Darth Windu Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 Hi everyone. As you may or may not know, in my idea for SWGB2, there are three different commanders for each side which you can play with, with various strenths. For example, with the Empire, General Veers could build mechs faster and cheaper, with more armour, whereas Admiral Piett could basically do the same thing but with Aircraft. What im wondering, is should there be unit denial or unique units? For example, General Veers but be denied the TIE Bomber or TIE Interceptor, but get something like the SWGB Dark Trooper. For the same token, Admiral Piett could miss out on the AT-AT, but have useage of the TIE Advanced instead. What does everyone think?
saberhagen Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 I think it would be too complicated and make balancing too difficult. In effect, each civ would actually be 3 different civs, so you've just multiplied all the work that goes into balancing civs.
Compa_Mighty Posted January 16, 2004 Posted January 16, 2004 It would be somewhat like AoM. I like it. Anyway, I think you could get even more choices, in the end it's only A or B situations. For the Empire you should be able to choose among: -Vader: All foot units are stronger reflecting pure strength -Veers: all the All Terrain vehicles get a punch. -Thrawn: (I know you're purist Windu... still) advanced tactics Or maybe even choose 2 or 3 commanders with different ranks, and make your own hierarchy. (spelling?)
Sithmaster_821 Posted January 17, 2004 Posted January 17, 2004 Hmm....seems kinda phony to me. Like an obvious ripoff of a ripoff. I would prefer to have more civs if civ numbers are being sacrificed for this (which they must be).
Compa_Mighty Posted January 17, 2004 Posted January 17, 2004 Well, that's also true Sith, it'll really be a matter of what LA decides.
Darth Windu Posted January 17, 2004 Author Posted January 17, 2004 Sith - doing this, in my template, would not change the number of civs from the eight i have planned. The reason i have suggested this is so that there can be a variety of strategies for each civ and a greater and longer re-play value to the game.
Admiral Vostok Posted January 19, 2004 Posted January 19, 2004 Not only is it somewhat like AoM as saberhagen pointed out, but it is exactly like Generals: Zero Hour. But that isn't my major problem. The reason being able to take three different paths with each civ worked for AoM and G:ZH is because they only have four and three civs respectively. It would be a balancing nightmare with the eight civs Windu proposes.
Sithmaster_821 Posted January 19, 2004 Posted January 19, 2004 Not only is it somewhat like AoM as saberhagen pointed out, but it is exactly like Generals: Zero Hour. Hence the ripoff of a ripoff. Windu, I hope by the time this game comes out, everyone has personal supercomputers, cause that's what you're gonna need to play it (although, by the time you are done with the balancing, that very well may be true)
Darth Windu Posted January 19, 2004 Author Posted January 19, 2004 Sith - where, exactly, is my template unbalanced? Vostok, Sith - So? By what you two are saying, we cant use infantry, armoured vehicles, aircraft or ships in SWGB2 either, because those concepts are ripoff's of ripoff's of ripoff's from almost every previous RTS.
saberhagen Posted January 19, 2004 Posted January 19, 2004 If you have 8 basic civs and don't drop any, this idea will effectively mean that you have 24 civs, which is obviously impractical.
Majin Boba Fett Posted January 20, 2004 Posted January 20, 2004 use custom commanders with possible special bonuses.
Sithmaster_821 Posted January 20, 2004 Posted January 20, 2004 Windu, I am not terribly bored enough to read your template, or anyone else's for that matter, but, judging from past experiences and the sheer impossibility of balancing 24 completely different civs, I would put money on the fact that your template is oozing imbalances.
Darth Windu Posted January 20, 2004 Author Posted January 20, 2004 Sith - ah, so the truth finally apprears. Without reading my template, you have no authority or right to say that my template is unbalanced, you mearly ASSUME it is because it suits your purposes. Nitro - thats the idea, sort of, in that, for example, Veers gets mech bonus', Piett gets air bonus', Windu gets Jedi bonus' etc. Saber - not really. There would be eight civs, with only minor differences between the different commanders - caertainly not enough to justify a claim that there would be 24 different civs.
saberhagen Posted January 20, 2004 Posted January 20, 2004 I don't think you understand enough about balancing. If you change one small thing it could potentially throw the whole civ off balance so you have to change something else to correct it and that might have knock on effects of its own. After enough trial and error, you will eventually get the balance back but it's not easy. You seem to be thinking in more cosmetic terms: because the variations will have the same graphics and names they are the same civ. This is not correct at all. If there is even a minor difference, then in balancing terms it is a different civ. Of course, you've said before that balancing isn't your responisibility. But if it's not the designer's job then whose is it???
Darth Windu Posted January 21, 2004 Author Posted January 21, 2004 Saber - as i said, the vast majority of units would be the same, so the balancing problems created by this idea wouldnt be much at all, certainly not as much as a whole new civ. As for balancing, i am not a game designed, and have never professed to be one. My template is just that, a template - not a fully balanced, worked out game. I dont have the experience, knowledge or time to create a fully worked-out game, and my template is designed to give a rough idea of what i would like to see in a SWGB sequel - that's all.
Darth Windu Posted January 22, 2004 Author Posted January 22, 2004 Saber - well, for two reasons really. First off, i enjoy it, and secondly, to provide any lucasarts reps with an idea of what i would like a new Star Wars RTS to be like on the off chance that they would actually look at my template.
Sithmaster_821 Posted January 23, 2004 Posted January 23, 2004 I don't think you understand enough about balancing. I've realized this for a while now....
Admiral Vostok Posted February 2, 2004 Posted February 2, 2004 Glad to see this thread hasn't resolved in my absence Windu, you may not have played AoM, but your idea is pretty much exactly that, and since the three Greek civs are all considered different civs, so yours will be too. So yes, that does mean 24 civs, and the balancing problems would make the concept impossible. But if you're just looking for a comment on your idea I say: Yes! Great idea Windu! That's why AoM and G:ZH has already done it.
Sithmaster_821 Posted February 4, 2004 Posted February 4, 2004 And AoM doesn't really have UU's for each civ (not culture, civ) aside from the Greeks, and we still have balancing probs (although the game is very close to balance now).
Admiral Vostok Posted February 11, 2004 Posted February 11, 2004 What about myth units? They're pretty much UUs.
Sithmaster_821 Posted February 27, 2004 Posted February 27, 2004 Not really...cause other civs can get them too. More similiar to units like huskarls that each culture gets.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.