Bay 12 Games Forum

Pushing Cars.
Hells yes.

Hmm... so we can now form an indestructible wall that's immune to non-jumping zombies? Interesting... (at least until the later zeds show up and jump the cars to eat us!)


I'm a little on-the-fence about 'rapid fire'. Consuming two bullets, especially when you're not guaranteed to land even a single shot, seems a bit... unfair. I mean, assuming a base of 100% accuracy, you've got a mere (.5 * .3) = 15% chance of landing two bullets, which means that 85% of the time you gain no benefit over single-shot. And, of course, there's always a good chance you'll miss both shots ((1-.5 * 1-.3) = 35%), meaning you've wasted twice as much ammo for no benefit. Doesn't sound worth it to me (although, I guess a weapon with a ridiculously high accuracy, like a point-blank-range shotgun blast with maxed Firearms, might see some benefit...).

Quote from: forsaken1111 on September 17, 2010, 08:10:20 pm

Wonder if Civ 5 will be on impulse, I could pick it up with the credit.

I was in the same situation and I doubt it will be for some time, possibly ever. Don't hold your breath. King's Bounty Platinum Pack is the best thing I can find on Impulse.

Civ 5 uses Steamworks, yes? Then it'll probably never be on Impulse. Forcing you to install a competitor's distribution platform and all. I know some of the digital platforms out there started carrying MW2 after a while, but that was the billion-dollar exception to the rule 
(and I could've sworn that Impulse was the one that never did start carrying MW2...?).

Ah, well yes you need to buy multiple copies to play multiplayer online. Why wouldn't you?

Just to clarify, I personally could care less. But there's a lot of people (including on this forum) who are heavy supporters of LAN play, and requiring multiple copies is a big change from the games of the past.

Quote from: Sowelu on September 17, 2010, 04:52:29 pm

forsaken is either being intentionally dense, or he was born less than twenty years ago, missing the era when it was normal to play one copy of a game on a LAN just as easily as you would play split-screen on a console.

No, I remember that era. I also know that era is more or less dead. You know the game will be using steamworks, so obviously it will check your CD keys when you hit their matchmaking server. I'm sure someone will eventually come out with a crack for it either way.

The whole point of LAN play is that you connect, ya know, over a LAN. 
It's not "playing multiplayer with multiple people in a house" - that's easy, just switch Steam's ports and you're good. A proper LAN game never goes past your router, and theoretically (say, if Steam is 'offline') can be played even if you don't have a pipe to the outside world at all. And, since you aren't bouncing commands off a remote server, LAN play is practically lag-free - the signal delay between rooms is negligible, especially in comparison with the pings to, say, the other side of an ocean.

And, while it's certainly less popular these days, LAN gaming isn't entirely "on the way out". Many developers are shying away from it, true, much like how many FPS developers are shying away from dedicated servers - and the response has been pretty similar, if on slightly different magnitudes.


EDIT:

At least a lot of games still have hotseat, right?

...Wait, no.  Simultaneous turns in Civ5 huh.  Dammit.  Well, that should still work as long as it's "everyone gives orders then they all happen at once".

Eh... not from what I've read. The whole point is to avoid you having to sit around and wait for stuff. 

Anyone confirm that day 1 multiplayer will work? Will we be able to play over LAN? I am seriously considering taking Tuesday off to play, but I've had mixed results with Day 1 excitement.

According to the review I just read, multiplayer is available out-of-the-box, but is limited to simultaneous turns, and you can't save. Haven't read anything about LAN play recently, but a quick Google search reveals that you'll still have to use Steamworks. This'll mean that you'll need everybody playing to own a copy of the game. Nobody's giving a clear answer as to whether it'll be LAN play using Steamworks, or if you'll be forced to connect online.   



I'm tempted to buy this, but I think I'd rather wait a bit. I've never really played Civ games online, and the single-player game will be just as good (if not better, yay patches!) once it's half-price on Steam. 

Quote from: Thexor on September 14, 2010, 10:44:45 am

Indeed. And the best part is, the game mechanics encourage you to force revolutions - if you've got an Absolute Monarchy, the only way to switch to a Republic is to goad the peasants into revolting, then take control of the revolutionaries and win. (And then promptly stage another revolution if you really just wanted a Constitutional Monarchy.)

Is that what happened in mid-17 century England?

Hey, if you want a realistic revolution, I can name a few politically-unstable countries that you could probably topple. For science, of course. 



The whole "AM --> Republic --> CM --> AM" loop is pretty unrealistic, but the idea of major governmental change generally only happening with some kind of serious motivation is completely realistic. Very few revolutions happened because people said, "Hey, we could probably do this better, right, guys? Let's just ask the ruling classes to give up their power, status, and money! That'll work!" Even non-violent revolutions generally occurred when the populace was seriously ticked off. And, well, the famous French Revolution certainly didn't happen because the lower class was 'mildly annoyed'... 

Quote from: Yaddy1 on September 14, 2010, 12:06:49 pm

Quote from: Thexor on September 14, 2010, 10:44:45 am

Quote from: Neonivek on September 14, 2010, 01:42:40 am

Empire Total War can have revolutions... It is incredably tough to play as the revolutionary though as it gives you a huge disadvantage (you lose all previous territory)

Indeed. And the best part is, the game mechanics encourage you to force revolutions - if you've got an Absolute Monarchy, the only way to switch to a Republic is to goad the peasants into revolting, then take control of the revolutionaries and win. (And then promptly stage another revolution if you really just wanted a Constitutional Monarchy.)

This makes me want this game even more...

The combat AI of Empire is frankly too poor to make the game as enjoyable as it's predecessors. Something in the switch to focusing on ranged combat has just caused something to get lost in translation. My first siege of a French Fortress was won quickly because by the time I got to the walls, the French already blew a hole through them with the cannons they had inside the fortress attempting to fire at me straight through the walls.

It's certainly not great (and a heads-up - higher difficulty levels don't improve the AI, they give ridiculous bonuses to AI units. Watch your trained line infantry break while exchanging fire with peasant militias!). But I haven't seen massive AI failings, especially during field battles. The AI really doesn't handle walls well, it's true - they'll garrison forts with cavalry, and deploy cannons inside their walls (though, contrary to your example, I usually witness cannons not firing at all, rather just sitting there until I breach their defenses). On an open field, they're remarkably more skilled, and provide at least a tangible opponent. And remember, unlike previous games, there's actually an incentive to not sitting in your secure castles - pillaging the countryside is effective.

Of course, the reason I suggested it was because it portrayed user-initiated revolutions, not necessarily because it was a dominant example of professional AI coding. 

So Mutantmell and I have one big glass tunnel underneath the big blue sea. Part of one, anyways. Unfortunately, it's way out on the edge of blocky civilization, but that just leaves more room for construction.

Anyways- The lighting system underneath the tunnel worked really well, actually. It's not all that much of a hassle to make, either. My only concern is the brightness of the tunnel at night, but it's not like you have to navigate anywhere in a tunnel anyways.

I'm getting rambly, but that's because I spent the last two hours on it. Hah.

So, when mobs are implemented, this tunnel will be dangerous as heck?

Awesome. 

Quote from: Thexor on September 15, 2010, 11:30:37 am

Quote from: NUKE9.13 on September 15, 2010, 08:17:16 am

The Monorail is being removed by the creator. Apparently there was 'an exploit' which allowed infinite diamonds and iron to be generated. Please do not use this exploit, especially for things like iron and diamond, which are supposed to be rare.
Seriously people. A little common sense, is it too much to ask?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

It's not like it's a well-hidden exploit... Notch basically told us how to perform it on his blog a while back. Hopefully he'll fix it once he polishes the network code.

That said, a proper railway would be awesome. If you're re-doing it with a more common material, might I suggest making it two blocks wide? Unless it's a two-lane railway, I forsee a lot of impending collisions. 

We're planning a 3 thick platform, so it looks like a monorail of sorts. But the problem is is that laying down track DESTROYS the server.

I remember hearing shouts about that. Ah well, laying the foundation is at least harmless. I'd still suggest making it large enough for a two-track passage - maybe call it a duo-rail? - although, if it's a full circle, I guess we can adapt.