EPTNo kidding. I heard Minecraft's in beta too.
Achron. Indie RTS with TIME manipulation - Page 9
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
ArcticVanguard
United States450 Posts
No kidding. I heard Minecraft's in beta too. | ||
|
FliedLice
Germany7494 Posts
On May 25 2011 01:22 ArcticVanguard wrote: No kidding. I heard Minecraft's in beta too. So? Giving Minecraft as an example for a Beta is pretty ridiculous. | ||
|
Almisael
Austria235 Posts
=> no more cheesy 5 min games or buildorder-wins lol. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
Wtf this game is brilliant, I saw it when it was just announced but didnt realize it then. | ||
|
masterbreti
Korea (South)2711 Posts
Holy crap on a cracker its confusing. Once released though it looks promising. If they contiune it the way its going, might be a nice little esport in the process. On May 25 2011 02:04 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Any game where you can say "Paradox resolution in my favor!" is by default awesome... Wtf this game is brilliant, I saw it when it was just announced but didnt realize it then. You vs me showmatch on this game. haha | ||
|
iCanada
Canada10660 Posts
o.O Q: How does one player beat another (when does the game end)? A: While we have a variety of end-game conditions for the single-player campaigns, we have two primary modes for multiplayer games. The first mode is: your game is over if you lose your ability to attack or produce units at any point in time. This yields interesting strategies where one player can be losing in the past, but rush in the present and still win. The second mode is: your game is over if you lose your ability to attack or produce units at the oldest position on the timeline, as it is impossible to recover from this. However, this second mode can obviously add time to the end-game. So basically you need to get totally killed in-between a time wave? I don't understand... | ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
On May 25 2011 02:47 iCanada wrote: So wait... how do you win? o.O So basically you need to get totally killed in-between a time wave? I don't understand... I'm going to assume it's like this: In the first mode, if you ever at any point in the timeline lose your ability to produce or attack, you lose. In the second mode, you're only dead when the final timewave hits you at a point where you can't produce or attack. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11547 Posts
On May 25 2011 02:47 iCanada wrote: So wait... how do you win? o.O So basically you need to get totally killed in-between a time wave? I don't understand... It depends on the map, but usually it is set so that you win when your win falls of the timeline. Because anything that happens at that past is completely unchangeble, so when your enemy does not have any stuff then, it will eventually propagate to every point in the future, while alternate states will fall off as unrealized realities. So you not only need to kill your opponent, but you also need to protect that victory against any changes he may do by sending stuff back, for example. That other mode is also basically the same, because hunting for every single unit and building the enemy has takes long enough for the whole thing to fall of the timeline anyways. Edit: To clarify, stuff obviously moves further into the past with time. You can usually watch stuff about 7 minutes back, and 1 minute in the future. The possibility to interact with different parts of the timeline differs, it is harder to do stuff the further back it is, and to some points you can not give direct orders, but you can still chronoport stuff back there. So your victory needs to be at the time 7 minutes before the present. This does not mean you have to wait 7 minutes after achieving victory to get your victory. You usually play a bit in the past anyways, and, as i said, you can still interact with the farther past, and then you can indirectly interact by chronoporting stuff back there even further. So, you need to protect your victory all the time until it finally falls of the timeline. One example: I build some bombers, and kill the enemy base. However, 3 minutes later his base still exists because that change has not yet propageted, and he sends some interceptors back to kill my bombers, so his base never got killed. I only win if i kill his base in a way that he can not unkill it by changing stuff. One way is to send additional stuff back to fight his preinforcements. Another would be to attack in the future and prevent those units from being send back, for example by destroying his chronoporter. Or i could harrass in between, and thus he will never have had the money to build those units he will send back later. But, as with any strategy game, the most common reason of winning is surrender of the opponent once he realizes he has no chance anymore. Also, regarding the tutorial, they say that that is part of the singleplayer campaign which will be released once the game reaches retail. So no, at the moment it is not there. However, they have a very helpful and newbiefriendly community over there. | ||
|
iCanada
Canada10660 Posts
On May 25 2011 02:55 Tobberoth wrote: I'm going to assume it's like this: In the first mode, if you ever at any point in the timeline lose your ability to produce or attack, you lose. In the second mode, you're only dead when the final timewave hits you at a point where you can't produce or attack. So do you need to go through a whole time wave of being dead? Or any point in time where your opponent can kill all your buildings kind of thing? Sounds like it would open up scenarios in which the game would end while you still very much could be able to continue playing and win. Or even scenarios where both players could win/lose... what would happen if Player A sends his units in the past, and player B sends his units to the future (like it gives the example in the quote) and they both kill each other during the same time wave? I think it is more saying in the second mode you need to be dead at the beginning of the eight minute window in time in which, which makes more sense to me. Seems to be a better competitive medium to me, and less of a catch your opponent with his pants down kind of thing. EDIT: Oh, okay, I get it. That makes a lot more sense now. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11547 Posts
| ||
|
inf3rnus
United States28 Posts
Guessing we won't get access to the game before the first match since no one gets eliminated until the real tournament begins. | ||
|
iCanada
Canada10660 Posts
On May 25 2011 03:21 Simberto wrote: Like i said above, it basically comes down to the same anyways. It is very hard to kill every single unit and structure an enemy has, and it takes a pretty long time, so surprising victories are not really realistic.And since the only way to make something stable is the point it falls of the timeline, that is also the only point where it is likely that a situation stays the same for long enough to wipe out every single unit. Generally, if the game were without the timetravel and stuff, it plays out much slower than, for example, SC2. Obviously, with having to fight at many different times it still gives you more than enough to do, and i think it would be impossible if it were much faster. Sounds pretty cool. I'm seriously contemplating spending the $30 on it. | ||
|
k!llua
Australia895 Posts
| ||
|
Hesmyrr
Canada5776 Posts
| ||
|
Almisael
Austria235 Posts
| ||
|
KillerSOS
United States4207 Posts
SO COOL | ||
|
doner0
United States233 Posts
| ||
|
Quotidian
Norway1937 Posts
I want Valve hire the developers and remake the game like they did with Portal. The idea of it is so awesome and it looks interesting in a lot of ways. It just makes my eyes bleed. | ||
|
Ideas
United States8114 Posts
anyone whose been playing have any comments on the more RTS-ey stuff? it seems pretty weak from the videos ive seen, but that might just be becuase whoever I watched play wasnt very good (IE all the units seem pretty generic and REALLY slow and there's no micro, macro seems extremely basic/trivial). if only someone just made this as a mod for SC lol | ||
|
KillerSOS
United States4207 Posts
| ||
| ||
