|
Keep "my game is better than yours"-slapfights out of this. If the discussion devolves into simple bashing, this thread will be closed. |
Canada11607 Posts
Custom units
This concept was implemented before by the Earth series and Alpha Centauri.
The idea is to be able to design your own units by choosing from different parts.
I don't know about Earth series, but Alpha Centauri is turn-based strategy. I can't imagine being able to take the time to design ships in real time. 2 expansions could get wiped out while you're busy designing your next awesome ship.
|
On May 23 2014 02:20 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +Custom units
This concept was implemented before by the Earth series and Alpha Centauri.
The idea is to be able to design your own units by choosing from different parts.
I don't know about Earth series, but Alpha Centauri is turn-based strategy. I can't imagine being able to take the time to design ships in real time. 2 expansions could get wiped out while you're busy designing your next awesome ship.
Yeah, here's what the makers of the slowest fucking RTS on the planet have to say on the subject:
Q. Can players design their own ships?
No, ship design would be too time-consuming for a real-time strategy game.
|
On May 22 2014 02:55 urboss wrote:Before this thread dies out, I went through the thread and have collected all ideas mentioned so far. Unfiltered list of ideas in this thread:- Improve team play maps
- Have battles last longer
Reduce the amount of multitasking required
Introduce hero units
- Improve the social/chat experience
- Create a constantly changing environment that keeps players engaged
- Speed up the initial phase
Create a universally accepted "BGH" mode
Have slower games with more time to react
- Allow better chances for comebacks
Simplify unit control and UI
Remove the importance of well-defined builds
Let it have an easier learning curve
Make laddering less "hard work" and less stressfully competitive
- Allow for more positional tactics
- Eliminate the boring phases of reaching supply cap and remaxing supply
- Make players find resources by exploring the map
- Create two entirely different games for hardcore and casual players
- Improve plot and writing of the single player campaign
Make the game free-to-play, with microtransactions (How the hell would micro transactions work?)
Make team play the default mode
- Put less emphasis on big explosive units, more on light and fast units
- Make the design of the units more interesting
Allow the players to customize their units/buildings/race
Make ladder games shorter (~20min) (They typically are sub-20min)
Get rid of base-building
- Let players develop characteristic playstyles / have favorite units (What?)
Allow players to be good at one thing and horrible at another
Have a LOT more different races (Civ like)
- Place more emphasis on arcade multiplayer
Have a more complex resource system: food, wood, gold, gas etc..
- Emphasize tactics with good map/unit design
Create a massive, large scale MMMORTS that spans the whole globe
Devote your resources into a revivable, upgradeable 'hero' unit
Make RTS games less fixated on keyboard/mouse input methods
Bring RTS games to other platforms (browser, mobile)
- Avoid concentrated resource spots, spread them across the map
Make the game start at stone age and progress toward the future (Civ like)
Find better ways to select and command units / buildings
Let units have defensive stances, formations, inventories and loadouts
Have fewer units per player (less learning curve)
Disallow massive hard counters
Have upgrades for units that are mutually exclusive
Include early base defenses at the spawning locations to avoid rushes
- Scouting should be less of a choice and more of a requirement
Make the games less of a click-orgy
Team games: let players control specific types of units
Team games: have one master strategist responsible for building stuff
Let AI take care of economy, let the player focus on strategy/tactics
- Make sure that beginners only face other beginners on the ladder
Include diplomacy, building wonders, gaining territory
- Remove the supply cap
- Make the RTS genre "trendy" again
FFA games: On defeat, respawn as an ally of the defeater
- Make it possible for spectators to join in the middle of a game (lag issues?)
Let players start on two bases
Randomize the buildings/units/resources the players start with
Have matches with different objectives (a la Counter Strike)
Let players pick from units to forge their own race at the start of the game
Instant Action from the get-go (less strategic build up)
- Let each unit have more space, avoid "clumping up"
- Lessen the downtime, increase the "action time".
This list is quite impressive, I must say, good work TL! You will note that most of the suggestions try to make improvements on the existing games. There have been very few posts that give us a complete idea of how a new, transforming game may look like. If there is still interest, it would be great if we could come up with some complete game descriptions. New games can be formed by combining several points from the list. But which ones are the most important? Also, I think there is still room for some radically new ideas.
I went through the list as if I was thinking these changes would pertain to StarCraft. I don't like most of them. If they were implemented into a new RTS game that nobody has ever heard of before, go for it! Although there are some contradicting points also. In the list it says, less downtime, more action, shorter games, but also says, create own races, more resources, slower game speed, avoid rushes, etc. What? Those can't go together. Then there are other things like, "Randomize the buildings/units/resources the players start with". For an eSport (StarCraft)? HELL no. That would be so imbalanced in most cases. But for a game that nobody has ever heard of before, and to start with some fresh ideas, maybe.
|
On May 23 2014 02:20 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +Custom units
This concept was implemented before by the Earth series and Alpha Centauri.
The idea is to be able to design your own units by choosing from different parts.
I don't know about Earth series, but Alpha Centauri is turn-based strategy. I can't imagine being able to take the time to design ships in real time. 2 expansions could get wiped out while you're busy designing your next awesome ship.
I think the idea has merit though. You could make custom units out of the game for example.
Say you have a basic fighter ship or something. You get 100 points to allocate or something. You're allowed to allocate those points into HP, attack, attack rate or even speed. So units start getting quite personal and you can't really complain about imba if your fighter sucks since you can just allocate the 100 points differently.
As long as players can allocate the points in whichever way they want with 0 hassle (unlike runes in LoL for example) and the game devs make sure that allocating points is balanced (eg it would cost 5 points to get +1 attack, 10 points to get 10 hp, etc), there should be some room for custom units without breaking balance.
On top of that, you add custom skins and stuff. Kind of like LoL.
|
On May 23 2014 03:14 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2014 02:20 Falling wrote:Custom units
This concept was implemented before by the Earth series and Alpha Centauri.
The idea is to be able to design your own units by choosing from different parts.
I don't know about Earth series, but Alpha Centauri is turn-based strategy. I can't imagine being able to take the time to design ships in real time. 2 expansions could get wiped out while you're busy designing your next awesome ship. I think the idea has merit though. You could make custom units out of the game for example. Say you have a basic fighter ship or something. You get 100 points to allocate or something. You're allowed to allocate those points into HP, attack, attack rate or even speed. So units start getting quite personal and you can't really complain about imba if your fighter sucks since you can just allocate the 100 points differently. As long as players can allocate the points in whichever way they want with 0 hassle (unlike runes in LoL for example) and the game devs make sure that allocating points is balanced (eg it would cost 5 points to get +1 attack, 10 points to get 10 hp, etc), there should be some room for custom units without breaking balance. On top of that, you add custom skins and stuff. Kind of like LoL.
To be honest, it sounds like a talent tree for RTS games, which I actually think sounds sexy as shit.
You a bio player? Get the talents to produce marines 1-2 seconds faster.
Mech player? Get the mastery to give turrets +1 range and tanks +1 sight
Muta/Ling player? Creep Tumor cooldown reduced by 2 seconds
Immortal play? Robo builds 5 seconds faster
etc....
Wouldn't that be sick!
You literally will get people to become specialized in their expertise. "Macro Player" "mech player" etc...
|
On May 23 2014 03:46 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2014 03:14 Incognoto wrote:On May 23 2014 02:20 Falling wrote:Custom units
This concept was implemented before by the Earth series and Alpha Centauri.
The idea is to be able to design your own units by choosing from different parts.
I don't know about Earth series, but Alpha Centauri is turn-based strategy. I can't imagine being able to take the time to design ships in real time. 2 expansions could get wiped out while you're busy designing your next awesome ship. I think the idea has merit though. You could make custom units out of the game for example. Say you have a basic fighter ship or something. You get 100 points to allocate or something. You're allowed to allocate those points into HP, attack, attack rate or even speed. So units start getting quite personal and you can't really complain about imba if your fighter sucks since you can just allocate the 100 points differently. As long as players can allocate the points in whichever way they want with 0 hassle (unlike runes in LoL for example) and the game devs make sure that allocating points is balanced (eg it would cost 5 points to get +1 attack, 10 points to get 10 hp, etc), there should be some room for custom units without breaking balance. On top of that, you add custom skins and stuff. Kind of like LoL. To be honest, it sounds like a talent tree for RTS games, which I actually think sounds sexy as shit. You a bio player? Get the talents to produce marines 1-2 seconds faster. Mech player? Get the mastery to give turrets +1 range and tanks +1 sight Muta/Ling player? Creep Tumor cooldown reduced by 2 seconds Immortal play? Robo builds 5 seconds faster etc.... Wouldn't that be sick! You literally will get people to become specialized in their expertise. "Macro Player" "mech player" etc...
If Blizzard isn't willing to change the micro mechanics of the unit, I doubt they actually want to change the unit themselves. As much as riveting and nerdgasmic the list are, SC2 won't be the game to contain them.
It will be someone else that have enough passion in order to implement those system into the game. So kickstart your own RTS!
|
On May 23 2014 03:46 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2014 03:14 Incognoto wrote:On May 23 2014 02:20 Falling wrote:Custom units
This concept was implemented before by the Earth series and Alpha Centauri.
The idea is to be able to design your own units by choosing from different parts.
I don't know about Earth series, but Alpha Centauri is turn-based strategy. I can't imagine being able to take the time to design ships in real time. 2 expansions could get wiped out while you're busy designing your next awesome ship. I think the idea has merit though. You could make custom units out of the game for example. Say you have a basic fighter ship or something. You get 100 points to allocate or something. You're allowed to allocate those points into HP, attack, attack rate or even speed. So units start getting quite personal and you can't really complain about imba if your fighter sucks since you can just allocate the 100 points differently. As long as players can allocate the points in whichever way they want with 0 hassle (unlike runes in LoL for example) and the game devs make sure that allocating points is balanced (eg it would cost 5 points to get +1 attack, 10 points to get 10 hp, etc), there should be some room for custom units without breaking balance. On top of that, you add custom skins and stuff. Kind of like LoL. To be honest, it sounds like a talent tree for RTS games, which I actually think sounds sexy as shit. You a bio player? Get the talents to produce marines 1-2 seconds faster. Mech player? Get the mastery to give turrets +1 range and tanks +1 sight Muta/Ling player? Creep Tumor cooldown reduced by 2 seconds Immortal play? Robo builds 5 seconds faster etc.... Wouldn't that be sick! You literally will get people to become specialized in their expertise. "Macro Player" "mech player" etc...
I personally don't like the idea at all.
|
On May 23 2014 03:50 sM.Zik wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2014 03:46 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 23 2014 03:14 Incognoto wrote:On May 23 2014 02:20 Falling wrote:Custom units
This concept was implemented before by the Earth series and Alpha Centauri.
The idea is to be able to design your own units by choosing from different parts.
I don't know about Earth series, but Alpha Centauri is turn-based strategy. I can't imagine being able to take the time to design ships in real time. 2 expansions could get wiped out while you're busy designing your next awesome ship. I think the idea has merit though. You could make custom units out of the game for example. Say you have a basic fighter ship or something. You get 100 points to allocate or something. You're allowed to allocate those points into HP, attack, attack rate or even speed. So units start getting quite personal and you can't really complain about imba if your fighter sucks since you can just allocate the 100 points differently. As long as players can allocate the points in whichever way they want with 0 hassle (unlike runes in LoL for example) and the game devs make sure that allocating points is balanced (eg it would cost 5 points to get +1 attack, 10 points to get 10 hp, etc), there should be some room for custom units without breaking balance. On top of that, you add custom skins and stuff. Kind of like LoL. To be honest, it sounds like a talent tree for RTS games, which I actually think sounds sexy as shit. You a bio player? Get the talents to produce marines 1-2 seconds faster. Mech player? Get the mastery to give turrets +1 range and tanks +1 sight Muta/Ling player? Creep Tumor cooldown reduced by 2 seconds Immortal play? Robo builds 5 seconds faster etc.... Wouldn't that be sick! You literally will get people to become specialized in their expertise. "Macro Player" "mech player" etc... I personally don't like the idea at all.
It could create some crazy imbalance as well..
|
For me Its the comeback or respawn mechanic in Mobas that work out really nice.
If you are new to the game you play in a team, you have others you can rely on and learn from at the start.
And you are not dead immediately if you make an error.
If I would translate starcraft 2 to dota 2 it would feel like getting ganked at the 5 minute mark and dying and not being able to respawn at the nexus.
StarCraft 2 is just 2 unforgiving and focuses too much on building stuff and resource mechanics then on actually fighting.
Its like being the healer in wow clicking on all these wonderful raidbars to heal and dispel and not really taking part or appreciating the fight around you.
In warcraft 3 you had 5 guys waving their hands around the undead mine or 5 whisps sitting in the mine and not constantly producing workers and mainarding and what not even on lower levels.
WarCraft 3 the hero mechanice the hero respawn and several other mechanics like townportals and what not made retreats and comebacks viable, armies did not evaporate in seconds and what not.
And thats Why I think a Warcraft 4 that focuses on these mechanice would be far more viable and could receive a massive audience if not screwd up.
|
On May 23 2014 03:57 Mistakes wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2014 03:50 sM.Zik wrote:On May 23 2014 03:46 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 23 2014 03:14 Incognoto wrote:On May 23 2014 02:20 Falling wrote:Custom units
This concept was implemented before by the Earth series and Alpha Centauri.
The idea is to be able to design your own units by choosing from different parts.
I don't know about Earth series, but Alpha Centauri is turn-based strategy. I can't imagine being able to take the time to design ships in real time. 2 expansions could get wiped out while you're busy designing your next awesome ship. I think the idea has merit though. You could make custom units out of the game for example. Say you have a basic fighter ship or something. You get 100 points to allocate or something. You're allowed to allocate those points into HP, attack, attack rate or even speed. So units start getting quite personal and you can't really complain about imba if your fighter sucks since you can just allocate the 100 points differently. As long as players can allocate the points in whichever way they want with 0 hassle (unlike runes in LoL for example) and the game devs make sure that allocating points is balanced (eg it would cost 5 points to get +1 attack, 10 points to get 10 hp, etc), there should be some room for custom units without breaking balance. On top of that, you add custom skins and stuff. Kind of like LoL. To be honest, it sounds like a talent tree for RTS games, which I actually think sounds sexy as shit. You a bio player? Get the talents to produce marines 1-2 seconds faster. Mech player? Get the mastery to give turrets +1 range and tanks +1 sight Muta/Ling player? Creep Tumor cooldown reduced by 2 seconds Immortal play? Robo builds 5 seconds faster etc.... Wouldn't that be sick! You literally will get people to become specialized in their expertise. "Macro Player" "mech player" etc... I personally don't like the idea at all. It could create some crazy imbalance as well..
Yes, it would create some absolutely lopsided imbalance. Rush strats get more intense, macro strats become more... macro-y?
Its kind of like a more intense version of Age of Mythology in tech tree specializations, and bonus spells/units. I didn't really track the AoM competitive scene, but it will allow noobs to feel more entrenched in something other than their race.
Suddenly players focus themselves on specializations instead of abstractly labeling themselves on a race. It would require a complete rewiring of what we think about a competitive RTS.
|
On May 23 2014 03:57 Mistakes wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2014 03:50 sM.Zik wrote:On May 23 2014 03:46 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 23 2014 03:14 Incognoto wrote:On May 23 2014 02:20 Falling wrote:Custom units
This concept was implemented before by the Earth series and Alpha Centauri.
The idea is to be able to design your own units by choosing from different parts.
I don't know about Earth series, but Alpha Centauri is turn-based strategy. I can't imagine being able to take the time to design ships in real time. 2 expansions could get wiped out while you're busy designing your next awesome ship. I think the idea has merit though. You could make custom units out of the game for example. Say you have a basic fighter ship or something. You get 100 points to allocate or something. You're allowed to allocate those points into HP, attack, attack rate or even speed. So units start getting quite personal and you can't really complain about imba if your fighter sucks since you can just allocate the 100 points differently. As long as players can allocate the points in whichever way they want with 0 hassle (unlike runes in LoL for example) and the game devs make sure that allocating points is balanced (eg it would cost 5 points to get +1 attack, 10 points to get 10 hp, etc), there should be some room for custom units without breaking balance. On top of that, you add custom skins and stuff. Kind of like LoL. To be honest, it sounds like a talent tree for RTS games, which I actually think sounds sexy as shit. You a bio player? Get the talents to produce marines 1-2 seconds faster. Mech player? Get the mastery to give turrets +1 range and tanks +1 sight Muta/Ling player? Creep Tumor cooldown reduced by 2 seconds Immortal play? Robo builds 5 seconds faster etc.... Wouldn't that be sick! You literally will get people to become specialized in their expertise. "Macro Player" "mech player" etc... I personally don't like the idea at all. It could create some crazy imbalance as well..
That depends on how big your changes are.
I would see this work more for a game with a hard counter system though, that way even souped up units would have their counter. In a game like SC2? getting +1 range marines is huge for example. If you're in a game with hard counters everywhere (rather than hard and soft that you get in SC2), this should be able to work out without problem. I'd go a step further and say that for this to work, civs/races need to follow the same core design, kind of like AoE.
As interesting as it all sounds, I think it would definitely take a full-blown studio to implement these sorts of ideas.
|
On May 23 2014 04:02 Holy_AT wrote:
For me Its the comeback or respawn mechanic in Mobas that work out really nice.
If you are new to the game you play in a team, you have others you can rely on and learn from at the start.
And you are not dead immediately if you make an error.
If I would translate starcraft 2 to dota 2 it would feel like getting ganked at the 5 minute mark and dying and not being able to respawn at the nexus.
StarCraft 2 is just 2 unforgiving and focuses too much on building stuff and resource mechanics then on actually fighting.
Its like being the healer in wow clicking on all these wonderful raidbars to heal and dispel and not really taking part or appreciating the fight around you.
In warcraft 3 you had 5 guys waving their hands around the undead mine or 5 whisps sitting in the mine and not constantly producing workers and mainarding and what not even on lower levels.
WarCraft 3 the hero mechanice the hero respawn and several other mechanics like townportals and what not made retreats and comebacks viable, armies did not evaporate in seconds and what not.
And thats Why I think a Warcraft 4 that focuses on these mechanice would be far more viable and could receive a massive audience if not screwd up.
True, but Wc3 did not get as big as BW or SC2 did, why would an WC4 be?
Why do you think wc3 "failed"? Was it timing? was it the Korean scandal? Was it Dota and other custom maps taking over the game? was it the cheaters on the Ladder?
|
Are you nuts? WC3 had a huge scene, it's like top 5 RTS ever made? Just because a game doesn't get as big as BW did in Korea doesn't mean that a game failed. WC3 was successful, huge numbers don't matter, it's the appreciation of those who play the game that does.
|
On May 14 2014 05:01 urboss wrote:
I guess a good approach is to take the best features from both games and merge them into something new. IMHO, this has already been done and exists for FREE, right now, under your very nose in the SC2 arcade: Kobold Tribes.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/387340-kobold-tribes
http://www.koboldtribes.com/ (while the blog is not kept up regularly, the forums are fairly active, and the game is about to see another update which allows for multi-team & FFA variants).
I would encourage everyone who has an interest in both MOBA's and RTS to give it a try and help grow our small community!
|
On May 23 2014 04:19 HypertonicHydroponic wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2014 05:01 urboss wrote:
I guess a good approach is to take the best features from both games and merge them into something new. IMHO, this has already been done and exists for FREE, right now, under your very nose in the SC2 arcade: Kobold Tribes. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/387340-kobold-tribeshttp://www.koboldtribes.com/ (while the blog is not kept up regularly, the forums are fairly active, and the game is about to see another update which allows for multi-team & FFA variants). I would encourage everyone who has an interest in both MOBA's and RTS to give it a try and help grow our small community!
Everytime I hear people whine about how bad the arcade is I keep thinking about these small but thriving communities of SC2 mods. Bravo sir 
|
Kobold Tribes looks like a very unique game with some interesting ideas.
I wouldnt call it "RTS" though. So it is probably not what we are looking for in this thread.
@Mistakes: The big list is just all the ideas that were posted in this thread dumped into a list.
Obviously not all the ideas in that list are equally important.
It is now open for cherry-picking.
And yeah, one thing that was mentioned pretty often was to make a game that is free-to-play.
As a game developer you would then need to make money with microtransactions.
How might this work in an RTS game?
- You can purchase different skins
- You can speed up some single player missions
- You can purchase additional heros
- You can purchase additional races
- You can purchase additional buildings
- You can purchase extra upgrades/tech
- You can purchase additional single player game modes
- If we have custom race design --> Make some valuable units purchasable
- If we have custom unit design --> Make some valuable upgradable parts purchasable
Those microtransactions would not happen in game of course.
The important thing to note is that this wouldn't affect the pro scene but only the casuals.
As a top player you simply have to buy all important upgrades anyway which would amount to the full game prize (~60$).
|
On May 23 2014 05:42 urboss wrote:
Kobold Tribes looks like a very unique game with some interesting ideas.
I wouldnt call it "RTS" though. So it is probably not what we are looking for in this thread.
@Mistakes: The big list is just all the ideas that were posted in this thread dumped into a list.
Obviously not all the ideas in that list are equally important.
It is now open for cherry-picking.
And yeah, one thing that was mentioned pretty often was to make a game that is free-to-play.
As a game developer you would then need to make money with microtransactions.
How might this work in an RTS game?
- You can purchase different skins
- You can speed up some single player missions
- You can purchase additional heros
- You can purchase additional races
- You can purchase additional buildings
- You can purchase extra upgrades/tech
- You can purchase additional single player game modes
- If we have custom race design --> Make some valuable units purchasable
- If we have custom unit design --> Make some valuable upgradable parts purchasable
Those microtransactions would not happen in game of course.
The important thing to note is that this wouldn't affect the pro scene but only the casuals.
As a top player you simply have to buy all important upgrades anyway which would amount to the full game prize (~60$).
Yeah I just thought I'd go through it and see what I thought of them myself. Haha.
Something like that would work if there were the StarCraft 2: Casual and StarCraft 2: Pro versions. The casual version would be free and you could buy stuff with micro transactions like you stated. But the pro version or "pro package" from the store ($60) would change the game to be "tournament" or "pro" mode to make it balanced and fair. Also laddering would (or should) only be allowed for people who are using the "pro mode" of the game, again to keep it fair.
I could possibly see something like that working. Making micro transactions work in an RTS and an extremely competitive (with a legacy) RTS such as StarCraft is really difficult.
|
^Actually adding skins + models + voice pack isn't exactly difficult to add in SC2.
|
On May 23 2014 06:06 Mistakes wrote:
Something like that would work if there were the StarCraft 2: Casual and StarCraft 2: Pro versions. The casual version would be free and you could buy stuff with micro transactions like you stated. But the pro version or "pro package" from the store ($60) would change the game to be "tournament" or "pro" mode to make it balanced and fair. Also laddering would (or should) only be allowed for people who are using the "pro mode" of the game, again to keep it fair.
I could possibly see something like that working. Making micro transactions work in an RTS and an extremely competitive (with a legacy) RTS such as StarCraft is really difficult.
I think they are going in that direction already, with Starter Edition (Arcade/Customs) being F2P.
Meanwhile the full campaign and ladder still costs money.
With LotV, Blizz has another chance to advertise the F2P version (which they don't seem to market well at all, right now).
|
On May 23 2014 06:13 Xiphos wrote:
^Actually adding skins + models + voice pack isn't exactly difficult to add in SC2.
Yes but balancing extra buildings, units, upgrades, etc is. And people probably wouldn't spend a whole ton of money on making their SCVs look different and the Psionic Storm ability having a different splash animation. Haha. At least I wouldn't think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
