I was wondering how this community feels about Artillery games, and what design ideas they may have? It seems an area often neglected of new and original, quality ideas. Worms seems to hold a domination of the market currently, but other than a slew of weapons, does it offer anything that the original Bomb game didn''t? Destructable terrain, wind, etc. have all been implemented since the creation of the genre. I''d like to hear what you guys have to say. Thanks! --Ben Finkel

I''d like to see a 3d remake of an artilery game... It would add to the gameplay, I think. And also have some structures that are useful, like storages or bunkers, and movement point per turn... Yes, I know it becomes a turn-based strategy, but maybe that''s what I''m looking for...

Boby Dimitrov
boby@shararagames.com
Sharara Games Team

Those are good ideas, and that doesn''t necessarily change it to a turn based strategy.

The basic idea behind an artillery game is the angle/power/shoot idea right? Point your gun, choose a strength, and fire. So as long as you don''t change that too much your okay.

As for structures, what do you think about deployment? And what would they house?

How about different levels of destructiveness for terrain? Concrete should be harder to blow up than dirt, etc..

Randomness of levels or pre-made?



--Ben Finkel

Both types of maps should be supported ... basically i would say just get your map through one level of indirection ... like a map manager object ... and then you can allow the map manager to load saved maps in order, or just randomly create ... whatever you want.

As for the rest ... the reason Worms owns the market is because of the comedy factor ... they didn''t really make the game much better ... they made it more fun to play.

Improving the game is a good idea though ... and look at it this way ... a 3D deformable terrain artilery game ... is the first step toward a tank simulator ... or adding just that weapon type to a 3D FPS game - like tribes2 or something.

If you add movement points .. you can give them diff weapons too ... fire the "BIG GUN" ... or "Old Faithful" or ... if close enough ... your 45 calibur pistol.

Or ... how about this ... add realistic wind and you can do an Archery simulation ... learn by shooting targets ... then go out deer hunting or something ... or a board where there is a pack of wolves ... or a bear ... or whatever paradigm you like ...

I personally like the idea of an archery game where you are a prehistoric man ... just you, a few good rocks, a sharp stone, and a simple bow ... out against the wild ... animals, people, weather, etc ... but this is probably more FPS than turn based artilery ... oh well

Can you imagine a 16 player version of a game like this, each player controlling one unit in real time? I think it'd be so fun, especially if it looks good but is clean and uncomplicated (angle/power/shoot holding down mouse, I'd think, with a tradeoff between aiming and moving).

You could make it either 3D or 3D rendered (or just good looking 2D) and in real time. Structures are a great idea. Have you ever played Metal Gear Solid? Imagine terrain that's that rich and complex, and that could block your shots.

The goal would be to get from your side to the enemy's side of the screen. Hey, you could even do capture the flag, all as a sidescroller! That would be hilarious.

[EDIT]
Just was thinking: Players could be varying types of arty units:

• Lowly mortar man: Takes 3 hits, short range, fast shot, fast move, hard to hit. Only unit that can deploy shield structures
  
• Light mobile arty: Takes 2 hits, medium range, slow shot, medium move
  
• Heavy mobile arty: Takes 1 hit, long range, slow shot, slow move, nice big area effect damage
  
• Tank: Can't shoot very high, takes 2 hits, medium range, medium shot, slow move
  
• Spanner: Takes 1 hit, can bridge gaps, has short range, slow shot
  

You could implement a sort of fog of war and larger playing field, too, if you wanted, and have each player scroll their screen or click a horizontal minimap.

I was also thinking that structures could take different levels of damage. Arty units (walking mechs I'm thinking) would then need Spanners to bridge the rubble, depending on the angle of the debris.

You've got me thinking now...

[/EDIT]
--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

Edited by - Wavinator on June 26, 2001 8:15:08 PM

Great ideas, Wav!
And how about teams of players, so they could help each other, like a fast, weak unit to scout the area and a heavy artillery to deliver the area damage? Or a unit that could dig the ground for increasing the safety factor and a slow moving, heavy unit.

On structures: you could have various structures with different purposes.
I.e. airport - whoever controls it, receives a supply of ammo by air and area bombing.
Or ground-to-air missile base structure, that would allow taking down the enemy planes.
Also bunkers - shelter for human units.
And one more thing - how about the ability the person to get out of the vehicle and you take control over him? That would be useful if your tank is wrecked and immobile and you run for the bunker, where you could continue to fight.
Radar – controlling one removes the fog of war at certain radius
Bridges – quite useful in a 3d terrain, can be destroyed to delay the enemy attack, also could be mined to blow up when the enemy is crossing over.

Hmm, the more I think of that game, the more it resembles “Z” (Zed). It was a RTS, but much more tactical gameplay. I have to dig it up from my archives.

[edit]
I just found out the sequel to the Z! Details here!
[/edit]

Anyway, those are just some ideas!

Boby Dimitrov
boby@shararagames.com
Sharara Games Team

Edited by - BobyDimitrov on June 28, 2001 5:00:15 AM

Those are some really good ideas.

I especially like the real-time concept, where you cannot both move and shoot at the same time.

I don''t think first person would work very well though. The idea is to be able to survey the entire area, see everyone at once, and make your decisions based on those concepts.

3D? Definately, but in the interest of keeping a simple engine, I''d prefer to start in 2D.


I think some of the important points have come out already too. There would have to be some limitations intrinsically built in to avoid it turning into either a RTS or FPS or even a turn-based strategy game as opposed to an artillery game.


What about the reality of the physics? I remember in Bomb (or whatever it was called) the ability to make gravity more or less powerful was available, along with many other features (like bouncy walls) that were totally un-realistic, but just added another dimension to gameplay. Is that a good idea you think?

Thanks for all the feedback guys!

--Ben

As the game progresses and you gain points you could have an option to buy upgrades or new types of ammo. Different types of ammo would change the range and power of the shot. Upgrade engine to move more. Etc.

Good ideas. One major challenge is to address "the luck of the draw" in games like these. I don''t really have any suggestions, so I''m really just stating that one of the worst aspects of turn-based artillery games like Warheads or Bomb is that it REALLY, REALLY sucks when you don''t even get a turn, or that, if you do, all of the juicy targets are already gone.

One idea is that all players simultaneously set their firing parameters (angle, force, weapon) then all bombs are fired at once. At first, it might seem like this would suck because 8 bombs of varying types might descend on one target and the points will all be divvied up from there, or you''ll fire your shot perfectly, but by the time your bomb gets there, the target will have moved or been destroyed. But this might actually add some cool elements to the game, such as the players with more confidence might forego an easy shot to try for a long shot that nobody else might be attempting. Also, the poor player that is an easy target for all of the rest doesn''t have to worry about divvying up his points with anyone else, since he''ll likely get a shot off at an unmolested target.

Anyways, any problems with this I''m not seeing?