Quote:

Original post by eiforall I got to worry about peoples expectations I already step boldly with my game making it an (m)morts – now is this ghost thing is rely something I should do? Stick to originality or stick to what people like/see/know and probably want?

I would say go for it. This is not only an idea in your case but also a graphic style. Let's face it, these things are not really material things, they are closer to abstract concepts you can play with. I think it is good, even if that is a smaller niche than the Star-Trek-ish metalic vessels style. But as you don't seem to have the ressources needed to make detailed 3D vessels, planets, stars, orbital bases, etc... I would say : stick with your concept and have the background story consistent with the graphics you can produce.

About OGame. It seams a nice little browser game yet it has some odd rules:


V. Bashing

- Attacking a planet or moon more than 6 times in any 24 hour period is considered bashing, and is not allowed.
- Moon Destruction missions count as attacks under the bashing rules.


VI. Pushing

- pushing is when a lower ranked player sends Resources to a higher ranked player who gains unfairly from these resources. This also includes sending ressources to a higher ranked player who extorts you.
- Under no circumstances whatsoever is pushing permissible.
- Note that if you unexpectedly receive resources from a lower player, you cannot keep them. They must be returned immediately.
- Loans are not permissible.
- Trades must be completed within 48 hours.



For storyline and graphics I guess I am stuck between:


This is what i can produce and it is just some bad programmers art...

Quote:

Original post by eiforall About OGame. It seams a nice little browser game yet it has some odd rules:

Yeah. If you need to make nonobvious rules to restrict gameplay, your game is BROKEN.

Quote:

The other idea I would like to discuss is one map or many map zones. In normal rts there is just one map where the battle takes place. For a mmorts it makes for more since to have the universe consist of multiple zonez where the player’s units would use hyper drives to jump form one map to the other instantly. While the player with godlike view could just switch to any map where he has units. Sounds simple?

I like how Privateer and similar games work. There are many different systems connected by jump gates, usually with more than one gate per system. Within each system you can fly directly between various stations, planets, mining bases, whatever. The jump gates could add a real strategic element, so you could take and hold a system just by defending the jump gates.

Quote:

Original post by eiforall About OGame. It seams a nice little browser game yet it has some odd rules:

Yeah, that is one of the things I thought of when I said it needs to be developed more.

Also it is too linear and lacks variety. Certain ship types don't get used at all when you pass the early game stages, not good.

The diplomatic side is lacking. U can form alliances but you have to make up your own inter alliance diplomacy trough game forums, and trade is sort of hard to do because of all those rigid rules and lack of true trade mechanisms in the game.

Which brings me to my point about MMORTS.

I think there has to be as much care given to economy and diplomacy as to the battle part of the game, if not even more. In normal RTS-es it is easy and better to dive straight into battle and it doesn't break immersion because you are just a commander on the battlefield.

In MMORTS you need something to defend, like a homeplanet full of civilans and factories supporting your machine. It helps immersion and a well developed alliance hierarchy system and well designed inter alliance ingame diplomacy can go along way in providing rich interaction with other players which basically the main reason people like to play multiplayer online games.

Quote:

Original post by drakostar I like how Privateer and similar games work. There are many different systems connected by jump gates, usually with more than one gate per system. Within each system you can fly directly between various stations, planets, mining bases, whatever. The jump gates could add a real strategic element, so you could take and hold a system just by defending the jump gates.

In a strategy game it is never a good idea to restrict defense of an area to a very small choke point. That kind of level design encourages turtling (massing up defenses and hiding behins them) which in turn slows down a game making it potentially a very boring game (take for example StarCraft - one of the most succesfull RTS-es of all time - in it it is impossible to build a defence you can just leave to its own without someone destroying it without a single unit lost). You can have jumpgates but you should also allow for alternate entrance points. Like if you are defending the gates the enemy can take a long drive across the space void to jump your defensless homeworld (think Hanibal -> Rome). Allowing that alternate roout shouldn't be a technical problem because at one point the ships will be in inter system void a long way from both systems at which point you can just switch the maps just like you would when they's pass trough the jumpgate.

my 2 (euro)cents

I like the hyperspace idea. New players either start out as "nomads" -- a force of troops in a space where you can't set up shop forever.

You could also use the RvR model -- have 3 seperate game areas.

PvE: You fight RTS battles against AI controlled fleets
RvR: You fight over contested territory against players from other empires
PvP: You fight "duels" between sets of players (steal the upcoming WoW arena system)

If you want an RTS feel... (start small, build up, engage, victory)

Fights in a 'sector' begin with both sides having very little in the way of troops. Both sides start with a portal which is then used to warp in factories and units.

Then, through a mixture of player resources and local resources, sides summon in forces.

The goal is to cut off the enemy line of supply (take out their portal).

...

Players can collect ships, techs and factories. They wouldn't be able to deploy everything they have instantly -- they start out with next to nothing, and have to collect local resources to pay to warp in their ships/factories, or locally upgrade their gear with tech.

...

In effect, use MMORPG style gameplay, but the combat is designed to act like Starcraft instead of an RPG.

Most of the gameplay research for mmorts I base on BoundlessPlanet mmorts – witch is full 3d universe currently in closed bata.


Biggest problem with that game is – vets own all
How is that fixed in other games? I think is to avoid conflict with between n00bs and vets.

planet maps reset every 2 weeks because they get full (with vet players) so its not all that persistent … only 2 weeks or so.
This this means world has to grow as more players are added.
Or don’t have world be based only on matters of territory.

Graphics of the game are bad and only 8 or so units.

I am going to identify some problems and possible solutions, but first Ill begin with a question: is the total energy in the game finite or does it expand with more users?

- Concept
I think 'ships' being made of energy (energy ghosts) is almost immediately disengaging for most people, and if people cant wrap their heads around the concept the game is pretty much doomed. For example, if the 'ships' are made of energy how does the opponent destroy them? Dont get me wrong the concept makes sense, but how are you going to present it to the user to draw him in? Emmersion counts.

Keeping 'ships' and whatnot iconic instead of abstract would help here. They can still be made of energy, however, it would probably work best if they were recognizable beyond the scope of the game. That is, a person who has never played or seen the game should be able to recognize SOMETHING familiar about each unit.

- Hardware
Why does the user need to have thousands of units?

Create different servers for each area of space. Moving between areas sends the user to the corresponding server. I realise this is most likely not cost-effective.

- Game Play
There are some big problems here, mostly concerning conflict. If its a real-time strategy why would the user persist when logged off? That is, isnt the fun of MMOs and RTSs playing with other people? What makes the game interesting or fun by having the user be persistent? How can the user be viably persistent without spoiling the fun? Can persistence add to strategy?

Acting on the principle that the entire fleet is made of energy. When the user logs off his entire fleet coalesces into an energy node. This way the user remains in game, but does not appear as such to other users. When the user logs back on he can divy up his total energy however he likes. Other users can 'mine' his energy while he is logged off. The problem here is what to do with users who get completely 'mined' out while offline.

- Game Play 2
I think you need a defined victory state. The problem here is that there really is no victory in an MMO. Why is the user allowed to expand to the point where they control the enitre universe? Why cant other users rise up againt it? Why does total power prevent other from 'rising up'?

Operating on the idea that fleets (and empires) are totally composed of energy, if an empire has too much energy concentrated in one area it becomes unstable. Other players could use subvertive strategy to steal energy or use the players energy against him.

- Player Interest
Already addressed in concept.


Additionally you define an inherent problem by labeling it an MMORTS. MMO players can be defined with the Bartle Model* (http://www.brandeis.edu/pubs/jove/HTML/v1/bartle.html) in which the individual user fits 4 different player types one of which is the spade. In an RTS everyplayer is essentially a spade, as the goal is (essentially) to just kill the other player(s).

Anyway, that might be a lot to digest.

New Screen Shot:
http://www.atlantisinterior.com/galacticus/screenshots/deepspace.JPG

This forum had lots influence over the design of my mmorts. Thanks guys!


Energy infinite – just build more power plants similar Total Annihilation resource model.

I have thought about it and decided (before you posted) I am scratching the energy space ship idea. First of all as you said player would not understand it easily and I would not be able to make it presentable.


“Why does the user need to have thousands of units?” – To make this true epic mmorts … more is batter right! But you are right I number of ships should directly proportional to the bandwidth I have. If player can only have 50 ships at any one time that is all he gets…

In fact I was thinking of an P2Pmmorts … lol. The side plan is to make zone servers which can be located on different computers – even client computers.

I don’t think having presistnt players is fun because can see and explore other people’s fleets/bases. Also because it is there and if you made it right it will be there. Having people disappear when the log off just makes it a regular online rts in witch u keep your units from battle to battle.

I there is no winning state in other MMOs or is there? Well there is that level 250 which is the highest level. In my game it will be probably reaching the largest size like 300 (depends on disk space) planets or if player go pass 300, the planets start breaking away into new players or hostile NPC.

Total power only restricts people from rising up if the recourses are limited. So if the world grows with the number of players then its not as big problem is it?

I like the Bartle Model thank you for the paper on that. I disagree about every one being killers! Oh the reverse! On Boundless Planet it was builders vs killers in which builders won 100% of the time. Everyone not in n00b status only build build build. Battles are so far and small and most often used to clear off what some one else has built. So in Bartle Model is achievers dominate the mmorts I played very few killers/explorers/socialists.

So now I think the key is to balance mmorts for all player types. Any ideas on that?


Current model now is to have 2 main resources. Credits and Energy. Planets give you credits that you can only spend in the orbit of that planet (credits is a way to buy work of the people form that planet). You get credits when you stay in orbit and provide “protection” or collect “tribute” with this money you can build star ships which are used to take over other planets. Planets at first a graded by NPC ships then player ships. See any problems with this?

Energy is used only as fuel for movement and guns. And represent supply in real life. You can ether have many power generator ships or power storage ships … or some ratio of the 2. Tactic can be used to destroy those ships in order to make fleet immobile and gun less. Like this idia?

The other idea is to have 9 tech levels each level 10 times more costly and 10 more powerful then the one before. So a n00b at level 1 would be 1,000,000,000 – a billion times weaker then a vet at level 9. This way they would have nothing in common to fight about! Same with planets level 1 to level 9 planets. Also if every one was 1 level Vet would need a billion ships in my model he just needs one. So levels idea is only used to “stack fleets” into more powerful units. This is just to save network and micro management and have some thing to show off. If one billion times stronger sound like a lot think about how level 1 char fights against level 100 chars in mmorpgs.