Fixed the issue where respawned players have reset upgrade numbers
Respawning now has visuals
Respawned players now retain their kill count on their unit
Rearranged diamondback command card
Added diamondback ability
Cancel menu button now has a hotkey
This is a very major update because of the new diamondback ability. It's a seeker missile which behaves just like in melee where it follows, can be dodged, and does high damage. This seeker missile ability adds quite a bit more depth to this game without making it harder to learn or play. The reason being is players now have a very effective tool for dealing with enemy players. If you cannot destroy them then you can at least make them move out of your way at times in order to close in and damage the enemy base.
I'm going to abandon this project. I mean it for good this time and this is not an issue of lacking motivation. I've said this before and I now clearly realise I'm not ready to make excellent multiplayer games yet.
Firstly, I don't play that many large multiplayer games, like 6+ people, so I have a disadvantage when it comes to game design sense.
Secondly, I spend alot of time playing my favourite steam games which are single player games. Because of this experience with single player games it has a large influence on how I design games because I need inspiration from something.
Thirdly, I trust what Extra Credits say in their videos and they do briefly mention that multiplayer games are far more challenging to design than single player games. This has become very evident from vast amounts of player feedback in the arcade.
Lastly, leading from my second point is that I often design games with a single-player mind frame. That doesn't work in multiplayer when things have to be balanced for fairness and every player is fighting for control and power of the game.
It's just taken me a long time to realise this because either people were too nice to say it or they didn't know my multiplayer game design sense is very lacking, which is understandable. It is encouraging that the last thing people said to me were "Trieve, you have many great ideas but you execute them very poorly every time". My plan for now is to take a long break from StarCraft 2 and make/refine single player games with the Unity engine. I may decide to make multiplayer games one day but definitely not in the near future and I will approach it very steadily like starting with 1v1 games.
I change my mind about this project. I'll continue working on it and I'd like to clarify what kind of vision I have for this project.
This is meant to be a 'low commitment game' which means multiple things to me. This game is intended to be group/party friendly by being easy to learn for any new players but has enough variety and choices for returning players to make each game fresh again.
Also, I consider this project the ideal game for people like me who have plenty of other commitments in my day including real-life, other games, making games, and other hobbies. The simple nature of this game makes it accessible and along with the time limit of 15 minutes, it's easy to pick up and put down. If you're someone who wants entertainment packed into 15 minutes or less then this game is for you.
Expanding on the accessibility of this game, you don't need to memorize a bunch of optimal strategies (defeating the purpose of a strategy game), build orders, or undergo training for hours/days/weeks to become 'pro' at my games. It is more of a relaxing fun backseat adventure with a focus on making plenty of interesting decisions. I usually dislike games that require me to invest a set/high amount of time/effort/skill to even begin experiencing the fun/core/meat.
What I've just described are unique traits about this game. There's not much like it on the arcade except for Pictionary, Hover, Star Strikers, and just about any other map that groups of people (eg under Traysent, Sinvicta, ChanmanV, etc) play rather frequently.
Yes, I do realise this particular game is punishing towards players who like to try very hard. Although this may include memorizing alot of information and physical training to up your performance (like with many other maps) I've made more considerations to keep this project moving towards my vision. I don't want players getting way ahead of eachother because they decided to transform into a Super Saiyan and make several hundreds of decisions and actions with every moment of game play . I find that's not fun in a big group of people and kind of defeats the core game play experience I'm trying to create (and is bad for keeping this game low commitment). The reason I mention this is I like to be honest. If you're a player who likes to push themselves to the absolute limit in every way possible then this game isn't for you.
From what I can gather, this project seems to be the ideal game Blizzard likes (as they've described in the last Rock The Cabinet contest). I agree with them where I see a charm to simpler, fun, and accessible (or low commitment) games. Something easy to pick up and play, challenging to win, and great with a bunch of friends or any people. There's a reason so many people like Angry Birds or Candy Crush Saga and I feel it's the accessibility in this often busy and sometimes hectic life.
I'm not making a game to be super awesome and exciting that you'd want to burn several hours of every day playing. This is a game that you players play at your convenience. Whenever you want and for at most 15 minutes in any one sitting.
I don't expect many people to understand or see my game with the same vision I do but I thought I'd share it for anyone interested. I hope anyone found this to be an interesting read as I still have a fiery passion for making games.
TL;DR: Continually making games for the StarCraft 2 arcade is taking a toll on me. There are many reasons why this is the case. I haven't given up my desire for engaging in game design or making really cool games but I need a break from StarCraft 2. I'm shifting my efforts to Unity for the time being.
I want to abandon this project. I've seen one too many problems with it and I think I've cracked under the pressure (again). Too many responses and feedback alerting me to flaws with my game design and it was getting too much for me.
I'm not blaming anyone here and I completely understand how this became an outcome (again). It's natural for players to respond negatively to a game play experience they didn't enjoy. It's also natural for game designers/developers to feel pretty hurt because unfortunately only we understand how much effort and good intentions go into our projects but at the same time we're human and we have flawed ideas for game design. Not to mention we could overlook problems or make incorrect assumptions about what parts of our game need adjustment based on our perception or player feedback. Also, we're probably terrible at conveying the exact vision we have in our games.
I think I speak for many game designers where part of the reason we work so hard on making games is to create an enjoyable experience for other players. Believe me when I say the last thing we want to see is players constantly and frequently hating games we made or having a bad time. After a certain point (and with the lack of fans or support) it seems pretty clear this game won't succeed or it's just not wanted. Also, it may get increasingly hard to get testers if people keep associating the bad game play experience with a particular game or its name.
I can see now how very challenging it is to make a game successful in terms of winning the hearts of players. By that I mean they find the game enjoyable, have a genuine excitement for the game, and will invest time, effort, and just about anything else. The same thing anyone would do for their favourite games.
Game design is a very uphill battle towards success. I've found that if games we make resemble anything other players can see in other games, you are living in the shadow of those games to begin with. For example when this project started and people keep comparing it with Nexus Wars or tug-of-war which was surprising to me at first since that wasn't what I had in mind when designing this game. Another example is if people are trying to making a tower defence game, you're likely competing with Squadron TD and have to be better than that in many ways. Basically, if people can't see why your game is better than similar games they've played which they personally had great enjoyment from then consider your game not interesting enough to try which leads to no players which needs to no feedback then the project dies.
I also don't have alot of support. People like Tya have a good reputation and other people who have kickstarter projects get a lot of support too. I'm grateful these people have made games that many others personally enjoy greatly but for game designers without that support, it's harder to make games and continue working on them. I can understand me not having a reputation since I've yet to make a game that was the 'one big hit'.
Also, there's this thing I believe that happens where 'you're damned if you do and damned if you don't'. What this means is no matter what kind of game you make, there will always be people who like it and people who hate it. It's hard to achieve that perfect game because game designers aren't perfect and plenty of people will always ask for more. Partly what made me crack under pressure was constantly and seemingly endlessly meet the needs of the players. Let's face it, game design has infinite possibilities considering our digital worlds have seemingly an infinite amount of space for ideas or games. It's stressful believing that I can never make any player happy because I've yet to have better game design skills or they keep asking for things or having high hopes that I can't deliver.
Long story short, there's many great challenges to making a game popular and it is certainly not just restricted to having the time and resources to finishing the game. As I've explained there's psychological aspects that could turn players away from your game (like comparing it to similar game experiences they've had). New games aren't generally welcomed (as far as I can see) when players already have games they have enough fun with. I'm guilty of thinking this way too and why people still play some of those old classic games from the 90s like Doom or the original X-COM. Those games spoke to us in a way that's hard to recreate with new games.
As Extra Credits said making a successful game is challenging and as I can see with myself, one of the biggest ways to make it through is it to fight all those natural instincts that you would do for self protection. Do not justify your design decisions in front of players and don't reject their feedback no matter how tempting it is. Doing so will deny you important moments where you realise there's a problem with your game and where it is. No one will welcome your game until you reach that threshold of getting things right. Basically, any new is game is treated like dirt because why would anyone in their right mind want to support something that could end up as a bad game?
TL;DR: I'm back and willing to continue work on this project. I've also included a video in this post hoping to make very clear what this kind of game is, why you should try it, and why you would have plenty of fun or enjoyment. This video is mostly about trying to point out unique aspects of this map and even its uniqueness as a whole.
I've had a sudden burst of passion and I change my mind again. I will not abandon this project since it really isn't that difficult to develop. I will find a way to work on this project while working on other projects in parallel (including Unity).
Development is fairly simple because I've reached that stage (a long time ago) where this game is essentially finished. Anything left is just patches or redesigns in response to player feedback. Player feedback has also been arriving pretty slowly as well which can be a positive thing.
I forgot to mention a few things in the video as it's challenging playing a game and doing meaningful talk at the same time while recording. These are more unique aspects of this game:
This game is fun regardless of player count. There's no such thing with this game as 'optimal with 12 players' or 'best balanced with X number of players'
There's no grinding or wasting of players time. Game play is straight to the point allowing immediate decisions and results
Expanding on this game being accessible and short, why spend much more time and effort playing another game/map which provides similar amounts and types of fun?
This game has no boring stalemates. The tug-of-war forces/waves dynamically shift between both sides
This game requires no or very minimal commitment to be fun or play competently. There's no need to practice or train up physical skills like reflexes nor is their the need to memorize any information. Extremely little time and effort needed.
This game aims to have very rounded design and give minimal or no reason to players to have their game play experience ruined. Having said this, this game is still potentially flawed and I welcome brutal and honest feedback/critique so I may improve this game further
EDIT: Another unique and good thing about this map is there are no lag issues. Which I've cleverly achieved by making a fun game with less units.
I think I've realised this game is missing one last thing that would make it very awesome. I'm assuming people like parts/all of my vision that I've expressed (like making this game accessible to play).
My next objective is 2 things:
Figure out what genres/maps that people relate Auto Squads with (like Nexus Wars/MOBA/etc)
Make this game unique compared to similar looking maps
When I say unique I mean add a cool game play feature or something that really stands out and would make you want to play this game much more. I'll think very hard about this which I believe is the next appropriate step with this project's development. I've already made the game I wanted and have spent enough time fine-tuning it for a more comfortable and fun game play experience.
Anyone is welcome to suggest ideas they believe would make this game far more awesome and unique to play compared to many other maps on the Arcade.
I've just published another update which adds more value to player input. I've added 'alien cover' which is the equivalent of 'cover' in games like XCOM. If you move your diamondback nearby then they'll receive a defensive bonus in combat. There's a few on the battlefield and you now have more interesting tactical/movement options.
For anyone interested I'm currently planning to re-design this game in a big way again. People may be familiar with the tug-of-war like game play much earlier and some of you may be familiar with the recent MOBA-like gameplay. I want to combine those 2 allowing players to choose one of those genre-style game play at the beginning or throughout the game. I'll make another post when I've finished this redesign.
It seems some people liked Auto Squads before I changed it to what it is now considered a hero battle game so I've decided to bring back the tug-of-war stuff but in a different way, yet some people like the new game too. As I've said in my last post this post means I've finished the redesign.
Just in case the screenshots below aren't entirely clear on how this game plays right now I'll give a brief summary. It is a power struggle between 2 sides to take out eachother's base. You may do this as a controllable unit with unique capabilities or as a support player with access to a few unit types that can add to the tug-of-war forces. You can switch to either hero or builder guy at any point in the game.
More feedback would be really appreciated. Just anything to help me know if my projects are cool or parts of it are. If no one wants to see drastic changes then let me know when I've landed on something good/awesome. With extremely limited feedback or comments, these projects are highly experimental. Based on comments from a couple people, I'm wondering if I should work on a project similar to but an improved version of Elite Agents / ES Tactics that Blizz arcade highlighted some time ago.
Just to quickly clarify, while I greatly appreciate any feedback or comments related to my projects (whilst looking forward to a large amount from massive amounts of people) don't worry too much about what I said in my last post.
I'm quite happy to share for the first time why I make such big redesigns or changes to my projects (which I may not have realised until now). I am very critical and analytical of my own projects/work and of games I play. I have a habit of breaking them down and teasing out what does and doesn't make a good game play experience. The result is I see flaws in my projects all the time and I prioritize fixing them in any way possible to increase the 'fun'. Even if it means doing a massive redesign to remove what I consider are big glaring problems.
My game design/development approach is start with a small idea, make it happen, and refine as much as possible over time. Anything additional added to the game supports these early/core ideas.
TL;DR: After the last update this game seems very awesome and unique now. It's a mix of a unique tug-of-war game play format (possibly never seen before) with hero battle. I consider this very fun and interesting to play. I'm also willing to make it easier for you players to get into this game and I'll explain how below.
I'm very happy to share I've just published an update which fixes several bugs/problems (since the last map version) and this game seems really awesome and fun to play right now. I know I say that all the time and I have a habit of getting excited over development achievements, no matter how small, but that's how much I love my projects.
I'm excited because this game keeps getting more awesome in frequently unexpected ways. I owe it to the persistence of sucking up my ego, carefully listening to player feedback, and the support of people who have made posts or comments when I'm on the verge of abandoning this project. Even if this game isn't as awesome and epic as I claim yet, I'm still passionate about continuing in that general direction.
The current tug-of-war component seems like an innovation to me. Every player can only send out one unit max but you can easily switch which type of units to send out for strategic counter play, similar to how this map was before, but easier to play and executed much better. You're not countering the entire enemy force but just the enemy players 'tug units'. Also, the AI waves of infantry are much more combat effective so we get to sit back and send in our support forces to influence the tug-of-war instead of having the pressure and responsibility of holding up the team.
Until Blizz implements much better discoverability of maps in the arcade I'm assuming I am the next best thing. For the sake of clarity when I say 'discoverability' I mean how easy it is for any player to find many games they would love playing considering all their personal gaming preferences. I shall explain what I mean with 'me being the next best thing'.
I would like anyone to ask me questions about this game/project so I can help you determine if this is the kind of game you would enjoy playing. You only need to make a quick effortless post in this thread and I can save you from going into SC2 and playing the game if you may not like it. I want to reach out to players who would love playing this game and hopefully build up a community or player base. There's currently a group created for this map and the links are in the arcade description.
I'm happy to answer any question. For example if the roles were reversed and I knew a developer offering to answer questions about their project, I would ask things like 'what is the average game time?' or 'how easy is it to learn the game/mechanics?'. After I've answered your questions, if you find this map interesting enough to try then I would be over the moon. If not, that's cool too. It also makes it much easier for me because I have time to answer questions that you people would be most interested in asking and it saves me the trouble of guessing what people would like to see/read with my frequent posts/updates. It's a win-win for everyone and you can see this as a fun interactive way to learn more about my project. I will do my best to answer questions in the shortest and most direct way possible.
Also, interesting things may happen where I may perceive some questions as suggestions which could inspire ideas to improve this game further. I also encourage asking me the same questions repeatedly because as this game evolves/matures/develops I may tweak things and turn it into a game you would prefer playing.
Update: I did some testing and tweaking and I think I've finally fixed that nasty bug (ever since we could play with tug units and controllable hero) that messes up the diamondbacks. Now players shouldn't have their minerals spent on diamondback upgrades wasted because the game creates new diamondbacks when switching between high command and diamondbacks.
This game should be back to being very clean, tight, crisp and bug-free. If not then I will actively keep an eye out for game-breaking and fun-breaking bugs/issues. All comments (including bug reports) are very appreciated.
Inspired by Extra Credits recent video on 'awesomeness per second' and the need to continue making this game more 'fun', I've just published an update which is another major redesign of this game. Diamondbacks and several other things were removed with some new things added.
Why should anyone care what this update brings? I'm glad you asked because I believe this game should be far more fun and exciting to play. Every player is awesome and my basic summary on how to win this game is: create units. I'm not joking and it's that simple.
The game format is tug-of-war-ish but with a huge focus and return to strategic counter play. This game is still easy to learn and play but every choice you make carries alot of 'awesome' results. It's possible to win this game without your team's forces reaching the enemy base.
I'd like to think this game is a revolutionary and innovative take on tug-of-war or accessible strategic multiplayer games. I'm really tempted to finally mark this project as beta but I'd like to do more play testing with players and receive more feedback about the level of 'fun' or enjoyment.
One reason for higher awesome-per-second (APS) is that players are highly rewarded for engaging with the game. As long as your mech units are attacking enemies and you build up kills, your AI ally will weaken the enemy base until it dies (which is a new gameplay mechanic).
Inspired by continued negative feedback and the need to improve this game I've just uploaded another major change. Don't worry guys, game design is an art and a science and I'll keep redesigning this until I get it right.
Did you ever wonder if this tug-of-war-ish game could get anymore unique, fun, and strategic? Well, how about an ability that instant teleports your mech unit to the target location of your choice on the battlefield, with some exceptions on choice of location. The reason I see this as a very good update is you now have much more control over your unit's survivability and ability to send them back into battle.
I've realised one aspect of game design that is often overlooked, that's very important to do, is letting players jump back into the game and continue from a lost battle/unit/event. Another important game design aspect is preventing players from reaching that point where they feel tense and cornered with no way to respond to a perceived danger. At least that's what I can interpret from some of the feedback I'm receiving.
Thanks to more feedback I'm seeing more areas of improvement for this project, as usual. This update is mostly making the underlying game structure much more transparent.
As you can see in the image below the UI is updated. Hopefully it's now clear how rewarding and fun this game is in a matter of seconds. There's no grinding or wait but straight up awesome decisions and results (or maybe better described as high awesomeness per second) throughout game play.
Another update has been published. I'll get around to testing this eventually, but for anyone interested, a couple major changes were made.
This new game is a little abstract, and thanks to player feedback for alerting me to this, I've tried to teach everything a new player needs to know in the most quick and efficient way possible. There's now a button and message at game start showing where you can easily find that one sentence that will clarify this game and allow you to start forming strategies and having purpose for checking out your buttons and options. I'm too lazy to do the tutorial outside the map and people may miss it anyway.
As a result of play testing and player feedback I've found another type of moment in this game which isn't fun, when it's 1v1. The reason being is you only have one unit max and if you're hard countering the opponent consistently, you've kinda won the game after the first counter attack. I've solved this by adding an ability that lets you remove your current mech unit so you may deploy another.
Following from the solution to 'being trapped in a series of counters', this game seems far more interesting now. Seriously, I thank players who speak up or play test with me in open lobbies since it helps me track down problems with fun helping me make a far better game than I could ever imagine.
This game right now makes me think it's a super strategic scissors-paper-rock game or an awesome real-time pokemon battle.
I've decided to take the last update further by using visuals to help present the most important and rewarding mechanics of this game. I really hope this rewarding game play loop (that I've intentionally implemented) is very clear to the players where: you kill to build up points which builds up the flying cannon's readiness to fire, which damages the enemy base, which creates more units, which gets killed by your units, etc.
As you can see in the pics below the red halo means that unit has been marked for kill assist by player's attacks. When they die the opposing team receives points or kill score. With every 1.0 increase in kill score that team's base will fire a green energy blast damaging the enemy base.
This isn't a conventional tug-of-war where your only indicator of winning is an overwhelming force that reaches the enemy base. In this game the simple act and winning of every battle is rewarded to your team through these kill points and energy blasts. Just win enough battles to win the game
I've just published, tested, and tweaked an update that adds dynamic kill score income adjustment making this game more fun. The reason being to remove the problem (like with most other games) with being on the losing end of 'racing to the same goal/objective as the only/best way to win'.
Now, if your team is consistently ahead of the enemy team with kill efficiency or kill count that is no longer a guarantee your team will always win even if this happens very early in the game.
Multiplayer PvP games are the most challenging type to design but I have an interest in getting it right. Every time I upload an update/patch/redesign I'm one step closer to an awesome game no matter how many forms and versions of failures this game ends up being .
Thanks for reading. As usual any interest, playing this game, or feedback is appreciated.
Oops, when I received a private message from the TL bot about large images I mistook the add image button for what they wanted. I'll reupload the last set of images.
On April 13 2015 14:14 Trieva wrote: As you can see in the pics below the red halo means that unit has been marked for kill assist by player's attacks. When they die the opposing team receives points or kill score. With every 1.0 increase in kill score that team's base will fire a green energy blast damaging the enemy base.
I've just published another major update which is most useful for new or all players. I've improved the UI and visual feedback to make understanding this game much easier.
As you can see in the screenshots I want to convey how kill score (or team kill performance) is linked with the amount of green energy blast firing. You may also notice the red-ish text mentioning the counter play component of this game.