Hi folks. I had an interesting idea (it's prolly been implemented before, but not in any game I've played) that I got while thinking about the Fournicolas's Moses Lemmings idea. =) In RTSes and other "god games", the player typically uses a cursor to make things happen. You click on guys, and they do things. It is basically the "hand of god" floating around in the air. What if we replace that cursor with a character? What if we still let the player be the Commander, but we take them out of their seat in the clouds and put them in the action? Medieval RTS Example Game The game starts. Your village consists of a wooden castle, a peasant huts, an armory, and three peasants. But in *this* RTS, something is different: YOU are standing next to the peasants (I'm thinking a third-person view similar to WoW, maybe zoomed out a little more -- capable of going overhead for strategic commands, but the camera is always centered on you). You, the player, are one of your own units (the commander/prince/general/whatever). Quickly you take action -- you point to two of the peasants and tell them to gather resources. You drag the third peasant along with you, heading towards the forest. On the way, you issue a command at the peasant hut that all newcomers should start farming until you get back. You also stop at the armory and spend some of your starting supplies to get a sword and shield for the peasant who's following you. You instruct the newly armed peasant (now a guardsman) to patrol around your city, then you run into the woods and pull out your bow. You see a deer (being an RTS and not a hunting sim, this takes 20 seconds instead of 20 minutes) and shoot it, then pick it up and stagger back to camp. When you get close to camp, you hear shouting. You drop your deer and start running, and you see that a couple of enemy archers are causing chaos in your camp. Your peasants (there are more of them than when you left, and most of them are carrying farm tools) are rushing back to the castle. You pull out your bow and, peeking around the peasant house, you start shooting. The archers return fire, but as they are reloading you see your guardsman rush in from the side and start wailing on them. You pull out your sword and rush to join him. And so it goes on... I think it would be nifty =D Of course, the other units on your team would need to be smarter than normal RTS units, because you won't have as much direct control over them. I also don't know how the minimap would work, or how combat in multiple locations would pan out, or what happens if the player's character dies. But by replacing the standard "RTS cursor finger of god" with an actual controllable commander unit, and limiting the player's abilities to that of a real life commander (giving commands to people around you, who are able to hear you, and then trusting them with the results), you have created a game that has elements of a Majesty-like kingdom sim, an action RPG (you can upgrade your own armor and weapons and get stuff like horses, presumably), and a squad-based combat game. The First Idea -- Moses Lemmings This is the idea that got me thinking about it. Fournicolas said I could make a Lemmings-like game about Moses leading the Israelites through the wilderness with miracles and such. I thought it was a very clever idea, and starting considering the possibilities. You know how in most lemmings games you use the cursor, and can use items from your toolbox anywhere on the map at any given time? Well, I found myself imagining what if you actually played Moses *in the game*. It would be like Lemmings in that the Israelites would trudge forward, get stuck, do stupid things, fall into snake pits, die of thirst, et cetera, and you would have to take care of them. Unlike Lemmings, though, Moses would be running around on the screen too. You control Moses like in a standard 2d platformer, jumping/climbing/whacking things with your staff. You *also* get the toolbox of miracles and tricks to help your Israelites make it through the level safely and accomplish whatever objectives (reach the bronze snake before they all die of poison, follow the pillar of cloud, transport Joseph's bones safely...). You can issue orders to each of your Israelites, but only if you are near them (i.e. if there is a tight tunnel at the bottom of a cliff, that only a kid can squeeze through, you would have to tell one of the kids to crawl through the tunnel, then climb up the mountain on the other side and throw a rope down for everyone else to climb up the cliff.). You can also perform a certain number of miracles (or maybe an infinite number, whichever works better) as well (manna, quail, healing, the serpent staff trick to scare the Israelites into running in the right direction, fire from heaven, minor versions of the plagues of Egypt ^_^, water from the rock, split the earth and swallow things up, all sorts of things). But the trick is that you can't just click anywhere to do these miracles. You, as Moses, have to navigate the level yourself, and do miracles at the proper places, and time things correctly, all the while keeping in mind that you can't be in two places at two times (which, essentially, you almost can be with a cursor). So if you are parting the river over here and the Israelites are walking through on dry ground, you can't lower your staff and run over there to stop some other Israelites from walking into a nest of poisonous snakes unless you want the guys in the river to drown. You can't just move the mouse over real fast and take care of both at the same time. (I'm not saying it's a better game, just a different one that hasn't been done nearly so much =). Therefore, by just replacing the cursor with a controllable character, we have added new elements of timing and strategy, as well as some platforming (if you want), and made the player feel much more like a leader of the people. =) What do you think this concept of replacing the cursor with a character to add some major twists to established genres? P.S. I hope no one takes the Moses game as disrespectful or unmindful of the Bible and Biblical accuracy. I know it isn't actually what happened, and that Moses didn't run around nilly willy performing miracles for his own convenience, but that they came from God for specific purposes. ^_^ P.P.S. As I mentioned before, I don't know if this concept has already been explored, maybe it isn't so original after all. But anyhow, I hope you find it interesting =)

Rome: Total War has an aspect to the battle system where your camera is limited to where you have troops (and an option to make the camera only where you have your general unit). Playing with a very-limited camera on a tremendous battlefield definately makes things more tenuous and sometimes more exciting, but that brings me to my next point.

In order for this to work, you'd need PERFECT AI for any type of RTS or similar (not for the lemmings game, obviously). There's no way to know whether things on the other side of a larger map are being destroyed from an AI problem, whether a trebuchet has started attacking and your AI doesn't send out a sortie to destroy it, what happens if all the trees in an area are cut down, where/how to build new buildings, etc. There is definately an aspect of RPG and immersiveness to the idea, but all the things that are normally controlled/micromanaged in a normal RTS have to be eliminated or turned over to very capable, and bug free, AI.

I've been playing around with design ideas for a game something like this. Think Rome Total War style, but you get 1 general, and thats you. You can issues orders to the city you are in, but you must use messengers to give plans and orders to your outlaying armies, and of course, the farther out they are, the longer it takes for updates. It also means that it takes longer for your armies to report BACK to you. (AI players would be limited in this way as well, meaning they can't react till messengers make the trip AND make it through)

This means that someone might bite off a fairly sizeable chunk of your empire before you even know their armies are crossing your boarder.

All amries and cities outside of those run directly by the player would be mini AIs, running their own City State, and each would have a personality. Some might be better at fighting and raising armies, others might be better at keeping the peace and producing lots off their lands. Some generals might be aggressive, getting their own reports from spies and that and might go off to capture a weakened city on their own, others might outright lie to you, sending you a fraction of the tax they should.

Another interesting thing with large empires fighting is having your armies pull a Battle of New Orleans, (Battle of New Orleans, in the war of 1812, ended january of 1815, peace was declared end of 1814,...)

Quote:

This means that someone might bite off a fairly sizeable chunk of your empire before you even know their armies are crossing your boarder.

that's slick :D

Sacrifice used a gameplay system that sounds similar to what you are describing, and I found that game to be very good. So yes, I do think that's a good idea; I love blending genres together like that.

(Sorry I don't have much more to add, except that I like the idea).

I think it's a wondeful idea for non-standard RTSes, but it would be a bad thing in classic RTSes such as Starcraft or Age of Empires.
That being said, it's about time for some radical changes in the RTS genre.

I myself have been thinking about this same idea. Currently I'm making a prehistoric (both the setting and the graphics are prehistoric :p) 2D turn-based RPG called Stoned. I plan to make Stoned II which will move to player controlling a tribe of cavemen (~20-50 individuals) indirectly, having direct control only over his character. I think that the system you described would work great in such a game as there is a small number of units and they generaly aren't scattered too much.

Populous: The Beginning. A 3D rts sort of thing. A little old now, but it was lots of fun. I'd play another game like it.