Tooth & Tail

[Plok 320]

Today's the day when I must retire my argument that all RTS games in the past decade, particularly indie ones, were shit trying to be C&C without any form of identity or depth of their own (basically, I'll have to use "most" instead of "all"). I present to you: Tooth & Tail, scheduled for release on 12 September, for PC, Mac and PS4 (available both on GOG and Steam).

 

[FRAYDO 4]

I like the art direction. This could be an interesting one.

The KSR look cool, and judging from this shot I bet they have some underhanded tactics and a poisonous arsenal.

[Plok 320]

What's special about this game is that you don't control individual units. You only control your faction leader who builds and scouts, but cannot attack. You create armies by building warrens that create units automatically, and at the start of the match, you choose six units from 3 tiers and a defensive structure tier.

Example gameplay of the lucky pre-alpha testers:

 

[Stygs 25]

On 14.7.2017 at 11:09 PM, Plokite_Wolf said:

What's special about this game is that you don't control individual units. You only control your faction leader who builds and scouts, but cannot attack. You create armies by building warrens that create units automatically, and at the start of the match, you choose six units from 3 tiers and a defensive structure tier.

If you cant controll you units directly, isnt that kinda like making an Online FPS where your charakter shoots on its own if you aim at an enemy?

 

It looks fun and is certainly a new idea, but I have to wonder how much deep the gameplay/fights can have with that kind of mechanic.

Edited July 15, 2017 by Stygs

[Plok 320]

2 minutes ago, Stygs said:

Isnt that kinda like making an Online FPS where your charakter shoots on its own if you aim at an enemy?

I've seen games where you aren't even in direct control over your armies...

What I discovered in last night's 3-hour dev stream is that the four factions/leaders, although different in lore and set of campaign missions, are functionally identical in gameplay. They did have them different before, but it caused "imbalances" and wasn't the gameplay they were "aiming for". Since there are 15 unit types and 5 defensive structures that are shared between all leaders (you choose 6), it isn't as hard to balance as your Command & Conquer, your StarCraft, or heaven forbid your Dawn of War Soulstorm, so this comes off as lazy to be honest.

[Nmenth 289]

4 hours ago, Plokite_Wolf said:

I've seen games where you aren't even in direct control over your armies...

I have the Majesty 2 Collection. Not being able to control your heroes isn't really a problem most of the time, but there are much greater weaknesses to that game that are likely an indirect consequence of the mechanic. Losing a mission also doesn't feel the same as usual games; the challenge is not skill and tactics, rather it is more like money management and predicting the future.

It is still an ok game and, up until I reached a mission where the AI was allowed to cheat and circumvent the limitations imposed on me, I enjoyed paying it. I never beat that mission, and the only YouTube video I found showing how to beat it still had the player lose most of his base halfway through and need to completely rebuild.

[Plok 320]

4 hours ago, Nmenth said:

It is still an ok game and, up until I reached a mission where the AI was allowed to cheat and circumvent the limitations imposed on me, I enjoyed paying it. I never beat that mission, and the only YouTube video I found showing how to beat it still had the player lose most of his base halfway through and need to completely rebuild.

TaxOwlbear to the rescue?

 

Come to think of it, I think Majesty 1 has a similar problem in a rather early mission where elves kidnap your son, and you either have to pay a ransom or kill all of them, and you're limited to 30 days, but they keep attacking you and are superfast, while you start out with very little.

[Nmenth 289]

3 hours ago, Plokite_Wolf said:

TaxOwlbear to the rescue?

Doesn't look like it, he skips over far too much of the mission to be helpful. That actually was the biggest problem with the other video I mentioned too, that guy also skipped over the part where his base was annihilated and rebuilt, just saying it happened.

It has little to do with the topic though, so I'll say no more about it.

[Gben 20]

Well, looks fun. I'll keep an eye on it.

[PurpleGaga27 39]

Well this looks interesting, an RTS full of animal power. 

[TaxOwlbear 20]

On 16/07/2017 at 1:27 PM, Nmenth said:

Doesn't look like it, he skips over far too much of the mission to be helpful. That actually was the biggest problem with the other video I mentioned too, that guy also skipped over the part where his base was annihilated and rebuilt, just saying it happened.

It has little to do with the topic though, so I'll say no more about it.

I suppose you mean the final mission of the base game: It's mostly random. If you are lucky, the demon doesn't go for you when you are not ready. If he does, you're done. Save every five minutes, lest the game will crash and you will lose all your progress, which happened five or six times for me when I played this.

On topic: I like the idea and I like that there's apparently a single-player campaign. I'll keep and eye on this.

[Nmenth 289]

43 minutes ago, TaxOwlbear said:

I suppose you mean the final mission of the base game

No, Pretenders to the Throne.

On topic: I have nothing to say that is on topic...

[AZ-Stalker 88]

Last time I fought with animal armies from an RTS perspective was back when I played Impossible Creatures and S.W.I.N.E.

[Saracen 16]

On 7/15/2017 at 11:42 PM, Stygs said:

If you cant controll you units directly, isnt that kinda like making an Online FPS where your charakter shoots on its own if you aim at an enemy?

 

It looks fun and is certainly a new idea, but I have to wonder how much deep the gameplay/fights can have with that kind of mechanic.

 

It's not a new idea. There's a Paradox IP known as Majesty where all you had control over is what you built. Whilst there was no commander avatar in this series of games, you operated the game more on a God like level where you had to bribe or bounty locations to get soldiers to attack: 

 

In the non AAA arena, this kind of gameplay also exists in a moderately popular game known as Rise To Ruins. It has a very similar concept to the Majesty series where you build as a god, and have to persuade citizens to do your bidding, but this operates more as a tower defence style game where you will eventually die.. it's just more or less how long you can hold out:

 

Even the later games in the Tropico series has dabbled in this mechanic quite considerably.

Tooth and Tail, basically takes this sub-genre mechanical concept and applies it into a more hands-on competitive approach that quite clearly works pretty damn well. I've been following this game since they announced it, and whilst I could have been one of those people who played the Alpha (I was given the chance) I chose to remain passive and wait for the full game.

The point is this gameplay mechanic really isn't anything new per-se.. But what is new is the player's ability to not rely on an semi-passive AI assisting the player to get things done. In Tooth & Tail, if you want it done, you can get it done without the worry whether your commands are actually going to get done within a time-frame. The commands you can give are instantaneous, which allows for a much faster free-flowing game. This is why it'll be one of the best examples of indirect control possibly ever created to date! 

[Nmenth 289]

54 minutes ago, Saracen said:

There's a Paradox IP known as Majesty

Didn't read the whole topic?

Side note, I acquired the Majesty 2 Collection on Saracen's recommendation.