6/20 If there are any X-COM: UFO defense fans in the audience, check out
laser squad: nemesis. Very fun squad-level turn-based strategy game,
in the spirit of X-COM, Combat Mission, Jagged Alliance, etc. -- ilyas
\_ I would love a game where you can lead a platoon and order them to
do things (split, outflank, regroup) AND participate in the war
in 3D. For example, in Battlefield 2 you're a soldier and you have
no way of ordering men, and in Rise of Nations you're the commander
and have no way of participating it in the first person. They should
have something that combines both.
\_ Savage does exactly this. One person plays commander and gets
an RTS view, everyone else plays it like an FPS. Tribes also
did this.
\_ Half-Life Natural Selection also does it. No vehicles
though.
\_ Brother in Arms?
\_ Have you played Homeworld? It's not person-based, and you
can't really take a 1st-person view, but I think being able
to order squadrons around in formations is really neat. -John
\_ Mothership.
\_ I looked at it a few years ago and it was much more frustrating
than any of the games you mentioned. It wasn't nearly as clean,
mostly because everything happened at the same time and being able
to tell how long it would take to do an action was really hard.
\_ It uses combat mission's 'VCR tape' metaphor for combat,
which I personally like, but I can see why people would hate it.
It IS harder to get good results in this metaphor, but it's more
realistic than units taking turns, imo. -- ilyas
\_ I don't care about realism. I care about fun. But I could
live with it if it gave you a way to actually tell what the
fuck you expect to happen during a turn. As it is I don't
know how many pixels I expect someone to run, or how long
a gun takes to shoot so I can wait until after I think
a few shots have gone off to have someone dash for the door.
\_ Gamespy just gave Battlefield 2 five out of five stars!
Yes I know it's multiplayer FPS and not turn-based stgy.
\_ You better have a kick-ass machine, the minimum
system requirements are ridiculous, my machine
cannot play it!
\_ There is this old jungle saying about how 'no plan
survives contact with the enemy.' Having to plant for
survives contact with the enemy.' Having to plan for
possible contingencies based on limited information about
enemy position, movement, and intent, and having to deal
with the fact that you soldiers are perfect drones obeying
your every order exactly is something I find kind of neat.
YMMV, as I said. -- ilyas
with the fact that your soldiers are not perfect drones
obeying your every order exactly is something I find kind
of neat. YMMV, as I said. -- ilyas
\_ It's not the planning I mind it's the fact that "I want
this person to start running this way as soon as X is
dead" is not possible. So instead I have to guess and
hope I'm right. Especially considering I have to guess
even how long it will take to shoot n times which I
think should be enough time to kill X. There needs to
be a better way to give the dudes orders because as it
is right now it is just frustrating. And I'm fine with
them not obeying orders all the time, morale issues are
kind of fun in a game, but dealing with poor ui is not
morale, it's fighting with the game engine to get it to
do what you want.
\_ Yeah, that's true. Having a 'programming language',
or, more accurately, a contingency planning language
(a big AI area) would be nice. A nice bonus here is
that it would be possible to write good AI for these
games then, or at the very least bring modern
techniques to bear. -- ilyas
\_ I've heard nice things about Full Spectrum Warrior. I've
wanted to try it. Any motd opinions? |