Judge feedback

Judge feedback is anonymous and shown in a random order.

• The game works well and you were able to make something quite different from the starting project. From your report, I got that you chose to reduce the scope, which is very good, as aiming to continue something you're not sure to deliver in time can be dangerous for a project. The game is fun and gameplay is quickly understandable. Thanks a lot for your hard work !
• Would be nice to see units 'locking' into combat between themselves rather than chasing each other around the map. AI balance might need more work
• The idea behind this implementation is interesting. I would have liked that the game would be more balanced, as it's very easy to win or lose very soon.
• I feel like this is a solid start. I was pleased to see the explanation of the thought process into the procedural generation for the maps, and you've shown an understanding of how psuedo-randomness can produce more pleasing results than true randomness. I felt that the map generation worked well for what you were trying to achieve, though I did feel that the game was slightly weighted in the player's favour during the rounds I played. I appreciate that you had to scale back the scope of the project due to time constraints, but it would be nice to see some additional complexity to the core game loop. The player does not have much agency beyond choosing which units to spawn, and the rest is completely handled by AI that the player has no influence over. I can see from your supporting documentation that you have thought about a number of ways to increase interactivity, so hopefully in the future you can explore expanding upon the core gameplay loop to make for more fulfilling player interaction. It would also be a good idea to expand upon the enemy AI to create a greater level of challenge for the player. Think about the enemy AI being able to make decisions, or react to the current state of the game, based on the player's input and strategy. If the AI is solely making random decisions, the decision making can seem incomprehensible to the player and subsequently the result of the game can feel a little more based on luck than the strategy of the player. Darren Ferrie Senior Programmer Supermassive Games
• This was good, I just wanted to give some general feedback: 1. A game like this can sometimes be difficult to balance against the AI. An easy win would be to create some levers (spawn speed, forager vs attacker, etc.) and then have different difficulty options (Easy/Medium/Hard) which then tweak those levers. 2. If you're doing random world generation in a game like this, you need to spend a lot of time generating worlds and tweaking your algorithm to make it as fair as possible. Otherwise you end up with games that are very one sided. 3. Think about adding a replay on win/lose screen, you want to make it easy for people to keep playing. 4. For your warrior movements, when deciding positions, have a think about them intercepting the opponent - look at where they're going to be as opposed to chasing where they are. 5. Think about adding a game speed toggle to keep the player engaged. Like I said, this was good and something you should be proud of.