I''ve been working on an rts, and programming wise, things couldn''t be better, but gameplay wise, I find it a bit one dimensional. Basically, you start the game with a bunch of units, select all of them and go and attack the nearest enemy unit. There is no room for any strategy or even quick reflexes if that is your type of thing. I want to finish it, but I want to end up with something that is fun (well duh). I''d be happy to do something drastic to change the way it works - it doesn''t have to be an rts at all. I was actually thinking last night of getting rid of combat and making the game more a stealth type thing... kind of like what Theif was to FPSes, this game would be to RTSes. So, the requirements that I''m setting are as follows: - Top down 2d graphics - While a few extra tiles can be added here and there, I''d prefer to stick with something similar to what I have (I''d like to actually finish this ) - Interface should resemble that of an RTS. This one is a little less concrete, I might just be writing this one because I''ve spent a fair bit of time fine tuning the unit control and pathfinding. - The whole ''style'' of the game is abstract. It isn''t past, present or future. If you have a look at the game (or just the screenshots) you will kind of get an idea on what it looks like. - I had left out construction of new stuff in the game (you started with units, and you couldn''t gain any new ones or build buildings). I would be able to change this, but don''t feel obliged to make this part of your idea. If you are curious, you can test out an alpha release of the game: emoticonvb.cjb.net I had planned to give some of the units special powers (things like teleportation, healing, invisibility etc), but I don''t think they will fix the gameplay. My hope was that these things would force a bit of unit coordination and teamwork by the player, but it just doesn''t sit right with me. Yes, I realise this is a pretty big ask, saying - design my game for me. But, I know there are people who just love this type of stuff, and since I know that my own game designs usually suck, I might as well get the help of some people who have more of a clue about what works and what doesn''t. Trying is the first step towards failure.

Two more things:

cjb.net have given me a popup, use this link instead (or it will do something like try to install gator)
Same link minus the popup

- If you have a great game idea but it doesn''t quite fit my requirements (say it needs totally different graphics), then please say it anyway.

Trying is the first step towards failure.

How about some kind of political element, not to mention logistics. That is to say, perhaps you don''t start with just a pile of units...instead you have essentially just your General whom you control in a simple kind of rpg style. Basically in order to get units, you have to have the govenrment approve your actions, through diplomancy, bribery assasination, etc...the first part would largely invlove just talking to people, forming alliances, gathering intelligence...and generally doing whatever it take to further your own evil ends....

as for logistics....well have you ever considered the problems and expense involed in shipping an army half way across the world...and now that I think about it...how come in pretty much every RTS/wargame I've ever played your troops will carry out any order no matter how stupid or suicidal......maybe i've not played enough good wargames...but really I think there is alot of role-playing and resource management potential involed in a wargame that focuses on the personality and character of the general....do people love you, or fear you, or hate you.....

[edited by - HashMaster on January 26, 2003 6:10:33 AM]

Somehow I have a hard time imagining emoticons (especially the spider), loving or hating you

The main problem I had with the game was that every unit has a long range attack, is the same speed, etc. They are all the same thing . so here''s some suggestions:


That spider emoticon might hit all enemies adjacent to it. The sunglasses guy might have good defense, etc. Give the units vastly different capabilities.

Definantly don''t start with so many units. Perhaps various emoti-units are being held hostage and you have to rescue them one by one. When you win they join your army. When you save them all, you move on to the next level and get points/$$$ the more you save.

And perhaps when you start a level you get to spend points/$$$ to buy extra starting units.

Emoticon combiners! Save all the red/blue/green to do a one time special attack. For example, a giant smiley rolls in a straight line, destroying all in it''s path. A green force field makes all the emoticons in a 9 square block invunerable for a while, etc.

Enemy attacks. Rather than just having enemies wait around doing nothing, maybe they should attack you on occasion.

Home base. Maybe if you have enemy attacks, also have a home base that you must keep defended from enemy touch. It''d be a challenge taking over the enemy base and defending your base, especially if the enemies respawn.

Well anyway, good luck, and it''s cool that you got the game this far.

Have units / things that are particularly good at fighting particular opposition, and bad against others. Everything should have at least one strength and at least one weakness, and be prepared to make them quite pronounced (like a factor of 2 or 3). This will introduce some strategy in using the right units for the right cause, and keeping enough of each for defense. For example, in a game with three types of units:

Soldiers with machine guns
Laser-armed robots
Tanks

The tanks with their large guns might be really good at defeating the robots, but rubbish against soliders who are difficult to hit.
The robots might be really good at frying troops with their lasers, but easily defeated by tanks.
The troops are therefore very effective against tanks, but not against robots.

Now we have some strategy. If I have two tanks guarding my base, you can quickly build some soldiers to defeat them. But, of course, I knew you would do that, and I''ve got a small army of robots hiding at the back of my base.

Some units can be effective or ineffective on particular terrain as well.

Perhaps a similar design might be of interest to you?

I''ll just emphasise this point - sorry that I wasn''t clear enough:

quote:

---

- The whole ''style'' of the game is abstract. It isn''t past, present or future. If you have a look at the game (or just the screenshots) you will kind of get an idea on what it looks like.

---

There aren''t tanks, generals, lasers or anything which resembles reality.

In regard to the other suggestions regarding (more) different units, that is exactly what I have been trying, and it just hasn''t been much fun. Making units have special functions didn''t really make stuff enjoyable at all - just some units got killed quickly when they went into the wrong battle.

Remember, your ideas don''t have to keep the game as being an RTS.

One thing I''m considering is this:
- The game is based on the capture the flag rules.
- "Combat", is a bit more like ''tip''. If a unit tips another unit, then *both* of the units have to go back to their flag (or possibly a respawn point)
- No units are gained or lost

What I''m hoping to get out of this:
- Defensive units have an advantage over attacking units. (They are trying to defend their base - when they tip another unit, they just move a couple of tiles away whereas the attacker goes all the way back to their base.
- A player must decide how they are going to split their team (attackers and defenders)

What it is lacking:
- Units all are pretty similar. I can think of a couple of special units (faster units, units which can disappear, units which can spy) - but I can''t think of many other things to separate the units.
- Might be overly difficult or overly easy. There is a bit of an advantage to defending, and if a player dedicated all his resources to defending, then I doubt the other player could win.

Possible solutions:
- Reduce the number of different units. I have no problem with that.
- Use a respawn point which moves further and further from the base depending on how many defenders there are.


Anyway, that is just something to give you an idea of what I''m looking for. I might try implimenting that and see if it is any fun. But, any ideas you could provide will probably be better than stuff I can think of. Improvements to that design would also be welcome.

Trying is the first step towards failure.