139 Responses

Page 1 of 1
  1. TrickyDragon
    TrickyDragon September 30, 2012 at 8:06 pm |

    ooh what a treat <3

  2. Itssnowing
    Itssnowing September 30, 2012 at 8:19 pm |

    Could you have used Guppies, to those pieces in the top-right?

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily September 30, 2012 at 10:21 pm |

      Yup. That would be an option.

  3. Chawe800
    Chawe800 September 30, 2012 at 8:21 pm |

    Looks awesome V. Great to se the progression with the interface over the past few months.

  4. TrickyDragon
    TrickyDragon September 30, 2012 at 8:25 pm |

    as for a strong strategy, run some relays across the top of the map and down the ridges supplying mortors suppressing the creeper and pop up some blasters to hold it back long enough for a nullifier…..

  5. Jimlad 42
    Jimlad 42 September 30, 2012 at 8:42 pm |

    Could you show us a mission where it’s useful to move the command node, as I don’t see why you’d do that. and maybe a vid on what happens when you lose, maybe you start on a almost dead one, it dies, then you retake it?

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily September 30, 2012 at 10:22 pm |

      It is useful to move a command node to make sure your units have supply that’s very close by. Very distant units can run dry very quickly in an energy crunch, when units are only getting partially supplied.

    2. Hybird607
      Hybird607 October 1, 2012 at 12:15 am |

      I found in CW1 there typically wasn’t much of a reason to move the command node unless it was in immediate danger.

      1. Shrike30
        Shrike30 October 1, 2012 at 7:45 pm |

        Moving a command node close to the frontline in CW1 was a lot more economical than building a bunch of speed upgrades to keep packet transmission times short. You didn’t *need* to do it, but it could save you a lot of time and let you spend energy on other types of infrastructure.

  6. billy
    billy September 30, 2012 at 8:51 pm |

    1: take a guppie, or command node, and colonize the top middle area early on. we may have to provide guppie support to north colony, but it would stall the creeper and provide a assault base area.
    2: take the third command node, and colonize south east area. may need some guppy, but will be a critical help in protecting the main colony. place a mortar tower on the spot above and it can stall creeper even better. mabye terrn that hole?
    i CAN’T wait!

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily September 30, 2012 at 10:25 pm |

      My strategy? Three CN’s to construct the initial nodes and blasters, sent two back for real estate when I begin building reactors. The entire time, have a relay route on the extreme upper edge, and build mortars to transit to the ridges on the upper-right, bridge them with mortars.

      After that, easy peasy.

      1. Lurkily
        Lurkily September 30, 2012 at 10:29 pm |

        Note – no guppies needed, no shields needed, PC’s to hold off creeper from advancing on your base, but this tactic is almost completely conventional, and much cheaper than strafer attacks or digging into the creeper with shields or berthas.

      2. TrickyDragon
        TrickyDragon October 1, 2012 at 11:31 am |

        lol i did the same, only i started with one Cn…. i am loyal to the CW1 style and only use more than one CN on the reallllllly big maps……

  7. anon
    anon September 30, 2012 at 8:55 pm |

    I would have replaced the collectors on the hills with reactors over time, used a terp to build a bridge along the top, and built a bertha or two to provide fire support.

  8. Kinam
    Kinam September 30, 2012 at 9:07 pm |

    Wow, nice to see the development going so well. Like yourself, I would have creeped across the ground in a slow forward moving assault. although TrickyDragon’s observation for the wind pushing the creep south more than west (I think this was due to just simply having the wind at a 45 degree and the map being further wide than tall… if it were perfectly square, that tactic wouldn’t have worked)

    couple questions:
    1) would wind be steady in one direction at map creation? or could it change depending on time spent on the map?
    2) If wind is set in stone at map creation, is it programmed in for a degree? or could you say… choose to have wind, and tell it to blow towards a single target? (IE: where the most likely place for landing the command nodes)

    1. TrickyDragon
      TrickyDragon October 2, 2012 at 2:59 pm |

      the wind doesn’t change direction in this map…. so it is safe to say that it is a consistant thing like the gravity in CW2……

      1. TrickyDragon
        TrickyDragon October 2, 2012 at 3:01 pm |

        But maybe a global field would have the effect of changing wind…… (if V decides he wants fields in…)

  9. Xander
    Xander September 30, 2012 at 9:11 pm |

    There’s a number of things that could be tried, but I honestly don’t know what would work best. Personally I would have gotten one of your giant cannons up and running which I’m going to fondly nickname the ‘F.U.’ cannon.

  10. sweetdude64
    sweetdude64 September 30, 2012 at 9:17 pm |

    wow! this is amazing! a few notes.
    First i would like to say could you remove the cancel sign from the HUD on the bottom. It just will not stop bugging me! I like it to where i click on a unit to delete it.
    Next, will the nullifiers time to transport the emmiter be reduced? It takes so long <:(
    Also, i just LOVE the new 'blow' effect with the creeper! Its like an advanced version of the gravity idea i pitched earlier about lesser amounts of creeper being able to climb higher terrain.
    I noticed the energy is a whopping 100, will this change? Also when you make more command nodes, dos it link? If you connect the two command nodes, what would happen?
    There were gaps at the beginning to place a few relays and you could have made the packet travel time halved.
    now to get into strategy 😀
    first, when you placed the reactors at the beginning, you made 4 at a time. Wouldnt it be more energy efficient to place them 1 by one?
    Next, in the bottom right corner, it was open bro! 😉 Guppy it up! from there you couldve got the high terrain barrier to your advantage.
    I noticed most of the time, you had full energy. Storage wouldve been a good way to go 🙂
    I was VERY surprised when you placed the mortar on the PZ instead of the shield (from what ive seen.) But it seems it was the way to go (: Does the mortar shoot at the densest creeper, but if a shot is already going to the denset area, it goes to the next dense area? It has always bugged me that it would target the same place twice, thx!

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily September 30, 2012 at 10:35 pm |

      The final energy amount is still in the air. As in CW2, I expect it will be upgradable.

      Command nodes instantly join and pool their energy when networks link.

      Storage doesn’t seem to exist as a separate structure, based on this video.

      If you watch these videos, mortars do target dense first, but do NOT always target the same spot twice in a row, when the last shot is still in the air. This points to the possibility that mortar targeting may be more intelligent this time around.

      1. me_me_me
        me_me_me October 1, 2012 at 8:58 pm |

        The mortars dont always fire in the same spot due to the fact that the creeper is flowing and it may be slighty thicker somewhere else.

        1. me_me_me
          me_me_me October 1, 2012 at 8:59 pm |

          nevermind i just read the next comment please ignore the one above

    2. TrickyDragon
      TrickyDragon October 1, 2012 at 7:27 am |

      mortars use a new advanced targeting system that calculates the damage from all shells in the air to predict the next densest area of creeper. Basically, the mortar wont hit the same place twice 😀 )

      1. Lurkily
        Lurkily October 1, 2012 at 9:44 am |

        Actually, now that it’s in the open . . .

        They MAY hit the same place twice. But only if the targeting algorithm decides that after the first impact, that same place will STILL contain the densest creeper. This is often the case on top of emitters.

        1. 4xC
          4xC October 2, 2012 at 7:11 am |

          Yeah. Density and depth weapons always did that before, hit the samespot and all.

          1. Lurkily
            Lurkily October 2, 2012 at 9:55 am |

            They were doing that because the last shot had not dealt damage, and the deepest point was still the same.

            The point I am making is that this is no longer the case. Targeting takes into account shells in the air, predicting damage so that they will strike what targeting estimates WILL be the deepest, after all shells in the air land.

            As my last post is trying to state, that’s not always enough damage to change targeting priorities. I was not trying to explain the same dynamics that were at work in CW1/2 – things have definitely changed.

            1. 4xC
              4xC October 2, 2012 at 4:08 pm |

              Actually, the point I had in mind was the fact that CW2 launchers hit the same spots before their first shells detonated sometimes. Since this does that in the case of PZ mortars, does it estimate what WILL be the deepest creeper spot and take nearby emitters into account at the same time?

              1. Lurkily
                Lurkily October 2, 2012 at 8:37 pm |

                It’s just like CW1 and CW2’s targeting, except that it throws in an estimation of the damage that will be done by rounds still in the air.

                I doubt that targeting predicts creeper that will be emitted – predicting creeper flow is CPU-intensive, and predicting it that many frames in advance for every shot is potentially ruinous.

      2. Nemoricus
        Nemoricus October 1, 2012 at 10:08 am |

        Unless doing so is the most damaging option.

  11. exhodelta
    exhodelta September 30, 2012 at 9:18 pm |

    Oh god the placements…

  12. me_me_me
    me_me_me September 30, 2012 at 9:18 pm |

    I’ve noticed I’ve never seen anyone use mortars for “bombing runs” Basically you send a mortar into a deep pool have it land and right before it gets destroyed bring it back to base. This was a strategy I used in CW1 and Im pretty sure that the map would have been easier with the use of guppies, terps, and mortars on those ridges on the north-east corner of the map. Use the guppies to supply terps that would close off those ridges and mortars to keep the creeper down.

    1. Bob
      Bob September 30, 2012 at 10:36 pm |

      I did that in game 1 sometimes.

    2. Lurkily
      Lurkily September 30, 2012 at 10:36 pm |

      Closing those ridges would overflow them fast, with that ‘wind’. They’re much more useful as weapon placements, which will keep them ‘above water’.

      1. me_me_me
        me_me_me October 1, 2012 at 9:01 pm |

        Its kinda like Loki on double down mode you 100% need mortars to keep the creeper low enough along with blasters to cover where it may get through

    3. Koker93
      Koker93 October 1, 2012 at 8:21 pm |

      I used to do it in game 1 a lot, only I did it with blasters. The blasters would run dry before they died, and usually by the time I was using this technique, I was well ahead of the game in terms of energy. So I would just start making another round of blasters as soon as the first one took off. I guess I used them a lot like the strafers in CW3 🙂

      1. fractalman
        fractalman October 4, 2012 at 4:35 pm |

        Same here. They’re very usefull when you don’t have the energy or time for a drone. They’ll still be usefull in 3 where anti-air is in place, but I do believe they have less hp and ammo capacity in 3, so their use as hyper-aggressive weapons will be limited.

        Though, I expect a swarm of 16 or so blasters in formation will still prove quite usefull. I used that size of swarm to reliable cap emitters on a number of levels before I got good at three-blaster leapfrog.

        1. Lurkily
          Lurkily October 4, 2012 at 8:00 pm |

          PC’s are also just more ineffective on deep creeper, from what I can observe.

  13. Zach
    Zach September 30, 2012 at 9:24 pm |

    it’s coming along, for sure. I can’t wait!

  14. Matthew
    Matthew September 30, 2012 at 9:25 pm |

    My favorite addition is not just the info bar at the top of the screen, but that the bars represent how your numbers have been over time. IE: they make a graph of your energy levels, etc. Love it! Can’t wait to play!

    Matthew

  15. Saneman
    Saneman September 30, 2012 at 9:34 pm |

    awesome video man. But i would say that the game is a bit slow-paced. other than that, nice progress, im looking forward to next weeks videos/pictures

    1. 4xC
      4xC October 2, 2012 at 4:10 pm |

      If it was fast-paced, it would be harder to deal with larger maps.

      1. Nemoricus
        Nemoricus October 2, 2012 at 10:18 pm |

        That’s what pause is for.

  16. Koker93
    Koker93 September 30, 2012 at 10:12 pm |

    Please make the energy bars part of the permanent UI. It is super annoying in CW2 when someone makes a map with gameplay up in the top 2 rows. One map was a maze and had the player going up to the top of the screen 4-5 times, ugh! Looks awesome, as usual. Lots of improvements to a game that appeared close to finished 3-4 updates ago!

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily September 30, 2012 at 10:37 pm |

      If you’ll notice, you can zoom the map out so far that this will never be a problem in CW3. We have enough problems that we don’t need to import problems from other games. 🙂

    2. TrickyDragon
      TrickyDragon October 1, 2012 at 7:28 am |

      No one can account for poor map design, just remember that for every bad map there will also be several awesome ones ^^

      1. Lurkily
        Lurkily October 1, 2012 at 9:45 am |

        Also remember that this problem of having a UI that obscures part of the map has not been carried over to CW3.

  17. Bob
    Bob September 30, 2012 at 10:49 pm |

    Drop a Command Node into the southeastern-most part of the map, and build a mortar on top of the bump right above it; and send some strafers to do a sortie all over the top of the map, drop another CN near the northwestern-most bump and put another mortar on there, all the while making a relatively large group of strafers and terps. When you get this far, you send half of the strafers to clear out the northwestern half of the bumps, and the other half to do the southeastern half. while they are doing that, use terps to create a high wall between all of the bumps, and build a series of relays and mortars on the bumps to keep the creeper back, this way you can take most of your force away from the main bases- make sure to leave some to kill the creeper that is getting blown upwards towards your base- and launch a all-out assault to get to at least one of the emitters and nullify it, and the rest is gravy.

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily October 1, 2012 at 9:50 am |

      Once mortars are on the northeastern ridge, I don’t think you need strafers for the entire ridge to resurface.

      Just chain that ridge with relays and mortars – though I would also take the southwest as a resource farm, and come over the top with relays. Southeast can build the combat infrastructure, southwest can supply the power.

      The north is always open as long as creeper doesn’t get too deep, so I don’t think that supply chain will be in danger if you keep the southwest protected.

      Strafers are expensive energy-wise, and I really think mortars will be more effective in such close quarters to the emitter itself. Those resources are better put into PC’s, mortars, and nullifiers, in my opinion.

      1. Bob
        Bob October 1, 2012 at 10:26 pm |

        I meant use the strafers to clear out the area behind the ridge line to begin the push to take the other ridges to put a mortar on each ridge instead of every other one.

        As for the north supply chain, you don’t need a supply chain if you can land a CN there.

        You’ve already got the strafers from before, so you might as well use them for the big assault.

        1. Lurkily
          Lurkily October 2, 2012 at 9:50 am |

          I would never have built them in the first place. Relay-chain from the mountain across the upper map edge to take the ridgeline’s northwest end. Place mortars and relays on each one. Once mortars start taking effect, the ones that are buried will surface. At the same time, use one of your CN’s, place it in the southwest corner – relays and mortars again.

          Strafers are very energy-expensive, and aren’t very effective on deep creeper. Mortars are cheap, fast to build, require no transit time, and target more intelligently. Mortars on that ridgeline will dominate this map.

      2. sevidog
        sevidog October 1, 2012 at 11:22 pm |

        what are pc’s?
        i’ve seen it a few times, and can’t seem to puzzle it out.

        1. Lurkily
          Lurkily October 2, 2012 at 9:47 am |

          Pulse cannons. Remember, we don’t have blasters anymore.

          1. 4xC
            4xC October 2, 2012 at 4:12 pm |

            Funny you should say that considering that Virgil calls them blasters in the clip at 1 point. I know it was a slip of the tongue or whatever accident it may have been, but I thought I should point it out.

            1. Lurkily
              Lurkily October 2, 2012 at 8:39 pm |

              Yep, done that myself on occasion.

          2. anon
            anon October 2, 2012 at 5:33 pm |

            Even though Virgil himself called them blasters. Just sayin’ 😉

          3. sevidog
            sevidog October 3, 2012 at 1:11 am |

            thx

            1. Lurkily
              Lurkily October 3, 2012 at 7:56 pm |

              No problemo.

  18. sevidog
    sevidog September 30, 2012 at 11:42 pm |

    1)AWESOMENESS
    2)You really could have built a relay or two next to your reactor farm to make the packets get to the front lines faster.
    3)Personally i would have snaked a relay chain across the top of the map after fortifying my position, and then built mortars/cannons on the series of ridges.
    4)I would have replaced the huge mass of collectors on the small area’s with reactors because i assume they would be more efficient.
    5)Since the bottom right hand corner was empty, i would have used guppies build both a forward base and an energy farm.
    6)I would have had all the funness! 😛

    P.S. YOU’RE AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    1. Saneman
      Saneman October 1, 2012 at 3:07 pm |

      I disagree on 4, i would put some generators there, but you have to think of the cost of all those generators, and the map isnt going to be that long were it will be a great thing.

      1. sevidog
        sevidog October 1, 2012 at 11:23 pm |

        i’m sort of an “overbuild” and “ocd” type of creeperwold gamer 🙂

  19. Hybird607
    Hybird607 October 1, 2012 at 12:18 am |

    Looks fantastic! Does anyone know if there’s been any talk of having the strafers and bombers onto repeat mode so they’ll continue to attack an area?

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily October 1, 2012 at 9:51 am |

      The idea has been floated more than once . . . I certainly intend to keep lobbying for it.

      1. TrickyDragon
        TrickyDragon October 1, 2012 at 11:35 am |

        *Ramble Ramble* Repeat mode! *Ramble Ramble*

      2. CPUmaster22
        CPUmaster22 October 3, 2012 at 10:54 pm |

        As awesome as that idea sounds, I think that this ‘automation’ of the air attack units will make the user obsolete. It can’t be much fun to sit back and watch the battle being fought for you.

        1. Nemoricus
          Nemoricus October 4, 2012 at 9:58 am |

          Air units still only take off at user command. In repeat mode, they just happen to repeat the last command they received until the player retasks them. It’s not like it would mean the aircraft would seek out and destroy targets on their own.

          If, for example, you’re using strafers to suppress a deep Creeper pool, the repeat mode will have them keep doing that while you can focus on more important things.

          1. Nemoricus
            Nemoricus October 4, 2012 at 6:48 pm |

            It’s also worth noting that auto-repeat mode can be replicated by frame-by-frame micromanagement, so giving the players an auto mode just reduces the amount of tedious work they need to do.

    2. Tiuipuv
      Tiuipuv October 2, 2012 at 6:05 pm |

      I agree that this should be a feature. It’s challenging to micromanage them for continuous use, especially when there are multiple targets being attacked simultaneously.

      1. Lurkily
        Lurkily October 4, 2012 at 8:01 pm |

        For my part, I want it because when I am utilizing AC bombers, which require downtime to restock AC, it’s easy to forget to put them back to use again, and have a weapon going to waste.

  20. Wally
    Wally October 1, 2012 at 3:33 am |

    Ad you mentioned Virgil, old CW1 players like us juste let the creeper flow for a few minutes, a start over the mission to defeat it. Knowing that, I would have placed my command base on the south-east corner, where creeper doesn’t flow, and rushed for the ridges with mortars to keep the depth low enough. The attack the emitters as you did.
    Same strategy might work from the north area of the map.

    Please please, hurry up and release this third series ! I can’t wait to buy it and complete my collection of CW games 😉

  21. AnonymousX
    AnonymousX October 1, 2012 at 6:23 am |

    Someone commented on youtube about LAN play, my initial reaction was dont be silly.
    But the more I thought about it the more i think it could work. 3 drop ships, 3 person co-op, the size of the maps possibly could make it work.
    Use guppies to share resources between players ( dont think they should share packet routes but maybe after research?).
    Anyhoo just random non serious thoughts.
    Can’t wait to get stuck into the game.

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily October 1, 2012 at 9:52 am |

      Networks, once connected, automatically share energy. You’d have to have a DAMN good team to avoid choking each other and siphoning off resources or repositioning units that the other players had plans for.

      1. AnonymousX
        AnonymousX October 1, 2012 at 5:03 pm |

        Well terrain design would obviously play a role, players on opposite sides of a map shouldnt interfere with each other too badly, the symantics like energy sharing would obviously need play testing and tuning. But the idea in principal i think is a good one

        1. Nemoricus
          Nemoricus October 1, 2012 at 9:20 pm |

          Not really. Support for multiplayer would have to be deeply integrated with the engine, and at this point it would be a lot of work to implement.

          Virgil’s got enough on his plate just developing the game as is….

          1. AnonymousX
            AnonymousX October 3, 2012 at 6:06 am |

            Good grief, I wasn’t suggesting it be implemented on this game. It was only an idea, Idle musings if you will.

            1. Gorgan184
              Gorgan184 October 3, 2012 at 4:27 pm |

              I remember reading somewhere the idea of having color coded networks. One color for each player. Perhaps there could be a menu with the players colors that lets you choose whom to give energy to and how much to give to them. Perhaps a new trade/link unit that lets you trade with other players each player that wants to use has to give so much energy before its built

        2. Lurkily
          Lurkily October 1, 2012 at 9:38 pm |

          You gain a huge advantage from pooling energy – giving this up just to remain organized is wasteful. A team that wants to perform well on a map has to be a team that performs well when resources are pooled.

          1. Lurkily
            Lurkily October 1, 2012 at 9:44 pm |

            To be more clear: This is a problem that must be clearly addressed. The complexities of coop aren’t something we can dismiss as ‘yeah, don’t pool your energy if you want to fight smart’. It’s not as simple as most RTS games, where coop means attacking the same person at the same time. It’s going to mean balancing your planned expenditure with your ally’s planned expenditure, somehow, and that’s not simple enough to leave up to in-game communication.

            1. someone
              someone October 20, 2012 at 1:22 pm |

              I think you’re looking at it the wrong way. Anything you can do with three player coop you can do more efficiently with one player + pause mode.

              The difference is in the fun factor. I can imagine having a LAN-party (or using Skype) and being with two friends on the same map all the while yelling at each other about what to do.

              Either with separated or shared networks (I think separated would work better, unless you want to allow for trolling), yes you will be at a disadvantage, but you can have fun playing a game with friends.
              You also don’t need a hosting server because playing with strangers doesn’t work anyway, which means it’s only a problem of programming (although that in itself might be prohibitive).

      2. sevidog
        sevidog October 1, 2012 at 11:27 pm |

        i would personally make it so that different people cant connect their networks at all, well maby with guppies for trading or something, but mostly just have them be their own separate base, but taking on the map together; seems simpler to me, but maby i’m just tripping 🙂

        1. Lurkily
          Lurkily October 2, 2012 at 9:46 am |

          That would make it actually harder to defeat a map with allies present.

          1. sevidog
            sevidog October 3, 2012 at 1:18 am |

            really?
            sorry, but could you explain how, i’m not sure what you mean and how, because the problem of building into your allies’ base and messing up energy production and use. also, a chat system or even an “audio call” system, like ventrillo or skype, built into the game could serve as constant communication with your teammates.

            1. Lurkily
              Lurkily October 3, 2012 at 8:02 pm |

              Not being permitted to share energy removes, well, the pooling of energy between networks. Single-player it is a tremendous advantage. If you eliminate pooling of energy between networks, you have three CN’s on the map, but one major advantage has been removed.

              Completely neglecting the problems of coordinating your efforts, removing this advantage will make a level harder.

              Of course, even if it’s left in, making use of that advantage as a team, and planning expenditure as a team, will also be far more difficult than playing the game single-player, even if technically you possess every advantage that’s present in single-player.

              1. Lurkily
                Lurkily October 3, 2012 at 8:11 pm |

                To make a comparison . . . it’s like being married, and having a joint checking account. If you don’t coordinate with your wife before you buy that HDTV, and she doesn’t coordinate with you before buying that dress, you both might be spending your rent money and not know it.

                Except in this case you have two wives, and protesters are busy throwing blue paint at their fur coats while you try to balance your checkbook.

                1. 4xC
                  4xC October 5, 2012 at 2:27 am |

                  Well let me ask you this: Do any BattleNet games allow resource sharing between multiple non-cpu gamers? And I know for sure that Starcraft 2 has a color code system regardless of which race each player utilizes.

                  1. Lurkily
                    Lurkily October 5, 2012 at 9:23 am |

                    How many Battlenet games let you use resource sharing to ‘steal’ your ally’s resources without their permission?

                    Resource sharing is usually optional, and lets you keep a reserve back – sharing without restraint in CW3 is a huge advantage because you can coordinate and plan the expenditures of each network together.

                    As for color-coding, I’m not really concerned about remembering what units are yours. Nonissue.

                    1. DestinyAtlantis(The Lord of Darkness)
                      DestinyAtlantis(The Lord of Darkness) October 6, 2012 at 9:43 am |

                      Well, how about the team coordinates, who will be what, like in Warcraft 3’s Simcity, 1 will by Mayor, building reactors/network/whatever is needed, 1 will be defense, building cannons/mortars/beams, 1 will be attack, who will move the cannons/mortars/beams that are built for attacking/the ones used for defense to attack, while the defender watches for any creeper leakage and builds more defenses where needed.

                      That way they can work together without problems for energy, just the attacker says, he will attack which costs more energy, so that the mayor doesn’t overbuild/build too much to deplete the energy reserves, and the mayor says he will build something, so that the other 2 are ready for some possible energy starvation, and in case someone needs energy, you get guppies to provide 100/150(or whatever the energy/packet/whatever amount is)

                    2. sevidog
                      sevidog October 7, 2012 at 2:49 am |

                      tip’o’the hat to you mate!
                      but really: awesome idea

                    3. Lurkily
                      Lurkily October 7, 2012 at 10:18 am |

                      That last part is really the hitch – communicating to each other what will be built and what the current requirement for the battlefront is.

                      Defense and offense are really much the same thing in CW, except in the case of phantom or spore defense. Your offensive line is also the defensive line. the only defense separate from that is usually your “In case of emergency, break glass” units.

                      I don’t play Warcrack 3, but one thing that distinguishes CW3 is that every single unit needs constant, uninterrupted supply to function effectively. Supply chain is critical like in almost no other RTS.

  22. George
    George October 1, 2012 at 6:43 am |

    Is there any chance of getting bombers and strafers to have a kind of “Auto” mode? I notice you need to keep retargeting them to the same destination every time they run out and need to re-arm.

    The Titan cannon (Bertha?) keeps targeting the same location, so do Guppies, so seems a logical jump to let your other air power do the same. Less babysitting means more fun.

    1. hindos
      hindos October 1, 2012 at 11:34 am |

      I agree, that would be very useful.

      1. 4xC
        4xC October 2, 2012 at 7:14 am |

        Particularly with AC placement.

  23. Cohiba
    Cohiba October 1, 2012 at 9:04 am |

    How can we see if our strategy is better since we can’t play 😛

    but many of the above recommendations would be similar to my suggestions.

  24. JTaylor
    JTaylor October 1, 2012 at 12:55 pm |

    Question regarding Bombers/Strafers: You can retarget them when they are in the air, correct?

    During energy surplus, would you be able to tell the strafers to patrol directly above their pads, so that they (the pads) will recharge with energy and the then direct the strafers to attack during a shortage of power?

    I think bombers drop their payload regardless of creeper presence, so that wouldn’t work either way.

  25. Saneman
    Saneman October 1, 2012 at 3:04 pm |

    There should be a packet construction unit or (PCU) that costs like 150 or so packets but then creates packets itself. As well as hold 20 energy, but be only allowed to create like 1-2 or 4 packets a second. This will be useful for making those very bases self sufficient without you having to worry about your guppies running out of energy. But it would need a power supply like generators or collectors.

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily October 1, 2012 at 4:57 pm |

      Putting guppy pads on this network, to discharge back into that network, is pretty much already this.

      1. Bob
        Bob October 1, 2012 at 10:30 pm |

        He’s referring to something that can make packets, not store them

        1. 4xC
          4xC October 2, 2012 at 4:16 pm |

          Thius sounds rather unprecedented. Base Hearts have always been packet producers and since we have lightning relays and transport guppies, the packet producer sounds redundant, and the CW3 arsenal looks finalized already except for the hidden titans and orbitals.

        2. anon
          anon October 2, 2012 at 5:37 pm |

          Technically yes, but Guppies cost energy to store packets, i.e. the generator costs energy to charge the PCU. Now, if you mean a structure that can operate directly off a network’s energy, then that becomes redundant with all the CNs available. Neither of those offer much payoff. However, a similar concept (remote packet travel) could be done if microrifts are reintroduced, but at a much higher price (100ish energy) and cost energy to maintain an open portal.

          1. Lurkily
            Lurkily October 2, 2012 at 8:45 pm |

            The purpose that was stated was to help pad a network against gaps in guppy deliveries. A guppy pad delivering to its own network will provide that padding, as long as your supply to that network is actually sufficient.

            I don’t think anything but CN’s will ever produce packets from energy. I seriously doubt that Virgil will ever create any unit that has the potential to make a CN unnecessary.

            1. Lurkily
              Lurkily October 2, 2012 at 8:48 pm |

              Actually . . . I misworded that. The stated purpose was to free a remote network from the drawback of gaps in guppy deliveries.

              Padding guppy supply with a local pad does that.

  26. Jimlad 42
    Jimlad 42 October 1, 2012 at 3:12 pm |

    What if you can upgrade you command nodes with stuff from each planet, like a CN with a abnormal storage, packets are always a bit faster, better at using energy to make packets, (that might make a cool building!) comes with a built-in blaster, maybe the same thing as if it was on a PZ, (the CN, not blaster) it would also be so cool if we can harvest PZ’s and make a deployable PZ to drop like storage pod or CN. And what does a CN do while on a PZ?

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily October 1, 2012 at 4:59 pm |

      CN’s basically get a longer connection range. They may produce more power, too, not sure.

  27. sweetdude64
    sweetdude64 October 1, 2012 at 4:01 pm |

    I dont think a repeat mode will be added into this game simply because the packets go to the pads. They are called ammo packets for a reason people! Once the strfers are out of ammo, they go to the pad to get more. I think a runway would be useful though, you could build it near the creeper and nearby strafers could quickly land and get more ammo.

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily October 1, 2012 at 5:01 pm |

      I’m not sure what you think the repeat mode means, but it certainly doesn’t mean free ammo . . .

      If I understand, it just means that after returning for ammo, strafers/bombers launch again to keep taking attack runs.

  28. Vkfan
    Vkfan October 1, 2012 at 5:03 pm |

    a single Bertha in the backline could insta-destroy the creeper pooled in the NE area of the map (at the beginning of the mission)

    1. TrickyDragon
      TrickyDragon October 1, 2012 at 6:48 pm |

      bearthas are huge and cost a lot of energy to produce… if V had started it at the beginning he might “might” have had a few shots in b4 the map was over (mind this map can easily be played in a short amount of time, unless you want to over-build hehehehehe)

    2. Koker93
      Koker93 October 1, 2012 at 8:29 pm |

      I would hope that by the time Virgil gets done balancing the game a bertha will be too expensive to be a weapon built quickly/first in a mission. It’s more like a weapon you build after building up a large resource base.

    3. Lurkily
      Lurkily October 1, 2012 at 9:36 pm |

      Could . . .

      Though probably the single most economical possible way to use a bertha on the entire map, still a wasteful use of resources.

  29. 4xC
    4xC October 1, 2012 at 6:14 pm |

    What I would do: spread all of the CN’s across the high mountain and cover the ground with collectors and reactors by 80%. Build pulse cannons and mortars to establish a line along with some shields. Maybe add a bertha or 2. As the middle is empty, run relays across the whole landscape for maximum coverage and terraform all ground in the middle to the same height (no holes). Possibly make it all the same height as the mountain base level.

    Sounds like there’s some different music even though it is faint and hard to hear. And the bar graphs are nice additions. Now all that’s missing compared to the first 2 is the amount of energy debt/deficit/starvation. Great progress overall.

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily October 2, 2012 at 9:41 am |

      You would remove the holes which inhibit creeper flow – even raise the plain up to your bases’ level, removing every terrain defense it has?

      1. 4xC
        4xC October 2, 2012 at 4:19 pm |

        Only after I have the creeper pushed back enough to know that the holes are useless as they become.

        After pushing the creeper back far enough and having a strong enough grip on it, what good will having ANY terrain defense be if it is between you and your frontline where there is NO CREEPER AT ALL and will not be?

        1. Lurkily
          Lurkily October 2, 2012 at 8:50 pm |

          Why not pour that energy into things like PC’s and nullifiers?

          1. 4xC
            4xC October 5, 2012 at 2:35 am |

            What if you need MORE energy in the future? Even with the original field of reactors and collectors you already have, you may end up needing more later. Besides, if you fight on multiple fronts, you may have trouble supplying weapons with ammo even if you don’t starve your energy storage. And other current fronts may be temporary without the extra energy production to make them stalemates.

            1. Lurkily
              Lurkily October 5, 2012 at 8:40 pm |

              You control nearly the entire map, have the creeper cornered and capped, and the only thing left to do is push close enough to place the nullifiers.

              Nothing I can imagine would require more energy than carpeting 80% of the map with collectors could provide. Resurfacing the entire map is also a huge investment, to get a relatively slight increase in power generation.

              Overcaution and OCD overbuilding is a valid play style – and a market that CW3 corners well, but I’m not sure I’d call it a better strategy.

  30. Pakars
    Pakars October 2, 2012 at 1:17 am |

    I so desperately want to be able to play this, because I’d love to break it with strong strategies.

    Oh please oh please oh please do some kind of open beta!

  31. Ronini
    Ronini October 2, 2012 at 2:56 am |

    For my part, this mission ought to beplayed at low-tech level. Will it be possible to limit tech-access in level creation? I mean, give the player just one CN to use, or no bombers/berthas/guppies. That would make for some challenging maps and force players to play like you did (except the north flank, how could you miss that??).

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily October 2, 2012 at 9:45 am |

      It was a map creation tool in all the offerings so far. I have hope that CW3 will be no different in that aspect.

      1. Ronini
        Ronini October 5, 2012 at 12:04 pm |

        I’d love it, if the Chronom or other random missions gave limited tech to work with. Not sure if this possible to implement, since some techs are required, some aren’t.

  32. cory
    cory October 2, 2012 at 9:13 am |

    ok…so i like my infostructure nice and even…will there be a way to adjust the drag to make a collecter every 2 squares instead of 3?…if so that would be AMAZING!!!

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily October 2, 2012 at 9:57 am |

      Just use a diamond layout instead of a grid.

      1. 4xC
        4xC October 2, 2012 at 4:23 pm |

        You know, now that you mention it, I realize that I actually used a variation of the diamond layout in CW1, but instead of diamonds, I had 9×9 squares with collectors, each 2 squares apart in any direction vertically and horizontally. (I always maximized ground coverage before production in anyway I could)

  33. Tiuipuv
    Tiuipuv October 2, 2012 at 6:29 pm |

    Figure out a strategy? Well it depends on how many CN’s I get. I’ll just assume I get 3, I think I read that somewhere. I would probably drop 1 CN in each safe corner (northwest and southeast), and build tiny collector fields so that the wind will keep the creeper off them. From there I would build reactors and start building a relay bridge over the ridge, later placing mortars on top. The 3rd CN would pretty much do exactly what you did to start off, keeping the creeper thin in the middle while my mortars are not yet running. Once those start up, and the reactors can provide a continuous supply of energy, they would utterly dominate the deep creeper that built up. The wind should then be helpful in clearing out the middle space for some quick collectors. With that, a shield/PC attack on one emitter should give me a pz, then its toast.

  34. fractalman
    fractalman October 4, 2012 at 4:54 pm |

    I’d have started with similarmethods…but then made a collector/relay chain along the north-west portion of the map.

    A couple strafers to keep the ridges from overflowing,then used the blaster-relay combination across the ridges, with occasional mortar support thrown in.
    The center field would be disconnected, and would be pushed into the blasters near the command node for easy anihilation.

    Then I’d use 4-5 blasters in a small cluster to get a toehold in the deep stuff. I’d probably have to choose a new number with the redesigned blaster, though.
    blasters, pulse cannons…they’re used in more or less the same way.

  35. sweetdude64
    sweetdude64 October 4, 2012 at 5:29 pm |

    If you have two terps close, and only one square can be terraformed, will they both terraform it so the process will be quicker?

    1. Nemoricus
      Nemoricus October 4, 2012 at 6:47 pm |

      No. Watch Roma Victor and you’ll see that only works on any given cell at a time.

  36. sweetdude64
    sweetdude64 October 4, 2012 at 8:17 pm |

    When you eliminate the last emitter, the remaining creeper dissapears.
    1. Will this be in the release version?
    2. Is it not when all emitters are eliminated, but when you eliminate the emitter that made the specific creeper, then that creeper goes away. Think of it like this:
    two active emitters are producing creeper. The creeper combines in a corner. Once you eliminate one of the emitters, what ever creeper that emitter made would dissapear.

    1. Nemoricus
      Nemoricus October 4, 2012 at 8:45 pm |

      2 is impossible, since as the Creeper spreads there is no means of telling what emitter it came from.

      1. Lurkily
        Lurkily October 5, 2012 at 7:32 am |

        Emitters might detonate and destroy creeper around them, but I don’t think either way would make the game more fun, even if creeper could be segregated and evaporated seperately.

    2. Ronini
      Ronini October 5, 2012 at 12:17 pm |

      I wondered about that, too. This heavily depends on mission objectives, but I can think of some (okay, it might not be many) situations/scenarios where that would represent a soft option to beat the level. Doesn’t matter if there is only the “Destroy all Emitters/Enemy Structures”-objective. And most of my ideas would require some form of terrain (like a special texture) that is slowly dissolved by creeper. I just recalled there were those greenish walls in CW1. So surely there will be something similar, or way more cooler (^^) in CW3. (?)

  37. Koker93
    Koker93 October 4, 2012 at 10:16 pm |

    Is the energy cost of terraforming high enough to preclude raising the terrain between the notches in the middle of the map? Would it be worthwhile to try and close off the creeper? Or even if not worthwhile, maybe fun? 🙂

    1. Lurkily
      Lurkily October 5, 2012 at 7:37 am |

      Why would you want to flatten the terrain out there? It’s not prohibitively expensive, but it is wasteful. Better to operate more mortars and PC’s.

      Closing the creeper off might help in the later game, but if you force it to overflow the ridge, then you’d lose the ridge itself as a strategic feature for weapon placement.

  38. Christian
    Christian October 5, 2012 at 3:23 am |

    Everyone who’s playing Creeper World Evermore each day like I do for months now should be able to figure this out: The northern edge of the map remains completely free of creeper for most of the time of the game, so sneaking up on the creeper breeding fields from there should make for a speedy extermination.

    Speaking of CWE: Its great, but I’d rather play the real McCoy real soon…

  39. tijno77
    tijno77 October 5, 2012 at 4:59 am |

    thnx for the bar on top 🙂 love to see the numbre’s XD

  40. Ronini
    Ronini October 5, 2012 at 12:20 pm |

    You still cannot fit two structures in between two collectors, can you?

    1. MadMag
      MadMag October 5, 2012 at 6:20 pm |

      Nope.

  41. Saneman
    Saneman October 6, 2012 at 8:24 pm |

    There needs to be creeper evaporation like CW2 because sometimes i would see creeper just pushed up against a wall and stay there forever until a weapon hits it. if it stays there, it will be pretty annoying getting all those last little puddles of creeper.

    1. fractalman
      fractalman October 7, 2012 at 7:23 pm |

      Actually, there is still evaporation due to rounding. It’s just slower, as the creeper flows more slowly.
      A wind or sheild can actually prevent that if it pushes the creeper up against a wall.

  42. ninja awsome
    ninja awsome October 7, 2012 at 2:19 am |

    Sorry I haven’t commented for a while I was on holiday. To be honest I would have used guppies on the bit of high terrain with some pre built moarters.

  43. sweetdude64
    sweetdude64 October 7, 2012 at 11:15 am |

    yeah, now that I think of it, that probably IS the best strategy! Building a few connectors for energy, build a guppy, send it to the high terrain by the creeper and let the mortars do the rest 😀

Comments are closed.