Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Member Since 03 Nov 2012
Offline Last Active Jun 15 2014 07:30 AM

#5159750 Assymetric (player vs computer) combat (turn based strategy)

Posted by on 11 June 2014 - 06:26 AM



(just for the sake of information - since I won't be going back to slots - one example of advantage of slots in terms och choices and richness is the ability to introiduce different unit types (a unique unit in any slot, not one unified stack), anyway, I agree it might be confusing to people who don't play "eurogames")


Don't know what it has to do with eurogames, I played shit tons of Paradox games, if they can be considered "eurogame", either way, we're obviuosly fundamentally differ in our understanding of "choices and richness", for me slots and such is an atavism of board games, and I just don't see how it helps anything except as a balancing band-aid, unplausible and unrealistic and unintuitive, simply lame-ass mechanic/feature, imho - the definition of "gimmick".


 How exactly slots provide choises and freedom? I just can't understand that.



Well, that's no choice at all... You will be soo restricted in deplyment it makes it very shallow tactically smile.png

(note the deployment per province, no objects)


 This made zero sence to me, so limited fixed amount of slots - isn't a restricted limitation? But  "plausible logistics based rules could create tactically/strategically meaningful choices" - is a "shallow limitation"??? HOW EXACTLY???



Not possible, the deployment is per province, not per object.


I also inluded a screen, it's for deployment of secret police agents, but the premise is the same (or very similar).


 Not possible in ur head? Or not possible as a game feature?




Anyway, first another question, if there is no pool where the units start? You mean you click "emergency, deploy police" and then huge stacks of police pop up in provinces with cities and then you struggle to move them around other provinces (it also makes you city provinces basicly immune at the start of the rebelion)? 


  I didn't say that - "emergency, deploy police" and I wasn't implying it either. I said - "...tie recruitment to amount of pop in a given province...", elaborating further, other features could be interconnected here, like again the amount of control, supply+logistics could be connected with pop state, things like loyalty, happiness, that you would need to have anyway, they can be balancing the "deployment/movement/stationing" mechanic" by intuitive/plausible limits that emerge from interconnecting elements/features mentioned as an example from top of my head.




Also how you say what portion of your forces you want to mobilize? And to where you demobilize forces (like you see it's a bit dangerous but you can recall the most of your forces so they don't scare the population and not make you bankrupt of upkeep).


  Simple really, like it works in a real life,   "mobilization/demobilization" mechanic, for example if recruitment/deployment takes x amount of time, then lets say that recruitment incorporates things like training your men(police academy, military training), then they become reserve force that you can "mobilize", the number will be in this case naturally limited by resources you have(pop,infra.,time,etc), once demobilized - they return to "reserve force" either back in the "native province" or into the "local pool" and cost a lot less to sustain than mobilizied forces, maybe an option as well to demobilize completely and remove them from a "pool of reserve forces",  this is the simplest  I could think of, while trying to stay plausible/intuitive and avoid overuse of arbitrary abstract rules.


  Short: pop+resource ->recruitment+training=reserve force/demobilized -> active duty/mobilized


 Mobilization/demobilization is  actually a good idea imho, especially if time becomes a factor, in this case planning ahead and having a strategy will be important, since you'd have to think ahead to be able "to be in the right place at the right time", which I think is one of the main game mechanic in this case, so everything that adds to it imho is good, like infrastructure and logistics and other things of that nature.

#5159237 Assymetric (player vs computer) combat (turn based strategy)

Posted by on 09 June 2014 - 06:08 AM

Well, slots provide far more choices and more rich gameplay, but I see players thinking like you do. Since it's not a wargame I can simplify it I suppose smile.png



  I don't see how abstract, unplausible limitations provide more choices, what they certainly provide is another arbitrary rule to learn for a player(complication) and another balancing headache for the developer, it's my personal opinion though, I might be wrong ofc.


  I tried to argue how plausible logistics based rules could create tactically/strategically meaningful choices without resorting to band-aids in form of outright abstract limitations, and so far I haven't seen arguments that would convince me as a potential player that  mechanic you're proposing(made up limits) is fun. 


How about this:

- there are two stacks (police and army) per province, there is an icon displayed with a number below (how many units) and tiny +/- buttons to deploy/recall units from the province

- there are of course identical units in each stack (all police is identical and all army is identical)

- you have 25 units total (police) and around 12 (army) on average (more on bigger maps)


  - that's fine I guess, try to find a screenshot of another game or what have you to illustrate it more clearly, if you mean deploy as recruitment, than yes, it seems fine.

 - ok

 - Limits on amount of troops could be done plausibly as a natural limiting factor of supply mechanic, as it's done in myriad of games, I think it will be a lot more realistic if this limitation would emerge naturally as an effect of supply+logistics mechanic. This way imho you can kill 2 targets with one shot - familliar/intuitive on one hand and realistic and simple on the other, as well as avoiding abstract limits and at least adding to realism and freedom of choises imho. I'm for plausible mechanics that balance the game rather than abstract rules.



- units are kept in the pool, you can deply them when you want

- there are logistic points, deplying in a province costs 2 logistic points (1 in provinces with a city), you get +8 logistic points per turn and can store like 12 total? Recalling a units is free.

- to deploy a unit in a province it either needs to be 50% controled by you or have a neighbour with 80% control





Tbh I think it won't do, too complicated, too abstract.  If you have pop in a game and I think you need to, you can tie recruitment to amount of pop in a given province, depending on the amount of control you have maybe? Deploying as in moving could be tied to province infrastructure, depending on things like airports, roads. This obvioulsy leads to having control of a province reflect the infrastructure objects being taken, in other words - 10% could mean peacefull protests without rebels/protesters taking hold of important infrastructure objects(occupy wallstreet), and at say 30% rebels can say occupy some goverment building or logistics/media infrastructure and at a 100% you get Kiev, Maidan. As well as each object lost leads to a certain consequence, like losing airport prevents you to deploy forces quickly this way, losing admin buildings may lead to inability to recruit or supply troops adequately and so on. This as well obviously leads to being able to deploy units not just all in a province, but to deploy them on certain objects, as lets say sending army to a city may have negative effects and you might be better off sending them to objects outside of city centre, say airports, ports and so on and reserve police for that if situation doesnt require army.

#5158951 Assymetric (player vs computer) combat (turn based strategy)

Posted by on 07 June 2014 - 02:27 PM


Visuals sad.png I made sketches and stacking looks bad, so far only by using slots you will be able to see all units on the whole map at once.


Another (but far less important) "bonus" is that it allows more tactical choices (can't use zerg tactic and send to one place all cheapest unts; also makes stronger units more useful, since you can't supplement them by hundreds of weak units).



  Still it aint the reason imho to castrate the game, I'd rather try for a workaround, then to simply cut away at freedom of choice. The zerg mechanic can be balanced in many ways, supply for example and other plausible "deterrents", intuitive and simple features interconnected with logistics. Lets say moving and stationing troops past a certain amount gives a penalty, like attrition or smtng, plenty of ways to balance it naturally imho.




Alternatively I could make just 2 slots/stacks (one for police and one for army) and then you can drop there as many (identical) units as you want (and there will be counter how many are present there already). But it also kind of cheapens the tactics (you simply prioritize provinces by throwing at it the quantity, can't have differnet units types as well).


 Try to correct the problem graphically, don't rush, look at games with stacks, try different ideas, but again don't butcher da freedom because of this.



Edit: just wanned to add, that if you are facing problems like that, imho always avoid arbitrary limitations and overly abstract mechanics in attempts to balance, in this case it's a band-aid, that will cause lotsa problems and will make the game lot less intuitive/simple, a game which can be easily decoded and "cookie-cut" and forgotten.

#5158650 Assymetric (player vs computer) combat (turn based strategy)

Posted by on 06 June 2014 - 03:40 AM

There are 8 provinces. If there are only 8 places units can be, does it make any sense to take logistics intro account? In 90% cases you will be neighbouring the province you would want to move to anyway...

Deploying/Moving units:

What you think about the 4 slots for player units? Note it's consistent & compatible with the rest of the game (drag & drop mechanic)...


And maybe I should introduce some limits to moving? Like locking a unit after a move/deployment? Or making some "logistics points" (1 point per deployment used, regenerates at a rate +5 per turn)? I don't know.


 Plausible logistics not only change the way you deploy units, it's also plays  a natural balancing role by limiting, say the amount of troops you can place/move to/in any given province, it creates  operational space for tactical decisions at least for a few turns ahead. Plus you can avoid arbitrary limitations and excessive abstraction that makes the game unnecessarily complicated by loading it with a bunch of arbitrary rules, I'd rather go with intuitive simplistic realism in form of logistics.


What you think about the 4 slots for player units? Note it's consistent & compatible with the rest of the game (drag & drop mechanic)... - I don't like it, what's the point of this limitation? So you can't drop too many? It's an outright blatant limitation, I'd rather wanna see more meaningful balancing mechanics instead. Imho overuse of abstract rules can create a headache later on in attempts to balance it.

#5157517 Assymetric (player vs computer) combat (turn based strategy)

Posted by on 02 June 2014 - 06:25 AM


The player has:

- a pool of units (police & army), there are like 25 units total max, each has type and strength (1-6); these units can be depolyed to any province anytime (teleportation), but there are only 4 unit slots per province.


 This is the biggest core "problem" here imho. I don't know why do you insist on "unplausible" as in unrealistic way of moving units(sorta whackamole), why not make a simple and intuitive logistics representation? it could be simplified and might as well actually be easier for players to pick up, as well as offering more meaningful tactical  choices, rather than make up totally arbitrary rules, which might lead to further balancing issues even at this scope. 




Each province has population (that can migrate to other provinces) and some infrastructure.


   If there is infrastructure, it begs things like airports, tv stations, administrative/governmental buildings, taking control of these leads to different logical effects. Here if you connect moving units and infrastructure in a meaningful way, some interesting mechanics can emerge, like if rebel took control of a local airport, you can no longer "teleport" there and will have to move on the land, as well as maybe introduce building, like building airports in outer provinces, or tv stations if you wanna increase your support and so on.

#4999063 Game design, ideas and concepts

Posted by on 08 November 2012 - 05:41 PM

Hello, After browsing a number of indie game forums you come across a lot of topics about people pushing ideas and trying to get someone with an actual ability to make games to work on their "brilliant ideas", in the end most of these attempts don't go anywhere, since there a LOT more ideas out there than there are "muscle"(actual game making skills) to make it work, in the end you can browse through loads of ideas and projects that just stuck, people who can make games have usually enough ideas on their own and people usually value their own ideas and concepts more than anyone else's.

Although there are thousands participants on the forums and many with technical skills, getting together and working on a single project is very hard unless you already create something attractive enough , if you just have a " brilliant idea" you will be dismissed or ignored in most cases rightfully so, since people usually unaware that their ideas suck, and as I said above - too many ideas and not enough "muscle".

What if people with "brilliant ideas" first get together and turn these ideas into well thought out game design/mechanics to a point where it could be presented to a gamedeveloper(s) as a blueprint for a game, like a scriptwriter who offers his script to a movie director.

What ya think?