RTS with Time manipulation

[Echo35]

Spring is a nice engine.. if only they would stop making TA Clones...

It was originally made as a TA clone before SupCom came out, so I see no problem with this

Any of you ever play Globulation? It's not very well refined and could use a lot of work as far as a game goes, but the concepts in it are amazing, and I would love to see a big indie developer or a AAA company derive from it (Looks at you Chris ).

[eRe4s3r]

Ah.. i gotta thank you, if you hadn't said that i would have never checked what new games are on the spring engine! It seems the situation changed quite a bit the past year 

So yes, Spring Engine is definitely a shining beacon of hope ^^

[Buttons840]

I love the concept of this game, and I will definitely think on is as I've aspired to make time travel meta games.

I can see eRe4s3r's point of view though, the only real battlefield is the past - the further back the better.  (Why would you spend resources to travel into the future and build an army in the future?)

There is a limit on the number of orders you can issue in the past, but that seems to be a broken mechanic because then the meta-game becomes accomplishing the most through the fewest orders possible.  "I could strategically flank them, but that would be too many orders so I'll just issue a single move command into the middle of the enemies base and hope for the best."

Brilliant idea though.  Hopefully the developer hasn't stretched himself too thin.

In the FAQ it sates: "we are considering using or licencing this technology for other types of games including casual, core, serious, and online."

You can't license a game mechanic can you?  That'd be like someone licensing the FPS genre.  Some stupid licenses have been granted in the past though, and to further complicate things having a licenses (patent) doesn't necessarily mean it's valid and will hold up in court.

[eRe4s3r]

No you can't license/trademark/copyright a game mechanic

[ShadowOTE]

Speaking of Achron, anyone else been watching it? I'm looking forward to seeing how it turns out.

[zebramatt]

I reckon this game looks awesome!

[RCIX]

just saw it and it looks awesome! To resolve your problems eraser, think about this: Player B has a slight advantage over player A and so warps his units back to the beginning of the timeline. Player A warps as many defenses back as they can, but it's not quite enough and he dies then. You still have time to go to the future, build out some extra units, and teleport them all the way back to the scene of the fight in order to survive. You have till the time wave makes it to the future to rally more defenses if i understand right. In fact, if you time it right you could yank units from shortly after the battle, but it would have to be precise (far enough from the death of the HQ to be useful and far enough from the "present" to not affect it and cause you to lose the extra benefits).

[Spikey00]

Quite the interesting concept--thanks for bringing it to our attention!

[soMe_RandoM]

you are hungry and you have an apple. but it rotten.
so you decide to go back when it was not rotten and eat it when you are there.
the moment you finished eating the apple and there no more trace of it. you are suddenly back in the present still hungry and still have the rotten apple.
you then decide go back again but take the apple with you when you travel back. but it still happens to be that when you do that you are back still with the hunger + rotten apple.
your last and final attempt. you go back in time but this time with the rotten apple. thus know you can eat your apple in peace when you return back to the present.

do they have time logic like this as you cant go back in time to defeat the enemy yust to realize it cant be done beacuse if they are defeated you would never been able to create the forces to go back in time in the first place?

[eRe4s3r]

Actually you made a good point - if you go back in time 50 years hungry and you eat something, if you RETURN you are hungry again because you - get this - never ate something (where it concerns your hunger, anyway).

Or put differently - its 2600 and you stand on a bridge - If you send a bomb through a time portal to 2300 where the bridge stands and nuke it - it will still be there because the bridge you are standing on already includes the destruction of the bridge - there are no time paradoxes possible (infinite energy problem). Time does not change - its a stream, unchangeable. Only our perception of it can change.

[rubikscube]

Actually you made a good point - if you go back in time 50 years hungry and you eat something, if you RETURN you are hungry again because you - get this - never ate something (where it concerns your hunger, anyway).

Or put differently - its 2600 and you stand on a bridge - If you send a bomb through a time portal to 2300 where the bridge stands and nuke it - it will still be there because the bridge you are standing on already includes the destruction of the bridge - there are no time paradoxes possible (infinite energy problem). Time does not change - its a stream, unchangeable. Only our perception of it can change.

If you return to the present having food in your stomach when you travel back in time, I do not get why you are still hungry.

On the other hand unless someone fixes the bridge, the bridge will get destroyed.

As for your time paradox or infinite energy problem which I believe you mean by having 2 nukes instead of one, both retrieved at a different time period is indeed impossible, as the one farther in the future will be affected by the first one, making the second one never existing, making the reality change, not only the bomb going poof as the matter has gone to somewhere else.

[soMe_RandoM]

Actually you made a good point - if you go back in time 50 years hungry and you eat something, if you RETURN you are hungry again because you - get this - never ate something (where it concerns your hunger, anyway).

Or put differently - its 2600 and you stand on a bridge - If you send a bomb through a time portal to 2300 where the bridge stands and nuke it - it will still be there because the bridge you are standing on already includes the destruction of the bridge - there are no time paradoxes possible (infinite energy problem). Time does not change - its a stream, unchangeable. Only our perception of it can change.

If you return to the present having food in your stomach when you travel back in time, I do not get why you are still hungry.

On the other hand unless someone fixes the bridge, the bridge will get destroyed.

As for your time paradox or infinite energy problem which I believe you mean by having 2 nukes instead of one, both retrieved at a different time period is indeed impossible, as the one farther in the future will be affected by the first one, making the second one never existing, making the reality change, not only the bomb going poof as the matter has gone to somewhere else.

because u never did it in the first place because you when you time traveled in the past didn't happen so you eating didn't happen

[Frozen Critical]

Another TA clone? , still , the game looks Like its Better then the original TA , but hell if i know

[RCIX]

That kinda misses the whole point, that being you get to manipulate time

Actually you made a good point - if you go back in time 50 years hungry and you eat something, if you RETURN you are hungry again because you - get this - never ate something (where it concerns your hunger, anyway).

Or put differently - its 2600 and you stand on a bridge - If you send a bomb through a time portal to 2300 where the bridge stands and nuke it - it will still be there because the bridge you are standing on already includes the destruction of the bridge - there are no time paradoxes possible (infinite energy problem). Time does not change - its a stream, unchangeable. Only our perception of it can change.

It really depends on what sort of time travel you're considering; if you're considering the type of time travel where only consciousnesses can travel in time, then sure that makes sense.However, there's the "normal" method of time travel, where you actually go back in time to do stuff, and if you eat then and return to the present you aren't hungry (since your food came with you on the way back).

That second example cannot happen however; to extend it, you can't blow up the bridge in the past from the bridge in the present, because if the bridge is blown up in the past then it was never around to be on to use as a base point to blow up the bridge from in the first place (hope that makes sense).

[eRe4s3r]

Rather - You get to manipulate time (a games life recording of its own gameplay) by a very small amount to some very small effect that might - and probably will not - aid in your victory

Speaking of this - This time rts game is VERY scant on new media - which makes me fear that they will actually ship out with these terrible graphics and controls.