so...why FA and not supcom 2

[Morax]

Personally I hope it's not TA 2. It's a fun, nostalgic idea, but something new and fresh would be a lot better in my opinion.

It's been long enough where there must be something that he's thought about over the years that will trump TA, SC, FA, etc. It has been nearly a decade since the SC beta was released to TA players...

[Col_Walter_Kurtz]

Personally I hope it's not TA 2. It's a fun, nostalgic idea, but something new and fresh would be a lot better in my opinion.

It's been long enough where there must be something that he's thought about over the years that will trump TA, SC, FA, etc. It has been nearly a decade since the SC beta was released to TA players...

I wonder how you could improve the concept of these games. Of course there are technical and practical improvements to consider like sim calculations server side, as in PA. But I fear that as soon as there are conceptual changes, you will get crazy stuff like "planets" or other ideas that are "new", but at the same time quite unnecessary and gimmicky.

I'm not CT, but I can't see anything replace FA unless it's an improved FA. I almost hope I'm wrong though.

[Aulex]

Weather, dynamic terrain, wreckage that blocks pathing, terrain effecting range, terrain effect vision, probably a lot more stuff

[Morax]

Environmental effects is a great idea, Aulex.

Imagine if a player has a SMD and you don't want to risk using your nuke right on the base. There is a mountain behind the player. You could fire the nuke and create a MASSIVE rock slide that falls onto an opponent's territory.

Maybe in the sense of unit types like a ground and air force there isn't much but I bet there are bountiful amounts of ideas.

You know how Wagners submerge underwater yet it's only to conceal themselves from above-water fire? Maybe in a successor there are underwater structures like in TA's Core Contingency: http://totalannihilation.wikia.com/wiki ... sion_Plant

Imagine you expand upon that and there are better underwater structures, bases, defenses aside from torp launchers like a water-permissible laser?

I can think of many things...

[=M.V.K.=]

I don't think the "graphics" support it..

Against "mods", think just say turning up the graphic settings alone can help and just alot of people don't..

Like you can't have "waves" that flip-over ships if there basically isn't any water on a water map cause the "graphics" "turns" it off..let alone "weather/weathering".."day and night shifts"...etc..

Like wreckage, if your graphics were on say a low setting at one time, you basically didn't have any wreckage if at all...worth reclaim since "ever"..

Just say the bare minimal for graphics increased for SupCom 2 and with it alot of say "gameplay"..

That and FA probably has like 100x the "compatibilty"..even if it just say "logical"..

I can even run SupCom 2 and still say when it is over it is debatable near all the time..

But compatibility and graphics is my answer...probably not right but still..

[Riser]

Environmental effects is a great idea, Aulex.

Imagine if a player has a SMD and you don't want to risk using your nuke right on the base. There is a mountain behind the player. You could fire the nuke and create a MASSIVE rock slide that falls onto an opponent's territory.

Maybe in the sense of unit types like a ground and air force there isn't much but I bet there are bountiful amounts of ideas.

You know how Wagners submerge underwater yet it's only to conceal themselves from above-water fire? Maybe in a successor there are underwater structures like in TA's Core Contingency: http://totalannihilation.wikia.com/wiki ... sion_Plant

Imagine you expand upon that and there are better underwater structures, bases, defenses aside from torp launchers like a water-permissible laser?

I can think of many things...

nah that's just going too far,i would enjoy seeing physics in let's say particle and wreckage movement (experimentals being destroyed with every piece falling on it's own and maybe causing damage to the units under it,same as with air units) but deforming terrain isn't something i want to see in supcom that would be unnecessary and gimmicky like Col_Walter_Kurtz just said.

[lynx_nz]

i did hear CT was working on something secret which is why i'm exited,one can only dream

there was talk of something being announced at gamescon this year, but i couldnt find anything. Chris Taylor never announced anything that i could find

http://worldoftanks.eu/en/news/pc-brows ... interview/

[codepants]

Chris Taylor was reportedly going through heroin addiction rehabilitation while designing Supp Comm 2 - not an ideal setting for a game dev.

So... does that mean he was on heroin when making FA?

[Zeldafanboy]

Chris Taylor was reportedly going through heroin addiction rehabilitation while designing Supp Comm 2 - not an ideal setting for a game dev.

So... does that mean he was on heroin when making FA?

Well, at a time probably not so true really..probably more often then not (given lack of say further words still then to say said for "saying") in regards to place of interest for say "interest" of outcome would probably of "added" better "foresight" then the "reserve" of before.. (I was going to post something actually completely different but lost it and close as could get in the meantime, cause I probably won't get it back anytime soon if at all) especially in worth of "work place"..
Other then "thoughts" of "time"..hard to really say..
___________________________________________________

It's speculative..

...what?