Slitherine

Did I miss something? I looked in Skirmish mode and you SHOULD be able to select Ork vs Ork and Space Wolf vs Space Wolf, and be able to play BOTH sides from one computer, not just one side and the AI the other. I want to control BOTH armies.

Please, add in Hotseat and please allow us to fight the same army.

Other than that, and the fact that your MAPVIEW.TXT file has Pitchlimit set to 10 instead of 35 which prevents you from getting a models eye view of the battle field, yes I changed it and it's awesome now, I love the game. Thanks for finally making a tabletop like experience that wasnt stupid like most other 40k titles.

Oh yeah, did I mention that you should add HOTSEAT and be able to fight the same army? Yeah, those two please!

Thanks!


EDIT: http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtop ... 37&t=74738

Oops! Ok, so I see where Mr. Wilkins said there is Hotseat. But how do I get to it?

I want Hotseat in Skirmish mode. I want to fight the same army in Skirmish mode. Can you add that?

To play hotseat just create a challenge and then accept your own challenge. If you want to prevent someone else accepting it then remember to password it first.

Ahh, Thank you! But I just want to add that I'd like to be able to play hotseat in Skirmish mode. And I'd like to be able to play against the same race. So Ork vs Ork for example.

I didnt know you guys made Armageddon. I'm gonna buy that too now that I see what kind of game studio you guys are. You are responsive to your customers and you make good games. Ive heard good things about Armageddon, but damn, there's a lot of crap 40k games on steam. Glad you guys didnt make that comical ott crap with this title. I wrote a review of this game on Steam, it's by Ana.

IIRC you can create MP Skirmish games and so should be able to play hotseat skirmish?

Cheers

Pip

This is not "hotseat" in the traditional sense. No internet=no hotseat. Warhammer 40k is the same. Would have been nice if "hotseat" had been implemented like Panzer Corps & or Fog of Glory. Oh well, I am sure the devs had their reasons.

Tried playing the hotseat mode. It is incredibly clunky, slow and prone to lags and locking up. Tried three games and we couldn't finish any. Extremely frustrating. A regular on computer client hotseat is much more preferable.

It certainly shouldn't lock up. Can you provide more details of the errors you were having.

Cheers

Pip

Why oh why is slitherine slowly minimalizing basic grognardy functionality from its games like real hotseat?? I get that the former "BA engine" didn't have true hotseat and it wasnt deemed worthwhile adding ( and thus accepting ones own MP challenges became the work a round) but this is a new engine that will be used for FOG 2 etc etc. Its usefull, players want it and its been a standard of many wargames across many companies!. I wouldnt mind the workaround so much but you have to log in an out of the game session to play both sides and watch the friggin replay of something you just did 5 seconds earlier! I could be wrong, but it seems like a pretty minimal thing to write into a new program..

Anyway, enough gripes outa me and question time. Does this game have a concrete ground scale at all? I cannot tell from the screenies. I was really hoping this would be like Steel Panthers in space hehe. I mean is it 50 yards a grid or something? I guess I could understand if I knew the in game grid range of say a standard "rifle" ( bolter??) versus say, a main battle tank cannon. If its something around 10 to 50 respectively, I''ll likely grab it!

Even if it turns out to not be for me, it does look like a good quality piece, cheers!

I am not a Warhammer nerd and don't care about the lore. Tanks is Tanks. But I like the game well enough. However, from a tactics point of view, I work a lot harder to win in Battle Academy 2. So this is on the "light" side in my opinion.

Rosseau wrote:I am not a Warhammer nerd and don't care about the lore. Tanks is Tanks. But I like the game well enough. However, from a tactics point of view, I work a lot harder to win in Battle Academy 2. So this is on the "light" side in my opinion.

Interesting. is it due to the AI perhaps, the mission designs or the mechanics? It seems like units have a lot more things they "can do" than in BA. ( which doesn't translate to a harder game if the Ai cant do them as well..) It does seem like enemy units are very close to each other in the screen shots, so is it a more "brute force " wins the day game?

Admittedly, I have only played a couple of skirmishes and the first wolf scenario. So maybe there are some intensely scripted missions using their newer and more sophisticated scripting system - their words (paraphrased), not mine.

As previously posted, multiplayer is another story, and should be quite good. But I don't do MP anymore. If the AI and scripting is better than the Order of Battle Series (what a boring slugfest that is), I will be good, and it probably is.

On another issue, a guy on Steam brought up what I think is a good point: One good mission for three random skirmishes in the campaigns. I would just rather have the six good missions. Plus, I can't edit the random ones, and they are not so enjoyable anyway.

Rosseau wrote:On another issue, a guy on Steam brought up what I think is a good point: One good mission for three random skirmishes in the campaigns. I would just rather have the six good missions. Plus, I can't edit the random ones, and they are not so enjoyable anyway.

It would've been nice if the campaign skirmishes were optional but the main missions were harder if you didn't do them. Both to simulate you not weakening the opponent beforehand, and to allow the player to regulate the difficulty slightly. Let's say each skirmish represents an enemy special unit that wont show up in the main mission if you do the skirmish.

Didn't get to first skirmish but assume your campaign units follow you through those as well?

Rosseau wrote:Didn't get to first skirmish but assume your campaign units follow you through those as well?

So far they've done so yes.