Just played the game, and one the "One" Level! AWSOMELY SWEET! There was one point in the game where i was realy stuck, he had the whtie star, and i had to take it, and the green one that connects the two white stars in the upper left corner, and i had to develop my own strategy, of pulling his forces toward my weaker fortificatoin,s while i set up some troops that would make it there and save it just on time, and then take the green and white stars at the same time! wow that was fun! anyway, i dont know if this would be feasable, but did you ever think about working to make a sequal of 3d? then you would have to like protect in a sphere. Just an idea, but i think it would probably be really cool... or even have it layered, so that you had to monitor 2 or 3 layers at once. Anyway, its just a thought.... not meant to be taken entirely seriously

Quantum

There''s no reason to go into the 3rd dimension... any 3d map could be represented in 2d in this game, and the 3rd dimension would just make the UI less natural.

I keep trying to get into new games lately and I keep finding them boring... but damn I enjoy Pax Solaris every time I play. I''m about this close <-> to registering. Damn you Diodor, I think you''re about to take away some of my hard earned money.

quote:
Original post by D_JildQuantum

anyway, i dont know if this would be feasable, but did you ever think about working to make a sequal of 3d? then you would have to like protect in a sphere. Just an idea, but i think it would probably be really cool... or even have it layered, so that you had to monitor 2 or 3 layers at once. Anyway, its just a thought.... not meant to be taken entirely seriously

Have a look at the cube level. I don''t want to make such drastic changes as adding layers or going 3d as they''d spoil the game''s simplicity and ease of use.

You''ll have to agree though that the white star is giving the map a sort of an extra dimension - and indeed much of the gameplay challenges seem to revolve around the white star. I''m planning on adding white stars in more colors, linking different points on the map together. This will capture the essence of 3d maps, unfolded on the 2d screen.

quote:
Original post by Dobbs

There''s no reason to go into the 3rd dimension... any 3d map could be represented in 2d in this game, and the 3rd dimension would just make the UI less natural.

There are 3d models that would be hard to put on the screen right now - the cube level is as far as I could go - and it''s not the easiest map to play. I would only need two types of white star to create a _very_ easy to visualize unfolded cube model (8 stars) and four white star groups to unfold a 3x3x3 cube though. Most interesting...

quote:
I keep trying to get into new games lately and I keep finding them boring... but damn I enjoy Pax Solaris every time I play. I''m about this close <-> to registering. Damn you Diodor, I think you''re about to take away some of my hard earned money.

The same thing has happened to me. I can''t even touch great games I used to play, let alone learn new ones but I find myself addicted to very simple games. Slay and Solar Wars instead of Shogun Total War or Homeworld, Soldat and the infamous Stick Soldiers instead of Counterstrike and Unreal. Triplane Turmoil is another great one.

Thanks, I''ll check those out. I broke down and bought Pax Solaris, so have a beer on me (or feed your kids and wife if you have em, whatever).

Pax is a great game. Very enjoyable and actually challenging Well written AI.

This is one of the first shareware games i am actually thinking of buying.

wow nice job, very addictive. ive never registered a shareware game but im thinking about it now.

my only suggestion is instead of having just one arrow make the star lane line change to color coded arrows

**************** = no one moving or attacking
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> = moving / attacking
>>>>>>>><<<<<<<< = when both oppenents are moving to eachothers planets

i think this would make it a lot less confusing

one other thing. i dont really get the point of the damaged ships. mabye you could explain why you decided to add the from a design perspective?

great job though!

quote:
one other thing. i dont really get the point of the damaged ships. mabye you could explain why you decided to add the from a design perspective?

Excellent! A design question at last

The damaged ships allow for some interesting tactics - defeating a star will simply force it''s damaged ships to retreat - and about half of them get repaired during the retreat. The defender has a large advantage here. That''s why the attacker must try to first surround a star with many damaged ships before forcing it to surrender. But to surround a star one must break through the enemy lines and often risks getting his attacking force cut off and surrounded.

Tactical retreats also work well, particularly against the AI. I retreat from star A, the enemy takes it. I retreat from star B, neighbor to A, the enemy takes it with forces from A (half of them move forward to B). I attack and take star A - perhaps half the enemy forces from A retreat to star B which is now surrounded - and has 3/4 of the forces the enemy started with - waiting to be destroyed.

That''s where the blocking move comes in (two stars attack each other). In blocking fights there are only destroyed ships, none damaged, and the smaller side loses ships faster than the stronger side, but it takes longer for the battle to unfold. So the blocking move can be used to keep a star surrounded for a little more time until it is defeated.

From a defensive point of view, getting ones forces broken up in more pieces can equal a catastrophe. That''s why it is often necessary to retreat instead of standing to fight. The blocking move comes again handy by helping to keep a corridor open just enough for the threatened forces to retreat.

Damaged ships make surrounding and forcing a surrender a very effective tactic, and this tactic is the main reason for the tactical complexity of Pax.

There''s also the issue of mobility. Too much mobility makes planning impossible. Damaged ships cannot move. Attacking a star decreases it''s repair rate a lot, so it''s often preferable to keep attacking it even if there''s no hope of taking it just to keep the large amounts of damaged ships from getting repaired fast. Damaged ships limit the freedom of both defender and the attacker - and this allows for planning. It''s the same stuff I was talking about in the Constraints; granularity; tactics thread.

In a way damaged ships increase the granularity of a game: a successful attack will force a surrender and destroy many ships - a failed attack will not be able to force the surrender and will only have destroyed a few enemy ships - with the rest of them damaged but getting repaired fast after the attack is lifted. There is no gray area between a successful attack and a failed one.

overall ur game is very good. after a while u have to learn the strategies.

the problem with the mouse did not occur 4 me.

what u need is some kinda intro screen. u really need to sell ur name in games. if u sell a game that someone really likes then they''ll remember ur name and maybe buy another of ur games.

maybe a bit of a story behind it. y r the ppl fighting each other and who r they?

____________________________________________________________

as you can see i ramble, but at least i have my own opinion
have a nice day

Update: I still havnt beaten the Crossed Level! its driving me nuts! i have beaten the others in under 10 minutes... arg crossed is crossed! rofl

Quantum

Holy sweet..this game is the the first with an original concept I''ve seen in quite a while, and have a great feel for the S in RTS, not just the RT as one usually see in big-title games..great fun too, two thumbs up!

-Luctus
Statisticly seen, most things happens to other people.
[Mail]