Aeroblaster,
Oh, I haven''t seen it - I''ll check it out. It''s still a Tolkien wannabe, though

Now listen to this. I''ve played nearly every RTS game there is from cover to cover (Warcraft 1-3, Starcraft, Warlords Battlecry, Cossacks, Ground Control, HomeWorld... you name it) and though many or most of these are truly great games there is still something missing, that would take the genre into a new era. The magic keyword is... Psychology!

Sure, some attempts have been made to make the units in Battlecry to lose heart if confronted by a dragon, and thats a good start, but a lot more can be done. Being an old Warhammer player I cant stop thinking of its powerful psychology rules, meking it possible to win the battle winthout touching the enemy, just scaring them way off the table. It pains me to know that warhammer never will be transferred to computer since all their money comes from selling the units. (I dont even mention the Dark Omen project, which was crap in a fancy cover)

Now, the game idea i have is this. An RTS game where you have little or no control over the troops individually, but rather over the leaders of the regiments to which the troopers belong (a la Ground Control). Regiments can be split up into smaller ones, but the less the soldiers are in number, the bigger the risk they will turn tail and run. Morale of troops can be boosted by numerous friends, imposing leaders and fluttering banners, etc. If a regiment is losing a fight or greatly outnumbered it will panic and flee and you will lose any control over it until it has recovered from its panic (unlikely if they are pursued). The game could take place in a fantasy world, present or a post apocalyptic. I would be the same concept anyway. There could be different races with different strenths and weaknesses, like the undead for example, could be weaker but immune to panic.

Anyway, this weight on psychology would make rushing impossible and bring a need for more strategic players.

Please, give me some thougts on this idea!!

STAAF

You could try the Close Combat series. They have implemented psychology into the gameplay mechanics. Soldiers will not run blindly into enemy machinegun nests, when hit by mortar fire they end up cowering no matter how much you try to order them.

The whole gameplay becomes extremely tactical since you cannot throw your soldiers blindly into battle. You must constantly try to outmaneuver the enemy, use smoke to provide cover and really look for good cover for the soldiers...

The psychology stretches far.. individual soldiers can cower, flee, become bezerk (running blindly against the enemy) and heroic.

Without a doubt it is one of my favourite RTT games...

::aggression is the result of fear::

Grimjack,
I agree totally. CC''s morale implementation is one of the best I''ve ever seen. LOL, I was trying to post this same message yesterday but kept getting those bloody ''internal server errors''

It really gives the gameplay an additional layer of tactics... besides its always a blast to see a tiny soldier scream and run towards a tank in berzerk... =)

::aggression is the result of fear::

quote:

---

Original post by mearrin69
But, I think that *with* the official Tolkien license it carries weight. Without it it''s just another wannabe like (ducks the flames) Warcraft (lol, like it''s not Middle Earth without a license). I would love to play an RTS based faithfully on the Tolkien universe.
M

---

If you need a heavyweight name license to carry a commercial game, then don''t bother. There are countless games that are based on a movie and vice versa. Generally speaking, they suck.

The reason is because the marketers expect the game to do well because of the name behind it. I''m not saying that there aren''t a few good ones, but if that''s your reason for wanting the Tolkien license, then you''re wasting a lot of peoples'' time, money, and delivering false hopes of a good product to the people who truly love the genre of Tolkien. I would say the same thing if it were set in the worlds of Star Wars, Star Trek, Willow, Spiderman, X-Men, etc.

If on the other hand, you''re doing it for fun and have no plans to release it as a commercial product, then be my guest. The reason I say that is because if you''re making it for fun, then you will do a better job because you like the game, you like the genre/setting, and you don''t have to answer to the marketing people. Having said that, I can''t say that you should reasonably expect to make a demo of the game and present it to the publishers of LOTR and expect them to publish it. They probably receive thousands of such demos and would prefer to work with a company who is very well established in the industry, like ID, Blizzard, Westwood, Microsoft, etc.

---

Looking for an honest video game publisher? Visit www.gamethoughts.com

quote:

---

Original post by Grimjack
STAAF
Soldiers will not run blindly into enemy machinegun nests, when hit by mortar fire they end up cowering no matter how much you try to order them.

---

Looks like a bug for me Just kidding.
"Damn it! Attack the base, you''re wasting food supply! Stupid soldier!"

quote:

---

Original post by Bob_The_Fly
You could always say its middle earth after like 2000 years and its completely flooded. all the building and units have adapted to underwater life. have some variations or something.

---

Hm....variations...I think it''s just another race.

---

My compiler generates one error message: "does not compile."

I think you''re right...most licensed games suck. The developer seems to think, "Well, we''ve got Star Trek, so we''re done. Just get some graphics on screen and ship it." without actually building a game that matches the universe...but that''s not exactly what I meant.

What I meant was that almost all modern fantasy is based on the world created by Tolkein (not all, I know, but most) but either didn''t or couldn''t get the real license. Without it it''s wannabe, it lacks the same flair, it''s a copy of a copy.

I didn''t mean at all that you shouldn''t have a game behind the license - if you''re gonna do Tolkien you should do it right. If you don''t I''ll find you and I''ll kill you

That''s why LucasFilms doesn''t license Star Wars that much - they do a really good job of protecting their universe. Paramount does a much worse job of protecting Star Trek - until recently I think the only *good* Star Trek games were the unlicensed ones.

Summary. I agree with you. But if you''re gonna make a really good game with a story based on a far future desert world with a messiah, life-extending spice, and really big worms - don''t bother unless you want to talk to Brian Herbert about getting a license for the original.
Michael

I''m glad to see that you guys like my idea. It would be cool to have it in that Tolkien world, but lets talk copyright laws here: Wouldn''t that stuff be public domain or something, or does it belong to the Tolkien family? Can you obtain it from them or some sort of company? I know this sounds like i have a big head, but I''m just interested in copyright laws and how you would go about obtaining them. Because it would be great to do Middle Earth and then even maybe use your imagination (and the appendices) to do something like Numenor or the West.

.elendil67

You won''t be able to, trust me.