tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-64424116601617961892024-03-13T19:14:22.198-07:00Faction Calculus: A Blog About Real Time Strategy GamesUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-6809802931761349032022-09-06T17:47:00.007-07:002022-09-06T17:48:05.587-07:00Balancing RTS Lethality<p><span style="background-color: white; color: #1a1a1a; font-family: "Noto Sans", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3QTG-HciCFF46K78lgjcF--E4NBaH3q0YxN-R3ZBIsZyV__6ZHF17nctmSkkRrHMig9w04J0YD1R9iqhetHJcbf-frBcALiiU_C6Te4fFgcc6I-GIYxlEonLiruTLSn9tkA9gyDvGWa2Lt7OmnqgwDWw9yoFmIOGp6g4Wfy-uzyZynHj6_i5N-IWquw/s1920/ss_2aed29415c7f96ea02b5289bf20d00a29355c5b8.1920x1080.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1080" data-original-width="1920" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3QTG-HciCFF46K78lgjcF--E4NBaH3q0YxN-R3ZBIsZyV__6ZHF17nctmSkkRrHMig9w04J0YD1R9iqhetHJcbf-frBcALiiU_C6Te4fFgcc6I-GIYxlEonLiruTLSn9tkA9gyDvGWa2Lt7OmnqgwDWw9yoFmIOGp6g4Wfy-uzyZynHj6_i5N-IWquw/s320/ss_2aed29415c7f96ea02b5289bf20d00a29355c5b8.1920x1080.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div></div></div></div><p></p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #1a1a1a; font-family: "Noto Sans", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">I hate RTSes where the units are basically bullet sponges and unlimited pop cap. It was good for Warcraft 3 because hero units and also a very limited unit pop cap. Grey Goo felt like it had bullet sponges more than its pop cap should have.</span></p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #1a1a1a; font-family: "Noto Sans", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">It feels like Company of Heroes was an opposite, but especially for infantry, lethality was very high but the squads were also limited pop cap. But it has a great multiplayer, compared to non-Starcraft RTSes.</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #1a1a1a; font-family: "Noto Sans", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">However, I don't want zero lethality. That goes back to the bullet sponge thing. Ghosts with a nuke was done right, ghosts only struck one building very lethally. There still needs to be moments like that. And maybe limit the lethality to attacks that only affect a single unit/target, Area of Effect should not be lethal unless it's balanced elsewhere.</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #1a1a1a; font-family: "Noto Sans", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">C&C Superweapons makes sense because of unlimited pop cap and also there is a clear timer for the player to react to the superweapon plus sometimes the superweapon is revealed on the map, so if you don't react, you only really have yourself to blame.</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #1a1a1a; font-family: "Noto Sans", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">As already stated, low pop cap with less lethality is good. But if there will be lethality, there should be a higher pop cap. In such cases, unit creation should ideally be multiple units, like a squad in order to mass.</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #1a1a1a; font-family: "Noto Sans", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">If debs want to make the debuff route viable, don't fall in the trap Red Alert 3 did, where freezing units with cryotechnology was OP. But also make that debuffing would allow lethalities to be very possible so that a player would have to perform two actions, debuff + attack to be lethal, whereas with no debuffs, it wouldn't be lethal. I think a debuff superweapon would work, I would say.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-35700809585821643422020-12-17T08:36:00.005-08:002020-12-17T08:36:45.684-08:00First Impressions: Star Dynasties<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-C-_94DY2BbY/X9uIYnmf21I/AAAAAAAAEBo/7TesFaoecJQ9XiTr3gmJ0L7xzO-42FCXQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1359/Decker.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="767" data-original-width="1359" height="226" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-C-_94DY2BbY/X9uIYnmf21I/AAAAAAAAEBo/7TesFaoecJQ9XiTr3gmJ0L7xzO-42FCXQCLcBGAsYHQ/w400-h226/Decker.PNG" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">This impression is of the open beta, which has bugs and is not representative of the final product. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Not an RTS by any stretch, Star Dynasties takes inspiration from Paradox games, billing itself as Crusader Kings in Space. While I couldn't get into Crusader Kings, I could get into the flow of Star Dynasties as it is more turn based and the UI is more flexible and intuitive in my opinion.</div><br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-81146376492853769912020-12-08T12:26:00.006-08:002020-12-08T12:26:51.484-08:00Asymmetry For Real Time Strategy Games<div data-reddit-rtjson="{"entityMap":{},"blocks":[{"key":"7hidq","text":"Asymmetry is more abstract than simply having heroes, so that's one reason why people don't talk about that as much. Though I suspect FG did that on purpose, but whatever.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"1k887","text":"So I'll just give examples of asymmetry from the top of my head. Yes, I have played most of these games, though some more than others.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"abadf","text":"RTS games:","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":10,"style":"BOLD"},{"offset":0,"length":10,"style":"ITALIC"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"602ld","text":"Starcraft 1+2, we all know about that. Protoss have shields. Zerg have creep. Etc.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":13,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"837vi","text":"Warcraft 3, resource gathering was different for each. The asymmetry was buried more in the details of each race, and each race had a clear counter for each unit type for the other race's units.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":10,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"9m3he","text":"Warcraft 2, the clearest asymmetry are the late game spellcasters between the two races. Otherwise fairly the same.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":10,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"bp3q3","text":"Dune 2 is the same, factions are the same except for the 3 unique units for each faction.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":6,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"520sg","text":"Tiberian Sun (Command and Conquer 2), sort of the same thing, mostly the same in the beginning, but then branches out differently to each specialty for GDI's armor and Nod's stealth. Nod cyborg technology in particular gave a cross between infantry and vehicular endurance, and was countered by EMPs. The asymmetry was basically conventional versus unconventional weaponry.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":36,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"4ru5n","text":"Command and Conquer 3 continues GDI armor conventional and Nod stealth unconventional, but the alien Scrin offers asymmetry by having a flying construction unit and mind control units.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":21,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"are7j","text":"Red Alert 2, Allies have chrono technology (teleportation), Soviets have iron curtain tech (invincibility), Yuri has mind control. Other different technologies like Allies are close enough to their counterparts to not be too assymetrical, but it was still a nice touch (for example, a Prism Tower and Tesla Coil are charged differently but still have the same result, a beam of something towards an enemy). ","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":11,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"ahct8","text":"Red Alert 3, Allies have cryo tech (freezing), Soviets have armor, Empire had a different construction mechanic entirely. Other asymmetry is more in the details.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":11,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"b5gjt","text":"Command and Conquer Generals have USA with lots and lots of drones that accompany units for support repair and fire and helicopters for resources, China with propaganda, nuclear radiation, and hacking (resources), GLA with chemical warfare, suicide units, and tunnel networks and quickly rebuildable structures but no air units.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":28,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"biq2l","text":"Grey Goo, the Grey Goo faction basically reproduces. The Mother Goo/constructor's resources is the same as its health and they can eat enemy units. Beta have hard points they can use as defenses and uses hubs to build bases. Humans have teleportation and power conduits that give them centralized bases. The Shroud can build anywhere unlike other factions but only have slow extraction of resources unlike the harvesters of the other factions but cannot auto produce units like other factions.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":8,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"29fhq","text":"Universe At War, each faction plays almost completely differently: Hierarchy has massive crawlers that function as the faction's structures and could crush other units, Novus uses a network to teleport around the map, Masari could change its entire faction into Light mode (attack) or Dark mode (defense) and each mode completely changes the faction's gameplay","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":15,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"93ge2","text":"Age of Mythology, there are five cultures, Greeks acquire worship by villagers assigned to temples, Egyptians acquire worship through monuments and have healer units, Norse have two resource gatherers and generic heroes that can be produced en masse and gain worship by killing enemies, Atlantean villagers do not need to return to a building to increase resources and can upgrade their normal soldiers to hero units and their town centers acquire worship, Chinese resource gatherers can drop off all resources at a single site and have gardens that gain all resources passively and have only one infantry unit (with all other units being archers) and the only culture with amphibious units.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":16,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"7j5up","text":"Age of Empires have a lot of civilizations that are different details such as unique units and buildings and statistics, but there are commonalities. 3's Asian Dynasties civilizations have Consulates that receive shipments. 3's WarChief civilizations share canoes.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":14,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"6q051","text":"Dawn of War has 10 full factions. There is no clear asymmetry with just the mechanics, however the feel of each faction is definitely different.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":11,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"egg53","text":"Company of Heroes have different progression for Allies versus Axis. Armored and specialized Axis has three phases while versatile Allies usually plop a Barracks then Motor Pool.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":17,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"6k4ih","text":"Warrior Kings starts you off as a neutral faction. But by choosing to build a Church, you pledge yourself to the Imperials, or if you build a Maypole, pledge for Pagans, or if do the neutral route in the middle with a Guildhall for the Renaissance faction. And you can have a part Imperial and part Renaissance mix OR a part Pagan and part Renaissance mix, but no Imperial-Pagan mixing. The asymmetry here is that Renaissance is for sieges and heavy upgrades, Imperials holy units can exorcise demons and call upon Acts of God, equivalent to superweapons , and Pagans can swarm with demons and other massed cheap units.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":13,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"cjnls","text":"Other games: ","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":13,"style":"BOLD"},{"offset":0,"length":13,"style":"ITALIC"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"8po0i","text":"Civilization, each civilization is different in mostly statistics, but multiple victory conditions I believe offer the most asymmetry in a Civ game. There is a domination victory, cultural victory, religious victory, science victory, etc. So asymmetry is not limited only to factions.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":12,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"cs3vt","text":"Conquest of Elysium and Dominions series from Ilwinter Games have many, many factions for their strategy games that are almost completely asymmetric. They are balanced by making sure every unit has at least one hard counter *somewhere* in another race, not necessarily all races.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":19,"style":"BOLD"},{"offset":24,"length":16,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"5d7u","text":"Endless series seems to master faction asymmetry in the 4X space. Each have different goals.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":14,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"ft07e","text":"Dune board game factions had cards that had different effects on different factions, different victory conditions, and so on but have the same core gameplay.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":15,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"8uoik","text":"Cthulhu Wars board game is the same, different victory conditions and yet even with same core gameplay, the factions play out very differently. ","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":23,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"8th7d","text":"ROOT board game have completely different game mechanics for each player almost entirely. Some factions can't even transverse on the forests and have to be limited to the roads. Each player have totally different goals to win.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":15,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"do5gb","text":"Among Us and other Mafia/Traitor games, there is an asymmetry between the Crewmates and Impostor. Both have almost totally different mechanics and tools, from doing tasks versus sabotages and killing. In other Traitor games like Salem, each player can have completely different roles and thus tools to win.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":38,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"f714l","text":"From that we get types of asymmetry:","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"7bhdg","text":"Mechanical asymmetry - Games with players and factions that have completely different game mechanics from each other are probably my favorite. ","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":20,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"60o41","text":"Economic asymmetry - Players and factions that utilize the same resources differently and gather those resources differently. Age of Mythology shines in this. ","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":18,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"c5vop","text":"Movement asymmetry - Factions that utilize different locomotions. For example, a faction may have air units and another has naval units but none for other factions. Another faction may have hover for their vehicles, making them able to cross water, instead of tracks. Factions that can teleport versus those that have no teleport is another example.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":18,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"8t598","text":"Weapons asymmetry - Players with specializations on different weapon types. For example, a melee heavy faction versus ranged faction. A siege faction versus a defensive faction. And weapon effects, too, for example, a piercing railgun that hits multiple enemies in a line versus a poison cloud that hits multiple enemies in a circle. You can have the same unit types but giving each a different weapon effect changes the battlefield completely.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":17,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"99ee9","text":"Upgrades and technology asymmetry - Rare to have alone because it is not so impactful visually, but you can have the exact same units and everything but with different focuses on upgrades, such as more attack or more defense. ","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":33,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"3m1qs","text":"Unit type asymmetry - Sort of related to weapons asymmetry but more deliberate and wider. For example, an infantry heavy faction versus a vehicle heavy faction. It could even take the form of a faction with no heroes versus a faction with heroes. ","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":19,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"58egf","text":"Base Building asymmetry - This can take on the form of things like mobile structures like in Starcraft, limited construction areas like creep, or even different construction mechanics like Empire of the Sun nanoconstructors versus the traditional MCV of Allies and Soviets or a hub system versus a network system in Gray Goo.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":23,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"fb0in","text":"Objectives asymmetry - As mentioned, Endless and Civilization has different victories, Among Us crew and imps have different goals. This is often paired with mechanical asymmetry but not always. Because of different victory conditions, players play differently.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":20,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"csqtk","text":"Progression asymmetry - This is often tied to build orders. Company of Heroes has Allies with fairly straightforward progression, whilst Axis have three phases of progression. So mixing up things is an asymmetry, for example, a faction may get light vehicles before they get infantry, or aircraft before they get tanks. Rocketeer infantry/jetpack infantry rush is an example for Red Alert 2/TibSun for the latter. This is only progression and not unit type, for example, you can have two factions with the same exact units but different progressions, forcing a different gameplay.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":21,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"2phac","text":"Feeling asymmetry - You can have no mechanical asymmetry and have the same core gameplay mechanics but still a different feeling for each race by just having different stats. For example, heavily armored faction versus a stealthy hit and run faction are often popular archetypes. Or a melee heavy faction versus a ranged heavy faction. Same mechanics, different stats, different feels.","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":17,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"3gl85","text":"Which asymmetry do you like? Which asymmetry do you not like?","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"1v55a","text":"","type":"unstyled","depth":0,"inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}}]}"><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="bb3e9d_initial-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="bb3e9d_initial-0-0"><span data-offset-key="bb3e9d_initial-0-0">Asymmetry is more abstract than simply having heroes, so that's one reason why people don't talk about that as much. </span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="bb3e9d_initial-0-0"><span data-offset-key="bb3e9d_initial-0-0"><br /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="9km40-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="9km40-0-0"><span data-offset-key="9km40-0-0">So I'll just give examples of asymmetry from the top of my head. Yes, I have played most of these games, though some more than others.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="evn1e-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="evn1e-0-0"><span data-offset-key="evn1e-0-0" style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">RTS games:</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="dsdjf-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="dsdjf-0-0"><span data-offset-key="dsdjf-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Starcraft 1+2</span><span data-offset-key="dsdjf-0-1">, we all know about that. Protoss have shields. Zerg have creep. Etc.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="as4l7-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="as4l7-0-0"><span data-offset-key="as4l7-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Warcraft 3</span><span data-offset-key="as4l7-0-1">, resource gathering was different for each. The asymmetry was buried more in the details of each race, and each race had a clear counter for each unit type for the other race's units.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="dob53-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="dob53-0-0"><span data-offset-key="dob53-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Warcraft 2</span><span data-offset-key="dob53-0-1">, the clearest asymmetry are the late game spellcasters between the two races. Otherwise fairly the same.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="9opqc-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="9opqc-0-0"><span data-offset-key="9opqc-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Dune 2</span><span data-offset-key="9opqc-0-1"> is the same, factions are the same except for the 3 unique units for each faction.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="mlp9-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="mlp9-0-0"><span data-offset-key="mlp9-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Tiberian Sun (Command and Conquer 2)</span><span data-offset-key="mlp9-0-1">, sort of the same thing, mostly the same in the beginning, but then branches out differently to each specialty for GDI's armor and Nod's stealth. Nod cyborg technology in particular gave a cross between infantry and vehicular endurance, and was countered by EMPs. The asymmetry was basically conventional versus unconventional weaponry.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="4uf03-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="4uf03-0-0"><span data-offset-key="4uf03-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Command and Conquer 3</span><span data-offset-key="4uf03-0-1"> continues GDI armor conventional and Nod stealth unconventional, but the alien Scrin offers asymmetry by having a flying construction unit and mind control units.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="3p70a-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="3p70a-0-0"><span data-offset-key="3p70a-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Red Alert 2</span><span data-offset-key="3p70a-0-1">, Allies have chrono technology (teleportation), Soviets have iron curtain tech (invincibility), Yuri has mind control. Other different technologies like Allies are close enough to their counterparts to not be too assymetrical, but it was still a nice touch (for example, a Prism Tower and Tesla Coil are charged differently but still have the same result, a beam of something towards an enemy). </span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="7of2i-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="7of2i-0-0"><span data-offset-key="7of2i-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Red Alert 3</span><span data-offset-key="7of2i-0-1">, Allies have cryo tech (freezing), Soviets have armor, Empire had a different construction mechanic entirely. Other asymmetry is more in the details.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="a2ubg-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="a2ubg-0-0"><span data-offset-key="a2ubg-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Command and Conquer Generals</span><span data-offset-key="a2ubg-0-1"> have USA with lots and lots of drones that accompany units for support repair and fire and helicopters for resources, China with propaganda, nuclear radiation, and hacking (resources), GLA with chemical warfare, suicide units, and tunnel networks and quickly rebuildable structures but no air units.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="cf1lu-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="cf1lu-0-0"><span data-offset-key="cf1lu-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Grey Goo</span><span data-offset-key="cf1lu-0-1">, the Grey Goo faction basically reproduces. The Mother Goo/constructor's resources is the same as its health and they can eat enemy units. Beta have hard points they can use as defenses and uses hubs to build bases. Humans have teleportation and power conduits that give them centralized bases. The Shroud can build anywhere unlike other factions but only have slow extraction of resources unlike the harvesters of the other factions but cannot auto produce units like other factions.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="e2o14-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="e2o14-0-0"><span data-offset-key="e2o14-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Universe At War</span><span data-offset-key="e2o14-0-1">, each faction plays almost completely differently: Hierarchy has massive crawlers that function as the faction's structures and could crush other units, Novus uses a network to teleport around the map, Masari could change its entire faction into Light mode (attack) or Dark mode (defense) and each mode completely changes the faction's gameplay</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="3mgma-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="3mgma-0-0"><span data-offset-key="3mgma-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Age of Mythology</span><span data-offset-key="3mgma-0-1">, there are five cultures, Greeks acquire worship by villagers assigned to temples, Egyptians acquire worship through monuments and have healer units, Norse have two resource gatherers and generic heroes that can be produced en masse and gain worship by killing enemies, Atlantean villagers do not need to return to a building to increase resources and can upgrade their normal soldiers to hero units and their town centers acquire worship, Chinese resource gatherers can drop off all resources at a single site and have gardens that gain all resources passively and have only one infantry unit (with all other units being archers) and the only culture with amphibious units.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="9di6c-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="9di6c-0-0"><span data-offset-key="9di6c-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Age of Empires</span><span data-offset-key="9di6c-0-1"> have a lot of civilizations that are different details such as unique units and buildings and statistics, but there are commonalities. 3's Asian Dynasties civilizations have Consulates that receive shipments. 3's WarChief civilizations share canoes.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="6ij1v-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="6ij1v-0-0"><span data-offset-key="6ij1v-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Dawn of War</span><span data-offset-key="6ij1v-0-1"> has 10 full factions. There is no clear asymmetry with just the mechanics, however the feel of each faction is definitely different.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="9l0ch-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="9l0ch-0-0"><span data-offset-key="9l0ch-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Company of Heroes</span><span data-offset-key="9l0ch-0-1"> have different progression for Allies versus Axis. Armored and specialized Axis has three phases while versatile Allies usually plop a Barracks then Motor Pool.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="1np2s-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="1np2s-0-0"><span data-offset-key="1np2s-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Warrior Kings</span><span data-offset-key="1np2s-0-1"> starts you off as a neutral faction. But by choosing to build a Church, you pledge yourself to the Imperials, or if you build a Maypole, pledge for Pagans, or if do the neutral route in the middle with a Guildhall for the Renaissance faction. And you can have a part Imperial and part Renaissance mix OR a part Pagan and part Renaissance mix, but no Imperial-Pagan mixing. The asymmetry here is that Renaissance is for sieges and heavy upgrades, Imperials holy units can exorcise demons and call upon Acts of God, equivalent to superweapons , and Pagans can swarm with demons and other massed cheap units.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="4a65f-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="4a65f-0-0"><span data-offset-key="4a65f-0-0" style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">Other games: </span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="ctpke-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="ctpke-0-0"><span data-offset-key="ctpke-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Civilization</span><span data-offset-key="ctpke-0-1">, each civilization is different in mostly statistics, but multiple victory conditions I believe offer the most asymmetry in a Civ game. There is a domination victory, cultural victory, religious victory, science victory, etc. So asymmetry is not limited only to factions.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="1vrrd-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="1vrrd-0-0"><span data-offset-key="1vrrd-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Conquest of Elysium</span><span data-offset-key="1vrrd-0-1"> and </span><span data-offset-key="1vrrd-0-2" style="font-weight: bold;">Dominions series</span><span data-offset-key="1vrrd-0-3"> from Ilwinter Games have many, many factions for their strategy games that are almost completely asymmetric. They are balanced by making sure every unit has at least one hard counter *somewhere* in another race, not necessarily all races.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="88ip0-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="88ip0-0-0"><span data-offset-key="88ip0-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Endless series</span><span data-offset-key="88ip0-0-1"> seems to master faction asymmetry in the 4X space. Each have different goals.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="3p4u-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="3p4u-0-0"><span data-offset-key="3p4u-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Dune board game</span><span data-offset-key="3p4u-0-1"> factions had cards that had different effects on different factions, different victory conditions, and so on but have the same core gameplay.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="4bq5k-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="4bq5k-0-0"><span data-offset-key="4bq5k-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Cthulhu Wars board game</span><span data-offset-key="4bq5k-0-1"> is the same, different victory conditions and yet even with same core gameplay, the factions play out very differently. </span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="5qchn-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="5qchn-0-0"><span data-offset-key="5qchn-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">ROOT board game</span><span data-offset-key="5qchn-0-1"> have completely different game mechanics for each player almost entirely. Some factions can't even transverse on the forests and have to be limited to the roads. Each player have totally different goals to win.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="3te2g-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="3te2g-0-0"><span data-offset-key="3te2g-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Among Us and other Mafia/Traitor games</span><span data-offset-key="3te2g-0-1">, there is an asymmetry between the Crewmates and Impostor. Both have almost totally different mechanics and tools, from doing tasks versus sabotages and killing. In other Traitor games like Salem, each player can have completely different roles and thus tools to win.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="97qr1-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="97qr1-0-0"><span data-offset-key="97qr1-0-0">From that we get types of asymmetry:</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="chfum-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="chfum-0-0"><span data-offset-key="chfum-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Mechanical asymmetry</span><span data-offset-key="chfum-0-1"> - Games with players and factions that have completely different game mechanics from each other are probably my favorite. </span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="5qgkp-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="5qgkp-0-0"><span data-offset-key="5qgkp-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Economic asymmetry</span><span data-offset-key="5qgkp-0-1"> - Players and factions that utilize the same resources differently and gather those resources differently. Age of Mythology shines in this. </span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="18uc1-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="18uc1-0-0"><span data-offset-key="18uc1-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Movement asymmetry</span><span data-offset-key="18uc1-0-1"> - Factions that utilize different locomotions. For example, a faction may have air units and another has naval units but none for other factions. Another faction may have hover for their vehicles, making them able to cross water, instead of tracks. Factions that can teleport versus those that have no teleport is another example.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="bpu57-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="bpu57-0-0"><span data-offset-key="bpu57-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Weapons asymmetry</span><span data-offset-key="bpu57-0-1"> - Players with specializations on different weapon types. For example, a melee heavy faction versus ranged faction. A siege faction versus a defensive faction. And weapon effects, too, for example, a piercing railgun that hits multiple enemies in a line versus a poison cloud that hits multiple enemies in a circle. You can have the same unit types but giving each a different weapon effect changes the battlefield completely.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="9uv4s-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="9uv4s-0-0"><span data-offset-key="9uv4s-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Upgrades and technology asymmetry</span><span data-offset-key="9uv4s-0-1"> - Rare to have alone because it is not so impactful visually, but you can have the exact same units and everything but with different focuses on upgrades, such as more attack or more defense. </span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="anncf-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="anncf-0-0"><span data-offset-key="anncf-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Unit type asymmetry</span><span data-offset-key="anncf-0-1"> - Sort of related to weapons asymmetry but more deliberate and wider. For example, an infantry heavy faction versus a vehicle heavy faction. It could even take the form of a faction with no heroes versus a faction with heroes. </span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="2e35d-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="2e35d-0-0"><span data-offset-key="2e35d-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Base Building asymmetry</span><span data-offset-key="2e35d-0-1"> - This can take on the form of things like mobile structures like in Starcraft, limited construction areas like creep, or even different construction mechanics like Empire of the Sun nanoconstructors versus the traditional MCV of Allies and Soviets or a hub system versus a network system in Gray Goo.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="7t77b-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="7t77b-0-0"><span data-offset-key="7t77b-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Objectives asymmetry</span><span data-offset-key="7t77b-0-1"> - As mentioned, Endless and Civilization has different victories, Among Us crew and imps have different goals. This is often paired with mechanical asymmetry but not always. Because of different victory conditions, players play differently.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="99c56-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="99c56-0-0"><span data-offset-key="99c56-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Progression asymmetry</span><span data-offset-key="99c56-0-1"> - This is often tied to build orders. Company of Heroes has Allies with fairly straightforward progression, whilst Axis have three phases of progression. So mixing up things is an asymmetry, for example, a faction may get light vehicles before they get infantry, or aircraft before they get tanks. Rocketeer infantry/jetpack infantry rush is an example for Red Alert 2/TibSun for the latter. This is only progression and not unit type, for example, you can have two factions with the same exact units but different progressions, forcing a different gameplay.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="daigv-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="daigv-0-0"><span data-offset-key="daigv-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Feeling asymmetry</span><span data-offset-key="daigv-0-1"> - You can have no mechanical asymmetry and have the same core gameplay mechanics but still a different feeling for each race by just having different stats. For example, heavily armored faction versus a stealthy hit and run faction are often popular archetypes. Or a melee heavy faction versus a ranged heavy faction. Same mechanics, different stats, different feels.</span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="daigv-0-0"><span data-offset-key="daigv-0-1"><b>Map asymmetry</b> - Or you can have no faction asymmetry whatsoever, and just have the map be asymmetrical. For example, a map with a different resource for each side.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="44p43-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="44p43-0-0"><span data-offset-key="44p43-0-0">Which asymmetry do you like? Which asymmetry do you not like?</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bb3e9d" data-offset-key="5hvp-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="5hvp-0-0"><span data-offset-key="5hvp-0-0"></span></div></div></div><p> </p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-49848263407293700462020-12-03T10:08:00.001-08:002020-12-03T10:08:41.304-08:00First Impressions: Rebel, Inc.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-0jsxDjEocdU/X8kpqPeY_AI/AAAAAAAAEAY/ZRnXW5T9rHMkdLN4CRdfw6mnFbJ5PB-4gCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/1607018917490563-0.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">
<img border="0" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-0jsxDjEocdU/X8kpqPeY_AI/AAAAAAAAEAY/ZRnXW5T9rHMkdLN4CRdfw6mnFbJ5PB-4gCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/1607018917490563-0.png" width="400">
</a>
</div><div>Rebel, Inc is a mobile real time strategy game loosely based on the endless wars in the Middle East. It is very reminiscent of Plague, Inc. Not sure if they are made by the same company. Anywho, it offers a far more degree of control than Plague, Inc.</div><div><br></div><div>You pick a leader, which has advantages, and a headquarters, and try to stabilize the region by upgrading the civilian and government. You fight off insurgents with military that try to destabilize it. </div><div><br></div><div>The map is divided into sections or zones. Each zone is stabilized separately. A lot of upgrades are not instant. Some emanate from your headquarters outward to adjacent zones, eventually affecting other zones. So a road upgrade would first improve your roads at the headquarters, then the zones next to the headquarters, then the next ones, until all zones are upgraded. </div><div><br></div><div>You have to manage corruption and inflation as well, which increases for each upgrade you buy. Corruption increases because of inefficiencies. Inflation increases when you rapidly buy upgrades rapidly that are related to each other. I like the balancing act this gives. </div><div><br></div><div>Combat is simply drag and drop the military to a hostile area. Reinforcements are done by dropping military in adjacent areas. Upgrades unlock other weapons such as airstrikes and defenses such as garrisons. Insurgents must be cornered as they can flee to adjacent zones. </div><div><br></div><div>All in all, good balance of management and light combat, great for mobile.</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-27041280131742380372020-11-28T10:15:00.007-08:002020-11-28T10:15:55.841-08:00Designing A Co-op RTS<div data-reddit-rtjson="{"entityMap":{},"blocks":[{"key":"6n27k","text":"So what would co-op probably look like? What ideas are there?","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"b0cqj","text":"I like SC2's co-op for the short time I spent in it, I definitely liked the variety of commanders. It felt more relaxing. Kinda like a Super Smash Bros. of RTS. According to reports, co-op is the most widely played mode in SC2.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"3uhmt","text":"One thing I feel like is being missed, though, I don't see too much synergy between players, at least to its potential. Or maybe it's just the commanders I've played.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"21qbn","text":"All-In-All, What Is The Point Of Co-op, Anyways?:","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":48,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"3qvfg","text":"The thing about co-op is that there are other players that, for good or for ill, will affect you. If one messes up, it is your job to shoulder the team, so to speak. This can simply mean you are just in the same team fulfilling the same goal, destroy everyone else, but that seems hollow to just limit co-op to your normal RTS multiplayer alliance. If you want to be independent and not be disturbed by people in your game playing, then play multiplayer. So co-op is made to mess around with friends or whatever.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"83d9b","text":"I'm not saying all these ideas are good or viable, just that they exist.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":72,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"5u2kp","text":"Allowing Others To Build On Your Land:","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":38,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"6h5kt","text":"This I think is the very least most team RTSes see coop, not very far from just being on the same team and not shooting each other in multiplayer. This does help in survival, or such as squirreling away a construction or worker unit in your allied base just in case your base is destroyed.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"b7icf","text":"Map Marking, Notifications, Voice Chat, and Communications:","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":58,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"7hvn7","text":"Cooperation is based on communication. Marking on maps what your intents are to attack or to move or whatever seems like another floor for a co-op game.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"7n4jb","text":"Also notifications are very important, I think, to make a successful coop RTS. Most coop games have the players nearby, or other players will not reach you.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"a5bst","text":"An in-game voice chat is probably necessary. I actually hate voice chat, tbh, but I know I would use it for games of Call of Duty with friends.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"e20vq","text":"Pre-Planning Phase:","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":19,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"2rd5u","text":"There are co-op games with pre-planning phases. There was a game like PayDay 2 that did it well, can't remember the name of it, but it had the tools necessary to actually draw out the plan. And the maps were randomly generated, so planning was a must. The plan was drawn on the minimap equivalent during the game.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"bnfsi","text":"Classes as Sub-Factions:","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":24,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"14jqr","text":"Command and Conquer 4 had the idea of classes for each co-op commander, divided into defense (infantry and base defenses), offense (tanks), and support (air and support powers). Other than it being a horrible game, I saw where they were going at.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"dqu1s","text":"They are basically very specialized sub-factions/races.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"7tdo9","text":"Not sure if it should reflect FPS and MOBA game classes. Though I think it's fun to make up classes in my mind at least. A sniper RTS class would have artillery and superweapon focus. And an economy class handles economy, harvesting, etc. A healer class would have the medics and repairers.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"2793h","text":"The new co-op Dwarfheim RTS has classes, but I don't know much about them. They are Warrior, Builder, and Miner, and Miner sounds like the economic class I threw out there.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"414bs","text":"More Explicit Reviving and Supplying Of Other Players:","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":54,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"16g0","text":"To look at other games that are not RTS, I liked how Left 4 Dead did co-op. You are able to easily heal a fellow player. You can eventually \"resurrect\" a player by finding them if the other players don't die.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"5q7nk","text":"In Killing Floor, not only are there healers, but you can get explosives and bombs from the ammo guy.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"5m7iq","text":"What if there was a mechanic to resurrect your fellow player?","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"79do6","text":"Unit and Resource Exchange:","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":27,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"1n4o8","text":"How about a unit exchange mechanic? Where you can trade or lend or borrow units from your fellow player? Instead of just shooting off credits or resources to your fellow for nothing (though the option could be good), you can get something back for your trouble.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"1v0hm","text":"I do envision it being more packs of units being exchanged, rather than just a single unit everytime. So a squad, battalion, or whatever. Maybe there could be an in-game specific structure they can be exchanged in.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"biq4n","text":"Letting Other Players Command or Lead (Some of) your Units or Structures (Sometimes or Partially):","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":98,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"a11pk","text":"Instead of necessarily doing a unit exchange, this can be done as well. Maybe there is a command you can use to toggle your own units that it can be used by an allied player, and an indicator and notification will notify your ally that they can use them. Then you can take back control by toggling out or the player can toggle out himself as well.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"2sr2e","text":"Or one can do partial control. I envision this is mostly for structures, but things like having allied harvesters drop at your refineries will add resources to their pile, and could charge them a fee for using your structures or something. Or do it for free like usual, but harvesting can take up space from other harvesters.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"dh0kk","text":"Special Units or Technology When You Have Certain Combinations of Factions/Classes:","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[{"offset":0,"length":83,"style":"BOLD"}],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"141kr","text":"I always loved the CnC mechanic where you capture the other enemy's tech, and then you can build your own units from other factions. Even better, the spy system in the Red Alert games lets you get a spy in the tech labs, and you get a super special unit that is a chimera of the factions. For example, in Red Alert 2, your Allied spy getting to an Allied Battle Lab will give you Chrono Commandos, a teleporting Navy Seal. Going to a Soviet lab will give you a Chrono Ivan, which is a teleporting explosives lobber. Going to a Yuri lab would give you Psi Commandos, Navy Seals with a mind control device. This idea gets even crazier in mods, like Mental Omega.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"eo3t2","text":"With co-op, one could have access to a unit that only those classes or factions share when they play together.","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}},{"key":"fiqve","text":"Edit: Added a couple of points","type":"unstyled","inlineStyleRanges":[],"entityRanges":[],"data":{}}]}"><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="betj9-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="betj9-0-0"><span data-offset-key="betj9-0-0">So what would co-op probably look like? What ideas are there?</span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="betj9-0-0"><span data-offset-key="betj9-0-0"><br /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="abmgt-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="abmgt-0-0"><span data-offset-key="abmgt-0-0">I like SC2's co-op for the short time I spent in it, I definitely liked the variety of commanders. It felt more relaxing. Kinda like a Super Smash Bros. of RTS. According to reports, co-op is the most widely played mode in SC2.</span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="abmgt-0-0"><span data-offset-key="abmgt-0-0"><br /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="4b4dg-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="4b4dg-0-0"><span data-offset-key="4b4dg-0-0">One thing I feel like is being missed, though, I don't see too much synergy between players, at least to its potential. Or maybe it's just the commanders I've played.</span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="4b4dg-0-0"><span data-offset-key="4b4dg-0-0"><br /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="ng3h-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="ng3h-0-0"><span data-offset-key="ng3h-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">All-In-All, What Is The Point Of Co-op, Anyways?</span><span data-offset-key="ng3h-0-1">:</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="d3rot-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="d3rot-0-0"><span data-offset-key="d3rot-0-0">The thing about co-op is that there are other players that, for good or for ill, will affect you. If one messes up, it is your job to shoulder the team, so to speak. This can simply mean you are just in the same team fulfilling the same goal, destroy everyone else, but that seems hollow to just limit co-op to your normal RTS multiplayer alliance. If you want to be independent and not be disturbed by people in your game playing, then play multiplayer. So co-op is made to mess around with friends or whatever.</span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="d3rot-0-0"><span data-offset-key="d3rot-0-0"><br /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="4nc47-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="4nc47-0-0"><span data-offset-key="4nc47-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">I'm not saying all these ideas are good or viable, just that they exist.</span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="4nc47-0-0"><span data-offset-key="4nc47-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="94edi-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="94edi-0-0"><span data-offset-key="94edi-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Allowing Others To Build On Your Land:</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="8flno-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="8flno-0-0"><span data-offset-key="8flno-0-0">This I think is the very least most team RTSes see coop, not very far from just being on the same team and not shooting each other in multiplayer. This does help in survival, or such as squirreling away a construction or worker unit in your allied base just in case your base is destroyed.</span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="8flno-0-0"><span data-offset-key="8flno-0-0"><br /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="ch185-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="ch185-0-0"><span data-offset-key="ch185-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Map Marking, Notifications, Voice Chat, and Communications</span><span data-offset-key="ch185-0-1">:</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="bi6vp-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="bi6vp-0-0"><span data-offset-key="bi6vp-0-0">Cooperation is based on communication. Marking on maps what your intents are to attack or to move or whatever seems like another floor for a co-op game.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="23g-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="23g-0-0"><span data-offset-key="23g-0-0">Also notifications are very important, I think, to make a successful coop RTS. Most coop games have the players nearby, or other players will not reach you.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="2o25d-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="2o25d-0-0"><span data-offset-key="2o25d-0-0">An in-game voice chat is probably necessary. I actually hate voice chat, tbh, but I know I would use it for games of Call of Duty with friends.</span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="2o25d-0-0"><span data-offset-key="2o25d-0-0"><br /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="69oc4-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="69oc4-0-0"><span data-offset-key="69oc4-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Pre-Planning Phase:</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="3bpdr-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="3bpdr-0-0"><span data-offset-key="3bpdr-0-0">There are co-op games with pre-planning phases. There was a game like PayDay 2 that did it well, can't remember the name of it, but it had the tools necessary to actually draw out the plan. And the maps were randomly generated, so planning was a must. The plan was drawn on the minimap equivalent during the game.</span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="3bpdr-0-0"><span data-offset-key="3bpdr-0-0"><br /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="2o072-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="2o072-0-0"><span data-offset-key="2o072-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Classes as Sub-Factions:</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="afbib-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="afbib-0-0"><span data-offset-key="afbib-0-0">Command and Conquer 4 had the idea of classes for each co-op commander, divided into defense (infantry and base defenses), offense (tanks), and support (air and support powers). Other than it being a horrible game, I saw where they were going at.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="8j434-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="8j434-0-0"><span data-offset-key="8j434-0-0">They are basically very specialized sub-factions/races.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="f70n5-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="f70n5-0-0"><span data-offset-key="f70n5-0-0">Not sure if it should reflect FPS and MOBA game classes. Though I think it's fun to make up classes in my mind at least. A sniper RTS class would have artillery and superweapon focus. And an economy class handles economy, harvesting, etc. A healer class would have the medics and repairers.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="8vv6n-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="8vv6n-0-0"><span data-offset-key="8vv6n-0-0">The new co-op Dwarfheim RTS has classes, but I don't know much about them. They are Warrior, Builder, and Miner, and Miner sounds like the economic class I threw out there.</span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="8vv6n-0-0"><span data-offset-key="8vv6n-0-0"><br /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="fii9j-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="fii9j-0-0"><span data-offset-key="fii9j-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">More Explicit Reviving and Supplying Of Other Players:</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="3dmgc-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="3dmgc-0-0"><span data-offset-key="3dmgc-0-0">To look at other games that are not RTS, I liked how Left 4 Dead did co-op. You are able to easily heal a fellow player. You can eventually "resurrect" a player by finding them if the other players don't die.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="d8lf6-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="d8lf6-0-0"><span data-offset-key="d8lf6-0-0">In Killing Floor, not only are there healers, but you can get explosives and bombs from the ammo guy.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="6o09r-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="6o09r-0-0"><span data-offset-key="6o09r-0-0">What if there was a mechanic to resurrect your fellow player?</span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="6o09r-0-0"><span data-offset-key="6o09r-0-0"><br /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="ataju-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="ataju-0-0"><span data-offset-key="ataju-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Unit and Resource Exchange:</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="2mh97-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="2mh97-0-0"><span data-offset-key="2mh97-0-0">How about a unit exchange mechanic? Where you can trade or lend or borrow units from your fellow player? Instead of just shooting off credits or resources to your fellow for nothing (though the option could be good), you can get something back for your trouble.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="46nm3-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="46nm3-0-0"><span data-offset-key="46nm3-0-0">I do envision it being more packs of units being exchanged, rather than just a single unit everytime. So a squad, battalion, or whatever. Maybe there could be an in-game specific structure they can be exchanged in.</span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="46nm3-0-0"><span data-offset-key="46nm3-0-0"><br /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="8h123-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="8h123-0-0"><span data-offset-key="8h123-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Letting Other Players Command or Lead (Some of) your Units or Structures (Sometimes or Partially):</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="d3tk6-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="d3tk6-0-0"><span data-offset-key="d3tk6-0-0">Instead of necessarily doing a unit exchange, this can be done as well. Maybe there is a command you can use to toggle your own units that it can be used by an allied player, and an indicator and notification will notify your ally that they can use them. Then you can take back control by toggling out or the player can toggle out himself as well.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="92aun-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="92aun-0-0"><span data-offset-key="92aun-0-0">Or one can do partial control. I envision this is mostly for structures, but things like having allied harvesters drop at your refineries will add resources to their pile, and could charge them a fee for using your structures or something. Or do it for free like usual, but harvesting can take up space from other harvesters.</span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="92aun-0-0"><span data-offset-key="92aun-0-0"><br /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="a425d-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="a425d-0-0"><span data-offset-key="a425d-0-0" style="font-weight: bold;">Special Units or Technology When You Have Certain Combinations of Factions/Classes:</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="fr61f-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="fr61f-0-0"><span data-offset-key="fr61f-0-0">I always loved the CnC mechanic where you capture the other enemy's tech, and then you can build your own units from other factions. Even better, the spy system in the Red Alert games lets you get a spy in the tech labs, and you get a super special unit that is a chimera of the factions. For example, in Red Alert 2, your Allied spy getting to an Allied Battle Lab will give you Chrono Commandos, a teleporting Navy Seal. Going to a Soviet lab will give you a Chrono Ivan, which is a teleporting explosives lobber. Going to a Yuri lab would give you Psi Commandos, Navy Seals with a mind control device. This idea gets even crazier in mods, like Mental Omega.</span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="a43adf" data-offset-key="a2uaj-0-0"><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="a2uaj-0-0"><span data-offset-key="a2uaj-0-0">With co-op, one could have access to a unit that only those classes or factions share when they play together.</span></div></div></div><p>Edit: Added a couple of points </p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-10113817604393604092020-11-17T06:28:00.005-08:002020-11-17T06:28:45.166-08:00 Individual Units or Squads or a Combo of Both?<p>In most older RTS games, you can only produce one unit at a time. The first "definitive" RTS game, Dune 2, had infantry as squads, but they weren't true squad units, because they were just a sprite/image of a squad, each sub-unit was not semi-independent.</p><p><br /></p><p>Some newer RTS games let's you produce units as squads, such as C&C3 and Dawn of War. These squads when you select one unit in a squad, you select all the other units in the squad, they act as one unit with many sub-units. Each sub-unit had their own health and their own firing and were semi-independent.</p><p><br /></p><p>Some have combinations of both. Starcraft has reactors where you can produce multiple marines at once. Of course, selecting multiple units make them in a sort of a squad. But that's not the default, of course, just that selected units sort of act like a squad. Carriers makes interceptors, so a carrier is basically like a squad unit.</p><p><br /></p><p>I would like more squad units in more RTS games. But Blizzard RTS games are not known for squad units. If Frost Giant will stick to the individual unit philosophy, and have things like reactors and carriers to augment units, my preference is to normalize making batches of individual units from the very beginning. In a real war, (lower level) units come in batches, 10 at once, 20 at once, or whatever, not just a single soldier you train every so often. So instead of just training one marine in the beginning of the game and then cycle to the next marine, 10 will pop out the first training class. It will normalize massive firefights in the beginning like a real war, instead of a battle, to me, at least.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-3739054676069028662020-11-14T05:44:00.000-08:002020-11-14T05:44:01.173-08:00 If you want to make an RTS with mass wide appeal (rather than RTS gamer only appeal), look at Age of Empires and C&C<div class="_3xX726aBn29LDbsDtzr_6E _1Ap4F5maDtT1E1YuCiaO0r D3IL3FD0RFy_mkKLPwL4" data-click-id="text" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #878a8c; font-family: IBMPlexSans, Arial, sans-serif; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 12px 0px 0px 8px; max-width: 800px; padding: 5px 16px 5px 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="_292iotee39Lmt0MkQZ2hPV RichTextJSON-root" style="border: 0px; color: #1a1a1b; font-family: "Noto Sans", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 21px; margin: 0px 0px -1px; overflow: auto; padding: 0px 0px 1px; vertical-align: baseline; word-break: break-word;"><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">(In context of the new studio Frost Giant, a studio composed of former Blizzard developers looking to make the next great RTS)</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">While it is true Starcraft has far more current players today, it is arguable that Age of Empires and C&C have a wider mass appeal among non-gamers and non-RTS gamers. Current numbers would only be useful since there are no true new releases of both series that are not remakes or remasters (or the most recent titles from them do not capture the early spirit).</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">These are just anecdotal experiences, so you can take them with a grain of salt.</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">I run a fairly okay and generic RTS page, and AoE, C&C, and SC is the order of ranking in popularity in regards to posts made on there. So that's one indication.</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">I am not a gamer (as in someone who spends half his day gaming, cause I have work and live a fairly normal life), so I meet a lot of non-gamers and non-RTS gamers (ie someone who would play, say, Call of Duty rather than a strategy game) in my circles.</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">A lot of older non-gamers I've met have played and enjoyed Age of Empires with fond memory, even though they don't play any games anymore (quite a few of them were politicians, might give you an idea what line of work I used to do) but would not touch other strategy games. A lot of the reasons they would give me is that they learned history from it. Quite a few also have played Civilization alongside it, which makes sense. But they would never touch Starcraft.</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, another trend I've seen were those who were older gamers, but not RTS gamers, again, those who would usually play something mainstream like Call of Duty rather than a strategy game. They usually gravitated to the Command and Conquer series back in the day when it was popular, particularly Red Alert 2. But not Starcraft. Some of the reasons they gave me were it was patriotic (the America versus Soviet timeline). The ones who were not into Red Alert were into Tiberian C&C's story of Kane. But they would never touch Starcraft.</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">So most normal people really like history. There's a reason why World War 2 games come out every year. Should Frost Giant's game be based on realism and history? Not necessarily, but it is to be considered that Starcraft's science fiction does go over the head of a lot of people. You can talk Marauders and Reapers and what have you and most people will look at you strange, while the AoE archers, musketeers, and knights people would immediately recognize what they would do. Red Alert 2 was a bit whacky, but soldiers with guns and tanks are fairly easy to understand. You have to learn basically a three new cultures for each race in Starcraft, Terrans are recognizable cause humans, and they have soldiers with guns and tanks. But Protoss and Zerg are basically homework if you want to learn how to play them. Of course, making it historical and realistic will limit gameplay, as well (unless you are creative). But the post is about accessibility to mass wide appeal. If a balance can be struck, then do so.</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">Those are my anecdotal experiences. It is clear to me that most Starcraft players in contrast, are RTS gamers. That's not a bad thing, don't get me wrong. I love all RTS games, as I said, I run a generic RTS game page myself. I've played almost all of them at least once, even the very obscure ones, though I keep finding even more obscure ones to this very day.</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">But one non-anecdote is how Microsoft made Age of Empires mass appeal. There was a very old article that I can't find anymore where Microsoft had every demographic do quality testing for Age of Empires. In that article, an old grandma was interviewed who tested the game, and it apparently went really well that she was able to play the campaign missions and hold off her own in a multiplayer match for at least 15 minutes before she succumbed. That's how strong the tutorials and pacing were in Age of Empires. Now, a grandma is probably not Frost Giant's target audience (and neither was her Age of Empires' audience), but can it really be said that a very old person can access Starcraft enough to be able to hold their own for a few minutes?</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0.25em; vertical-align: baseline;">So if Frost Giant just wants to target RTS gamers, which is not a bad thing at all, and create a spiritual successor to Starcraft, with esports scene and all that, then that's totally fine. That's what they are experts on. I'll definitely still play it.</p><p class="_1qeIAgB0cPwnLhDF9XSiJM" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0.8em 0px 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But if they want to reach non-gamers and non-RTS gamers, they need to look at how AoE and C&C do things, maybe not necessarily in terms of gameplay, but in terms of tutorials and accessibility (for AoE) and theming (for C&C).</p></div></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-23575146889067198382020-11-09T08:11:00.007-08:002020-11-09T08:23:52.078-08:00Many Pitfalls of Conspiracy Strategy Games: Secret Societies, Subterfuge, Traitors, Etc.<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-iXTm7vLk4pg/X6lgsecjdLI/AAAAAAAAD-4/juI40lvmfAMbtENSrg5aiOmapjt3tmkIQCLcBGAsYHQ/image.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1080" data-original-width="1920" height="180" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-iXTm7vLk4pg/X6lgsecjdLI/AAAAAAAAD-4/juI40lvmfAMbtENSrg5aiOmapjt3tmkIQCLcBGAsYHQ/image.png" width="320" /></a></div><br /><br /><p></p><p>There has been a fascination for strategy games that let you mastermind a conspiracy. Who doesn't want to be an evil puppet master behind the scenes? </p><p>However fascinating the ideas are, there are very few dedicated games for it, and those dedicated ones... arguably aren't very good.</p><h1 style="text-align: left;">Elements of Conspiracy Strategy Games</h1><p><b><i>A conspiracy strategy game usually has the following I have noticed:</i></b></p><p><b>Behind The Scenes</b> - In a conspiracy strategy game, you are often not one of the "major players" in the world stage. You are not a king, or a country, or a military commander. You are an advisor, a grandmaster, a priest, a prophet, a cult leader behind the thrones. Your goal is often to affect the major players to bow down to your will. </p><p><b>Indirect Influence</b> - To convince the "major players", you will need to convince them. One way to do this is automatically. In Civilization, a neighboring city may come over to your side because of your strong cultural influence in a number of turns. Another is to do it manually, you order agents to convince the major player, through seduction, bribes, blackmail. </p><p><b>Voting</b> - Because conspiracy games are about influence, a lot of them have voting somewhere, where it shows if your influence actually works. </p><p><b>Multiple Map Overlays</b> - Because there is something as behind the scenes, there is often at least one other map overlay. For example, in Civilization, a religious map and cultural map will show the different kinds of influences.</p><p><b>Agents</b> - Agents do things. They are spies. They are assassins. They are diplomats. They are cultists. They are information brokers. They are prophets and preachers to convert the flock. They can often do a lot of things and are not specialized.</p><p><b>Information Warfare</b> - Because conspiracy strategy games are all about subterfuge, information warfare is king. At its basic level, this would be the fog of war that conceals enemy units. </p><h2 style="text-align: left;">Examples</h2><p><b><i>What are some examples of conspiracy strategy games or strategy games with subterfuge elements?</i></b></p><p>Game of Thrones: Genesis was a failed product. It was very convoluted.You gain prestige, and the methods to get that prestige were very arcane, at best. There was a war aspect, but the subterfuge aspect confused everyone. There are so many moving parts. It seems automation would help this.</p><p>Shadow Council The Puppeteers is an okay indie strategy game. It's very click to do something, and boom, you increased influence. Yeah, very much an oversimplified spreadsheet game.</p><p>Shadows Behind The Throne suffers from your actions not having very clear effects at all. You make nobles vote to ignore the Lovecraftian army you are creating. While that sounds sort of exciting, it's not. Lots of micromanagement. </p><p>Republic: The Revolution was a really cool political RTS. You canvassed neighborhoods and got votes in order to enact a revolution in an alternate history East European country.</p><p>Left Behind: Eternal Forces was very similar to Republic: The Revolution. You prayed and converted people to your side. It was just very tedious to do that. It seems automatic preaching and conversion would have helped from the beginning. But it was a story-based game, so that could be forgiven.</p><p><a href="https://gamejolt.com/games/conspiracrat/9163" target="_blank">Conspiracrat: A Game of Secret Machinations</a> is a game of my own making. There should have been better objectives, like causing an actual war and nuclear warfare, rather than just accumulating much money and power. Ordering agents was tedious.</p><p>Offworld Trading Company was probably the best non-violent RTS I have played. The interplay between trading felt visceral. There was clear objectives and progress. Subterfuge also had clear results. An EMP bomb would disable my opponent's buildings very clearly.</p><p>Secret Government is a recent grand strategy game in the same vein. Early Access reviews show it is mostly positive. Time will tell if it actually will last the test of time.</p><p>Crusader Kings and similar Paradox games seem to be long lasting, but they are very convoluted for the average player.</p><p>The more warlike RUSE offers a solution, while combat would be a thing, give commanders more explicit information destroying abilities such as "fake armies". Many RTS games have some form of information disruption, but RUSE makes it front and center.</p><p>There was a simple Flash game, I'm not sure what it was called, but I think it was called "Third Party" or "Third Side" where you played both sides in a war and you had to balance the war so one side would not win and so you could get an endless war. Units fought automatically. You were given a random unit and you can place the unit on the left or right side, so if you place it on the left side, it will fight for the left side, and vice versa. If you balanced it long enough, a nuclear war starts and you win.</p><p>Among Us isn't strictly a strategy game, but it is a strategy game. It is a traitor game like Mafia. It's ideas on how to play an Impostor, Sabotages, and the voting system can be translated into a gameplay with multiple units.</p><h2 style="text-align: left;">Proposed Solutions</h2><div><b><i>What are some solutions to the pitfalls of conspiracy strategy games?</i></b></div><p><b>Less Micromanagement, More Macromanagement</b>: In many conspiracy strategy games, you have many agents working for you. Clicking and ordering your agents is tedious and gets overwhelming the more agents you get. We will get to more specific details how on the next points.</p><p><b>More Automation</b>: Agents are agents for a reason. They need to be independent. Have them bribe automatically. Have them infiltrate automatically. Have them assassinate automatically. And so on.</p><p>A lot of other things in conspiracy strategy games can be automated as well. We look at automating voting last.</p><p><b>Agent Specialization</b>: Another way to lessen micromanagement is to make agents specialized rather than all-around hero units with many abilities. So spies always spy, assassins always assassinate, etc. rather than have agents that can do all these.</p><p>For converter units, it is very tedious to keep clicking to convert other units, when in the end, those units are just walking resources. See converter units as harvesters rather than hero units in their own right.</p><p><b>More Strategy, Less Tactics With Planners</b>: This ties to both micro and macro as well, and even automation, but it is beyond those. Strategy means you can set an overarching goal with actual planning. Strategy games do not have planners. They really need to.</p><p>A <b>planner</b> would where you can choose objectives or goals or layouts or loadouts (whatever you need to prepare) <i><b>before the game</b></i> that every unit would know beforehand. Most planners in strategy games just consist of loadouts, such as for XCOM.</p><p>Maybe the goal is nuclear war. You choose "nuclear war" in your planner as an objective. Then all your agents would work with that plan in mind. Diplomats would automatically tell rulers to consider nuclear war. Sabotages would target nuclear silos immediately.</p><p>There should be a <b><i>planner in-game as well</i></b> so that changes to the master plan that would immediately affect everyone. If I want to switch from "nuclear war" to "make a one world government", I should just be able to do it with a button.</p><p>Real-time strategy games have always leaned towards tactics, command this building to produce this single unit, command this unit to go here, etc. A focus on strategy would make this less of a hassle. For example, switching to a "mobilized vehicle strategy" from an "infantry strategy" can be done with a button, changing all your unit production into vehicles rather than going to each factory to make vehicles and going to each barracks to stop infantry production. </p><p><b>Information Warfare Progression</b>: </p><p>There should be no or little information warfare in the beginning. Only when it is near the end should complete "plot twists" be accessible and reveal themselves. Conspiracy strategy games like to throw you to a complete subterfuge mode where everyone is a double agent.</p><p>This would be a good progression:</p><p><b><i>Start</i></b> - Everyone on the map has clear allegiances. When you send agents to convert someone, they fully convert to your side with no question.</p><p><b><i>Mid-game</i></b> - Making more fog of war, some people have unclear allegiances because multiple sides are vying for them. </p><p><b><i>End-game</i></b> - Most people are close to their end game objective (nuclear war), secret agreements and double agents can now be a thing, where some people seemed to be working for you, when they were sleeper agents. And they will be revealed as double agents and sleeper agents when they act (or close to it), rather than it being hidden the whole time so that enemies can react and don't feel too bamboozled.</p><p>A system like DEFCON where you are allowed to use some things depending on DEFCON level would probably work in some capacity, but you can design it naturally as well.</p><p><b>Make Soft Power More Impactful and Deterministic, Not Probabilistic</b>:</p><p>It is hard to show "soft power" and "indirect influence" and making them impact hard. Religious and cultural victories in Civilization are often maligned because influence mechanics are just not hard hitting. This is probabilistic and not deterministic.</p><p>Rather than, say, influence giving you a vote, have it that those you have influenced always vote like you. Or even better, they always vote according to your planned strategy.</p><p>There also needs to be a lot of UI that indicates this. For example, mind control lines like in Red Alert Yuri's Revenge clearly shows who is in control of a unit. A place getting cultural influence in Civ should have the number of turns shown when it will convert.</p><p><b>Reduce Voting In General (Or Turn It Into A Resource Rather Than A Game Stopper)</b>: </p><p>Showing influence's impact to just culminate in a single vote is anticlimatic. Often, the game pauses just for a vote so you could choose. And often, that vote doesn't do much of anything impactful, maybe just +1 Economy. Whoppee.</p><p>Instead of influencing "major powers" just to vote on some proposal, influence them to do more concrete things like pressing a nuclear button for war immediately. Or if you still want votes system of gameplay, make them vote automatically for your benefit (and <b>planner strategy</b>) without you having to click to choose (thus <b>more</b> <b>automation</b>). Turn votes into a resource and a number than something you have to pause the game for (which Shadows Behind The Throne is particularly bad at).</p><p>So if your strategy is nuclear war, agents and the influenced will always vote for it. If it's a vote for something like +1 economy for you and -1 economy for everyone, then they will always vote for +1 economy for you. Of course, there may be a subtlety here, that they would vote for themselves if it affects them if the against vote makes them get -1 economy, but for things that do not affect them, they would vote for you.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-36697365309525792382020-11-04T07:57:00.002-08:002020-11-04T07:57:20.612-08:00RTS Equivalent of A Deathmatch: Learning From FPS Games<p><b>Team Based Gameplay:</b></p><p>In FPS games, team deathmatches are very popular. In RTS games, gameplay is pretty much centered on single player campaigns, skirmishes, or 1 v1. </p><p>The thing with RTS games though is that you are controlling a team instead of being in a team. It is more akin to being a coach or a team managers. There is no team of team managers.</p><p><b>Respawning: </b></p><p>In FPS games, when you die, you usually respawn in most game modes. This lets off pressure to succeed.</p><p>RTS games do not have respawning when a player "dies". The closest would be hero units respawning in Warcraft 3, or having a builder unit like an MCV tucked away for a future base. </p><p>How this can work in an RTS game is that players (like in C&C4) or whole armies can respawn (like MOBA creeps or how Art of War did it).</p><p><b>Different Loadout: </b></p><p>In Call of Duty, you can choose which loadout you start with when you spawn and respawn. And that each loadout is more or less lethal as other loadouts.</p><p>This needs to be coupled with a respawn mechanic.</p><p><b>Comeback: </b></p><p>When one respawns in an FPS, the player is still in more or less the same equal to their enemies. A respawned gun is the same as a spawned gun. An unspawned player may have the superior position, but in terms of potential lethality, it's still the same.</p><p>The ability to come back is paramount to an FPS success. RTS games arguably have the worse mechanics in order for a player to come back from a very precarious position.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-10977717696928286542020-11-04T07:47:00.005-08:002020-11-04T07:47:57.561-08:00Looking At Extremes: Many Factions (6+) Strategy Games and Balancing<p>Games with more than 6 factions, actual factions instead of AoE style where there is like only one unique unit, feel very sandboxy. This may appeal to some.</p><p>Total War: Warhammer has many factions and they do them well, in my opinion. But then it is a slower paced game of amassing huge armies in formation.</p><p>Illwinter's Conquest of Elysium, while more of a turn based strategy game with a auto real time battle component, has many factions as well. Balanced? It really depends on the map because each faction depends on entirely different resources, units, and game mechanics and playstyles.</p><p>Their Dominions series is more of the same but a bit more dynamic Illwinter's balancing strategy is every unit has at least one severe weakness in some other faction, not necessarily all factions.</p><p>Dawn of War series has about 9 factions with all the expansions. Most units feel tanky enough that they aren't bulldozed immediately. Not sure if that is good balancing, but I love the variety. </p><p>I have not played Warlords Battlecry which is supposed to have many factions up to around 16. So I cannot give input there.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-50054821521238162192018-12-08T15:57:00.001-08:002018-12-08T15:57:14.546-08:00First Impressions: Bad North<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-EE160aWqhAM/XAxWfRuu_9I/AAAAAAAAC9A/IXuN3n8zphoZrimReIwz70wgehA1ZkQxgCLcBGAs/s1600/2018-12-08.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1600" height="225" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-EE160aWqhAM/XAxWfRuu_9I/AAAAAAAAC9A/IXuN3n8zphoZrimReIwz70wgehA1ZkQxgCLcBGAs/s400/2018-12-08.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Bad North is a small, procedurally generated, minimalistic real time tactics and turn based strategy game. Yes, a real time tactics game. Let me explain.<br />
<br />
What makes it different from normal RTS games is notable.<br />
<br />
There is no group select, or rather, each unit is a squad, and you can only select one squad at a time. Time slows down if you select a squad to order them considerably. <br />
<br />
Battle maps are small, even bite-sized. You can see everything in one glance, except for the parts hidden by cliffs, which makes the camera rotation mechanic vital and replaces the fog of war concept.<br />
<br />
The rock-paper-scissors balance is also very apparent and significant, and will punish you if you aren't careful. Archers beat pikemen and swordsmen without shields, until they are close enough to damage the archers. Pikemen beat any melee units, like swordsmen with shields, except when they are moving, so they must be prepared and grounded in a position to be effective. Swordsmen with shields beat archers by shrugging off their arrows. Swordsmen, the "weakest" unit in the game, wins through overwhelming and outnumbering numbers, and also used to rush archers and moving pikemen. You can upgrade swordsmen's class to archers, pikemen, or swordsmen with shields.<br />
<br />
The strategy layer is turn based. Here, you can choose which next location to defend. Then you can also choose your commanders, which command your squads, and upgrade them to different unit classes. You can also further equip them with skills and items.<br />
<br />
You only start with two commanders/squads, however, and you must pick up new commanders along the way. There is a limit of four squads per island.<br />
<br />
There is permadeath, so if you make a mistake, your squads die, all with its upgrades. You can replenish your units in battle through the houses you defend in the midst of the skirmish, though this takes considerable amount of time.<br />
<br />
Once al your commanders are dead, it is game over.<br />
<br />
One of my problems with the game is that the interface when selecting units is farther down the screen, and it is not really that noticeable. So to replenish or flee, you must go all the way to the bottom.<br />
<br />
Other than that, Bad North is enjoyable. I really like the "time slows down when giving orders" mechanic. It seems to hearken to my previous post's point about orders having a pause: <a href="https://factioncalculus.blogspot.com/2018/11/possible-solutions-for-preventing.html">Possible Solutions For Preventing A "Clickfest" RTS</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-15096473583246016972018-11-09T09:43:00.000-08:002018-11-09T09:53:04.971-08:00Possible Solutions For Preventing A "Clickfest" RTS<div data-contents="true">
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="a9chl-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="a9chl-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="a9chl-0-0"><span data-text="true">I've been trying to generate ideas on how to prevent the clickfest of an RTS and provide a better pacing.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="8gqu7-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="8gqu7-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="8gqu7-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="5of1f-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="5of1f-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="5of1f-0-0"><span data-text="true">So, assuming classic RTS gameplay (basebuilding, resource, etc.), in addition to that, I propose:</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="8ds16-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="8ds16-0-0">
<b><span data-offset-key="8ds16-0-0"><span data-text="true">1. Pre-planning or (actual) strategy phase </span></span></b></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="f0ue1-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="f0ue1-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="f0ue1-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="3jb5h-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="3jb5h-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="3jb5h-0-0"><span data-text="true">In real warfare, there is more planning than simply just going down on the battlefield and hoping for the best (which is tactics, not strategy).</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="d3jpk-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="d3jpk-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="d3jpk-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="7cgpo-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="7cgpo-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="7cgpo-0-0"><span data-text="true">So taking a cue from board games and the like, a pre-planning phase would go a great length in the strategic aspect of an RTS. So, your opponent can plan out his moves, and you can plan out yours, before gameplay starts, giving each equal ground.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="c993u-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="c993u-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="c993u-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="dsken-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="dsken-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="dsken-0-0"><span data-text="true">I would equate this as having a pre-planned opening in chess.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="40olk-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="40olk-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="40olk-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="ecpa-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="ecpa-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="ecpa-0-0"><span data-text="true">What can go into a phase, perhaps?</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="eovb9-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="eovb9-0-0">
<i><b><span data-offset-key="eovb9-0-0"><span data-text="true">A. A predetermined base architecture/structure layout</span></span></b></i></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="vkk3-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="vkk3-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="vkk3-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="elr5n-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="elr5n-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="elr5n-0-0"><span data-text="true">With basebuilding in current RTSes, often, it is part of a reactive action. You have a build order you have to build, and if you spend too long placing units here or there, you forget to build proactively.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="eps85-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="eps85-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="eps85-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="aurck-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="aurck-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="aurck-0-0"><span data-text="true">So instead, how about planning the base layout in advance? Like in real warfare?</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="8ddit-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="8ddit-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="8ddit-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="8rjm5-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="8rjm5-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="8rjm5-0-0"><span data-text="true">Prison Architect has a function where you can place tiles to plan out where you want to build future structures while pausing the game. So something like that.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="574it-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="574it-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="574it-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="fo40-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="fo40-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="fo40-0-0"><span data-text="true">So instead of worrying whether you can click faster than another player to build a power plant or two, have the planned ahead.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="70mjb-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="70mjb-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="70mjb-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="7acc2-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="7acc2-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="7acc2-0-0"><span data-text="true">And, if a base layout is good enough, saving and loading base layouts might be a thing.</span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="7acc2-0-0">
</div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="7acc2-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="7acc2-0-0"><span data-text="true"><img alt="Image result for prison architect planning" class="irc_mi" height="222" src="https://i.imgur.com/0wVGuUB.jpg" style="margin-top: 0px;" width="400" /> </span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="5m9e8-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="5m9e8-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="5m9e8-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="5967l-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="5967l-0-0">
<i><b><span data-offset-key="5967l-0-0"><span data-text="true">B. Pre-determined build orders</span></span></b></i></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="8afoh-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="8afoh-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="8afoh-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="fko13-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="fko13-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="fko13-0-0"><span data-text="true">Like base layout, why can't the build orders also be pre-planned?</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="5ql9b-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="5ql9b-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="5ql9b-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="f4uss-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="f4uss-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="f4uss-0-0"><span data-text="true">If your strategy is based on pumping out several units of the same type, say, siege units, or whatever, why not just have it set in the beginning and automated?</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="778jf-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="778jf-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="778jf-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="1u9l7-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="1u9l7-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="1u9l7-0-0"><span data-text="true">So instead of having the reaction immediate, an opposing player can plan to be in a defensive position instead. But most importantly, both are prepared to win (or fail), equally.</span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="1u9l7-0-0">
</div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="1u9l7-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="1u9l7-0-0"><span data-text="true">It might just involve setting up sliders or toggles for each unit.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="7bvcs-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="7bvcs-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="7bvcs-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="3vmq2-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="3vmq2-0-0">
<i><b><span data-offset-key="3vmq2-0-0"><span data-text="true">C. Pre-determined scouting/attack routes</span></span></b></i></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="1tqli-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="1tqli-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="1tqli-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="79t7a-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="79t7a-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="79t7a-0-0"><span data-text="true">So, once structure and unit build order is done, why not attacks and scouting?</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="dhcgm-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="dhcgm-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="dhcgm-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="5bff-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="5bff-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="5bff-0-0"><span data-text="true">Once the pre-planning phase is done, the AI will automatically build your custom layout in the order and optimized. So whatever advantage you have clicking fast will be nil.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span data-offset-key="5bff-0-0"><span data-text="true">Games with a waypoint mode like Red Alert 2 is sort of like that. Except this will happen before gameplay starts.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span data-offset-key="5bff-0-0"><span data-text="true"><img alt="Image result for waypoint mode red alert 2" class="irc_mi" height="224" src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/tSPKgtIcLsw/maxresdefault.jpg" style="margin-top: 0px;" width="400" /> </span></span><br />
<span data-offset-key="5bff-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br />Now, I'm not saying throw away all the micro. I would think a commander can override the macro orders. But planning ahead would be advantageous.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="334eu-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="334eu-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="334eu-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="a8jht-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="a8jht-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="a8jht-0-0"><span data-text="true">But if we want to extend it to the realtime gameplay:</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="6a3ul-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6a3ul-0-0">
<b><span data-offset-key="6a3ul-0-0"><span data-text="true">2. A staggered or modified command system</span></span></b></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="79agl-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="79agl-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="79agl-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="3jmep-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="3jmep-0-0">
<i><b><span data-offset-key="3jmep-0-0"><span data-text="true">A. Action points? </span></span></b></i></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="9jk1g-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="9jk1g-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="9jk1g-0-0"><span data-text="true">This might make an RTS a bit more turn-based. But just a bit. </span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="cfnef-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cfnef-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="cfnef-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="6oj4j-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6oj4j-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="6oj4j-0-0"><span data-text="true">We know in TBS games that there is such a thing as action points that limits actions per turn. </span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="7hti5-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="7hti5-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="7hti5-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="2tphg-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="2tphg-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="2tphg-0-0"><span data-text="true">So, can something like that be applicable to an RTS? </span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="ci6nj-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="ci6nj-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="ci6nj-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="6m1j4-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6m1j4-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="6m1j4-0-0"><span data-text="true">How about something like a limited amount of clicks per minute or some sort?</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="4ir7h-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="4ir7h-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="4ir7h-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="46j03-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="46j03-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="46j03-0-0"><span data-text="true">Might be some balance issues there, and definitely a lot of RTS players might get annoyed, depending on how it is implemented.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="5r3d-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="5r3d-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="5r3d-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="bpdf6-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="bpdf6-0-0">
<i><b><span data-offset-key="bpdf6-0-0"><span data-text="true">B. More generalistic/macro actions</span></span></b></i></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="c1qbc-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="c1qbc-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="c1qbc-0-0"><span data-text="true">In real warfare, you can't really micromanage your soldiers too much. Most of the time, commanders give a sort of general command.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="4tavf-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="4tavf-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="4tavf-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="f732a-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="f732a-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="f732a-0-0"><span data-text="true">The Majesty games has it where you pin a flag on the ground and reward bounties to heroes or such that take up the call to arms. A general macro attack command might work that way.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="4sjj5-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="4sjj5-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="4sjj5-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7anao" data-offset-key="5qdjf-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="5qdjf-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="5qdjf-0-0"><span data-text="true">It might take better AI for other actions. A general command to improve economy (compared to microing harvesters) might take building and commanding harvester units, building more refineries, etc. Apparently, Distant Worlds does a good job.</span></span><br />
<br />
<i><b><span data-offset-key="5qdjf-0-0"><span data-text="true">C. Ability to order while pausing games</span></span></b></i><br />
<span data-offset-key="5qdjf-0-0"><span data-text="true">This will really only work for single player games, unless the pause is mandatory for all players. And this has already been done in some obscure RTS games I don't remember the name of. But the ability to give orders while pausing can give players a breather.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span data-offset-key="5qdjf-0-0"><span data-text="true">Maybe pausing can also switch to the planning mode I proposed. So once paused, you can do more build orders, structure layouts, and attack formations.</span></span><br />
<span data-offset-key="5qdjf-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span>
<span data-offset-key="5qdjf-0-0"><span data-text="true">If there is mandatory pausing for multiplayer games, it might take the form of a turn-based game where you are given 15-minute (or so) bursts of real time activity and then a mandatory pause for planning mode.</span></span><br />
<br />
<b><span data-offset-key="5qdjf-0-0"><span data-text="true">In Conclusion:</span></span></b><br />
<span data-offset-key="5qdjf-0-0"><span data-text="true">These are just some solutions I propose to prevent RTS games becoming clickfest. Will they be effective? Well, it depends. </span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-30215772116294853012018-05-16T10:01:00.000-07:002018-11-09T10:06:11.151-08:00Game: Actions Per Minute: The RTS <div style="text-align: center;">
<img class="game_cover" src="https://img.itch.zone/aW1hZ2UvMjM4MTQxLzExNDI1MjEuZ2lm/315x250%23c/e10HZW.gif" /> </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<h2 style="text-align: center;">
Actions Per Minute: The RTS </h2>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://gmx0.itch.io/apmrts" target="_blank">Download FREE on Itch.io</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://itch.io/jam/metagamejam/rate/238141" target="_blank">Meta Game Jam</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
Real time strategy games have a tendency to be accused of being
clickfests and that a higher APM (actions per minute) is the thing that
wins games in RTSes rather than strategy and tactics. With that in mind,
APM: The RTS is a distillation of that winning skill of clicking faster
than your opponent to win games.<br />
All you have to do is click a lot, and win.<br />
Left click to build structures and stuff. Right click to command units and stuff. <br /><br />
Updates:<br />
Added Fog of War<br />
Nuclear Superweapon<br />
All units and structures now work correctly<br />
Win/lose state<br />
<br />
Planned:<br />
Better feedback<br />
Highscores<br />
More factions Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-44273587967789185502018-01-22T17:00:00.001-08:002018-01-22T23:40:34.394-08:00First Impressions: Forged Battalion (Early Access) <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-F7D1SBGAWJQ/WmZ6OGQR8zI/AAAAAAAACPU/J6W3zcckqsQ39Ph4kkxv2u9zz_aVKRJzwCLcBGAs/s1600/2018-01-22%2B%25281%2529.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1600" height="225" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-F7D1SBGAWJQ/WmZ6OGQR8zI/AAAAAAAACPU/J6W3zcckqsQ39Ph4kkxv2u9zz_aVKRJzwCLcBGAs/s400/2018-01-22%2B%25281%2529.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Forged Battalion is a game in Early Access from the Westwood offshoot Petroglyph games, makers of Universe At War, Star Wars Empire At War, Grey Goo, and 8-Bit RTS series, and in Westwood days, makers of the Command and Conquer series. I am a fan of their work and would at least try, if not outrightly buy a game they come out with.<br />
<br />
At its basics, Forged Battalion is a Command and Conquer-style RTS with a faction creator mechanic, with hints of 8-Bit in it. There's a tech tree players can buy technology to use in the faction creator with research points gained in single player or multiplayer. Units come as infantry in mech suits, light vehicles, heavy vehicles, and aircraft. Units have one weapon and may have different passive support abilities or movement, all customizable from the faction editor. Each faction has a superweapon, unlocked from the tech tree. With some differences, it is simply a barely improved Command and Conquer.<br />
<br />
Which is not a bad thing, but there are still things to be desired. <br />
<br />
This is a "review" of its Early Access stage. Many things could have changed after this review, which was conducted on the date on this article. <br />
<br />
<b>Thoughts and Recommendations</b><br />
<br />
<b><i>Faction Creation </i></b> <br />
This is the main selling point and gimmick of Forged Battalion, hence we will cover it. Not that it's bad, it could be a lot better.<br />
<br />
While the Faction creator tool is admittedly cool and reminds me of Warzone 2100 RTS unit creator, it makes units and factions as a whole look generic. There are no cosmetic differences and thus gives no personality to the factions or units.<br />
<br />
The Faction creator tool works in conjunction with the Tech Tree to customize units. Units come as as infantry in mech suits, light vehicles, heavy vehicles, and aircraft as previously stated. There are also right now five tiers in the tech tree with different levels of tech in it. You may create four units for each type in different tiers to fill a slot. You use research points gained from gameplay to unlock technology. <br />
<br />
I recommend adding more cosmetic options, even if upended with microtransactions, just for differentiation's sake. Things like different unit skins and different chassis designs. Have an option for different voices for units.<br />
<br />
I would also love more customizable buildings, not just turrets and headquarter upgrades. In fact, an ability to have more specialized buildings would be really cool and more in line with the create your own faction gimmick.<br />
<br />
No customization options for harvesters? Anyone remember the Chrono Miners, War Miners, and Slave Miners of Red Alert 2 days? More personality is often better than lesser personality.<br />
<br />
As for units themselves, what would be really cool is to add an option for higher tier units to have two weapons, instead of just one. I want to be able to recreate Mammoth Tanks. Or have multiple barrels of the same weapon. <br />
<br />
Really, please add more personality and more uniqueness for faction creation, Petroglyph. Your 8-Bit RTS series was oozing with personality. It doesn't feel individual enough that I can own my factions.<br />
<br />
<i><b>Tech Tree</b></i><br />
This is related to Faction Creation, but is a major enough segment to include a different set of recommendations for it.<br />
<br />
More tiers. Please. If you want truly special factions, Forged Battalion does not provide. Please look at your past games, especially Red Alert, Generals Zero Hour, 8-Bit, and Universe At War to understand how to differentiate factions. There is so previous material much you can lift from.<br />
<br />
I would love more superweapons. How about an option to put epic units to replace superweapons like what was done in 8-Bit Invaders? A mind control superweapon like the one from Yuri's Revenge would be cool.<br />
<br />
I understand the last tier is locked, and thus can't guess what they are about, so if my suggestions are already in that last tier, ignore. <br />
<br />
Tentatively, I would want to see a Deploy type technology ala Red Alert for added armor and a different type of weapon. Other Command and Conquer technology tropes are already included such as Stealth and Nuclear weaponry and even an Ion Cannon.<br />
<br />
Non-lethal weaponry such as freezing/cryo technology and mind control technology would be awesome to have and would add in more to the personality argument I am making. Of course, mind control and such would have its own balancing issues, but it would be so cool.<br />
<br />
In fact, more non-lethal support abilities would be needed. There are no medics or engineers or any repair types of buildings or units can be found or any buffs at all. Or even transports. I can do without transports, but no support units? Maybe I haven't dug into the tech tree enough but I didn't find them. <br />
<br />
<i><b>Graphics</b></i><br />
I don't care about graphics that much. I particularly liked 8-bit voxel style for instance. In fact, I do think this new style is an improvement over that. Not too blocky and minimalistic, but detailed enough to strike a balance.<br />
<br />
That said, I can barely make out the different units on the battlefield, for again, a lack of cosmetic options. I just need a bit of a color difference other than the faction colors! The Artillery units are different enough to be able to tell them apart from the others. Other ones, not that great to tell them apart.<br />
<br />
Also love how Infantry units are in mech suits like GDI Wolverines are. It reminds me of End of Nations as well.<br />
<br />
The Barracks could look a bit more different to the other War Factories on the map... I couldn't tell them apart immediately. The Hand of Nod and even the GDI Barracks were clearly Barracks. Just please use a totally different style without the garage door thing in the front. That is a bit confusing, and especially if you want to do an e-sport of this, seeing differentiation is key.<br />
<br />
<i><b>Gameplay</b></i><br />
Gameplay is standard/classic RTS warfare. Or read, Command and Conquer style warfare. Only can build one structure and so on. Mine only one resource and manage the power.<br />
<br />
Strategy so far seems to be spamming units repeatedly. Simple and effective. However, lack of different RTS tropes, such as the lack of walls to funnel units, makes the execution of combat have something yet to be desired.<br />
<br />
A big difference is, there are no more MCVs. Infantry must find an Outpost to capture and expand. I am ambivalent about this change.<br />
<br />
I'm not sure if it's because it is Early Access, but destroying an enemy's Headquarters does not prevent the enemy from constructing(!?). It frustrated my large attack against the AI base in the first mission. Please do not do this regenerating AI thing.<br />
<br />
Not a big thing, as it also wasn't present in 8-Bit, but there is a lack of walls construction. I think walls would at least help in some strategizing by funneling enemy units to a spot.<br />
<br />
What I liked about Command and Conquer 3 is the ability to queue more than one building by constructing Cranes. I think it would be an option to consider.<br />
<br />
I would like to see more than one resource type on the map. Or rather, like in Command and Conquer, where there was different types and colors of Tiberium, I think it would be nice to have something like that. I just think gold is overused. And don't even really have to do much, just change colors for the types of resources, or even throwback to Command and Conquer by having radioactive resources again. Not too important to me, but I think it will increase player options.<br />
<br />
I don't do multiplayer too much, so please have a great campaign for us single only players. <br />
<br />
<i><b>Sound</b></i><br />
Great Frank Klepancki music. I would like more unit voices, tied to my argument for Faction Creation personality up there. It isn't a priority for me though.<br />
<br />
<i><b>Story</b></i><br />
The story itself is a rehash of the End of Nations backstory, except with changed names to suit the stripped down game: a man taking over the world with new technology to save the Earth from climate change and disaster.<br />
<br />
It's fine for its purpose, but it needs more meat.<br />
<br />
<i><b>Overall</b></i><br />
All in all, I like Forged Battalion and its potential. But at its current state, I would probably forget about it once I get to play with all the unlocked technologies. So please further improve and polish the game, Petroglyph.<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-80078347163073441362018-01-12T06:34:00.002-08:002018-01-12T06:34:52.350-08:00Video: What Makes RTS Games Fun: Base Defenses in RTS<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe width="320" height="266" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/dAl7BP7pivc/0.jpg" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dAl7BP7pivc?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-71730316185960847352017-04-20T21:26:00.000-07:002017-04-20T21:26:48.848-07:00First Impressions: 8-Bit Armies<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RM3At00lSkw/WPmIxLYfLMI/AAAAAAAACAw/prIrQMesBbUghy-yyi4YNJrqm8VfulsYgCLcB/s1600/2017-04-21.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RM3At00lSkw/WPmIxLYfLMI/AAAAAAAACAw/prIrQMesBbUghy-yyi4YNJrqm8VfulsYgCLcB/s400/2017-04-21.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
At first, 8-Bit Armies do not look at all that much. But once you get into it, it feels a lot like the classic Command and Conquer. And for a good reason, too, the game was made by Petroglyph Studios, which is a descendant of the Westwood Studios.<br />
<br />
You have two factions, the Renegades and the Guardians. Both factions are a mix of GDI and Nod units and powers. For example, the Renegades have nukes but also the military GDI-esque hardware, while the Renegades have a Nod vibe, yet with an ion cannon satellite.<br />
<br />
Campaigns play and look like mobile missions, with a 3 star rating for completing objectives. With each mission, you unlock more units and structures for a loadout, which is surprisingly addictive.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-73504439940458701872017-02-20T19:49:00.000-08:002017-02-20T19:49:06.915-08:00Just Interesting: Failure RTS<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe width="320" height="266" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/xEbwbzqq-XM/0.jpg" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xEbwbzqq-XM?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>
<br />
Failure promises to be a original cyberpunk RTS with some MOBA elements and other hybridization. I like how the units show what territories they get on a hex board, and also clear terrain manipulation.<br />
<a href="http://www.failuregame.com/" target="_blank"><br /></a>
<a href="http://www.failuregame.com/" target="_blank">Check out their website</a>.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-55221509499003309132017-02-19T18:22:00.001-08:002017-02-19T19:25:34.199-08:00Game Design: A Soulslike RTS?<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ChImT2wtcTw/WKphoMAoMSI/AAAAAAAAB-s/ZshWgVljdmIW9Q_IFhHz-_zhipRsj7a7ACLcB/s1600/Dark-Souls-2-Scholar-of-the-First-Sin-Gameplay-Changes-Get-Details-466167-4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ChImT2wtcTw/WKphoMAoMSI/AAAAAAAAB-s/ZshWgVljdmIW9Q_IFhHz-_zhipRsj7a7ACLcB/s400/Dark-Souls-2-Scholar-of-the-First-Sin-Gameplay-Changes-Get-Details-466167-4.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
Anyone play Dark Souls?</div>
<div class="text_exposed_show" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; display: inline; font-family: "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<div style="font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 6px;">
So DS has a reputation of tight but deliberate combat gameplay.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
And there has been a crop of games called Soulslike (as a genre) trying to emulate the tightness and deliberate combat.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
For those who haven't played Dark Souls:<br />
1. DS has a stamina bar, which limits your combat actions until it refills<br />
2. Each combat action cannot be stopped midair, if you commit to an attack, you can't cancel it.<br />
3. Each enemy has a distinct and non-randomized pattern in combat.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Is there an RTS equivalent? </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Starcraft is the first to come to mind. It is said to be the tightest RTS gameplay there is.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Dune 2's limitation of being able to select only one unit and attack brings it to mind. It felt deliberate, even though limiting.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
But if there's no RTS equivalent, what if a Soulslike RTS would play as follows:<br />
1. It would have a sort of stamina bar for the player to limit his actions of selection and combat? Basically, you get only a few actions per minute.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
2. If you send out a unit/squad to move or attack or whatever, you can't immediately micromanage it out of the way to avoid an attack or whatever, so then you must commit to whatever action you put forth.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
3. More experimentally, in a squad, you are able to command the units directly and instantly like a character with hotkeys along with mouse. Switch formations on the fly, use the WASD to "guide" the flow of attack. Right clicking is instantly responsive despite distance, for example, clicking for an archer squad will immediately fire a volley of arrows at the mouse location (without doing that hotkey then click or click button then click). Kinda like a MOBA style control.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Thoughts?</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-76174522270166734972017-02-17T08:08:00.001-08:002017-02-17T08:08:22.401-08:00First Impressions: 0 AD<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HV0pS0pbw6w/WKcTaK4Tv9I/AAAAAAAAB-Q/8cI7dIS9Eh09xaPhQDOY01kKoaxS_aeIACLcB/s1600/2017-02-17.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HV0pS0pbw6w/WKcTaK4Tv9I/AAAAAAAAB-Q/8cI7dIS9Eh09xaPhQDOY01kKoaxS_aeIACLcB/s400/2017-02-17.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
0 AD is a free, open source RTS.<br />
<br />
As an RTS, 0 AD reminds me most of a cross between Age of Empires 3 and Age of Mythology. They have almost the same resources and seeming economic focus. I tried the Athenians, which were the first in alphabetical order for the historical factions.<br />
<br />
The most obvious difference is that soldiers also have all worker/builder abilities. There are no male "villagers", all are soldiers. There are female villagers who actually speed up male unit work. I like that dynamic.<br />
<br />
The game is incomplete and unfinished so far.<br />
<br />
I would love an Israel/Hebrew civilization mod for it.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://play0ad.com/" target="_blank">Download and play 0 AD here</a>.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-82574741837829527292017-02-15T17:51:00.000-08:002017-02-15T17:51:13.258-08:00Just Interesting: SC2VN<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54f199dbe4b04ba2593918f4/t/55b30fcfe4b0dfe9f078c9ed/1461752017062/tumblr_mn8b8sLRb61rkz363o1_1280.jpg?format=1500w" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54f199dbe4b04ba2593918f4/t/55b30fcfe4b0dfe9f078c9ed/1461752017062/tumblr_mn8b8sLRb61rkz363o1_1280.jpg?format=1500w" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<a href="http://www.sc2vn.com/">SC2VN</a> is not a real time strategy game. Rather, it is a visual novel based on a real time strategy game, particularly Starcraft 2, and even more particularly, the South Korean competitive e-sports scene of Starcraft 2.<br />
<br />
It is actually pretty well written, and I felt like I saw and understood a subculture when I finished it. It definitely showed a side of RTS gaming I wasn't that knowledgeable in. I hardly ever play multiplayer on Starcraft, so this was, in effect, eye opening.<br />
<br />
It's free on <a href="http://store.steampowered.com/app/404480/?snr=1_5_1100__1100">Steam</a> and <a href="https://teameleveneleven.itch.io/sc2vn">Itch.io</a>, so go ahead and try it.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-46756824628420944022017-02-12T20:35:00.000-08:002017-02-12T20:35:42.450-08:00Meta General: Why I Love To Play RTS GamesOkay, I figured out a big reason why I love (slower paced) RTSes, and only like, say RTTs (real time tactics) like Dawn of War 2 or why I don't play multiplayer Starcraft that much (and again, 3/4s of Starcraft players don't play multiplayer). This might help some RTS designers in the group.<br /><br />I like that you build the economy. I like that you fight and command in combat.<br /><br />But what I love about it is that you keep on unlocking new stuff as you build your base and survive so you can finally have the epic toys of superweapons and OP units, or the end game.<br /><br />*That* gives me a feeling of truly earned power and at the same time captures my imagination.<br /><br />It's not base building that is important, it is the clear progression from weak to strong. Base building is just the expression of that progression. Removing base building is removing the expression of progression. If one removes base building, it must be replaced with a better sort of progression.<br /><br />With fast paced multiplayer like Starcraft, I can't ever build a truly epic army with cool units before getting destroyed. Either I strike hard early with a bunch of low level units (ie Marines or Zerglings) and I win, or more likely than not, I get annihilated with a bunch of low level units while I tried to get to the Battlecruisers.<br /><br />While that may be fun for some, winning early, that just feels... unsatisfying to me. It feels rushed and also you don't get to experience much of the content because of early winning and losses.<br /><br />With Dawn of War 2 (just talking about early campaigns), yes, I like the combat is better inherently, but you just get a squad(s). While a powerful squad, it's just the same squad(s) the whole game! You get new weapons, but nothing spectacular to write home about. Dawn of War 1 had much more toys to play with like tanks and aircraft and titans. Combat may be better, but at the expense of the sandboxy variety. <br /><br />So, tl;dr<br />Unlocking (not just having, as unlocking is earning) powerful units and commander powers like superweapons to use against my enemies is why I love RTSes.<br /><br />It is not (always) satisfying for people (me, at least) to win a match with just weak units in the early game because it didn't give me (or my enemy even) a chance to use cool stuff!<br /><br />I don't know if that helped you, but I just had to put it into words.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-68630462727567732452017-02-01T12:10:00.000-08:002017-02-01T12:10:14.312-08:00Just Interesting: RULE<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gxbbkVJ-Qz8/WIe0XFu9E-I/AAAAAAAAB9s/umpbn1dMdDwsJsOBsYTyo5aOIiCyozfAwCLcB/s1600/12809701_1077499345645569_6104933380660066355_n.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="269" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gxbbkVJ-Qz8/WIe0XFu9E-I/AAAAAAAAB9s/umpbn1dMdDwsJsOBsYTyo5aOIiCyozfAwCLcB/s320/12809701_1077499345645569_6104933380660066355_n.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
A <a href="https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/boydrobertson/rule-massively-multiplayer-real-time-strategy-game/description">recently Kickstarter funded MMORTS</a> that is simple in concept and execution: the world is your battlefield. There is a <a href="http://www.rulegame.com.au/">demo on their website</a>.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-35469668578634706682017-01-28T11:28:00.000-08:002017-01-28T11:28:06.842-08:00Just Interesting: Kravall<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://riot.autious.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/concept2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://riot.autious.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/concept2.png" height="225" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<a href="https://riot.autious.net/">Kravall</a> is an RTS set in the future where there is societal rioting. It seems to be a halted student project in a college. <a href="https://riot.autious.net/">Their blog</a> details what kind of technical specifications they were up to.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-1405040966386323082017-01-27T19:48:00.001-08:002017-01-28T08:55:07.883-08:00First Impressions: Art of War: Red Tides (Open Beta/Early Access)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/9bByjwkLEY4/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9bByjwkLEY4?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<a href="http://store.steampowered.com/app/558100/">Art of War: Red Tides</a> can probably be considered to be a really basic, stripped down real time strategy. Although it has more in common with MOBAs, but on a single lane. The game describes itself as a "tug of war" game, and a tug of war is what it actually does feel like.<br />
<br />
And it is addicting. There are plenty of unit variety and commander powers for each faction. You pick several units from your arsenal to deploy into battle. Unit composition is important! Every wave sends out your units automatically. You can sell the units for half price and buy a different unit as you study the enemy's composition. And you regularly unlock new units as you level up, which is awesome, unlike other free-to-play fare. You do not pay for every wave's units, just when you buy said unit initially.<br />
<br />
All the units, and future unlocks, are balanced against each other. For example, you can opt to unlock and use snipers instead of a rifleman. A sniper is not necessarily a lot better than a rifleman, as it just has a longer range and slower shot, but it fills the mass infantry slot. Each unlock is simply a variation of an existing unit with a special ability and a different, balanced weakness. There is no pay-to-win, a low level player can win against a higher level player.<br />
<br />
The thing that makes the game great is that there are hard counters and a rhythm. Explosive suicide beetles do not work on shields, when they can usually make a mincemeat of your other units. Stealth detectors reveal cloaked enemies. Cloaked enemies can make short work of the tough units you have if you can't see them. You an either swarm many small units or save up for the big guns.<br />
<br />
I only got to play the free-to-play Early Access/Open Beta version of the game. I would be playing it right now instead of writing this post if it wasn't for the Open Beta ending. It is that addictive.<br />
<br />
Apparently, it was inspired by a Starcraft 2 mod called Desert Strike. The influence from Starcraft is definitely present. Three factions, one of them being the Terrans. The Atlac are Protoss. The Yaguiaoi or however you spell it is supposed to be the Zerg counterpart, but with a more zoo-like aesthetic.<br />
<br />
The soul essence mine resource acquiring needs a bit of work. Resource gathering is a constant stream of increasing soul essence, which is fine. However, at higher waves, you need to upgrade said mine, which stops resource gathering for quite a bit. I was not a fan of holding off picking units which costs essence to upgrade mines. The resource gathering is passive except for those moments. I think resource gathering tied more to the game flow and play would be better.<br />
<br />
As you destroy enemy units and crates, you gain some soul essence but mostly gold. Gold is used to be spent on commander powers such as bombing runs or special "epic" units.<br />
<br />
One thing though, the menu music is terrible. Please, please change it. The cheery tone does not fit the game, except possibly ironically. I also would love to have the English translation done better. There are story lore still in Chinese(?) that needs to be translated.<br />
<br />
Regardless to say, I'm waiting for the full release! I hope it still sticks to being free-to-play. Free-to-play actually works with this game, and I'm interested in how the developers will take Art of War: Red Tides.<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6442411660161796189.post-7040136491058597712017-01-27T08:51:00.001-08:002018-01-12T06:36:30.643-08:00Game Design: Making RTS More Strategic Or TacticalTactical:<br />
A pausable RTS game. Can be auto-paused when encountering an enemy unit. Orders can be given in pause.<br />
<br />
Pre-set plans for dealing with different units. Like designing AI for each squad.<br />
Plans would include:<br />
Rough formations of the unit in the squad.<br />
Orders in sequence: throw a grenade, hide in cover, etc.<br />
This is all done either before the game or during. Like a planning session.<br />
<br />
A focus on micro skills that can quickly turn the battle.<br />
<br />
<br />
Strategic:<br />
<a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3515/the_future_of_the_realtime_.php?print=1">More political decisions and less total war.</a><br />
More other macro decisions<br />
Ability to set AI governors and automation to focus on micromanaging the mos fun parts (subjective to the player) Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0