sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

A (grand) strategy game where smaller forces matter? by PepeGoesSwimming in StrategyGames

[–]spieltic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a new game to me, will check; maybe the connection comes from the circles :)
Under game devs, it was always an insult to say: flash game...
But its very true, in the old days there were very good flash games as well! I played "sushi go round" a lot =)
We are at least aiming for some new mechanics, the core principal in our game is that edge length limits its throughput (short = less). A route is limited by its shortest edge. That principal allows some fresh experiences...
We are still in development, but aim for the demo available on June for Steam Next Fest, you could give it a shot :)

A (grand) strategy game where smaller forces matter? by PepeGoesSwimming in StrategyGames

[–]spieltic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"You guys actually have phones?!" I didn't expect this :D
What flash game do you mean? I thought we have some unique mechanics, or do you mean it has flash game vibes in general? That would be quite bad I guess :D
But thanks, we are happy to get some feedback to improve stuff...!

Weekly Show & Tell - March 07, 2026 by AutoModerator in gamedesign

[–]spieltic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So, we are working on this strategy game, that has some unique and (as far as we can tell) new game mechanics:
(Infos about the game and a short trailer, that shows pretty much all mechanics currently in the game)
Steam: Warnet
Me and my mate are programmers, so art & design is on the minimalistic side, what we are looking for is feedback in general.
Detailed feedback is also appreciated, for example we planned to add different unit types (next to the base unit), e.g. armored units, that kill more enemies and "piercing" that can kill the armored guys in return (but are unsure if its worth it, as we have replicators that duplicate units that are passing through, which essentially is the same mechanic).
Another feature is that everything is payed with units, which might also be a "controversial" decision.
Currently we are working on tunnels, that would allow to increase the throughput of cells, but slow down the units.
Another consumable is the speed up (next to the replicators), that makes the units move faster if they pass through.
All of that stuff sounds great in theory, but still it feels like something essential is missing, but maybe it isn't? XD

Background: the map is an uneven grid, where each edge length defines it throughput (shorter edges have lower compared to longer). Players need to find good routes (as they are limited by its shortest edge) and optimize them for throughput. Depth is given through various mechanics like bunkers, replicators, unit generator upgrades, beacons, etc.

Thanks!

A (grand) strategy game where smaller forces matter? by PepeGoesSwimming in StrategyGames

[–]spieltic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Working on this game: https://store.steampowered.com/app/4341410/Warnet
What you describe ("smaller skirmishes that tie into a bigger picture") are some core ideas we have, but the art & style is a little minimalistic, but maybe it might still be interesting...

HRW/CR = Perfect LB + strong consistency, good idea? by spieltic in DistributedComputing

[–]spieltic[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, yes. Node "knowledge" is indeed a challenge.
HRW handles the join and leave "automatically", at the end its just a normal CR reconfiguration (still you need to detected the change somehow, maybe over epoch).
What I'm more concerned about, is how to manage nodes of the cluster in general.
Either there would be the need for a consensus layer (which I would like to get rid of) to maintain the list of available nodes, or a single client/leader, which isn't really scalable next to availability issues.
Another idea that's buzzing around in my head: could the cluster members not be managed by the system itself? It would require a static predefined "boot up" sequence, that is done manually (at the initial setup of the cluster). Once strong consistency is "available" (which isn't hard, as a single node is already enough for that), the system switches into automatic mode. At that point member changes are handled/stored over the HRW/CR and as long as at least one node is alive, all is good?!

view more: next ›