Dawn of Coalescence is no longer on hold!
Interanlly, work is slowly resuming!
However it remains irresponsible to try and offer a concrete timeframe.


  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
RSS Articles

Slowly the ancient DoC machine-spirit is re-awakening;

However first i must insure that all of it's cogitators (AI) are in working order

While the means for effecting the most basic of AI functionality have been well established there are still many finer points to DoC gameplay i must attempt to address with the AI somehow or another such as:

starting with no hq building as such,

strategizing hq location based on a given map/opposition etc,

managing units operating at different elevations (orbital, bomber, flyer and strafing units)

not to mention managing map structures the AI gains control of during the course of a battle....and so on.

So that is the current first order of business

When the first "properly" functioning AI is finished and tested i will post footage. No timeframe.

When every armies AI is finished and tested there will be a full release but again it would be irresponsible of me to try and offer a timeline.

DoC Discord chat?

DoC Discord chat?

News 9 comments

Considering a more private but also more regular DoC Discord chat for those interested enough to want to at least attempt to offer constructive insight...

Alpha Release

Alpha Release

News 6 comments

DoC is NO LONGER on hold! Expect news and updates to once again be posted here. INTERNAL production has resumed and anyone wishing to help or barter with...

Dawn of Coalescence Overview

Dawn of Coalescence Overview

Feature 7 comments

Summary of what Dawn of Coalescence has to offer. 59 Races Destructible terrain Defensive Structures.

Dawn of Coalescence Frequently Asked Questions.

Dawn of Coalescence Frequently Asked Questions.

Feature 9 comments

Answers some of our community's more pressing enquires about the Dawn of Coalescence mod.

Post comment Comments  (30 - 40 of 629)
IronWarrior42 Creator
IronWarrior42 - - 191 comments

Regarding Trenches and timeframe vs quality of play cost-benefit analysis:

THEORETICAL: While more time consuming a more visually and strategically appealing form of trench warfare could be implimented by modding the trenches into the maps themselves BUT make them only "unlockable" by armies who specialize in trench warfare. After which point units from any army would be able to use them/fight to gain control of them; and MAYBE even with proper trench bridging, gun nests, the works

PRACTICAL: I'm more confident about being able to create the trench networks, blockhouses, gun nests, even collapsable vehicle bridging...
...than i am in my ability to figure out an army contextual scar that uncovers the trench networks when an trench warfare army chooses to activate them...

Please put ANY and ALL theoretical ideas AND practical concrete knowledge pertaining in replies to this and/or private message me.

Reply Good karma+1 vote
Leeching
Leeching - - 88 comments

This is an old post, but having buildable structures is much superior. Yes, they will look a little more like bunkers than trenches, and they'll be built 'up' above the ground line, but that's fine, it gives the illusion of trenches perfectly. More hardened trench positions can looklike long pillboxes with guns sticking out of gun holes and a lot of dirt/shovels and wear and tear. I've thought about dkok mechanics as well, but having trenches be map specific is bad because you never know how relevant they'll be, and it will put these factions at a HUGE disadvantage on non trench maps/ might give them an unreasonable one in trench war maps. Also, if trench sections cannot be replaced when destroyed, even if you went to the trouble of adding them all in to all these maps, they wouldnt last long under heavy assault.

Buildable custom buildings that looks a bit like trenches are the way to go.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
Kloefklaffer
Kloefklaffer - - 246 comments

I'm glad to see DoC i back. This project can be amazing. However as it died before perhaps it is better to focus on the more finished factions and release a version with a dozen factions adding more later. This could help prevent you getting burnt out as well as keeping the community interested.

Have you thought about contacting the modding community? After all this can become THE mod to rule them all. With so many awesome race mods appearing lately and still being in production it might be possible to bundle the community's assets if everyone agrees.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+3 votes
IronWarrior42 Creator
IronWarrior42 - - 191 comments

and thank you for the kind words, on behalf of all of us that have worked on this project it means a lot to us that after all the ridiculous setbacks people still like what we're trying to do and want to see it become reality

Reply Good karma+3 votes
IronWarrior42 Creator
IronWarrior42 - - 191 comments

Zeidra is correct on all counts.

Reply Good karma+2 votes
Zeidra_Senester
Zeidra_Senester - - 541 comments

It is meant to be happening, at least for the last paragraph. For now, we're rebuilding our new core team, gathering help from the community will come next.
We won't release factions separated, but there will be a different kind of parallel process that will make the mod reach public beta state faster anyways. Because, it didn't die before. The team disappeared, but the mod stayed. And as for the previous public release, a public alpha thrown out by an already dying team was definitely an error. It won't happen again.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+2 votes
Guest
Guest - - 706,582 comments

I thought, Iron is dead like Lenin. Good news!

Reply Good karma Bad karma+2 votes
IronWarrior42 Creator
IronWarrior42 - - 191 comments

So i have this "Reverse gear" coding for tanks...basically just a variant coding of the entrench extension....

....anyone up for editing a Leman Russ or Predator model so it's movement orientation is reversed and the "reverse gear" code can be properly tested?

This would be nice since tanks are coded in such a way that their rear armour is less resistant to damage, not to mention being able to fire with accuracy while simultaneiously retreating or withdrawing...

Reply Good karma+3 votes
DerKommissar
DerKommissar - - 435 comments

So, tanks will actually have different armour values per side?

Reply Good karma Bad karma+2 votes
IronWarrior42 Creator
IronWarrior42 - - 191 comments

i actually have the tank reverse function coded too but while it "functions properly" in terms of weapons "aiming" and applying damage in the proper direction relative to the position of the weaker rear armour...
BUT
visually it LOOKS like a Leman Russ just driving away slowly and firing (animations) in the opposite direction of the enemy (even though damage is dealt properly and in the correct direction)

Reply Good karma+1 vote
IronWarrior42 Creator
IronWarrior42 - - 191 comments

yes, for right now im just giving them weaker rear armour; but different resistance to side armour attacks could be created quite easily as well.

Reply Good karma+1 vote
DerKommissar
DerKommissar - - 435 comments

That's good to hear, man. I can't think of any DoW 1 mods that do that.

Next we'll have systems knocked out depending on where it's hit. xD

Reply Good karma Bad karma+2 votes
Post a comment

Your comment will be anonymous unless you join the community. Or sign in with your social account:

X