Less of a hit for hit game more strategic and more ground to cover on and make units and bases more customizable
> 2533274881395995;1:
> … make units and bases more customizable
How so? Expand on your idea. Flesh it out so it can actually be discussed.
> 2533274881395995;1:
> Less of a hit for hit game more strategic and more ground to cover on and make units and bases more customizable
To flesh out your very vague concepts I’m going to be throwing in my two cents and assuming all of what you mean is identical to what I am going to suggest for our Halo Wars 2, though I am going to be somewhat brief.
To start, players must not be confined to predetermined base locations like in HW1. Instead they must be allowed to build the structures they want where they want to build them. Take into consideration the games Command & Conquer or Supreme Commander; players spawn at fixed locations and only have their HQ/Leader to start and then they can build their resource and production buildings and defenses wherever they please. Including this would require larger maps by default. As for units, I see more customization as being able to determine whether or not my grunts carry plasma pistols vs. needlers, or whether I want to build Falcons vs. Hornets, Brute Prowlers vs. Spectres. And yes I know that Falcons and Hornets are functionally very different but that is where the dynamic gameplay comes in; you research one and it locks out the other thus requiring you to rely on an ally to provide either direct fire support (Hornets) or reinforcements to flank the enemy (Falcons). Similarly, Prowlers and Spectres are very similar, so the Prowlers could get extra armour whilst the Spectres receive a speed and maneuverability boost.
To add on to this whole thread, I suggest (at the very least) that atmospheric (air) combat be implemented so that we can have truly massive battles covering both the ground and air.
> 2533274889138755;3:
> To start, players must not be confined to predetermined base locations like in HW1. Instead they must be allowed to build the structures they want where they want to build them. Take into consideration the games Command & Conquer or Supreme Commander; players spawn at fixed locations and only have their HQ/Leader to start and then they can build their resource and production buildings and defenses wherever they please. Including this would require larger maps by default.
Static spawn location and building placement was implemented because Ensemble could not include free placement while maintaining a fluid and practical control scheme for HW (they tried initially, as they showed in their first E3 play through demo, but changed upon release). If CA can figure it out, how to utilize console controls to implement PC standards then good on them, but otherwise I don’t see them adding it. You reference SupCom and command and Conquer, both games succeeded on PC, but failed to gain sufficenient followings on console due to their cumbersome nature (in terms of control on console, not withstanding other shortfalls)
> 2533274889138755;3:
> As for units, I see more customization as being able to determine whether or not my grunts carry plasma pistols vs. needlers, or whether I want to build Falcons vs. Hornets, Brute Prowlers vs. Spectres. And yes I know that Falcons and Hornets are functionally very different but that is where the dynamic gameplay comes in; you research one and it locks out the other thus requiring you to rely on an ally to provide either direct fire support (Hornets) or reinforcements to flank the enemy (Falcons). Similarly, Prowlers and Spectres are very similar, so the Prowlers could get extra armour whilst the Spectres receive a speed and maneuverability boost.
Rather than “customization” you should ask for more unit variety. Units that serve distinct purposes and not just aesthetic difference. More tech research would be alright, but as for having left-or-right tech tree options (ability to research A or B, not both), I don’t see the purpose. There is no reason to have a player locked into their research choice. Having to spend more money on the second/alternate upgrade as well as time wasted without it is punishment enough.
> 2533274889138755;3:
> To add on to this whole thread, I suggest (at the very least) that atmospheric (air) combat be implemented so that we can have truly massive battles covering both the ground and air.
Air combat was already implemented in HW, it just lacked variety. Population limits were due to hardware limitations, streamlined controlability, and combat balance. I’ve have no doubt that they could easily be higher in HW2, but needs to be done in a way to maintains the same feel of engagements from HW.
I would like small, medium and large maps. Not just a specific size for a specific amount of players, more in depth unit and base upgrades, more buildings, more defenses, more map unique features, more unit types, either flood or promeathean faction, better campaign, more (free) game modes, increased troop limit (or none at all) and more leaders.
that may be a mouthful but that’s mainly what I want from halo wars 2
Also maybe somehow get theatre and forge.
forge basicly being a map maker which would be really cool IMO.
That would be awesome!
> 2533274974984138;5:
> …increased troop limit…
I agree! More troops would be great! I also think this is a realistic thing to expect, as well, seeing how CA wants to make bigger battles.