3-Dimensional Strategy

Re: 3-Dementional Strategy

I think strategy in this game could be the same. It's hard to tell as we don't really have a definitive picture of how the game works yet.

On a side-related note, the game could be very hard or just as easy to understand as other RTS games. All that depends on how Uber manages the AI.

Dammit. :lol:
Good post, though.

Also, bmb, it really does seem you are purposely picking a fight over semantics.
In response to your first question that apparently never got answered, the gameplay knight was talking about how the game plays out while they are working on it (mostly alpha time.) If it becomes apparent to testers and the devs in alpha gameplay that the best solution to orbital dropping units being OP is AA guns firing on them as they fall, they will implement that to happen.

Re: 3-Dementional Strategy

Im getting tired of half the forums being idiotic fights between bmb and Nanolathe. bmb stop picking fights and offer some constructive posts.

Re: 3-Dementional Strategy

Populous 3 The Beginning had 3D planets and something of a strategic zoom. It also featured terrain adjustments.

IMO, 3D planets provide much more pure strategy and less meta strategy (IE: no hiding in map corners).

Flanking has much more meaning to it and turtelling is much more than dumping a ton of defenses in a small spot.

Re: 3-Dementional Strategy

Populous had the illusion of 3d planets. They were square tiling maps that were warped to look like 3D spheres.

I think he means 3d as in you can attack from all sides of an opponent. Unlike TA / Supcom where you could bunker in a corner and never be attacked from that side.

Also, populous was one of my favourite games as a kid.

I had Populous: The Beginning...but my rig at the time was never powerful enough to run it, hehe.