StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Single-player

One thing I have a problem with- there are tons of screenshots of Soviet tanks all over the internet- never mind the pictures you'll find in books and references and what not- yet for some reason, I look at the Soviet tanks in the screenshots (check em out, they're gorgeous) ....

And for the fuck of me I don't know what the hell variant they're supposed to be. They just look ... weird.

How hard is it to make a convincing looking T-72AV or T-72B? Honestly? T-80B? T-80U?

The other units seem fine, but that's just a pet peeve of mine.

Looks pretty, I think this will be the first RTS in two years that I'll pick up.

Vympel, check PMs.

EDIT:Deployable bridges? SOLD!

Is there anywhere I can find the system reqs for this? I love it already, just from the screenshot of the Su-25 pulling up from a bombing run (yes, I'm an Su-25 fanboy) but my "good" computer still isn't so good.

Looks nice. How realistic is realistic? Full range of weapons available? No jackass balancing?

Line of Sight? Weren't we talking about wanting an RTS with this a month or two ago?

Yes. Yes we were. And it appears we may be rewarded. I wonder how much realism it will go into though. Will troops have ammo capacities to go along with their fancy graphics? Will tanks have vaiable front, back, side, top, and turret armor? I must know more!

Variable armour is almost a certainty, but ammo is not, although I think it'd be nice. Hopefully they won't skimp on weapons - I'm curious if we can finally have a game where tanks have a cannon, a coax, a roof MG, and smoke launchers. It's

Stark wrote:Variable armour is almost a certainty, but ammo is not, although I think it'd be nice. Hopefully they won't skimp on weapons - I'm curious if we can finally have a game where tanks have a cannon, a coax, a roof MG, and smoke launchers. It's

Indeed it is.

On topic: First, I think limited ammo would be lame. Second, that looks orgasmic. Fully destructible American cities, suburbs and small towns? Carpet bombing, napalm, and tac-nukes? Hell yes! But unless the game comes complete with a new hard drive and graphics card, I don't know how the hell I'm supposed to run it. It looks too good to be true! My compy would probably throw itself from the tower of my desk to stop the pain if it tried to run that.

I know who the mysterious third faction will be!

THE WOLVERINES!

Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba wrote:

Stark wrote:Variable armour is almost a certainty, but ammo is not, although I think it'd be nice. Hopefully they won't skimp on weapons - I'm curious if we can finally have a game where tanks have a cannon, a coax, a roof MG, and smoke launchers. It's

Indeed it is.

On topic: First, I think limited ammo would be lame. Second, that looks orgasmic. Fully destructible American cities, suburbs and small towns? Carpet bombing, napalm, and tac-nukes? Hell yes! But unless the game comes complete with a new hard drive and graphics card, I don't know how the hell I'm supposed to run it. It looks too good to be true! My compy would probably throw itself from the tower of my desk to stop the pain if it tried to run that.

If you look at the video clips in the website Vympel linked, you'll find a clip showing some actual gameplay videos. The earlier gameplay clips from last year look pretty slow and jerky, but there's a clip showing a bunch of pro gamers testing out the game, and it looks acceptable.

Shroom Man 777 wrote:I know who the mysterious third faction will be!

THE WOLVERINES!

If it is, then this gets immediate Best Game Ever status. Damn I love that movie!

The third faction is XXXX. No, I can't say more.

The game is incredibly pretty.
Tutorial is done through movies, atleast in this stage.

Gameplay looks kickass, but I dropped due to lag for my first trial run.

Will post more inabit.

EDIT: Problems connecting means I give up on tonight for gameplay.

This game possibly has the greatest feature known to online gaming mankind.

Okay, everyone knows what clans are, groups of people who like playing together, usually competetively. But what if you're not in a clan, but you just enjoy playing with a bunch of people, usually from differant clans, how do you set up so you all play together?
Enter stage left, The 'Gang'. This is a feature so that the MassGate(their server managing software) can steer you indirection of servers where your friends are playing, lets you join their team(depending on server settings due to autobalence) and generally makes meetups easier between friends.

Other interesting features I've heard from the designers is that during multiplayer games, you can join the game and just be a spectator, VoIP is a definite in, delayed troop deployment and being able to transfer your own resources to the command of a team player.

I'd like to know how the 'specialties' break down: if you choose Air, do you just get choppers etc, or do you have airmobile infantry or a lower ratio of other units? If you choose armour, do you have mechanised infantry as well, or just tanks?

Stark wrote:I'd like to know how the 'specialties' break down: if you choose Air, do you just get choppers etc, or do you have airmobile infantry or a lower ratio of other units? If you choose armour, do you have mechanised infantry as well, or just tanks?

Uh..*thinks how much he can say*.

You can pick one of the four roles, this gives you price drops on your types of units(I.E a tank costs far less then it would otherwise) but at the same time you can still acess other groups units except at a higher cost and you can't use their best units.
I.E me as an armour guy, cannot get the infantrys sniper, while the infantry dude can't get my heavy tanks.

Oh yeah, sounds like industrial secrets to me. I bet you signed an NDA for that and all!

Pfft. I'd prefer to just command realisitc unit groups (ie company level or whatever the game supports) rather than have unrealistic "teams"- ie. if in one scenario I'm a VDV unit commander, I drop in on some town in Bumfuck, Kansas with BMDs, BTR-Ds, and 2S9s, and that's all I can possibly get.

But then, it's not as hardcore a game as I would like.

Stark wrote:Oh yeah, sounds like industrial secrets to me. I bet you signed an NDA for that and all!

Spoilsport. Let me enjoy my build of WiC.
And by the way, yes.

Vympel wrote:Pfft. I'd prefer to just command realisitc unit groups (ie company level or whatever the game supports) rather than have unrealistic "teams"- ie. if in one scenario I'm a VDV unit commander, I drop in on some town in Bumfuck, Kansas with BMDs, BTR-Ds, and 2S9s, and that's all I can possibly get.

But then, it's not as hardcore a game as I would like.

So far, I've seen servers where you have large groups of people intereacting, each focusing on their own area and it's mostly working out.

Heh, I saw your post before you edited it. I wish the third faction was the Scrin, instead of NATO. Or am I allowed to say that? Well I dinna sign no NDA!

Shroom Man 777 wrote:I know who the mysterious third faction will be!

THE WOLVERINES!

It's blindingly obviously that the third faction will be.....


CANADA!

kheegster wrote:

Shroom Man 777 wrote:I know who the mysterious third faction will be!

THE WOLVERINES!

It's blindingly obviously that the third faction will be.....


CANADA!

No, it's Yuri!

Red Alert 2 had the Soviets invade America...



...this game is obviously a homage to that

Vympel wrote:Pfft. I'd prefer to just command realisitc unit groups (ie company level or whatever the game supports) rather than have unrealistic "teams"- ie. if in one scenario I'm a VDV unit commander, I drop in on some town in Bumfuck, Kansas with BMDs, BTR-Ds, and 2S9s, and that's all I can possibly get.

But then, it's not as hardcore a game as I would like.

I'd imagined it would be something like this - ie, you choose an armour battalion, and can attach infantry elements, support elements etc. Seems it's just lame 'build cost' stuff, which is a shame. Ever since 1944:AtR introduced me to higher level organisation I've wanted a game with that sort of thing that didn't suck.

Stark wrote:
I'd imagined it would be something like this - ie, you choose an armour battalion, and can attach infantry elements, support elements etc. Seems it's just lame 'build cost' stuff, which is a shame. Ever since 1944:AtR introduced me to higher level organisation I've wanted a game with that sort of thing that didn't suck.

Usually, you end up working together with quite a few people, so theres not much of a problem of lacking specific units(say, being artillary with no armour).

IGN wrote:Our demo took place in the same region as previous multiplayer demonstrations, Pine Valley. It's a fictional town built around the stereotypes of small-town USA perpetuated by so many Spielberg films. It's got a lovely dogs-barking, paperboys-wailing, birds-tweeting, wholesome feel - a town where we'd all like to live. No wonder we couldn't wait to nuke this putridly perfect place into the ground.

This game looks fucking awesome, why haven't I heard of it before?

Ace Pace wrote:

Stark wrote:
I'd imagined it would be something like this - ie, you choose an armour battalion, and can attach infantry elements, support elements etc. Seems it's just lame 'build cost' stuff, which is a shame. Ever since 1944:AtR introduced me to higher level organisation I've wanted a game with that sort of thing that didn't suck.

Usually, you end up working together with quite a few people, so theres not much of a problem of lacking specific units(say, being artillary with no armour).

Er, it's not about lacking units, it's about working with a TO&E, and making decisions beforehand, and having to work with what you've got. Not build costs.