A Fuel based game mechanic mode?

[wombat789]

Is there a generation gap in the way people like the game to be emphasized ?

I think Warthog makes an interesting point . With Earth the ammo deployement could have had more endurance .
What was interesting was the deformable terrain . Dig a ditch or form a mound .

Cuban missile crisis . The fuel and ammo run out too quickly and the maps were too small .

I like the Forged Aliance aerocraft fuel system . fifteen minutes or so .

[R315r4z0r]

While I like the idea of adding fuel as a resource, I don't like how much you're suggesting that the game play should change.

If fuel was to be incorporated, the way I'd go about it is just use it as a credit system for unit movement. Everything else would remain the same about C&C. Units shouldn't be free.

Vehicle fuel should slowly drain, but not fast enough to feel like it's a hindrance. This idea would also open up a stance called "Fuel Conservation Stance" in which the unit basically shuts down and sits cold on the map until given other orders. And another new thing that fuel could introduce is a fuel unit. Not only a "harvester" unit but a tanker unit that would deliver fuel to vehicles out in the field. That unit would be highly explosive if destroyed (and could also be used in a demolition truck fashion (similar to blue Tiberium harvesters in TS) when desperate.

Overall, I think a fuel mechanic has it's merits, but it really would need some thought for it to be worthwhile.

[=LEVIATHEN=]

Cold War Crisis for ZH mod uses a fuel system, in which all most structuers and vehicles require fuel to work. However I didn't like the system much. Even in YR Robot Tanks shut down once the player is low on power.

Powering units with fuel... not my kind of fun.

Yes, and Mid East Crisis 2 has that system too. While it's interesting, I can't really say I like it as much as a central objective.
Maybe as a separate game mode...

[MILINTarctrooper]

Yes, and Mid East Crisis 2 has that system too. While it's interesting, I can't really say I like it as much as a central objective.
Maybe as a separate game mode...

It becomes rush prone...something I have found in such games. If you have resources on the map that power your forces along...you know where they are rush...and you get an overwhelming advantage. Not particularly my kind of soup. A good game mixes resources, territories, zones, terrain, and logistics and economy. On the field resources or resource zones...becomes really rip for rush or spam tactics. If you haven't played Company of Heroes on some maps they are almost assured rush maps. and others are spam happy.

[Rpatto92]

Really not to sure on this idea; while I think yes this sounds like conventional warfare, therefore true to the reality of an actual war, I also think it could have a major affect on the game balance.


Although...I do have an idea; first of all it could be entirely optional, like a hardcore type mode and secondly instead of adding a whole new feature in which the player needs to micro manage, which would be annoying, you could make much of the system autonomous, like having supply stations or lines were units automatically returned to, to rearm/refuel etc. These station or lines could be deployed all around the map by the player making rushing viable, but disrupting these station/lines could be a tactic to slow the enemy's pace. This all said rather than having units simply die out when deprived of fuel and ammo you could instead have them simply return to based whenever an alternative supply point is not available; so they won't ever run out or stop if they get low they return to base automatically, almost as if the units had predicted that they couldn't remain in the battle and planned there own return.

This way the only extra micro management the player needs to be involved in is building stations and maintaining them; no fussing about sending fuel and retrieving downed units.

Just as an option suggestion; they could maybe reduce a units speed when they're running on low power.

My restructuring of this idea could allow for an extra mechanic to the game without really impacting its balance, it could simply be tweaked as a tool to help balance how the game currently works.

[Foxtrot984]

I just like the idea of having drilling rigs, transport vehicles, and a refinery on the battlefield. It's realistic. Drilling rigs, supply lines and oil depots are BIG targets for military tacticians in the real world. CnC Generals used this method of "supply gathering" from the magical piles littered about the battlefield... I think having different regions of the battlefield the contain more or less oil, having to construct rigs in those "fields" and then transport it would give the game an awesome realistic perspective. I mean after all, to power the power plants, run the factories, power the tanks...you need oil and/or oil-based products for all of it.

I think you're on to something with using fuel in the game... just not on such a micro-level. Perhaps each vehicle uses a small amount out of your total supply in relation to how much it moves. Instead of "credits", I would rather see "barrels". Much more realistic...Whether you're talking about an entire country, an army, or a single base... without oil, they're dead in the water.

[A51UK]

I play some RTS that have this it was not fun. Too much work for the player.

[Voiru]

Idea works if it's just a game mode. But honestly, you should play tactical games like Men of War. And if you think that vehicles with fuel tanks is sort of complex system, it's least of your worries in that game.