I am working on a RTS + TPP based game in which player can be able to switch between this two gameplay simultaneously. 

Just for example game will start as RTS in which player can spawn new unit from town center or something like that. After game progresses forward player can select a single unit from his/her army and will be able to play as TPP wtih that unit in between his/her own army on ground to destroy the enemies army as goes in typical RTS. The difference is he/she will be down there with his/her army as a part of it. It means the rest of the unit of player's army will be controlled by the AI and the one unit player selected will be controlled by the player as TPP. The conversion of views from RTS to TPP or vice versa is done by camera animation attaching itself to player unit or the top view of the war field. The best part is player can switch between this two views as many times he/she want. Player really can be part of the war(as TPP) which is going down there and give mass commands to it's own army from up there(in RTS view). Any unit which is a mobile unit is eligible for player's third person control.

It will be like A soul switching the human bodies and dictator giving command simultaneously. 

Now my doubts are

1) the idea Is lame,obscure,dumb

2) the idea is foolish player won't like it.

3) the idea is been already implemented.

4) the idea is very difficult to achieve.

5) I am dumb.

6) the idea is wonderful and worth a try(no matter what i am gonna do it)

My objective is not to make a fully functional game to play, it will be just a prototype.

 I am doing it from scratch reasons i won't mention for not to bother you all.

so anyone who want to give his/her advice on this are greatly appreciated.? ?

It sounds rather ambitious, and I have actually envisioned this type of gameplay before. My idea was actually to have an MMORTS that is a persistent world where as a new player you start as a basic unit of your chosen faction, basically a worker or basic fighter, but then grow up into more units and control buildings working in alliances with other players to challenge other alliances who are in a more resource rich sector. I know thats kinda vague but I don't wanna be too descriptive because I want to address your idea.

Your idea is not bad, but I think it would be a challenge to perform actions from both scales simultaneously. Let's say you have 15 swordsmen and a couple magicians, you ordered them to engage a nearby army, then you scale down to control one of the swordsmen, what advantage would you have of controlling this 1 swordsman over having full vision and control over your entire army? Would have to be split screen I think to be useful so you can see whats going on on a macro scale at the same time.

39 minutes ago, NukedPenguin said:

what advantage would you have of controlling this 1 swordsman over having full vision and control over your entire army? 

This one will be granted more power and special attacks during the course of TPP only. Which can lead a lossing battle into a win probably. 

Moreover its never gonna be like StarCraft 2(even if try) so player won't have to focus on the bottleneck strategies right away from TPP view. 

For start I will make NPC based opponent. 

The following games were RTS/FPS hybrids, so the concept has precedence.  Tweaking it to be third person instead of first person would be a minor change.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savage:_The_Battle_for_Newerth

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlezone_(1998_video_game)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlezone_II:_Combat_Commander

Savage and BZII have 'commanders' on a team which see things from an RTS-style camera.  The other players on the team play in FPS view and receive orders from the commander.  There are AI controlled units as well.  BZII's commander can also play first person if they want.

The advantage of a human pilot in BZII's hovertanks vs. an AI pilot was that a player typically has a much higher skill than the AI did.

1 hour ago, Nypyren said:

Savage and BZII have 'commanders' on a team which see things from an RTS-style camera.  The other players on the team play in FPS view and receive orders from the commander.  There are AI controlled units as well.  BZII's commander can also play first person if they want.

Is it a multiplayer team based game game. 

Because I am planning to make solo player. 

I am not amazed its like I am expecting it. Because the probability of getting the idea as a first person in millions of people who have worked before you in the same field is pretty low

3 hours ago, Uttam Kushwah said:

Is it a multiplayer team based game game. 

Because I am planning to make solo player. 

I am not amazed its like I am expecting it. Because the probability of getting the idea as a first person in millions of people who have worked before you in the same field is pretty low

Battlezone 2 is not multiplayer-only, it has a pretty good singleplayer campaign as well. It's a great, very unique game and one of my all-time favorites, because I love both RTS and FPS. The feeling of being right in the center of the action is unlike any other game I ever played (except its predecessor Battlezone 1). Unfortunately, it clearly shows its age, with physics and graphics far below modern standards. It recently received a minor touch-up / "remaster" (see link below), but they changed less than I had hoped for. It's basically still the same game, only with some improvements to textures, effects and compatibility with modern hardware and operating systems.

I think you greatly overrate the importance of having totally unique idea that nobody else had before. And especially in this genre mix, there are so few titles that yours would still be very much unique. I mean, what problem are three or five slightly similar games, compared to e.g. classic RTS, where there are hundreds of almost identical titles?

A couple more games with a similar idea you can look at:

- Men of War franchise: It's more or less a standard RTS, but you have the option to "take direct control" of any unit, allowing you to do things like strafe with infantry and aim at weak points with tanks. The game is more RTS than TPP, but taking direct control of units is crucial. 

- Battlestations: Midway / Battlestations: Pacific: This is a naval combat game: you are primarily in direct control of ships/aircraft, but you can switch between them at any time, and you have a rudimentary "RTS map" to give orders. When you are not controlling units they are controlled by AI. You are mostly doing all the important fighting yourself, and the map is there mostly to ogranize your ships. It's the complete opposite from Men of War.

Don't forget about Brütal Legend.

Brütal Legend is often described as having RTS gameplay, but I don't think it did. What it had was more like "tower defense/offense* where you produce your own waves". Also, there is no direct control of units except for the main character.

But it did have an interesting way of switching between third person fighting and overhead giving orders - the main character could fly  

* today a "symmetrical tower defense/offense" would be called a MOBA, but I don't like that name ?

31 minutes ago, wurstbrot said:

I think you greatly overrate the importance of having totally unique idea that nobody else had before.

Just  because it gives you some extra confidence to work with. But with those titles mentioned up there now i can see them as a reference. 

And the most important thing is to get something made up in your hand, which you understand fully.So that you can modify it when a creative bubble pop up in your thoughts chain.