Since we can't talk on the announcement, who all has seen the creeper world 3 stuff on the blog? (http://knucklecracker.com/blog/) I think it looks really neat, there's a lot of potential. :D I just have one thing to say, though. I hope and pray that we don't get a third lame boss fight for Creeper World 3. That's been my only complaint about the previous Creeper World games. I'll be thrilled if we have more than 20 levels, maybe even multiple bosses. (multiple bosses would be amazing!) But can they be original? And without an ultimate kill all weapon that ruins the entire fight? If we get good, original bosses we can fight with the basic weapons... I will be happy. Who else agrees?
me. That would be really cool if we could have multiple 'branching' story levels, each with a boss at the end. Maybe something like that to earn tech (at the end of every boss fight you would find a tech or something)?
Well, you are going to be in luck with game 3. In cw1 and cw2 I focused on unique game play and compelling strategy. But the story elements and the mission system are pretty "normal" . For game 3 I have a more open and immersive system in mind.
I still plan to tell a story, but it won't be a linear set of missions or levels. As such, there won't really be a final boss. That said, the enemies you encounter will get more and more intense as your journey progresses.
Much of this is still in the planning and very early dev stages, but my intent is to move a giant leap in this direction.
There might be several "encounters" of more dangerous stuff as the Creeper, yes? :)
that sounds AWESOME.
Quote from: virgilw on March 30, 2012, 08:38:28 PM
Well, you are going to be in luck with game 3. In cw1 and cw2 I focused on unique game play and compelling strategy. But the story elements and the mission system are pretty "normal" . For game 3 I have a more open and immersive system in mind.
I still plan to tell a story, but it won't be a linear set of missions or levels. As such, there won't really be a final boss. That said, the enemies you encounter will get more and more intense as your journey progresses.
Much of this is still in the planning and very early dev stages, but my intent is to move a giant leap in this direction.
This makes me happy. Bosses tend to be my favorite part of games... provided that they're fun. I like to be incredibly overmatched by a seemingly invincible enemy, it's just so much fun. :D This is one of my favorite boss fights to date: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_nRutTXNNQ
Just cant wait for another amazing game by the creative and talented Virgil Wall. It looks like it will be eating up a lot of my time. Unity is also a great program.
A creeper world iPad app would be amazing. The app market would be a great place for Knuckle Cracker to expand to. Especially if it became popular, and I have no dought that it would.
Edit: 300 post btw!!!!!!!! W00T! I guess this means I get the official "This is Sparta Award" eh?
This is probably the most exciting thing I've heard all week!
Some initial questions:
1. Will the drones from CW2 make an appearance in this game?
2. Will ore still be needed be needed for anti-creeper production? Will anti-Creeper emitters show up?
3. Will there be repulsor-like units in this game? What about shields?
4. Will there be a hotkey system for selecting user-defined groups of units? Like how most RTS games use Ctrl-# to define a group and # to select that group again?
5. What are those purple-spikey units by what looks like an Odin City equivalent? What about those units with the blue centers and red feet?
More questions to come as I think of them!
Good luck, Virgil. I'm eagerly awaiting any and all news on how development.
Any comment on how it performs on the larger maps?
Quote from: Echo51 on March 31, 2012, 03:46:20 AM
Any comment on how it performs on the larger maps?
Virgil switched to Unity because it is much, much more efficient than AIR and can exploit video cards for rendering. So take it that it is far better than AIR on any size map.
As for details, so much is probably not in the game yet that specific performance numbers will have no bearing on what Virgil may eventually deliver. And we don't know yet how map makers will (ab)use the features of the new game. :)
yeah however it turns out, i'm buying it lol
I hope there's an evermore for cw2 too
Everyday I live to play that 10 min of cw1 evermore but the excitement is too short
Quote from: zcxcasd on March 31, 2012, 02:01:54 PM
yeah however it turns out, i'm buying it lol
I hope there's an evermore for cw2 too
Everyday I live to play that 10 min of cw1 evermore but the excitement is too short
Buy the full games and you can play way more than 10 minutes a day... :)
Quote from: Nemoricus on March 31, 2012, 02:49:14 AM
This is probably the most exciting thing I've heard all week!
Some initial questions:
1. Will the drones from CW2 make an appearance in this game?
2. Will ore still be needed be needed for anti-creeper production? Will anti-Creeper emitters show up?
3. Will there be repulsor-like units in this game? What about shields?
4. Will there be a hotkey system for selecting user-defined groups of units? Like how most RTS games use Ctrl-# to define a group and # to select that group again?
5. What are those purple-spikey units by what looks like an Odin City equivalent? What about those units with the blue centers and red feet?
More questions to come as I think of them!
Good luck, Virgil. I'm eagerly awaiting any and all news on how development.
1: Drones won't exactly being coming back, but I will experiment with discrete units. I also plan to experiment with hybrid units that are between discrete and Creeper based....
2: My plans right now are to eliminate 'ore' and move straight to producing AntiCreeper (or other variants...) directly from the Rigs. This will stream line the process and eliminate the middle man. It does mean that you have to handle the AntiCreeper as it is produced and conduct it to storage tanks via pipelines. But, I think this will be cooler and more interesting. This is one of the potential additions to the game that I'm really excited to play with.
3: I do plan to have field based units. Their exact form (from shield to black holes) is still all experimental.
4: Yes. Along with drag selection, double click selection, and shift-click to add/remove units from groups.
5:Those are Reactors and Collectors in the screen shots. These were two things that worked out really well in CW1, so my plan is to bring them back. You don't see network lines between structures in the screen shots since I've not implemented those parts yet.
Quote from: Nemoricus on March 31, 2012, 02:49:14 AM
4. Will there be a hotkey system for selecting user-defined groups of units? Like how most RTS games use Ctrl-# to define a group and # to select that group again?
You know of course that this is implemented in CW2, right?
Quote from: virgilw on March 31, 2012, 09:13:41 PM
5:Those are Reactors and Collectors in the screen shots. These were two things that worked out really well in CW1, so my plan is to bring them back. You don't see network lines between structures in the screen shots since I've not implemented those parts yet.
Will it be "just" the networks or will it be some sort of a combination? Something along the lines of beacons that allow wireless paths to an extent but cost a bit more than network paths to maintain?
well the network path cost nothing in CW1 but the becons required a steady stream of energy I supose both could be used.
Quote from: weekendgamer on April 01, 2012, 08:32:19 AM
Will it be "just" the networks or will it be some sort of a combination? Something along the lines of beacons that allow wireless paths to an extent but cost a bit more than network paths to maintain?
This is the kind of thing that Virgil may not even have decided yet.
He spent an awful long time porting the creeper flow to Unity and was very happy with the performance, it was orders of magnitude faster than AIR.
Then he spent a bunch of time figuring out how to render terrain. And how to give it some "depth" with light effects and something called "beveling."
MadMag contributed some neat unit designs.
And now that he has those - he wrote the blog to give everyone a little taste of more or less what things will look like.
I just want to say that CW3 looks fantastic and I'm really excited to play it when it comes out. Honestly, I'd be happy with just CW1 on a larger scale, but it looks like there will be so much more to the game too.
You can even see shadows under the flying units! How cool is that?
What's the Kaboom button for?
Quote from: mopa42 on April 01, 2012, 04:08:35 PM
I just want to say that CW3 looks fantastic and I'm really excited to play it when it comes out. Honestly, I'd be happy with just CW1 on a larger scale, but it looks like there will be so much more to the game too.
You can even see shadows under the flying units! How cool is that?
What's the Kaboom button for?
It's probably an insta-win developement button. :P
Quote from: virgilw on March 31, 2012, 09:13:41 PM2: My plans right now are to eliminate 'ore' and move straight to producing AntiCreeper (or other variants...) directly from the Rigs. This will stream line the process and eliminate the middle man. It does mean that you have to handle the AntiCreeper as it is produced and conduct it to storage tanks via pipelines. But, I think this will be cooler and more interesting. This is one of the potential additions to the game that I'm really excited to play with.
4: Yes. Along with drag selection, double click selection, and shift-click to add/remove units from groups.
2. Would these pipelines be incorporated into the regular network? Or would it be a separate one? Either way, seems interesting.
4. Excellent!
And to Karsten75: It seems I missed that particular feature.
Nemoricus: you do ctrl-# and shift-#
Is the unity player required to play the game, or will it be bundled as a stand-alone?
The game will definitely support standalone. It will be a game you can download for Windows or Mac. It will support full screen and windowed modes and you can fiddle with things like screen resolution. I _may_ also make a version that is web playable via the Unity Web player.
In other words, when you get the desktop game you won't know anything at all about unity. It will just be a regular game that installs like any other application.
I like the looks of it, and the bigger maps! thats been one of my gripes for a while now
Web playable would require a login to your site for the full version, and i assume you *might* make a few teasers/demo's for kongregate too?
Yeah, there will definitely be a 'training sim' equivalent for at least kongregate and knucklecracker. My hope is that one or more other popular portal will start accepting unity web player based games (kongregate already does).
I am considering allowing people to store their save games (optionally) online. If so, then having a web based version of the full game could be convenient since you could more easily play it on some other system. In this case there would be online accounts. All of this would be optional, though.
Creeper world 3 sounds amazing :D .
Will there be more multiplayer items, e.g. coop, in which two players both control command centres and setup networks at different parts of the maps and work together against the creeper. Or rival, in which tow players both build networks but they have two enemies the other player and the creeper; thus they could assault the opponent as they would the creeper, could do well since humans have a naturual tendency to fight amungst one another even in the future. And perhaps the more complicated human-controlled creeper vs player-controlled human.
Also i'd love to see more aliens then just the humans and stylk , it's a big galaxy after all ;)
Oh and a proposal you may want to consider
Spoiler
http://knucklecracker.com/forums/index.php?topic=9616.30 (http://knucklecracker.com/forums/index.php?topic=9616.30)
Quote from: Mr.H on April 22, 2012, 11:24:54 PM
Creeper world 3 sounds amazing :D .
Will there be more multiplayer items,
No. Not saying never, because never is a long time, but don't hold your breath (or do, it's yours to hold anyway. :))
Yeah, the multiplayer concepts I am most interested in providing are asynchronous in nature. Things that allow interaction... possibly even working together, but don't require being online at the same time.
Quote from: virgilw on April 23, 2012, 01:43:27 PM
Yeah, the multiplayer concepts I am most interested in providing are asynchronous in nature. Things that allow interaction... possibly even working together, but don't require being online at the same time.
Glad I held my breath *ahhhhh*, since that's still awesome :D
Quote from: lich98 on April 01, 2012, 10:46:39 AMwell the network path cost nothing in CW1 but the becons required a steady stream of energy I supose both could be used.
I would like to see this - in fact, I would like to see maintanence used for all units, perhaps in the form of a resource that is consumed in order to effect repairs, as well as maintain function as in CW2.
Quote from: virgilw on April 20, 2012, 08:42:34 AMI am considering allowing people to store their save games (optionally) online. If so, then having a web based version of the full game could be convenient since you could more easily play it on some other system. In this case there would be online accounts. All of this would be optional, though.
Awesome, awesome, awesome, awesome, awesome. I will love you forever for this, due to my current circumstances.
One thing that would interest me greatly is to see an enemy that also used a network of some sort - one you could link to, utilize against the enemy, (Shared transport links,) and ultimately cut off from the enemy, to utilize as your own.
Quote from: virgilw on April 23, 2012, 01:43:27 PM
Yeah, the multiplayer concepts I am most interested in providing are asynchronous in nature. Things that allow interaction... possibly even working together, but don't require being online at the same time.
You implied on the blog the the concept that a loss might take several rounds to complete . . . and now asynchronous MP? Combined with the idea of cloud-based saves?
I see all the components of asynchronous coop campaign. The campaign could have two orbital ships completing two sets of objectives separately, but their objectives could affect the future of their partner's missions. The cloud saves are there, so one player could access a second player's campaign mission. The asynchronous MP coop is there, so that the game can extrapolate mission parameters out of separately played campaign missions. The development of mission parameters (so I surmise) based on previous missions (Or your partners' previous missions) is (theoretically) there . . .
Or am I barking up the wrong theoretical tree?
*views today's picture* The more I see about this game, the more excited I get about its possibilities.
Some thoughts and questions for Virgil:
1. While the campaign will naturally limit the number of command posts available, will this limit be adjustable in custom maps? I can foresee mapmakers wanting to use more than three, especially ones in the style of the 'Multitask' maps.
2. Will some maps come with 'civilian' command posts? This could allow for scenarios where the player is coming to the rescue of a besieged population, and while they are able to hold off the Creeper for a time, they cannot do so forever. Also, the civilian structures could then come under the command of the player after they are linked to a player-controlled network.
3. How do you feel about different types of command post? Perhaps some models have higher initial energy production, but lower packet production caps or vice versa. Also, what about locking technologies so that they can only be built from certain command posts? A standard command post can't produce packets for that giant cannon, say, but the high-technology one could.
4. 'Network crawlers'. This enemy type uses the player's network connections against them by moving along them like packets, destroying everything that they come in contact with. If players can't destroy the crawler in time, they may have to choose to cut off part of their network to save the rest.
5. When will there be a forum for Creeper World 3? There's no rush on this. I'm just curious.
6. Will Nullifiers be making a return in this game?
More to come when I think of it.
1: Probably... three is an arbitrary number. Though, there still will be a practical limit.
2: Possible... Basically, it would just be a unit that is marked as 'not under your control'. You'd have to perhaps 'capture' these units before you can control them.
3: Maybe. I wouldn't want to create a micro management issue. But I will keep this kind of thing in mind and see if it fits in.
4: Interesting idea. These crawlers would have to be able to hop from unit to unit and cause a delayed destruction of the units (else the pathway would be cut when a unit is destroyed).
5: Soon I think. Certainly by the time it reaches beta. I have to balance my ability to work on the core concepts with ideas and questions that would come from the forum.
6: Yes.
Network crawlers... I love this idea. :D:D:D Now I have a very important question. You aren't planning to add an ultimate kill-all weapon to the last level of cw3, are you?
Who said anything about a last level ? :)
This sounds cool... ^
The thing I'm most looking forward to Is that massive cannon. I want to see waht other epic weapons are in the game. One question, is the Pulse Cannon replacing the blaster?
Right now it is... it serves as the same basic weapon.
Okay, you'll probably sick of me asking questions, but here's my last one hopefully. Will the command nodes be even or odd so it will match the map? In other words, can I make a perfectly symmetrical map without Crazonium or infinite-dig walls?
If I may make a suggestion... is some sort of "tainted land" a possibility. That being land you can't build on, but creeper can flow through?
or land that you can't harvest energy from... maybe because of the shadow of a ship, etc.
or that is unsuitable for anything to be on?
Yes, maybe. I think fields in a top down view will be interesting. I would imagine some kind of visual effect would almost be a requirement If you're going to have fields that can drag creeper between layers. Hmm... I wonder if the top down view will allow for 3d fields? Could be very cool. :D
what is the max level size that the game will support? something like 16x256x256?
i'd personally dislike another "massive anihililation" weapon. In CW1 you build the THOR and the map is won.
in CW2 you built a DB and the map was won.
- I'd love to see a super-weapon, that is very strong, but not unlimited strong. Like A Thor being limited to a firepower of ca 4 blasters, 2 mortars, and being destructable when flying over creeper. Or a dark beam that is like a beam WITH a maximum range, and taking its time to crush through creeper, instead of instaannihilating it all.
- Writing this gave me one more idea, like i've mentioned in the "weak THOR", some kind of flying battlestation. You can put some units on it, mabe you can even upgrade the unit per techonology for more units being able to put on it. Then you can fly it around and the units are able to fire to ANY layer(its flying over it!), and can fire while moving. Flying over creeper will slowly kill the station, when the station is killed all units on it are ALSO killed.
- and maybe the creeper even creates an Anti-Air weapon for themselves, allowing them to fire at our drones or this station, even destroying them.
so, there are some ideas by me. What you think of them?
Quotesome kind of flying battlestation. You can put some units on it, mabe you can even upgrade the unit per techonology for more units being able to put on it. Then you can fly it around and the units are able to fire to ANY layer
Good idea. Just a platform that you can put several units on and then hover over the creeper. (must be attached with a relay)
It should have a realy on it that alows it to move around. I like this idea
Quote from: mpete on May 13, 2012, 02:58:15 AM
what is the max level size that the game will support? something like 16x256x256?
There are currently 10 level of terrain height, but this may change. I may experiment with more but not any less.
CW1 maps were 70x48 (or 3360 cells in surface area)
The largest map in game 3 is currently 210x115 (or 24150 cells in surface area).
So currently game 3 supports maps with over 7 times the surface area of CW1.
Maps can be bigger... there really isn't a technical limit. It all depends on the total surface area and the performance. A map could be 400x50 or 200x100 and produce roughly the same performance results.
I should also mention that Creeper gets updated per frame in game 3 and that I have the coefficients in the fluid equation reduced. This means that the Creeper flow in the game (for normal creeper) isn't as high as it can be. This allows for things like terrain where the Creeper flows 4 or even 8 times faster than on other terrain. Or for fields that accelerate the flow of creeper. All things being experimented with, so we'll see how it works out.
Regarding a flying platform:
I'm about 50% confident that you will be able to save some units across levels and carry them on your orbital ship. This will allow you to drop them in at the start of a mission, or even mid mission. This isn't the same as a flying 'carrier', but was still brought to mind by the suggestion.
There will be a few 'Titan' weapon in the game. One of them you already see on the latest blog post. The 'Bertha' is a big cannon that can shoot really far and does some serious damage. It costs a pretty penny to build and fire, but is tons of fun.
Titan weapons are not all powerful like a Thor. They aren't game enders, just game advancers. So, another Titan weapon might be something like a flying platform that has several Pulse Cannons and a couple Mortar attachments. You could load it up with energy and send it on a run, or the idea of having a built in 'relay' is interesting as well. That would allow for it to hover over Creeper... so long as you defend the front lines. If this is too powerful, then just a hovering unit with a cannon and mortar built in might do the trick.
Quote from: Ebon Heart on May 12, 2012, 04:00:22 PM
If I may make a suggestion... is some sort of "tainted land" a possibility. That being land you can't build on, but creeper can flow through?
perhaps radioactive?
Quote from: virgilw on May 13, 2012, 09:41:29 AM
Maps can be bigger... there really isn't a technical limit. It all depends on the total surface area and the performance. A map could be 400x50 or 200x100 and produce roughly the same performance results.
If I have learned anything approving maps for CW2, it is that for some reason people like to max out the size of the maps they can make. I would certaintly suggest a reasonable map size limit. I would be scared to see what kinds of maps would be made otherwise ;)
I certainly would disaprove of a map size limit. Why not let people make outrageously large maps? I have yet to understand this aversion to 80-height maps, why not let them make whatever size maps they want to?
Perhaps a file upload size limit would suffice, but what's the harm in huge maps? If people have problems with large maps, I would suggest not playing them.
Of course some people will abuse this feature somewhat, but why not let people make 3000x4000 maps? some people could make huge maps, in which there are large stories, and expansive worlds.
If people make bad maps, then few others will play them, and if their goal is for others to play, they will learn quickly.
But, if you want to make a huge map for your own enjoyment, what's the harm, and why a restriction?
Imagine if maps like these:
http://knucklecracker.com/creeperworld2/viewmaps.php?embedded=false&gameVer=&mapid=28
http://knucklecracker.com/creeperworld2/viewmaps.php?embedded=false&gameVer=&mapid=195
http://knucklecracker.com/creeperworld2/viewmaps.php?embedded=false&gameVer=&mapid=218
Just to name a few, were able to be larger and have more expansive gameplay.
Or, what if they were not able to be created, because the size limit was smaller.
Your suggestion follows the logic that:
if people can abuse it, it should not exist.
according to that logic:
because people can get paper-cuts, paper should be illegal.
because people can get stabbed, we can't use knives in the kitchen.
because people could get run over, cars should be banned.
etc.
so why not let people do what they want to?
Virgil i like all that this is comming to be, By the way TP I love your new avatar
Quote from: lich98 on May 13, 2012, 01:13:39 PM
Virgil i like all that this is comming to be, By the way TP I love your new avatar
thanks, lich
Quote from: thepenguin on May 13, 2012, 01:42:32 PM
Quote from: lich98 on May 13, 2012, 01:13:39 PM
Virgil i like all that this is comming to be, By the way TP I love your new avatar
thanks, lich
It is very cool.
There will of course be _some_ limit on the map sizes since entering very large values will eat all of the memory on any existing machine. Now, by 'large values' I mean value that would produce maps with surface areas in the hundreds of thousands or millions.
The primary reason to limit map sizes (in general for any game) is to encourage an ecosystem populated with games that will run happily on average hardware. A year from now there will be thousands of worlds made for game 3 and an average player with an average machine is going to want to be able to play the majority of missions. If even 20% of missions require hardware that's in the top 5%... that becomes a frustration for players and ultimately reflects poorly on the game (not the map makers).
So that's the general philosophy on putting boundaries in place... it isn't so much about limited choice as it is about ensuring accessibility
All that said, maps with 7 or 8 times the surface area of a CW1 map are really large. Pick your 8 favorite CW1 maps and stack them together 4 wide by 2 tall and play them all at once. Throw in new weapons, technology, enemies, cross mission objectives.... and you have an idea of what a large map experience would be like.
... *mouth hangs open but nothing comes out* ... IT sounds AWESOME!!
Quote from: virgilw on May 13, 2012, 03:20:09 PM
There will of course be _some_ limit on the map sizes since entering very large values will eat all of the memory on any existing machine. Now, by 'large values' I mean value that would produce maps with surface areas in the hundreds of thousands or millions.
The primary reason to limit map sizes (in general for any game) is to encourage an ecosystem populated with games that will run happily on average hardware. A year from now there will be thousands of worlds made for game 3 and an average player with an average machine is going to want to be able to play the majority of missions. If even 20% of missions require hardware that's in the top 5%... that becomes a frustration for players and ultimately reflects poorly on the game (not the map makers).
So that's the general philosophy on putting boundaries in place... it isn't so much about limited choice as it is about ensuring accessibility
All that said, maps with 7 or 8 times the surface area of a CW1 map are really large. Pick your 8 favorite CW1 maps and stack them together 4 wide by 2 tall and play them all at once. Throw in new weapons, technology, enemies, cross mission objectives.... and you have an idea of what a large map experience would be like.
Sounds great!
I was thinking if you could possibly combine this with multiplayer (maybe cooperative, or capture the totems?) this would be very fun.
What about a type of gadget that will let you convert a creeper emitter to an anti-creeper emitter? Take it over, or possibly the "bad guy" can do the same, and there could be 3 types of creeper :) The good, the bad, and the.... UGLY! :)
Hmm. Here's a possible idea for a terrain type:
Void - No units may be placed on it, and any Creeper that spreads into it as lost. It could be useful for simulating a very deep trench, or perhaps the space between the pieces of a shattered world.
How about a IPAMM (inter-planet anti-matter missile) base that charges for a while, and when launched the missile strikes into the Creeper and effectively owns the Creeper, but takes forever to make one? or somewhere near forever.
No over powered kill all weapons! No! Just no!
Quote from: Ebon Heart on May 29, 2012, 07:14:23 PM
No over powered kill all weapons! No! Just no!
This does not "kill all," it has the power of a mortar amplified just a few times. This isn't Thor, or the Dark Beam, just a slight advantage. Keep in mind the maps may be larger, and the amounts of creeper may be larger.
this could also be something that made mission ahead easier... say you can't build it 'on-the-surface', but when launched from your ship gives you a temporary respite, maybe so that you could get through those massive creeper waves that supposedly took over planets in cw1 (what you were fleeing from). might be a cool mechanic, a sort of 'race' to get stuff before the creeper comes back from titan emitters.
EDIT: it could also easily be worked into the story. In-fact, i might use it :D
Exactly...
There will likely be an orbital weapon like this for just this purpose. I may also allow the orbital ship to carry a small sqaud of pre built units.
How will all this work with custom maps and fairly keeping score?
the orbital ship and such will probably be determined per-map.
- Planetary orbit obtained. Target designation; Hope. -
- Orbital laser array fully charged and in position; firing. -
- Dropping garrisoned units. Dropping command nodes. -
- Foothold established, procceding with mission. -
How about a temporary connection generator?
If your blasters are in a pool of Creeper, and gets overwhelmed from the rear, you can move a connection generator and keep them connected before they die. Or if there is a wave of Creeper coming from the North and you have to move a blaster quickly but can't without building another collector, then you have a solution. The connection distance could be maybe as long as a collector?
The cost might be somewhere in between a collector and relay.
Hmm....I wonder if this unit is the Nullifier. It's not a Terrap, since there's one right next to it in the second picture from this week's blog, and since it has an ammo bar, it's most likely a weapon. Since it's not visible in any other picture, it seems most likely that it's the nullifier.
(http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/8274/nullifier.jpg)
Two suggestions
1. A flak gun. Fires 10 shots that are scattered around where it aimed. Each pellet will have a small explosion. Fires at the most optimal place in its meduim range.
2. LRMWSSM (Long Rang Multiple Warhead Surface to Surface Missile) A Bertha cannon sized base that fires missiles every 10 seconds. Hits randomly with 5 explosions in a user selected area the size of an unupgraded CW1 mortar's range. Weapon range is the whole map.
Quote from: Nemoricus on June 02, 2012, 10:34:26 PM
Hmm....I wonder if this unit is the Nullifier. It's not a Terrap, since there's one right next to it in the second picture from this week's blog, and since it has an ammo bar, it's most likely a weapon. Since it's not visible in any other picture, it seems most likely that it's the nullifier.
(http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/8274/nullifier.jpg)
That's just a Mortar... but the image was taken right as it was firing. So there is a nearby shell, and there is a smoke ring that is just starting to expand over the Mortar.
Can't wait for CW3. I loved the way cw1 was set out and the concept of CW3. This is going to be cool :D
Ah, that makes sense! No wonder I couldn't find it in any other pictures.
Any chance that we'll get to see the nullifier in action at some point?
we already have, I beleive
Those are Bertha cannon explosions, aren't they?
Nope, that's a picture of emitters being nullified.
Also, I mispoke. What I'd like to see is a picture of the nullifier unit some time.
Still looks great! Im intrested in the creeper pipeline which we haven't heard much about.
If Creeper does become human controlled, here's an idea to make it simple:
Have the creeper work as the human network works (i.e. Odin City are the emmitters, collectors are space covered by Creeper) and you can only lay down collector-like structures, temporary gravity generators, and pushes the Creeper in that direction.
Quote from: Kingo on June 05, 2012, 06:28:34 PM
If Creeper does become human controlled, here's an idea to make it simple:
Have the creeper work as the human network works (i.e. Odin City are the emmitters, collectors are space covered by Creeper) and you can only lay down collector-like structures, temporary gravity generators, and pushes the Creeper in that direction.
We've been able to control creeper ever since creeper world 2. It would be hard to change how it works now...
Quote from: 2b3o4o on June 05, 2012, 08:36:51 PM
Quote from: Kingo on June 05, 2012, 06:28:34 PM
If Creeper does become human controlled, here's an idea to make it simple:
Have the creeper work as the human network works (i.e. Odin City are the emmitters, collectors are space covered by Creeper) and you can only lay down collector-like structures, temporary gravity generators, and pushes the Creeper in that direction.
We've been able to control creeper ever since creeper world 2. It would be hard to change how it works now...
I meant that a player could be the enemy creeper, and in this way could decide how and where the Creeper goes.
If the creeper is so similar to the humans in terms of play-style, there isn't really any point.
oi
i liked the firs boss fight and i haven't seen the second
but your rightish
i mean ive still got a phobia of black holes
tornado
Quote from: Kingo on June 06, 2012, 06:15:27 PM
Quote from: 2b3o4o on June 05, 2012, 08:36:51 PM
Quote from: Kingo on June 05, 2012, 06:28:34 PM
If Creeper does become human controlled, here's an idea to make it simple:
Have the creeper work as the human network works (i.e. Odin City are the emmitters, collectors are space covered by Creeper) and you can only lay down collector-like structures, temporary gravity generators, and pushes the Creeper in that direction.
We've been able to control creeper ever since creeper world 2. It would be hard to change how it works now...
I meant that a player could be the enemy creeper, and in this way could decide how and where the Creeper goes.
Creeper goes to the point that is both lowest and least dense. Beyond that, it passively responds to fields.
Being able to 'play' the creeper side would require new mechanics for how creeper works, since it's generally acted as a passive force of nature in the past, such as a flood.
I would like to see an emitter stealer, like you have to get real close, build something right beside it, and it will cap it off and convert creeper into anti-creeper.
Quote from: Lioncourt on June 29, 2012, 01:13:49 PM
I would like to see an emitter stealer, like you have to get real close, build something right beside it, and it will cap it off and convert creeper into anti-creeper.
hmm intresting idea...
huh, took a look at the screenshots
looks like it's going to be mainly CW 1's gameplay.
I never really got the hang of bridging :(
I wonder how much it's going to cost.........
@Creeper Killer
I`ve tested CW3 a little and I can assure you that you will not need so much talent at bridging :)
The cost is going to be affordable. It is not gonna cost like COD or BF.
I'd like to repeat whats been said a few times before - please no kill all weapon. Maps with the Dark Beam are usually among my least favorite. Especially when you have to use the beam to nullify an emitter. It just adds time to a map that is basically unloseable once the DB is built.
Also a series of maps at the end of the story line that are harder to pass than level19 and 20 in CW2. Those levels were great fun, but not really hard to pass.
As far as I know there won't be any kill-all weapons (like the thor in CW1) in CW3 or a weapon that instantly kills all creeper on a big part of the map. There will be some titan weapons (like the bertha) that do huge damage but also at a huge cost.
i just can't wait to play it in general. I LOVE THESE GAMES!!!
I just saw the 'Creeper World Game 3 Alpha Footage' video. Good grief, I LOVE it!!! I always liked CW1 better than CW2, and I am very happy to see CW3 is going to be more like CW1. The graphics quality, the zooming option, and (hopefully) improved performance.
I'll check whether I can pre-order it now.
Quote from: J on August 06, 2012, 05:04:20 AM
As far as I know there won't be any kill-all weapons (like the thor in CW1) in CW3 or a weapon that instantly kills all creeper on a part of the map. There will be some titan weapons (like the bertha) that do huge damage (limited) but also at a huge cost.
Well, it's early to say. The game has already undergone some revolutions in the single month that alpha videos have been released. (guppies being the most visible example.) I can say that there are likely to be plenty of people who agree with this thought - I also don't like "I win" buttons.
I couldn't find any pre-order info. Can someone point me in the right direction?
There is no preorder at the moment....
I don't in general like to take people's money till the game is ready (or certainly very, very, very close). I might change my mind in the future given the way people raise money on kickstarter. But for game three the plan is to get it ready, then release it. Just hang in there for a few more months...
I'd be so happy if map-makers could make their own custom campaigns that seep into each other(i.e. you open the first map and it chronologicaly goes through them, perhaps even your own galaxy map like in CW1's campaign)
Can't wait :D
Quote from: virgilw on August 11, 2012, 09:58:47 AM
I don't in general like to take people's money till the game is ready (or certainly very, very, very close). I might change my mind in the future given the way people raise money on kickstarter. But for game three the plan is to get it ready, then release it. Just hang in there for a few more months...
From seeing the alpha videos, i'm pretty much prepared to preorder the game right now. Just tell us when you're happy to 'take our money' for it.
I see why you don't want to do it just yet though, as the game's not even finished yet. :)
Quote from: hoodwink on August 13, 2012, 12:45:36 PM
Quote from: virgilw on August 11, 2012, 09:58:47 AM
I don't in general like to take people's money till the game is ready (or certainly very, very, very close). I might change my mind in the future given the way people raise money on kickstarter. But for game three the plan is to get it ready, then release it. Just hang in there for a few more months...
From seeing the alpha videos, i'm pretty much prepared to preorder the game right now. Just tell us when you're happy to 'take our money' for it.
I see why you don't want to do it just yet though, as the game's not even finished yet. :)
To quote Virgil "I'm looking forward to sharing it with the world as well... It's getting pretty fun to play already." So I'd be more then glad to pay for the alpha version alone :P
My progression with CreeperWorld:
1. Played CW 1 as a flash game.
2. Pirated CW 1.
3. Bought CW1 and CW2 when CW2 came out.
4. Want to pre-order CW3.
From pirate to fan in 4 easy steps ;D
Quote from: koker93 on August 05, 2012, 09:44:32 PM
Also a series of maps at the end of the story line that are harder to pass than level19 and 20 in CW2. Those levels were great fun, but not really hard to pass.
You should not really expect super-hard levels in the game itself. It is too frustrating for most game players. Look to custom maps to provide you and other hard-core players with the needed challenges. The in-game levels are meant to be completable and winnable by the majority of purchasers.
Quote from: Grauniad on August 21, 2012, 09:27:34 AM
Quote from: koker93 on August 05, 2012, 09:44:32 PM
Also a series of maps at the end of the story line that are harder to pass than level19 and 20 in CW2. Those levels were great fun, but not really hard to pass.
You should not really expect super-hard levels in the game itself. It is too frustrating for most game players. Look to custom maps to provide you and other hard-core players with the needed challenges. The in-game levels are meant to be completable and winnable by the majority of purchasers.
That's the point, that if the end levels are only beatable to the 'hardcore' players, then all the rest (which is the vast majority) will just fail a few times and get bored of the game. This is getting bored of the game before they do the custom maps or the 'code' missions, which means they don't really play it as much as they easily could.
I'm assuming most people try and play though the main storyline before all the other features, of course.
always play the story first...... its the interesting because of the story xD
I still plan to tell a story, but it won't be a linear set of missions or levels. As such, there won't really be a final boss. That said, the enemies you encounter will get more and more intense as your journey progresses.
Thank goodness for that. my pet hate is being sat there for "hours" just wearing something down that is beaten.
Great games, can't realy split them, but on experience alone much prefer the chronum maps over the code maps
Thanks
BoB
I must say, I'm like iycgtptyarvg ... almost to a T actually...
Was kind of bored today (partly because my system's not exactly in it's best condition right now and can't play high-graphic games), and popped in CW1 ... wiped the save and started fresh from nothing. Had an absolute blast, and just reminded me how much I enjoyed that one.
I wasn't a huge fan of CW2 though, what with the different gravity fields that weren't initially visible. Also, the thought that you had to have a surface to place a structure on, didn't float well with me for some reason...oh well. I DID however, LOVE the anti-creeper strategies and the nullifiers that you had to use to pass the maps and thus secure that area
Thus, the mixture of CW1 and 2 ... into the 3rd version... OMG it's awe inspiring ... wish I could get in on the beta (I keep getting in betas everywhere LOL) but will do with waiting if it's only a couple more months. From what I'm seeing thus far in the blog and stuff, I'd love to pay into it already, even if it doesn't come (but I know you're doing your best to bring it)
Thanks for giving me something to look forward to for the end of the year :)
"The game has already undergone some revolutions in the single month that alpha videos have been released. (guppies being the most visible example.)" (quote by Lurkily)
Yeah, No doubt about that. I think it's because videos are more encouraging to do a good job on important aspects and change what can or must be changed.
As I say in the blog comments, videos are superior to pics, but pics are still good to look at when time is of the essence for everyone making the game.
I have to admit that I am amazed. I knew games in early production were good all the way, but I never felt THIS obsessed for anything to be released as soon as possible and still maintain high game quality at the same time. But in any case, I will wait as long as it takes for CW3 to hit the online shelves so it can be bought for keeps. ;D
Personally I found Shields to be just a little over powered. It just feels like it's portrayed as a little too powerful. In the Marshlands mission I saw that 1 shield in the power zone was able to withstand 3 emitters baring down on it with no support. I understand Power zones are supposed to greatly amplify a Unit strength but It just felt a little too powerful to me. Maybe if the creeper would slowly crawl towards the emitter more after the initial blast. I understand Virgil is using these alpha maps for testing stuff but I just want to make sure especially in later missions that we get a hell of a ride.
Quote from: Chawe800 on September 26, 2012, 07:35:31 PM
Personally I found Shields to be just a little over powered. It just feels like it's portrayed as a little too powerful. In the Marshlands mission I saw that 1 shield in the power zone was able to withstand 3 emitters baring down on it with no support. I understand Power zones are supposed to greatly amplify a Unit strength but It just felt a little too powerful to me. Maybe if the creeper would slowly crawl towards the emitter more after the initial blast. I understand Virgil is using these alpha maps for testing stuff but I just want to make sure especially in later missions that we get a hell of a ride.
As to how powerful a shield can be, how powerful did you think the repulsors in CW2 were? They could hold back a good deal of creeper so why shouldn't the CW3 shield? After all, the shields of CW3 are NOTHING like the CW2 shields. At least now we can build and produce within the shield's protective influence instead of behind it.
I hope virgil takes his time. The longer it takes the more refined it is, the more epic features it has. After realese no real new game features will be added, so it should maximise epicness before that.
Also 4xC use the 'edit post' button please ;)
Quote from: Mr.H on September 27, 2012, 03:21:17 PM
I hope virgil takes his time. The longer it takes the more refined it is, the more epic features it has. After realese no real new game features will be added, so it should maximise epicness before that.
Also 4xC use the 'edit post' button please ;)
To begin with, I agree that time taking in game development makes it more refined, and that is why I said long ago that I will wait as long as it takes to play this one. Second, why do you want me to use post editting? To respond to a particular post, it makes more sense to put the response after the post you are responding to. Or is some error you noticed?
Quote from: 4xC on September 27, 2012, 08:24:33 AM
As to how powerful a shield can be, how powerful did you think the repulsors in CW2 were? They could hold back a good deal of creeper so why shouldn't the CW3 shield? After all, the shields of CW3 are NOTHING like the CW2 shields. At least now we can build and produce within the shield's protective influence instead of behind it.
Yea I guess that Repulsor was pretty powerful but I always felt it was a more cheaper unit that didn't cost as much and use as much energy as the blaster and mortar. Also it kinda felt like the CW2 equivalent of the Drone bomber in the way it causes a small pushback against the creeper. I really just wanna make sure two shields can repel 4 creepers at a small fairly wide choke-point.
watch "The March" on the blog. The shield at its known peak is demonstrated there.
You made a double post at the top of this page 4xc, is what I meant ;) . I wonder if virgil will allow modding, since it is a singleplayer game?
Quote from: Mr.H on September 29, 2012, 12:03:28 PM
You made a double post at the top of this page 4xc, is what I meant ;) . I wonder if virgil will allow modding, since it is a singleplayer game?
I think the lack of modding was not a design choice in the other CW games, but more of a practical limitation. Any aspect in which you permit modding is something that will require dev support to implement, and I think that's a bigger consideration than anything else in whether modding's permitted.
As long as there's some sort of drain on shields that increases with the amount of "pressure" they're receiving from creeper, they ought to scale well. A single shield on it's own at a chokepoint should be overwhelmed eventually, unless you're able to keep it aggressively supplied with energy. Otherwise, I envision "shield crawls" where players simply leapfrog shields forwards towards the enemy and force all the creeper back, terping the ground flat in front of them. In theory, this would result in a massive wall of creeper on the far side of that shield wall, and so (hopefully) force the player to support this with a massive amount of energy.
Totally Shrike. The more you try to do with a shield the more energy it consumes. But then how would power zones work? Would it increase the amount of energy to operate the shield or decrease it?
Even if a shield absorbed the most energy it ever could given whatever circumstances, it would still be overpowered eventually like the CW2 repulsors were no matter how much power they had.
I am definitely looking forward to that overwhelming feeling of a creeper wall rolling towards you and putting up your shields and it is JUST enough to keep the creeper from overtaking you :).
I was assuming the shields would act as a field which would give the creeper a bias in radial angles. Sort of like the "creeper in the wind" video, where the entire map had such a bias in one direction. It could probably work like an electric field emanating from an electric charge, repelling similar charges from it. Putting more energy into it would generate a stronger force by q/r^2, but since distance is cubed the payoff would not be too great and always weaken far out. The shields' fields would have to be strong enough to repel the creeper pressure, otherwise it would push to the equilibrium point where the force is still enough.
I can already see interesting maps where the map's creeper bias is so strong that even using shields would only cause the creeper spread to behave normally :).
Quote from: Shrike30 on September 30, 2012, 04:54:16 AM
As long as there's some sort of drain on shields that increases with the amount of "pressure" they're receiving from creeper, they ought to scale well. A single shield on it's own at a chokepoint should be overwhelmed eventually, unless you're able to keep it aggressively supplied with energy.
This is the case now - too much creeper will overwhelm a shield. Not through energy use, though. It will overwhelm the shield by pushing through the field.
I like this solution, but it's more CPU-intensive as well, which is my only worry - the shield has to account for every bit of creeper within its radius, and overlapping shields, to calculate its energy use.
I'm imagining "shield tunneling" now; a three building wide "tunnel" of structures, with the center being alternating relays and shields, and the sides of these tunnels being lined with blasters or alternating blasters/mortars, terps hopping along the front of the line to make sure it stays paved, and creeper piled hundreds of meters high on either side of the shields. The pressure from the creeper is massive, but since there's another shield every six cells, none of them has too much weight on it. Not exactly energy efficient, but it's kind of an epic image for me.
Quote from: Shrike30 on October 03, 2012, 05:11:42 AM
I'm imagining "shield tunneling" now; a three building wide "tunnel" of structures, with the center being alternating relays and shields, and the sides of these tunnels being lined with blasters or alternating blasters/mortars, terps hopping along the front of the line to make sure it stays paved, and creeper piled hundreds of meters high on either side of the shields. The pressure from the creeper is massive, but since there's another shield every six cells, none of them has too much weight on it. Not exactly energy efficient, but it's kind of an epic image for me.
You'd be able to do it with a "tunnel" a single shield wide. I've done that.
Even with 6 cells inbetween, that still sounds like a lot of energy consumption and by extension, starvation/deficit/debt/whatever-the-term-is-for-CW3. And even though the numbers have yet to be finalized as I understand it, what I don't get is why the shield is so much more substantially expensive compared to everything else than the repulsors were compared to everything else there.
And doesn't the range of the particle beam look a little over-wide compared to its predecessors, the SAM and P. Coil? I know CW3 specifics are not typically deriving from the past 2 games' specifics, but I somehow think there is small, yet seriously significant influence coming from the past 2 games' specifics to the specifics of 3.
And are there any ideas for speed upgrades for units movement, including the flying units' speeds as well?
Currently there are idea's for some upgrades. But there is no upgrade system yet. Currently V is focusing on bugs, performance and experimenting with key futures. I think upgrades are coming soon, but I don't have any idea when.
Quote from: 4xC on October 03, 2012, 10:59:25 AM
Even with 6 cells inbetween, that still sounds like a lot of energy consumption and by extension, starvation/deficit/debt/whatever-the-term-is-for-CW3. And even though the numbers have yet to be finalized as I uderstand it, what I don't get is why the shield is so much more substantially expensive compared to everything else than the repulsors were compared to everything else there.
Well, you could always go shield-generator-relay-generator-repeat, you might need a single extra shield to leapfrog that push, but it'd (hopefully) be self powering at that point :)
Quote from: Shrike30 on October 03, 2012, 05:11:42 AM
I'm imagining "shield tunneling" now; a three building wide "tunnel" of structures, with the center being alternating relays and shields, and the sides of these tunnels being lined with blasters or alternating blasters/mortars, terps hopping along the front of the line to make sure it stays paved, and creeper piled hundreds of meters high on either side of the shields. The pressure from the creeper is massive, but since there's another shield every six cells, none of them has too much weight on it. Not exactly energy efficient, but it's kind of an epic image for me.
Okay, done.
This use would not be invalidated by an increased energy use per creeper affected, though. Just the fact that there's another shield nearby would limit the exertion by individual shields.
Why limit the excursion when overlapping shields would mean extra pushing power?
Because if the force each shield exerts is proportional to the amount of Creeper impinging on it, the presence of a second shield nearby would allow the shields to distribute the load between each other. The net result is only a slightly increased use in energy due to the increased area they are protecting (since you can't one shield on top of another.
But Shrike I don't want a single shield to hold back massive amounts of creeper and rather slowly collapse in on itself (well instead we use terps to created tunnel walls and bomb the creeper with mortars to make the pressure a lot lighter.)
Quote from: Nemoricus on October 04, 2012, 06:57:04 PM
Because if the force each shield exerts is proportional to the amount of Creeper impinging on it, the presence of a second shield nearby would allow the shields to distribute the load between each other. The net result is only a slightly increased use in energy due to the increased area they are protecting (since you can't one shield on top of another.
The shield force exerted on a spot by any number of shields would be proportinal to how many shield circles would cover that 1 spot. The amount of energy used by each shield would be no different as well. So overall, a stronger push requires more shields to cover the same point and the energy used by each shield would always remain the same unless you could manually alter the value of the shield diameter like the CW2 repulsor's beam length and if doing so actually DID require extra energy. But you can't change the size of the shield's AOI courtesy of the PZ. And while one shield GENERATOR cannot be placed on another, the effective areas can overlap.
My response was based on the suggestion that shields should have their force and energy use be proportional to the amount of Creeper they have to repel.
Man, I hadn't even thought of "reinforcing" the tunnel with terps. Slowly start swapping out those shields for mortars with a 10-high wall on either side, sounds brutal :)
Quote from: Shrike30 on October 05, 2012, 12:49:49 AM
Man, I hadn't even thought of "reinforcing" the tunnel with terps. Slowly start swapping out those shields for mortars with a 10-high wall on either side, sounds brutal :)
Better to use the shields to clear creeper so you can build a platform for them to rest on top of.
Either way, terribly wasteful. Easier to just relay through the creep, with a shield and a mortar to protect key relays under threat, until you can get a nullifier in range.
I actually like the idea of shields consuming more, but requesting at the same rate no matter what. Their consumption is close to their resupply at the moment. This means that shields under heavy pressure would eventually fail unless you took the pressure off. (Perhaps with a second shield.) This would also mean failures would be more catastrophic.
It would also be helpful I think, if a shield had to be fully charged to activate - thus a shield that failed wouldn't still hold back creeper as long as it had sufficient intermittent supply.
It's just my opinion and all, but I'd like shield failures to be significant events.
Even if it is incredibly wasteful it might be fun to try it :)
We're aren't here to discuss whether or not strategies will work :-\
I just want the shields to consume an appropriate amount of energy and not end up OP.
Also I feel it would be simple and effective to have 1 shield take up 2.5 energy or something like that.
Maybe a solution would be to have shields stay permanently in place. I feel this would work a lot better since shields might be op in a push. :P
Shields are already very energy-consumptive, particularly because they never stop.
Personally, this is what I'd like to see:
1: Shields increase energy consumption (but not necessarily the force of their push) based on the amount of creeper in their proximity. Overlapping shields distribute the burden between the overlapped area.
2: Shields consumption stays rigid - that is, it's possible for the creeper's pressure to require more energy per second than it is possible to supply.
3: Shields can only be activated at full power.
Due to 1, shields are powerful, we accept them that way.
Due to 2, shields also are prone to failure under high pressure. This can be alleviated by adding more shields. Adding a shield to the same area increases the total request rate of packets to that area's protection, without vastly increasing the area covered by the two shields, which now share the load.
Due to 3, shield failure is catastrophic. When a shield fails, it's useless, and you cannot simply recover by restoring energy supply. You must move in additional units to support the failed front, or lose assets. The shield cannot be used again until it's fully recharged.
Also due to 3, if you use grouped shields to hold back large amounts of creeper, then shield failures are likely to chain. If one shield dies, it increases the stress on the remaining shields, which are more likely to also die in turn. It adds risk to the reward of a powerful unit.
YES YES SO MUCH YES!
That is exactly the stuff I want in CW3 Lurkily.
;D ;D ;D
I Love it!
I worded #2 in a confusing way. Shield's packet request rate remains rigid. Consumption rises with creeper presence, but it requests energy at a rigid rate. That way it's possible for shields to require more energy than can be provided to them - a net loss of energy until they fail.
Sounds good to me. One of my primary concerns about gameplay in general ATM is that shields appear to be *very* powerful in terms of manipulating creeper and forcing those open spots you need in order to place any sort of infrastructure or nullifiers. A scaled energy consumption matched with a fixed energy demand seems like a good way to put a hard limit on the effectiveness of shields.
I really feel we should create a forum vote on whether or not we should nerf the shields and how. I feel the true votes should come from the beta tester who have actually had live play with the shields. Also I want it to be formal and not just a bunch of yes and no answers in a forum like this one
Problem with shields activating when fully charged: repulsors of CW2 always activated when the first packet touches them. And repulsors would have creeper coming in on them at higher densities and still use the same amount of power to hold of what they could. Regardless of how uncomparable the factors are said to be between 2 and 3, it seems there's more of it than anticipated.
Quote from: 4xC on October 10, 2012, 05:13:07 PM
Problem with shields activating when fully charged: repulsors of CW2 always activated when the first packet touches them. And repulsors would have creeper coming in on them at higher densities and still use the same amount of power to hold of what they could. Regardless of how uncomparable the factors are said to be between 2 and 3, it seems there's more of it than anticipated.
It is different than units in past games, true.
Oooo bertha autotargetting. For those who don't want the micro.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS-xPPic_oY&feature=g-all-u
I see that being especially handy on larger maps where your initial base ends up far from the frontlines. Terp them into a parking lot, reconfigure for massive energy production, maybe even take that base off the larger network (to prevent from draining the energy bucket you've got close to your frontline), and set those berthas up where they may have longer travel times to their targets, but they'll have shorter arcs of swing so that they don't "stake a claim" and then have to rotate nearly as far before firing, making their staking more likely to be relevant to the current situation.
Do Berthas have a maximum range? I'm flashing back to Total Annihilation now, where there were guns that had *enormous* range, but some maps that were even larger. While on a midsize map a big gun might be constructed in your fortified base, on a large map you might seize an island in the mid-map somewhere of little tactical importance besides the fact that a Big Bertha (not kidding) built there would have range to an enemy base.
Having Berthas in CW3 have a very long but not unlimited range might make for some interesting tactical variation on maps of the Walloping variety, requiring you to maintain forward firebases rather than simply converting old bases into masses of Berthas and reactors. It could also make for some interesting networking options, where you would deliberately sever an old base from the energy network and then use massed guppies or a cleverly-laid chain of relays to keep that network separate, but provide energy to a forward firebase.
I really interesting option would be the ability in custom maps to choose whether or not air prevention fields prevent bertha shots from going through them. This could limit Bertha use while having it still be effective.
Currently, the Bertha's range is infinite. Although, assuming that the last level in the CW3 story has ANOTHER nexus, I think the area around it should not be truely affectable until more progress has been made elsewhere which means berthas would not be able to make a dent in the area too soon. Maybe there should be a T(and/or O)ET (Titan and/or Orbital Exclusion Tower) to compensate for that. Of sourse, it also depends on the abilities of the Titans and Orbitals that are being hidden until the game is released.
Speaking of secrecy, I was thinking maybe a select group could have access to all units including the secret ones, but be sworn into secrecy at the same time with the punishment of breaking that secrecy being total KC banishment or something. I don't expect that to really happen though considering internet communicators are not always reliable secret-keepers.
What secret units? (Pun not intended.) I don't think there should be any units that aren't attainable to all players, with a little work.
Quote from: lurkily on October 17, 2012, 12:31:17 PM
What secret units? (Pun not intended.) I don't think there should be any units that aren't attainable to all players, with a little work.
I have the impression that 4xC is talking about units that V hasn't disclosed yet, rather than units which are hidden as easter eggs in-game.
I'm pretty sure advice about the game's development progress and balance, using information that isn't yet public, is what the alpha and beta groups are for.
Quote from: Lord_Farin on October 17, 2012, 01:10:48 PM
I have the impression that 4xC is talking about units that V hasn't disclosed yet, rather than units which are hidden as easter eggs in-game.
Quote from: lurkily on October 17, 2012, 06:08:08 PM
I'm pretty sure advice about the game's development progress and balance, using information that isn't yet public, is what the alpha and beta groups are for.
First off, your impression is correct, Lord_Farin.
Second, I think I will have referred to the alpha and beta groups if they were sworn into secrecy of any kind about the units not publicly known.
Argh it's so nerve-wracking to not know these most likely epic units.
I wonder when V will announce some units Alpha or Beta players know about but the public doesn't
Quote from: Chawe800 on October 18, 2012, 06:15:38 PM
Argh it's so nerve-wracking to not know these most likely epic units.
I wonder when V will announce some units Alpha or Beta players know about but the public doesn't
I believe he said in an old CW3 blog comment that some will not be revealed until release.
Quote from: Chawe800 on September 27, 2012, 06:18:47 PM
Yea I guess that Repulsor was pretty powerful but I always felt it was a more cheaper unit that didn't cost as much and use as much energy as the blaster and mortar. Also it kinda felt like the CW2 equivalent of the Drone bomber in the way it causes a small pushback against the creeper. I really just wanna make sure two shields can repel 4 creepers at a small fairly wide choke-point.
I doubt this will be possible, but shouldn't creeper be able to flow
above shields? I mean, if the surrounding creeper becomes high enough so it overflows like with a wall. But I think shield hight is treated as being unlimited for now.
EDIT: restored quotation
There is a quote mark in your post. Who are you quoting?
That was me from awhile ago.
Quote from: Chawe800 on November 05, 2012, 05:43:13 PM
That was me from awhile ago.
Yeah it was. As you can see, I just recently discovered this forum, but wanted to add my thoughts to the shield discussion.
As to the shields, you would think they would flow above them. maybe thin layers on top would if gravity manipulation continued to be a benefactor for the creeper and thin waves poured down on shields only to slide off. If they don't, it's a small flaw in logical physics.
Shields aren't forcefields in the conventional sci sense. They're concentric rings of force, like repulsors are linear arrangements of force. By building up a sufficient head of pressure, Creeper pushes through fields, but it cannot go over them.
Well that explains why CW3 is less 3D than its graphic definition makes it seem.
Even CW1 is essentially a 2D game, with some tricks used to make it seem as though it were truly 3D. For example, units don't actually move up and down, but rather are increased in size and moved up the Y axis to make it look like they were moving along the Z axis.
For that matter, all games are 2D doing clever things to look 3D. It's just the nature of the display they have to work with.
Quote from: Ronini on November 05, 2012, 06:33:01 AM
Quote from: Chawe800 on September 27, 2012, 06:18:47 PM
Yea I guess that Repulsor was pretty powerful but I always felt it was a more cheaper unit that didn't cost as much and use as much energy as the blaster and mortar. Also it kinda felt like the CW2 equivalent of the Drone bomber in the way it causes a small pushback against the creeper. I really just wanna make sure two shields can repel 4 creepers at a small fairly wide choke-point.
I doubt this will be possible, but shouldn't creeper be able to flow above shields? I mean, if the surrounding creeper becomes high enough so it overflows like with a wall. But I think shield hight is treated as being unlimited for now.
EDIT: restored quotation
V Addressed this on the blog post - apparently he'd already experimented with it, from the sound of things. It's too difficult to show flow of creeper above units, and clearly convey that these units aren't actually in danger.
I think it's better for gameplay's sake not to get TOO 3-D in our thinking on this one.
I agree. I still would like to see/perform a test that puts a shield at the bottom ofa deep gorge with creeper on top of the walls. I try to show what I mean with this crude graphic:
Ground lvl: 666919666
CCC] [CCC
CCC] [CCC
CCC]s[CCC
CCC] [CCC
CCC] [CCC
or something similar that. s being the shield, C creeper and ] and [ walls.
Will the shield push the creeper backwards through the wall, just out of the gorge, or will it be overwhelmed and buried once creeper overflows the walls and into the gorge. Either way would be fine with me. I simply like speculating about this kind of stuff. (But not so much that I don't want to know the answer..)
With mechanics as they are now? I expect creeper will bulge away from the gorge near the shield, and pour into the gorge at either end. With pressure (depth) greater in the gorge, it'll probably force itself closer to the shield in the gorge than it will on the plateau.
As for pushing creeper up a terrain level? As it compresses (makes deeper) creeper against a cliffside, I expect the creeper will flood out. Whether there is a point at which it will force ALL creeeper out, I couldn't say, but evaporation would take care of scraps.