On December 18 2017 19:39 noname_ wrote:
I think a nice balance between challenging, hard - and varied- gameplay, interesting story and adept design are the keys to success. [...] I don`t really mind if the base game has modifications or not, the most vital parts of a campaign are to be whole and fun to play.
I definitely agree that designing the maps to be complete, polished, and especially fun is a worthy philosophy to hold when creating or critiquing campaigns. Furthermore, I'd go ahead and say that the campaigns that add new mechanics via modding were the most successful when those new mechanics were properly introduced (e.g. player is given the opportunity to learn the ins and outs of a new spell before a spike in difficulty), which speaks to how central this design philosophy is.
On December 18 2017 20:14 outscar wrote:
I liked mission difficulty and how after you finish one objective game doesn't end and you need to complete another one.
I'm a big fan of discovering new objectives as the map plays out, though it's important to consider whether your map overstays its welcome when doing something like this. I'm glad you enjoyed Inconsummate!
On December 18 2017 21:34 Freakling wrote:
Well, I would actually like to try my hands myself at some campaign map(s) again some time. Would you be interested in putting together a team to collaborate on something really high level, with high quality maps, interesting story writing and scenarios, using custom AI scripts, EUD triggers and maybe even voice acting?
I'm very busy now with my current projects, the holidays, and my youtube channel, but I'm always available to contact for voice acting or testing/feedback. If you're still interested in February, drop me a line!
On December 18 2017 21:34 Freakling wrote:
As for classic build-and-destroy: It's good to have something focused on RTS core gameplay, but I would like so see something which is more unique and challenging than the classic campaigns (more interesting and sensical base designs for AI bases and custom AI scripts) and makes good use of more melee-map like open map designs (using custom extended ramps etc) to not shoehorn players into air strategies all the time. Interesting objectives, scripted events and bonus objectives also can help making this kind of scenario more engaging.
I wholeheartedly agree with the notion that more open map designs can benefit macro maps, and I'm a big fan of the idea of changing the objectives up so that there's a bit of variety in the core premise of the mission itself. Finding unique ways to change things up without making the variances seem like gimmicks is a tough balancing act, but if it pays off, it's well worth a designer's while.
On December 18 2017 22:10 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:
something in a tone of warcraft missions will be cool,but i think BW decoration is not so cool compared to wc3
Freakling already mentioned it earlier, but it's possible to add custom terrain/doodads to maps in 1.16.1. I've created dead versions of all units, which can be viewed
here if you'd like to see examples of what's possible. The problem with decoration in BW is mostly the asset creation itself, since it's incredibly time consuming even if you know what you're doing (and I don't), but it's certainly possible to use visual storytelling in BW if you're willing to put in the work.
On December 18 2017 22:48 Ryzel wrote:
For me, it's definitely the idea of making story decisions in game that have lasting consequences. Like being asked to leave a village alive or destroy it, and if you leave it alive you have an AI partner in some levels or additional reinforcements, but if you switch to the opposing side in a future level you now have to deal with that enemy. Also, scripted ARPG-esque boss fights.
Big fan of optional objectives and branching decisions. I have a project in conceptual stages that uses plugins to read/write death counters between the map and the mod in order to simulate bank data without creating a bunch of extra map variants (see expzerg 04 with all its different map files). It's a long ways away, but I think it's feasible in 1.16.1, and I hope more people start attempting this sort of thing in their projects if they decide to work with plugins. Boss battles, on the other hand, are explored via triggers, but ideally I'd find some way to implement some sort of tactical AI for bosses where possible, using mods to standardize damage values without having to delve into the mess that is the EUD. All possible, just a lot of technical work required behind the scenes.
On December 18 2017 23:27 Peeano wrote:
From playing UMS for almost 19 years on and off I find that most popular and enjoyable ones have:
- coop option
- random chance
- unique triggers
- upgrades/tech
- flaws (which you should see as features)
- learning curve (a map that's beatable on your first try will suck by default, don't make it too easy)
- dynamic (being able to choose game settings via beacons)
I think some degree of variance (e.g. enemy AI is unpredictable; some scripted events only happen under specific circumstances, making them rare; etc) can be a really interesting way to add replay value, keep the player on their toes, and most importantly, prevent the gameplay from feeling stale. You're basically building on top of a strong core design with a lot of what you've said, which is good because these certainly seem like things a lot of people would want in a polished project. What did you mean by 'unique triggers' and 'flaws as features'?
On December 19 2017 02:54 Bonyth wrote:
I think time limitations is a great challanging factor that almost forces u to play asap with what you are given
.
Yes, I think this is underutilized in BW content and that if balanced appropriately, would greatly add to a sense of urgency and impact. Events that wouldn't perturb you before the timer suddenly fill you with dread as you try to make your escape from one part of an infested facility to another. We all know what that's like.