First off i want to say i don't know much about the game i have just signed up because it reminded me of my favourite rts supreme commander FA after read through a few of the threads its quite clear what the player base wants and that you guys should definitely listen to us
So far what people want that i have read are the following
-Long range artilery
-Experimental units
-Naval units / Large oceans
-Shields
-Ability to zoom out with icons on main screen like in supreme commander FA
-Possibility of having some sort of Commander type unit
I don't know how much of this you have already added of if you have taken into consideration but let me tell you this no game so far has come close to surpeme commander FA its still the #1 rts in my opinion i feel that so many companies have gone wrong making rts games but ignoring what the player base is asking as well as the foundation of what really made the best RTS there is no shame in taking ideas from supreme commander it is an amazing game and i don't think anyone would think any less if you added these things
I mean the people signed up as founders are the ones asking you to implement stuff from supreme commander FA simply becuase they know how good of a game it was and that they don't want to be disappointed again as we have for so long
Please take what me and others are saying seriously
Thanks
I am digging the new videos. The concept of zone control looks good. Not seeing much information on game structures. Will there be point defenses to fortify areas of control?
P.S. I see you have already conquered 2 of the critical problems of previous large scale rts games. A solid game engine and ease of creating maps to enhance replayability.
Yup the map / zone control in the video looked really good / interesting. not seen the latest vid yet will check it tonight.
Am I reading it right that AotS may end up having the zoom out replace individual units with meta units icons, or something like that? If so, that sounds like a good middle road to me.
For me i dont like Zoom out and only see icons ,takes out all the objective i like on all gameplay.
Its possible have options, without only see icons, i prefer something diferent.
In FA 1 think i didnt like was that most game we play zoom out and only see that icons, i like see all the quality game in and out, so im sure we will have bether options then just simple icons.
But this is the way i like play the game.
But a good rts for me must have full zoom out ,i want see all field to take fast conclusions ,i hate close zoom just dont play that rts games like starcraft.
Whether you agree or not so far the game is built like TA/SC and is playing similar including in the video showing the zoom feature already working i really hope you can stop focusing on making a game thats won't be called a TA/SC clone or worrying that people will claim it to be a successor and focus on the good work your doing by taking proven ideas from other games and building on them and adding to them instead of making the drastic mistake other devs have done and trying to focus on being different from other games
Watching the videos, I'd say it has a SC look, but more of a Company of Herose feel. Comparisons to SC look to be only skin deep, literally. By combining the elements from multiple titles, plus the advances with the Nitrous engine, I'd have to agree with Frogboy that this is really a new game, perhaps a new sub-genre of RTS. I actually hope it is, because then maybe we can look forward to the next iteration in 2021. People who want SupCom 3 will be disappointed, but I'm really starting to get excited! I think this thread may have also run its course.
Realistically guys, there is Zero need for max zoom out if the mini map provides adequate information on current state of the battle.
imho that is a statement likely said by somebody who has not played (enough) SupCom?
Even in the short lets play video I felt that icons were missing after all. I basically felt "and now add icons so I can quickly tell what is going on from up here".
The minimap is small, the main game view is big. The movement of the camera via zoom nicely can be combined with getting an overview of what is going on via a zoom with icons. In minimap driven games it is a skill to be able to constantly look at the minimap. The player is forced to basically spent a considerable time their with his/her eyes instead on the big main view. An artificial limitation. Can be fun to play with (see starcraft 2), but for a game that wants to be more in the area of "the UI supports the player as much as it can" it is weird.
Now if it has to be "one icon per unit" or "abstract icons for meta units/whatever" is totally open. But having more than just a pretty view of the map when fully zoomed out is very helpful.
I am not saying in any way I expect or want a copy of SupCom btw. I realize by now I think that AOTS has some quite different gameplay aspects. Still the reasons for "no zoom" are still a little weird to me. Yes I can't make out the exact form of the map from high up. So what? The same can be said about a minimap, in fact there you can even make out less details as it is small. I also will know the map perfectly by heart anyway.
Also the modder in me wonders how doable it will be to mod in icons and whether such a mod would provide an advantage (I still think it would, SupCom is proof of that much in that many players basically disabled the minimap it had completely in favor of the zoom). I in the end did manage to mod in a minimap into PA -by reverse engineering the client and reading data from memory directly-, getting icons into AOTS would be a nice new target
Well I am looking forward to the alpha.
Looking at the squad based games I've seen so far, Kohan and Company of Heroes, which I think are closer to AotS than SupCom, both use icons in the main map to represent squads/companies. AotS has squads, control groups, and battlegroups, so I'm eager to see how such groupings will eventually be represented when zooming out (the founder videos have no icons at all). I don't want to steer the devs in a particular direction, I'll wait and see.
@Frogboy
To be completely honest I am glad the team is taking the approach you are. There have been countless times I have seen games ruined because the player base whines and complains until something gets implemented. I want Ashes to be its own game, and not a clone of something else I have played.
With that being said, I do believe that community feedback is valuable as long as it pertains to the overall vision of the game. If you want the game to be a clone of another game then it's honestly an insult to the creativity of the team. As a founder I went into this knowing that Ashes of the Singularity would be its own monster, and really love the thought of having an RTS unlike the others I own.
The only concerns I have really just pertain to the more tactical side of gameplay like artillery, snipers, units that can break a formation/line, etc. I just don't want the game to be two blobs hitting each other with the largest group winning 100% of the time. With the use of more tactical units a battle can be turned with some well placed shots.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
