Yay, finally got around to getting all the missing songs for my Starbound OST.
-Ocean Exploration 1
-Jupiter
-Forest Exploration 1
-Forest Exploration 2
-Forest Battle 1
-Forest Battle 2
-Forest Battle 2 (Alternate Version w/ Techno Electricy Sound In The Background That I Only Got For Completion Sake Because It Kind Of Hurts My Ears)
-Tentacle Exploration 2
That makes 68 and I
think every single piece that was at any point avaliable... Hopefully.
(08-31-2015, 10:01 PM)Battle Bee Wrote: [ -> ]![[Image: 08tUQP9.gif]](http://i.imgur.com/08tUQP9.gif)
...Zap?
(08-31-2015, 11:25 PM)Shaadaris Wrote: [ -> ]Yay, finally got around to getting all the missing songs for my Starbound OST.
-Ocean Exploration 1
-Jupiter
-Forest Exploration 1
-Forest Exploration 2
-Forest Battle 1
-Forest Battle 2
-Forest Battle 2 (Alternate Version w/ Techno Electricy Sound In The Background That I Only Got For Completion Sake Because It Kind Of Hurts My Ears)
-Tentacle Exploration 2
That makes 68 and I think every single piece that was at any point avaliable... Hopefully.
(08-31-2015, 10:01 PM)Battle Bee Wrote: [ -> ]
...Zap?
BZZZzzzZZZzzzzZZZT
Question. Would anyone here play an RTS where as the factions advanced in tech the strengths they could play to and what they had to counteract from the enemy changed dramatically? Like, for example, let's say that in the early game player A can pump out units really easy and has to do so because B has better units, then as the game progresses that changes completely and A now has better units but B can produce units faster and for less.
(08-31-2015, 04:51 PM)Marxon Wrote: [ -> ] (08-31-2015, 04:47 PM)Flarezerker Wrote: [ -> ]K, just used to being judged by rep and stuff, I've had a bit of a bad past with certain rep systems.
I have one of the lowest reps here.
Actually there are quite a few of us who are or used to be in the -10-1 category.
I was negative 13 a while back...
(08-31-2015, 11:41 PM)UnamusedAvali Wrote: [ -> ] (08-31-2015, 04:51 PM)Marxon Wrote: [ -> ]I have one of the lowest reps here.
Actually there are quite a few of us who are or used to be in the -10-1 category.
I was negative 13 a while back...
Oh, mine has rapidly surged upwards in the past few days.
Oh and to Surge, fix your signature, you definitely are not the most hated person here.
(08-31-2015, 11:44 PM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ] (08-31-2015, 11:44 PM)Marxon Wrote: [ -> ]Oh, mine has rapidly surged upwards in the past few days.
Oh and to Surge, fix your signature, you definitely are not the most hated person here.
That's what you think.
I'm quite sure rukii has you topped.
(08-31-2015, 11:48 PM)Marxon Wrote: [ -> ] (08-31-2015, 11:44 PM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]That's what you think.
I'm quite sure rukii has you topped.
Not even close my man. The ire of maybe 5 people versus the ire of...lemme count here, 1...2...3...4...5...6-oh my we've already gone over.
(08-31-2015, 11:49 PM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ] (08-31-2015, 11:48 PM)Marxon Wrote: [ -> ]I'm quite sure rukii has you topped.
Not even close my man. The ire of maybe 5 people versus the ire of...lemme count here, 1...2...3...4...5...6-oh my we've already gone over.
You just want to be hated because it's easier for you.
(08-31-2015, 11:52 PM)Marxon Wrote: [ -> ] (08-31-2015, 11:49 PM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]Not even close my man. The ire of maybe 5 people versus the ire of...lemme count here, 1...2...3...4...5...6-oh my we've already gone over.
You just want to be hated because it's easier for you.
Pump your brakes kid you're speeding towards a mighty solid obstacle
(08-31-2015, 11:53 PM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ] (08-31-2015, 11:52 PM)Marxon Wrote: [ -> ]You just want to be hated because it's easier for you.
Pump your brakes kid you're speeding towards a mighty solid obstacle
I know you better than you think, just keep that in mind.
(08-31-2015, 11:56 PM)Marxon Wrote: [ -> ] (08-31-2015, 11:53 PM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]Pump your brakes kid you're speeding towards a mighty solid obstacle
I know you better than you think, just keep that in mind.
Bold claims, but not much slips by me in these kind of matters, so I assure you that you know less than you realize
(08-31-2015, 11:30 PM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]Question. Would anyone here play an RTS where as the factions advanced in tech the strengths they could play to and what they had to counteract from the enemy changed dramatically? Like, for example, let's say that in the early game player A can pump out units really easy and has to do so because B has better units, then as the game progresses that changes completely and A now has better units but B can produce units faster and for less.
i would if it was pulled off correctly, with the way this is sounding it seems like so much could go wrong with the changing of strengths, it may become a endless game of adapting to the opponent, or it could end up just being some sort of whoever is fastest to adapt wins no matter how great they are at the game, the person who makes this would have to hit spot on in a very small target to make this game balanced, strategy involved, and fun.
(09-01-2015, 12:14 AM)AustinLB90 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-31-2015, 11:30 PM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]Question. Would anyone here play an RTS where as the factions advanced in tech the strengths they could play to and what they had to counteract from the enemy changed dramatically? Like, for example, let's say that in the early game player A can pump out units really easy and has to do so because B has better units, then as the game progresses that changes completely and A now has better units but B can produce units faster and for less.
i would if it was pulled off correctly, with the way this is sounding it seems like so much could go wrong with the changing of strengths, it may become a endless game of adapting to the opponent, or it could end up just being some sort of whoever is fastest to adapt wins no matter how great they are at the game, the person who makes this would have to hit spot on in a very small target to make this game balanced, strategy involved, and fun.
Not necessarily, you're assuming that it will be a constant game of reactive tug-of-war when major shifts in playstyle would only occur at major milestones.
(09-01-2015, 12:24 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ] (09-01-2015, 12:14 AM)AustinLB90 Wrote: [ -> ]i would if it was pulled off correctly, with the way this is sounding it seems like so much could go wrong with the changing of strengths, it may become a endless game of adapting to the opponent, or it could end up just being some sort of whoever is fastest to adapt wins no matter how great they are at the game, the person who makes this would have to hit spot on in a very small target to make this game balanced, strategy involved, and fun.
Not necessarily, you're assuming that it will be a constant game of reactive tug-of-war when major shifts in playstyle would only occur at major milestones.
well what if the game doesn't last that long? what's the point then?
(09-01-2015, 12:26 AM)AustinLB90 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-01-2015, 12:24 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]Not necessarily, you're assuming that it will be a constant game of reactive tug-of-war when major shifts in playstyle would only occur at major milestones.
well what if the game never last that long? what's the point then?
Well the idea is that because it is map control based defensive play is very important, so early game you have a set of strengths and weaknesses you have to use while balancing grabbing and holding ground with developing your base to progress your tech and transition into the mid-game, where those strengths and weaknesses may be turned on their head and you'll get the tools needed to start working towards the end of the match. Ultimately it's not a problem if the game doesn't reach late or endgame, the intention is just to provide a more dynamic challenge.
Too depressed, going to isolate myself now.
![[Image: 9GTNGaZs.jpg]](http://i.imgbox.com/9GTNGaZs.jpg)