CW3 Suggestions Redux

[4xC]

Good idea, but not only is CW3 too thoroughly developed, digitalis does not seem like something to prioritize controlling unless potential CW4 comes out with AntiDigitalis.  :D

I would like for there to be a Titan or Orbital that can convert Creeper to AC, but we will just have to wait and see if the released product has it.

[Shrike30]

I could see some utility for a titan able to "salt the earth" in areas where digitalis would normally grow, allowing a Commander to keep it from regrowing.

[ShadowDragon7015]

Possibility for a unit could be something that claws across an area killing the digitalis there and stopping its growth there for a certain period of time.

[Mr.H]

Randomly Generated Map Ideas

In Virgil's most recent blog post "The Bulk" he hinted at some new randomly generated maps, like the code maps of CW2. Personally I'd like to see more levels of customization over these maps to get a play-style more honed in to the person in question. This could be done by having an 'advanced' sub-menu for controlling minute details which add to the maps splendor. Therefore I believe these features should be included:

1. Difficulty scrollbar (with a type your specific number in a box thing next to it) this gives control over the amount of creeper given per an emitter pulse, the amount of runners released per second, etc. Ramping this up makes maps much more tedious.
2. Enemy Presence Bar Graph Setup-Drag up the amount of each unit, with a little icon on the x axis, and move the bar up and down the y axis(form 0 to 80 for example). Thereby you can control how many emitters  there are, runner nests, Warp Inhibitors, Anti-Air zones etc.
3. Terrain Type(colour)- This alters the algorithms to display different terrain types, e.g. desert, tundra or wasteland(metropolis perhaps). Which changes the visual appeal of the map as well as some of the terrain features.
4. Topography(altitudes)- Control how high-and-low everything goes(altitude) whether it is a plateau/flat/sharp mountain. If it has dents in the terrain or is smooth, and perhaps other terrain features(like nature-advanced). Advanced options could set special 'structures' on the map.
5. Unit Access(Advanced)- Set whether specific units are locked or not(by default none locked)- Could also depend on how far you are in the story missions?
6. Preview Screen- So you don't have to open the map beforehand.
7. Share Feature- Found a particularly amazing seed? Upload it to knuckle-cracker Randomly Generated Maps section.
8. Digitalis- Control how many factories for digitalis there are as well as the type of spread(tree branch, flood, etc). Settings to control distance from emitters can also be selected, otherwise there is random placement.
9. Map Size- Small, Medium, Large, Gigantic


Feel free to add to that guys, I'll edit it any additional ideas here on this topic as it comes :)

Asteroid (Belts):

On another note, asteroid belts ( as well individual asteroids, or even comets!) in individual solar systems would be a great feature. It would also allow for those space-maps.

[4xC]

Quite a few ot those are attributes I think need to be displayed upon each custom map before anyone actually plays it. Not knowing some similar stats for CW2 custom maps beforehand is rather irksome.

[Ronini]

I'm afraid I don't like most of these proposed options. Apart from 6 and 7 (and probably 4, that's just colouring, isn't it?), which ought to be a given.
The others add too much individuality to make any competition regarding map times (e.g. weekly tournaments) extremely hard and complicated and not very meaningful. The seed as such gives the topography, doesn't it? Seed + difficulty level (Do we need more than 3? Definitely no more than 5) gives number of enemy structures, which in any case is relative to map  size. Are there just a distinct number of map sizes or could they be any size you wish? I'd vote for distinct map sizes (e.g. tiny, small, medium, large, huge, gigantic). I don't really care whether a specific seed means a specific map size, or if any seed produces a (slightly) different map for the different sizes (as in CW2). After all, map size could be defined by one (additional) digit (first/last) in the seed, couldn't it?

Just my opinion.

[TrickyDragon]

How about we over simplify the seed generation and use one seed for a system...   Specify some constants such as general difficulty, enemy restrictions and system size and let one seed generate a system....   We could even call the seed "singularity coordinates"

[BGMFH]

I really like the singularity seed / system generated idea

[Michionlion]

How about we over simplify the seed generation and use one seed for a system...   Specify some constants such as general difficulty, enemy restrictions and system size and let one seed generate a system....   We could even call the seed "singularity coordinates"

I like it.  That would provide some other tournament style things too, using only one seed.

[BGMFH]

How about we over simplify the seed generation and use one seed for a system...   Specify some constants such as general difficulty, enemy restrictions and system size and let one seed generate a system....   We could even call the seed "singularity coordinates"

I like it.  That would provide some other tournament style things too, using only one seed.

Exactly.  Not just 1 map, a tournament could define a seed for each round of competition, and it would be less likely to hinge on one skill.  Now all we need are leader board for systems, not just maps.

[Mr.H]

I'm afraid I don't like most of these proposed options. Apart from 6 and 7 (and probably 4, that's just colouring, isn't it?), which ought to be a given.
The others add too much individuality to make any competition regarding map times (e.g. weekly tournaments) extremely hard and complicated and not very meaningful. The seed as such gives the topography, doesn't it? Seed + difficulty level (Do we need more than 3? Definitely no more than 5) gives number of enemy structures, which in any case is relative to map  size. Are there just a distinct number of map sizes or could they be any size you wish? I'd vote for distinct map sizes (e.g. tiny, small, medium, large, huge, gigantic). I don't really care whether a specific seed means a specific map size, or if any seed produces a (slightly) different map for the different sizes (as in CW2). After all, map size could be defined by one (additional) digit (first/last) in the seed, couldn't it?

Just my opinion.

Most are those are advanced options. As for the individuality, each part of the selection is incorporated into the seed alongside it. So it would retain the same difficulty and such when shared.

[Shrike30]

Asteroid (Belts):

On another note, asteroid belts ( as well individual asteroids, or even comets!) in individual solar systems would be a great feature. It would also allow for those space-maps.

Would it be possible to have maps that wrap around at the edges, or at least at two edges?  I got to thinking it might be possible to play a map that is the entirety of an asteroid belt or a planet's rings, where when you scroll far enough to one side you simply wrap around to the other side of the map.  I realize there's issues of scale here, but happily CW games never established how large or small anything was :)

[tornado]

I posted that over a year ago under the concept
That most planets are round

[4xC]

Since CW3 is pretty much on the brink of release, I have to ask how close this thread and all other pre-release topics and threads are to being locked?

[Grauniad]

I posted that over a year ago under the concept
That most planets are round

I have been talking to Virgil about wrap-around maps as well, since a favorite game of mine employs this technique. Unfortunately, I don't think it will be in CW3.

Since CW3 is pretty much on the brink of release, I have to ask how close this thread and all other pre-release topics and threads are to being locked?

Not even close.