I''ve been thinking about this idea a lot today and was just wondering what people thought the pros and cons of it were... THE IDEA: Instead of the usual "You''ve completed one mission now do this one" approach to stratery games (and I include the one where you branch off for a few levels, but eventually come back to the same level) I was thinking, what if it was layed out a little more RPG like. I know this wont work for all stratergy (or probably most) games, but for the one I''m working on it would work a little like this... (quick background thing) Basically in the game you play a wizard looking for bits of a magical item that will give you unlimited mana (ok not the most orriginal I know, but if anyone has a better excuse for looking for bits of something worth putting together I''m interested), there are also a lot of computer wizards looking for the same items. Now instead of pitting you against them, all liniar fashion, the idea is that the between level "briefing" screen would show all the worlds (levels) connected together by lines (representing the portals between these worlds, the portals arnt always there and so the screen would be slightly different each time). You can jump to any of the worlds connected to the one you are currently at this "between levels" point, the computer (AI) wizards would be able to do the same thing from the worlds they occupied. You would only "enter" a level when one or more wizards "jumped" to the same world as you. (Adding in options to make aliances, etc. may also be an option here) Things I can already see with this idea.. (+ = pro - = con * = general observation) * The more powerful opponants would have to start on the otherside of the world map - much harder to vary the mission objectives, all you really have is "arrive, slay, leave". + Much more varied, could provide a good "replay" factor for the game as a whole. + Additional dimension to the stratergy aspect, "where do I go next?" + Can have several sub-missions running at once. Any thoughts ppl.. (btw sorry if any of this doesnt make sence i''m half-asleep here... so just ask and i''ll try and clarify) NightWraith

when you say "strategy game" do you mean RTS? i''m just curious, i am trying to visualize your game... right now i am imagining it as such, please correct me if i am wrong!

quote: * The more powerful opponants would have to start on the otherside of the world map

maybe rather than having more "powerful" opponents, you can have them about the same level of "power" and vary them in other ways... for example, different wizards can have different "abilities", different "types" of magic, et cetera... nobody is a stronger uber-wizard who you must always face last, but rather they are all similar but you would have to use different strategies to defeat them.

quote: - much harder to vary the mission objectives, all you really have is "arrive, slay, leave".

you could throw in other objectives. you already have one: that super powerful mana item... maybe you can rather have the winner of a battle in previously "unclaimed" land get a less powerful, but still quite nice, item of some sort. maybe conquered lands give a bonus (extra mana, resources, i dunno)... and you (or the AI players) can invade and retake previously conquered lands, and thus "steal" another player''s bonus...
plus, since you want to go RPG-ish, you can throw in all sorts of character-advancements after each battle.

quote: + Much more varied, could provide a good "replay" factor for the game as a whole.
+ Additional dimension to the stratergy aspect, "where do I go next?"

i think that is why i like this idea so much...

quote: + Can have several sub-missions running at once.

hmmm... if this isn''t an RTS i can see this... otherwise you''d have to either "pause" a battle until the player is done with the other one, or have AI take care of one of the battles.

i really like your idea. i wish you luck.

--- krez (krezisback@aol.com)

krez..

My game is actually Turn based, since 1) I dont think some of the other elements, like your units being able to pick up and use items (like keys, weapons, etc) working too well in Real-time and 2) because it is slightly easier to code...

quote: maybe rather than having more "powerful" opponents, you can have them about the same level of "power" and vary them in other ways... for example, different wizards can have different "abilities", different "types" of magic, et cetera... nobody is a stronger uber-wizard who you must always face last, but rather they are all similar but you would have to use different strategies to defeat them.

The idea is that during the between worlds phase you can spend some kind of experience type points on new spells, and generally making your wizard stronger and better equipt, the computer wizards I am planning to make fixed in order to make coding a bit easier.

quote: hmmm... if this isn''t an RTS i can see this... otherwise you''d have to either "pause" a battle until the player is done with the other one, or have AI take care of one of the battles.

Ok, to clarify, maybe sub missions wasnt the best word here.. I think objectives would have been much better, and these objectives could easily span the worlds... like "get object a from world b and take it to point c on world d"

NightWraith

As far as the system goes, it sounds like a pretty reasonable one. However, I wouldn''t really compare it to an RPG. It actually sounds more like a game of Civilization than anything else.

You could easily start with a certain amout of strength and resources, and all the opposing wizards start with equal resources, but different abilities.

Then, you can expand your abilities, and influence, while trying to attain the various magic thingies. Maybe this is by doing quests, gaining allies, killing monsters for exp. But while you''re doing this, the other computer wizards are doing the same. Some of who are going to ally, others will die, and some will be bested by you.

In the end, you just might end up with a titanic battle.

Hope that helps

I once played a SNES racing game. This particular one was set up so that if one player had a ferrari and went 200mph and the other player had a golf cart and went 100mph, they would still be a challange for each other and would be racing neck and neck. Even if you crashed, went down the wrong path and then followed the opponent, you would soon catch up nearly to him.
Perhaps this is an extreme example, but you might think about setting up the opponent wizards so that they automatically increase in power as your character/army increases and decreases in power as you seem to be swamped.
You want the player to always be challanged but never be discouraged.