I have juggled around a few different ideas for a RTS game. However, my lastest idea involves magic vs machines. A world where swords and magic may be just as powerful as guns and tanks. I am hoping there are some creative minds who can pour their ideas out. Whatever they may be. I am mostly looking for ideas on the fantasy side. Cool ways to attack and defend against the army/navy/air force. I appreciate any advice or thoughts given. Thanks.

Magic vs. technology is not really my cup of tea, but you might want to check out the pen and paper game of Shadowrun for at least a tactical scale level of magic vs. technology, as well as the paper and pen game Rifts.

In my own game, there will be some paranormal forces at work, but with some pseudo scientific explanations at work. Think more Psi instead of magic for what I''m trying to do. And at least in my game, these forces aren''t going to argue with a battleship and come out winning. So my ideas probably don''t mesh with yours very well.

Perhaps instead of pitting magic vs. technology, why don''t you mix and match each side so they both have technology and magic at their disposal?

Because then it''s harder to have interesting divisions, backstories, and so on.

Personally, I like the idea of two utterly different sides. Nellspot, are you thinking of ''modern'' technology, or a sort of anachronistic technology (think of Thief 2, or any ''steampunk'' setting)?

[ MSVC Fixes | STL | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost ]

Just look at Arcanum. The game was shite, the magic totally unbalanced, but the backstory on how Technologie and Magic affect each other was great ^_^ You can read the background on their site.

-Maarten Leeuwrik
=================
[Illiad] J.R.R TOLKIEN ACHIEVES 40,000 RPM IN GRAVE

I too rather like the magic vs technology idea. It''s even one of the bases for JJR Tolkien''s Lord Of The Rings books (he saw how modern technology was laying waste to the beauty of nature in his own life and tried to mirror that image into his fantasy setting where the forces of evil destroy everything in their path, even the peaceful village of the Hobbits.

What I have always found annoying in AOE type RTS games (I am assuming it''s an Age Of Empires style RTS game, but correct me if I''m wrong) is that no matter what side I choose, it usually looks a lot like any of the other choices I have. Sure, tanks are different, units are different, but not that much. I agree with Kylotan, liking the idea of two completely different sides to play.

Something to think about:
Have the two sides been ''at war'' for some time, or have they grown up far apart and are only now starting to fight each other, unaware of the strengths and weaknesses of their units?

Cool ways to fight?
How about shooting nets into the air to catch air units?
How about shooting giant disks onto the water that skip until they hit their intended target?
How about creating a giant fissure circle around a troop of ground units, making it impossible for them to move from their current location?

And of course a third party could be added to the mix which is based on purely natural forces (physically superior beings) that don''t need magic or technology. They could be like giants, bashing magical and technological units under their heavy leather boots, stomping them deeper into the ground with their massive wooden clubs.

quote: Original post by Silvermyst
I too rather like the magic vs technology idea. It''s even one of the bases for JJR Tolkien''s Lord Of The Rings books (he saw how modern technology was laying waste to the beauty of nature in his own life and tried to mirror that image into his fantasy setting where the forces of evil destroy everything in their path, even the peaceful village of the Hobbits.

where do you people get this stuff?!
J.R.R. Tolkien explicitly stated in his introduction that there are no hidden "themes" of any sort in The Lord of the Rings . he was not trying to mirror anything at all from real life (he wrote that he hated allegory from the moment he was old enough to identify it). he considered himself more of a historian (although the history was made up) than a storyteller with some point or theme.

Maybe the backstories could involve one side discovering or stealing some of the other side''s abilities and adapting them?

Tanks could gain shots with larger splash damage, wizards could get armor...

The backstories for each race could be based only on themselves, but adding more capabilities as the story progresses can add some depth as well.

- Waverider

quote: Original post by Silvermyst
What I have always found annoying in AOE type RTS games (I am assuming it''s an Age Of Empires style RTS game, but correct me if I''m wrong) is that no matter what side I choose, it usually looks a lot like any of the other choices I have. Sure, tanks are different, units are different, but not that much. I agree with Kylotan, liking the idea of two completely different sides to play.

That is what was good about Starcraft. In Warcraft, the two sides had A = A'' balancing... i.e. there was a corresponding unit on both sides with roughly the same purpose. In Starcraft, the 3 races had completely dissimilar units and means... there wasn''t anything from one side that was really comparable to the other. That also meant that you couldn''t develop your tactics with one race and expect to be able to use the same tactics with another race.



Dave Mark
Intrinsic Algorithm Development
"Reducing the world to mathematical equations!"

KREZ:

Saw two different documentaries on JRR recently and both showed how the area where he grew up had tons of similarities with the areas in the books he wrote. I guess that if JRR himself denies it, that really makes those documentaries look like fools, but I think that every person, even if they don''t want to admit it, gets their ideas from the things that happen and the things they see around them.

quote: Original post by krez
where do you people get this stuff?!
J.R.R. Tolkien explicitly stated in his introduction that there are no hidden "themes" of any sort in The Lord of the Rings . he was not trying to mirror anything at all from real life (he wrote that he hated allegory from the moment he was old enough to identify it). he considered himself more of a historian (although the history was made up) than a storyteller with some point or theme.

Hmmm...well, assuming this is true, Tolkien, like any writer, was still influenced by his environment. Growing up in a poor family in post-Industrial Revolution England (I''m talking about after he and his mother moved there from South Africa), I''m sure he developed a healthy awareness for the negative impact technology had on the environment. Just as his involvement in the War couldn''t not have had an influence on his work. You can''t just shut it off...

As for hating allegory, Tolkien''s themes are biblical in origin whether he intended them to be or not. And, drawing heavily from the extremely allegorical Anglo-Saxon and Nordic legends for inspiration, I think this was a ridiculous thing to say, even for Tolkien.

But, it was well known that Tolkien was very anti-technology. He was a lover of ancient things through and through, shunning technology (hated TV; think of how much more he''d hate it now), and preferred to live in his fantasy world. He was such an escapist that way...

Based on what I know of Tolkien, I don''t find Silvermyst''s comments about Tolkien''s work to be so unbelievable. Still, maybe you know a lot more about Tolkien than I do, Krez.