| Author |
Message |
|
|
Here’s my thoughts on undo...
Does it get rid of interesting game mechanics? Of course. Surprise positionings, fog of war, etc sort of become moot points when you can undo a turn. However, consider the following:
* Uniwar is played on touch devices, and touch as an input has more room for error than mouse clicks. As such, if undo were to be removed a single mistap could legitimately ruin a game.
* Uniwar, like most asynchronous turn based strategy games, initially saves all your moves locally and then “pushes” them to the server for validation when you hit “End Turn”. This is why in the past lots of players would make an alternate account to log into and out of, since doing so would overwrite the locally saved data for your online games on your main, essentially giving you a free undo. That or removing and reinstalling Uniwar. Players will use one of these methods if they really wanted to, so why not just even the field and add undo as an actual feature?
* Uniwar could feasibly be changed so that the client communicates with the server whenever you make a move in a game, so that it “pushes” every move you make to the server and avoids exploits associated with locally saved data. However, that would require *significant* changes to the backend and server. But would this really be an improvement? Such a change would push players to record and keep track of game states for every single game they’re in and lead to a lot more misplays since you generally don’t perfectly recall what you were going to do for SvT #43 in your online games list 24 hours after your last turn. Also, a lot more stress/frustration on the player’s end if this were to happen.
Although now that I think about it, a real time “blitz” mode Uniwar would sound nice.
|
|
|
The thing with veterancy is that it rarely ever makes an appearance in games, because of how hard it is to obtain veterancy.
I've said this before - I believe the veterancy system should award experience points based on damage dealt, rather than kills.
As it stands, veterancy is awarded as (Price of unit killed) * (Health before destruction/10). Veterancy should instead be awarded by ( (Price of unit attacked) * (Damage dealt/10) ) / 2. We divide this by 2 to prevent veterancy from accumulating too quickly.
So using this new formula, a marine attacks an underling for 5 damage, and underling damages the marine back for 4 damage. The marine will gain (100 * 5/10)/2 = 50/2 = 25 experience. The underling will gain (100 * 4/10)/2 = 40/2 = 20 experience. Then we'd be seeing more veterans on the board.
|
|
|
|
Tankbusters down the line really need their vs. Ground Light and vs. Aerial nerfed heavily (looking at you, Guardian). Then give Guardian a +1 repair rate and it'll still be one of the better tankbusters with solid counterplay.
|
|
|
Besides some visual eye candy, it doesn't add anything to the game.
Although I do like seeing infantry appearing in squads - if you've played hex turn based strategy games like Order of Battle: WW2 on Steam, infantry units always come with 3 models on a hex. Or even in games like Civ V, where infantry come in a numerous formation while tanks and larger units come with 2 models or so.
However, I do not think it is worth the time and money to give infantry a more "fuller" appearance, because:
1) It's just simple eye candy
2) Said eye candy probably wouldn't even work for Uniwar, considering it's a mobile game meant to be played on smaller size phone screens. If anything it'd probably detract from the visual experience.
|
|
|
My experience with Bopper in SvT is that it is extremely situational. I rarely use the unit myself.
It can't effectively counter Plasma because it's not mobile at all and is vulnerable to Walker/Eclipse snipes. It can't fight back on adjacent hexes. It sorta feels like pre-buff Battery (550, 2-4 range, no move-after-attack).
With Sapien you need to constantly pressure Titan, but Bopper can't do that. It's a turtle unit. Guardian on the other hand is infinitely more useful because it's highly mobile and poses a greater threat as such.
|
|
|
Currently veterancy works like this - the unit that deals the killing blow to an enemy unit earns (Enemy_Cost * (Enemy_HP/10)) experience towards its veterancy pool, which is equivalent to the unit's cost.
For example, a Marine (100 points) killing a 1 HP Plasma (500 points) would earn (500 * (1/10)) = 50 experience towards veterancy pool (of 100). Units need to match the veterancy pool to gain one level, and earn at least 2x the veterancy pool to gain two levels.
I personally think veterancy should be awarded at half rate every time you damage a unit instead of having to kill it. For example, a 10 HP Marine attacking a 10 HP Underling for 6 damage would earn (100 * (6/10)) = 60/2 = 30 experience. That way we'd see veterancy play into more games.
|
|
|
|
I know this is an old thread, but I've always thought buffing battery heavy +1, light +1, change move-after-attack value from 4 -> 5, change battery's movement values into swamp/forest from 6 -> 5 would make the unit worth its 650 points. That way battery deals better damage to plasmas and is guaranteed a one hex move into any terrain after attack. Giving it its entire 6 points of move-after-attack might be a bit too much imo.
|
|
|
I found a rather interesting exploit.
If you make your moves but have not submitted your turn yet and are unsatisfied with your moves, you can log off and log back into the game to redo your turn.
This also means that you could use recon to scout ahead and restart your turn with advanced knowledge of what the enemy has.
|
|
|
|
As a mapper, it gets pretty tedious to have to go through and manually delete every single hex so that you can start a new map from scratch. Why not have a clear all option that clears all the hexes on the board so you can start anew?
|
|
|
|
Also, I may have missed this, but what is the general rule on skipping player turns/removing from game? Is it forbidden?
|
|
|
trineroks (Sapien) vs AnuarAnsat (Sapien)
AnuarAnsat (Sapien) vs trineroks (Sapien)
trineroks (Titan) vs AnuarAnsat (Khralean)
AnuarAnsat (Titan) vs trineroks (Khralean)
|
|
|
Username: trineroks
Score: 1851
Experience: 4 years 11 months on and off.
|
|
|
You can only change your colors if
A) The map you're playing on has those colors (depends on a map's player count/theme)
B) You're not host (the host is always forced into the P1 slot, whose colors can be different given the map's theme)
By map theme, I mean the type of map (desert, snow, default, etc). For example, default themed maps have Blue as P1 and Red as P2, whereas volcanic themed maps have Black as P1 and Yellow as P2.
Welcome to UniWar!
|
|
|
In response to Gnugary, I was also thinking of a light aerial scout unit for Titans.
When does Xavi expect to create six new units?
|
|
|
This is my first post on the UniWar forums.
I haven't touched the map editor yet, but judging by the available gametypes (FFA, 2v2, 3v3, 4v4) I can tell that map makers can only make these types of maps. Heck, even in FFA you can only do 2 player, 3 player, 4 player, 6 player, and 8 player.
I was thinking it'd be pretty cool if we could have 5 or 7 player FFAs or even coop maps, like 2v1, 3v1, 4v2, etc (where the smaller team starts off with more bases and the majority have to work together).
It'd also be pretty cool to place certain units (not just infantry) in maps, as well as locking certain player slots to certain races.
|
![[Search]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_search.gif){kind=icon}
![[Recent Topics]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_recentTopics.gif){kind=icon}
![[Login]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_login.gif){kind=icon}
Login
