Massive Assault Official Forum
   
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 2:29 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: I love Massive Assault !!... and a little M.A.X. nostalgy :)
PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2004 9:18 pm 
Hi all, just wanted to tell my enthusiasme about this game. Turne base strategy is cool and this game is gorgeous. I like the revenue/guerrilla part.
If im allowed to dream a little, i'd like next version of this great game to include some elements of Mechanized Assault and Exploration (M.A.X.).
The things i miss :
-infantry/infiltrators (can steal vehicules, prevent them firing for one turn,...)
-only view zone under your own radars (fix, mobile ground, "awaks")
-submarines
-air transport
-air/air ground/air air/ground capabilities
-research to improve units capabilities
-mix of movement/fire calculation
-visualisation for movement/radar/firing range for friendlies and ennemies (in a more convevient way than the actual MA system)
-repair units and pads
-amo system with reload pads and units

What i dont miss is the ressource management part. I like the way they did it... "a la" Rik.

What do you think ? Personnaly i would love a more deep and complex game... although i realy have a great time playing Massive Assault.
A big Thank you to MA devs !!


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: I love Massive Assault !!... and a little M.A.X. nostalg
PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2004 10:26 pm 
Offline
P.L. Marshal
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 11:14 am
Posts: 1065
Karma: 0
Hi Cof!
guess what? you are NOT the first coming here with M.A.X. nostalgy
similar stuff was discussed here
http://massiveassault.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=188
and here
http://massiveassault.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=277

So i'll give just a short comments about those offers
Cof wrote:
-only view zone under your own radars (fix, mobile ground, "awaks")

Not a good idea - definitely NOT fits the MA gameplay. MA is about thinking and estimating,not guessing and expecting.Devs deliberately eliminated all sorts of uncertainity from game.And btw you can imagine that in sci-fi environment there ere enough spy-sattelites in orbit and they watch everything what moves on planet.
Cof wrote:
-submarines
-air transport
-air/air ground/air air/ground capabilities

Here i agree - i would like to see those units included in upcoming addon.Though i not sure how they will affect the balance.Suppose devs will give you more verbose answers on what they are going to add.
Cof wrote:
-research to improve units capabilities

Not a good idea.There are a hell lot of games where you need to spend resources purchase endless "upgrades" for your units.I certainly not want to see something like that in MA.And - what stats you offer to upgrade?Make an upgraded rocket launcher with 4 damage? balance will go to hell then..
Cof wrote:
-mix of movement/fire calculation

again not a good idea.Currently units in MA not have an ability to fire multiple times per turn.They also not have such a lot of moves like M.A.X. units.MA mechanics are simpler but they ensure much smoother gameplay.
Cof wrote:
-visualisation for movement/radar/firing range for friendlies and ennemies (in a more convevient way than the actual MA system)

can you specify what's wrong with current fire ranges?and what exactly you offer to add?
Cof wrote:
-repair units and pads

was discussed here -
http://massiveassault.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=358
seems not a good idea in MA environment - will make online games continue forever.
Cof wrote:
-ammo system with reload pads and units

I personally like this idea but majority of players wont enjoy it - will make game too complex.

Listen Cof you should understand that devs had to make a very hard choise -
make game very complex and realistic
create easy to leard and fast gameplay.
In a choice between realism and gameplay...you can imaging that gameplay will be winner.
If they made a game like you (or me) like to see - that would be a game for a few dozens of Hardcore TBS fans and casual player would not be able to understand how to play it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2004 2:58 am 
Offline
Developer

Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 338
Karma: 0

Location: Wargaming.net
God Damn, Marshal Mrakobes!

What a FANTASTIC REPLY to Cof's question.

I can hardly find anything to add...

Thanks for the help, Mrako!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2004 8:02 am 
Offline
P.L. Marshal
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 11:14 am
Posts: 1065
Karma: 0
2 Vic
???? what does it mean "nothing to add"?? we all wait comments from you about which new units will appear in addon....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2004 10:27 am 
Quote:
Listen Cof you should understand that devs had to make a very hard choise

realy ? :)

Appart for the "listen Cof..." part, thx a lot for your answer ! I appreciate the time you took and the references to other posts. I agree that MA is not MAX and your bad/good comments make sense. Those were just wishes with no consideration for the impact on the game.

Don't get me wrong. I love the game as it is. I will recommend it to friends with whom i'd like to play. Maybe it's not a good idea to compare but well... it's just that, in term of pleasure, i have now 2 references in Turn based strategy : MA and MAX.

Quote:
you can imagine that in sci-fi environment there ere enough spy-sattelites in orbit and they watch everything what moves on planet.

Erm... maybe they also developed anti-satelite measures that make them too expensive to keep alive ? :)

Quote:
can you specify what's wrong with current fire ranges?and what exactly you offer to add?

Nothing wrong ! The SHIFT+Click to reveal potential threat is perfect. What would be convevient as a complement visualisation is the ability to select enemy units and get the same spot highlights for movement and range of fire circle + the ability to then select a potential spot for the selected enemy unit and see the range of fire circle from there. Yes it would be a functionnal redundancy with the current SHIFT+Click but i would enjoy this alternate way.

Quote:
In a choice between realism and gameplay...you can imaging that gameplay will be winner.

I'm not particularely found of realism either.

... in short, i can feel you like this game verry much and i share this "likeness" with you. Hope to fight on battle fields with you and share some more ideas on this forum.
Regards


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2004 12:10 pm 
Offline
Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 9:29 am
Posts: 78
Karma: 0
I always liked the idea of ammo.
I think the best ammo system ever implemented in an RTS game thus far was in Earth 2150, from Topware/Zuxxez.

You had air transports carry ammo from an ammo depot to units when they ran out.

This could actually be implemented quite easily into MA, if you ask me.
Best way to do so would be to have an ammo depot that you can purchase and place, which comes with 1 ammo transport. The ammo transports could work in the same way the bombers do, fly out to units at a range of 6 from the depot.
And it could be made as a weak enough thing, even though its a structure. Perhaps 3 - 4 armor, no defensive capabilities. Have it cost 1 resource, maybe 2. Additional ammo carriers could be purchased for 1 res, max of 3 per depot.

Of course, the best way to make units not too ammo dependant would be to give plenty ammo to begin with.
And bots wouldn't need ammo replacements for their point-blank laser attacks. And LAVs seem to have energy weapon attacks as well.

And an interesting system would be to have each unit with different amounts of ammo.
LAVs have infinite, Tanks have a lot, mortars a little less (to compensate for their range), about the same with bots, Rockets have the least ammo.


Just some ideas/speculation.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2004 12:43 pm 
Re: Ammo...

Ok, nice idea in general, but what does it really add to MA gameplay? If you ask me it just makes things worse, it creates another level of micro which this game really isn't about. Next you'll want to add fuel as well, and then things will really get annoying...

If you want to add to the strategic aspects of MA I'd think there'd be better and less micro intensive places to go.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2004 1:57 pm 
Offline
Developer

Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 338
Karma: 0

Location: Wargaming.net
licker wrote:
Re: Ammo...

Ok, nice idea in general, but what does it really add to MA gameplay? If you ask me it just makes things worse, it creates another level of micro which this game really isn't about. Next you'll want to add fuel as well, and then things will really get annoying...

If you want to add to the strategic aspects of MA I'd think there'd be better and less micro intensive places to go.


I totally agree with Licker...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Well
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2004 3:08 pm 
Offline
Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 9:29 am
Posts: 78
Karma: 0
Point well taken, but I think to say that the game isn't about micro isn't exactly 100% true.

Its true that the game focuses a lot on the strategies of recruitment, secret allies, etc.

However, the game also takes a lot of tactical skill - a.k.a. micromanagement.

I mean, when I usually whoop the hard AI, its because they can have all the goddamn tanks and mortars in the world, but I can hold them off with a line of LAVs (that I replenish in recruitment) and 2-4 missile launchers.

So, its about the units you have, and how you use them.

And no, fuel wouldn't be that great an idea for this. And ammo was just a pipe dream, I guess :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2004 3:41 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 3:06 am
Posts: 1338
Karma: 1

Location: USA
How is micromanagement the same as unit tactics? I don't understand your definition.

For me, at least in MA:
Tactics - The ability to use what units you have in the most effective way, and the ability to outmanuver your enemy on a specific front.

Micromanagement - Lots of additional features you need to account for that may or may not add value to a game.

Sounds like you are a TBS buff, and love having additional features :).

I'm exactly the opposite... I think elegant simplicity is what makes MA so incredible. I like focusing purely on the strategic and tactical side of things.

_________________
Founder of The New World Order, and moderator for the Andromeda Clan War.

NWO website:
http://www.freewebs.com/massiveassault-nwo/index.htm

Clan War website:
http://www.massiveassault.com/clans/nwo/ClanWar


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2004 4:55 pm 
Offline
Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 9:29 am
Posts: 78
Karma: 0
Maelstrom wrote:
For me, at least in MA:
Tactics - The ability to use what units you have in the most effective way, and the ability to outmanuver your enemy on a specific front.


Exactly.

Maelstrom wrote:
Micromanagement - Lots of additional features you need to account for that may or may not add value to a game.


Not quite. In fact, your definition of tactics pretty much also defines my definition of micromanagement.
Just think about it:
Management: How you "manage," a.k.a. "use" your resources. In this case, how you manuever and use your units.
Micro- : Really small.
Micromanagement: How you use your resources/units on a small scale.

So really there isn't much, if any difference between the two terms. I use them practically interchangeably.

Its also pretty much the opposite of macromanagement, which would be using your resources on a huge ("macro") scale. Macro is similar to overall strategies, as in "one portion of the big army hits here while the second portion flanks on the side." That would be the kind of thing where you send millions of units at people in games like StarCraft.


As for TBS buff, not really. I just like to play what I think is good and fun. That usually amounts to FPS and/or RTS games, but I do like a good TBS game as well. Chess, MBC, Cyberstorm, MA, just for example.

As for loving features, I just sometimes let my imagination get away from me :P
Sometimes all the concepts you've seen from other games can kind of mesh together and give you new possibilities in your mind. Like the Ammo thing from Earth2150, unit customization from Earth2150, the anti-air system in MoonBase Commander, etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2004 6:36 pm 
Offline
Developer

Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 322
Karma: 0

Location: Wargaming.Net
IMO:

Let's make the difference between tactics, micromanadgement, strategy and macromanadgement.

When you do "tactics" you think like this: "I need to change formation from column to a V-type."
At this point tactics ends. What goes next is micromanadgement: You execute the self-given order the best way you can. In computer games this involves cliking on units and pointing thier places...

The same applies to strategy and macromanadgement.

The problem is that if a game is a large scale(has large armies with lots of units) AND deep (have lot's of levels - from army command to refueling particular unit (1 out of 100)) it will require several times more MICRO actions than MACRO. Regardless of ammount of variety in the game the actions tend to repeat over time. In a good game you HAVE to choose each turn what particular action to repeat. But there are some actions that should be repeated regulary anyway.
In this case, after repeating them two-three times a player will ask to automate them because he hates to do these monotonous things he already knows about(and this is not his job to do them again and again). And if these actions will be fully automated why should we bother telling him about them?

The only good answer is eye-candy (ear-candy, brain-candy...) and making him feel "proud for having all his units upgraded, rearmed and refuelled, ready for anything, having the best chance to SURVIVE". But that's another topic and another game.

It seems to me that one of the major factors of FUN in a pure strategy game is the absence of compulsory monotonous actions a player should take to achieve victory.

_________________
Do not invade 8 countries on your first turn :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:47 am 
Offline
Developer

Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 338
Karma: 0

Location: Wargaming.net
Maelstrom wrote:
I think elegant simplicity is what makes MA so incredible.


Damn, I was charmed by that phrase...

Should put this quote on the next printrun box of MA....

:-)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 24, 2004 12:11 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 3:06 am
Posts: 1338
Karma: 1

Location: USA
Too bad I'm not from Gamespot or that might carry some weight ;)

_________________
Founder of The New World Order, and moderator for the Andromeda Clan War.

NWO website:
http://www.freewebs.com/massiveassault-nwo/index.htm

Clan War website:
http://www.massiveassault.com/clans/nwo/ClanWar


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Karma functions powered by Karma MOD © 2007, 2009 m157y