I'm assuming you aren't looking for bug report videos in this thread, because I have a few of those :P
eviator
I've recently learned that holding on to the "old" way of doing things is not productive. Leaders must set the vision, but embrace the new ways younger folks make it happen. If we make the vision clear enough, and focus on results, we get what we want. If our vision is murky, we don't. When you compare two products and can clearly see one is good and one is not, the difference isn't usually budget, it's leadership. My $0.02.
Gotcha, now I understand.
[quote quoting="post"] AI One thing that really bugs me is that the AI often sends raiding groups straight through my main defense lines to attack control points behind it. They literally just drive through, most of them get killed but often enough a few make it through and kill quite a lot of production. I get the general idea of these raids but rushing through a defensive line? Really? [/quote] Does this really fall under
[quote who="ASADDF" reply="4" id="3615320"] Putting the same Units into 1 Icon with a number next to it, I think it will be awesome because you can have a maximum of 12 different Icons per Group or region, and that will save a lot of space in the Empire Tree. [/quote] You've convinced me. Sort-of. A number is quick, but physical size comparisons are quicker. If the empire tree grew the size of the unit icon depending upon the number of units, it could also display
I just got Sins: Rebellion on Steam and now I can understand why Ashes has an Empire tree. To make the Ashes empire tree usable requires significant improvements from its current state in 0.71. I don't want to diminish this terrific effort by ASADDF , so I'm just going to talk about why I think the Empire tree in Sins works well, and how it can work better in Ashes. 1. Icons in the tree match the icons on the map.
[quote who="Moomo" reply="9" id="3614963"] When multiple factories are selected, queuing units spreads them across the factories. However, queuing a single unit will only yield construction of a single unit, so only the first factory will build. If you queue multiple units, then they are spread across the other factories as well. [/quote] Thats sounds like it is the way it is by design.
The only time I've noticed formations failing is when 1. Units go over cliffs, or 2. a unit created using the reinforcement system is supposedly part of the army according to the selection circles, but it seems to operate independently of the army. If you can make it happen again and record video of it, I think that helps the devs.
Excellent! You hit all the major points for my thoughts about unit/group representation on the strategic map. ASADDF also had an excellent post on the empire tree that, combined with your idea, could unify the interface rather well. Right now a bunch of dots is not of much value, so most people don't use the strategic map, including the devs. I really hope they have plans for a major overhaul before release. And the sooner the better so we can give them more suggestions.
Entertaining read, good ideas, good description of some common bugs. Nice write-up!
I could say "Hey honey, I really like the way you look in the black dress." Or I could say "Hey honey, you do not look good in the blue dress." One of these is the right way to say it, and one is the wrong way. Both are honest, but one is better.
Molokoww, you have been informed many times that the game isn't even in beta yet. It's pre-beta, or alpha, or whatever, and not all features are in. A better way to say this is: "Developers would you please consider adding the ability for me to queue units at all selected factories? Currently it only queues units for the one selected." This would demonstrate that you understand that the game is still in development and that you are patiently waiting for the devs to improve the game, i
Good stuff. Having played the game many hours a lot of this stuff is natural to me and it's hard to see the perspective of someone who doesn't know much about this game and perhaps even RTSs in general. Just a tip, Stardock went overboard with reliance on mouseover in GalCiv3. Maybe it makes some sense for a TBS game, but not an RTS game. We need the critical info on the screen by default, mouseover should be "one-time" information, as in "what is this building for?", not upda
A crash can't explain how losing the seed/crashed ship loses the game. You'd actually have to contrive that the crashed ships were still in fact partially functional and that two to six different crashed ships were miraculously in similar states of partial functionality. It's more implausible than a nice shiny building popping up out of nowhere because the lore at least supports the latter thanks to the inclusion of long-distance matter manipulation. Besides, I'd rathe
Doesn't fit the lore so much, I think. I could be wrong, the whole expansion event is not too specific on that.
Lately I've been trying to complete the GalCiv3 steam achievements when I have nothing better to do. There are three that are causing me trouble: "We care for the least of us" "Results outweigh ideals" "Means to an end" All of them require you to unlock all of the ideology traits for Benevolence, Pragmatism, and Malevolence, respectively. Apparently all traits must be unlocked in a single game, because I tried unlocking them all over multiple games and didn
ASADDF, I love it man! Absolutely love it! TAG_* perhaps the reason they don't use it is because it's not very functional. ASADDF's idea is a large step to making it functional, then perhaps people will use it.
Don't worry, the game is still in b... post release development. Come back in another six months and there will probably be some great improvements to spend another 500 hours on.
I think it's safe to say every Star Wars fan wanted the movies to be made, they just wanted them to be stories, not just fight and chase scenes. What was the most compelling part of the latest movie? That's right, and its compelling because we care about the character, not because it was a cool action scene.
Apparently this new world cares more about fast pace and complexity than character development and a logical progression of plot line. I don't give a single care in the world what happens to the new characters. The only two I care about is Chewy and Luke, the only two characters who showed any signs of having to deal with the aftermath of very bad circumstances...and neither of them spoke a word. There is a lesson to be learned in that. Unfortunately I think they are going to blow
[quote who="Ticktoc" reply="22" id="3613742"] Also forgot to say, did you see the bug with the engineer? Where its conjoined streams grew and then broke off and drifted across the landscape? It was a bug another Dev wanted a screen shot of a few weeks back. So if he hasn't seen it then there is a good example of it starting at the 18.00 mark. [/quote] LOL awesome! Didn't even notice that.
[quote who="ASADDF" reply="7" id="3613763"] I don't Think that my Ideas are that ambitious, but yes i do think that the Dev's Don't have the Time and the Budget to do that right now. [/quote] In my line of work (computers and programming) that's what too ambitious means. :D
Thanks again!
[quote who="Ticktoc" reply="19" id="3613605"] Yeah, I thought I saw one leading an army which you probably don't want. There will be times to target it and other times to target the army units. Hard to set a special default as in different situations one will be right and the other wrong. [/quote] "Leading" is a loaded word here. If it leads an army in the sense that it is up in front, probably not the best idea. But it's okay for it to be the army leader,
Accumulation of responses: ASADDF, they specifically want unlimited tech advances. Yes, I believe they are kinda vanilla, but I don't see them going away. I do, however, see them possibly adding new things to the tech tree that are NOT unlimited, and many of your ideas are superb. My expectation is that we'll have to wait a few patches after release to start seeing major updates to the tech system. Coming up with ideas now is great. TAG_Utter, while off-topic, there is