Kuniworth Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Any news? Anything at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill101 Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 No news yet, because to get it right there's lots to be done, so it'll be a while before anything gets announced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuniworth Posted January 12, 2012 Author Share Posted January 12, 2012 Ok perhaps 2012 though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I can say this much, this will be the year we work on it full time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabro Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Interesting. This will let you fully revise the engine again and represent battling, supply, etc. even better. Can you share any early macro design concepts with us? Back to hexes perhaps? Stacking? Panzercorps-style movement and combat? Air layers? Large worldwide map? Heh, well, I can wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krista Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 What is the difference between SCWWI&WWII and SC1&2&3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuniworth Posted January 14, 2012 Author Share Posted January 14, 2012 This is excellent news. Official confirmation. Glabro: I have no doubt hexes will the choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acrashb Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Glabro: I have no doubt hexes will the choice.Hexes it is then. Back to realistic movement constraints instead of giant boxes for everything with movement more than 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 I'm just glad to hear there will be an SC3. And Krista, we're not ignoring your question, but the differences you're asking for would fill volumes with explanations. Summarily, SC2 WW1 and WW2 Gold are pretty similar except for the different eras. The differences between SC1 and SC2 are vast, with a thread of similarities. Just grab hold of one of the contemporaries and come along for the ride to SC3. You can't get what you want if you don't participate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 And Glabro, I hope you will continue your quest to pry information out of Mr. Cater, it seems that you are most successful in that endeavor. I've been here a long time, relatively speaking, and the conversation we had in the supply thread with Hubert was unprecedented. For whatever reason Hubert usually displays a nature of confidentiality, I will not question, for I'm sure he has his justifications, but I have noticed of late that his cards are not held so tightly to his vest as in the past. Good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 I'll add one other suggestion. As Bill has stepped forward to assist Hubert in these terrific improvements to the SC engine, he must accept heaps of our accolades, consider a swift pat on the back with the exclamation "Atta Boy", superbly done Bill, thank you. Now, with the toasts of success behind us, perhaps Hubert and Bill might entertain thoughts of adding a third to the team, if the revenues so dictate, cause obviously three heads are better than two if we compare the two to the one from the past, no offense to your artistic talents Hubert. SC3 will be no small accomplishment. Course, then again, three could be a crowd, it just seems appropriate for SC3 (done by 3), (SC2 done by two), (SC1 done by one) ...just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krista Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 I have ww1&ww2&gold, think I saw SC1 many years ago but my english was not good enough back then. It just seems on the cover that SC1&2&3 is basically the same as the others. Therefore I'm asking. I'm reading the forum about six times a week, but my opinions are few. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabro Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Hmm, a good idea, a third member to work on the audiovisual side of the game to give it a unique and appealing graphic design? There's been a lot of new developments in this field that show that even 2d grand strategy can look appealing when done right. This would leave Hubert & Bill in charge of the game design & programming with their full attention... Anyway, let's not try to mess too much with Fury Soft's way of game design! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 It is like you guys are reading our minds or sitting in on our development strategy sessions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acrashb Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 It is like you guys are reading our minds or sitting in on our development strategy sessions You heard it here first: Hubert has confirmed hexes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 You know Hubert, it's not like there's a forum here devoid of talent, ideas and deductive reasoning, not to mention dedication. Liken it to your own personal "think tank". I for one think it would be foolish to ignore the fact that your's and Bill's job could be made easier by accessing that information, all for essentially free. (nothing is ever, totally "free") Thing is, if you want that information, ideas need orientation, which allows for focus and filters the distractions and suppresses some, and I use the term loosely, "some" of the opinions. So you have to throw out a little "crap", then put on the hip boots and wade through the BS. It could be worth it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuniworth Posted January 16, 2012 Author Share Posted January 16, 2012 consider a swift pat on the back with the exclamation "Atta Boy" Mohammed Atta was killed on 9/11 and will thus not be helping out with sc3. Anyway bringing in a graphic designer would be really cool. Much of the game engine and other stuff is already developed over the years, we only lack simple retreat rules(eg retreat in normal terrain if lots of casualties, never retreat while on city hex) and hexes and some more stuff. Though what the game need is something brand new to seperate form the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Kuni, reel in your bait, motor on over to the launch and pull your boat out of the water. You don't want to catch a Great White Shark, especially on MLK day, that would be racially insensative! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabro Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 we only lack simple retreat rules Speak for yourself. I lack realistically punishing supply rules, an air layer, some form of stacking (I hate the "attack, figure out a huge puzzle to move that attacking corps back because friendly troops in the rear lines prevent him from moving back, and thus allowing another corps to take its place and attack, all the while trying to accomplish the same for the entire battleline so you don't accidentally take up someone else's only withdrawing tile"). In fact what I'd probably do with the current system is disallow corner-to-corner attack but have a stacking limit of 3, allowing for the same number of attackers from a direction against a single target, but allow for a realistic concentration of troops against an entire battleline. One corps would always be in the "lead" and be the one enemies would resolve attacks against. Also, I'd want to disallow corner-to-corner movement between two adjacent enemy corners entirely (it's supposed to be a solid battleline). But I suppose hexes would solve this already. What else? Don't get me started....I have great expectations of this series, but what I don't want is for it to turn into something you can't approach relatively easily, like TOAW. But adding rules that mostly resolve themselves automatically or intuitively shouldn't hurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill101 Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I'll add one other suggestion. As Bill has stepped forward to assist Hubert in these terrific improvements to the SC engine, he must accept heaps of our accolades, consider a swift pat on the back with the exclamation "Atta Boy", superbly done Bill, thank you. Thanks SeaMonkey! Course, then again, three could be a crowd, it just seems appropriate for SC3 (done by 3), (SC2 done by two), (SC1 done by one) ...just a thought. I like it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill101 Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I hate the "attack, figure out a huge puzzle to move that attacking corps back because friendly troops in the rear lines prevent him from moving back, and thus allowing another corps to take its place and attack, all the while trying to accomplish the same for the entire battleline so you don't accidentally take up someone else's only withdrawing tile" Wait for 1.04. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Awhile back I made a proposal for "Density of Deployment" for the SC3 engine which allows a variable force structure to occupy a hex/tile. With that premise in mind, there would only need to be a variable attack/defense stance available to the players to execute the action of combat. At the players' discretion they could either micro-manage the sequence of combat or indicate an automatic action to be taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabro Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Hooray, Bill! Maybe we'll have the Panzercorps-style separated movement and and attack possible at different times in the turn. That alone would help a lot! We would be able to use the "shift units" feature and still attack. However, often the rear lines are taken up by artillery, so it's good that other units further back could also move in to attack. But in any case, I'm certainly eagerly waiting for 1.04. A huge load of improvements is sure to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuniworth Posted January 17, 2012 Author Share Posted January 17, 2012 Hooray, Bill! Maybe we'll have the Panzercorps-style separated movement and and attack possible at different times in the turn. That alone would help a lot! We would be able to use the "shift units" feature and still attack. However, often the rear lines are taken up by artillery, so it's good that other units further back could also move in to attack. But in any case, I'm certainly eagerly waiting for 1.04. A huge load of improvements is sure to come. speak for yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabro Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 speak for yourself. Umm, I just did. I certainly didn't speak for anyone but myself. There's no need to be bitter and offensive. Even on the internet, you can read into the tone of the text, and mine wasn't offensive. Plus the context was different, you said "the only thing we need" which is actually speaking for others, whereas I said "we'll have" and "we'd be able to use" which is not speaking for others. But really. Peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts