BGForums

Course SR 1945 or 1946 be nice. Start the game right after WW2 leading up to when ever. Say 2005. The year the game came out. Most of the units u start a game with in SR 2010 be the highest tech units. Just an idea probably mentioned somewhere before or was already thought of. Just a refresher if so.

_________________
In war destroy everything even the livestock.

Speaking of nuclear tipped SAM's, anyone remember Atomic Annie? - Nuclear Artillery. The US Army tested this in the fifties. Problem was getting enough range so you didn't blow yourself away, too (had to watch the wind direction or you'd be eatin' fallout).

If the goats wanted to work on diplomacy, perhaps Supreme Ruler 1860 would be interesting, assuming a fifty year time frame - all the stuff leading up to world war 1 and the last half of the industrial revolution thrown in for good measure, in an age when diplomacy was a much more studied art than today (or perhaps just more formal)... "Peace in our time."

_________________
Colorless green ideas sleep furiously [but otherwise, they do not worry and are happy].

I am a little worried about the next project personally.

For me, the only place sr2010 falls down is the AI.

I just dont think they can make a better one (AI) yet ,with so complex a game as sr2010 is.

So do they make the next game more simple ? I would hate that.

Or do they make the next game with the same strs and flaws as this one.
Also not something id really be happy with.

To me the key to any next project BG does is to improve the AI alot.And sadly larger more experienced game companies have failed to do so on a regular basis.

I really wish ( and yes, i know its not gonna happen) that BG could just spend the next 1/2 to 1 year doing absolutely nothing but experimenting with the AI and implementing the things that they manage to come up with that work,in as much as making the AI a more serious opponent is concerned.

_________________
This post approved by Tkobo:Official Rabble Rouser of the United Yahoos
Chuckle TM

Only problem with the 1800's and early 1900's was most the fighting was done by leg infantry. So imagine fighting with the leg infantry in Sr2010 throughout the whole game. I would like a American civil war verison of Sr 2010 though.

_________________
In war destroy everything even the livestock.

...Just speaking in the abstract... A lot of the WW2 forces were also basically leg units. It wouldn't be that hard to set up the model and process so that time passage and scale makes this a non-issue.

Not that I know that much about warfare in the 1860's to 1920's, except for the odd interesting fact or two, but the period does seem to be quite overlooked by anyone capable of doing a really good treatment of it, and it certainly would provide a platform in which the players agility as a strategist and tactician would be tested (no big-bang techs to rely on, but a lot of common sense, guile, and careful conservation of scarce resources would be required).

Hey - remember Blackjack Pershing created the first truly mechanized force to pursue, of all things, Pancho Villa, the Mexican bandit, across the Texas border before WW1? Stuff like that would be interesting to see in a game - where a little tech [like just plain trucks, that we would otherwise take for granted] would make a big difference. BTW - Pershing never caught Villa - who had only horses.

_________________
Colorless green ideas sleep furiously [but otherwise, they do not worry and are happy].

For them to give up the current tech model, units file, and features such as NBC weapons and incomplete electronic warfare etc. would be incredible, so I for one think that roughly the same time is a given.

Don't remember every meeting Pershing. had to say it. And I would like to play a game that is set sometime in the 1800's and move all the way up to the modern day. But something tells me either it be right before 2010 or after. One of the 2.

_________________
In war destroy everything even the livestock.

Just say no to any more WWI/II games. Perfect and add to the modern age!

I just don't see how SR2010's model would work for anything other than a modern or slightly post-modern game. I like "Age of Rifles"-era strategy as much as the next guy, but it'd require a different mechanism of play.

Total agreement here...

_________________
NO MORE NOISY FISH [unless they are green & furiously]
I HAVE STILL A FISH IN MY EAR

Can both of you - or anyone else - be more specific? Feel free to send me an email - daxon@battlegoat.com - and let me know what you think or post it here. In what ways would should the AI be improved? What is the first thing that should be improved? What is the next? Is the biggest issue AI tactics or how the AI runs the economy?

As for our next title... If I told you, I'd have to drop a nuke on you!

For me the AI's inability to be more pro-active in conducting diplomacy with the player is a huge failure. I hate comparisons, but at least the CIV series will show the computer players actively seeking negotiations beyond a simple counter-offer. BG, it would be a huge step forward if the AI would "understand" (if that is the correct terminology) its position vice that of the player and other AI countries and attempt to position itself diplomatically to improve itself. The game may already be doing this, however I cannot see it in the limited transactions that the AI completes with me as a player.

The AI's current failure to improve its country by means of R&D in the many available areas and lack of building additional R&D facilities.

The AI's failure to build additional facilities to improve itself.

The AI's failure to conduct better military operations be it offensive or defensive in terms of:
- airborne/air assault
- use of aircraft beyond defense only
- ability to conduct targeting and make attempts to destroy its chosen targets to limit its enemies ability to wage war
- better use of naval assets and utilize "power projection" with those forces by means of aircraft carriers, threat of amphibious landings, etc.
- Better protection of its critical facilities in times of elevated tensions and war.
- The understanding that it needs to rebuild destroyed facilities, military bases, etc.
- The actual loss of capabilities once facilities are destroyed to AFFECT the AI's ability to continue to build units and support current units.
- The ability of the AI to "understand" its technology shortcomings and seek countries with the knowledge.
- The ability to see its coming demise and make diplomatic attempts with the winning country (player or AI) to stop the war. If the AI would see that it cannot defend itself it should at least seek a ceasefire. If the winning AI/player country refuses then it should affect that countries CB with other nations.
- Allow the AI or player to give territory back to the original owner and it have a diplomatic meaning. When I take control of 50,000 sqkm of Syrian territory and then pull my troops back to Israeli territory and offer the land back to Syria - Syria should take the land. While a ceasefire or peace treaty may still not occur, it should still back the territory.
- The ability of the AI to understand its diplomatic position and it to maximize its role in the actions of a binding treaty - to include both the positive and negative affects of its actions.
- The ability of the AI to "Learn" the player and other AI countries actions so that it doesn't fall victim to the same tactics every time - either diplomatic or militarily. Allied countries would also have a sharing of knowledge to improve themselves against a common enemy country or enemy alliance.


There are probably more but I must go.

Tony.

PS. Regardless BG, I am seriously looking forward to your next product and I continue to spread your name to everyone I know to hopefully improve your budget!

The AI must be able to do anything the human can.

Build new industries
Use transport. etc. etc.

With our price drop, it should help in "your" marketing efforts .

As for your list of items... well said. Many of your notes are already being addressed for future engine work... and other points need to be worked through and detailed. Anyone else?

Legend... maybe a stupid or wilt idea
(and again quoting tkobo)

[quote=] that BG could just spend the next 1/2 to 1 year doing absolutely nothing but experimenting with the AI [/quote]

Is it maybe possible that the player could help in this....
There is alot of input from the players but we (well.. atleast i) don't know what's possible....

So i'm thinking of somesort of -blanco- map where we can experiment.
For example pathfinding:
Give us a an unit and a map and the programlines that are used for the pathfinding and the ability to adjust or alter the parameters
I have absolutely no understanding in modern programming (and don't know if this is possible) but i hope you'll see my point..

It's not a nice job (even wurst then betatesting)
But there are alot of dedicated players and i'm sure some of them would voluntairly help you with this.

_________________
NO MORE NOISY FISH [unless they are green & furiously]
I HAVE STILL A FISH IN MY EAR