In my paraller universe Im still the first one to comment. Its says the creepers home universe.
Its not so nice in here. Creeper has launched eternal attack trying to overcome my defences from very small area.
KharnelliusNovember 19, 2012 at 2:43 pm | Permalink
The whole idea of digitalis and the runners just seem odd. What purpose do they serve the enemy?
Currently, none of it seems to really be a threat, beyond the minor annoyance of slowing you down.
The bigger runners need to fire more often and disable something for a longer period of time
Perhaps require packets to restore the stunned structures? This way it can be a real problem if you get cut off and have low energy and it slows your energy economy some. Give all of this some teeth, and a purpose (explained in story I suppose). 😉
Exactly: they can deactivate all of your frontline weapons and leave you vunerable to the purple goo that either crushes or dissolves them, I’m not sure which.
Are you saying that snipers are not frontline weapons? They would have to not be because they kept shooting even when they were shot by runner stunners. 🙂 (rhyme moment)
DestinyAtlantis(The Lord of Darkness)November 19, 2012 at 3:26 pm | Permalink
The runners already remove all your weapon packets, so it does hurt if your economy is low.
Also if it hits an almost charged bertha/bombers/strafers/anything with a high red energy capacity, it owuld be really bad when low on economy.
KharnelliusNovember 19, 2012 at 5:38 pm | Permalink
Do you honestly believe these guys will ever get to those? It’s so easy to stop them and they have to stay on this predetermined path. Would be cool of digitalis was a subterranean pipe network that could pop up in the middle of your base.
There could be a radar/seismometer that detects when it is coming up through the ground (and reveal the entire network within range) so you could place some blasters to push back the attack and reseal the newly made hole. Eventually you have to take out the source to stop the attacks. He could even work in that the bombers could still attack it by making their bombs ground penetrating to help cut off networks.
I guess, I am just having a hard time figuring out how this really changes the battle. You’re still fighting a one front war that you can only lose by being very reckless with your attacks.
Crazycolorz5November 19, 2012 at 5:16 pm | Permalink
Point taken into account. Stunned Snipers apparently keep their energy for ammo when stunned and keep shotting. All stunners from runners (no pun intended) do now is create forced disconnections that do not stop usage of energy.
If you absolutely ‘have’ to have a Bertha in the frontlines pile up a few snipers near it, they shouldn’t get close. Same thing with bombers and strafers.
Kurt WerleNovember 19, 2012 at 2:52 pm | Permalink
The snipers look cool, but they seem to totally nullify the runners. Other than taking up space, there seems like no drawback. Looks like you just build a bunch and move them along with all your anti-creeper units and that’s an end to it.
Just like Particle Beams nullify Spores. And the drawback of snipers is that it only harms runners.
I always knew CW3 needed a new special case weapon other than the particle beam and the Sniper is the current answer. Although, I would prefer if they were called “Rail Guns”.
No. Not rail guns. The ones the U.S. Navy is experimenting with need rail replacements every four or five shots. Now coilguns, on the other hand… Gauss Rifle is also a good name, even though it technically isn’t.
How would testing of a weapon now affect a race that isnt even human? I personally would like the name to be “rail gun” if they are kept which is unlikely, at least kept in their current state that is, and in about 10k years wouldnt we have some better alloys and and weapon designs along with anything else that could affect weapon tech.
DestinyAtlantisNovember 22, 2012 at 11:52 am | Permalink
In 10-100 years we will have better alloys/materials(carbon fibers), because currently they are only a few mm long, so when they can be more mass-produced and longer, we will be able to create really strong things.
Also the space elevator needs something that can survive a lot of stress(due to the massive distance+atmospheric difference(probably) and what not, and for now only pure carbon fibers(nanotubes) can do that, and by pure i mean single long lines, and not multiple short ones put together, but for a lot of other things, non-pure carbon fibers will be able to do a lot, like armor(or armor coating/thin layer/whatever it is), and probably for rail guns too.
This seems like it could make an excellent ‘tutorial’ map for introducing the sniper. It’s quite safe and if you only allowed sniper offensive units, then I imagine it would work out quite nicely. Perhaps a kind of ‘simulator’ map made to teach new commanders the effect of their available units since it doesn’t make much sense for any kind of creeper to be so passive.
CheeesesodaNovember 19, 2012 at 4:12 pm | Permalink
The snipers seems fine, I’m just not sure about multiple specialized defense unit. Beams for flyers, snipers for runners. have you considered a multi purpose defense unit for them? Whatever you choose I’m looking forward to the game.
That’s an interesting concept. It sounds like for that to work, PB’s would be able to shoot constantly at either spores or runners. Or even (like p. coils in CW2) both or 2 at once.
At least there is now more than one special case weapon other than the PB.
I found the digitalis/runner combo to be a great new feature for CW3. They add some teeth to the enemy, by giving the creeper some sort of “trenches” that can effectively hold you back for a long time – or even spread into your base, giving you all sort of FUN.
The sniper seems way too powerful as it is now, effectively rendering runners an impotent threat. The idea of the sniper is great however, don’t get me wrong. There should be some specialized weapon against runners.
But the sniper at this time seems too cheap to build/maintain –> Easy to mass build them.
Having a weapon that effectively renders runners useless should come with a major drawback in my opinion, here some suggestions for the drawback:
– Cannot move (static weapon)
– Prerequisites to operate (needs to be adjacent to, say, a reactor to operate)
(OR —> Can only be loaded by adjacent reactors, cannot process packets)
– Huge initial cost (somewhere between nullifier/titans?)
– Very expensive to maintain (huge energy usage on shots)
– Exotic maintenance (could shoot concentrated anticreeper shells, making it require processed ore to operate – maybe along with energy?).
– Huge building (5×5 size for example, making it clunky, which is a drawback in itself).
– Losing energy (weapon loses energy, making it a draw on the economy even when it doesn’t operate – it’s a prototype weapon after all, quickly assembled after we met the runners for the first time^^).
These are some possible drawbacks you could add to this weapon, which seems, to me, very powerful. Would one rather have a major drawback on the economy to fight off runners? Or maybe just do it the old fashioned way? Make it a hard choice, would be what I suggest.
Hope you consider adding at least one drawback to it! (static being my favorite, actually).
Besides that, the game is looking great. You make the wait even harder by showing us how amazing it will be 🙂
Crazycolorz5November 19, 2012 at 5:13 pm | Permalink
I really hate static structures. Reactor loading sound interesting, until you consider that it wouldn’t get very much energy per time… It already costs a bit(in between nullifier and titans, as you said)… It is… somewhat expensive to maintain. I don’t think any structure takes in more than 1 type of packet though… Personally I like the losing energy idea.
fractalmanNovember 21, 2012 at 12:23 am | Permalink
Incidentially, it’s hard to get it to happen, but if a building packet goes into a finished blaster, it will be received as if it were a weapon packet.
at least as of creeper world 1.
I think a few of those ideas are a bit overkill and would render the snipers useless, like the 5X5 thing, not even a Bertha is that ridiculous. It being a static weapon would mean you would have to put it deep into enemy lines in order to operate in any way but sucky, but that’s near-to-impossible because of the creeper. Instead of massive energy usage, I think they should have less potency with attacks.
I like the idea of draining energy even when not in use. That way they must be positioned in specific situations on the front line. It would act to put a cap on the number you would want in use. Or there could be an actual limit, say 5 per map. It could be because they are built using some special material for the “weapon core” of which you only have a limited supply.
Hows this for a draw back, say for each drop ship you get a set number of “snipers” to use. That way in a large map with lots of runner nests you have to think of how you use the “snipers” instead of just building a lot of them. something like 3-5 per drop ship.
Another thought is slowing down the speed of which the “snipers” can shoot slightly would make multiple fast runners or even just 2-3 large runners a slightly bigger threat.
Finaly if you make the “snipers” line-to-sight weapons like blasters you could make the runners come from or even behind higher terrain. This would effectively make the range of the “snipers” useless untill placed in a strategic location. and sence the degitalis moves diffrently from normal creeper it could simply climb terrain faster then creeper putting the runners in front of the creeper mass makeing them the first things you have to deal with.
They’re a great idea, but I think the range, price, and energy usage should be increased a little bit (about 110%, 100 packets, and 1.5x to 2x Mortar, respectively), the health made very low (not quite Phantom Coil, Dark Beam, or SAM low, but Dark Mirror or Repulsor low), and the damage decreased so the biggest runners take five shots on their default settings (Unless they do already? It was hard to tell.). Personally though, I am totally open to the idea of specialized weapons for a specific enemy unit. Others will certainly disagree, but I think it they give the game more depth. Do you want to build a specialized weapon to get rid of the Runners and pray the Creeper doesn’t get too high until you build up your economy, or do you build a few jacks of all trades? Finally, so my OCD doesn’t make me go crazy, please please please add an eighth thing under the structures tab.
I too hope that there will be an eigth unit under structures so that it is eaven with the weapons.
And I would say that the second-to-smallest runners do not need 1 shot to kill like the smallest ones do.
As to what the eight structure unit should be, I say it needs to be a researching building that produces technytes or tech point and make each building vary on what kind to make depending on the category of what to spend them on
In CW2, I thought it was nerfed when tech domes make technytes for anything to benefit from depending on whatever choice you made despite the different categories under the tech upgrade menu.
*facepalm*
I cannot believe myself. I build tech domes on almost all maps that have them available. Then I destroy them and replace them with reactors once I get the necessary technytes (up to 682, sometimes only around 450 or 500) and upgrades. And I forgot all about them. Thanks for reminding me they exist, good sir!
Not really sure what you’re trying to say here. Do you mean you like the older system in CW1 where you could only ever get as many upgrades as were on the map, or do you mean the upgrades got too specific, or is it something else entirely?
I mean that in CW2, the technytes could be spent on ANYTHING. All the while, tech domes were researching for all categories of your choice and I would like it if technytes varied on types of upgradeables. There is the structure, weapon, efficiency, and economy category
I would like a certain kind of research to be conducted that did not provide too much time to let you make your upgrade choice. I also do not want to no longer nee tech domes after upgrades are made.
That depends on if you want to wait another year for the AI to be coded for something that compicated, I think.
Crazycolorz5November 25, 2012 at 10:59 am | Permalink
Doesn’t seem too complicated…
1) Every certain amount of time
2) choose a random runner
3) About half of all other runner gather to that one runner
4) After they’ve all gathered, they all aim for the weapon in range that is farthest from other weapons(ie, an isolated weapon).
thephysicsgamerDecember 1, 2012 at 8:01 pm | Permalink
I think that system would be very flaud, as an isolated weapon could be one that is on a PZ, or the runner it picks would die and it would have to wait a while again, and it would have to count the individual runners, and it would have to take into account that other runners could very well be spawned in the process of choosing the runner, and if two are constantly being created at the same time the cycle would never cease.
Sounds like a recipe for runner slaughter. Most runners would take the same path and overlap, making AoE weapons like mortars and PC’s hyper-effective.
I typed a different comment, but by the end I realized what it was I was trying to say and decided I’d just come right out and say that instead. With the inclusion of the Sniper unit, Runners are to CW3 what Spores were to CW1 and Phantoms were to CW2.
What do I mean by that? I mean that they no longer pose a challenge, but become a nuisance to swat away. The Sniper unit is such a focused counter to the Runner that it becomes pointless to use any other defense. With that shift, they are immediately downgraded from an interesting new enemy that requires strategy to overcome and instead become simply a drain on your economy when properly contained and hold no threat of danger (except in massive, massive numbers). In fact they’re weaker than Spores and Phantoms, because they can’t escape the boundaries of the Digitalis.
I guess what I want to say is: Spores bored me. I typically opt not to play a map that uses Spores because they’re irritating, and not in a good way. Please don’t make Runners into Spores v3.0.
You are correct, but only to a certain extent. Remember that your primary defence is going to be Pulse Cannons, since those kill all three enemies (Runners, Creeper, and Digitalis). If anything, they’ll be Drones 2.0. Yes, you do have the sniper, but it costs nearly 4 times as much as a Pulse Cannon and sucks up energy AND is only usable against one threat. So sure, you’ll be decently to well defended late game, but you won’t be able to afford it early game. I am currently neither for nor opposed to the Sniper unit, but I find no reason to reject anything until we can see how they fare.
Also, I forgot to mention, Phantom Coils cost 5 packets and SAMs 20. 1/18 and 2/9 the price of the Sniper, respectively. That doesn’t take energy usage into account either. Remember that SAMs also killed any Spore in one hit and Phantom Coils needed a medium-ish stream of energy.
5 per coil? I though it was 10. And as to energy usage, 1 SAM equals 2 spores without reloading it and 1 coil should be about 4 without reload if you count the fact that they can harm up to 2 phantoms at once.
ShadowDragon7015November 21, 2012 at 10:42 pm | Permalink
Crazycolorz5November 25, 2012 at 11:02 am | Permalink
But really, the range of Pulse Cannons is pretty terrible compared to the snipers, and the effect is multiplied here since the runners will be able to stun the pulse cannons but not the snipers due to their larger range and putting them a bit more back.
Crazycolorz5November 19, 2012 at 5:03 pm | Permalink
If you’re going to take out snipers, how about making the beams capable of aiming at runners, but it takes a TON of energy for them to do and they don’t do too much damage? Because I feel that the pulse cannons are too short range to be very good vs. runners, and mortars are too slow.
Crazycolorz5November 19, 2012 at 5:10 pm | Permalink
PS. This also verifies that Digitalis doesn’t have to originate at an emitter.(Maybe just from any enemy structure?)
I’m not seeing it. I think you are mistaking withering for being shot. I don’t see any digitalis killing itself anywhere near 11:30 in that video. Perhaps you could be more specific as to where you see it occurring? All I see is strafers blasting it away, a little chunk even sits there for a few seconds all on its own before getting blasted away, no decay occurred.
Crazycolorz5November 19, 2012 at 5:39 pm | Permalink
Another note: The creeper payload that came from killing runners also appears to be gone. Or is it possible to set that in the map editor and it was just set to 0 here?
battlealexNovember 20, 2012 at 2:05 pm | Permalink
or maybe the snipers don’t let the runners drop the payload?
since packets naturally go slower without using relays, they do use up energy fast, and faster if they are further away from CNs like everything else. and because their fire is constant, they use it up faster than usual that way.
Just like CW2’s anti-phantom defenses, they fire faster than they reload.
Lots of spore towers are fine. You just need so many beams that they store the firepower needed to shoot them down, and/or that they request so many packets, among the many beam towers, they even when they run dry they can collectively shoot down spores.
I only found out about your games a couple of hours ago, but WOW. Creeper World looks simple, and it took me no time to get the idea, and yet there’s so much cool stuff going on.
Well done, sir! I’m inspired. I’ll be getting 1&2 first thing tomorrow. 😀 (Even though I have far too many games already…)
Just like the very old board game “Othello”. It takes a short time to learn, but mastery of it takes forever.
Blue DwarfNovember 19, 2012 at 5:31 pm | Permalink
The thing about this map that makes snipers look so godly: The runners aren’t spilling creeper when they explode.
A healthy number of runners can still screw you over if you’ve only got Snipers watching out for them, because as we have seen snipers don’t target creeper or digitalis. I easily could see snipers balancing out as a part of your army.
Another theory might be that the snipers just fry any creeper inside the runners, and if that is the case then yes I will agree that they are OP.
I don’t like the snipers at all. The digitalis is at its best when it can bring the creeper to your base across empty space (where you cannot defend). The runners are hugely annoying (in a good way) when you try to nullify their nest. It really can become a back and forth war (as evidenced by the previous video where the runners kept stunning your nullifier).
The snipers take that challenge away. Now it just becomes a simple case of building some snipers. The runners are degraded to just a nuisance (in a bad way).
If you nerf snipers, they become useless, or secondary to PC’s.
They must be suited to their role to have any use. But if PC’s can hold off runners in any way, (for instance, with range upgrades, they can do this by holding off digitalis,) they are useless at the same time that they are overpowered.
I think they already are useless. PC’s control digitalis, and thus control runners – with a range upgrade or two, you should never have need of a sniper unit.
The thing about this map that makes snipers look so godly: The runners aren’t spilling creeper when they explode.
A healthy number of runners can still screw you over if you’ve only got Snipers watching out for them, because as we have seen snipers don’t target creeper or digitalis. I easily could see snipers balancing out as a part of your army.Another theory might be that the snipers just fry any creeper inside the runners, and if that is the case then yes I will agree that they are OP.
heres an idea: if the runner wasnt insta-killed, in which case it would release a flood of creeper as previously shown, but if one shot hits it, it starts leaking creeper. lower the HP, more creeper leaking out. this would be what the runners made of, ?cytoplasm? in which the cargo is held. on death, release same amount of creeper as a one-shot. this is the payload, undamaged until total destruction.
needs to tone down the sniper RoF or damage- big ones seem to die in 3 hits.
most sniper units in other games trade that high damage for a very low RoF and ammocount. that should apply here.
we have tiny small medium and large, so they could need 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 hits to kill, respectively.
another thing to note people, is he had a massive energy grid to support those few units. now add in the same number of bombers, strafers, cannons, mortars, a few shields,etc. much larger demand when the grid is stressed.
I must say I am somewhat surprised that nests leave PZ’s behind. Now only AETs do not.
If anything, Snipers make excellent other special case weapons. I repeat, I always knew CW3 needed more special weapons and enemies other than Spores and Particle Beams. But they could use some weakness. IT reminds me of the fact that a single Phantom Coil in CW2 could harm up to 2 Phantoms at once.
I would hope that there will be as many structures for players as weapons. Maybe you should add a research laboratory building that researches technytes with functions that vary depending on what kind you want them to be.
In CW2, Tech Domes were not varied by the categories in the upgrade menu. It would be more interesting if they were in CW3.
I have to ask, what important purpose does it serve to keep playing a world after it is secured? I like being able to do that, but I don’t see why it would be possible if it did not do anything important.
Here’s another thought. What if runner nests were not supporting that digitalis, as I first speculated, but very-low-output emitters hidden behind them?
Honestly . . . I am agreeing with Virgil’s reticence. Some players cry useless, others cry overpowered . . . I’m seeing both at the same time, in the same unit.
yes, look forward to the addition of something that high range and can penetrate the creeper at mass layers with some kind of explosive shell, wait a minute, dont we already have that?
Just like Particle Beams nullify Spores. And the drawback of snipers is that it only harms runners.
I always knew CW3 needed a new special case weapon other than the particle beam and the Sniper is the current answer. Although, I would prefer if they were called “Rail Guns”.
Wow…that said alot of what I was thinking 🙂 Also, I was thinking, RAISE the snipers damage, and dramaticly raise the runners health. This way, other units would be more challeenged, and thus, the snipers potential is born. I agree the name should be changed, and add a real sniper unit in 😉 I cannot get over the new range of the relay/collectors now! It is amazingly perfect!
Heres another thought: What if you surrounded a weapon(normal, not titan) with reactors, and you colud combine the reactoors into the weapon, so that way it does not need any more ammo packets, it got unlimited ammo and you could send it to the front line and even disconnect it from your network!
I like the new concept and all, but SOMETHING unique should be put into play. I noticed that if you made one cannon to defend the PZ from digitalis, you could have put a sniper on it, but the way the sniper would be then, it would half to be called an over powered zone 😉
I would have thought you would have eventually put a relay at the top to connect it to your network..Your packets went in a big ‘U’ type formation
Finally- I personally think reactors are too OP..Everyone, Go back to the beginning of the vid and look at how little reactors he had and compare that with how much ammo he was producing to the snipers when they were first made.
for the combining units with reactors thing, I think it should produce enough power to supply itself, but not be able to produce packets, thats the command nodes job
Looks like they have enough ammo for a few shots before running dry. That may be the balancing solution. In this map you could have built 20-30 snipers. Dropped them all over the map and killed everything in one huge wave. And as long as you had 2 on the bottom nest and 4-5 on the top one you probably could have built relays after the initial slaughter and never lost the upper hand. Maybe a good way to balance the sniper out would be to only give it an ammo tank good for one or two shots.
Balancing the sniper sounds like balancing the CW2 phantom coils because not only does it harm 2 at once per single coil, but its fires constantly.
TelapoopyNovember 20, 2012 at 12:43 am | Permalink
The only way we can really tell if the snipers are overpowered is when you combine multiple elements of this game. The creeper was no threat on this map, so you could spam snipers. When you have to battle against other kinds of enemies, things may have to be done differently. The sniper, using lots of energy, would only be useful when you are trying to take out a nest. Seeing the map NACDAR, it was a pain to take out the nests because the pulse cannons couldn’t take them out fast enough before stunning the nullifier, even when spawn camping. The sniper is the solution to that issue, as it can take out a runner a lot faster. In fact, I think that was the only reason he came up with the sniper. But every now and then, the runner does get a chance to shoot when it spawns, I guess there are 2 things he can do: make it so that the runner can’t shoot within the first half second or so, or remove the sniper and increase the time that the runner can’t shoot prior to spawning to maybe a second or two
I, like Lurkily in the comment above, see both the overpowered side of the snipers, namely that they render the runners as only a nuisance unless in large numbers, and the under-powered side of them: they can’t do anything else. I think something that might fix this is the ability to upgrade pulse cannons into a type of “sniper class”. This would probably involve there being some different “tech trees” for each weapon; maybe one focusing more on range, whereas another tree could focus on RoF, or “damage”. In this way, a weapon could narrow down their effectiveness against a certain type of enemy (runners, digitalis, spores, regular creeper, …) without completely giving up their ability to harm other types of enemies. This would also serve as a way to moderate the weaknesses of a given weapon, and also might give incentive to not squander units (CW1’s mortar suicide bombing run).
I would think in this case that PCs could have a “fire at runners only” option that gives them a little extra range in the process since runners and PCs seem to be dead even in range as it is.
And as for tech trees, I really think that if there turns out to be a building that researches upgrades, it needs to handle one of several different categories at a time unlike CW2 tech domes.
I was actually thinking more Structure specific. more like every pulse cannon, or mortar, or what have you, could be upgraded slightly differently. for example, one could focus more on range (the “sniper” tech tree), and a different one could focus on RoF. but again: not universal upgrades, but ones focused on each and every building on the map individually. this could also apply to collectors/reactors and other economic buildings.
This conclusion was not reached quickly, so I should point out that most of the effort exerted in reaching it (including the ‘AHA!’ moment) is not mine.
it’s sure look overpowered here as the map is extra easy : nearly no creepers, no spore, and a huge area safe from digitalis and runner to have lots of spare energy!
It may need some readjustment, but I think It’s a good idea to have some “hard-counter” against the runner for harder map where the digitalis could spread in ours base easily
Here’s a trade-off that would in a way nurf them but make the unit still valuable… Have the sniper stun the runners.
On their own they can be over run if the fire rate is too low, but it provides cover for the other units to take them out, or have the runners disarmed temporally, but still able to move.
Story TimeNovember 20, 2012 at 6:56 am | Permalink
Hm. What to say…
I noticed the nice explosion animation from a destroyed Runner. Perhaps that animation is part of the Sniper shot. I noticed, again, that neat Can-Not-Build-Here sound effect.
It was nice to see that Nests leave behind a Power Zone.
Please also allow me to take a moment and compliment the nice diagonal / turn motion of the Runners. This makes them seem much more organic and fluid. A pleasant sight.
As for the Sniper turret itself… I see it as a tool of necessity. A world dominated by Air Exclusion Towers, Digitalis, and many Runners would make a nearly impossible fortress with-out a Sniper-like turret available. I also see it as a tool of necessity should any worlds be designed with Digitalis capable of growing into the base area where the Command Nodes land.
…and yet the Sniper Tower does not give the Player what they need: the ability to detect where the Digitalis could grow. A subterranean radar so-to-speak. Perhaps the Sniper could perform this function? Another tower? What-ever the final choice I have little doubt that it will make a good game experience.
Perhaps the Sniper could better fit as a Titan level turret. At any rate, please do not take offense. I see what the Sniper is meant to do: Allow the Player a ground-exclusive method of defending against Runners. But I am sorry to say that I do not know if they are the right choice either.
Thank you for the video, Virgil. It was once again interesting.
ninja awsomeNovember 20, 2012 at 1:15 pm | Permalink
Hey I just realised that runners don’t
Relece creeper payload anymore :/. I liked that idea of creeper comeing out of it
Well maybe it is set up so that each can have either a certain payload or none at all like in the CW2 editor for drones. Recall that the campaign drones had no payloads at all.
The digitalis doesn’t seem like it does much. What might be interesting, is to see it work similarly to the fields in CW2, but without being static or on a timer- What I mean is, give it an AI. Make it so that when you get close to digitalis, it will siphon the creeper around, maybe even “squeeze” creeper out at you.
Personally I like the digitalis because I can imagine what would happen if a map had digitalis that grew at much faster than normal rate (as in spread across a large size map in a minute kind of speed), had more health, and regened faster.. It would be evil yet oh so fun for people like me that enjoy being pushed (take many of the maps from the “Super Hostile” map series for minecraft.. it is a whole new game and when a strategy game stresses my limits players like me enjoy it)
As for the storyline the creeper is an organism it will develope new strains to help defend itself. Maybe the digitalis and runners were even a race that is being morphed to the loki’s will and has adapted to become part of the creeper (Starcraft players are familiar with these kind of shennanigans). The digitalis may not be an immediate threat but what if there was a world where you had to save this games version of survival pods (assuming they will be added in ofc) that are on the high ground far away from the creeper? The digitalis would not be slowed in the least.
Now time for suggestion for the didgitalis-
1 Some sort of creeper “conductance” it could accelerate large masses of creeper on it in a certain direction.
2 Another idea for the creeper conductance: in a radius around the digitalis it would pull creeper towards it or have the same effect in idea #1
3 Digitalis that cannot be cut off. Sort of a late game strain of the digitalis that even when cut of from an emmiter or nest will still grow and regenerate (maybe even normal digitalis could do this it would just be at a slower rate)
4 As part of idea #3 spores that spread digitalis on impact and maybe even an advanced targeting for the digitalis spores: Aim away from weapons, and shields, aim for the high ground if there are any viable targets and priorty targetting like in cw1 and cw2 (maybe even pathing so that they could avoid your PB)
1: In other words, fields.
2: In other words, fields that act as attractors to a point, instead of a linear field per each cell.
3: Eh . . . my favorite part of digi is that you can attack it strategically – something that is often much less possible with creep. Digi has a distinct supply line – creeper has the entire world.
They would be fields, but fields that fit well into gameplay. Or as I suggested previously, fields that can flit around dynamically, based on where buildings are.
In other words, fields dynamically generated in accordance with structure placement – not designed by a mapper.
fghjconnerNovember 21, 2012 at 3:42 am | Permalink
I don’t like digitalis very much as it stands. Creeper is a great enemy because it flows and interacts with the terrain in interesting and unpredictable ways. Digitalis just slowly spreads over its preset. Furthermore, it isn’t much of a threat, even with runners (the effectiveness of snipers in protecting a front from runners is clearly evident). I’m really hoping for digitalis to do something interesting like creating structures on powerzones that it covers or producing creeper. Even so, the digitalis network seems really boring with it’s arbitrary shape and lack of real aggression.
bobbybrownNovember 21, 2012 at 3:39 pm | Permalink
Even so, the digitalis network seems really boring with it’s arbitrary shape and lack of real aggression.
I agree wholeheartedly. More so, the addition of runners (separate units with primitive AI) seems to be more in the vein of cookie-cutter TD games rather than this unique physics-meets-tactics style Creeper World series is known for.
I think there should be way less predictability in the way digitalis grows. The thing that made creeper so exciting as enemy for me was that it has no AI in the usual RTS-sense but still is threatening and _very_ responsive to player’s actions.
fractalmanNovember 22, 2012 at 12:46 am | Permalink
Creeper is actually quite predictable, once you know the emitter intensities. if you can’t see the future digitalis spread patterns, on the other hand…
I completely agree with this, but I don’t see any way for the digitalis to spread similarly to how it currently does without being confined to a certain area.
Digi does have a pre-defined ‘growth area’, as shown in previous videos.
However, it has a lot of potential – there are a lot of interesting ideas that could make intersections of digi and creeper change the tactical landscape a bit.
Digitalis can be devastating how it is.
Imagine a map that the digitalsi can spread freely, with no restricted areas. It would spread quickly to your base, and would bea challenge to just keep it away!
I truly think you need some unpredictable factors.
Definitely for the bigger maps.
Otherwise once the player has a solid base, the rest of the game is executing the plan witch have been made in the beginning of the map.
Maybe the walkers are the way to go but at the moment there are to predictable and to easy to manage.
In game 1 this was not a problem because setting up the base was almost finishing the map.
Auw I feel as giddy as a schoolboy when I see my own suggestion added. Applied differently ofcourse, and virgil probanly came across the idea on his own accord at some point? But still great.
The unit may need some more work, minute differences in statistics or function to make more tactics possible(e.g. the terrain height-range idea I suggested) but other then that it’s slow firing, large ammo requirement, and singular function compensate for it’s 1 hit KO to basic runners.
Hey, V, How do you see when people update?
I mean, do you get a notification when people make a comment or do you just check it every so often and run through a list of comments to be accepted or not?
I don’t get it. How come Creeper World looks so crappy on your website, except your blog looks cool? How do I get the cool one with all the runners, ect?
ShadowDragon7015November 23, 2012 at 12:40 pm | Permalink
Except that this blog has posts about KC in general and the current main buzz is CW3. When it is over, this blog will not be devoted to CW3 anymore for sure.
Blue DwarfNovember 29, 2012 at 3:08 pm | Permalink
Perhaps, but every entry for the past few months has been tagged “Creeper World 3,’ and since this person clearly doesn’t spend much time here it doesn’t hurt at all saying that this is a dev blog for CW3, since that’s what it has been for a long time. Once CW3 is done, it won’t be a dev blog for it anymore. But until then, I stand by my original comment.
I don’t get it. How come Creeper World looks so crappy on your website, except your blog looks cool? How do I get the cool one with all the runners, ect?
The ‘crappy’ games are CW1 and CW2, the blog post images are of CW3 which is still under development and not availible to the public.
Always nice to see some process, but this one leaves me a little bit curious: Are there other things you have experimented with? Did they end well or did you trash them?
hi V
i recently watched a documentry called “indie game:the movie” and i’v gotten a lot more respect for you. just do us all a favor? dont.give.up.
-live life crayz, life is too short be lazyyyy,
-billy
flabbyflagNovember 24, 2012 at 2:01 pm | Permalink
I noticed that the world was completed when all the enemy structures were killed. I don’t think it should work that way. Think about it, if the NHA sent a colony ship to that planet and there is digitalis there. Than what?
Digitalis withers away when disconnected, as demonstrated in an earlier video. You can see it go dark when the last nest is destroyed here, too, though there isn’t enough time for it to wither.
I’m pretty sure you’re mistaken about that..I seem to recall it being specifically stated that digitalis only stops growing when it’s cut off from the source. I get the impression this map had the digitalis pre-placed and no emitters at all. Are you sure the video you’re referencing for that didn’t merely show the digitalis getting shot down?
ShadowDragon7015November 26, 2012 at 8:43 am | Permalink
you can see in previous videos that the digitalis withers virgil can probably place the digitalis. but it has to be connected to something.
Also . . . there is creeper present on the map. I suspect there are features hidden by overlap.
Crazycolorz5November 25, 2012 at 11:23 am | Permalink
That’s assuming by CW2 plot… maybe the plot is different here. Remember the ending of CW2 said something about Adm. Abraxis meeting up with Platius again and disappearing…? Doesn’t really sound like something the NHA has to do with it.
At this rate though, that goal will be met only on New Year’s Eve. Not saying that progress is slow, but the concept of CW3 does not appear to be finalized just yet.
ninja awsomeNovember 25, 2012 at 1:40 pm | Permalink
I really hope it does come out at the end of the year because my cw jar has allready destroyed my counter
Crazycolorz5November 26, 2012 at 6:03 pm | Permalink
I think he means his jar for change saved up for CW3 has so much change it has crashed trough his counter or something. It happened to me too a while back.
ninja awsomeNovember 27, 2012 at 4:52 am | Permalink
That’s what I mean sorry for unclear maening
KharnelliusNovember 25, 2012 at 2:11 pm | Permalink
The runners should be able to delay a structure being built. I noticed at the very beginning he was building snipers and the runners were right next to them and did nothing.
If they can shut down a structure for a short while, why can’t they shut down its construction?
Also the stun time seems awfully short. Wouldn’t mind a MUCH longer stun to really make you regard it as a somewhat serious threat.
sweetdude 64November 25, 2012 at 2:44 pm | Permalink
Kharnellius-It only stuns when destroyed, as shown earlier. And I agree they need to be more of a threat, like greater overall health, or even multi-stun, but not by a longer stun time.
Also, in the map editor, COULD we make the digitalis diamond shape instead of square? Might be really interesting for certain parts.
KharnelliusNovember 25, 2012 at 5:35 pm | Permalink
I’m not sure what you mean “It only stuns when destroyed”.
Watch video at 0:34. A runner at the bottom stuns his relay tower but the runner was not destroyed.
ShadowDragon7015November 26, 2012 at 8:46 am | Permalink
Runners can stun when they get close enough and they will . The runners drop creeper a lot when they are killed though in some videos kind of like the drones in CW2.
I guess, I am just having a hard time figuring out how this really changes the battle. You’re still fighting a one front war that you can only lose by being very reckless with your attacks.
“Lose”? I didn’t think CW was hardly ever about *whether* you could win, just about how long it takes you. If you suck, it takes a long time, and with increasing skill and experience, you can do it faster.
My opinion of the intent of the CW series is to create a game in which the player’s progress against his enemy can be pushed back without unit loss. Everything in this game seems designed to avoid any unit loss at all if you are attentive.
It’s my belief that Virgil is trying to design enemies that attack your advancement, not your units.
Point taken. The average difficulty of the CW series in general does seem relatively nerfed.
You know, I would like to know what would happen if each campaign map had bonus/side objectives/achievements. I just got Starcraft II Wings of Liberty on the night of Black Friday and I have slaved over beating it and its side achievements and objectives and difficulties ever since.
In addition, if there was some way to implement a Fog of War without disrupting the CW3 style of play, I will have more satisfaction for it. That is what made it more interesting to beat the Starcraft II levels.
The point is not to make it easy or nerfed – the point is to make it possible for the enemy to halt or even reverse your advance without forcing you to take losses.
Fog of war would be pointless… How? You won’t know where the creeper is necesarrily coming from so it would be more difficult to defend against. You might send in some Strafers just to find that the area is protected by AETs.
Fog of war could add to the game. I’m not sure if it’s something I’d want to see implemented, but I can say that it wouldn’t be pointless. (You might be thinking you could just float a tower around the map once, but generally Fog of War refills itself after your unit has left the area. So it would be useful only in getting a lay of the land)
fractalmanNovember 26, 2012 at 11:36 am | Permalink
though…with double down, or some of the custom maps…you very much can lose.
the 101 series is evil in that regard.
I don’t necessarily agree with you on that. There are several levels that are easy to lose if you aren’t good and quick. Some people enjoy spending time on a level and don’t care about the score of a really fast game.
ninja awsomeNovember 27, 2012 at 9:41 am | Permalink
Why is there still no new post as in before you go into comments
fractalmanNovember 27, 2012 at 12:47 pm | Permalink
Just keep track of the number of posts. when it changes, there’s new posts.
Yeah, the Thanksgiving holiday knocked me out of business for more than half a week. Rather than post another simple screenshot I decided to wait another week and post a video.
Blue DwarfNovember 27, 2012 at 5:45 pm | Permalink
I am both happy and sad at the same time. If only I could learn some patience, then I’d be all happy.
Maybe that Thanksgiving meal gave you some ideas, gravy can sometimes be like creeper, breaking out of it’s mashed potato holding cell and rushing towards your cranberries or other fruity delight… *sigh*
Can’t help but notice that energy storage containers haven’t appeared in any recent videos or screenshots. Have they been removed or replaced in game, and if so, by what?
thephysicsgamerDecember 1, 2012 at 8:07 pm | Permalink
He hasn’t needed capacitors is my guess.
sweetdude 64November 27, 2012 at 4:32 pm | Permalink
yay! Another video 😀
ShadowDragon7015November 27, 2012 at 5:03 pm | Permalink
With there being storage units wouldn’t it be possible to have tech that would increase individual storage units capacity?
That wasn’t very clear – I’m gonna rephrase, and sorry about the double post. If storage capacity upgrades are implemented as 4x suggests, then would having separate storage even make sense?
Correction: ShadowDragon7015 suggested it, not me.
Crazycolorz5November 30, 2012 at 3:35 pm | Permalink
The storage WITHIN each built unit would increase, is what I think Shadow was saying. You’d still have to build them. But these upgrade should exist and have a point, because having less storage units means you have more space for other things(like reactors or Berthas)
ShadowDragon7015December 1, 2012 at 2:13 pm | Permalink
maby but that would seem complicated for you have to make the upgrade stuff then implament the upgrade then see if it works so it seems to much of a waste of time
On the other hand, we have no upgrades in CW3 to date as of now. So the question remains, why is it a waste of time?
Assuming there will be an upgrade system, I personally think there should be a way to use research units that do not allow you to choose something in any category to upgrade so easily. All potential enhancements in CW2 are available at the same time and the fact that research is being conducted for all of that at the same exact time is a little disturbing to me.
I just think the upgrading should be more elaborate and layered in CW3. I see it being based off of the upgrade system of the Starcraft series; although, it has both upgrades and research, thus emphasizing the difference between research and upgrades.
Personally, I don’t think the upgrade system needs to be more complicated. CW is ultimately about setting the quickest time (yeah, I know there are other ways playing it, but those still work great with the “be quickest” setup, don’t they?) Selecting in which order to unlock upgrades is tricky enough as it is (if you go for a good score). An option in the editor to make certain upgrades unavailable for a mission would be great, though.
That’s deceptive, actually, I think. The largest consumer market here is probably casual. The problem is, the voice of the community has a much larger representation of hardcore players, because those are the players who really will take an interest in immersing themselves in a game’s community and details.
I think the a large portion of the vocal community is score-oriented, but I suspect that this represents only a fraction of the people actually playing CW.
I think the main thing research needs is ongoing cost. More complicated, layers of upgrades and research . . . that’s detailed and complex stuff, stuff that needs management on more than a casual level.
The one thing that I think has held back interest in technology in CW/2 is the fact that tech is a “Once And Done” deal. Once you have what you need, the idea of technical investment ceases to exist.
I would agree that the more vocal people are more likely to be the hardcore/score seeking players. People who play casually or only when they have nothing better to do (perish the thought) may not think about checking the website about updates.
I have to say in regards to your last 2 paragraphs, Lurkily: FINALLY. I was wondering if anyone would get the message I have been trying to convey all along and let alone not necessarly appose it.
If I understood Lurkily’s post correctly, it said that CW3 does not need “more complicated, layers of upgrades, research”, because that would lessen the casuality with which the CW games can be played and casual players being the majority.
@Lurkily: Let’s turn to the forum for the “ongoing costs” thing.
Exactly. Complexity and layers and intricacy doesn’t really cater to what’s at the core of CW – casual fun that you can jump into without having to dig through multiple types of research to figure out what your next move should be.
Crazycolorz5November 30, 2012 at 3:39 pm | Permalink
I feel that in CW2, the tech domes kinda lost usefulness after you had all your upgrades, but they were expensive to make and I end up having probably a lot of wasted energy. I think that the upgrade system could be where you select an upgrade you want to make, and you get a specialized tech dome that you can place that will having ongoing research in that category, then when it’s finished it’ll vaporize like the ore mines.
TrickyDragonNovember 28, 2012 at 9:10 pm | Permalink
people do love the videos… i know i do!
flabbyflagNovember 29, 2012 at 10:51 am | Permalink
I don’t think that the sniper is overpowered because it doesn’t seem to do any damage to the digitalis or creeper. Their one purpose is to kill the runners.
Blue DwarfNovember 29, 2012 at 3:20 pm | Permalink
That is utterly pointless. Just say that it may be released around the start of the new year, but nobody knows for sure. That alone is more useful than the entire release date thread.
If you go to that thread, you waste time reading about Tee Shirts and Mayan predictions. Pointless beyond the first 3 posts (which I summed up in one sentence, seen above)
Maybe so, but as it is a release date forum thread, maybe anyone anxious should use it to try to talk more about it and vent their anxiety about the release there instead of here over and over.
No one person appears to be doing that, but in case it does, I was just trying to prevent it.
It wouldn’t hurt to point them to the thread, and also tell them ‘Somewhere around New Years, but nobody knows for sure’ so that they don’t go to the thread expecting to find an answer that isn’t there, and waste their time reading the multitude of offtopic or worthless posts. At least then they can go to dig deeper and ask there if they want, or just leave it at that.
Actually, Virgil, I was thinking about letting your beta testers cover some of the video material for you, instead. Have you ever spend it a thought?
As I believe the beta testers have more time playing than you do, wouldn’t it be good for everyone if they showed some gameplay?
You could put up constraints, so they would go to show us new units in a very organic way on “regular” maps, giving us a great feel for the game, a good time watching and lastly, giving you more time to concentrate on development.
As there is no coverage from testers other than that you posted on the blog, I guess you are not fond of this idea. Probably to avoid showcasing gamebreaking bugs? Or you don’t want to showcase an unfinished product excessively, which is understandable.
So, instead of letting them post videos all day long (which sure would be awesome), you could like let every tester play a mission (which showcases new features, while playing a complete mission), let the testers vote on which video would suit well (or you do it? Would be time consuming, though), and post one or a couple of them for us to see.
It would be fantastic to see more gameplay, see a complete mission – and have you able to dedicate more time programming instead of having to feed us, your fans, with video material 🙂
Just a thought 🙂
Molay
Sander BouwhuisNovember 30, 2012 at 6:09 am | Permalink
I second this!
Crazycolorz5November 30, 2012 at 3:33 pm | Permalink
There was a short video and some screenshot from Madmag or something a while back.
Yeah that’s right, the one Virgil posted on this very blog 🙂 My idea was to give the testers _some_ more autonomy when it comes to creating video content for the fans. Also, that one 5 minute video was pretty exciting. Wish it was longer – wish it was complete!
Let’s hope this gets some attention. Devs are not always fond of the idea of having other people show their game before it’s “ready”, but looking at what we’ve seen so far, the game seems to be in a great state, and more content could barely hurt – I think the opposite being true, that it will be very beneficial to attract new players.
Now there is a blog.
What if there were youtube channels aswell?
We know those can bring in lots of potential customers 🙂
ninja awsomeNovember 30, 2012 at 1:30 pm | Permalink
I fourth it. I have to say that it does looks like personally making these vids on your own part does seem to be hindering your other porgress. Besides, most of us are aware that you cannot concentrate and demonstrate at the same exact time. Maybe one of the testers who can should after all.
I think that, when Virgil was asked if he intends to rely on kickstarter/beta-access for backing for an upcoming CW4, he mentioned this could be a possibility for the next game in the series. Not sure where he said that, though. Some older comment, somewhere. I’m not optimistic to find it all too soon^^
Yeah, that’s one of the strongest points I feel. It hinders development when Virgil has to sit down, prepare a video, record it etc…
He obviously has to have some kind of preparation before, an idea of what he is going to show and how, creating the map and setting up the recording environment.
Then comes the time of recording. Hopefully the first recording being good enough (for his quality standards, which obviously are quite high), so he doesn’t have to spend more time on just recording.
Lastly comes eventual post-production, even though I’m not sure he does any of that. It’s more like he records and posts, so this phase shouldn’t be of a bother.
Anyways, the point is it consumes time. That’s time he could save 🙂
And yeah, then there’s the point that a tester likely has much more time to spend, so he might play entire missions, instead of the usual half-way-through Virgil can afford the time to do.
Anyways, appreciate I already got “fourthed” 😀
fractalmanNovember 30, 2012 at 10:00 pm | Permalink
Do I even need to fifth/sixth whatever this? Let your testers make the vids so you have more time to polish up the code and/or game balance.
sweetdude 64November 30, 2012 at 10:06 pm | Permalink
4xC-When CW4 comes out, there BETTER be a multi-player 😉
I wouldn’t really mind if you paused it alittle more to demonstrate/explain as long as you still have alot of gameplay in your videos. Maybe make a 10 minute long video and another 5 minute long, due to the space on your flashdrive. That would work 🙂
ShadowDragon7015December 1, 2012 at 2:17 pm | Permalink
With the pause function in the game it would be impossible to have multiplayer
Each player has an energy bar, let’s call it the “slow bar”.
That slow bar slowly replenishes it’s energy.
Each player can opt to pause/slow down the game to a minimum by draining energy from said bar. If the bar is empty, the game goes back to normal speed.
Could be something like, every 2 minutes you regenerate for up to 15 seconds of pause. Something like this maybe? Balancing will have to be figured out later.
This would effectively implement pause, but limiting the duration of it. Would keep MP fluid.
Also, an option to have “unlimited pause” at the beginning of the game. No need to hamstring the pause for friends playing together 🙂
Typically, multiplayer games are played without the option to pause. Even in RTS games, only the host can pause, and he better use it sparingly, or his players are going to be dropping out.
Yeah that’s true, a typical RTS doesn’t have a built-in pause function (atleast not one where you can issue orders while paused). But let’s be honest here, other RTS don’t have a pause function like CW in singleplayer, either 🙂 It’s a part of the game to pause for a bit – maybe to send multiple units simultaneously, to issue many orders at a time, stuff like that. But yeah, the pause should be kept short else you’re just going to annoy your opponent 🙂
A pause in which you can issue orders is not uncommon. But when you go into multiplayer, that feature is usually disabled, when it is present, because it can be abused to disrupt another player’s experience. If it is used, it is usually only accessible to the hosting player.
When you say multiplayer, what modes are you thinking about?
I just came up with some:
CO-OP: quite obvious
RACE: multiple players race to collect an artifact (or multiple), located somewhere on the map. Collecting the artifact requires high amounts of energy.
King of the Hill: Multiple players compete to obtain control of a particular region.
Anyways, it will be hard to have any decent competitive modes unless we implement new features to attack structures. It would be awful (I think) to have blasters shoot at each other. Maybe manipulating creeper more intensely (ability to “build” or “feed” emitters so they stomp your ennemy?).
Not sure about this. But anyways, that’s still a long road ahead. I’m looking forward to CW3 right now first 🙂
I could see rival armies having their blasters fire on eachother in a bloody (well, maybe not bloody) war over a valuable relic. You could have a sort of ‘Flood Gate’ module on the map that you can power up and once at full you can open a wall on the opponent’s side that was holding back creeper.
As for capturing the relic, I see your packets getting it closer to collection, and their packets would reduce the amount you have already put in, so it’s like a tug of war sending in packets (giving you the option to win economically, pumping out tons of packets quickly, or militarily by holding the relic and forcing back their relays and such)
Anyway, there is potential for multiplayer. But players would likely have to accept giving up their pauses. Maybe that would call for being able to coordinate mass commands that wait until your que to activate, so you could launch a large well coordinated assualt if you wanted.
The player units simply are not designed to deal with an aggressive enemy. Beyond that, the game is not designed to encourage accepting huge unit losses in failed attacks – PVP multiplayer would completely upset that, requiring the build of tons of units, and the acceptance of heavy losses.
I think the only thing that would make sense for multiplayer is co-op.
Yeah you’re right on that, PvP with the current set of units seems like a horrible idea. Also, you could prevent any attacks by just blocking all the landing space, having it guarded by blasters etc… That’s why a more PvP oriented play should incorporate creeper manipulation in my opinion. Where it’s basically:
Player 1 defends against player 2’s creeper and vice versa.
Creeper output should be easily scalable. Rather go for a good defense? But then you can’t afford creeper to freak out your opponent… Stuff like that. Somehow. Maybe. This would need far more consideration and space than any comment here has to offer, though 🙂
I guess what I mean is that the game seems designed to permit the player to encounter setbacks, even have to retreat, without ever losing a single unit. A mission can be a disaster in which you barely succeed, but even then you might never have lost a single mobile unit.
PVP would absolutely require losses from a player. That’s why I am not really sure it’s suited to what V’s trying to create.
Lurkily – I dont really know what you are driving at here. I do not really think a pvp option would work either. However I lose units all the time. granted that almost 99% of the time I lose something its because I sent a wave of blasters in behind enemy lines to thin the creeper and hold it back, but I certantly do not play the game with the mindset that I cannot lose a blaster…
But still, compared to Starcraft or Total Anihilation, how many losses do you take, on a moderately challenging map?
Any time you take a loss of a mobile unit in CW, it’s because you are either inattentive, or because you choose to accept that loss. (If I have the chance, I typically pull weapons back at the last instant, but I don’t get too worked up if something blows because I’m inattentive.
My point is that crafting a game mode that absolutely demands massive losses and constant weapon manufacture to replace losses is probably not what the game is supposed to be about.
It would be a completely different playstyle, but definately doable. The anti air beams would have to be able to target enemy strafers and such. Berthas would be used to soften an area up to land your invasion force.
I could see a sort of tug-of-war/king of the hill type of gamestyle rising out of it. (see above comment by me)
Alternatively, you could have player one control the people, and player two could control a set of ‘Creeper Cores’ which generate points over time, which could be used to summon Spores, Creeper, Digitalis, Runners, etc. over time. Maybe the Creeper player could also save up to build AET’s and Runner Nests. For a certain number of points, maybe they could also change the ‘wind’ direction and force.
Could be interesting, but it’d be a ton of work. Maybe something to look into for #4. (Creeper finally being beaten back, now various warbands rise up to fight for power… And the creeper has time to recollect, and strike out yet again)
There’s potential. I can’t say how well it would work out in the end, but I think it could be done.
i agree with lurkily because if there was pvp you would need more units and since there stationary flying units can be taken down before they are able to deal damage to the enemy :/
You place emitters, upgrade them.
You place runner nests.
You paint digitalis zones.
You set up air exclusion towers.
You launch (target) spores at stuff.
You could get mobile emitters, maybe? Slow moving emitters that can be hit by regular weapon fire.
You could change “wind” direction, pushing your creep up on ennemy walls.
You could make creeper mines, exploding when ennemies get close.
You could terraform the area using drones.
How about you getting ressources for creep coverage (the idea being it is some sort of SC2 creep, absorbing minerals from the ground)?
How about generating ressources by having special creep-buildings, which need constant protection?
Nah, I see a lot of potential. And lots of people love to see how the stuff they engineered and placed carefully evolves to swallow a whole map.
For those that find it boring to manipulate creeper (which is crazy amazing), well, defend against it.
The idea is great to play as the “opponent”. Esspecially such a special kind of opponent, a giant mass of creeper which you can direct!
The player is just very powerful in comparison to creeper – it’s hard to actually lose in a normal game. Overcoming that with powerful Multiplayer upgrades seems like it would require a very serious time investment and a very hard slog, no matter who won.
sweetdude 64December 2, 2012 at 3:06 pm | Permalink
What I always thought for multiplayer vs mode on this game is when you have anti creeper, it was creeper to the other players screen(Vice-versa)
And I liked the idea of blasters and others attacking eachother. I would have simply disabled any pause feature from multi-player(but it would be more challenging,not less fun!) but you have all suggested great ideas for pause like the slow bar. I though of another pause possibility:
Every minute, a player gains a pause ability. You can stack this 6 times, and when used, it pauses both screens for 10 seconds.
Having my game pause and unpause outside my control and without my warning would irritate me severely. I say if it goes multiplayer, just take out pause.
Crazycolorz5December 2, 2012 at 4:55 pm | Permalink
Haven’t been blogs for a bit… is Virgil getting ready to announce something BIG???
Ideas:Maybe a “thunder tower”.It would be a giant tesla coil that would cost 100 energy to build and 30 energy to fire but could hit all enemies near it and its range would be a 7 by 7 -ish circle.Thoughts?
Lots of interest here. For one, we have digitalis and nests powered without digi connections to an emitter.
easiest map ever! and FIRST!!!
Cool I’m first one to comment.
Don’t you wish…
hey just like me he did not see any comments so he thought he was first
I know, but I felt I had to say something. And I was not intending any apathy either.
In my paraller universe Im still the first one to comment. Its says the creepers home universe.
Its not so nice in here. Creeper has launched eternal attack trying to overcome my defences from very small area.
(Damm can’t edit post and misclicked send. Sorry about double) Waiting for Platius to show up whit Thor…
Loving the sniper! At least put it as an exp
The whole idea of digitalis and the runners just seem odd. What purpose do they serve the enemy?
Currently, none of it seems to really be a threat, beyond the minor annoyance of slowing you down.
The bigger runners need to fire more often and disable something for a longer period of time
Perhaps require packets to restore the stunned structures? This way it can be a real problem if you get cut off and have low energy and it slows your energy economy some. Give all of this some teeth, and a purpose (explained in story I suppose). 😉
They are capable of destroying things, just because the ones we’ve seen so far are easy to deal with doesn’t mean they aren’t a threat overall.
Not alone, they aren’t. Capable of destroying things, that is.
Runners do not inflict damage to your structures or weapons. They simply force disconnection but not disarming or deactivation.
Exactly: they can deactivate all of your frontline weapons and leave you vunerable to the purple goo that either crushes or dissolves them, I’m not sure which.
Are you saying that snipers are not frontline weapons? They would have to not be because they kept shooting even when they were shot by runner stunners. 🙂 (rhyme moment)
The runners already remove all your weapon packets, so it does hurt if your economy is low.
Also if it hits an almost charged bertha/bombers/strafers/anything with a high red energy capacity, it owuld be really bad when low on economy.
Especially bombers, since they use AC packets.
Do you honestly believe these guys will ever get to those? It’s so easy to stop them and they have to stay on this predetermined path. Would be cool of digitalis was a subterranean pipe network that could pop up in the middle of your base.
There could be a radar/seismometer that detects when it is coming up through the ground (and reveal the entire network within range) so you could place some blasters to push back the attack and reseal the newly made hole. Eventually you have to take out the source to stop the attacks. He could even work in that the bombers could still attack it by making their bombs ground penetrating to help cut off networks.
I guess, I am just having a hard time figuring out how this really changes the battle. You’re still fighting a one front war that you can only lose by being very reckless with your attacks.
Not anymore. Check out 5:00, to the right.
Point taken into account. Stunned Snipers apparently keep their energy for ammo when stunned and keep shotting. All stunners from runners (no pun intended) do now is create forced disconnections that do not stop usage of energy.
Yeah, that part annoys me.
If you absolutely ‘have’ to have a Bertha in the frontlines pile up a few snipers near it, they shouldn’t get close. Same thing with bombers and strafers.
The snipers look cool, but they seem to totally nullify the runners. Other than taking up space, there seems like no drawback. Looks like you just build a bunch and move them along with all your anti-creeper units and that’s an end to it.
Is that new music I hear in the background?
Just like Particle Beams nullify Spores. And the drawback of snipers is that it only harms runners.
I always knew CW3 needed a new special case weapon other than the particle beam and the Sniper is the current answer. Although, I would prefer if they were called “Rail Guns”.
No. Not rail guns. The ones the U.S. Navy is experimenting with need rail replacements every four or five shots. Now coilguns, on the other hand… Gauss Rifle is also a good name, even though it technically isn’t.
How would testing of a weapon now affect a race that isnt even human? I personally would like the name to be “rail gun” if they are kept which is unlikely, at least kept in their current state that is, and in about 10k years wouldnt we have some better alloys and and weapon designs along with anything else that could affect weapon tech.
In 10-100 years we will have better alloys/materials(carbon fibers), because currently they are only a few mm long, so when they can be more mass-produced and longer, we will be able to create really strong things.
Also the space elevator needs something that can survive a lot of stress(due to the massive distance+atmospheric difference(probably) and what not, and for now only pure carbon fibers(nanotubes) can do that, and by pure i mean single long lines, and not multiple short ones put together, but for a lot of other things, non-pure carbon fibers will be able to do a lot, like armor(or armor coating/thin layer/whatever it is), and probably for rail guns too.
except carbon isn’t magnetic, and that’s how rail guns work…
This seems like it could make an excellent ‘tutorial’ map for introducing the sniper. It’s quite safe and if you only allowed sniper offensive units, then I imagine it would work out quite nicely. Perhaps a kind of ‘simulator’ map made to teach new commanders the effect of their available units since it doesn’t make much sense for any kind of creeper to be so passive.
The snipers seems fine, I’m just not sure about multiple specialized defense unit. Beams for flyers, snipers for runners. have you considered a multi purpose defense unit for them? Whatever you choose I’m looking forward to the game.
That’s an interesting concept. It sounds like for that to work, PB’s would be able to shoot constantly at either spores or runners. Or even (like p. coils in CW2) both or 2 at once.
At least there is now more than one special case weapon other than the PB.
I found the digitalis/runner combo to be a great new feature for CW3. They add some teeth to the enemy, by giving the creeper some sort of “trenches” that can effectively hold you back for a long time – or even spread into your base, giving you all sort of FUN.
The sniper seems way too powerful as it is now, effectively rendering runners an impotent threat. The idea of the sniper is great however, don’t get me wrong. There should be some specialized weapon against runners.
But the sniper at this time seems too cheap to build/maintain –> Easy to mass build them.
Having a weapon that effectively renders runners useless should come with a major drawback in my opinion, here some suggestions for the drawback:
– Cannot move (static weapon)
– Prerequisites to operate (needs to be adjacent to, say, a reactor to operate)
(OR —> Can only be loaded by adjacent reactors, cannot process packets)
– Huge initial cost (somewhere between nullifier/titans?)
– Very expensive to maintain (huge energy usage on shots)
– Exotic maintenance (could shoot concentrated anticreeper shells, making it require processed ore to operate – maybe along with energy?).
– Huge building (5×5 size for example, making it clunky, which is a drawback in itself).
– Losing energy (weapon loses energy, making it a draw on the economy even when it doesn’t operate – it’s a prototype weapon after all, quickly assembled after we met the runners for the first time^^).
These are some possible drawbacks you could add to this weapon, which seems, to me, very powerful. Would one rather have a major drawback on the economy to fight off runners? Or maybe just do it the old fashioned way? Make it a hard choice, would be what I suggest.
Hope you consider adding at least one drawback to it! (static being my favorite, actually).
Besides that, the game is looking great. You make the wait even harder by showing us how amazing it will be 🙂
I really hate static structures. Reactor loading sound interesting, until you consider that it wouldn’t get very much energy per time… It already costs a bit(in between nullifier and titans, as you said)… It is… somewhat expensive to maintain. I don’t think any structure takes in more than 1 type of packet though… Personally I like the losing energy idea.
Incidentially, it’s hard to get it to happen, but if a building packet goes into a finished blaster, it will be received as if it were a weapon packet.
at least as of creeper world 1.
It was in Creeper World 1, but not in 2.
“Cheap to build”? They cost 90 energy to construct.
The idea is great, but I agree that the sniper could use some more weakness.
I think a few of those ideas are a bit overkill and would render the snipers useless, like the 5X5 thing, not even a Bertha is that ridiculous. It being a static weapon would mean you would have to put it deep into enemy lines in order to operate in any way but sucky, but that’s near-to-impossible because of the creeper. Instead of massive energy usage, I think they should have less potency with attacks.
I’m not sure about that. Check earlier videos, where you observe the grid used for terraforming. PC’s and mortars appear to be 3×3.
I count the normal weapon size as a one-by-one.
I don’t think Molay is, though.
I like the idea of draining energy even when not in use. That way they must be positioned in specific situations on the front line. It would act to put a cap on the number you would want in use. Or there could be an actual limit, say 5 per map. It could be because they are built using some special material for the “weapon core” of which you only have a limited supply.
Hows this for a draw back, say for each drop ship you get a set number of “snipers” to use. That way in a large map with lots of runner nests you have to think of how you use the “snipers” instead of just building a lot of them. something like 3-5 per drop ship.
Another thought is slowing down the speed of which the “snipers” can shoot slightly would make multiple fast runners or even just 2-3 large runners a slightly bigger threat.
Finaly if you make the “snipers” line-to-sight weapons like blasters you could make the runners come from or even behind higher terrain. This would effectively make the range of the “snipers” useless untill placed in a strategic location. and sence the degitalis moves diffrently from normal creeper it could simply climb terrain faster then creeper putting the runners in front of the creeper mass makeing them the first things you have to deal with.
They’re a great idea, but I think the range, price, and energy usage should be increased a little bit (about 110%, 100 packets, and 1.5x to 2x Mortar, respectively), the health made very low (not quite Phantom Coil, Dark Beam, or SAM low, but Dark Mirror or Repulsor low), and the damage decreased so the biggest runners take five shots on their default settings (Unless they do already? It was hard to tell.). Personally though, I am totally open to the idea of specialized weapons for a specific enemy unit. Others will certainly disagree, but I think it they give the game more depth. Do you want to build a specialized weapon to get rid of the Runners and pray the Creeper doesn’t get too high until you build up your economy, or do you build a few jacks of all trades? Finally, so my OCD doesn’t make me go crazy, please please please add an eighth thing under the structures tab.
I too hope that there will be an eigth unit under structures so that it is eaven with the weapons.
And I would say that the second-to-smallest runners do not need 1 shot to kill like the smallest ones do.
As to what the eight structure unit should be, I say it needs to be a researching building that produces technytes or tech point and make each building vary on what kind to make depending on the category of what to spend them on
In CW2, I thought it was nerfed when tech domes make technytes for anything to benefit from depending on whatever choice you made despite the different categories under the tech upgrade menu.
*facepalm*
I cannot believe myself. I build tech domes on almost all maps that have them available. Then I destroy them and replace them with reactors once I get the necessary technytes (up to 682, sometimes only around 450 or 500) and upgrades. And I forgot all about them. Thanks for reminding me they exist, good sir!
Not really sure what you’re trying to say here. Do you mean you like the older system in CW1 where you could only ever get as many upgrades as were on the map, or do you mean the upgrades got too specific, or is it something else entirely?
I mean that in CW2, the technytes could be spent on ANYTHING. All the while, tech domes were researching for all categories of your choice and I would like it if technytes varied on types of upgradeables. There is the structure, weapon, efficiency, and economy category
I would like a certain kind of research to be conducted that did not provide too much time to let you make your upgrade choice. I also do not want to no longer nee tech domes after upgrades are made.
Actually, I think the second-smallest runners also took one shot.
Yeah. You’re right about that.
Have you thought about giving the runners pathing and having them try to target weak points in groups?
That depends on if you want to wait another year for the AI to be coded for something that compicated, I think.
Doesn’t seem too complicated…
1) Every certain amount of time
2) choose a random runner
3) About half of all other runner gather to that one runner
4) After they’ve all gathered, they all aim for the weapon in range that is farthest from other weapons(ie, an isolated weapon).
I think that system would be very flaud, as an isolated weapon could be one that is on a PZ, or the runner it picks would die and it would have to wait a while again, and it would have to count the individual runners, and it would have to take into account that other runners could very well be spawned in the process of choosing the runner, and if two are constantly being created at the same time the cycle would never cease.
Sounds like a recipe for runner slaughter. Most runners would take the same path and overlap, making AoE weapons like mortars and PC’s hyper-effective.
I typed a different comment, but by the end I realized what it was I was trying to say and decided I’d just come right out and say that instead. With the inclusion of the Sniper unit, Runners are to CW3 what Spores were to CW1 and Phantoms were to CW2.
What do I mean by that? I mean that they no longer pose a challenge, but become a nuisance to swat away. The Sniper unit is such a focused counter to the Runner that it becomes pointless to use any other defense. With that shift, they are immediately downgraded from an interesting new enemy that requires strategy to overcome and instead become simply a drain on your economy when properly contained and hold no threat of danger (except in massive, massive numbers). In fact they’re weaker than Spores and Phantoms, because they can’t escape the boundaries of the Digitalis.
I guess what I want to say is: Spores bored me. I typically opt not to play a map that uses Spores because they’re irritating, and not in a good way. Please don’t make Runners into Spores v3.0.
Don’t forget the spores of CW3.
You are correct, but only to a certain extent. Remember that your primary defence is going to be Pulse Cannons, since those kill all three enemies (Runners, Creeper, and Digitalis). If anything, they’ll be Drones 2.0. Yes, you do have the sniper, but it costs nearly 4 times as much as a Pulse Cannon and sucks up energy AND is only usable against one threat. So sure, you’ll be decently to well defended late game, but you won’t be able to afford it early game. I am currently neither for nor opposed to the Sniper unit, but I find no reason to reject anything until we can see how they fare.
Also, I forgot to mention, Phantom Coils cost 5 packets and SAMs 20. 1/18 and 2/9 the price of the Sniper, respectively. That doesn’t take energy usage into account either. Remember that SAMs also killed any Spore in one hit and Phantom Coils needed a medium-ish stream of energy.
5 per coil? I though it was 10. And as to energy usage, 1 SAM equals 2 spores without reloading it and 1 coil should be about 4 without reload if you count the fact that they can harm up to 2 phantoms at once.
The coils could hit up to three phantoms at once.
no, it’s 2
But really, the range of Pulse Cannons is pretty terrible compared to the snipers, and the effect is multiplied here since the runners will be able to stun the pulse cannons but not the snipers due to their larger range and putting them a bit more back.
If you’re going to take out snipers, how about making the beams capable of aiming at runners, but it takes a TON of energy for them to do and they don’t do too much damage? Because I feel that the pulse cannons are too short range to be very good vs. runners, and mortars are too slow.
PS. This also verifies that Digitalis doesn’t have to originate at an emitter.(Maybe just from any enemy structure?)
That Digitalis was put there, it didn’t grow out of the nests.
Digitalis withers without a connection, as showed in the first runner video.
As to whether that’s because the nests provide it, or because something is hidden in overlaps, who knows?
There IS creeper around those nests, though . . . . . . .
Digitalis just doesn’t grow, it doesn’t die.
Go back to the video introducing runners. You can observe this behavior in action. Try around 11:30 in the NACDAR video.
I’m not seeing it. I think you are mistaking withering for being shot. I don’t see any digitalis killing itself anywhere near 11:30 in that video. Perhaps you could be more specific as to where you see it occurring? All I see is strafers blasting it away, a little chunk even sits there for a few seconds all on its own before getting blasted away, no decay occurred.
Another note: The creeper payload that came from killing runners also appears to be gone. Or is it possible to set that in the map editor and it was just set to 0 here?
or maybe the snipers don’t let the runners drop the payload?
This sounds like a colossal waste of ammo, and a drain on spore defense.
Remember, as shown in earlier videos, beams appear to expend ammo faster than they can load it.
since packets naturally go slower without using relays, they do use up energy fast, and faster if they are further away from CNs like everything else. and because their fire is constant, they use it up faster than usual that way.
No, I mean, even if they are RIGHT next to a CN, beams cannot sustain fire. Even with constant reload, they consume ammo faster than they request is.
Really? Why is that? Would that make it unrecommended in the future to make a map with buku spore towers that attack at the same time?
Just like CW2’s anti-phantom defenses, they fire faster than they reload.
Lots of spore towers are fine. You just need so many beams that they store the firepower needed to shoot them down, and/or that they request so many packets, among the many beam towers, they even when they run dry they can collectively shoot down spores.
I only found out about your games a couple of hours ago, but WOW. Creeper World looks simple, and it took me no time to get the idea, and yet there’s so much cool stuff going on.
Well done, sir! I’m inspired. I’ll be getting 1&2 first thing tomorrow. 😀 (Even though I have far too many games already…)
CW follows a simple rule of a lot of good games – simple to learn, hard to master.
Just like the very old board game “Othello”. It takes a short time to learn, but mastery of it takes forever.
The thing about this map that makes snipers look so godly: The runners aren’t spilling creeper when they explode.
A healthy number of runners can still screw you over if you’ve only got Snipers watching out for them, because as we have seen snipers don’t target creeper or digitalis. I easily could see snipers balancing out as a part of your army.
Another theory might be that the snipers just fry any creeper inside the runners, and if that is the case then yes I will agree that they are OP.
I don’t like the snipers at all. The digitalis is at its best when it can bring the creeper to your base across empty space (where you cannot defend). The runners are hugely annoying (in a good way) when you try to nullify their nest. It really can become a back and forth war (as evidenced by the previous video where the runners kept stunning your nullifier).
The snipers take that challenge away. Now it just becomes a simple case of building some snipers. The runners are degraded to just a nuisance (in a bad way).
Then there is the purple goo of death that the snipers pilots are too derpy to aim at, and the fact that nerfs are possible.
If you nerf snipers, they become useless, or secondary to PC’s.
They must be suited to their role to have any use. But if PC’s can hold off runners in any way, (for instance, with range upgrades, they can do this by holding off digitalis,) they are useless at the same time that they are overpowered.
So why not have it so that PC’s are unable to harm runners? In CW2, only blasters could directly hurt drones when there was no AC or experimentals.
I said nerf, not make them useless
I think they already are useless. PC’s control digitalis, and thus control runners – with a range upgrade or two, you should never have need of a sniper unit.
great. i’m always keen on seeing new things being added to the game. its really taking shape now.
heres an idea: if the runner wasnt insta-killed, in which case it would release a flood of creeper as previously shown, but if one shot hits it, it starts leaking creeper. lower the HP, more creeper leaking out. this would be what the runners made of, ?cytoplasm? in which the cargo is held. on death, release same amount of creeper as a one-shot. this is the payload, undamaged until total destruction.
needs to tone down the sniper RoF or damage- big ones seem to die in 3 hits.
most sniper units in other games trade that high damage for a very low RoF and ammocount. that should apply here.
we have tiny small medium and large, so they could need 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 hits to kill, respectively.
another thing to note people, is he had a massive energy grid to support those few units. now add in the same number of bombers, strafers, cannons, mortars, a few shields,etc. much larger demand when the grid is stressed.
I must say I am somewhat surprised that nests leave PZ’s behind. Now only AETs do not.
If anything, Snipers make excellent other special case weapons. I repeat, I always knew CW3 needed more special weapons and enemies other than Spores and Particle Beams. But they could use some weakness. IT reminds me of the fact that a single Phantom Coil in CW2 could harm up to 2 Phantoms at once.
I would hope that there will be as many structures for players as weapons. Maybe you should add a research laboratory building that researches technytes with functions that vary depending on what kind you want them to be.
In CW2, Tech Domes were not varied by the categories in the upgrade menu. It would be more interesting if they were in CW3.
I have to ask, what important purpose does it serve to keep playing a world after it is secured? I like being able to do that, but I don’t see why it would be possible if it did not do anything important.
Who’s to say they don’t? We haven’t seen one destroyed in some time . . .
Here’s another thought. What if runner nests were not supporting that digitalis, as I first speculated, but very-low-output emitters hidden behind them?
There is a little bit of creeper there. Virgil even points it out. So I assumed the nests were stacked on top of emitters.
The creeper was not much the whole time so it is hard to tell if there are emitters.
When did the digitalis ever dissolve without an emmiter? I think it was just there, and wasn’t destroyed because nothing destroyed it.
It was visibly demonstrated in the video in which runners were introduced, even if he did not draw attention to it.
If they do, it has not been posted in any updates.
Maybe they don’t leave pzs, but as Lurkily said down there, there could be an emitter under it, that left that pz
Honestly . . . I am agreeing with Virgil’s reticence. Some players cry useless, others cry overpowered . . . I’m seeing both at the same time, in the same unit.
Aren’t we all? (truely level-headed supporters like us that is)
I like it, should we expect “Bazooka’s” or something?Plz reply. 🙂
yes, look forward to the addition of something that high range and can penetrate the creeper at mass layers with some kind of explosive shell, wait a minute, dont we already have that?
cooltv27 is right. Why do you think we have berthas?
We already have mortars, why do we need bazookas?
Wow…that said alot of what I was thinking 🙂 Also, I was thinking, RAISE the snipers damage, and dramaticly raise the runners health. This way, other units would be more challeenged, and thus, the snipers potential is born. I agree the name should be changed, and add a real sniper unit in 😉 I cannot get over the new range of the relay/collectors now! It is amazingly perfect!
Heres another thought: What if you surrounded a weapon(normal, not titan) with reactors, and you colud combine the reactoors into the weapon, so that way it does not need any more ammo packets, it got unlimited ammo and you could send it to the front line and even disconnect it from your network!
I like the new concept and all, but SOMETHING unique should be put into play. I noticed that if you made one cannon to defend the PZ from digitalis, you could have put a sniper on it, but the way the sniper would be then, it would half to be called an over powered zone 😉
I would have thought you would have eventually put a relay at the top to connect it to your network..Your packets went in a big ‘U’ type formation
Finally- I personally think reactors are too OP..Everyone, Go back to the beginning of the vid and look at how little reactors he had and compare that with how much ammo he was producing to the snipers when they were first made.
How many reactors do you think there should be then? There are 34 now.
for the combining units with reactors thing, I think it should produce enough power to supply itself, but not be able to produce packets, thats the command nodes job
Looks like they have enough ammo for a few shots before running dry. That may be the balancing solution. In this map you could have built 20-30 snipers. Dropped them all over the map and killed everything in one huge wave. And as long as you had 2 on the bottom nest and 4-5 on the top one you probably could have built relays after the initial slaughter and never lost the upper hand. Maybe a good way to balance the sniper out would be to only give it an ammo tank good for one or two shots.
Balancing the sniper sounds like balancing the CW2 phantom coils because not only does it harm 2 at once per single coil, but its fires constantly.
The only way we can really tell if the snipers are overpowered is when you combine multiple elements of this game. The creeper was no threat on this map, so you could spam snipers. When you have to battle against other kinds of enemies, things may have to be done differently. The sniper, using lots of energy, would only be useful when you are trying to take out a nest. Seeing the map NACDAR, it was a pain to take out the nests because the pulse cannons couldn’t take them out fast enough before stunning the nullifier, even when spawn camping. The sniper is the solution to that issue, as it can take out a runner a lot faster. In fact, I think that was the only reason he came up with the sniper. But every now and then, the runner does get a chance to shoot when it spawns, I guess there are 2 things he can do: make it so that the runner can’t shoot within the first half second or so, or remove the sniper and increase the time that the runner can’t shoot prior to spawning to maybe a second or two
I, like Lurkily in the comment above, see both the overpowered side of the snipers, namely that they render the runners as only a nuisance unless in large numbers, and the under-powered side of them: they can’t do anything else. I think something that might fix this is the ability to upgrade pulse cannons into a type of “sniper class”. This would probably involve there being some different “tech trees” for each weapon; maybe one focusing more on range, whereas another tree could focus on RoF, or “damage”. In this way, a weapon could narrow down their effectiveness against a certain type of enemy (runners, digitalis, spores, regular creeper, …) without completely giving up their ability to harm other types of enemies. This would also serve as a way to moderate the weaknesses of a given weapon, and also might give incentive to not squander units (CW1’s mortar suicide bombing run).
I would think in this case that PCs could have a “fire at runners only” option that gives them a little extra range in the process since runners and PCs seem to be dead even in range as it is.
And as for tech trees, I really think that if there turns out to be a building that researches upgrades, it needs to handle one of several different categories at a time unlike CW2 tech domes.
I was actually thinking more Structure specific. more like every pulse cannon, or mortar, or what have you, could be upgraded slightly differently. for example, one could focus more on range (the “sniper” tech tree), and a different one could focus on RoF. but again: not universal upgrades, but ones focused on each and every building on the map individually. this could also apply to collectors/reactors and other economic buildings.
P.S. just a thought.
I see a different weakness to snipers. They are expensive. And once you can upgrade range, PC’s can take over their role.
If you control digitalis, you control runners. If your PC’s outrange runners, they control them by controlling digitalis.
This conclusion was not reached quickly, so I should point out that most of the effort exerted in reaching it (including the ‘AHA!’ moment) is not mine.
it’s sure look overpowered here as the map is extra easy : nearly no creepers, no spore, and a huge area safe from digitalis and runner to have lots of spare energy!
It may need some readjustment, but I think It’s a good idea to have some “hard-counter” against the runner for harder map where the digitalis could spread in ours base easily
Here’s a trade-off that would in a way nurf them but make the unit still valuable… Have the sniper stun the runners.
On their own they can be over run if the fire rate is too low, but it provides cover for the other units to take them out, or have the runners disarmed temporally, but still able to move.
Hm. What to say…
I noticed the nice explosion animation from a destroyed Runner. Perhaps that animation is part of the Sniper shot. I noticed, again, that neat Can-Not-Build-Here sound effect.
It was nice to see that Nests leave behind a Power Zone.
Please also allow me to take a moment and compliment the nice diagonal / turn motion of the Runners. This makes them seem much more organic and fluid. A pleasant sight.
As for the Sniper turret itself… I see it as a tool of necessity. A world dominated by Air Exclusion Towers, Digitalis, and many Runners would make a nearly impossible fortress with-out a Sniper-like turret available. I also see it as a tool of necessity should any worlds be designed with Digitalis capable of growing into the base area where the Command Nodes land.
…and yet the Sniper Tower does not give the Player what they need: the ability to detect where the Digitalis could grow. A subterranean radar so-to-speak. Perhaps the Sniper could perform this function? Another tower? What-ever the final choice I have little doubt that it will make a good game experience.
Perhaps the Sniper could better fit as a Titan level turret. At any rate, please do not take offense. I see what the Sniper is meant to do: Allow the Player a ground-exclusive method of defending against Runners. But I am sorry to say that I do not know if they are the right choice either.
Thank you for the video, Virgil. It was once again interesting.
Hey I just realised that runners don’t
Relece creeper payload anymore :/. I liked that idea of creeper comeing out of it
Well maybe it is set up so that each can have either a certain payload or none at all like in the CW2 editor for drones. Recall that the campaign drones had no payloads at all.
The digitalis doesn’t seem like it does much. What might be interesting, is to see it work similarly to the fields in CW2, but without being static or on a timer- What I mean is, give it an AI. Make it so that when you get close to digitalis, it will siphon the creeper around, maybe even “squeeze” creeper out at you.
Personally I like the digitalis because I can imagine what would happen if a map had digitalis that grew at much faster than normal rate (as in spread across a large size map in a minute kind of speed), had more health, and regened faster.. It would be evil yet oh so fun for people like me that enjoy being pushed (take many of the maps from the “Super Hostile” map series for minecraft.. it is a whole new game and when a strategy game stresses my limits players like me enjoy it)
As for the storyline the creeper is an organism it will develope new strains to help defend itself. Maybe the digitalis and runners were even a race that is being morphed to the loki’s will and has adapted to become part of the creeper (Starcraft players are familiar with these kind of shennanigans). The digitalis may not be an immediate threat but what if there was a world where you had to save this games version of survival pods (assuming they will be added in ofc) that are on the high ground far away from the creeper? The digitalis would not be slowed in the least.
Now time for suggestion for the didgitalis-
1 Some sort of creeper “conductance” it could accelerate large masses of creeper on it in a certain direction.
2 Another idea for the creeper conductance: in a radius around the digitalis it would pull creeper towards it or have the same effect in idea #1
3 Digitalis that cannot be cut off. Sort of a late game strain of the digitalis that even when cut of from an emmiter or nest will still grow and regenerate (maybe even normal digitalis could do this it would just be at a slower rate)
4 As part of idea #3 spores that spread digitalis on impact and maybe even an advanced targeting for the digitalis spores: Aim away from weapons, and shields, aim for the high ground if there are any viable targets and priorty targetting like in cw1 and cw2 (maybe even pathing so that they could avoid your PB)
1: In other words, fields.
2: In other words, fields that act as attractors to a point, instead of a linear field per each cell.
3: Eh . . . my favorite part of digi is that you can attack it strategically – something that is often much less possible with creep. Digi has a distinct supply line – creeper has the entire world.
They would be fields, but fields that fit well into gameplay. Or as I suggested previously, fields that can flit around dynamically, based on where buildings are.
In other words, fields dynamically generated in accordance with structure placement – not designed by a mapper.
I don’t like digitalis very much as it stands. Creeper is a great enemy because it flows and interacts with the terrain in interesting and unpredictable ways. Digitalis just slowly spreads over its preset. Furthermore, it isn’t much of a threat, even with runners (the effectiveness of snipers in protecting a front from runners is clearly evident). I’m really hoping for digitalis to do something interesting like creating structures on powerzones that it covers or producing creeper. Even so, the digitalis network seems really boring with it’s arbitrary shape and lack of real aggression.
I agree wholeheartedly. More so, the addition of runners (separate units with primitive AI) seems to be more in the vein of cookie-cutter TD games rather than this unique physics-meets-tactics style Creeper World series is known for.
I think there should be way less predictability in the way digitalis grows. The thing that made creeper so exciting as enemy for me was that it has no AI in the usual RTS-sense but still is threatening and _very_ responsive to player’s actions.
I would like to see interesting new developments here, too.
. . .
Ditto.
………………………
Creeper is actually quite predictable, once you know the emitter intensities. if you can’t see the future digitalis spread patterns, on the other hand…
I completely agree with this, but I don’t see any way for the digitalis to spread similarly to how it currently does without being confined to a certain area.
Digi does have a pre-defined ‘growth area’, as shown in previous videos.
However, it has a lot of potential – there are a lot of interesting ideas that could make intersections of digi and creeper change the tactical landscape a bit.
I’m optimistic that there’s more we haven’t seen.
If anything, I would like to see if there is anything that makes the enemy side unpredictable as everything is currently defined and pre-determined.
Digitalis can be devastating how it is.
Imagine a map that the digitalsi can spread freely, with no restricted areas. It would spread quickly to your base, and would bea challenge to just keep it away!
So it would be creeper…
More interesting doesn’t necessarily have to mean more threatening . . . just that it affects the progress or tactics of the game significantly.
I find it odd that people don’t realize that the phantom coils in CW2 were able to hit 3 phantoms at once cause it watched it hit 3 at once.
actually, it was 2
I thought it was infinite . . . how many they were able to KILL before running out of ammo now, is a different story, though.
no, if you had only one phantom coil, and three phantoms attacked you, one of them would pass
Phantom coils never run out of ammo, provided their supply line is long enough. However, they can only fire on two phantoms at once.
I truly think you need some unpredictable factors.
Definitely for the bigger maps.
Otherwise once the player has a solid base, the rest of the game is executing the plan witch have been made in the beginning of the map.
Maybe the walkers are the way to go but at the moment there are to predictable and to easy to manage.
In game 1 this was not a problem because setting up the base was almost finishing the map.
Auw I feel as giddy as a schoolboy when I see my own suggestion added. Applied differently ofcourse, and virgil probanly came across the idea on his own accord at some point? But still great.
The unit may need some more work, minute differences in statistics or function to make more tactics possible(e.g. the terrain height-range idea I suggested) but other then that it’s slow firing, large ammo requirement, and singular function compensate for it’s 1 hit KO to basic runners.
Hey, V, How do you see when people update?
I mean, do you get a notification when people make a comment or do you just check it every so often and run through a list of comments to be accepted or not?
I don’t get it. How come Creeper World looks so crappy on your website, except your blog looks cool? How do I get the cool one with all the runners, ect?
CW3 has the runners and its not out yet
Because he’s playing CW3. And you’ll be able to get it when he’s ready to release it.
Creeper World 1 and Creeper World 2 are the only games available. This is a development blog for Creeper World 3, which hasn’t come out yet.
Creeper World 1 and 2 are far from crappy though…. Creeper World 2 is a completely different playstyle.
Except that this blog has posts about KC in general and the current main buzz is CW3. When it is over, this blog will not be devoted to CW3 anymore for sure.
Perhaps, but every entry for the past few months has been tagged “Creeper World 3,’ and since this person clearly doesn’t spend much time here it doesn’t hurt at all saying that this is a dev blog for CW3, since that’s what it has been for a long time. Once CW3 is done, it won’t be a dev blog for it anymore. But until then, I stand by my original comment.
The ‘crappy’ games are CW1 and CW2, the blog post images are of CW3 which is still under development and not availible to the public.
Always nice to see some process, but this one leaves me a little bit curious: Are there other things you have experimented with? Did they end well or did you trash them?
You could go through previous posts in the blog – that has a pretty much continuous log of what’s been played with around here.
That’s true. But I was more talking about things he decided to throw away before he showed them.
hi V
i recently watched a documentry called “indie game:the movie” and i’v gotten a lot more respect for you. just do us all a favor? dont.give.up.
-live life crayz, life is too short be lazyyyy,
-billy
I noticed that the world was completed when all the enemy structures were killed. I don’t think it should work that way. Think about it, if the NHA sent a colony ship to that planet and there is digitalis there. Than what?
Digitalis withers away when disconnected, as demonstrated in an earlier video. You can see it go dark when the last nest is destroyed here, too, though there isn’t enough time for it to wither.
I’m pretty sure you’re mistaken about that..I seem to recall it being specifically stated that digitalis only stops growing when it’s cut off from the source. I get the impression this map had the digitalis pre-placed and no emitters at all. Are you sure the video you’re referencing for that didn’t merely show the digitalis getting shot down?
you can see in previous videos that the digitalis withers virgil can probably place the digitalis. but it has to be connected to something.
In early videos, this is true. When runners were introduced, withering was shown in the video, though it was not commented on.
Also . . . there is creeper present on the map. I suspect there are features hidden by overlap.
That’s assuming by CW2 plot… maybe the plot is different here. Remember the ending of CW2 said something about Adm. Abraxis meeting up with Platius again and disappearing…? Doesn’t really sound like something the NHA has to do with it.
is this game still suppose to come out at the end of the year? my creeper world change jar is starting to flow like creeper onto the counter.
The release date given publicly is that he hopes to have it to market by the end of the year.
At this rate though, that goal will be met only on New Year’s Eve. Not saying that progress is slow, but the concept of CW3 does not appear to be finalized just yet.
I really hope it does come out at the end of the year because my cw jar has allready destroyed my counter
Meaning?
I think he means his jar for change saved up for CW3 has so much change it has crashed trough his counter or something. It happened to me too a while back.
That’s what I mean sorry for unclear maening
The runners should be able to delay a structure being built. I noticed at the very beginning he was building snipers and the runners were right next to them and did nothing.
If they can shut down a structure for a short while, why can’t they shut down its construction?
Also the stun time seems awfully short. Wouldn’t mind a MUCH longer stun to really make you regard it as a somewhat serious threat.
Kharnellius-It only stuns when destroyed, as shown earlier. And I agree they need to be more of a threat, like greater overall health, or even multi-stun, but not by a longer stun time.
Also, in the map editor, COULD we make the digitalis diamond shape instead of square? Might be really interesting for certain parts.
I’m not sure what you mean “It only stuns when destroyed”.
Watch video at 0:34. A runner at the bottom stuns his relay tower but the runner was not destroyed.
Runners can stun when they get close enough and they will . The runners drop creeper a lot when they are killed though in some videos kind of like the drones in CW2.
“Lose”? I didn’t think CW was hardly ever about *whether* you could win, just about how long it takes you. If you suck, it takes a long time, and with increasing skill and experience, you can do it faster.
My opinion of the intent of the CW series is to create a game in which the player’s progress against his enemy can be pushed back without unit loss. Everything in this game seems designed to avoid any unit loss at all if you are attentive.
It’s my belief that Virgil is trying to design enemies that attack your advancement, not your units.
Point taken. The average difficulty of the CW series in general does seem relatively nerfed.
You know, I would like to know what would happen if each campaign map had bonus/side objectives/achievements. I just got Starcraft II Wings of Liberty on the night of Black Friday and I have slaved over beating it and its side achievements and objectives and difficulties ever since.
In addition, if there was some way to implement a Fog of War without disrupting the CW3 style of play, I will have more satisfaction for it. That is what made it more interesting to beat the Starcraft II levels.
The point is not to make it easy or nerfed – the point is to make it possible for the enemy to halt or even reverse your advance without forcing you to take losses.
Welcome to the starcraft II club, mate!
also; interesting ideas. i like them.
easily removed fog of war would be pointless.
Fog of war would be pointless… How? You won’t know where the creeper is necesarrily coming from so it would be more difficult to defend against. You might send in some Strafers just to find that the area is protected by AETs.
Fog of war could add to the game. I’m not sure if it’s something I’d want to see implemented, but I can say that it wouldn’t be pointless. (You might be thinking you could just float a tower around the map once, but generally Fog of War refills itself after your unit has left the area. So it would be useful only in getting a lay of the land)
though…with double down, or some of the custom maps…you very much can lose.
the 101 series is evil in that regard.
I don’t necessarily agree with you on that. There are several levels that are easy to lose if you aren’t good and quick. Some people enjoy spending time on a level and don’t care about the score of a really fast game.
Why is there still no new post as in before you go into comments
Just keep track of the number of posts. when it changes, there’s new posts.
yeah i wonder why :/
Prob he forgot or is making an extra long vid on sunday coming to cover for the post which was suppose to be a few days ago
i hope….
Looks like we have a record. A record for the longest this blog has gone without a new post.
Yeah, the Thanksgiving holiday knocked me out of business for more than half a week. Rather than post another simple screenshot I decided to wait another week and post a video.
good choice;)
I am both happy and sad at the same time. If only I could learn some patience, then I’d be all happy.
Maybe that Thanksgiving meal gave you some ideas, gravy can sometimes be like creeper, breaking out of it’s mashed potato holding cell and rushing towards your cranberries or other fruity delight… *sigh*
Anyway; keep up the good work Virgil!
good choice 😀
Can’t help but notice that energy storage containers haven’t appeared in any recent videos or screenshots. Have they been removed or replaced in game, and if so, by what?
He hasn’t needed capacitors is my guess.
yay! Another video 😀
With there being storage units wouldn’t it be possible to have tech that would increase individual storage units capacity?
That would be surprising since they are extremely cheap to make. Although, I would not deny that storage capacity upgrades ae likely to persist.
With storage upgrades possible, does having a separate storage unit really make sense?
That wasn’t very clear – I’m gonna rephrase, and sorry about the double post. If storage capacity upgrades are implemented as 4x suggests, then would having separate storage even make sense?
Correction: ShadowDragon7015 suggested it, not me.
The storage WITHIN each built unit would increase, is what I think Shadow was saying. You’d still have to build them. But these upgrade should exist and have a point, because having less storage units means you have more space for other things(like reactors or Berthas)
That was what I was saying individual increase.
Yeah, I got it. Thanks.
maby but that would seem complicated for you have to make the upgrade stuff then implament the upgrade then see if it works so it seems to much of a waste of time
On the other hand, we have no upgrades in CW3 to date as of now. So the question remains, why is it a waste of time?
Assuming there will be an upgrade system, I personally think there should be a way to use research units that do not allow you to choose something in any category to upgrade so easily. All potential enhancements in CW2 are available at the same time and the fact that research is being conducted for all of that at the same exact time is a little disturbing to me.
I just think the upgrading should be more elaborate and layered in CW3. I see it being based off of the upgrade system of the Starcraft series; although, it has both upgrades and research, thus emphasizing the difference between research and upgrades.
Personally, I don’t think the upgrade system needs to be more complicated. CW is ultimately about setting the quickest time (yeah, I know there are other ways playing it, but those still work great with the “be quickest” setup, don’t they?) Selecting in which order to unlock upgrades is tricky enough as it is (if you go for a good score). An option in the editor to make certain upgrades unavailable for a mission would be great, though.
That’s deceptive, actually, I think. The largest consumer market here is probably casual. The problem is, the voice of the community has a much larger representation of hardcore players, because those are the players who really will take an interest in immersing themselves in a game’s community and details.
I think the a large portion of the vocal community is score-oriented, but I suspect that this represents only a fraction of the people actually playing CW.
I think the main thing research needs is ongoing cost. More complicated, layers of upgrades and research . . . that’s detailed and complex stuff, stuff that needs management on more than a casual level.
The one thing that I think has held back interest in technology in CW/2 is the fact that tech is a “Once And Done” deal. Once you have what you need, the idea of technical investment ceases to exist.
I would agree that the more vocal people are more likely to be the hardcore/score seeking players. People who play casually or only when they have nothing better to do (perish the thought) may not think about checking the website about updates.
I have to say in regards to your last 2 paragraphs, Lurkily: FINALLY. I was wondering if anyone would get the message I have been trying to convey all along and let alone not necessarly appose it.
If I understood Lurkily’s post correctly, it said that CW3 does not need “more complicated, layers of upgrades, research”, because that would lessen the casuality with which the CW games can be played and casual players being the majority.
@Lurkily: Let’s turn to the forum for the “ongoing costs” thing.
Exactly. Complexity and layers and intricacy doesn’t really cater to what’s at the core of CW – casual fun that you can jump into without having to dig through multiple types of research to figure out what your next move should be.
I feel that in CW2, the tech domes kinda lost usefulness after you had all your upgrades, but they were expensive to make and I end up having probably a lot of wasted energy. I think that the upgrade system could be where you select an upgrade you want to make, and you get a specialized tech dome that you can place that will having ongoing research in that category, then when it’s finished it’ll vaporize like the ore mines.
This… this makes SENSE…
I just mean for storage units I am not against an upgrade system jusr that 1 idea
He hasn’t posted yet?
vid on Sunday instead of a pic last week 🙂
people do love the videos… i know i do!
I don’t think that the sniper is overpowered because it doesn’t seem to do any damage to the digitalis or creeper. Their one purpose is to kill the runners.
Any ideas when is CW3 release date – how far it is?
Thanks
There is a release date thread on the forum
That is utterly pointless. Just say that it may be released around the start of the new year, but nobody knows for sure. That alone is more useful than the entire release date thread.
If you go to that thread, you waste time reading about Tee Shirts and Mayan predictions. Pointless beyond the first 3 posts (which I summed up in one sentence, seen above)
But, 4XC is pointing people towards the forums in general. Which is a good thing.
Maybe so, but as it is a release date forum thread, maybe anyone anxious should use it to try to talk more about it and vent their anxiety about the release there instead of here over and over.
No one person appears to be doing that, but in case it does, I was just trying to prevent it.
It wouldn’t hurt to point them to the thread, and also tell them ‘Somewhere around New Years, but nobody knows for sure’ so that they don’t go to the thread expecting to find an answer that isn’t there, and waste their time reading the multitude of offtopic or worthless posts. At least then they can go to dig deeper and ask there if they want, or just leave it at that.
Actually, Virgil, I was thinking about letting your beta testers cover some of the video material for you, instead. Have you ever spend it a thought?
As I believe the beta testers have more time playing than you do, wouldn’t it be good for everyone if they showed some gameplay?
You could put up constraints, so they would go to show us new units in a very organic way on “regular” maps, giving us a great feel for the game, a good time watching and lastly, giving you more time to concentrate on development.
As there is no coverage from testers other than that you posted on the blog, I guess you are not fond of this idea. Probably to avoid showcasing gamebreaking bugs? Or you don’t want to showcase an unfinished product excessively, which is understandable.
So, instead of letting them post videos all day long (which sure would be awesome), you could like let every tester play a mission (which showcases new features, while playing a complete mission), let the testers vote on which video would suit well (or you do it? Would be time consuming, though), and post one or a couple of them for us to see.
It would be fantastic to see more gameplay, see a complete mission – and have you able to dedicate more time programming instead of having to feed us, your fans, with video material 🙂
Just a thought 🙂
Molay
I second this!
There was a short video and some screenshot from Madmag or something a while back.
Yeah that’s right, the one Virgil posted on this very blog 🙂 My idea was to give the testers _some_ more autonomy when it comes to creating video content for the fans. Also, that one 5 minute video was pretty exciting. Wish it was longer – wish it was complete!
Let’s hope this gets some attention. Devs are not always fond of the idea of having other people show their game before it’s “ready”, but looking at what we’ve seen so far, the game seems to be in a great state, and more content could barely hurt – I think the opposite being true, that it will be very beneficial to attract new players.
Now there is a blog.
What if there were youtube channels aswell?
We know those can bring in lots of potential customers 🙂
I third this
I fourth it. I have to say that it does looks like personally making these vids on your own part does seem to be hindering your other porgress. Besides, most of us are aware that you cannot concentrate and demonstrate at the same exact time. Maybe one of the testers who can should after all.
Addition: It is also why I currently plan to keep eyes and ears open for the virtually inevitable moment when new testers will be welcomed for CW4.
I think that, when Virgil was asked if he intends to rely on kickstarter/beta-access for backing for an upcoming CW4, he mentioned this could be a possibility for the next game in the series. Not sure where he said that, though. Some older comment, somewhere. I’m not optimistic to find it all too soon^^
Yeah, that’s one of the strongest points I feel. It hinders development when Virgil has to sit down, prepare a video, record it etc…
He obviously has to have some kind of preparation before, an idea of what he is going to show and how, creating the map and setting up the recording environment.
Then comes the time of recording. Hopefully the first recording being good enough (for his quality standards, which obviously are quite high), so he doesn’t have to spend more time on just recording.
Lastly comes eventual post-production, even though I’m not sure he does any of that. It’s more like he records and posts, so this phase shouldn’t be of a bother.
Anyways, the point is it consumes time. That’s time he could save 🙂
And yeah, then there’s the point that a tester likely has much more time to spend, so he might play entire missions, instead of the usual half-way-through Virgil can afford the time to do.
Anyways, appreciate I already got “fourthed” 😀
Do I even need to fifth/sixth whatever this? Let your testers make the vids so you have more time to polish up the code and/or game balance.
4xC-When CW4 comes out, there BETTER be a multi-player 😉
I wouldn’t really mind if you paused it alittle more to demonstrate/explain as long as you still have alot of gameplay in your videos. Maybe make a 10 minute long video and another 5 minute long, due to the space on your flashdrive. That would work 🙂
With the pause function in the game it would be impossible to have multiplayer
I could imagine something that would do the job.
Each player has an energy bar, let’s call it the “slow bar”.
That slow bar slowly replenishes it’s energy.
Each player can opt to pause/slow down the game to a minimum by draining energy from said bar. If the bar is empty, the game goes back to normal speed.
Could be something like, every 2 minutes you regenerate for up to 15 seconds of pause. Something like this maybe? Balancing will have to be figured out later.
This would effectively implement pause, but limiting the duration of it. Would keep MP fluid.
Also, an option to have “unlimited pause” at the beginning of the game. No need to hamstring the pause for friends playing together 🙂
Typically, multiplayer games are played without the option to pause. Even in RTS games, only the host can pause, and he better use it sparingly, or his players are going to be dropping out.
Yeah that’s true, a typical RTS doesn’t have a built-in pause function (atleast not one where you can issue orders while paused). But let’s be honest here, other RTS don’t have a pause function like CW in singleplayer, either 🙂 It’s a part of the game to pause for a bit – maybe to send multiple units simultaneously, to issue many orders at a time, stuff like that. But yeah, the pause should be kept short else you’re just going to annoy your opponent 🙂
A pause in which you can issue orders is not uncommon. But when you go into multiplayer, that feature is usually disabled, when it is present, because it can be abused to disrupt another player’s experience. If it is used, it is usually only accessible to the hosting player.
Not if you limit how long each player is allowed to pause the game for…or simply disable pause in multiplayer mode.
When you say multiplayer, what modes are you thinking about?
I just came up with some:
CO-OP: quite obvious
RACE: multiple players race to collect an artifact (or multiple), located somewhere on the map. Collecting the artifact requires high amounts of energy.
King of the Hill: Multiple players compete to obtain control of a particular region.
Anyways, it will be hard to have any decent competitive modes unless we implement new features to attack structures. It would be awful (I think) to have blasters shoot at each other. Maybe manipulating creeper more intensely (ability to “build” or “feed” emitters so they stomp your ennemy?).
Not sure about this. But anyways, that’s still a long road ahead. I’m looking forward to CW3 right now first 🙂
I could see rival armies having their blasters fire on eachother in a bloody (well, maybe not bloody) war over a valuable relic. You could have a sort of ‘Flood Gate’ module on the map that you can power up and once at full you can open a wall on the opponent’s side that was holding back creeper.
As for capturing the relic, I see your packets getting it closer to collection, and their packets would reduce the amount you have already put in, so it’s like a tug of war sending in packets (giving you the option to win economically, pumping out tons of packets quickly, or militarily by holding the relic and forcing back their relays and such)
Anyway, there is potential for multiplayer. But players would likely have to accept giving up their pauses. Maybe that would call for being able to coordinate mass commands that wait until your que to activate, so you could launch a large well coordinated assualt if you wanted.
The player units simply are not designed to deal with an aggressive enemy. Beyond that, the game is not designed to encourage accepting huge unit losses in failed attacks – PVP multiplayer would completely upset that, requiring the build of tons of units, and the acceptance of heavy losses.
I think the only thing that would make sense for multiplayer is co-op.
Yeah you’re right on that, PvP with the current set of units seems like a horrible idea. Also, you could prevent any attacks by just blocking all the landing space, having it guarded by blasters etc… That’s why a more PvP oriented play should incorporate creeper manipulation in my opinion. Where it’s basically:
Player 1 defends against player 2’s creeper and vice versa.
Creeper output should be easily scalable. Rather go for a good defense? But then you can’t afford creeper to freak out your opponent… Stuff like that. Somehow. Maybe. This would need far more consideration and space than any comment here has to offer, though 🙂
I guess what I mean is that the game seems designed to permit the player to encounter setbacks, even have to retreat, without ever losing a single unit. A mission can be a disaster in which you barely succeed, but even then you might never have lost a single mobile unit.
PVP would absolutely require losses from a player. That’s why I am not really sure it’s suited to what V’s trying to create.
Lurkily – I dont really know what you are driving at here. I do not really think a pvp option would work either. However I lose units all the time. granted that almost 99% of the time I lose something its because I sent a wave of blasters in behind enemy lines to thin the creeper and hold it back, but I certantly do not play the game with the mindset that I cannot lose a blaster…
But still, compared to Starcraft or Total Anihilation, how many losses do you take, on a moderately challenging map?
Any time you take a loss of a mobile unit in CW, it’s because you are either inattentive, or because you choose to accept that loss. (If I have the chance, I typically pull weapons back at the last instant, but I don’t get too worked up if something blows because I’m inattentive.
My point is that crafting a game mode that absolutely demands massive losses and constant weapon manufacture to replace losses is probably not what the game is supposed to be about.
I agree with you. Crafting a game mode that absolutely demands massive losses and constant weapon manufacture is not what this game is supposed to be.
So, let’s envision other PvP possibilities before discarding all of them, just because blaster vs blaster fights seem dull 🙂
It’s all about the interaction with the creeper, after all.
It would be a completely different playstyle, but definately doable. The anti air beams would have to be able to target enemy strafers and such. Berthas would be used to soften an area up to land your invasion force.
I could see a sort of tug-of-war/king of the hill type of gamestyle rising out of it. (see above comment by me)
Alternatively, you could have player one control the people, and player two could control a set of ‘Creeper Cores’ which generate points over time, which could be used to summon Spores, Creeper, Digitalis, Runners, etc. over time. Maybe the Creeper player could also save up to build AET’s and Runner Nests. For a certain number of points, maybe they could also change the ‘wind’ direction and force.
Could be interesting, but it’d be a ton of work. Maybe something to look into for #4. (Creeper finally being beaten back, now various warbands rise up to fight for power… And the creeper has time to recollect, and strike out yet again)
There’s potential. I can’t say how well it would work out in the end, but I think it could be done.
The question isn’t what we want, but what Virgil wants.
Do we think, based on what CW is, that this is what he wants CW to become? If the answer isn’t yes, then it will probably never happen.
i agree with lurkily because if there was pvp you would need more units and since there stationary flying units can be taken down before they are able to deal damage to the enemy :/
maybe the Loki vs the Humans? 🙂
as in 1 person commands the Loki which can build emmiters ect overtime and 1 player as humans 🙂
‘Commanding’ a force of creeper sounds boring . . . I place an emitter and . . . wait? Meh . . .
You place emitters, upgrade them.
You place runner nests.
You paint digitalis zones.
You set up air exclusion towers.
You launch (target) spores at stuff.
You could get mobile emitters, maybe? Slow moving emitters that can be hit by regular weapon fire.
You could change “wind” direction, pushing your creep up on ennemy walls.
You could make creeper mines, exploding when ennemies get close.
You could terraform the area using drones.
How about you getting ressources for creep coverage (the idea being it is some sort of SC2 creep, absorbing minerals from the ground)?
How about generating ressources by having special creep-buildings, which need constant protection?
Nah, I see a lot of potential. And lots of people love to see how the stuff they engineered and placed carefully evolves to swallow a whole map.
For those that find it boring to manipulate creeper (which is crazy amazing), well, defend against it.
The idea is great to play as the “opponent”. Esspecially such a special kind of opponent, a giant mass of creeper which you can direct!
Boring? Sure not.
The player is just very powerful in comparison to creeper – it’s hard to actually lose in a normal game. Overcoming that with powerful Multiplayer upgrades seems like it would require a very serious time investment and a very hard slog, no matter who won.
What I always thought for multiplayer vs mode on this game is when you have anti creeper, it was creeper to the other players screen(Vice-versa)
And I liked the idea of blasters and others attacking eachother. I would have simply disabled any pause feature from multi-player(but it would be more challenging,not less fun!) but you have all suggested great ideas for pause like the slow bar. I though of another pause possibility:
Every minute, a player gains a pause ability. You can stack this 6 times, and when used, it pauses both screens for 10 seconds.
Having my game pause and unpause outside my control and without my warning would irritate me severely. I say if it goes multiplayer, just take out pause.
Haven’t been blogs for a bit… is Virgil getting ready to announce something BIG???
Ideas:Maybe a “thunder tower”.It would be a giant tesla coil that would cost 100 energy to build and 30 energy to fire but could hit all enemies near it and its range would be a 7 by 7 -ish circle.Thoughts?