Introversion

Gen. Ripper wrote:

xander wrote:As to a matchmaking system, that would be required. I think that it could only work if the metaserver tracked each key (assume that each key equals one player), and keeps their rating.

mmm would this work for steam users? I had the nasty suprise of having my key revoked when i logged on tonight, only to find that apprently steam re-sets or does some other dodgy stuff (I had to re-install via steam to it working again...although the key was diffrent from my original)

The metaserver knows who owns what keys, and what keys have been replaced with what other keys. It should be fine.

xander

xander wrote:

Gen. Ripper wrote:

xander wrote:As to a matchmaking system, that would be required. I think that it could only work if the metaserver tracked each key (assume that each key equals one player), and keeps their rating.

mmm would this work for steam users? I had the nasty suprise of having my key revoked when i logged on tonight, only to find that apprently steam re-sets or does some other dodgy stuff (I had to re-install via steam to it working again...although the key was diffrent from my original)

The metaserver knows who owns what keys, and what keys have been replaced with what other keys. It should be fine.

xander

Which could mean that IV could be able to attach one fixed name to every key?

caranthir.pkk wrote:

xander wrote:

Gen. Ripper wrote:

xander wrote:As to a matchmaking system, that would be required. I think that it could only work if the metaserver tracked each key (assume that each key equals one player), and keeps their rating.

mmm would this work for steam users? I had the nasty suprise of having my key revoked when i logged on tonight, only to find that apprently steam re-sets or does some other dodgy stuff (I had to re-install via steam to it working again...although the key was diffrent from my original)

The metaserver knows who owns what keys, and what keys have been replaced with what other keys. It should be fine.

xander

Which could mean that IV could be able to attach one fixed name to every key?

That'd be a bad way of doing it, but they could make a "PlayerID" which you could use to look up all the names they have used and their scores and such.

NeoThermic

My two cents, I'm sure you've already heard the suggestion:
need a lobby with the server lists

I really want to see recorded games now that we have defcon schools and tournaments going. Plus, considering the game already seems to download an entire match when you join late, it might not bee too hard to just write it to the hard drive and give players control over the speed. It could provide match conformation and valuable tutorials on advanced techniques. Plus, you could see after the game exactly how your opponent beat you and how he snuck past your anti-sub carriers.

Could the data that we already download just be saved to a permanent file? It's already stored on the server since it can be sent to joining spectators. Would it be difficult to save it to a hard drive if a player chooses. When it is played back, it would act just like a spectated game when you right click, but trigger it so that the viewer gets control over the time. The only potential difficulty would be if they wanted to add rewinding.


I would really like to see some interface improvements though just to make the game feel nicer. Hot keys for things like Radar, Population, Comms, etc and fleet building just so I can build those smaller fleets without wasting everybodies time in real time. Unit ones wouldn't be bad either, anything to increase efficiency and help me bug players less with my real timing.

On the interface front, I would also like to see team colors changeable from the style menu. I can't stand the blue as it is so dark and difficult to see. I've tried everything to make it stand out more including changing to a different style that didn't have any blue, but it is still difficult to see. The ability to choose a color such as magenta would be nice. It would also be useful for picking a new color to distinguish orange and yellow.

I really want to see recorded games now that we have defcon schools and tournaments going.

Definite agreement, doubly-so if it also comes with the ability to save a game in progress. As a real time DEFCON player, my biggest peeve is that I can't save a game in progress. This forces me to only start a game when I know that I will have the proper amount of time to finish it...which isn't that frequently.

The thing I want most of all is better CPU AI, followed by the option to save a game! I find it strange that this option wasn't in the game from the beginning.
Could AI that actually offers a decent challenge (especially in a one on one, they're not challenging at all) be made in a new patch? Why was the CPU designed primarily as a training tool? Not everyone can or wants to play online (in my case it's because of my lousy BT Option One 5gb monthly limit) so the AI should be made to be as good as it can! Obviously, it can never compete with a human opponent, but it should be more than a training tool.

Any way, thanks for making such a great game, all you need to do is give us a save option as well as scaleable and better AI overall. It's really nice and refreshing to see a developer come on to a forum and ask the community directly what they would like in patches. Well done!

MegaDeathKill! wrote:The thing I want most of all is better CPU AI, followed by the option to save a game! I find it strange that this option wasn't in the game from the beginning.

It was, ish. The alpha and early betas (IIRC), had the ability to select the AI level, from 1 to 10. The thing is there wasn't much visible change between them to make it possible to spot, ergo it was removed.

NeoThermic

NeoThermic wrote:

MegaDeathKill! wrote:The thing I want most of all is better CPU AI, followed by the option to save a game! I find it strange that this option wasn't in the game from the beginning.

It was, ish. The alpha and early betas (IIRC), had the ability to select the AI level, from 1 to 10. The thing is there wasn't much visible change between them to make it possible to spot, ergo it was removed.

NeoThermic

I'm guessing even in that selectable difficulty mode, the AI never A/ backstabbed
B/ kicked players from an alliance (human or AI alike)
C/ stopped mixing subs with fleets
D/ sneakingly nuked you (or sank your ships or what not) with cease fire enabled.
E/ and much more

That's really what I feel is "a better AI" ; not a "harder AI" per say.

torig wrote:

NeoThermic wrote:

MegaDeathKill! wrote:The thing I want most of all is better CPU AI, followed by the option to save a game! I find it strange that this option wasn't in the game from the beginning.

It was, ish. The alpha and early betas (IIRC), had the ability to select the AI level, from 1 to 10. The thing is there wasn't much visible change between them to make it possible to spot, ergo it was removed.

NeoThermic

I'm guessing even in that selectable difficulty mode, the AI never A/ backstabbed
B/ kicked players from an alliance (human or AI alike)
C/ stopped mixing subs with fleets ;)
D/ sneakingly nuked you (or sank your ships or what not) with cease fire enabled.
E/ and much more ;)

That's really what I feel is "a better AI" ; not a "harder AI" per say.

The problem with several of these things (the sub strategies, non-mixed fleets, ocean nuking, &c. is that the beta testers didn't come up with these ideas, so it hadn't even crossed the minds of the developers to include them.

xander

I absolutely don't refute the validity of your point xander

Merely trying to show that what makes an AI "harder" isn't what makes an AI "better".
In most RTSes the AI, when it gets "harder", is handed more resources/intel. Therefore it can chunck out units faster, and doesn't need to really scout around as much. You the player on the other hand are supposed to have a better understanding of (counter)tactics and until you get your own economy going it's a mere struggle to survive long enough to get to your higher-end units/heroes.

Obviously the unit point doesn't apply to Defcon, but I'd hate to see it go down the more-intel path.

Something else that would be good would be the settings saving themselves and not returning to default whenever you quit. I know this can be fixed by editing 'gameoptions.txt' but it shouldn't be necessary. Also when printing messages over the explosions, change the colour of the text so you can read the message! I'm aware of several explosion mods, but I like the default. It makes it look like a giant mushroom cloud has actually blanked out the whole city on radar.

As far as AI goes, I was a bit disappointed. Surely if a PC can produce good AI in a complex game like Chess with all its different pieces and strategies, then it should also be possible for Defcon. Please address this in the next patch as a priority.

Megadeath, this one could be the solution for you: http://forums.introversion.co.uk/defcon ... +explosion

I use it as well. It's actually identical to the default explosion, except it's transparent.
A bit more visible, while it retains the feel of the original.

Was reading some of these posts and not sure if it got noticed yet or not but all of berts Dedcon servers have recorded games, including in game conversation between players...i just watched a repeat of my game and the system is far beyond excellent...this neednt even be on the IV update list...they need only concentrate on the ranking systems already, i want a rank damn it!

I'd like to be able to box select and give multiple units the same command i.e. put 4 bombers into SRBM mode and send them all to the same place. Also, a small but effective change could be to have the crying sound only triggered after a nuclear attack, otherwise it is overused and can get somewhat irritating.
Finally, when you attack an ally, the ally should be immediately broken. I had an occasion once when I attacked my ally and it cost me points because the alliance wasn't broken!