Game Status -- Message Board / Global Triumph -- Too Much Stupid

As you may have noticed, I haven't had much time to work on Global Triumph lately. There are a few relatively minor bugs that I need to fix when I find time, but it's been running pretty smoothly for quite a while.

Once I iron out the last bugs, I believe I'll be done with Beta and launch the game as it plays now. It will be the actual 1.0. I don't expect to charge for upgraded accounts that get additional capabilities at that time, but I'll likely have a small fee for an upgraded account that can play on more than one world.

I have a fairly long list of improvements I'd like to make, but it borders on rewriting the entire game! So, when I do find time, I'll likely start on GT2. Some things I'd like to incorporate into GT2 (if I can make them work well with a browser):

- Wrapping (non-flat) worlds.
- Multiple zoom levels, including infinite dragging.
- Different terrains.
- Air unit develop within air attacks.
- Roaming units that target blank land (may require an account upgrade).
- Click and drag selection for all keyboard shortcuts (instead of just clone attacks). For example, if you're holding the "create unit" key and highlight a square around a land base, you could create an entire tank ball with one click.
- A "vacation" setting.
- "Resigning" a country will be replaced by "abandoning" a country.

There's a lot more, but those are the highlights. A few notes:

- I'm not sure yet if I'm going to address the timing issue, as I'm hesitant to implement a change that would slow the gameplay too much. Adding a build delay may also make it impossible to make a successful landing via sea attack. I may instead make different worlds process at different times, so a user who can stay up until 3:59am won't have an advantage on every world.

- I'll likely abandon keeping the game universal across most browsers and OSes, instead focusing on the most common, fastest, and standards-compliant browsers (i.e. Firefox and Chrome). IE is horrifically slow, so I have no plans to even test within it. I can't depend on Mac users having a right-click, so I avoided it in the current user interface (UI). I think the UI could be much improved with it, though, so those users may lose some ease-of-use that other users will have. A very large majority of the current users use Firefox or Chrome on Windows anyway, so it shouldn't have much of an impact.

And finally, please note that I don't have a timeframe at this point. I'm just sharing my plans.

Thank you very much for the information/plans update. It is much appreciated (as is the game in general, as noted elsewhere).

I might suggest that a cylindrical or toroidal world map would be significantly easier to implement than a spherical one. I would, however, be keenly interested in any ideas you have on how you could go about making a spherical map.

LCCX wrote on :

I might suggest that a cylindrical or toroidal world map would be significantly easier to implement than a spherical one.

Sorry, I meant spherical in concept, meaning that the world would wrap (instead of being "flat" like the current version). Poor wording choice on my part!

I'll adjust the original post to be more clear.

edited 1x / 2m

I just want to say that I think worlds like Fulgur are pretty awesome and would like to see more maps based on our world. Like perhaps one of Hawaii or Great Brittain, or if you ever do another Cerato sized, perhaps the entire world.

SCUM wrote on :

perhaps the entire world.

I actually have a map file ready for the entire world, but I haven't decided how I'd like to use it just yet!

user image

Johnny wrote on :

I actually have a map file ready for the entire world, but I haven't decided how I'd like to use it just yet!

Oh wow. I'm salivating. What size is it?

Johnny wrote on :

I actually have a map file ready for the entire world, but I haven't decided how I'd like to use it just yet!

As in the spawn rules and such? I am also curious as to the size.

BTW, looks awesome.

edited 1x / 1m

Kadath wrote on :

Oh wow. I'm salivating. What size is it?

I created that one at 4096x2048. I'm debating using it for the next world of that size.

Going to 2048x1024 with it would be very easy, but I could also do a 8192x4096 one if need be. I don't want another Cerato sized world yet, though.

I thought I might reuse the U.S. map for a 4096x2048 weekly cycle world, too.

Kadath wrote on :

Oh wow. I'm salivating. What size is it?

omg that looks massive!!

I call Australia!

I eagerly await it's arrival as a playable world.

4096x2048 sounds good, I am thinking selectable spawning would be good for a real world map since I'm sure most people already have a favorite corner they want to play in.

I see South Pole, but no North Pole??

I see the best starting location... Hawaii.

Yea, because it'll take about a year for anyone to get a boat out there. :-p

Manaco wrote on :

I see South Pole, but no North Pole??

I could be wrong, but I believe the North Pole is actually a shifting block of ice and not an actual land mass.

Weekly cycle... as is one turn a week?

Johnny wrote on :

I could be wrong, but I believe the North Pole is actually a shifting block of ice and not an actual land mass.

something to consider for GT2? ice terrain... :)

Terrain that can't be build upon and moves every turn (taking whatever unit is on it)? Could be some random fun.

Johnny wrote on :

I created that one at 4096x2048. I'm debating using it for the next world of that size.

Please do, I think it's something a lot of us have been waiting patiently for!

Einio is over...this would be a good time to throw it in.

May I throw in a small suggesetion:
Put material values on the sectors that correspond with the real world. For example: Sectors in the Antartic would only have a materials value of 100 while sectors in the eastern US would have a materials value of 1000.

Rick wrote on :

May I throw in a small suggesetion:
Put material values on the sectors that correspond with the real world. For example: Sectors in the Antartic would only have a materials value of 100 while sectors in the eastern US would have a materials value of 1000.

I don't really have access to any sort of data source that would provide me with that type of information. And different areas of the world have different types of resources, so I'd need quite an extensive set of data!

Also, if I'm allowing people to select a starting location, everyone would just cluster around the highest resources. I think I'd have to keep resources fairly neutral in order to keep the same level of relative balance in the game.

Johnny wrote on :

Also, if I'm allowing people to select a starting location, everyone would just cluster around the highest resources. I think I'd have to keep resources fairly neutral in order to keep the same level of relative balance in the game.

Then they can just kill each other off while the isolated, low-resource country expands and mop up the remainder. :)

i want to play it now lol

Johnny,

What about message board improvements? Any chance they'll make the GT2 cut?

I'm guessing I like others are used to robust message boards that enable organized thread management: things like board/topic subs, moving and deleting. And I know it's been mentioned before, but polling would be very useful to coordination among alliances.

GholaMaster wrote on :

Johnny,

What about message board improvements? Any chance they'll make the GT2 cut?

I'm guessing I like others are used to robust message boards that enable organized thread management: things like board/topic subs, moving and deleting. And I know it's been mentioned before, but polling would be very useful to coordination among alliances.

I think it might be neat to have some sort of "Hall of Fame" list. Perhaps listing the largest single nation on each map after it ends? Also, maybe set time limits on each map. It might give some interesting progression throughout the game.

Blackthorne wrote on :

I think it might be neat to have some sort of "Hall of Fame" list. Perhaps listing the largest single nation on each map after it ends? Also, maybe set time limits on each map. It might give some interesting progression throughout the game.

Oh that would cool.

Johnny wrote on :

I don't really have access to any sort of data source that would provide me with that type of information. And different areas of the world have different types of resources, so I'd need quite an extensive set of data!

Also, if I'm allowing people to select a starting location, everyone would just cluster around the highest resources. I think I'd have to keep resources fairly neutral in order to keep the same level of relative balance in the game.

You could use population density for the resource value in each square. Ranking by income rather than sector count would make more sense in this kind of map though.

I also, more or less, agree with Manaco regarding how players would naturally distribute themselves. To make sure the low resource countries have enough space, you could make the distance requirement for placing dependent on the average resource value in an area.

GholaMaster wrote on :

Johnny,

What about message board improvements? Any chance they'll make the GT2 cut?

I'm guessing I like others are used to robust message boards that enable organized thread management: things like board/topic subs, moving and deleting. And I know it's been mentioned before, but polling would be very useful to coordination among alliances.

Any thoughts Johnny?

GholaMaster wrote on :

Any thoughts Johnny?

Improvements to the board and chat are things I'd like to get to one day, but my priority is the game itself. I've already been having a hard enough time keeping up with that lately!

I'd love to see that US map with the actual countries already established and a bidding/auction system for each country. Everyone gets 50,000 and bids on the counties they would like to have. Players could have multiple countries at the start. The starting money is that 50k, minus what was spent on countries.

Johnny wrote on :

Improvements to the board and chat are things I'd like to get to one day, but my priority is the game itself. I've already been having a hard enough time keeping up with that lately!

I can only imagine. You've done a great job though man.

With all the suggestions and ideas coming, have you ever considered outside help? I'm sure you're not ready to hire anyone to work on a free game (lol), but what about volunteer designers, coders, coordinators, moderators etc? If you had interest and put it out there, I'm sure people would step up.

Cool map. you are correct about the south pole being a land mass, and not the north.

Global Triumph

Thread

Messages / 1 to 30 of 30

Message Board

Categories

Search