Hello and MANY Thanks the Devs !!
1, 2
posted on November 11th, 2010, 4:11 pm
Hi,
I am a Star Trek fan from the first TV series here in germany (around 1975 ..) and was long
time in search of an adequate game ... but ALL commerciale games ar at the best a nice game
with startrek relevance - but with very low feeling from startrek :
Now i found fleetOps .. io know Armada II long - and it was not a at all bad game ... but not a musst
have for me - FO changed this dramatical
A brilliant Game play - good balancing - nice gfx - in one word ... a truly StarTrek Game
Have not found (with 5 games at the moment ..) any thing i dislike or i miss ...
Because one thing ............
True 3D (yes - i have read the FAQ and i agree here with all [warp as example] except 3D)
I play Homeworld from time to time - it is the only very good space RTS available ....
A space RTS is for me a RTS with true 3D.
Dont get me wrong - FO is a IMMENSIVE RTS game with all nice - but realy - i dont need an space
RTS if i play only on a plane - then i can use an ground based RTS too.
I understand many players dont like true 3D (the same is by Homeworld - only very few friends like it
)...
And he like to play with StarTrek units - so i have no problem with this
But i hope it is possible - for the few user that like the difficult - to reenable the 3D system ....
btw. - i have only quick tryed long time ago Armada 2 and so i dont know sucks the implementet
3D system or was other bad things with it who make it logical to disable it ...
I know only the very space like 3D system frome homeworld, and have only read in the FAQ , in FO
3D was disabled because you musst think in 3D and make it more complicatet .......
So if i musst alter an specific setup file please tell me
If this not simple - i hope this get a suggestion as option for an next version
Regards
R-TEAM
I am a Star Trek fan from the first TV series here in germany (around 1975 ..) and was long
time in search of an adequate game ... but ALL commerciale games ar at the best a nice game
with startrek relevance - but with very low feeling from startrek :
Now i found fleetOps .. io know Armada II long - and it was not a at all bad game ... but not a musst
have for me - FO changed this dramatical
A brilliant Game play - good balancing - nice gfx - in one word ... a truly StarTrek Game
Have not found (with 5 games at the moment ..) any thing i dislike or i miss ...
Because one thing ............
True 3D (yes - i have read the FAQ and i agree here with all [warp as example] except 3D)
I play Homeworld from time to time - it is the only very good space RTS available ....
A space RTS is for me a RTS with true 3D.
Dont get me wrong - FO is a IMMENSIVE RTS game with all nice - but realy - i dont need an space
RTS if i play only on a plane - then i can use an ground based RTS too.
I understand many players dont like true 3D (the same is by Homeworld - only very few friends like it
)...And he like to play with StarTrek units - so i have no problem with this
But i hope it is possible - for the few user that like the difficult - to reenable the 3D system ....
btw. - i have only quick tryed long time ago Armada 2 and so i dont know sucks the implementet
3D system or was other bad things with it who make it logical to disable it ...
I know only the very space like 3D system frome homeworld, and have only read in the FAQ , in FO
3D was disabled because you musst think in 3D and make it more complicatet .......
So if i musst alter an specific setup file please tell me
If this not simple - i hope this get a suggestion as option for an next version
Regards
R-TEAM
posted on November 11th, 2010, 4:20 pm
Hi and welcome to the forums! 
True 3D for Armada II was not possible with the desired effects for FO so it was removed - until a better system can be designed and coded, it will remain out I'm afraid
. If the devs so desire, I'm sure they'll reintroduce a 3D system that is more to their liking . Also, the cursor up/down action was removed via hardcoding, so it's not possible to reimplement it, only to change the actual height of the map.
Hope you join us online!
True 3D for Armada II was not possible with the desired effects for FO so it was removed - until a better system can be designed and coded, it will remain out I'm afraid
. If the devs so desire, I'm sure they'll reintroduce a 3D system that is more to their liking . Also, the cursor up/down action was removed via hardcoding, so it's not possible to reimplement it, only to change the actual height of the map.Hope you join us online!
posted on November 11th, 2010, 4:37 pm
welcome to the forums R-Team
hope u enjoy your time here.
i never really liked 3d for an rts, it was ok in bridge commander type games. but for an rts i prefer top down 2d views.
hope u enjoy your time here.
i never really liked 3d for an rts, it was ok in bridge commander type games. but for an rts i prefer top down 2d views.
posted on November 11th, 2010, 5:25 pm
Welcome man! I really liked the homeworld 3D system too, and if it would work in FO I would gladly accept it, but for now, I am just happy with FO.
You do have to think about it though... In trek and most other shows, the ships always seemed to be on a flat plain. They always met each other facing the same direction(top to bottom) and always were seen on the same elevation. I don't think it is that bad in a2 to have them like that as well.
You do have to think about it though... In trek and most other shows, the ships always seemed to be on a flat plain. They always met each other facing the same direction(top to bottom) and always were seen on the same elevation. I don't think it is that bad in a2 to have them like that as well.
posted on November 11th, 2010, 7:06 pm
Hi,
thanks for your replays
@Dominus_Noctis
O.K. - then i dont need to hunt down script/config files.
Hope it will come back
@Myles
It is not that i only like 3D for an RTS , play SupcomFA regulary (heavy modded ) with
friends - and here i have an 2D gameplay, but with hight changes (hills/mountains) and with
additional 3 layer (submarine/Air with planes/"Space" with satellites-based-wappon and spaceships)
and so at the limmit for an "2D" RTS game ...
@Adm. Zaxxon
yea - The Homeworld 3D system is not the best i can imagine for an RTS , but very nice and handy,
if you get it - many of my friends prefere simple 2D RTS , as it is much harder to think in full 3D in
defence and in an inovative fleet movement way - but if you get it - you have many more ways to
fight that in simple 2D ....
@all
Have now played another game - here i have set the build costs to here maximum - and it looks the
AI is here buggy
Both (have maked 2 random AI enemys) have not build an resouce process station - but build
an space yard - and so ne resources left to build an resource process station and stuck with no chance
to process further ..........
And i am happy with the actual 2D system too
It is a so nice game
Regards
R-TEAM
thanks for your replays
@Dominus_Noctis
O.K. - then i dont need to hunt down script/config files.
Hope it will come back
@Myles
It is not that i only like 3D for an RTS , play SupcomFA regulary (heavy modded
) withfriends - and here i have an 2D gameplay, but with hight changes (hills/mountains) and with
additional 3 layer (submarine/Air with planes/"Space" with satellites-based-wappon and spaceships)
and so at the limmit for an "2D" RTS game ...
@Adm. Zaxxon
yea - The Homeworld 3D system is not the best i can imagine for an RTS , but very nice and handy,
if you get it - many of my friends prefere simple 2D RTS , as it is much harder to think in full 3D in
defence and in an inovative fleet movement way - but if you get it - you have many more ways to
fight that in simple 2D ....
@all
Have now played another game - here i have set the build costs to here maximum - and it looks the
AI is here buggy
Both (have maked 2 random AI enemys) have not build an resouce process station - but build
an space yard - and so ne resources left to build an resource process station and stuck with no chance
to process further ..........
And i am happy with the actual 2D system too
It is a so nice game
Regards
R-TEAM
posted on November 11th, 2010, 7:12 pm
posted on November 11th, 2010, 7:41 pm
Last edited by DOCa Cola on November 11th, 2010, 7:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
posted on November 11th, 2010, 8:08 pm
Last edited by Elim on November 11th, 2010, 8:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Elim wants to HSA 1000 3d-stacked monsoons! >:D 
Btw, welcome to the community!
Btw, welcome to the community!
posted on November 11th, 2010, 9:21 pm
Hi,
@Dominus_Noctis
i agree that fom the "pont of view" of the top-down view future an 3D system is a bad idea ...
But i have a little bit played with the alternate view - and it is not so much away from the homeworld
system
So it can maybe not bad to play it in full 3D - and for a simply overwiev or for the users that happy with
2D gameplay the top-down view ... (but would prefere a little bit more zoom out possibility in the top-down
view ...)
And interesting that it can be modded
It is hard ? Will this be available as an optional mod
oh - and if you interestet - i have SacrifyOfAngel for homeworld, rebalanced and borg included (from the
StarWars_VS_StarTrek mod) here, but with an unfixed texture buff overfill problem (only visible is more
than 1 cardassian player in game imho).
@Myles
i dont say the AI make dumb moves or so
But in an game who it is possible to adjust the build costs in a so much way , the ai should check
before building anything, if he can still build the most important buildings to gain resources IF he
dont build the important resource buildings first ........
Or the ai should marked "dont use it with more than 1.x build costs" or so ...
Regards
R-TEAM
@Dominus_Noctis
i agree that fom the "pont of view" of the top-down view future an 3D system is a bad idea ...
But i have a little bit played with the alternate view - and it is not so much away from the homeworld
system
So it can maybe not bad to play it in full 3D - and for a simply overwiev or for the users that happy with
2D gameplay the top-down view ... (but would prefere a little bit more zoom out possibility in the top-down
view ...)
And interesting that it can be modded
It is hard ? Will this be available as an optional mod
oh - and if you interestet - i have SacrifyOfAngel for homeworld, rebalanced and borg included (from the
StarWars_VS_StarTrek mod) here, but with an unfixed texture buff overfill problem (only visible is more
than 1 cardassian player in game imho).
@Myles
i dont say the AI make dumb moves or so
But in an game who it is possible to adjust the build costs in a so much way , the ai should check
before building anything, if he can still build the most important buildings to gain resources IF he
dont build the important resource buildings first ........
Or the ai should marked "dont use it with more than 1.x build costs" or so ...
Regards
R-TEAM
posted on November 11th, 2010, 9:50 pm
the ai cant check that sorta stuff, so if u put in really high costs for the ai, it will actually run out of money before making mining giving u instant victory.
the ai does make dumb moves, it is pretty stupid, the way it stays competitive on harder settings is by spam spam spam spam spamming ships way more than u can hope to. then it sends them single file into your wall of turrets.
giving u instant victory.the ai does make dumb moves, it is pretty stupid, the way it stays competitive on harder settings is by spam spam spam spam spamming ships way more than u can hope to. then it sends them single file into your wall of turrets.
posted on November 11th, 2010, 9:56 pm
It's quite a bit different than Homeworld I believe, because in A2 you could only ever move in a full plane, when moving in height . Aka, you move down or up a little bit, but you can't ever move diagonally, just straight up or down (and then on a plane).
You can mod the maximum heights via the RTS configuration file, but it will destroy multiplayer compatibility if you do so. More information is available via the link in my signature
. Aka, you move down or up a little bit, but you can't ever move diagonally, just straight up or down (and then on a plane).You can mod the maximum heights via the RTS configuration file, but it will destroy multiplayer compatibility if you do so
. More information is available via the link in my signature posted on November 11th, 2010, 10:33 pm
Hi,
@Myles
i dont expect the ai doing more clevernes things than spaming the enemys with units ...
It is VERY hard to code an (even harder an realtime) good AI ...
But it is not so hard to check before build anything :
Wich buildings/ships i need essential to get new resources ?
Substract the resources that is needed to build the essential ships from the available resource pool ...
With the rest the ai can build anything he like - and can he build nothing usefull - then he build the
essential buildings/ship first ......
@Dominus_Noctis
No - the view in A2 is more flexible as i have seen ATM.
In homeworld, you MUSST always atache your central view point to anything (that is selectable from the corsour ...).
Over this central "point" you can rotate and zoom the view free.(and have an very good zoome range )
If the atached object fly - then your view fly too
But you cant fly free in view mode thru the space ....
Here in FO , i can have an top-down view , and an tectical view - if i like atached to an unit, like in homeworld - but in homeworld i have an bigger zoom area ..
But i can in FO fly free thru the space - this is in homeworld impossible.
You can have an overview map in HW - and here you can free move - but only in a planar way,the origin in hight from the plane is the last selectet "center point" ingame.
And from the overview you can only back in the normal view by select going back to the old "center point" or select an new - but you cant go to freespace who no unit is from you ...
In FO i can in the minimap going anything and have no restrictions.
The moving from units/fleets in HW is going not easy (this is natural, with your mouse, you have only an 2D movable area .. you would neen proffesionell input things like in 3D production to give full 3D control over the coursor ...)
To move you musst first set on a plane from the movable unit the range and THAN with holding shift, the hight difference up or down from the origin hight ... not allways you end up in the right point
So i see in FO still a good potential for 3D fighting
Regards
R-TEAM
@Myles
i dont expect the ai doing more clevernes things than spaming the enemys with units ...
It is VERY hard to code an (even harder an realtime) good AI ...
But it is not so hard to check before build anything :
Wich buildings/ships i need essential to get new resources ?
Substract the resources that is needed to build the essential ships from the available resource pool ...
With the rest the ai can build anything he like - and can he build nothing usefull - then he build the
essential buildings/ship first ......
@Dominus_Noctis
No - the view in A2 is more flexible as i have seen ATM.
In homeworld, you MUSST always atache your central view point to anything (that is selectable from the corsour ...).
Over this central "point" you can rotate and zoom the view free.(and have an very good zoome range
)If the atached object fly - then your view fly too
But you cant fly free in view mode thru the space ....
Here in FO , i can have an top-down view , and an tectical view - if i like atached to an unit, like in homeworld - but in homeworld i have an bigger zoom area ..
But i can in FO fly free thru the space - this is in homeworld impossible.
You can have an overview map in HW - and here you can free move - but only in a planar way,the origin in hight from the plane is the last selectet "center point" ingame.
And from the overview you can only back in the normal view by select going back to the old "center point" or select an new - but you cant go to freespace who no unit is from you ...
In FO i can in the minimap going anything and have no restrictions.
The moving from units/fleets in HW is going not easy
(this is natural, with your mouse, you have only an 2D movable area .. you would neen proffesionell input things like in 3D production to give full 3D control over the coursor ...)To move you musst first set on a plane from the movable unit the range and THAN with holding shift, the hight difference up or down from the origin hight ... not allways you end up in the right point
So i see in FO still a good potential for 3D fighting
Regards
R-TEAM
posted on November 11th, 2010, 10:35 pm
posted on November 12th, 2010, 12:06 am
posted on November 12th, 2010, 2:28 pm
Hi,
have self fixed the issue with the AI and high build costs.
Have altered the build order files, so the AI build the resource important things first.
Need anybody this files i can it maybe upload here (dont know can upload files here ...)
Have it testet - works for all 5 races (the Borg was a lttle bit complicatet but have it get at the end ).
Remember -> The Game self dont switch this file ATM - so if you replace it make a copy of the orginal files first ! You need it for games with lower build factor (IMHO 2.2 around ..)!
Regards
R-TEAM
have self fixed the issue with the AI and high build costs.
Have altered the build order files, so the AI build the resource important things first.
Need anybody this files i can it maybe upload here
(dont know can upload files here ...)Have it testet - works for all 5 races (the Borg was a lttle bit complicatet but have it get at the end
).Remember -> The Game self dont switch this file ATM - so if you replace it make a copy of the orginal files first ! You need it for games with lower build factor (IMHO 2.2 around ..)!
Regards
R-TEAM
1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests