StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Pablo Sanchez wrote:

TheDarkOne wrote:Close Combat didn't have any resource gathering.

Yes it did! You earned experience by keeping the same units in action over time, you earned morale by succeeding, and you earned requisition points by... continuing to play.

Only in 1-3, 4 and 5 removed requisition points, made it so moral only ever went down and I don't think experience changed either.

Really? Damnit. Well, 1-3 were the only 'real' Close Combat games, IMO.

Pablo Sanchez wrote:
Really? Damnit. Well, 1-3 were the only 'real' Close Combat games, IMO.

Well Close Combat Five actually added something back in place of the requisition points. Before each battle you got to choose your troops from a force pool. Various forms of tanks where less available then say rifle teams. What units where available was depend on the battlegroup type but you basically had a free hand. You could also do the same thing for the computers side. All snipers versus all scout teams on an urban map could be interesting.

Having eight 120mm mortars firing aginst the computers heavy infantry marching across an open field could be amusing.

Close Combat 4 sucked ass. You *never* got Tigers or King Tingers, just Panthers and Pz IVs, even though the damn unit was listed in the manual.

I hated it so much I didn't buy 5.

But 3 was the best.

Vympel wrote:Close Combat 4 sucked ass. You *never* got Tigers or King Tingers, just Panthers and Pz IVs, even though the damn unit was listed in the manual.

I hated it so much I didn't buy 5.

But 3 was the best.

I had mixed feelings about the carry-over of troops from one operation to the next. I got rather good at the game, and my unit just kept getting more and more invincible. The only times when I really suffered was during the "Death Missions" where you only got a handful of req points and the enemy got hundreds.

Frankly, no RTS game has ever truly appealed to me, but I generally liked Black and White, which I think treads the lines somewhat. In general, though I likes my computers fast and my strategy games turn-based.

And I miss M.U.L.E.. Now THAT was resource-gathering!

Lagmonster wrote:And I miss M.U.L.E.. Now THAT was resource-gathering!

Space HoRSE is supposed to be a good successor to M.U.L.E., but I wouldn't know. Haven't gotten around to either.
There's an old game I had once called Metal Marines in which you had two resources:cash and energy. You built one building for cash and another for energy. Buildings cost cash and energy, attacks and things only cost energy. Very simple system, but good. It's not like you could get enough cash for a new cash-producing building without wating a little while, quite long enough for your opponent to blast what you have. You can get the whole thing off of Home of the Underdogs. Love that site.

In Total Annihilation: Kingdoms, you're production rate is dictated by a number of magic nodes that you control and the number of builders (units or buildings) that you have created. Nodes don't require any units to operate them, although you do have to build a "collector" on top of it, and those come in two grades.

Lagmonster wrote:Frankly, no RTS game has ever truly appealed to me, but I generally liked Black and White, which I think treads the lines somewhat. In general, though I likes my computers fast and my strategy games turn-based.

And I miss M.U.L.E.. Now THAT was resource-gathering!

M.U.L.E. rocks! Anyone for a game of multiplayer M.U.L.E.?

Slartibartfast wrote:

Lagmonster wrote:Frankly, no RTS game has ever truly appealed to me, but I generally liked Black and White, which I think treads the lines somewhat. In general, though I likes my computers fast and my strategy games turn-based.

And I miss M.U.L.E.. Now THAT was resource-gathering!

M.U.L.E. rocks! Anyone for a game of multiplayer M.U.L.E.?

How is that done? I haven't seen a version of it since my Commodore 64! Don't tell me someone made a PC version of M.U.L.E. and I WASN'T INFORMED???

Lagmonster wrote: How is that done? I haven't seen a version of it since my Commodore 64! Don't tell me someone made a PC version of M.U.L.E. and I WASN'T INFORMED???

Wow, that would be interesting. I dont think there is a version out there, maybe a fan produced version?

Ground Control and Force21. You have to select what you want before you start the mission. And thats it. Deal with it, you choose them, you make them work.

In Advanced Wars you collect money based on how many cities you own.









Ok, it's not a RTS but still.







Fuck you.

Vympel wrote:Close Combat 4 sucked ass. You *never* got Tigers or King Tingers, just Panthers and Pz IVs, even though the damn unit was listed in the manual.

Apparently unit files existed for them and many mods added them in. I suspect they got left out because they'd make the German battlegroup too powerful, since the American player can't pit 20 Sherman's against them.

I hated it so much I didn't buy 5.

It was greatly improved.

Pablo Sanchez wrote:

Stravo wrote:Yeah but manpower in the game drops over time, especially if you're Germany, for the US its always up and up and up....

That's a historical balance issue. If you play as France or a small nation, you'll find that your manpower is prohibitively low--as indeed it was historically. Or you can play as China, the USSR, or the USA, who in history and gameplay had a bigger military population than they knew what to do with.

As the USSR I always had 6000+ manpower; if I understand the game mechanics correctly, that corresponds to 6 million men available for service Thankfully for the soldiers, my Soviet Union opted to utilize maneuver instead of mass... in my Great Patriotic war, the only Axis soldiers to set foot in Russia were Japanese bastards siezing the very southern tip of Siberia

Well the mods like Shep's uses for the Americans graduating class size based on the difficulty you set. The country has no provincal manpower but the manpower is generated in one class as was around historical. Also, hardly any mnanpower before war no US buildup. But in my opinion the USSR manpower should be a little lower.

CHEAT CODES!!!!!!

I once bought an RTS called 7th Legion. In it you were paid by HQ every so often based on how much you'd managed to kill.

TrailerParkJawa wrote:

Lagmonster wrote: How is that done? I haven't seen a version of it since my Commodore 64! Don't tell me someone made a PC version of M.U.L.E. and I WASN'T INFORMED???

Wow, that would be interesting. I dont think there is a version out there, maybe a fan produced version?

Well, I don't know

I was thinking there must be some C64 or Atari emulator with multiplayer features... I mean I've played Street Fighter Alpha over the net using Callus...

I'll resurrect this thread just to add some info. Somebody already suggested Kohan, I got it recently and it's awesome. You don't gather resources per se, you manage cities (each city is a single structure) and balance your resources: gold, stone, wood, iron (and magic).

You have a limited amount of "modules" in each city that you build, and these provide you with, among other things, resources (build a sawmill and you have +4 wood) and gold. If your resources are on the negative (each regiment gives a negative to resources, depending on type) you get a penalty to gold, it can go negative too. No pluses are stockpiled (it just means you have overproduction) except gold. Eventually your gold income can be so high that you don't give a shit about underproduction...

And the armies are also great. Instead of building a unit, you make a regiment (4 of the same units for a front line - only infantry, cavalry or archer types - and 2 support units that can be either front line types or specials, like paladins or rangers or mages), plus the commander which can be a hero or a stock captain. Then it appears next to your city, but only the commander + 1 unit is there. If it is within supply range of a city or fort, the units heals slowly to 100% one at a time, and also the ranks get refilled (when everyone is at 100% one empty slot is filled and starts healing) until you get your whole regiment. Unless they ALL die, all they have to go is near a city until it gets whole again and it doesn't cost a thing.

Of course, if the commander gets killed then the whole lot usually panics and retreats, but more often they get killed because of stupidity.

All this makes it very easy to manage, since you only need to worry about moving the entire regiment (not each individual troop). When two enemy regiments encounter, a battle begins and the AI moves them, making they fight. They look quite a lot like Age of Empires. The only interaction you can do is retreat. And each city is just a building with slots that you upgrade... usually you won't have more than 10 at the end of a scenario.

Very cool game, I recommend it. I like it more than traditional Dune/Warcraft based games. You can read a review here.