't being sunk by jets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Count me in with the preference that this shouldn't be a technology-based game.

I want to go out, build my army, and conquer the world. I don't want to be in a tech race with the other players so that my Dreadnoughts aren't being sunk by jets.

Don't worry, the AI doesn't build air units ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goodaye,

Empire might have sold a truck load of copies but consider the context of when it was sold.

Years ago when it was released it was regarded as a lot more 'Advanced'. It certainly wasn't promoted as 'simple-strategy'.

Times have moved on. Attempting to market a 'simple-strategy' game that carries the flag of past gaming glory is tricky. You're certainly going to appeal to a small vocal minority of players who liked the previous incarnations and appreciate a new version with a facelift and a few extras.

But - and this is my personal opinion only - I'd suggest that deliberately keeping the game 'simple-as-possible' isn't going to be a winning approach if Brit wants to make a dollar out of it.

A better approach - once again my opinion - is to throw some more gaming angles into the mix, whether that is some form of logistics, enhanced combat, whatever, and make them all optional. Each extra optional feature attracts a wider audience and ensures those that like it just the way it is won't be offended.

The argument that more features equals more complexity therefore making the AI correspondingly harder to program is has some weight. However given that the game is - in terms of strategy - relatively simple already and that the AI, from what I've seen so far in the demo, isn't that flash it may be a moot point.

Adding extra features doesn't necessarily have to overburden the AI. You could have a ruleset for logistics that applies to the player, for instance, but is abstracted for the Computer controlled players.

So in summary I'd argue that deliberately keeping the game simple and aiming it predominately at the vocal multiplayer minority isn't going to ensure that it becomes anything other than a fun game for a small number of players.

But hey, I could well be wrong.

Cheers,

Plugger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Count me in with the preference that this shouldn't be a technology-based game.

I want to go out, build my army, and conquer the world. I don't want to be in a tech race with the other players so that my Dreadnoughts aren't being sunk by jets.

Do you know you can just launch the 1940 ruleset, or will be able to make your own ruleset, with no technologies at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do great designers work to make a dollar or do they work to make the best game they can?

I have long felt that the great games are labours of love and designers are no different from artists and authors in what drives them originally. Of course like a lot of initially successful creative types they then become hacks churning out what will keep them and their publisher/agent in comfort.

: )

Brits vision I always imagined, and given the title, was a superior form of Empire. Whether he has lost the purity of vision whilst programming or had too much advice I know not but it does seem to be trying to encompass too much in one bite. I could be wrong on this.

For those who are too young to have played Empire one of the great pluses was that one could keep in ones head your general strategy so play swiftly turn after turn aftr turn. An additional layer would have made that impossible - one would have been reduced to making notes and jotting down plans.

It was assisted by having automated moves for produced units to the front , or to form task groups etc. Incidentally you could name your ships which also helped to keep track of what was going on ... or mislead your human enemies.

The AI was pretty darn good and playing multiple AI was a challenge.

So how does this relate to EoS. Apparent simplicity does not mean game play is simple and layers of additional chrome do not necessarily make a better product as time spent per turn of action would rise quite quickly. Apart possibly for the Ad-men who would extoll the wonders of upgraded tech, many dozens of units etc etc. chrome is not always good.

To turn a moment to CMx1 series which is the greatest work of BF. Their labour of love. I can play a turn very quickly, minute, and see the results; I know of someone who plays each turn and takes up to an hour a time. Investment of time to fun is an important metric for most players - too much complication would skew this badly. Fortunately this game does play swiftly - but this against a simplest AI player.

I am not against deeper layers to the game at all. I am a great fan of resource capture, supply, technological research, exploring etc but to do all that in one game module seems very ambitious if the desire was a improved multi-player Empire or a quickplaying solo game.

And I think the chief PITA is the technology tree going into an unknown future warfare. The best of the bunch for EoS is resources as historically that is what most wars are about. If technology is included the abilty to find new resources and evolve the technology for drilling oil at sea would surely be more important than most.

I am sure you are interested in my game theories ! But to add colour I have been playing boardgames for 40 years and computer games for 20. At one stage I had 200 boardgames and therefore I have had plenty of time to figure out what makes lemons and what makes for classic games. Of course in my opinion. Its nice though when my opinions coincide with others. : )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree - ruleset editor is an awesome feature. Being stuck with the current two rulesets would become quite boring over some time. Not that they're messed up or something. It's just that it would be the same game every time.

Ruleset editor is one of the things that will likely make EoS grand. New rulesets might let you play EoS over and over again, with the feeling that you're playing a different game every time.

edit. diesel, your experience of playing wargames may be reaching out to the pyramids, but times change. *Many* people who played Empire don't play at all anymore, while a vast majority of the current pool of players aren't getting their super-hyped graphics cards for no reason. They would laugh at EoS graphics before they got to know it.

Games move on. You can't make a new game that is not a big step forward from the one it is based upon. EoS has a very basic graphical side. If not for the powerful engine, the ruleset and map editors which allow you to remake the game from its ground up, EoS would never break through. Empire fans would stay with Empire, other people would go glare at the awesome Empire:Total War graphics and learn new ways of exploiting the retarded AI there.

You have to move forward. Brit is moving EoS forward. He can't go anywhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...