Smakpopy

Members
  • Content count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

127 Neutral

About Smakpopy

  • Rank
    Member
  1. A diffrent type of rts.

      You could have a set number of breeding combos to toggle on throughout a multiplayer game. Sort of like magic the gathering and the sideboard cards, when you come up against something the units you have cant beat, you can start generating some mixed race from your sideboard.   That way you would not have to come up with a combo on the fly.   Would rts really be better for this than a turn based game?   A game I have been playing lately is xcom, and I could see how coming up with your own mixed up units to play in a squad like turn based game could be fun.   Or it could be played out like savage newearth, its a sort of rts but also a first person shooter.   I think a game like savage is always going to be better than mouser games like starcraft, warcraft, or command and conquer. Because units left alone or even those in combat that you aren't micromanaging are going to make a lot of mistakes.   Cool thing about savage is that each team has a player controlling it like its a rts, but every combatant for each side is directly controlled by separate players.   http://www.newerth.com/
  2. If you are using a month as a time cycle you could show a moon picture waxing and waning from full moon to sliver.
  3. World War 2 Game - Economy Concept

    You might want to add the civilian populations as a resource to be kept track of. Not everyone is in the military, but the civilian population is a resource as well. To keep the factories running, perform administrative tasks, manage shipping and well everything not related directly to combat.   Eventually the world war took a bad turn and killing civilians became a lateral goal to aid in the war effort, it was called collateral damage but it weakened moral and the ability to recover and carry on the fight.   Then there are partisans, freedom fighters or rebels that are not soldiers, or not soldiers of the country they harass.   If you are focusing only on the merchant and naval fleet at sea these things may not matter as much in this game.
  4. A diffrent type of rts.

    Unless you purposefully pick out identifiable traits and try to tie them into the real world as a poorly disguised inside joke, I don't see anything wrong with making black orcs tougher yet possibly not as smart as goblins or whatever. In lord of the rings the black skinned/painted orcs with the white hand mark on them were stronger. bred that way out of the earth as a twisted form of elf.   There is no way to avoid having characteristics that set races apart and personalize them in a fantasy world. Players will want to look at a race, read a short description and have a feel for what its all about. So having intelligent devious yet weak goblins or gnomes breed with a big nasty troll to create a half breed that's not quite as large as a troll, but is more cunning and agile could make it a desired pairing.   If you go into detail as much as the "sims" game goes to personalize every character in the game, and then breed them together it would be way too much micromanagement for a rts.   What you could do is develop a combination, take the trolls and goblins base hereditary stock, and then experiment with percentages of lineage from each type to end up with a desired set of characteristics or stats in combat. Then once discovered you could apply those base races as resources that you must combine in the correct parts or fractions thereof. And as long as you have the right mix of the base breed you can create a stock or barracks of the hybrid. After that they could just breed with eachother.   I think this type of game could be fun, as it may end up like spore but instead of one race you have various genetic branches you can explore.   I think what others may have posted worries about is a deep seated ethnic slant to the game corresponding with real world peoples and cultures.   I don't think its an issue as its a game, and you would have to go out of your way to pattern in such slights.   If you are familiar with the wheel of time series, the trollocs in those books are humanoids with various beastial mixes to them. Horns, feathers, claws, hooves and all in a humanish looking form. That may give some inspiration.
  5. (just an idea)   You could have a clock, or what looks like a clock with a min hand but no hour hand. One revolution could be a day, or week, or month, or year that you set it for. Any time something is selected a number appears digitally near the middle of the clock counting down full revolutions of that min hand until that task is completed.   So if you set the clock to count as a single day for one complete circle of the min hand, and you target a structure that takes four and a half more days to complete, the digital readout would show 4.5   Looking at budget window and there are 25 more days until taxes are paid/due then it would show 25   The min hand would continue to go around the clock at the same pace, counting off one full day every rotation.   Changing the speed of the game 1x 2x 3x 4x would make it spin faster, or alternatively make everything require less "days" or revolutions to complete.   That way in one corner of the screen you are showing time passing, and also a way to quickly show progress on any action you are taking with just a few digits in the middle of the clock.
  6. In what ways can a text adventure have combat?

    You may want to take a look at dragonrealms, http://www.play.net/dr/ (You can of course take this reply as one from a gamer, and not one skilled in creating a game)   It is a text based game with combat, it has been years and years since I played it, but you would enter into stances and ranges, and make various attack types as your opponent would be in other stances. Anything from laying on the ground dead, to kneeling, standing, tiredness. A lot of the actions were based more on a players skill value and what you were doing and not so much die rolls. I think, its been a while. It would take pages to detail all of the commands, here is a link to many of them if not all of them. http://www.play.net/dr/info/commands_all.asp   Many commands are emotes and other non combat commands, way more commands than you could have buttons on the screen for. But you could have some form of radial wheel or drop down menu that could be navigated to select a command with point and click.  The nature of many commands is such that you may have an action, and a target thing you are interacting with, and maybe some modifier word that helps define how you are interacting with that thing. Instead of punch, or punch the monster, it may be punch the monster in the head.   For a real text based game you may as someone above said need to look around, and be able to freely see every bit of your surroundings before you even make an action like a movement. And then that would have to be figured into the combat timer. Monsters will periodically advance to the next round, giving you maybe 30-45 seconds to type out your action for your round. Unless you go about having time stop at every instant and let the player consider in depth every possible action before proceeding.
  7. "What if?"   This is just an idea, or cloud of ideas that have formed over time and I will attempt to transcribe them.   You need not bother reading or replying to this as a serious game topic, more as a diversion if you have free time to read it instead of the comics.   What if a game world was created that consisted of a large variety of game types. A 3 dimensional world that could be navigated to enter into many game modes, many of them interconnected. One limited example of an interconnected game is the way eve online interacts with the dust console game. In eve players play the space faring part of the game, on starships, and in dust players are on planets and control in first person shooter style combatants. And the actions of one group of players impacts the other.   What if a core world was generated and then spun off many lateral games that would interact?   A good game engine for such a game could be what will be used in everquest next. It and other newer games use a voxel structure that allows parts of the world to be assembled and disassembled. Instead of limited battleground instances that warcraft uses for pvp combat, eq next could allow players to build up villages, towns, forts, castles, or even just lonely tents and hunting cabins. And then players could form alliances to protect territory or go to war and destroy enemy territory, or conquer their lands and take control of the resources they generate.   I know that letting players go off and dig and destroy or build anything anywhere could be rather... messy in the long run. So maybe limiting the lasting changes a player or group of players could do to the game would be good. I know eq next says they plan to have any destruction revert after a period of time, maybe as quickly as 30 mins. I think giving players a certain capacity for lasting change and letting them decide when and where to effect change would be better.   A game that starts with a completely formed landmass and living plants and animals, as well as indigenous fantasy peoples both friend and foe would be good. No large existing civilizations, let the players decide when and where to begin development of the towns they will use. And allow players to develop magic and technology via experimentation and interaction with the environment. So that players would drive the direction of the game, be it more of a technological, magical, spiritual magic, direction or even to achieve a more classical level of fantasy tech, arms and armor up to the discovery of gunpowder.   But it would not just be an mmo, as players could form guilds or civilizations and elect leaders, those leaders could then take part in a macro game similar to how SimCity, and civilization play out. But instead of sending npc spies on missions, every action taken would be done by a player. So to have a real intelligence network, you would actually have to have rogue agents installed in the enemy civilizations and safehouses and methods for relaying information and materials to and from the agents.   Instead of just sending a /tell or a /whisper, if you wanted to communicate with someone you would have to be physically close to another player in the game or hire someone to transport letters or relay messages.   But the game would not just be everquest like, and doac like, and civilization like, there could be a lot more added to the world. Whole other games accessed within the world, say your character is going out hunting for game, you could access a form of the deer hunter game using a bow and arrow, or possibly later with the technology a firearm. The game could be taken in the direction of modern technology, with combustion engines, vehicles, ships and weapons that would allow a form of the world wars to play out.   A micro part of the game may be like playing Farmville, someone may work to build a farm in the game. And others might work to defend, or to ransack that farm.   Not only could many games link up to a world like this, I think another thing could be added to it, the ability to browse or use the internet itself, in a form of 3d browser.   Maybe the whole game aspect of this idea could just be scrapped as it would take years to sync up so many intricate aspects of the game,   There must be something like it in the works, and here I just found a link to some news of one: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=98753&page=1 / http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/201/1/3DWeb.pdf / http://www.foxnews.com/story/2008/09/18/three-dimensional-web-pages-possible-with-browser-plug-in/   So what if a browser was created that allowed you to flow to and from a 3d gamelike world, to sections of the internet?   Maybe there could be sections of the 3d gamescape, where one continent is all very secured and verified to be filled with "links" to virus free adware free sites. And a whole nother island could contain all adult content, and another island could be dedicated to social media linkages like facebook and twitter. One area could allow you to access many types of games. And another island could be filled with repositories of knowledge, libraries, and connections to colleges.   Since a 3d game environment does not really have to adhere to physical laws, it could have connections in the way the game myst plays out. Going deeper into the rabbit hole.   There could also be a 3d environment for shopping, each store could either have links to their webpage or better yet each store could create a 3d building that people could walk around with avatars and shop online. Travel to individual stores could be instantaneous, once bookmarked or if you know the name of the store or website. You could even have employees working at computers on avatars right there to answer questions about products instead of waiting on phone lines or for email responses.   If a 3d engine became widely used and accepted it may even take the place of normal webpage formats.
  8. Theoretical Multiplayer Game

    [quote name='cronocr' timestamp='1348188224' post='4982209'] So the game could indeed start in the stone age, and when it reaches the atomic era players will be so tempted to start a full scale nuclear war, that it will be unavoidable. At that point the game's technology age will automatically restart. [/quote] That was an aspect to a previous iteration of this game idea, that would have modeled itself closely with the CIV series as well as elements of the major mmo games and games such as counterstrike and call of duty, where eventually the cavemen would develop technology to make guns and the game could be played out on a global scale. But that idea was to model the earth as precisely as possible, even size, and there just would not be enough players to man all the aircraft carriers, planes, tanks, ect to play out a world war. This idea here, there would be one continent broken up into zones and each zone would be about the size of a savage map, or maybe 2 or 3 times as large since there would be many factions not just 2. By having what amounts to many small persistant battlegrounds closely grouped together, you avoid the tedium many players hate of traveling long distances to get to the action. When i had mentioned the previous idea to some friends, one in particular said it would be impossible to make a game that could model the entire world so closely, let alone get enough players into it at once to avoid heavy use of npcs. What you want to avoid is a game too intricate that kids cannot figure out how to do everything, and too dumbed down that adults and many kids would find boring or repetitive. If i ever made a game like this i originally would have called it something like civilization simulation, or Sim Civ. But i guess taking two popular named games and combining not only the name but many aspects in their games would get shot down. Maybe partner with stronghold makers and make it "Stronghold Online" or "Stronghold MMO", Since the game revolves around building up defendable cities and fortifications.
  9. Theoretical Multiplayer Game

    [quote name='cronocr' timestamp='1348185339' post='4982198'] I think the few people that have power in their hands must keep the population happy to avoid rebellions, for example keeping monsters outside the land, maintaining a healthy economy, etc. As a player earns more and more territory, he will also be required to do more micro-management tasks. At some point the player will be forced to ally with other players to take care of these tasks so he can continue with conquest campaigns. But if the player doesn't care about his land and his people, individual players could find chances to sabotage his power. For example under a good government the "burn this farm" action will be grayed out, and farms will randomly enable this action as rating goes down. With supplies reduced the player's army will lose its combat performance and soldiers will defect. This will become a snowball effect that could quickly remove all of the player's control of his territory, allowing other players to take advantage and become new rulers. [/quote] That is a good idea. Also if a town or guild does nothing but attack its surrounding civilizations the rest of the cities would take note and ally themselves against it. And yes i think there should be initially a democratically elected leader of each town and or region, and that a group could decide to take control by force and then set up their own government. I just added the idea of food as a resource to the mix and if disgruntled players or enemy nations decided to they could focus their attacks on a towns or guilds food supplies and production ability. The king may feast, and the army may get rations, but if the workers and general populous of a town sant eat they will desert you or revolt.
  10. Theoretical Multiplayer Game

    Well, the idea is that instead of advancing personal goals, you are trying to help your civilization advance. It could be your guild, or maybe towns and cities could be seperate from guilds. Say you could ally yourself with a particular village at the begining that has a mix of players who are solo or also from multiple guilds. Then the inhabitants could vote for a leader who would handle the rts aspects of the town. Even if a guild controls a city or a castle they still need inhabitants, who may not be guilded. But i think guilds themselves should have the ability to declare war on another guild, or another town, or simply flag an individual as "kos". And a guild, OR the leader of a city, should be able to go to war with another town and attack it. destroy or take it over. The conquered could either join forces with you or flee to another town. And about banditry, i see several resource nodes on the maps, where it would take several players efforts to collect a wagonload. And when the wagon is full it could be rolled towards a town, since there would be wagonloads from 6 or more locations on each map going to different towns, the leaders of the towns or guilds would have to arrange for gaurds, players, who would escort the wagons. But a small number of players with bows in a good ambush position should be able to take out some of the gaurds before getting attacked. And if the workers have no military escort... they will have to defend themselves with tools, shovels ect. The bandit groups would have to be very secretive about the location of their hold, a cave or maybe just a cabin in the woods. And it would add some inrtigue to the game for the townsfolk to hire spys to locate the bandits, and hire mercenaries or bounty hunters to take them out. But i think the main goal of the game should be about war between the cities, regions, guilds. And there should be a way made for players to align themselves with a guild or town, maybe as a follower and not a full member. So you only have to adventure alone if you want to, in fact that could be a big part of the game. You alone working as a craftsman in a town could earn money to reinvest in your business. As well as provide a service that the guilds or towns require. One of the big crazes is something called moba or something like that, its like warcraft rts but you only control one character, and i think its all top down not like a fps game. Although i am in a beta for smite, and it is a fps game similar to moba's. But each of those games have no leader on each side, and when towers are destroyed you cannot rebuild them. Also mobas have npcs that fight for you. In the game i suggest i think there should be no npcs that do anything for you, only the barbarian civs that attack you and animals or monsters you hunt. One of the problems with eve is that new players are years behind the current players, as skills are gained over long periods of real time. In my game new skills would come to you along with new technology, buildings made in your city, items you obtain by trade or tradeskilling, and of course you could pick a basic skillset to advance at any time. Basic job that you do such as gathering or manipulating a particular resource. An important job would be gathering and preparing food, since going without food would reduce your effectiveness by a % off all stats and skills until you eat a few regular meals. And going without food or with bad food for a long time could terminate your character, perhaps as your stats reach zero from lack of food/drink.
  11. Theoretical Multiplayer Game

    What is fun is different for each player, you may not enjoy any competitive games but many do. And in this supposed game if most players have been destroyed by a large guild or a few large guilds they could vote for a world reset and start over again. Even if you are losing you can still fight back, attack supply lines and outlieing towns. And if you are playing a feudalistic game you should expect someone more powerful than you telling you what to do, or what you cant do. A king, or your guild master, or an enemy guilds taxes on their town that you reside or trade in.
  12. This is just an idea for a game, by a gamer, not anyone who could ever create it. So dont bother reading this if you expect to tell me afterwards how and why this could never be made. This is just for fun and if any part of this idea is used to make a part of any game, well that is my only goal. Most people are familar with warcraft orcs and humans, or if not that then the mmo it eventually spawned. But not many people have heard of a game called savage, or savage 2. Savage took elements of command and conquer/warcraft and combined them with the gameplay of fps shooters such as counterstrike. One player on each team would play a top down rts game, directing their team on where to fight, or where and what to build things. Players could natually do as they wished, sometimes to the frusteration of their commander. The game was won when the enemy base or stronghold was destroyed. Savage was played out fresh each time, like a team match of counterstrike. Only the stats of the players and occasional persistent items would carry over to the next match. If you want to read more about savage you can google it, now ill talk about my idea for a game, soon. MMo games have been popular since everquest, and more so since warcraft. Most mmo games are designed as pve grinds to gain alot of levels, skills, spells, and items, as well as tradeskills. Few are designed with pvp from the ground up. For example the most popular mmo, warcraft, very rarely sees open world pvp happen. Instead there are pvp instanced battlegrounds that have little to no impact on the factions out in the normal game world. Well, here is my idea for a game: Start out with a continent, a new world so to speak, that has no humanoid habitation. Just natural turrain features, grasslands, forests, swamps, jungles, hills, mountains, lakes ect When you make a new character you select a basic skillset that you can change later, such as logger/carpenter, miner/smelter, mason/builder, fisherman/cook various basic skills that will be needed. You start the game on a ship with other new players, and as you approach the coastline you select a place to land by vote. You can also form what will become your own guilds, or what are considered guilds in this game. After you land you can start off building a settlement with the players from the ship, or you can break off into your own guilds from the crew, or you can adventure alone looking for another settlement to join, maybe with some rl friends you know. The goal of this game would be for your guild to develop villages, towns, cities, forts, and eventually castles. And make war, trade, or otherwise interact diplomatically with other "civilizations". I suggest a starting technology of somewhere between the roman empire and the 1600-1700s. You could design the game in a way that eventually the players could have the same technology we have today, like guns and bombs, planes, tanks, nukes. Instead of having masses of land for the players to deal with, the whole continent should be designed like interlocking battlegrounds. So there would be 2 to 4 sites for settlements in each "zone", and enough of each resource for them nearby. But not endless lands between towns. This way players would be more likely to encounter another player traveling, or gathering resources. Maybe there could be a computer controlled faction that takes control of unsettled lands, and occasionally attacks player towns. And there could be periods or eras in time based on player progress, like near the begining gm gods would direct divine forces of destruction or benefit to the players, and later on there could be monsters out of fantasy appear and attack, and a plague of death that spreads from town to town, different gm type events. I just think a persistant game that played out like savage, in the way mmos play out, in a style like stronghold, would be great. Players may even form bandit guilds and form defensible cavern hideouts or whatnot. I guess the problem i see with most mmos is that after a very long time playing, maybe years, your character may have alot of levels, hp, mana, and good gear, but aside from that and your guilds accomplishments in raids, you have nothing to show for it. With the game i suggest, after a long time you could eventually "win" the game with your guild, taking control of a large majority of the playable turrain, and imposing your guilds will on the rest of the populace as most real life empires have done. You could point at the largest castle your guild has built and say, no one has ever taken this from us by force. Or you could recall the destruction of a similar fortification one of your enemy guilds once had.
  13. I have played games since the Nintendo Entertainment System was released, now i mostly play PC games. I have been trapped in one MMO world or another since Everquest started, but lately i find i keep trying a new MMO and quitting it very quickly feeling unsatisfied. No MMO has been able to recapture how revolutionary Everquest was when it started, that same feeling of experiencing a whole new way to play games. I would like to play a new type of game, or i suppose you could say a melding of alot of other games into one world. This is all theoretical, and unless i win some huge lottery ill never be able to promote or produce this game. But maybe someone who reads this knows someone that will or might be able to. First a whole world would have to be generated, maybe an exact duplicate of earth with all buildings and manmade alterations removed. Then systems would have to be developed for everything, the weather, physics of water, growth of plants and animal activities. And everything would have to be made so it could all be altered by players, cutting down trees, starting fires, digging holes, building buildings, dams, anything. Players would start off by picking a timezone to play in, and the world would be a real 24 hour cycle. They would start out naked and without any technology, just what they can do with their hands, feet, teeth or items they pick up like stones or sticks. And they would have to hunt or gather to eat. Hunger kills and players would only start with a limited number of lives before that character permanently dies. Instead of the normal guild system in most mmo games, players would join a tribe and work together to better themselves, defend against animals and other tribes, trade with or conquer other civilizations. And there would be no npcs, everyone you meet would be a player unless its an animal, and maybe there could be an option to play an animal as well, but thats not the main point. If you have played a game like savage you might start to get the picture, one or a small group of players in each tribe would be able to access an alternate interface they can use to issue commands to their players, and people have free will and the ability to ignore commands. But a tribe leader may get annoyed and direct other members to take you into custody or exile you or have you killed. But for the most part players would play in first person or over the shoulder view. There would not be instant communication like /whisper in warcraft, at least not until your society develops technology for cell phones or radio. But there could be voice communication for players with a mic to talk to others in a small radius around them. Anyway, you start off as a caveman or less than that. It might start off similar to minecraft where you use your hands to gather resources to fashion basic tools, but for advanced tools you would need to develop technology maybe as a group by repeated production or experimentation of basic items. Maybe you could locate ancient relics from past civilizations that can be studied to get technology. But eventually you could advance through the basic technology tree found in civilization games, but with alot more steps added in. So after a long time there may be multiple civs with guns, artillary, machines that they could begin a world war with. Players would be free to do just about anything they like in the game, if you like chess you could build a chess set and play against other players. If you like to race cars you could eventually build one and act out a scene from road warrior. If you like shooter games you could start off using spears, or bows and arrows and later guns in pvp combat. If you like thief games you could become a thief in the game, maybe with a band of other players and prey on merchants. If you want to be a king you could gather supporters and have them build a castle with you, or you could assassinate a king that you are supposed to protect... or go to war against a civilization that has a kingdom and after killing off their soldiers you could establish yourself as ruler. If you wanted you could build a space ship and colonize another planet, or destroy the earth with nukes and rebuild in the aftermath. At some point there could be integration with the internet with a 3d avatar interface that could replace internet explorer and google. So in the game you could access the real internet and even play other games. Imagine roleplaying a character that is sitting at a computer that is accessing the internet and playing yet another computer game within the one you are really playing. Anyway, there would be no limit to the options a player has in this game, and if something is not possibile then players could submit feedback to developers to add the desired content. I know realistically this game will likely never be made, or if it was it would rival the manhatten project as far as production costs go, but if it was it would be literally the last game ever made since it could eventually incorperate every other game within it in some fashion.
  14. Non-Permanent Perma-Death

    This has been done in a game called i believe dragonrealms, its a character based mud online text game, when you died you would need someone to drag you back to a certain place where healers would rez you, and you would lose some amount of skills. But it was a game where you could advance any skill you like by using it repeatedly. If you did not get rez in a certain time you would rot and your items would appear on the ground for others to take.